The Thin White Dude's Reviews - The Guard

Directed by: John Michael McDonagh

Produced by: Chris Clark

Flora Fernandez-Marengo

Ed Guiney

Andrew Lowe

Paul Brett

Don Cheadle

Martin McDonagh

David Nash

Ralph Kamp

Lenore Zerman

Elizabeth Eves

Lee Magiday

Screenplay by: John Michael McDonagh

Starring: Brendan Gleeson

Don Cheadle

Liam Cunningham

David Wilmot

Mark Strong

Fionnula Flanagan

Cinematography by: Larry Smith

Editing by: Chris Gill

Studio(s): Reprisal Films

Element Pictures

Crescendo Productions

Distributed by: Sony Picture Classics

Element Pictures

Optimum Releasing

Release date(s): January 20, 2011 (Sundance)

July 7, 2011 (Ireland)

July 29, 2011 (United States)

August 19, 2011 (United Kingdom)

Running time: 96 minutes

Country: Ireland

Language: English

Irish

Budget: (Unavailable)

Gross revenue (as of publication): $761, 079 (Foreign gross only)

Another week, another obligatory and rather boring introduction to my review(s). Not only have I seen this movie, but I have also seen Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows: Part 2 and Horrible Bosses. The reviews for these films will be coming soon, although I may well be heading to The Strand to re-watch HP7.2, as the press screening I went to, though I was pleased of course of the invite from my good friend and fellow film critic Daniel Kelly, was in 3D and plagued by an audience of families (3-year-olds way too young to see HP7.2 included) making whispering amongst each other interspersed with the occasional dropped popcorn box. Apologies for the Jamesian sentence there.

The movie we have here is an interesting case, given that this year seems to have had a tendency to produce comedies which are effectively biologically linked to those that have come before. As Bridesmaids is in many ways The Hangover with women, this has been critically received as the new In Bruges. When In Bruges came out a couple of years ago, I did enjoy it but it certainly wasn't the comic masterpiece that many people cracked it up to be. Here, we have Brendan Gleeson from that film being directed by John Michael McDonagh, the brother of the In Bruges writer-directed Martin McDonagh, so similarities are perhaps inevitable. In The Guard, a rather-anglicised version of a title that should have been The Garda (I'm nit-picking), Gleeson plays Sergeant Gerry Boyle, a bit of a Bad Lieutenant type with an unorthodox style and a penchant for drink and prostitutes, is forced into an investigation with straight-laced by F.B.I. agent Wendell Everett (Don Cheadle) when drug smugglers are attempting to bring contrabands into Connemara.

To start with what is good about the film, we must bring up one Sergeant Gerry Boyle himself. Regardless of whether or not he does things by the rules or is politically correct (which he certainly isn't), his character is a fantastic comic creation. John Michael McDonagh writes some of the most spiky dialogue in any comedy for some time, and the character of Boyle is very well-rounded. The big pro on this side of things is Brendan Gleeson. He gives such a fine performance as this bonkers, uncouth policeman. Just watching the facial expressions he pulls when his colleagues question his behaviour is a thing of beauty. Also, what could have been a poor drunken Irish stereotype is made whole and three-dimensional by Gleeson. He embodies the essence of that character, and this is the kind of performance that a man of his talents has been waiting for his entire career. Also, I like how John Michael McDonagh keeps the film sticking to it's guns. This is not a PG-13 comedy and it is admirable how unashamedly un-PC the movie is. It is a movie with some really strong comedic ideas, and it embraces the fine line of tension between horror and comedy, the darkness and the light.

Nevertheless, despite the fact that I laughed at a good few bits in the movie, frankly I was not able to escape the feeling that despite a couple of new ideas and funny parts, this was merely window-dressing to what is a tried and tested genre. Granted, McDonagh does have some good pointers in his script, but structurally it is all same old, same old. The buddy cop genre of 'good-cop/bad-cop' routine has been done so many times and The Guard frankly follows down the same pattern. Although Gleeson and Fionnula Flanagan add pathos to the backstory of Boyle and his mother, it is a plot device that has been used over and over. Furthermore, the 'good-cop/bad-cop' routine is not even particularly well-balance. There is one scene, in which Everett's investigation are contrasted with Boyle's 'investigation' of two young women, where Everett's character seems appropriate in this movie. Otherwise, for the most part the character is a sore thumb. It is nowhere near as well-written as Boyle, whom the whole movie caters towards. Don Cheadle is a good actor, but is saddled with lackluster folly that is an excuse for a character. Finally, the ending is the movie is completely botched. There is nothing wrong with movies that are different in tone to the rest of the preceding film, but in this case, it seems inappropriate. I'll try my best not to spoil it, but for a movie so unashamed of it's no-bullshit approach, it felt like a copout and as though they were saying "You know what? There's more to this than the un-PC bullshit that you all enjoyed."

The Guard is one of those movies I get intensely frustrated at, perhaps more so than a terrible movie. On the one hand, there is a lot of good about the movie, as Sergeant Gerry Boyle is a fantastic character, Brendan Gleeson gives what I feel is thus far the best lead acting performance by a male of the year, and the sharp, jagged-edge un-PC humour is enough to make me want to see it one more time. However, it does feel as though they betray this with a truly poor ending, and that the film is essentially the Lethal Weapon-achetype buddy-cop movie, except set in Connemara and without the balance of the pairing of Riggs and Murtaugh. I was very disappointed by this film, and while I don't dislike it, I don't what the fuss that the critics are making is all about.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 5.8/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Very busy (tight schedule today, believe you me!)

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - Transformers: Dark Of The Moon

Directed by: Michael Bay

Produced by: Don Murphy

Tom DeSanto

Lorenzo di Bonaventura

Ian Bryce

Screenplay by: Ehren Kruger

Based on: Transformers by Hasbro

Starring: Shia LaBeouf

Josh Duhamel

John Turturro

Tyrese Gibson

Rosie Huntington-Whiteley

Patrick Dempsey

Kevin Dunn

Julie White

John Malkovich

Frances McDormand

Music by: Steve Jablonsky

Cinematography by: Amir Mokri

Editing by: Roger Barton

William Goldenberg

Joel Negron

Studio: DreamWorks Pictures

Distributed by: Paramount Pictures

Release date(s): June 23, 2011 (Moscow International Film Festival)

June 29, 2011 (United States/Canada)

Running time: 155 minutes

Country: United States

Language: English

Budget: $195 million

Gross revenue: $693, 683, 712

Once again (as is per usual, i sound like a broken fucking record!), I am slack on catching up with reviews. There isn't much new coming out in my defence, and I have seen the final Harry Potter film, review of which will be coming in soon (I hope). If I am being truthful though, I will confess that my recent sickness has infected me with the dreaded disease of laziness, so I have essentially been sitting around drinking beer and watching Ross Kemp In Afghanistan. Alas, I digress, for this is the review that you, my omnipresent/non-existent readership, have all been waiting for.

History and the benefit of hindsight gives one the time to reflect upon one's past judgements and question as to whether or not one made a completely rational decision. So, in looking at history, with the benefit of hindsight, I asked myself these questions: was I right in voting the last Transformers movie (which is and forever will be known not by it's official title, because it doesn't deserve to choose, but instead my self-assigned title, The Robot Movie: With Added Phwoar! Hello Dr. Kermode!) the worst movie of 2009, and was I right in voting Michael Bay, the director of works such as Bad Boys, The Rock and Armageddon, a Horseman Of The Apocalypse two years running? To answer both those questions, in my not-so humble opinion, yes, yes, abso-fucking-lutely yes! Armond White would be ashamed of my language, but I'll be damned if that wasn't the worst movie 2009 and there is no other way in which I can convey how strongly I feel about that film, through lack of invention or otherwise. Furthermore, Michael Bay, who is a man I believe to have a good degree of talent, decides to takes GWAR's satirical lyrics a bit too far, make it a personal manifesto and become one of the infinite amount of assembly-line, money-men Scumdogs Of The Universe that threaten to destroy both art and entertainment as we know it. Despite these (extreme!) reservations, I really did make a genuine effort to go in with an open mind to this film. I am going to skip out plot synopsis because I would like people to try as a personal challenge to keep up with the movie and make sense of it all.

That said, there is good to found in Transformers: Dark Of The Moon, a film that is deserving of choosing it's own title, as opposed to a slightly insulting and patronising one a critic has bestowed upon it. For starters, having to film in 3D seems to have forced Bay and new cinematographer to the series Amir Mokri to restrain themselves. This can only be a good thing, as now I can see what is going on, and there are some genuinely terrific images in the film. Also, unlike the other films, despite it being long and boisterous, it actually embraces the fact that it is essentially about robots hitting each other and big, big special effects. The last hour of the film in Chicago is effectively a long series of action sequences, and creates some scenes that are genuinely entertaining, in particular the scene involving a building (no spoilers, but you'll have probably been bombarded by advertisements and trailers). So yes, this is high praise from me, but this film did actually have a couple of things going for it.

However, despite having a few things going for it, it has a lot more going against it. Ehren Kruger, a new screenwriter who has been brought in to avoid the series going stale, despite efforts to make a far darker and edgier film than previous instalments, simply doesn't structure it appropriately enough. It is all over the place and jumps from one thing to another. I actually struggle to remember the film, as the film just introduces characters, including one played by the under-utilised and brilliant John Malkovich, Ken Jeong going mad again in a silly part, and just disposes of them or gives no valid reason as to their absence. Even John Turturro, who to be fair always got an amusing part, and Frances McDormand, who gets a decent amount of screen time, have poorly written roles. I know that badly written parts usually have a reciprical effect on the actors, but I'll spare some time on Rosie-Huntington Whiteley's performance. Now, in many ways she is the talking point of the film, with Megan Fox having left the series, and so she probably had a lot of pressure being thrown into this behemoth (yes, it is that, but 'scourge' is probably more appropriate) of a franchise. Nevertheless, it does not excuse one from the terrible performance she gives. Her delivery of lines comes across as borderline self-parody, and yet you realise that this is meant to be taken seriously. Also, sometimes you cannot understand whether she is meant to be serious, ironic or whatever. Good acting is about conveying the correct emotions to your audience, looking through the viewfinder without looking like you are, playing the magician's trick. Unfortunately, this no magician's trick and constitutes the word 'FAIL.' Finally, although there are other annoying things in this boom-boom-chicka-boom-boom-snap-fizz-crackle-spew and pop-diddly-op mess of a film (terrible vocabulary I know), Steve Jablonsky's score has to rank up there with the worst of them. It is so loud and excessive that alongside the explosions and Transformers hitting each other, I wanted the sound in the Strand Cinema to have one of it's occasional random breakdowns. Also, it is so grandoise and full of pomp as though to say/shout at the audience "isn't this something grand and significant and how awesome is that!" Look mate, I watched Seven Samurai the other day, and despite being about hour longer, it kept me entertained throughout and the action sequences were shot with great dignity and respect to their audience. This is just too fucking loud and excessive and needs an intermission (which conveniently came as part of my copy of Seven Samurai as a five-minute scene of music with Japanese characters reading 'Intermission'), as I was extremely nauseated by the experience. I shudder to think what the 3D version would have done for my sanity.

It is a real shame that Michael Bay has used his powers to do evil, as even in this monstrous clusterfuck (there you go, Kermode) of a film, there are flourishes of the Bayian (if there such a term) brilliance that we have seen in some of his films. This is actually a well-shot movie that looks the part, some of the action scenes are really good, and I like the fact that in many ways they embrace the lack of seriousness of the concept and just go for the balls-to-the-wall attitude. However, as soon as you hear that Steve Jablonsky score, one that makes the bad work of Alesandre Desplat sound like Ennio Morricone, you just want to pop some conveniently placed cotton buds in your ear, shut yourself off from the world, and get the well-earned rest you deserve, and dream up an even better movie than the one in the theatre. It is a step-up from The Robot Movie: With Added Phwoar! aka Previous Film, but it is still S.O.S. (Same Old Shit or genuine S.O.S.!) and I am bored, dulled and indifferent. Words of advice for Michael Bay, do a Tony Jaa and retire to the jungle for some meditation, come back and watch some Kurosawa and then make a great film. Honestly, you should really know better than this!

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 3.7/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Craving (can't wait a beer. Look, I'm sitting in a Duff t-shirt, I can't not have one!)

P.S. Morals are not necessarily required for a film review, but they do suck in this. It is pretty leery and excessive and boorish, and I (and every one else in the audience) did not miss the American flag waving behind the Transformers. Also, look at the motorway sequence: every car bashed over and destroyed has blacked-out windows so you can't see anyone in them and all the other cars avoided or otherwise unscathed have people in them. It gives one interesting food for thought with regards to screen violence, as does the depiction of the Transformers fighting: if it was human beings fighting, the film would be a solid, Lucio Fulci big fat red 18. Finally, I hate the stereotypical humour of African-Americans, the Irish and the Scottish. Michael Bay, you suck, I hope you have a bad Christmas!

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - Bridesmaids

Directed by: Paul Feig

Produced by: Judd Apatow

Barry Mendel

Clayton Townsend

Screenplay by: Annie Mumolo

Kristen Wiig

Starring: Kristen Wiig

Maya Rudolph

Rose Byrne

Wendi McLendon-Covey

Ellie Kemper

Melissa McCarthy

Chris O'Dowd

Music by: Michael Andrews

Cinematography by: Robert D. Yeoman

Editing by: William Kerr

Michael L. Sale

Studio(s): Universal Pictures

Relativity Media

Apatow Productions

Distributed by: Universal Pictures

Release date(s): May 13, 2011 (United States)

June 24, 2011 (United Kingdom)

Running time: 125 minutes

Country: United States

Language: English

Budget: $32.5 million

Gross revenue (as of publication): $191, 174,000

Hey folks, The Thin White Dude here. No real updates from the outside world for the past few days. I haven't really been doing much, although I did get to see Tron for the first time last night. Visually, it's stunning, Jeff Bridges is always a great and charismatic screen presence, but honestly, it can be boring and overwhelming, to the point where I spent large sections just looking at the visuals in the background and opposed to the characters in the foreground. The big elephant in the room is that later on today I will be going to see Transformers: Dark Of The Moon. For those of you who don't remember or don't follow the blog, I declared the previous Transformers (which I refer to as The Robot Movie, for it doesn't deserve to be known under it's title) the flat-out worst movie of 2009, and Michael Bay has two years in a row been one of my Four Horsemen Of The Apocalypse. I am going to try and go in with an open mind, but if I'm being honest, things aren't looking up.

Today's film for review is Bridesmaids. To put the work in a bit of context, it was written by Kristen Wiig and Annie Mumolo, and stars Wiig as Annie, the maid of honour for Lillian's (Maya Rudolph) wedding, leading up a troop of bridesmaids that includes the slightly jealous and competitive Helen (Rose Byrne), bitter and cynical mother Rita (Wendi McLendon-Covey), idealistic and happy newlywed Becca (Ellie Kemper) and unashamedly blunt and forthright Megan (Melissa McCarthy). Of course, as goes these comedies (deliberate grammar gaffs in case you grammar freaks hold me up on that), during the process of setting up the wedding, all manner of things happen with, you know it, 'hilarious consequences.' Good critical reviews in comparison to the Sex And The City film's made me go in with a relatively open heart. That said, I was partially ambiguous, because the last time the critics latched onto a comedy like this the movie was The Hangover, and the last 'comedy' I saw Wiig and Rudolph star in was MacGruber, so there was also part of me holding back.

To start with what is good about the film, I must point out the acting because there are a number of very good performances. Kristen Wiig delivers a real star-maker of a turn as Annie. Having wrote the character, she clearly knows her very well, but Wiig takes her theoretical knowledge of the character and plies it practically into delivering a great performance. She really nails the various dimensions of the character. At once charming and endearing, Wiig is able to skilfully reveal Annie's flaws without losing any of her charm. It truly is a fine performance, and perhaps the best I have seen full-stop so far from this year. Also good in a supporting capacity is Maya Rudolph, who, although not having as much screen time as her Bridesmaids, gives depth to the character of Lillian. Her role would be the equivalent of the often-absent Doug in The Hangover films, but it is through Rudolph's skill that we get to know this character. Subtle brilliance is to be found in the performance that Rose Byrne gives as Helen. The competitive nature that she possesses towards Annie is revealed is glances and smiles, and as such the character's nature and it's projection relies much on Byrne's performance. However, like her fellows Bridesmaids, she is a fully-rounded character, something that can also be attributed the strength of the script, and Byrne conveys that with conviction. On the other end of the spectrum, this film's equivalent Zach Galifianakis is to be found in Melissa McCarthy's borderline boorishness as Megan. Providing a lot of scene-stealing laughs and nigh-on perfect comic delivery, this, along with the aformented performances, proves Bridesmaids as a high watermark for female acting. On the male side, good bit-parts are to be found in Matt Lucas and Jon Hamm. I would like to point the wonderful Chris O'Dowd as Officer Rhodes. He too is a really solid comic creation, but also possesses a tenderness and a good heart that embodies all that is good about this film. These strong characters and their complementing dialogue can be attributed to Wiig and Mumolo's fine script, which really is a fine slap/wake-up call to the scribes of film's such as The Hangover and Sex And The City. On the one hand, it shows that there can be such a thing as good 'women's pictures', although I usually refrain from using the term, as it, along with the film's under the label, usually alienate it's male audience. On the other, it is easily as smutty as The Hangover and in many ways flips those guys the bird and says "screw you, we can outdo that!"

Bridesmaids is an all-round pretty solid movie. However, by no means is a perfect comedy. The script is for the most part great. There are occasions in which the gags are stretched out too-long and feel more like sketches as opposed to part of a feature-length film. Also, it suffers from a recent tendency in a lot of comedies of being too long as a whole. I personally feel that this could well have been been trimmed by about fifteen minutes. Also, despite being in many ways an innovative comedy, in others it is very nuts-and-bolts, and does feel like I have seen it all before. There was this feeling of deja vu as I watched the film, as you get from much of the Judd Apatow stable of comedies.

Despite these issues, and they are ones that do genuinely annoy and feel like a thorn in my side, Bridesmaids is a great comedy. The script, although occasionally problematic, is full of really strong, fully-rounded characters, and a number of gags and things that happen in the film are genuinely funny. Furthermore, it boasts terrific acting, particularly from Kristen Wiig as Annie, but also Maya Rudolph, Rose Byrne, Melissa McCarthy and Chris O'Dowd. I don't think, even in the bit-parts, there is a single bad performance. I really enjoyed Bridesmaids and would sincerely encourage people to go and see it, as it is a comedy that seems to appeal both to highbrow and lowbrow humour. A really solid film that everyone can enjoy, as it caters towards females without alienating the male audience.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 8.0/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Very well (despite being awake pretty early today)

P.S. Wish me luck for Transformers: Dark Of The Moon

P.P.S. Wish me luck also: I am considering re-watching Marley and Me in the wake of getting a dog and my reaction to the puppies in this movie, as I am worried I'm going soft

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - Kung Fu Panda 2

Directed by: Jennifer Yuh Nelson

Produced by: Melissa Cobb

Guillermo del Toro

Written by: Jonathan Abel

Glenn Berger

Starring: Jack Black

Angelina Jolie

Gary Oldman

Dustin Hoffman

Jackie Chan

Seth Rogen

Lucy Liu

David Cross

James Hong

Music by: Hans Zimmer

John Powell

Editing by: Clare Knight

Studio: DreamWorks Animation

Distributed by: Paramount Pictures

Release date(s): May 26, 2011 (United States)

June 10, 2011 (United Kingdom)

June 23, 2011 (Australia)

Running time: 91 minutes

Country: United States

Language: English

Budget: $150 million

Gross revenue (as of publication): $536, 866, 756

I tell you guys, I have made some awesome buys on DVD lately. I've been shopping primarily out of a shop called Head (I know, horrible name), picking up great films such as Tetsuo: The Iron Man, but also building up a stockpile with stuff like Capturing The Friedman's and a very nice book/film combo of The Hustler for £2. It is rare that I buy a DVD over a £5 these days, and it is my sincere recommendation, no matter how much you like movies, that you rarely do so yourself. The only 'expensive' purchase (at £6) I made was a full restored version of Fritz Lang's Dr. Mabuse der Spieler. Considering the specialist nature of the film (silent movie, four-and-a-half hours long), that is a good buy. Also, I'm finding that the YouTube uploading service is shit, and my attempt's to branch out into video reviewing is getting pretty hampered, so you'll be seeing me here quite a lot over the next few weeks.

So, the film here today is Kung Fu Panda 2. For those of you who don't know the history of my blog (I don't expect you to, the early stuff is boring anyway), I was a big fan of the original Kung Fu Panda film, so much so that I bestowed upon it the honour of my Stan and Ollie Award for Best Comedic Film of 2008. In Kung Fu Panda 2, Po (Jack Black) and the rest of his fellow Kung Fu masters return to confront, as Master Shifu (Dustin Hoffman) seems to predict, that the nefarious Lord Shen (Gary Oldman) has returned, creating a weapon that threatens the very existence of Kung Fu. Furthermore, Po is forced to confront the demons of his past in order to achieve inner peace.

One of the best things about the original was the all-star vocal cast, and the sequel follows suit in this manner. Jack Black, who I think is one of the most charismatic funny-men in America gives Po an instantly likeable and humorous presence onscreen. Also, he handles well the rather emotional character arc of Po with real dignity and pathos. Dustin Hoffman is also good once again as Master Shifu. However, the really great voice role in the film belongs to Gary Oldman as Lord Shen. It is almost as though this is a role he had been waiting for, understanding the absurdity of it appearing in celluloid, unleashing it now that he is playing an animated character. Shen is at once absolutely terrifying (a great achievement, given that he is a peacock) and a great comic creation. Furthermore, Oldman's vocal performance makes him feel real, a flesh and bone character, despite being a bunch of animated pixels: we feel for Shen and there is strong pathos in his character arc. I would like to point out as a positive the arc's of both Shen and Po, and the parallels they possess. Both are character's who ultimately are damaged as the result of circumstances outside their control. These decisions involve their parents, but it is the attitude that both take that defines them. The theme of parents, origins and birthright give the film one of it's greatest strengths. Finally, I would like to point out the film's imagery and imagination. Clearly there has been more research done into the Asian/Buddhist/Kung Fu iconography, and this gives the film a unique feel and taste. The use of Po as the prothesized enemy of "black-and-white" takes the yin-ying symbol, transplants it to the physical features of the panda and turns it into a plot point. Also, the film look absolutely wonderful. The original looked the part, but DreamWorks Animation have really outdone themselves this time. It is completely seamless and of an appropriate frame-rate, but also the colour palette is really balanced and of a great variety. If anything, Kung Fu Panda 2 stands as a testament to the real beauty and potential of contemporary animation.

That said, despite the fact I am and will gladly gush over a number of the points in Kung Fu Panda 2, it is by no means faultless. In fact, there are actually a number of severe problems with the film. Despite strong thematic content and character arcs, the film is tedious and predictable, and more importantly, it simply isn't as funny as the original. The balance of great comedy and story has teetered too far towards the story this time around and not enough towards the comedy. I found the 2D-dream sequences/memories of Po harrowing, but the film just was not that funny. I fear that with DreamWorks now having another cash cow on their hands, they are going to turn this into the new Shrek series, and milk the cow until it is a dry skin-and-bone abomination. Furthermore, the film does feel very undeveloped. For such strong material with regard to thematic content, it is a real shame that more time was not spent on scribing the film with the respect that it's characters deserve. Also, it is clear that they have spent so much time and invested some much effort in the film that it seems a waste for the film to feel as lacking as it does. To use a horrible pun, it lacks the punch of the original.

The script is pretty flawed and there are a number of elements in the film which just seem to be there for the sake of being there, their potential being wasted, but Kung Fu Panda 2 is by no means a bad movie. It is certainly a good movie, with some great vocal performances from Jack Black, Dustin Hoffman and (particularly) Gary Oldman. Also, DreamWorks Animation has crossed over into new bounds of brilliance in the visual style and beauty of it's animation, bringing to mind the scale (on occasion) of something like James Cameron's Avatar. Finally, the film is worth seeing for the emotional depth of the thematic content surrounding parents alone. I did find myself on the point of tears at one point. Even though the floodgates did not open, that is an achievement in itself. While not a perfect movie, Kung Fu Panda 2 is a good movie to go and see, and is worth the price of a ticket.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 6.8/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Active (for the first time in a few weeks, I feel genuinely awake and like I have achieved something today)

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - Bad Teacher

Directed by: Jake Kasdan

Produced by: Jimmy Miller

David Householter

Written by: Lee Eisenberg

Gene Stupnitsky

Starring: Cameron Diaz

Lucy Punch

Justin Timberlake

Jason Segel

Music by: Michael Andrews

Cinematography by: Alar Kivilo

Editing by: Tara Timpone

Studio: Mosaic

Distributed by: Colombia Pictures

Release date(s): June 17, 2011 (United Kingdom)

June 24, 2011 (United States)

Running time: 92 minutes

Country: United States

Language: English

Budget: $20 million

Gross revenue (as of publication): $91, 307, 505

Once again, I have disappeared off the radar and stopped posting for near enough two weeks. However, this time I would like to think that I had a valid enough excuse. This annoys me because I had seen a ton of movies and now have to rush through them all (Kung Fu Panda 2 and Bridesmaids coming soon). Nevertheless, I have been sick with a bad flu/fever which for the first few days put me in what was more-or-less a state of delirium and for the week after gave me a bad stomach bug which has caused me to lose eight pounds of weight. I have not weighed under eleven stone for about four years, so this was a temporary health concern, I am ok, but I have had to pretty much schedule my timetable around it. Unfortunately, no reviewing or writing of any sort was factored in, and I have been resting up. Now, temporary setbacks aside, the show will go on.

The film in front of the panel today is Bad Teacher. By no means a particularly original concept, although judging from the film's tone they have clearly seen Werner Herzog's Bad Lieutenant: Port Of Call New Orleans, as the influence extends beyond the title and concept. Cameron Diaz plays Elizabeth Halsey, who after her rich fiance dumps her, is forced to continue her job as a teacher. After being attracted at the possibility of breast enlargement surgery (priced at $10,000), she begins to try to win over wealthy substitute teacher Scott Delacorte (Justin Timberlake). However, he seems more taken with the kind and dedicated, if slightly eccentric Amy Squirrel (Lucy Punch), which along with gym teacher Russell Gettis' (Jason Segel) teasing advances, compounds Elizabeth's stress, which she takes out on her pupil's.

As mentioned, it is not exactly an original role, but Cameron Diaz clearly relishes the part. She is a charming comedic actor, and this is a role that I feel only a woman of her talents could have pulled off. Instead of coming across as attempting to act bad, she just does, and it all seems to be a natural process for her. The part is nuts-and-bolts, but Diaz does a great job of it, and is the beacon of the film's comedic potential. Also in the acting department, in a role that could have ended being the film's worst and all-round filler, Jason Segel is really good as Russel Gettis, the gym teacher who is constantly Elizabeth's case. He is a very funny man who in this part does not fail to be both funny and creepy. However, he is a sympathetic character with whom the audience can empathise, and Segel plays this aspects of the character well. Despite the film not having particularly well-written characters or a strong story/structure, there are a number of funny gags. Elizabeth's Halsey's constant dismissal of certain characters challenges public politeness, which is usually pretty humorous. Also, I do rather like the fact that instead a false pretence of being 'Bad' or a kind of faux-hip version of being bad, the film actually goes for an R-rating and has a proper consistency and appropriate level of badness. Halsey smokes pot, is rude and crass to her fellow faculty members, and is ruthless in the pursuit of her ultimately selfish goal in getting her boob job. Having a boob job in itself as a the prime motivator for a character is a 'Bad' move, and feels appropriate for the movie.

That said, Bad Teacher is by no means a flawless movie. As I have mentioned already, the script's character's are poorly written. They are all cardboard cutouts, each with the eccentricities and fetishes so that one can put a label on them and say "these are fully-rounded character's" when they aren't really. Also, in terms of structure, the plot is very nuts-and-bolts. We've seen it all before, and like all good chess-masters, we can predict the move of our opponent before they have even made it. One must automatically approach a film as an enemy, for it is the film's task to spin an illusion before us and convince us that it is our friend. Ultimately, Bad Teacher is not convincing enough to make me believe it is my friend, for it's frilly exterior does not disguise what I see as a rotten core. Furthermore, the film is wrapped up and sugar-coated in a pop-culture kind of contemporary feel of trying too much to be a movie of it's time that it occasionally betray's it's 'Badness,' turning out as more a member-of-the-pack than a truly 'Bad' original.

That said, with all it's problems, particularly with certain aspects of the script and it's pop-culture ridden feeling of ubiquitousness, Bad Teacher is not a bad film. It's not a particularly good movie by any means, but nowhere near the monstrosity a grumpy film critic such as I would lead myself to believe. I laughed a number of times during the course of the film, which actually does make a pretty ballsy attempt at sticking with it's guns as an R-rated comedy, and boasting some pretty good performances from Cameron Diaz and Jason Segel.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 5.2/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Excitable (very busy, things to do, time too short, time my enemy)

P.S. Weird to think that the slightly overbearing music was done by Michael Andrews, whose very different score for Donnie Darko was one of the greatest in movie history

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - Green Lantern

Directed by: Martin Campbell

Produced by: Donald De Line

Greg Berlanti

Screenplay by: Greg Berlanti

Michael Green

Marc Guggenheim

Michael Goldenberg

Story by: Greg Berlanti

Michael Green

Marc Guggenheim

Based on: The Green Lantern by

John Broome

Gil Kane

Starring: Ryan Reynolds

Blake Lively

Peter Sarsgaard

Mark Strong

Angela Bassett

Tim Robbins

Music by: James Newton Howard

Cinematography by: Dion Beebe

Editing by: Stuart Baird

Studio: DC Entertainment

De Line Pictures

Distributed by: Warner Bros. Pictures

Release date: June 17, 2011

Running time: 114 minutes

Country: United States

Language: English

Budget: $200 million

Gross revenue(as of publication): $118, 711, 000

Here comes the obligatory movie updates. I have since seen Kung Fu Panda 2, and my next review following on from this will be that of Bad Teacher. Oh, and by the way, loved Way Out West all over again, and am looking forward to watching Our Relations tonight. I really urge people to get into Laurel and Hardy: comedic brilliance, brilliance full-stop, is never outdated. Also, listen to Bjork. I know that my recent infatuation with her music has been viewed by some of my friend's as borderline obsession, but her work is that of genuine and emotionally heartrending power.

Anyway, post-indulgence in obsessions, it would be wise to stick to the job at hand, and at hand, of course, we have Green Lantern. Unlike the movie, I'm not going to get into the decades-long mythology of the Green Lantern universe, so I'm going to try and make this synopsis as brief as possible (not an easy task). Aircraft test pilot Hal Jordan (Ryan Reynolds), a bit of a loose cannon whose attitude problems ultimately stem from a degree of guilt at the trauma of his father, also an air pilot, dying untimely in an explosion, is chosen by the ring of Abin Sur (Temuera Morrison), who appoints him a Green Lantern. After being transported to the Lantern home plant Oa, he discovers he is the first human appointed to the honour, and the significance and responsibility of his position as protector of Earth. Back home, government scientist Hector Hammond (Peter Sarsgaard) is summoned by his father Senator Robert Hammond (Tim Robbins) to conduct an autopsy on an alien being. During this autopsy, Hector is infected with an organism, which turns out to be the DNA of Parallax, the arch-nemesis of the Green Lantern Corps, who is threatening to destroy the universe.

This synopsis I like to think would more than aptly set the scene for the film, although I'm leaving out large chunks of what is in the film. For a movie that is as large as the Green Lantern is, you'd like to think that the visual effects are of a decent standard. Well, you won't be disappointed, because visual effects team that worked on Green Lantern have done a stunning job that, despite being of a dirty, murky tone for much of the film, stands as one of the best examples of contemporary visual effects. Also, editor Stuart Baird does a good job of making sure that the visual effects and live-action are able to coexist in a universe that is seamless and believable, if a bit overdone on the greenscreen side of things. The action scenes, particularly the final battle between Hal Jordan and Parallax, are extremely well edited, considering the ambition and the scope that the filmmakers were aiming for. It perhaps sounds horrible to judge how good these things were in the context of the future and not on the basis of the film itself, but this spectacular sequence made me genuinely believe it would be possible to now adapt Half-Life for the screen.

Despite these qualities about Green Lantern, it is ultimately a very flawed film. First and foremost at fault, as ever, is the script. The film opens and closes with some amazing action sequences, but they comes across as bookends to what is an emotionally vacuous film that bombards you with way too many details to get involved in the central story. I read a review of the film in which a fan of the franchise argues that if you know some of the backstory going in you will enjoy it. The thing about that is that it inevitably alienates everyone who hasn't read any of the original source material. For adaptations of comic-book series, structurally there should be a balance between backstory and moving story. Backstory is the history that must be covered and moving story is the one that they want to cover for the movie. With roughly two-thirds of the movie being spent on backstory and a rushed last act being spent on moving story, we have a highly uneven film that is unbalanced. Perhaps Green Lantern is not good material for adaptation to the screen, which doesn't make it a bad source, I haven't read them, but for film, a medium for which some vigilance and editing is inevitable and required in the process of adaptation, it just does not work. In other Warner Bros. superhero-pics, such as Superman, they deal with this problem by spending an hour on backstory and an hour-and-a-half on moving story. Others, such as Batman, do away with backstory altogether, and dive straight into moving story. In a rare example that more or less completely worked, Batman Begins dealt with both in a cohesive manner which did them justice. Green Lantern's structure feels like the first hour of Superman with a really expensive episode of a television series clumped on the end. Furthermore, the screenwriters do not craft characters that make me want to care what is going on. I understand the various little bits of cliche synchronicity going on, such as the theme of parents, children and responsibility occurring between Hal Jordan and Hector Hammond, but no character makes me feel as though they could exist as a human being. The thing that comes to mind is in fact Six Characters In Search Of An Author, in which the Six Characters laugh at the Actors for portraying them as cardboard cutouts. All of the actors, perhaps as much the fault of the script as their own, give Eisenstein-esque acting performances, the difference being Eisenstein wanted his actors to come across as simplistic and two-dimensional. Finally, director Martin Campbell should really know better. Don't forget, Campbell is the man who was responsible for rebooting the James Bond franchise not just once with Goldeneye, but twice with Casino Royale. I know he has worked with poor scripts before, I mean look at Vertical Limit and to a lesser extent the 2009/2010 Edge Of Darkness, but his work has always had a flair and pace, an energy that keeps things going. Here, outside of the action scenes, it lags and feels like flogging a dead horse. Perhaps a six-part HBO series a-la 1985 Edge Of Darkness would have been more appropriate.

Green Lantern is not an absolutely terrible movie, although it certainly gives one much food for thought regarding it's pros-and-cons. It possesses some terrific visual effects, and Stuart Baird really deserves to be commended for his work in the editing department. However, it is a very boring and lifeless two-dimensional piece of badly structured drivel that is not befitting of some of the better work of director Martin Campbell. Ultimately, it reflects worst of all on Warner Bros., who clearly are just trying to pump money into any potentially bankable superhero franchise in the wake of the box-office success of Christopher Nolan's Batman films. They are really lucky they have Nolan and the Harry Potter series, because they have lost so much money with this and other films of late.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 4.0/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Bored and indifferent (eating up Eric Clapton/Michael Kamen Edge Of Darkness theme)

P.S. Why was I only seeing marketing for this a few weeks before it was released? You do not spent $200 million dollars on a movie and have shit marketing campaigns. Warner Bros., you know what I am talking about, especially after Inception was being hyped nearly half a year in advance of it's release!

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - X-Men: First Class

Directed by: Matthew Vaughan

Produced by: Gregory Goodman

Simon Kinberg

Lauren Shuler Donner

Bryan Singer

Screenplay by: Ashley Edward Miller

Zack Stentz

Jane Goldman

Matthew Vaughan

Story by: Sheldon Turner

Bryan Singer

Based on: Characters by

Stan Lee

Jack Kirby

Chris Claremont

Starring: James McAvoy

Michael Fassbender

Rose Byrne

January Jones

Jennifer Lawrence

Oliver Platt

Kevin Bacon

Music by: Henry Jackson

Cinematography by: John Mathieson

Editing by: Eddie Hamilton

Lee Smith

Studio: Marvel Entertainment

Dune Entertainment

Bad Hat Harry Productions

Donners' Company

Distributed by: 20th Century Fox

Release date(s): June 1, 2011 (United Kingdom)

June 3, 2011 (United States)

Running time: 132 minutes

Country: United States

United Kingdom

Budget: $140-$160 million

Gross revenue: $289, 378, 043

Updates once again on the movie watching front! I have now seen Green Lantern and Bad Teacher, with reviews for both coming in soon. Also, on another note, I have been a fan of Laurel and Hardy for many years, but honestly, they make most of the so-called 'comedians' of today look horrible. I re-watched A Chump At Oxford last night: I haven't laughed this much at any of the comedies I have seen all year. Take note young comics, these guys could tell you a thing or two about how to make people laugh. No doubt Way Out West tonight will be as much fun!

The movie up for analysis today is X-Men: First Class. To be frank, it does suffer from the problem of 'is there any need to make this film?' After all, we already have X-Men, X2 (both of which I bought together for £4) and X-Men: The Last Strand as a trilogy, plus X-Men Origins: Wolverine as a stand-alone film. The idea of making a prequel to set up something already established seems superfluous. However, despite not caring for Layer Cake, after last year's Kick-Ass, I was enthused about Matthew Vaughan's switch from superhero parody/tribute to legitimate superhero franchise. In this film, set around the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, a young Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and foster-sister Raven (Jennifer Lawrence), are drafted by the CIA on the basis of their knowledge of mutants to install nuclear missiles in Turkey. The man behind this plot is Sebastian Shaw, formerly known as 'Dr. Schmidt' (Kevin Bacon), who conducted cruel experiments in a German concentration camp in Poland on a young man named Erik Lensherr (Michael Fassbender), who seeks revenge on Shaw. Xavier, seeing the power of Lensherr, drafts him in to help bring down their mutual enemy.

To start off with the goods, the X-Men series has always been known for having a good cast, and this film is no exception. James McAvoy plays a rather charming, intelligent, if occasionally rash young Charles Xavier. In a part that could have been very much the boring lead that ends up being dwarfed by his supporting cast, McAvoy makes us believe legitimately in this character and his playing it. Although having perhaps not as hard a job to do as McAvoy, Michael Fassbender is also great as Lensherr. His chameleonic abilities are displayed his skill as an actor to use dialogue (and languages) to throw as many powerful punches as any bullet in an action scene. The single-minded revenge plot and gradually unravelling future leader is a fascinating watch. Jennifer Lawrence, who got saddled with an unfortunately small part in The Beaver, gets a great role to play in Raven. This character has always been of a smaller proportion in the big picture, so it is nice to get Raven a good arc and an actress who is primed and ready to play it to the best of her abilities. Finally on the acting front, Kevin Bacon is wonderful as ever playing Sebastian Shaw/Dr. Schmidt. He makes a potentially boring villain a pleasure to watch. There are other good aspects about X-Men: First Class excepting the acting. Director Matthew Vaughan really has come into his own with this picture. His personal stamp is clearly all over First Class, and could be seen as a companion piece to Kick-Ass. He steps up his A-game and handles a difficult project with finesse and a love for the material. I personally feel that this is his best work yet and that only greater things will come. First Class has some excellent production design which is of worthy note. Some of the set's in the film, such as The War Room, which I gather is a reference to Dr. Strangelove, are magnificent and a pleasure to behold. Jane Goldman's contributions to the script inject a sense of personality and humour to what could be cold proceedings. Despite dark topic matter, it is at heart a warm film.

X-Men: First Class is a very fine film, however, to argue that it is a flawless film would be an out-and-out lie. Fundamentally, the X-Men as a franchise has always had problems in balancing out it's characters onscreen. As film is a medium which inevitably has more editing by default than a multi-decade long comic-book source material, there is a lot of stuff that ends up for the chop. As such, some of the characters in this film, particularly Shaw's cronies, some of the young mutants that Xavier finds and the CIA agents end up coming across as two-dimensional filler and not fully-fleshed characters. This is the type of film in which these characters are not well written have performances which correspond to this quality, or lack thereof. As a result, too many characters are involved in the film, move in and out of the plot and it ends up becoming, for lack of a better word, a bit of a clusterfuck.

Despite these problems, annoying as they are, X-Men: First Class is a great movie, the first I have come across in 2011. It may have too many characters, pretty messy and performances which correspond with the weaker characters, but it is the best origin story/stand-alone superhero film (excepting Hellboy II: The Golden Army) to emerge in the post-Batman Begins era of superhero films. It is handled well, efficiently and admirably by Matthew Vaughan. I have already mentioned a Dr. Strangelove reference, but the opening scene in the concentration camp is a shot-for-shot remake of the opening scene in Bryan Singer's X-Men, showing a real love and respect for those who came before him. McAvoy, Fassbender, Lawrence and Bacon give some great performances, and Jane Goldman's contributions give the script a real sense of personality. This is a very fine film and deserves to be seen more than some of the shoddier summer far we have on offer.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 8.2/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Pleased (I am about to watch Way Out West after all!)

P.S. Great to see Bill Milner, Michael Ironside and a certain fantastic cameo appearance