Reviews by SJMJ91

I was looking forward to seeing The King's Speech all year and now it is finally here! I must admit that I did actually enjoy it more than I was expecting to. It is a beautiful story that is truly inspiring and surprisingly a film that can and will make its audiences cry like it almost made me cry. Admittedly, I never really knew very much about King George VI until I saw this but he has really opened my eyes and has shown me that it is indeed Great Britain. I would naturally call The King's Speech an underdog story because Britain goes from bad to worse and then George picks this country up and fights! The film also demonstrated the passion and the pride that this country has and it is so great!


I must also admit that there were some moments in The King's Speech that were pretty damn funny so yeah, this film did have its light-hearted and friendly moments aswell. I tell you what this reminded me of (not regarding the story but how the audience feel about leader of country and country itself) is Clint Eastwood's Invictus because that film demonstrated how great South Africa became because of one man. As far as awards go, this isn't the first time that a historical film involving kings and queens has been a contender for Best Picture. Let's not forget Elizabeth, A Man For All Seasons, The Private Life Of Henry VIII, The Queen and a few others but this easily surpasses all of them and I am not even sure whether any other historical film will be able to beat this one! I think most of them fail because the acting is rather weak on occasions and I just fail to feel any emotion or anything realistic about them. I mean, there are some historical royalty films that can be too complex for its audiences depending on the viewer(s) but this is quite possibly the easiest royalty story that I think I have watched.


The King's Speech tells the story of the man who became King George VI, the father of Queen Elizabeth II. After his brother abdicates, George ('Bertie') reluctantly assumes the throne. Plagued by a dreaded stammer and considered unfit to be king, Bertie engages the help of an unorthodox speech therapist named Lionel Logue. Through a set of unexpected techniques, and as a result of an unlikely friendship, Bertie is able to find his voice and boldly lead the country through war.


It is simple an outstanding cast! British actors Colin Firth, Helena Bonham Carter, Guy Pearce, Michael Gambon, Derek Jacobi and Australian actor Geoffrey Rush join together in front of the screen and show the nation and the world how great Britain was back then and that there is still hope for a Great Britain. All of the actors had a lot on their shoulders going into this film especially Colin Firth and Helena Bonham Carter as George and Elizabeth. Colin Firth was absolutely outstanding! It was unfortunate that he didn't win Best Leading Actor last year for A Single Man but I think he'll win it this time round. If not Colin Firth, it'll go to James Franco in 127 Hours. It goes to show that despite George VI didn't have full confidence publicly of being a king but he had the heart of one and he was and still is a fine example of great men in this country and Colin Firth showed that! I was on the journey with George and felt like a proud Englishman all the way through it. Firth's performance as King George VI is definitely one of the best male performances that I think I have ever watched. In the past, Geoffrey Rush has played supporting roles in quite a few historical films about history and films set in a historical era like this such as Shakespeare In Love, Elizabeth, Elizabeth: The Golden Age and Twelfth Night but his performance as Lionel Logue was just brilliant! I thought that the bond between Rush as Logue and Firth as George was like a firm hold from the very start to the very end and together, they both build a friendship that makes Britain strong in a dark time. Geoffrey Rush also made me laugh on occasions and he should get his rightly deserved Oscar nomination too.


I was curious about Helena Bonham Carter playing Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon aka the Queen Mother seeing as Helena is perhaps the most unique and peculiar of all actresses and she's in a relationship and got children with the most unique and peculiar of all directors: Tim Burton. Anyway, I think she did an absolutely fantastic job and she made Elizabeth like a real hero because she was the one who went to Lionel Logue first for him to treat her husband George VI. I mean, yeah she did look like Elizabeth when she was younger, obviously, but she also looks like she would actually make a good Queen herself. To be honest, all three actors deserve their Oscar wins for their roles in this film. Other good performances from Guy Pearce as Edward VIII, Michael Gambon as George V, Timothy Spall as Winston Churchill and Sir Derek Jacobi as Cosmo Gordon Lang (Archbishop of Canterbury).


Tom Hooper is a director who is the early stages of his career making feature films but he has almost reached the top already. He previously directed The Damned United which was a success but not like this one. He deserves all the credit that he put into this film and he had a lot on his shoulders as well seeing as he controls all what is going on on-set. Screenwriter David Seidler apparently had stuttering problems as a child as well so that is another key point that makes this film just so great! His script was solid, genuine, heartfelt and at times, hilarious! However, it will be tough for him to beat Chris Nolan's script in Inception though.


Overall, The King's Speech is an absolutely magnificent film that is definitely one of the most moving and inspiring films that I have seen in a long time. It has made me feel proud to be English. As far as I'm concerned, despite The Social Network is the favourite for Best Picture and as brilliant as it is, The King's Speech along with Toy Story 3, Inception, Black Swan and 127 Hours, it completely swept it away! Her Majesty would be proud of this film and all of the actor's and maker's dedications towards the film. She may knight Colin Firth and maybe even Helena Bonham Carter for portraying her parents so amazingly! A masterpiece in every way and I would call it a tear-jerking film. I was just left speechless at the end of the film in the cinema.

I have had plenty of knowledge about the Aron Ralston incident ever since high school in 2003 when I was 12. This was announced by my headmaster and I was in shock when I was told about it. It was also on the news the night I came home and ever since then, I have always wanted to see a film about this. When I found out Danny Boyle was making a film about Aron Ralston, I couldn't wait to see it! The trailer looked fantastic as predicted as the film itself was. I would presume that some people might say that 'this looks boring because it is about one guy stuck and it looks cheap'. It really is not a cheap film at all! The filming of it was very professional and, if I am honest, very precise! The cinematography was absolutely outstanding and I hope that it wins the Academy Award for Best Cinematography as it should.


I absolutely loved 127 Hours from start to finish! This is a perfect example that shows the pride and the courage of the human heart and what must be done in order to survive. I'll tell you another real-life story that this reminded me of; and that was John McLaughlin and Will Jimeno's entrapment and rescue on 11th September 2001 and the film World Trade Center in general. I guess this was perhaps a really difficult film to give a solid title but quite frankly, I think '127 Hours' is a very solid title because it shows almost instantly how much pain and suffering Aron went through. It was very graphic only in two specific scenes (falling and his entrapment and the next bit is a bit of a spoiler) and I did feel uneasy in my seat in the cinema watching it.


127 Hours is the true story of mountain climber Aron Ralston's remarkable adventure to save himself after a fallen boulder crashes on his arm and traps him in an isolated canyon in Utah. Over the next five days Ralston examines his life and survives the elements to finally discover he has the courage and the wherewithal to extricate himself by any means necessary, scale a 65 foot wall and hike over eight miles before he is finally rescued. Throughout his journey, Ralston recalls friends, lovers, family, and the two hikers he met before his accident. Will they be the last two people he ever had the chance to meet?


I never thought I would say this but James Franco deserves the Academy Award for Best Leading Actor. His role as Aron is perhaps the most career defining performance that I think I have ever witnessed and it has become a massive breakthrough in his career. I mean, before he was just known as Harry Osborn in the Spider-Man trilogy and Pineapple Express, but now he has proven us wrong that he really isn't just another Hollywood actor and, quite frankly, I knew deep down that Franco can perform something worthy of an Oscar and he certainly showed that with 127 Hours so I hope he does well enough to do it again. This film may have pretty much just starred James Franco but I liked how strong the rest of the characters were such as the two hikers Christie and Megan who Aron met just before the accident and his lover Clémence Poésy and we go deeper and further into how their relationship was before Aron's accident. Surprised me with how Aron had a creative and intelligent side to him as well during his entrapment when he uses the equipment that he had with him to help him survive despite only being able to use one arm. You know what else is great about Aron Ralston? Despite what happened to him and what he had to do to survive, he is still a mountain climber now and that is pure inspiration and does take a lot of guts! The incident gave Aron a lesson as well because he never told anyone where he was going but now after that, he always tells his friends and family where he is going off to. I have to admit that despite Aron was in a sticky enough situation as it is, it could have been a lot worse! I mean, he could have had another body part trapped and might not have been at the bottom of the canyon and could've dangled half way down by his arm stuck in the boulder. So the whole thing was like a lesson for Aron but also woke him up because he truly realised what was important in life.


After Slumdog Millionaire, you can tell that this is a Danny Boyle film seeing as he again uses a similar style of filmmaking and cinematography. In every single film Danny Boyle has directed, he has taken us all on different journeys from different genres but this time, he takes us on a true journey and this is the first and only bio-pic film he has done thus far. I just can't wait for his next project. The script was adapted from the book called Between A Rock And A Hard Place by Aron Ralston himself as well as a true story of course. It was written by Danny Boyle and Simon Beaufoy I was impressed with how precise Aron managed to get it by remembering it all despite all the pain he went through during those 5 days. Brilliantly written especially when it is basically about one guy alone in the canyons and trying to survive when it could have been absolutely boring and nobody would care whether he lives or dies but also the fact, we go into flashbacks of Aron's youth and the times just before his voyage to Utah led to his entrapment, made it more dramatic and the audience are like 'You can do it! You can make it, Aron!' It is also brilliant how there were talks of Aron alone then actions then camera change etc. Just incredibly made! Danny Boyle needs Best Director nomination and he needs a shared nominated with Simon Beaufoy for Best Adapted Screenplay.


Overall, 127 Hours is a deeply inspiring, possibly tearjerking and horrifying film that is probably one of the most gripping films that I have ever watched. James Franco has delivered a career defining performance and he has shown us finally what he is best at doing. Danny Boyle succeeds once again but probably won't earn the same Oscar glory with this one like he did with Slumdog Millionaire. I would definitely call 127 Hours one of the best films of 2010 and also one of my favourite bio-pics films of all time too. One bit of a warning: prepare to squirm and cringe in your seat while watching this; especially in one specific scene. A must-see film!

Quite frankly to start off with, I wasn't entirely sure what to expect from this seeing as I didn't see the original version but when I did, I loved it so expectations went rather high for this remake. I have to admit that despite it is a remake and does feature pretty much the same scenes from the originals, it actually managed to work because there were slight adjustments to some events and script. Now, that is how a great remake works. To be honest, I would say that True Grit honoured the original 1969 version of True Grit like 1960 western The Magnificent Seven honoured its original film Seven Samurai in 1954.


The remake is perhaps more successful than the original by both critics and box office takings for the pretty obvious reason, really: because it's not as old and people won't be as fussy to watch it, pretty much everyone recognizes the actors within the remake as well as the directors. I mean, most remakes are like that more than the original versions (except critically the originals are mostly more successful). I will admit that this remake was darker (in terms of filming) than the original but the original version was stronger, more emotional and quite frankly, tenser.


Following the murder of her father by hired hand Tom Chaney, 14-year-old farm girl Mattie Ross sets out to capture the killer. To aid her, she hires the toughest U.S. marshal she can find, a man with "true grit," Reuben J. "Rooster" Cogburn. Mattie insists on accompanying Cogburn, whose drinking, sloth, and generally reprobate character do not augment her faith in him. Against his wishes, she joins him in his trek into the Indian Nations in search of Chaney. They are joined by Texas Ranger LaBoeuf, who wants Chaney for his own purposes. The unlikely trio find danger and surprises on the journey, and each has his or her "grit" tested.


Jeff Bridges really is the only actor who would've been able to play Rooster Cogburn with succeeding after John Wayne. Jeff's performance wasn't only a re-creation of a character that another actor showed in the older generation but Jeff re-lived Rooster Cogburn in the modern era and it was an honour! I mean, an actor like Mickey Rourke or Sylvester Stallone could have been cast as Rooster but they might have killed him so good job Jeff Bridges was cast. He probably won't win the Oscar for Best Leading Actor this year (would be a back-to-back win if he did) but Jeff should get Oscar nomination for his performance. Matt Damon in a western? Wow! I was quite surprised when I heard he was in this but he does look a bit like the actor who played LaBoeuf in the original True Grit film. His performance perhaps wasn't worthy of an Oscar nomination but it still is another good performance from Matt. Josh Brolin who appeared in 2007 Coen Brothers Best Picture winner No Country For Old Men and his character's in True Grit is quite similar to what his character's appearance was previously in No Country For Old Men. I mean, no he wasn't in it that much but he did play a great villain and re-lived the Tom Chaney character like Jeff Corey created it in the original version. Hailee Steinfeld was fairly decent as well but her performance wasn't Oscar material. At times, her acting was a bit plain and wooden like she was trying a bit too hard especially in the scene where she confronts Chaney by the stream and how she tries to take control of the two men who are accompanying her on this quest. I mean, you're with the Dude and Jason Bourne, lady! Don't even try it. I did love Kim Darby's performance in the original a lot more!


The Coen Brothers don't usually make remakes and that is another reason why I was a bit unsure about this one although they did remake The Ladykillers in 2004 starring Tom Hanks. Their directing style in True Grit did remind me a lot of No Country For Old Men but there were some familiarities with Fargo as well. One thing I really do admire about the Coen Brothers is that every year since No Country For Old Men in 2007, they have thought up some random stories that are darkly humorous (Burn After Reading in 2008, then A Serious Man in 2009 and now True Grit in 2010) and they still manage to write fantastic screenplays together. I was impressed with how they edited the script and wrote their own and still merged the scenes together from the original and the events that occurred. As I said, there were some slight changes in terms of scenes and events within the film. That didn't effect my liking of the film, though.


Overall, True Grit is a very dark, rather sinister and more badass remake where the directors and actors within gave the director and actors in the original like a firm handshake and a hug so to speak in honour of a successful remake. As good as this really was, I do still prefer the original version even though I predicted that anyway because I just loved the original. True Grit is a rarely successful remake that is perhaps now known as the best remake since Martin Scorsese's The Departed.

I had two attempts at seeing TRON: Legacy; first I arrived at the cinema and bought my ticket and when I was in the auditorium just about to watch it, there were complications with the projector and saw something else instead but the second time was a success. I almost saw this before the predecessor but when that first incident, I decided to watch it and I am glad I did because I really needed to so I can understand the story and the world they were in. Anyway, my expectations were pretty high, to be honest, because of the effects, art direction and other parts of production so was expecting a strong story. Well, stronger than the first film anyway. I did see the first film only recently and did like it but didn't greatly impress me.


The 3D experience was just magnificent! If you are going to see this film at all, whether expectations are high or not, at least check it out in 3D! Despite how good the 3D was, the film would almost be nowhere without it. Despite that the film didn't impress me greatly, the film totally deserves the Academy Award for Best Visual Effects and I think that the effects in TRON: Legacy were almost as fantastic as the effects in James Cameron's Avatar. I think the main flaws that this film had were that whilst inside Tron, it somehow didn't feel like inside a video game and I couldn't really feel any seriousness or drama between the characters, like at all.


Sam Flynn, a rebellious 27-year-old, is haunted by the mysterious disappearance of his father Kevin Flynn, a man once known as the world's leading video-game developer. When Sam investigates a strange signal sent from the old Flynn's Arcade -- a signal that could only come from his father-- he finds himself pulled into a digital world where Kevin has been trapped for 20 years. With the help of the fearless warrior Quorra, father and son embark on a life-or-death journey across a cyber universe -- a universe created by Kevin himself that has become far more advanced with vehicles, weapons, landscapes and a ruthless villain who will stop at nothing to prevent their escape.


Jeff Bridges makes his return and reprises his role as Kevin Flynn but this time, he has his son by his side and he has to fight off Clu (who is also played by Jeff Bridges). What I actually really liked was there was an old Jeff Bridges like he is now but there was also a character that Bridges portrayed who made him look younger like in the first Tron film so there was Jeff Bridges looking both young and old. One thing, though, the effects on Bridges as Clu didn't really look real and you could tell that it was either CGI or crap make-up. Garrett Hedlund was average to bad as Sam Lynn. I tell you he reminded me a lot of: Channing Tatum not only because of the looks but also the way he acts and the film choices. Olivia Wilde was actually alright in this one, surprisingly, as well as gorgeous. Bruce Boxleitner makes his return as Alan Bradley/Tron. He isn't it that much as Alan Bradley but in it a lot as Tron. Boxleitner and Bridges are the only two actors to have appeared in both Tron films.


I guess you could say that TRON: Legacy does have its similarities with G.I. Joe: The Rise Of Cobra in 2009; not only the effects but the world it is set in, the characters and also the story. Steven Lisberger who is the original creator of the characters and story in the first Tron film, wasn't even part of the sequel and, quite frankly, in some ways they did a decent job of it without him even though I did prefer the original. The action scenes were brilliantly filmed admittedly but there were loads of flaws in the script. I was thinking when watching it 'No, no, no!' while holding my head. Despite that there are quite a lot of flaws in TRON: Legacy, this really doesn't deserve Razzie nominations (except for Worst Screenplay perhaps). It probably will get a Worst Sequel/Prequel/Remake/Spin-Off nomination, though.


Overall, TRON: Legacy was a visually stunning (as predicted) but at the same time, pretty weak film in terms of dialogue, script and characters that I don't find an awful film nor a great one either. Despite how fantastic the effects are, I wouldn't even rent it on blu-ray because it is just a film to watch and experience once and that is it. Obviously, the predecessor is better and liked that one a bit more but still I would watch neither of them again. Entertaining once but wouldn't entertain me again, sorry.

Ever since the release of Meet The Fockers, there have been a lot of rumours about a third instalment in the series and, to be perfectly honest, I didn't really think it was a great idea especially when they only just survived critically with Meet The Fockers even though I prefer that one over Meet The Parents and quite frankly, it was literally everything that I was expecting it to be. I knew that because the predecessor and this one have a 6 year gap, I did think it would lose tone and then would have the same jokes with nothing different added to it. I think there was one thing that was absolute genius about this film and that was the title of the film. It is an absolutely fantastic title because yeah the kids names are Focker but kids really can be little fuckers at times! So the title is both extraordinary and hilarious. We had not seen them in the previous two and this one led to the family's lives with the kids here now.


It has taken 10 years, two little Fockers with wife Pam and countless hurdles for Greg/Gaylord to finally get "in" with his tightly wound father-in-law, Jack. After the cash-strapped dad takes a job moonlighting for a drug company, Jack's suspicions about his favourite male nurse come roaring back when he begins to get suspicious about Greg cheating on Pam with new work colleague Andi. When Greg and Pam's entire clan-including Pam's lovelorn ex, Kevin descends for the twins' birthday party, Greg must prove to the sceptical Jack that he's fully capable as the man of the house. But with all the misunderstandings, spying and covert missions, will Greg pass Jack's final test and become the family's next patriarch...or will the circle of trust be broken for good?


Robert De Niro is the perfect actor for the Jack Byrnes character but I am afraid to say that despite it is Robert De Niro, I thought he slightly lost his charm with the character and neither bought anything new and extraordinary to the character and didn't bring out anything that we hadn't seen before so I think he was on the edge of both of them. He wasn't bad, though, despite that. I love Ben Stiller in these films! He was brilliant once again as Greg/Gaylord Focker. I mean, both De Niro and Stiller certainly do make a great duo but because I wasn't entirely impressed with De Niro in this one, couldn't fully get to grips with the fantastic duo that we saw in the two predecessors. I just cannot stand Owen Wilson. He is an idiot who just cannot act (except Marley & Me perhaps) but because he was in this one more than Meet The Parents and Meet The Fockers, that was another reason why I sort of felt slightly put off by this third instalment. Not only did Jessica Alba make the audience feel worse for the relationship between Greg/Gaylord and Pam, she made our eyes burn with her admittedly gorgeous body but also her lousy acting! All I think of Andi's character is just a greedy, careless, dirty slut, nothing more. Daisy Tahan and Colin Baiocchi were actually very good as twins Samantha and Henry Focker.


Ok, so Jay Roach wasn't the director of Little Fockers this time like he was of Meet The Parents and Meet The Fockers although he did produce it again, like the first two films. Paul Weitz, who is perhaps the poorer director out of him and his brother Chris Weitz was chosen to direct this one and I have to say that most scenes were weakly handled and rather irresponsible on occasions. Paul previously did films such as Cirque Du Freak: The Vampire's Assistant, American Pie and About A Boy so I guess he has had experience with comedies but not really with a hugely successful one, though. Out of those films that he has done in the past, I would say that Little Fockers is his weakest project thus far. The script was rather soppy throughout most of the film but there were some interesting moments in the film too.


Overall, Little Fockers is a decent film that I did enjoy despite its extremely deep flaws and it's overdone dialogue. This needs to be the last of the series because I think it ended decent enough even though I still think that Little Fockers was rather irrelevant anyway and Meet The Fockers was a great film with a great, solid ending. There are great performances from most of the cast (except Wilson and Alba as predicted) but direction and script was rather lame. It is just a guilty pleasure that I would just watch for entertainment, nothing more.

For years, I have had A Man For All Seasons on DVD in my possession and have been meaning to watch it so when I looked upon it in my collection, I had this strong and rather sudden urge to watch it. There are a lot of films based on a true story with kings, queens, chancellors etc that have either been just decent or bad but I admit that A Man For All Seasons is probably the most successful of that kind seeing as it won 6 Academy Awards (Best Picture 1966, Best Leading Actor (Scofield), Best Director (Zinnemann), Best Costume Design, Best Cinematography and Best Adapted Screenplay) although I do think that Who's Afraid Of Virginia Woolf? should have won Picture, Director, Actor and probably everything else except Cinematography and Costume Design over A Man For All Seasons.


I think where I found this quite a powerful film was that it isn't only a tale of tragedy, betrayal and love but it is also a story of strong inspiration because Sir Thomas More stood up for his beliefs against Henry VIII of all people despite there being a friendship between the two of them. Plus, More was Henry's Chancellor as well which makes it even more heartbreaking. I tell you what else makes it an even stronger film personally is that you have to read the plot and you know what happens or is a fan of history and have read a lot into it but despite we know the ending, we feel gripped to it like we don't want it to happen and it becomes a predictable sad story. Another thing I must point out, despite we know that it is a true story but in a complex and hard to explain sort of way, there are some segments where this could have possibly worked as a Biblical story with the kings, the executions and their kingdom.


The story takes place in 16th century England. But men like Sir Thomas More, who loves life yet has the moral fibre to lay down their lives for their principles, are found in every century. Concentrating on the last seven years of English chancellor's life, the struggle between More and his King, Henry VIII, hinges on Henry's determination to break with Rome so he can divorce his current wife and wed again, and good Catholic More's inability to go along with such heresy. More resigns as chancellor, hoping to be able to live out his life as a private citizen. But Henry will settle for nothing less than that the much respected More give public approval to his headstrong course.


Actor Richard Burton who starred in Who's Afraid Of Virginia Woolf? the same year A Man For All Seasons was released was the first choice to play Sir Thomas More but rejected it presumably because he was working on Who's Afraid Of Virginia Woolf? (I don't blame him, to be honest) but Paul Scofield was just fantastic as Sir Thomas More. I think what I liked the most about his character was that he was completely open with how he felt and stood up for himself and probably for others seeing as they might have thought the same thing. Thomas More may have perhaps acted like a bitter man towards his family but stepping that aside, he stood up for his beliefs and I respect that! I really liked Wendy Hiller as Alice More who is the wife of Sir Thomas More and mother of Margaret More. She deserved her Academy Award nomination too. I must say that Robert Shaw actually really surprised me as Henry VIII and did an absolutely brilliant job! He perhaps wasn't in it a great deal but of what we saw of him, he was still awesome as the fat ginger king. Orson Welles plays a great supporting role as Cardinal Wolsey.


Fred Zinnemann earned Oscar glory in 1953 for From Here To Eternity and lightning has struck twice with A Man For All Seasons. I have watched both of his biggest successes and yet neither of them have managed to blow me away despite they are both still very enjoyable classics. One thing I do respect greatly about Zinnemann's work on this film is that it is a film made from a play and a play made from real-life and a lot of play film adaptations have been failures but thankfully this one wasn't. Also for this very reason, the screenplay was fantastic too.


Overall, A Man For All Seasons is a very enjoyable classic that I would definitely watch again but I do still feel that Who's Afraid Of Virginia Woolf? was robbed of the Oscars it won. This is perhaps the ultimate history film involving kings and queens of England but not quite one of the ultimate classics for me. If you're fond of history, you'll love this one!

Ok, first of all, I am going to confess that I needed to see this soon because the Coen remake is coming out very soon and I just needed to see the original version first and, quite frankly, I am really glad that I did because I am not entirely sure that I can see the Coen version beating this one (as awesome as they are). I am not really a big fan of western films because I always feel that they are the same with very similar characters, stories and backgrounds with almost no differences but I have to admit that True Grit is perhaps the most basic and straightforward western that I think I have ever watched.


The murder of her father sends a teenage tomboy, Mattie Ross, on a mission of "justice", which involves avenging her father's death. She recruits a tough old marshal, "Rooster" Cogburn, because he has "grit", and a reputation of getting the job done. The two are joined by a Texas Ranger, La Boeuf, who is looking for the same man Tom Chaney for a separate murder in Texas. Their odyssey takes them from Fort Smith, Arkansas, deep into the Indian Territory (present day Oklahoma) to find their man.


Admittedly, I hadn't been a strong admirer of John Wayne's before I saw this because I had only watched one of his films before this one but now after watching True Grit, I really like him now and seek to watch more at what he does best: as a badass character in westerns. I absolutely loved Rooster Coghurn's character because, yeah he may like a bitter old veteran but he is still a guy with feelings so there is like a clash between a cold-hearted man and a gentle man. When Rooster, Mattie and La Beouf were on their quest to find Tom Chaney, Rooster was almost acting like a father figure towards Mattie which did comfort her and that made the film seem a bit warmer. John Wayne fully deserved his first and only Academy Award in True Grit. I cannot wait to see Jeff Bridges portray Rooster in the Coen Brothers remake. Kim Darby was brilliant as Mattie Ross! I think most of you reading this will laugh at what I am about to say: I actually thought it was a young man when I first saw Kim as Mattie; like a James Dean sort of person. Anyway, her performance was intriguing because we see the innocence and heartbreak of a young girl but at the same time, the viewers watching begin to get this feeling that during her quest to find Chaney, she is slowly being dragged to a low level that will bring out the worst in her. She was robbed of an Academy Award nomination as well but it definitely is a great breakthrough performance from her. Glen Campbell was pretty awesome as La Beouf as well and I was impressed with Robert Duvall's supporting role as Lucky Ned Pepper. A great underrated role before The Godfather, The Godfather: Part II, Apocalypse Now amongst others.


Like every single western that I have watched, True Grit was filmed beautifully but Henry Hathaway and other crew members of the film have bought out a western that is obviously a load of fun with lots of gun action scenes and suspense but also some quite psychological segments too. Admittedly, I hadn't seen anything from Henry Hathaway before until now but, just like with John Wayne, I am now going to start to watch more films from Hathaway even though it'll be tough for any of his other films to beat this one for me. After watching the original True Grit, I now realise that this would make a typical Coen film and I can't wait to see that version too especially when that one has earned a stronger response than the original version.


Overall, True Grit is an extremely underrated western that I absolutely loved from start to finish. As I said, it is a very straightforward story but does go quite deep in terms of characters and what is happening or might happen. Despite the remake has had better reviews, it'll have to do really hard to beat this one! I think I am going to have to watch the sequel of this called: Rooster Cogburn starring John Wayne, of course, and the legendary Katherine Hepburn. I would definitely call True Grit one of my favourite westerns of all time. Just brilliant!

For years I have denied about considering watching Carrie and it has been on TV a couple of times over the years and every time I have skipped it but one night, it happened to be on TV so I recorded it and decided to give it a go seeing as I am watching more horror films nowadays and have grown out of that fear now. Plus, I love Stephen King and his works in general so that is another reason why I needed to see this. Carrie was indeed a scary film but not terrifying but it probably was back for its time so I think I found this as scary as A Nightmare On Elm Street which I saw for the first time a couple of months ago. There are moments where it is set in a normal high school but elsewhere there are moments that are Sam Raimi-like moments like from The Evil Dead trilogy, Within The Woods and Drag Me To Hell even though those were released after Carrie.


I must say what really surprised me about Carrie was that it was actually really emotional and rather heartbreaking because of the bullying that goes on within the school and what Carrie goes through at the hands of her abusive mother. The opening scene when Carrie had her first period in the shower was a shocking and powerful scene that ultimately showed Carrie's character and what she goes through and also the other girls within who laughed at her when Carrie thought she was like dying. It is more of a horror-thriller than a drama but I would still call it a drama film as well. It is also quite a twisted film as well because there are some peaceful moments but there are also some pretty damn sick moments too. I mean, the pig’s blood scene was so tense and I was like 'Oh for God's sake! Just do it!' It is perhaps a message about bullying and that it shouldn't happen no matter how someone looks or acts.


Carrie White is the outsider of her class. She's a mousy girl, all of her classmates hate her, and her mother is a religious fanatic who walks around in a black cape. After she unexpectedly has her first period, she is teased by the girls more ruthlessly than before. The gym teacher punishes the girls that were involved and one of them, Sue Snell, feels sorry for what she did and asks her boyfriend to take Carrie to the prom instead of her. But another girl that has been banned from the prom, Chris Hargenson, isn't so forgiving and hatches an evil plan with her boyfriend that involves Carrie and a bucket full of pig's blood. But what none of the students realize is that Carrie has the power of telekinesis, the power to move things with your mind, and that when you make her mad, she transforms from an innocent girl to a rage-filled monster. And this is gonna be a prom no one will ever forget.


Sissy Spacek has accomplished a lot in her career but here is what I think she is most famous for. Her performance as Carrie White was just fantastic! I did think it was quite extraordinary how well and how young Spacek looked as Carrie when Carrie is around 17-18 years old and Spacek was 26-27 years old at the time. She rightly deserved her first Oscar nomination for this performance but despite the roles are totally different, I did feel that Faye Dunaway in Network was the rightful winner. Piper Laurie was even better than Sissy Spacek in this one as the psychotic mother of Carrie; Margaret. Now, she creeped me out even more than Carrie did because of her obsession with religion, her possessive and abusive ways with Carrie and also the house that they both live in as well. It just makes it even scarier. One thing that I wasn't aware of until I saw it was that John Travolta had a supporting role in Carrie and this was before Saturday Night Fever and Grease which are his famous roles in his early days of his career. I guess you could compare John Travolta's supporting debut role in Carrie like Johnny Depp's supporting debut role in A Nightmare On Elm Street.


Most of Brian DePalma's famous films aren't really very friendly films so he has usually gone for crime, action or horror films. His work on Carrie was rather impressive and I do think he was robbed of Best Director in 1976. I liked how he mixed the beauty of the film to the horror and, quite frankly, they worked pretty damn well together. The period scene was impressive (no, not just because of a girl having a period) but because it was really well edited and there were some impressive shots and it made it a very genuine and rather heartfelt moment. The script was incredible! I liked how they used some quotes from the Bible especially from Margaret because in a way, it makes it sound like that God has turned her into this mad psycho and has made her be like the way she is.


Overall, Carrie is a classic horror film that is full of fears and tears. There are some stupid teen-horrors nowadays like Jennifer's Body, Twilight (not horror but still involves teenage characters and vampires), most of the films from Uwe Boll (in fact, probably every film from him) and others but this is the Don of all of them! I would say it is like a tragic story as well as a scary one too. It definitely is one of my favourite horror/thrillers so you cannot afford to miss this one!

After the strong negative criticism that Jingle All The Way had, I was considering just giving it a miss but when it was Christmas, I changed my mind and decided to at least give it a go (which is something that I always do with almost every film). So, I would say it is a film that I just decided to watch for curious purposes and, quite frankly, I actually enjoyed it. Yes, I enjoyed it. Admittedly, I am a sucker for entertainment but what I really spotted with Jingle All The Way was its incredibly fun side but also its laughably awful side at the same time so I would say it isn't a bad film and it isn't a good film either.


Understandably, most people only watch Christmas films around the Christmas season because it doesn't feel the same when watching one like in the middle of the summer or spring and that doesn't always work with me and can watch Christmas films in the summer despite I love Christmas. However, with Jingle All The Way; it is a film that I would only watch at least once every year when it is near to Christmas to brighten up my Christmas spirit and giving me 80-90 of pure entertainment. Throughout most of the film, I just went 'no, no, no!' in a rather shameful way but others I just chuckled in a 'What the f***?' sort of way. The dialogue is hilarious but daft.


Howard Langston, a salesman for a mattress company is constantly busy at his job, and he also constantly disappoints his son, after he misses his son's karate exposition, he tries hard to come up with a way to make it up to him, this is when his son tells Howard that he wants for Christmas is an action figure of his son's television hero, Turbo Man. Unfortunately for Howard, it is Christmas Eve, and every store is sold out of Turbo Man figures, now Howard must travel all over town and compete with everybody else including a mail man named Myron to find a Turbo Man action figure, and to make it to the Wintertainment parade which will feature Turbo Man.


Arnold Schwarzenegger, surely you must have been stoned in front of the casting director to agree to sign up for this one! I mean, I did like Arnie in this film on occasions but… it is ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER! This is the guy who plays the Terminator, was the leading actor in Predator and has starred in other brutal action films who is like an action rival against Sylvester Stallone. I mean, seeing Arnie play a soft, gentle and emotional character was just weird to see and the fact that he kept getting beaten by other characters both emotionally and physically is just beyond belief! I mean, doing all that for a poxy toy! Come on! I think everybody probably noticed this: the young boy who plays Arnie's son Jake Lloyd played Anakin Skywalker in Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace. His performance wasn't that bad despite he was only 7 years old at the time and after watching Jingle All The Way, I have absolutely no idea what George Lucas liked and what led Jake to play such a powerful and crucial character like Anakin Skywalker. So I guess you could say that Jingle All The Way has a bit of Terminator and a bit of Star Wars part of it.


I am sorry but I have to admit that the direction was just atrocious! It was rather cheesy and there weren't any unique camera angles. Also, a lot of the chase and some fight scenes were quite rushed and also I think that the way he handled the scenes in the house such as the lighting and other bits was weak as well. I noticed quite a lot of bloopers as well so that is another major weakness. The script was cheesy! I mean, the dialogue in general is daft enough but the screenplay is just laughably awful but in a funny and humorous way which was in a way, a good thing for a film like this with a daft story.


Overall, Jingle All The Way is a Christmas film that is neither good nor bad. I shockingly and surprisingly enjoyed it despite the many flaws that it has. It probably is worth watching at least once a year around the Christmas season but it is one of my biggest guilty pleasures. If they're gonna cast Arnie in this one, they might as well cast Sylvester Stallone in a sequel to this which will be mad! Arnie you can do so much better and there are many Christmas films that are so much better than this. Still a fun film, nothing more.

To be perfectly honest, the trailer looked typical Disney that combines fiction with reality just with live-action, not animation. I am not really a great big fan of live-action Disney films although there have been fantastic Disney live-action films over the years such as Pirates Of The Caribbean, Enchanted, The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch And The Wardrobe, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time and few others but I am afraid to say that this is one of their weakest live-action films. Understandably, Disney try to take you to an enchanting world or to mix fiction with reality as I said but this wasn't gripping to hold on to and also it wasn't even fun to watch because the dialogue was so cheesy and unrealistic although the effects were fantastic.


Balthazar Blake is a master sorcerer in modern-day Manhattan trying to defend the city from his arch-nemesis, Maxim Horvath. Balthazar can't do it alone, so he recruits Dave Stutler, a seemingly average guy who demonstrates hidden potential, as his reluctant protégé. The sorcerer gives his unwilling accomplice a crash course in the art and science of magic, and together, these unlikely partners work to stop the forces of darkness. It'll take all the courage Dave can muster to survive his training, save the city and get the girl as he becomes The Sorcerer's Apprentice.


Jay Baruchel may have played the main character in How To Train Your Dragon but his performance as Dave in The Sorcerer's Apprentice is absolutely appalling! He brought nothing new to a character who has been dragged into magic and his life being changed forever. He was just another hopeless, teenage muppet who has absolutely no character whatsoever. I mean, with that girl that Dave met, I literally thought when they saw each other that she's gonna get herself involved and they're gonna end up kissing and guess what? To my shock horror, they did! The entire film was stupidly predictable! Nicolas Cage hasn't been a fantastic actor for quite a while (only just managed to create his breakthrough in Kick-Ass) but in all fairness to him, I don't think he was that awful in this one than he has been before in the past. Alfred Molina has portrayed a villain in pretty much every fantasy/sci-fi film that he has been involved in (let's not forget his fantastic portrayal of Dr. Otto Octavius/Doctor Octopus) and I actually liked him in this one which did surprise me a lot. That is probably the best quality that the film had besides the effects despite the film overall was crap.


Jon Turterltaub, I'll give you credit: you did a decent job with both National Treasure films which are also produced by Disney but I'm sorry but this was just in a word; fail. You really need to wise up and make films that are actually entertaining and are gripping to the audience, not this extremely predictable, soppy and daft shit. I mean, I am usually really into fictional fantasy films that involve magic, magical creatures and objects etc but the characters within this film just didn't work for me at all. The script was crazy! I mean, one minute there is archaeology discussion then there's babbling on about wizards then about teenage lovers at school and so on and the lines that they come out with is like disgustingly hilarious!


Overall, The Sorcerer's Apprentice is a crap film that I really did not like and one that I wouldn't call an example just for entertainment. Nicolas Cage, you can do so much better! The effects were obviously brilliant but pretty much everything else was just shit. One of the worst films of 2010.