Hereafter, Black Swan

Hereafter - 5.5/10
Hereafter concerns the strory of an unwilling psychic, played by Matt Damon, who is the central meeting point of two other characters trying to come to terms with death and the afterlife. In my opinion, a nice enough idea. French journalist Marie survives a tsunami, but is haunted somwhat by her time in said afterlife, after she just about came back to life. English twin Marcus goes through the film trying to connect with his brother, Jason, who is killed early on in the film. The picture is a change of pace for action man Matt Damon, but he does surprisingly well, he pulls off the tortured-soul gig convincingly and you get a real sense of the character's inner turmoil at what others, including his pushy brother, call a gift, he refers to as a burden. The film is watchable in the main, but is utterly ruined by probably the worst child performances I have ever watched. English twins Frankie and George McLaren give awkward and completely unconvincing turns in pivotal roles, and their side of the plot is all but written off in my eyes, as they give dialogue that seems as if they are reading off a cue card. It gets better, I'll give them that, but only because the surviving twin doesn't have an awful lot of talking to do, thank the Lord. The plot itself seems to dabble in seeingly needless side-plots, like the cooking partner Damon has in night school, who begs him for a reading then disappears after Damon sees that she was abused as a child, I felt this could have made the film more hard-hitting, and the plot line dissolves before it's really begun, which is disappointing. I should give credit to the tsunami sequence that opens the film, whether or not it was meant to be the Thailand disaster of 2004 is unclear, but either way it is an effective sequence. Overall, Hereafter is a good storyline that doesn't quite pack the punch it ought to. Director Clint Eastwood has done perfectly well in the past with sentimental films, look no further than 2009's Gran Torino for proof, but there's something missing from this that makes it a tame effort, and the fact that I couldn't tell you what probably makes it even worse.

Black Swan - 9.5/10
Movies are not often made about ballet in this day and age. Dance movies in the 21st century are usually about hard done by kids doing flips in the street, and perhaps because of this, Black Swan won't get the attention it thorughly deserves. It tells the tale of Nina Sayers, who is portrayed superbly by Natalie Portman, a shy and naive ballerina who is cast as the Swan Queen in her company's upcoming production of Swan Lake. As the movie progresses, Nina changes drastically, trying desperately to impress her director, mother and stave off competition from a feisty newcomer who appears to be after her role. No doubt Portman will win numerous accolades for her turn in this film. I hardly think there are enough superlatives to describe her, but she is worth the money on her own. However, saying that, the movie is perfectly able to stand on its own merits. It is not what you think it is. Trust me when I say that Black Swan is deeply psychological film, with scenes that would probably fit in to many modern horrors. Director Darren Aronofsky is shameless in his imagery, constantly showing us the contrast of black and white, light and dark, good and evil that is basically the underlying battle throughout the movie. Mila Kunis is also excellent in her role as Nina's rival, who convinces her to let loose and truly become the Black Swan that is shown to be inside her from the outset. The film keeps the viewer guessing throughout, and is unflinching in its portrayal of the psychological breakdown that is occuring within Nina's head. I have no doubt in my mind that this will be up for many awards, and so it should be, a truly sterling effort all round that quite frankly needs to be seen, and is a perfect example in every way that you should never judge a book by its cover.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1, London Boulevard, Monsters

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 - 7/10
The beginning of the end, as it were. 2001 seems a long time ago now, when we first laid eyes on Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson as real life interpretations of Harry Potter, Ron Weasley and Hermione Grainger respectively. Back then they were young, unknown, children. Now, they're worldwide celebrities, and more importantly and tellingly, adults. The film doesn't appear to hide what it is inevitably trying to do. It is solely a prequel to the final installment, due July 2011, and doesn't really add to the series of films as a whole. Sure, the background information is handy and probably needed but surely it would've been possible to do this book in one film? The 2-part system had been considered before, concerning the fourth chapter, HP and the Goblet of Fire. They decided against it then, and in my opinion would've been better off making the same decision now. In not doing so, they have been forced, almost, to create a film that is slow and ponderous for much of its middle section, dwelling on matters that needn't be dwelled upon, adding scenes that really don't need to be added, such as the cringeworthy dance scene between Harry and Hermione, which shows nothing but Radcliffe's tendency to become uncomfortable and awkward in such a big role. Nevertheless, the film has definite high points, and has managed to keep the tongue-in-cheek humour from previous parts of the series. For example, the animated scene explaining the Deathly Hallows themselves is a surprisngly welcome addition and change of feel for the series. Overall, the film does its job, it is a good lead-up to the second part, which ought to be a lot more entertaining, however surely the Potter universe will always wonder how much better the book would be interpreted as a one parter, guess we'll never know.
London Boulevard - 4/10
Haven't I seen this before? I'm sure i've seen this before. British gangster films are not hard to come by, one usually appears every year, recently the not-so-bad RocknRolla, but that was by Guy Ritchie, the guy basically invented the genre as it is today. Yet, he, nor any other director, has ever hit the heights of Snatch, or Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. It's disappointing, the genre has a lot of potential. Oh well, life goes on, and more and more British gangster films hit our screens. This one, featuring Colin Farrell doing a rubbish 'Landan' accent and Ray Winstone being typecast, falls very far short of the high standards set by the films mentioned above. The plot is fairly simple, ex-con comes out of jail, tries to stay clean, gets mixed up with the wrong crowd etc etc, yet it still somehow manages to confuse itself, when you sit there wondering why you're watching the scene you're watching, asking yourself, 'what was the point in that?'. The ad campaign and trailers would suggest that Keira Knightley has a pretty big role in the film, in my opinion, her character is a side-plot. She is somewhat unneccessary, the story could have been told with her character being far more low-stated. She gives Farrell's character a job, and a love interest, but that's about it, I reckon Ray Winstone should be on the posters. Anyway, London Boulevard is a British crime/gangster movie, it tries hard, probably too hard, to stay in that bracket, and is a worse film because of it, it is overemphasised and obvious, quite a let down if you ask me.

Monsters - 8.5/10
This film isn't what you think it is. It's not another War of the Worlds, not another Cloverfield even, it's more of a mixture of John Hillcoat's 2009 post-apocalyptic interpretation The Road, admittedly a bit of War of the Worlds, and, perhaps most surprisingly, Titanic. You may scoff, but what does the whole two-characters-from-different-social-backgrounds-who-learn-from-each-other-and-share-a-forbidden-romance subplot remind you of? Told you. The story is basically that a few years before the film is set large octopus-esque aliens landed on Earth and have been pretty hard to budge, thus creating an 'infected zone'. The film comprises of two main characters, one male, a journalist who is asked by his boss to escort the lead female, who is the boss's daughter (forbidden romance much?) back home. Inevitably, things conspire against them, and they have to go through the infected zone, where they come up against rustling in the woods, obviously inhuman roars and eventually come face to face with two actual aliens. It is this scene where the moral of the movie finally hits home, a hostile conclusion ends with us asking ourselves the question, who is the title really referring to? A superb first-time effort on a shoe-string budget, a must-see.

Saw 3D, Paranormal Activity 2, The Social Network

Saw 3D - Kevin Gruetert - 6/10

Saw 3D is the seventh installment in the Saw series, which began what feels like an eternity ago in 2004. 6 increasingly gruesome and repetitve films later, here we are, Saw 3D, the natural progression of the series into today's 3D revolution. The film appears to take the series full-circle, supposedly tying up all the loose ends (of which there are a LOT), and filling the gaps in the actual plot, storyline and dialogue with a now familar tale of a man attempting to overcome various gory but admittedly inventive traps in which his colleagues and loved ones are ensnared. That bit of the plot is what the Saw fans have come back to see times, and they won't, and if you are one of these, you won't exactly be disappointed, there is plenty blood and guts to keep you satisfied, which, with the addition of 3D, occasionally appears to fly at you from the screen, boring and cheap if you ask me, terrifying if you ask another, fun if you ask someone else (who may be a bit weird). So if that's what you're looking for, yeah, by all means go for it, pay the extra money for the glasses and enjoy it, which you by all means ought to. However, if you are looking for some sort of film from which you can take a message, or find some Oscar-worthy performances, you may want to look elsewhere, its not exactly what I would deem a classic. It's a Saw film, through and through, though, so will no doubt go down well with the series' loyal and bloodthirsty fans.

 
Paranormal Activity 2 - Tod Williams - 7/10
Paranormal Activity 2 does exactly what it says on the tin. Following on from the huge cult success of Paranormal Activity 1 from last year, this new follow up, set before the actual events of the first one, promises more bumps in the night than the admittedly terrifying first installment, whether it follows up on these claims is a different matter. The main reason why I think PA1 worked so well was because of two things. 1: people didn't know what they were in for, and 2: the all-important hype. The movie was an internet sensation, after being played in small college towns in America, it was demanded by millions and eventually gained a worldwide release. This second one however, has lost the element of surprise. Paying viewers have walked into that cinema knowing exactly what to expect, and they're right to be fair to them, the movie is full of jumps and scares, demonic presences and as mentioned before, bumps in the night. I got the feeling that the audience I was with were treating it as an excuse to laugh at each other when they got scared, the atmosphere created by this ruined the jumpy bits slightly. One moment in particular raised such a laugh that I almost felt like the movie I was watching was a spoof of its predecessor (I'll give you a clue, it's when the baby gets dragged up its cot, hilarious) . However, the movie still packs a creepy punch, and I was certainly scared by it, not as much as the first one maybe, but I'd definitely recommend this one if you're up for a good fright.

The Social Network - David Fincher - 8/10
This was inevitable. Facebook, the common link between 500 million people worldwide, finally gets its story told on the big screen. Mark Zuckerberg, the man behind the friend requests and notifications, said he 'just wished they waited till after he died to make a film' about him, sorry Mark, no chance of that happening, Facebook is too well-known, too marketable to not be made into a film. So, its quite important that this film is good, then, right? It represents a generation, the Facebook generation, and how their (I should say 'our', I'm definitely one of these people) lives have become revolved around status updates and the continuing perils of Facebook chat. Anyway, onto the film. It is pretty good, the dialogue is excellent in places, and Zuckerberg is portrayed brilliantly by Jesse Eisenberg, who delivers one-liners and mind-boggling equations alike to an absolute tee. Justin Timberlake is not so good, no shock there, and some of the characters seem a bit, defenceless, the upper class twins are made to look like fools, as is Zuckerburg's best friend (incidently, it is these characters that end up sueing Zuckerberg in the film). Also, Zuckerberg himself does come across, overall, as a bit of a twat, really, which makes the film sort of hero-less, there is no-one the viewer can get behind, empathise with, support, but other than that it is a very strong effort from Fincher, who can boast films like 'Se7en' and 'Fight Club' in his repertoire, and it is a film that grew on me, and I make it one of the best this year.