Worst Five Films 2012

I don't want to sound nasty and vindictive in compiling this list but the films which follow are, from my reviewed films, the worst of 2012. If I sat you down and made you watch them back-to-back (don't worry, I'm not that heartless), you'd need to lie down in a dark room and listen to The Very Best of Enya album in order to calm down and prevent yourself from punching someone very hard in the face. If you've had the good fortune to have missed these films, please read this as a public health warning. Don't waste valuable hours of your life watching these putrid, vomitous, rotten, corrupted, vile, cynical and – above all – boring films.

5. 
   Wrath of the Titans

All show and no tunics, Wrath of the Titans proved that it was possible to so catastrophically misjudge the balance between story and action that I left the cinema delusionally thinking that Michael Bay's narrative cinema wasn't actually that bad. Starring Sam Worthington (Avatar, Man on a Ledge) as Perseus, the demi-god and son of Zeus, the film leaps from one set piece to another and totally bypasses any semblance of a plot. The action it favoured was flat, unenergised and even exploding mountains couldn't stop me wishing I'd stayed at home and alphabetised my Mum's cookbook collection. The relentless, tedious action seemed to be an attempt by director Jonathan Liebesman to try and hide the lack of a plot from the audience. Sorry Jon, it didn't work.

4. 
   Wanderlust

Annoying, painful and grating are all words which could be used to describe a migraine. They are, also, perfectly suited to discussing Wanderlust, a 'comedy' staring Paul Rudd and Jennifer Aniston. The pair play George and Linda, a couple who, after losing their house in New York, decide to try an alternative way of life in a rural commune to find themselves and discover the important things in life. I was aware of the number of times I laughed: zero. Not even a smile. With annoying characters, painful jokes and a rather prejudiced look at the world of hippies, Wanderlust is intrinsically dull and has the comedic wit of a chewing gum packet. However, it's not all bad: I had my review of this film read out on BBC Five Live. Every cloud...

3. 
   Ted

Obviously I'm out-of-touch with the youth of today. Many found Ted, Seth McFarlane's comedy about a pot smoking teddy bear to be the funniest film of the year. I didn't. The number of times I smiled could be counted on Homer Simpson's left hand and the number of times I laughed on a snake's. To get away with jokes about 9/11, the humour should have been astronomically funny. It wasn't. The characters should have been perceptive and funny manifestations of the concerns of moving from childhood to adulthood. They weren't. The CGI bear was well done but it should have been less crude and, fundamentally, more comedic. It wasn't. All in all, I'd rather eat a bowl of desiccated toe nails than sit through Ted again. Honestly.

2. 
   Rock of Ages

Just missing out on the top (or should that be bottom?) spot, is a musical which boasts the star names of Tom Cruise, Catherine Zeta Jones and Russell Brand. With some big 1980s rock anthems such as 'Any Way You Want It' and 'Don't Stop Believin'', Rock of Ages simply exists as a royalties generator. The characters were totally unbelievable, the dialogue and plot dire and the songs...well, X Factor's Rylan could have put more soul into them. Cruise's rather bemusing performance as the out-of-control rocker Stacee Jaxx pales into insignificance when Brand pipes up with his awful (and rather bemusing) Cockney accent. Cringe-worthy, this film is most definitely. Entertaining, it most definitely isn't. 

1. 
   Piranha 3DD

For all our sakes, I'll keep this brief. Some have called Hugo and Life of Pi examples of how 3D can be used to great effect. Piranha 3DD is the example of how it shouldn't. More misogynistic than gangsta rap, more hideous than Donald Trump's hair and supremely boring, the film is offensively made and appeals to the lowest common denominator on every occasion. Slow-motion shots of women running around with nothing on and piranha fish coming out of a woman and biting a man's penis off (yes, you read that correctly) were, quite possibly, the best bits of a film which is so unintelligent that it makes The Only Way is Essex look like an orange version of University Challenge. All prints of this film should be shut away in a lead-lined box and thrown to the bottom of the Pacific. That's all I'm saying on the matter.

On that note, Happy New Year to all my readers! Your support is really appreciated.

Top Five Films 2012

Yes, it's that time of year when I attempt to sum up the year's filmic offerings and compose my 'Top Five of 2012' list. Now, before we begin, I have to point out that whilst I have seen a nice cross-section of this year's films, I'm not super-human and haven't been able to catch everything. You will, no doubt, shout 'how could he have left that out?!' and there are some highly-recommended films which I haven't seen. Life of Pi has been very well-received, as has Planet of Snail which was hailed by many as a moving documentary about friendship and love. Equally, Michael Haneke's Amour has been much lauded, as has the thriller Argo which, for many, is their favourite film of 2012. It's been very difficult to narrow down the films to a top five. The fact that I've excluded the likes of The Pirates! In An Adventure With Scientists, Jeff, Who Lives at Home, Avengers Assemble and Silver Linings Playbook shows just how good 2012 has been for film. Over the past year, I've seen and reviewed forty-four films. And these, in my opinion, are the best of the bunch...

5. 
   The Hunger Games

Based on the best-selling book, The Hunger Games could quite easily have been a superficial action flick for teenagers which could have quickly disappeared to a DVD stand in a pound shop. In reality, The Hunger Games was discussed in the same sentence as Harry Potter and Twilight. The dis-utopian future portrayed in the film, where each year, twelve teenagers are selected to fight one another to the death in the annual Hunger Games contest, was rather unsettling and the action was enthralling, the violence visceral and shocking. A stunning central performance from Jennifer Lawrence as the head-strong and ferociously-driven Katniss Everdeen was a refreshing addition to young female protagonists seen in recent years. The second book, Catching Fire, is due to be released as a film next year and if it is anything like The Hunger Games, it will be hugely – and deservedly – successful.

4. 
   The Descendants

With a strong cast led by George Clooney, The Descendants is a strange film. It follows Hawaiian land baron Matt King (Clooney) as he struggles to come to terms with a jet ski accident which has left his wife in a coma and his relationships with his two children in turmoil. Watch it once and you'll find it moving, funny, engaging and you will want to book a flight to Hawaii straight away. But wait a few days and something very odd will happen. Rather like a Polaroid photo, the film develops on an emotional level long after the credits have rolled. Indeed, it was only a week or so after I'd seen the film that I looked back and thought 'you know what, I was much more affected by that film than I first believed'. Whether it was the powerful performances (especially from Shailene Woodley as Clooney's teenage daughter) or the thought-provoking narrative, I don't know. What I do know, however, is that it is one of my favourite films of 2012. 

 

3. Skyfall

In my mind, no list of the best films of 2012 will be complete without an appearance from Bond 23. Not because it's James Bond and not because it's taken nearly $1 billion worldwide. Skyfall succeeds thanks to Daniel Craig's troubled and lethal Bond, some fantastic action sequences, a brilliant villain and, importantly, a return to old-style Bond. By this, I don't mean a return to the invisible cars of Brosnan or rather suspect treatment of women, but a return to the essence of Bond: stylish, gritty and supremely entertaining. Paradoxically both traditional and updated for the 21^st Century, Skyfall is as British as it gets and after the patriotic year we've had, that's no bad thing.

2. 
   The Dark Knight Rises

Hailed by many as an auteur director, Christopher Nolan brought his Batman trilogy to an epic conclusion with The Dark Night Rises. Beautifully-shot and with a real sense of dramatic gravitas, Nolan's film is masterful in its approach to reinventing the superhero genre (you need only look to the new Superman film to see its impact) and offers much on repeat viewings. Despite a few very minor plot issues which weren't satisfactorily addressed, there's plenty to keep mouths wide open in amazement. Hans Zimmer's score and a stellar cast only heightened the unrelenting thrills of a film which requires no interest in comics to enjoy. This is high-stake, intelligent, pulsating action cinema at its very best.

1. 
   Rust and Bone

Here it is. The best film of 2012. Rust and Bone is a French film and, as such, you won't have seen it. In fact, I would bet a lot of money (well, £5) that you haven't seen it. You're missing out. Starring Marion Cotillard and Matthias Schoenaerts, the film sees Stephanie (Cotillard), an orca whale trainer who, after an horrific accident, develops a strange and deep relationship with Ali (Schoenaerts), a nightclub bouncer who wants to make it big in the world of boxing and kick-boxing. You could throw a bucket load of superlative adjectives at Rust and Bone and the vast majority of them would stick to a film which, whilst not perfect, features such gut-wrenchingly powerful performances that its emotional impact has been unrivalled this year. Painfully consuming and dramatic in every sense of the word, Rust and Bone restores my faith in cinema which, as we shall see with my Worst Five Film list, has been seriously shaken throughout the past year. See it. Now.

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

In October, I was lucky enough to see Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring in concert in Paris. A full orchestra and choir sat in front of a cinema screen and played the film's soundtrack live. It was one of the most amazing cinematic experiences I've had and was a fantastic prelude to the release of The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. Having read Tolkien's original novel (and unsuccessfully attempting the sequel, The Lord of the Rings) when I was eleven, I was keen to find out how much I would remember of the book and how it would translate to screen. As it turns out, my memory is very patchy and my star rating for this film has been the most difficult to decide upon this year.

If there's one thing to say about The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey it is this: it's far too long. At 169 minutes, and the first of three films, An Unexpected Journey only makes it to Chapter Six in the novel. In terms of narrative, the first forty minutes do feel very slow and full of lethargic exposition. In all fairness, a certain amount of exposition was necessary: Tolkien's fantasy world demands careful attention to detail and as an audience, we were being introduced to many new characters. It's just the time it took for Bilbo (Martin Freeman) to run out of his green front door in search of an adventure that was rather over-stretched. Once things got going, however, and the epic helicopter shots of the New Zealand landscape started, the film stepped up a metaphorical notch. As in The Lord of the Rings, director Peter Jackson has created some vivid characters (this time, more dwarves than you could shake a sword at) and has retained the spectacular fantasy which characterised his earlier trilogy. Martin Freeman is perfectly cast as Bilbo, and plays the part with a charming and disarmingly comic edge. A strong supporting cast, led by Ian McKellen as Gandalf and featuring Richard Armitage and James Nesbitt as dwarves of every shape and size were entertaining to watch. Some familiar faces from Jackson's last outing to Middle Earth gave a nice continuity to the film (yes, Gollum's back!). 

Speaking of continuity, some of the best moments in the film were when Howard Shore's accomplished score revisited themes and musical motifs from The Lord of the Rings. Evoking the emotional depth and dark subject matter of The Return of the King, the soundtrack also highlights why The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey doesn't quite work. I kept finding myself comparing the film to The Lord of the Rings which is, from one perspective, doing the film a disservice. Tolkien's original novel is a work of children's literature and, by nature, is much lighter and more humorous than its sequel. Yet the film seemed to be confused about its tone: the action and drama kept shifting and modulating between the serious tone adopted by The Lord of the Rings and the more playful tone of the source. At times, the characterisation and dialogue seemed rather superficial, something which some critics have blamed, in part, on the 48 frames per second which was used to shoot the film. Personally, I felt that the moments in which the film was more closely aligned with The Lord of the Rings were far better and far more cinematic. The decision to shoot another trilogy is, in my opinion, a misjudged one: two, two hour films would have been much more successful. But hey, I haven't seen the other two instalments, so who am I to judge?

An Unexpected Journey certainly has some stunning visual effects and Jackson's love and intense interest in the construction of Middle Earth is plain to see. Its fundamental flaw, however, is its length. There are some nice, exciting and powerful moments in the film, but these are eclipsed and become weighed down by excess baggage: you certainly wouldn't want to take the running time on an Easyjet flight. All in all, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey is really fun, entertaining and a welcome return to Middle Earth, albeit a rather long one. My reservations are founded on comparisons with The Lord of the Rings – something I don't apologise for. But don't listen to those who say it's unwatchable and disappointing. They just don't have a strong enough bladder. 

Clapperboard Rating: * * * (and a half!) 

Silver Linings Playbook

With perhaps the most confusing film title since the dinosaur-free Tyrannosaur, Silver Linings Playbook is a romantic comedy/drama which could quite easily be the perfect date movie. For starters, it stars Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence who provide more than enough eye candy to satisfy both parties, should the date not be going to plan. Adapted from a novel of the same name and directed by David O. Russell, Silver Linings Playbook is quite often surprising, frequently heart-felt and always superbly acted. Take a girl to see this film and she'll be very impressed with your taste in movies...

David O. Russell is a film-maker renowned for his bizarre shifts in tone from film-to-film and his latest release is no different. Somewhat of a departure from The Fighter, O. Russell's previous film, Silver Linings Playbook mixes Pat (Cooper), a former school teacher who has spent the last eight months in a psychiatric hospital suffering from bipolar disorder, with Tiffany (played by Lawrence) whose mental health has also been seriously compromised by the death of her policeman husband. When Pat is discharged from hospital, he moves back in with his parents who are determined to help him get his life back on track. His friendship with Tiffany develops and it soon becomes clear that the two exert a positive force on one another.

Central to this film's success are the performances. Jennifer Lawrence has already proved herself to be the upcoming talent during her stellar performance in The Hunger Games and really shines opposite Bradley Cooper who may just have done enough to atone for his sins in The Hangover Part II. Cooper sensitively, but boldly, portrays a character whose mood swings and frustrated musing about the ending of A Farewell to Arms confound his parents, who themselves are part of the problem. The dialogue – especially the encounters between Pat and his father (Robert De Niro in a back-to-form role) – was dynamically-written and gave a real sense of the volatile familial situations which always threatened to descend into a shouting match, should a wrong word be said.

O. Russell must be applauded for never falling into the trap of caricaturing the issue of mental illness. This is not to say that there aren't any funny moments; indeed, there are plenty of laughs to be had. But the strength of the script lies in its treatment of mental illness and the emotive, and sometimes distressing, feelings which go with it. The characters were multi-faceted and felt like real people – perhaps the highest compliment which can be paid to the actors. Although well-paced for the most part, the final quarter of the film did feel slightly less fluid and rather rushed but that is not to detract from what is, otherwise, a very enjoyable film.

Some have cynically suggested that Silver Linings Playbook is a mere vehicle for Oscar nominations but I feel that this does the film a great disservice. Fantastic performances, a sensitive script and assured direction all make for a film which will get better with repeat viewings. Girlfriend/boyfriend optional. 

Clapperboard Rating: * * * * 

Sightseers

In somewhat of a departure from his previous film – the horror thriller Kill List – Ben Wheatley's new film is a dark and rather twisted black comedy set around the British institution of the caravan holiday. I caught this film at a preview screening a few days ago and I have to say that I didn't have any idea what to expect (which was quite a refreshing change). I didn't know if I'd find it funny, hate it or be rather underwhelmed by it. Turns out, it was all of the above...

Written by the stars of the film, Alice Lowe and Steve Oram, Sightseers sees boyfriend and girlfriend Chris and Tina get away from their unsatisfying lives and head to the Lake District on a caravanning holiday to take in some of the 'world-famous' attractions such as the Pencil Museum. However, things soon take a shocking and unexpected turn and the couple quickly lose control of their idyllic holiday. Now, the first thing to say is that the opening fifteen minutes are quite funny as the balance between awkward humour and characterisation was nicely maintained.

However, once Chris and Tina had set off on their holiday, caravan in tow, something terrible happens at the most unexpected of places: a tram museum. Now, without giving too much away, I'll just say that once this plot point had happened, I became totally disenchanted with the rest of the film (which was kind of a big deal seeing as we were less than a quarter of the way through the 88 minute running time). I appreciate that, if you do see this film, you may argue that this event was necessary to set up the tone of the rest of the film but for me, it was the same as watching The X Factor: slightly bemusing and thoroughly irritating.

Tina and Chris are the text book example of anti-heroes and the performances from Lowe and Oram were very naturalistic and convincing. This was partly due to some solid direction from Wheatley whom, I think, we'll be hearing a lot more from in the future. The chemistry between the naïve Tina and the initially easy-going Chris was confidently executed but in the end, I just became annoyed with the characters whose actions became rather grating. Few of the scenes were realistic and even fewer were rip-roaringly funny. Maybe I'm missing the point but I felt cheated by the whole thing. The film felt rather uneven and misjudged: the comedy wasn't funny enough and the violence didn't sit well with the comedic intentions: rather disappointing for a black comedy.

Some have praised the ordinariness of the characters which makes their actions so extraordinarily amusing and refreshing for a road-trip killer film. I, on the other hand, just found the whole thing irritatingly unbelievable and fatally un-funny. The premise of British suburban middle-class reservedness being shattered in the most violent way possible promised much but, ultimately, Sightseers not funny enough and is something of a washout. And an ill-judged washout at that. 

Clapperboard Rating: * *

Sightseers is released nationwide on 30th November  

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part II

Last Wednesday, I was fortunate enough to attend the European Premiere for the final instalment of The Twilight Saga and walk the red carpet. I have to admit that I felt slightly guilty that the hundreds of 'Twi-hard' fans who had camped out overnight weren't even going to see the film and I was. But hey, it's a perk of the job. The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part II brings to a close a series of films which have created a hype incomparable to anything seen before. So, is the film a worthy send-off for the fans or is the whole thing, as many critics believe, slightly anaemic?

Looking at my review for Breaking Dawn – Part I, I was struck at how nice I was about it. Sure, there were serious issues and the character of Bella left much to be desired but, overall, I seemed to have quite enjoyed it. My main problem was with stuck-up critics who dismissed the film with scathing reviews and who didn't seem to appreciate the film on the fan level. I have tried to do this and am happy to report that Breaking Dawn – Part II will delight fans and, perhaps, non-fans like me.

Picking up from where the previous film left off and directed again by Bill Condon, Breaking Dawn – Part II sees the Cullen family call on other vampire clans to help protect Bella and Edward's daughter, Renesmee, from the Volturi who falsely believe that she is a threat to their existence. From the beginning of the film, it is clear that the moping, moody and rather feeble Bella of old is long gone. Now a vampire, Bella relishes in her new-found skills, darting around a forest in a cocktail dress (not the most practical attire, I know), trying to hunt and repress her desire for human blood. Her newly-acquired strength is used to great effect (and much to the dismay of Emmett Cullen, played by Kellan Lutz) and it was quite refreshing to see her take control of events around her.

Robert Pattinson's smouldering look has now been honed to a fine art and the chemistry between Edward and Bella, now cemented with the presence of their daughter (played by 12 year-old actress Mackenzie Foy), seemed unforced and believable. There is little doubt that the franchise has become rather self-conscious: the obligatory scene in which Taylor Lautner removes his shirt (and trousers this time!) was greeted – rather fittingly – with wolf whistles from the audience and it was obvious that the films have become acutely-aware of what the fans want. In narrative terms, the film's first half did feel rather episodic and disjointed as moments from the book were translated to the screen. On another level, the film suffers from introducing too many characters, with too little to do and who end up standing around as if waiting for a family photo. Even the most devoted 'Twi-hards' may find keeping track of who's-who a little confusing, although the dynamics between Edward, Bella and Jacob seemed genuine, funny and were nicely developed.

The film's final act was both demented and bizarre, as the Volturi (led by the bubbly evil of Michael Sheen) closed in on the Cullens. If you want to see Dakota Fanning's head being removed by a wolf, then this is the kind of manic film for you. This is not to say that, in a strange way, the denouement wasn't enjoyable. In fact, it is so mad that it kind of works and, without giving too much away, it offers a twist that even fans of the books may not be expecting. From a visual perspective, the film retains a CGI aesthetic – most obvious in a love scene between Bella and Edward – and certainly looks glossy. Fans will be kept happy by a montage end credit sequence set to Christina Perri's A Thousand Years and, in general, will be very pleased with the conclusion to the ultimate vampire love story.

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn – Part II isn't a fantastic film by any means. But what it does succeed in doing is bringing the franchise to a satisfactory end for fans. The cast have matured and developed into their roles, the romance which enchanted so many in the beginning is still alive and well and it does, in the end, remain true to the spirit of Stephenie Meyer's novels. Popular with older critics it may not be, but The Twilight Saga has struck a cord with millions of people, many of whom will defend the series to the death. And you can't argue with that.

Clapperboard Rating: * * * 

Rust and Bone

It is a real shame that many people steer clear of foreign films. Offer most of my friends the chance to watch a subtitled movie and they'll look at you as though you've just announced that you've got bubonic plague. But, you know what? It's their loss. Rust and Bone – a French production – is a strong contender for the Top Five Films of 2012 and if you see it, I'm sure you'll agree that the pea brains who don't go anywhere near the faintest sound of an accent are missing out. Big time.

From the celebrated French director Jacques Audiard, Rust and Bone is an atypical love story starring Marion Cotillard (most famous for her roles in Inception and The Dark Knight Rises) and Matthias Schoenaerts (no, I don't know how to pronounce it either). Cotillard plays Stephanie, an orca whale trainer who, after a horrific accident, develops a strange and deep relationship with Ali (Schoenaerts), a nightclub bouncer who wants to make it big in the world of boxing and kick-boxing. Their relationship is flawed, intense and hugely touching and the performances from both Cotillard and Schoenaerts are nothing short of stunning. The character of Stephanie, vulnerable and yet fiercely strong-willed, was portrayed with such intensity by Cotillard that she was intoxicating to watch.

Audiard's direction achieved a perceptive balance between the brutal violence of Ali's fights (where losing a few teeth was to be expected) and the tenderness with which he treated Stephanie. Actually, tenderness is the wrong word. Ali's initial encounters with Stephanie are unsympathetic and rather one-sided. Schoenaerts portrays a character whose actions often hurt those he should love the most; he is not actively cruel but has little awareness of how devastating his behaviour can be to those around him. His poor relationship with his young son only scratches the surface of his inner turmoil and this, perhaps, is why he hits it off with Stephanie. Both are emotionally-damaged and seem to find comfort and strength in the other's problems. There is a quiet, unspoken understanding between the pair, which makes for an incredibly moving love story.

Shot with a beautiful juxtaposition between idyllic beach sequences and dark, blue tones of domestic spaces, the film retains a sense of realism, despite having a plot which could easily be described as ludicrous melodrama. Whilst the last ten minutes did slightly slip into overbearing sentimentality, the rest of the film is so good that I forgave it. There's a scene where Stephanie re-lives her whale training sequences from a wheelchair on her balcony, set to Katy Perry's pop-tastic Firework. In any other hands, this would have shouted 'emotional manipulation' louder than a John Lewis Christmas advert but Audiard, somehow, manages to create a moment of concentrated power.

Rust and Bone is a painful, consuming, intelligent and bruising film, with two fantastic leads in roles which are fascinating to watch as they develop and redefine themselves against a plot which rarely offers them anything to smile about. The sex is graphic, the emotions raw and although totally unorthodox, the film is utterly convincing. Rust and Bone demonstrates the true power of cinema and I urge you to see it. 

Clapperboard Rating: * * * * * 

Skyfall

Having made £37.2m in its first week of opening, Skyfall is on course to become one of the most successful Bond films to date. Daniel Craig's third outing as everyone's favourite spy only has to surpass £93.5m to become the highest-grossing UK release of all time, therefore beating James Cameron's Smurf epic. So, the question is, unlike Avatar, does Sam Mendes' take on the 007 franchise deserve such huge box office success? The answer is a resounding yes.

Timed to coincide with the release of Dr. No in 1962, Skyfall is the twenty-third Bond film and sees MI6 come under direct attack and Bond's loyalty to M is pushed to the limit. This is, without a doubt, the most personal of the 007 films and Craig is quickly becoming one of my favourite actors in the role. His performance in Skyfall is both quietly nuanced and brash; aggressive and sensitive and supremely intense. The supporting characters are fantastic as well. Two Bond girls (or three, depending on how you look at it), a scarily-camp villain (Javier Bardem), Ralph Fiennes and the inimitable Judi Dench as M gave the whole thing a sleek and elegant feel.

From a bike chase in Istanbul to a denouement in the Scottish highlands, the action is achingly visceral and enthralling, whilst still retaining the real essence of Bond which had – arguably – been missing from recent films. Craig has returned Bond to his literary roots and champions a dark, even malevolent, character with a traumatic past. I really admired the film's focus on Bond as a human and not the perpetually immaculate, suave womaniser which has characterised so many previous films. This is not to say, of course, that Craig isn't full of quick one-liners and he certainly does the rounds with the women. But Daniel Craig's 007 has matured and is rather battle-weary: he fails a fitness test, is much more affected by his fights (both physically and emotionally) and has even developed tear ducts. This multi-dimensional characterisation was a joy to watch and Craig's performance was very self-assured.

On a visual level, Skyfall looks exquisite. Luscious cinematography from Roger Deakins, combined with an engaging narrative and great direction from Mendes created a picture which oozed style and sophistication – just what you want from a Bond film. Adele's theme gave the opening credits a real sense of occasion and set the tone of the film perfectly. Bardem's villain – a cyber-terrorist – was enigmatic and intoxicating to watch as he strutted around with his henchmen and was really rather scary as, in a very surreal scene, he began to stroke Bond's thighs. Coupled with just the right amount of exposition and action, the pace of the film – although long at 143 minutes – seemed appropriate and well planned.

Skyfall is a dramatic, rich and highly-enjoyable return to form and can easily be considered as one of the best Bond films. It has the cars, the locations, the gadgets, the women and the action, all cemented by Craig who is fantastic. In a year of all things British, you can't get more British than Bond and if you haven't seen it, see it. It won't disappoint. 

Clapperboard Rating: * * * * * 

The Sapphires

I have ticked off another entry on my bucket list. Actually, I don't have a bucket list, but if I were to have one, I could put a big tick next to “Walk down a red carpet”. Oh, that's another lie: it was blue, not red...but you get the idea. Last Monday I headed to the 56^th BFI London Film Festival and hit the red/blue carpet for the UK Premiere of The Sapphires, starring Chris O'Dowd (Bridesmaids). And you know the best bit about it? I got free Icelandic bottled water and G&B chocolate. The perks of being a film critic...

The Sapphires (hence why the red carpet was sparkly-blue) is based on the true story of four Aboriginal women who formed a soul group and headed out to 1960's Vietnam to entertain the American troops stationed there. The Sapphires (based on a play of the same name) is a comedy/drama with plenty of musical numbers thrown in for good measure and features some really energetic performances from its cast. O'Dowd as the Sapphires' manager achieves an endearing balance between comedic charm and manic energy and his humorous delivery of lines made me laugh-out-loud on several occasions. His enthusiasm lifted scenes which would otherwise have felt flat and un-engaging, whilst demonstrating an emotional realism which I hadn't seen from him before.

The sisters (played by Deborah Mailman, Jessica Mauboy, Shari Sebbens and Miranda Tapsell) all approached their roles with a similar level of liveliness, although at times there seemed to be a lack of believable chemistry within the group. For a film about family and triumphing against adversity, this was a problem and these themes felt rather undermined by the lack of group dynamics. The cast and director (Wayne Blair) spoke before the film started and emphasised the film's political nature and its comments on race and racism in Australia. This agenda, however, seemed to have been addressed on a far-too-superficial level and the film's message may have been somewhat lost.

Early on in the film, for example, there's a scene where two of the sisters try to flag down a cab to get into town and it drives straight past them. “What's his problem?!”, exclaims Cynthia.“It's because we're black, stupid” replies Gail. Cynthia hits back with the line “No, it's 'cos you're ugly”. Yes, the line is funny and yes, a film following an Australian soul group belting out hits such as 'I Heard It Through the Grapevine' and 'Soul Man' is hardly going to be the most profound comment on Australian race-relations, but with its agenda so explicitly set-up, it felt a bit too superficial.

The musical numbers were certainly toe-tapping and the singing (much of which was done by the cast themselves) felt very authentic. As a comedy/musical, The Sapphires works well and makes for entertaining viewing. O'Dowd produces a sterling performance and the rest of the cast shine individually, although poor ensemble dynamics aren't helped by a script which is, at times, uneven. More fundamentally, there is a problem with how it approaches its politics and it could have been more emotionally-charged and driven. But, perhaps, this isn't the point and The Sapphires should be enjoyed for what it is: good-natured fun. 

Clapperboard Rating: * * *

The Sapphires is released nationwide on 7th November 2012  

Liberal Arts

Allison Janney will always occupy a special place in my heart. Her portrayal of White House Press Secretary C. J. Cregg in The West Wing (possibly the best American drama series ever) was nothing short of masterful and it was my admiration for her that convinced me to see Liberal Arts – the new film from director/writer/producer/star Josh Radnor. Allison, you didn't disappoint but shame about the rest of the film.

Watching Liberal Arts is an odd experience. It begins with thirty-something Jesse (played by Radnor) returning to his old college to attend a professor's retirement party and meeting Zibby (Elizabeth Olsen), a nineteen-year-old student. From the outset, it's obvious that the two have a connection as they exchange tentative glances, snatched whilst no-one else is looking. As their relationship developed throughout the first thirty minutes of the film, I found myself heaving a largely-cynical sigh. This was going to be a clichéd, predictable romance with shots of the pair lying together in the lush grass of campus, discussing the merits of life, love and being young. Whilst there was plenty of the latter, I was rather surprised (and pleased) as to how their courtship developed.

Before you think that I was deeply moved and affected by their relationship, I wasn't. Never without a book in his hand, the character of Jesse – sixteen years Zibby's senior – was distinctly annoying and seemed incapable of holding any conversation without discussing the existential meaning of life and age. Indeed, I was half expecting him to launch into a monologue about the virtues of post-modernist literature whilst ordering a latte. Zibby, too, was vaguely grating, although Olsen is quickly becoming one of the most vibrant acting talents of the future. Her performance was both nuanced and bold and was utterly convincing as a college student older than her years.

One of the film's main themes is that of ageing and nostalgia. When Jesse returns to the college campus, he seems much more alive than during scenes at his home in New York. This idea of idolising college years and youth in particular, was nicely handled – even if it was mediated through characters I could quite happily have hit with a copy of Catch-22. That said, there were moments of comedy and biting lines of dialogue which always managed to stay good-natured.

Of course, Allison Janney was brilliant as a professor of British Romantic literature with something of a rock-god/cougar reputation on campus. An equally-entertaining cameo from Zac Efron as a free-living Buddhist type raised several smiles and I feel as though he is well on his way to shaking off the High School Musical stigma (and good on him for doing so).

Performances aside, the plot wasn't perfect, and an ill-judged romance between Jesse and a bookshop owner somewhat de-valued an ending which could have been so much more profound. Nevertheless, Radnor created several moments of dialogue about life which were so insightful and so on-the-mark that I almost forgave the weaknesses in plot. At one point, Jesse's bookshop love exclaims that she spends so much time reading about life in books that she doesn't get the time to experience life itself. In many ways. it's the same for this film. If you've got something to do, don't put it off in favour of watching Liberal Arts. But if you've a spare ninety minutes, it might just make you smile...

Clapperboard Rating: * * *

Looper

The most common criticism of foreign films is that they demand too much concentration as one has to watch the action and read the subtitles at the same time. Whilst anyone who thinks this has the cultural aptitude and IQ of an amoeba, some films do require a higher level of concentration to watch. Looper is a case in point and is intellectually stimulating and exciting and will leave you with more puzzling questions than an episode of University Challenge.

Written and directed by Rian Johnson, Looper is an engrossing mix of The Terminator and 12 Monkeys and stars Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Joe – a 'looper', or contract killer who kills targets who are sent to him from the future by 'the mob'. However, when his future self (Bruce Willis) is sent back in time, he allows him to escape, with life-changing consequences. Confused? You should be. Whilst this plot is, at times, rather confounding, the film excels in its balance between action and a strong sense of narrative direction.

There is a scene in Looper where two versions of the same person sit across from one another in a diner, discussing the complexities of time travel and whose life is being affected by the decisions they make at that moment. Thankfully for the audience's sanity, the older incarnation of Joe brings the conversation to an end by exclaiming that talking too much about time travel and its effects will scramble your brain to mush. It is sequences such as this which highlight the brilliance of a film which has the potential to give the audience a headache to rival the worst of hangovers. Somehow, however, it doesn't.

Johnson's script develops convincing, multi-faceted characters and he draws some fantastic performances from the cast (Emily Blunt in particular, is superb) and makes full use of its central concept. The moral ambiguities of time travel felt fully-developed and were a satisfying juxtaposition to the action sequences in which more people died than during a stampede for One Direction's book signings. Johnson's dystopian future, where cars have solar panels welded onto their bonnets due to the lack of oil and high-rise skyscrapers counterpoint the graffiti-marked streets where murder is an everyday normality is both startling and tense. It is because of this dramatic setting that the time travel theme works so well and the moral decisions made by the characters feel as though they carry true weight.

There were some pacing issues, especially during the farm house scenes but in general, the film had a taut and dramatic feeling, aided by the combined talents of Gordon-Levitt and Blunt. Their performances created an emotional depth to the characters which underpinned the brain-frying of time travel and even Bruce Willis aimed for a bit of emotional tenacity.

Looper is a thrilling, perplexing and satisfying sci-fi picture, which works because of its engagement with meaty ideas and abundance of gritty action and multi-dimensional performances. Just don't pop to the loo half way through otherwise you won't have a hope of catching up...

Clapperboard Rating: * * * *

Anna Karenina

If there is one word most used to describe the literary works of the Russian author Leo Tolstoy, it is 'long'. His most famous novel, 'War and Peace', is over one thousand pages long and could certainly be used as an offensive weapon. Anna Karenina – at over eight hundred pages – is the latest cinematic adaptation of Tolstoy's work and stars Keira Knightley in the title role. Love her or hate her, Knightley is certainly one of the most successful British actors of recent years and seems perfectly cast as the self-destructive Anna. Shame, then, that the rest of the film is emotionally-inert.

Directed by Joe Wright (who has collaborated with Knightley on two previous films – Atonement and Pride and Prejudice), Anna Karenina is set in nineteenth-century Russian high society and sees aristocrat Anna Karenina embark on an affair with the affluent Count Vronsky (played by Aaron Taylor-Johnson). From the opening scene, it is clear that this adaptation is rather unlike Wright's previous costume dramas which have been played straight-down-the-line. Much of the action is set in a theatre and the characters weave in and out of the sets with a balletic fluidity which was very impressive. Combined with innovative editing, the theatricality of the film is both its greatest strength and weakness.

There is no doubt that Anna Karenina oozes quality. From the sets to the costumes, the exuberant mise-en-scène is both enticing and distracting. In many ways, such a theatrical approach distances the audiences from becoming emotionally-engaged with the characters and, given that this is essentially a love story, this is a problem. Things are not helped by the performances which are rather uneven and Anna's moustachioed love interest is somewhat miscast and wasn't as magnetic as he should have been. Knightley, on the other hand, settles comfortably into the role of Anna and commands the aristocratic role with confidence. Her performance is, however, difficult to engage with – as is the narrative which is hugely overshadowed by the film's theatrical nature.

Wright's decision to pursue such an extravagant tone may reflect the novel's original intention: to depict the falsity and excesses of Tsarist Russian high society. The director of photography, Seamus McGarvey, has done a fantastic job reflecting this society, where people take pleasure in seeing Anna's downfall. His lyrical camera movement was first-class and I could have quite happily watched this technical aspect of the film at the expense of the story. A dance sequence really showed his flair for dynamic camera movement and certainly impressed.

The fundamental flaw with Anna Karenina, however, is its overt theatricality. Whilst this makes the film pleasant to look at, it swamps any sense of a meaningful, emotionally-charged story. Ultimately, this should have been the film's focus and no matter how 'nice' everything looks, the vacuum left by the lack of electric performances and any sense of realism left me as emotionally cold as a Russian winter. 

Clapperboard Rating: * *

Lawless

What do Boris Johnson, Dark Shadows and new Minis all have in common? Before you start making jokes, the answer is that they have all been accused of having style over substance. John Hillcoat’s new film, Lawless, suffers from this very problem but as I left an early afternoon screening of the film, I faced a dilemma. Does extraordinary style ever negate the need for real substance? Or does the weight of a film’s screenplay dictate how stylish it can be? Writing this review, several hours after seeing Lawless, I still have no idea.

Set in Prohibition-era rural America, Lawless is an adaptation of Matt Bondurant’s 2008 novel ‘The Wettest County in the World’ and follows a trio of bootlegging brothers (Tom Hardy, Shia LaBoeuf and Jason Clarke) whose business is threatened by a new deputy (played by Guy Pearce) who is determined to bring their monopoly on moonshine to an end. Hillcoat (who directed apocalyptic thriller The Road) has certainly assembled a tour de force of a cast, with Jessica Chastain and Mia Wasikowska playing pretty girls attracted to bad men, and Gary Oldman and Guy Pearce as fantastic villains on both sides of the law.

This cast – and its performances – is certainly one of the most striking aspects of the film. I’ve never warmed to Shia LaBoeuf as an actor (nothing to do with Transformers…cough, cough) and I have always found him difficult to take seriously. But his performance as Jack, the youngest and most eager of the brothers to prove himself, was startlingly convincing and charged with an emotion which I hadn’t seen before. Tom Hardy is, well, Tom Hardy and produces an intimidating performance, made even more incredible through his ability to pull off ‘menacing outlaw’ whilst sporting several styles of cardigan. Guy Pearce, however, steals the show and is fantastic in his role as the villainous deputy. The female roles, on the other hand, felt very under-developed and it was a real shame to see Chastain and Wasikowska being sidelined in favour of a more macho plot and even the terrific Gary Oldman seemed to be a mere token.

The screenplay obviously aimed for a greatness which it sadly never achieved. The dialogue was unmemorable and the plot and its development felt rather average, a disappointment considering its basis in fact. Despite its graphic violence (and trust me, this film is as violent as your mother-in-law when you tell her the gin has all gone), I felt that the screenplay was far too safe and straight down the line for any real brilliance to shine through. These issues aside, Lawless truly excels in terms of style and beautiful cinematography. The set pieces are theatrical, the locations vivid and the whole mise-en-scène feels rich and exciting, if a little too glossy.

Lawless isn’t as intoxicating as it wants to be and falls into the old ‘style over substance’ category. Its style is enough to carry what is still an entertaining and enjoyable watch. Ultimately, however, the film’s vacuous nature overshadows some terrific performances and the effect of the moonshine soon wears off.   

Clapperboard Rating: * * *

The Expendables 2

It was with a certain degree of excitement that I went along to an afternoon screening of a film I knew was going to be one of two things: over-the-top or, well, over-the-top. That film was The Expendables 2, and I can happily say that I wasn't wrong.

You only have to watch The Expendables to know exactly what you're getting with The Expendables 2 and that, I'm afraid, is damning with faint praise. The Expendables 2 reunites the old gang from the first film (Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren) and throws in some more action-heroes for good measure in the form of Chuck Norris, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger. The result is certainly explosive and it's safe to say that a drag act is more understated and reserved than The Expendables 2.

We'll address the plot first, which sees Mr Church (Willis) send the expendables on a mission which should be a walk-in-the-park. But when one of their men is killed in cold blood, the need for revenge leads the ageing heroes deep into enemy territory. I'll begin by stating the obvious: subtlety, nuanced performances and intricate story lines were not this film's forte. This is, however, kinda the point. Audiences don't go to see an action film expecting anything less than all-out, full-throttle madness. This madness took the form of action sequences which were tautly-edited and (although it shames me to say it) really quite enjoyable. From the opening sequence to the film's denouement, the explosive violence and crazy fight scenes were so over-the-top and so excessive, that I found myself sitting in stunned consternation. There was also, I'll admit, a grin on my face.

With the outrageous action to one side, there was a serious issue with plot exposition which felt rather stagnant. In many ways, it felt as though scenes in which Arnie muttered one-liners and Stallone tried to pull off convincing emotion were mere padding and I kept wanting the film to get back to the thing we'd all come to see: a group of OAPs blowing things up. At one point, Stallone exclaims that his new aeroplane belongs in a museum. “We all do” returns Schwarzenegger. Never has a piece of cinematic dialogue rung more true.

To the film's credit, the screenplay (co-written by Stallone) was suitably self-aware of all the tropes of B-movie action films and wasn't afraid to send itself up. Then again, to have done anything else would have been seriously silly. As the body count rose higher than an episode of Midsomer Murders, I came to the realisation that despite the camp action, predictability and feeling that I could have been watching an advert for Age Concern UK, The Expendables 2 really is rather fun. Its indulgent, no-brain attitude to violence and fighting can't be applauded for insight or originality but that's no bad thing and it is certainly an entertaining watch. Roll on The Expendables 3 (!). 

Clapperboard Rating: * * 

Brave

There are two giants within the world of animation: Disney Pixar and Dreamworks. Both studios have produced massively-successful films over the years and this summer, it's the turn of Disney Pixar to step up to the metaphorical plate and continue its brilliance, inventiveness and superiority when it comes to things that don't exist in reality. And their offering? Brave.

It's been two years since Pixar released Toy Story 3 and cemented the trilogy in the annals of film history as being one of the very few trilogies where, arguably, every film gets better than the last. It may seem a little odd at first that the American studio have chosen the Highlands of Scotland to set their latest film, Brave, a story of self-determination, punctuated by every imaginable Scottish stereotype. The film charts the fortunes of Rebekah Brooks look-a-like Merida (played by Kelly Macdonald), a princess whose impassioned personality matches her fiery red locks. When her mother (voiced by Emma Thompson) decides it is time to find her a suitor, Merida is far from happy and sets out to take her fate into her own hands. What you have here is, in many ways, typical Pixar: a film with a moral message at its centre, with enough laughs along the way to retain a certain charm for which the studio has become known. But, behind the cheap gags and visually-arresting shots of a Scottish countryside which could only exist in a CGI world, there is something very genuine and really rather touching about Brave.

Recent trends in cinema and in general society have placed the strong, independent woman at the centre of attention. This is the first time that Pixar have elected for a female lead and her character is the epitome of ferocious autonomy: Merida knows how to fire a bow better than any man, is not afraid of speaking her mind and doesn't feel pressured into following the wishes of her mother. This characterisation was refreshing and sat well within the film's plot and overall narrative, which had a nice mix between action, drama and gags. Whilst the film's gags were up to Pixar's usual standards, I did find myself willing there to be more of them and I feel that the script was slightly underdeveloped in this respect. For example, Merida seeks the advice of a witch who, whilst she was on-screen, was spectacularly amusing but her character's appearance was all too short. Flashes of comedic brilliance which would make adults and children laugh at the same joke – but for different reasons – did shine through but (for me at least) there just wasn't enough of it.

The technical animation was executed to a very high standard and managed to retain a realism in the characters' faces which is instantly-recognisable as the work of Pixar. The vocal talent from Macdonald, Thompson, Billy Connolly, Julie Walters and Robbie Coltrane certainly added further life and vivacity to the animated characters and, placed alongside the rich vibrancy of the visuals, the film is a pleasure to watch. In many ways, Brave plays itself straight down the line, evoking little of the early ambition shown by Pixar during its infancy. This doesn't, however, really matter. The film's simplicity is one of its main successes and ensures that the audience can just sit back and enjoy every “aye”, “wee” and “cannae”.

Whilst Brave is nothing startlingly new in the arena of animation and could do with just a few more jokes, its solid plot, convincing morals and superb performances all make for a hugely-entertaining motion picture. Enjoy. 

Clapperboard Rating: * * * 

Ted

I can safely say that my most recent trip to the cinema was one of the most mind-numbing, irritating and, quite frankly, depressing experiences I have had so far this year. Why, I hear you ask? For once it wasn't the annoying 3D; it wasn't my fellow audience members making too much noise as they demolished buckets of over-priced popcorn and waved their mobiles around like they were at a rave in Ibiza; it wasn't even the constant chatter of the two cretins sat in front of me. No, on this occasion, the problem was more fundamental: the film.

Ted is the first feature film from Seth MacFarlane, the creator of the animated TV series Family Guy. It charts the friendship between John Bennett (Mark Wahlberg) and his teddy bear who, thanks to a wish John made as a little boy, can talk. As the pair grow up, their relationship begins to be put under strain as John's girlfriend Lori (Mila Kunis) becomes unhappy with their situation. And so the stage is set for a 'comedy' about a pot-smoking teddy and a guy who just can't get his life sorted. In many ways, the only thing you need to know about Ted is that it's spectacularly unfunny. Moreover, there are more laughs to be had in an embalming workshop than throughout the entire 106 minutes of Ted.

I really did go into the screening with an open mind and wanting to laugh at the outrageous comedy for which MacFarlane is famous. Instead, I raised a vague smile twice throughout the whole film and didn't laugh a single time. Not once. The jokes in Ted were poorly set-up, lacked any comedic flair and too often relied on crass and offensive material. MacFarlane truly excelled himself by including not one, but two 9/11 jokes which would have needed to have been astronomically good for them to not be hugely offensive. Unfortunately they seemed to have been included to try and get laughs through shock tactics: 'did he really just say that?!'. Such jokes were lazy at best, and criminal at worst.

Wahlberg and Kunis made for a fairly unremarkable couple (although not without merit) and there's no denying that MacFarlane's vocal talents lifted a CGI bear which would have otherwise been annoying. Actually, I take that back: he was as irritating as BBC Olympic commentators who use 'medal' as a verb. The film's narrative stumbles down various avenues which lead to nowhere and I found myself slumping in my seat, willing the torturous meandering from bad joke to no joke to end. This dull carousel of non-existent humour was tempered by the few gags which appeared in the trailer: suffice to say that if you've seen the trailer for Ted, you've seen the best bits.

Ted is supremely unfunny and has the potential to offend pretty much anyone who sets foot in their local multiplex. Fine if this humour has some basis in true wit or satire but the indolent writing and generally misjudged nature of MacFarlane's sense of humour reinforces the fact that Ted is an awful film. If you do have the misfortune to sit through it, I truly pity you. 

Clapperboard Rating: * 

The Dark Knight Rises

A little over seven months ago, I sat in a packed BFI IMAX screen, surrounded by people who would have sooner disembowelled you with an ice cream scoop than if you'd said anything negative about the preview footage which was about to be screened. That footage was the first six minutes of The Dark Knight Rises and the excited anticipation in the cinema was palpable. Personally, I was certainly impressed by the opening sequence's visuals and its introduction of Batman's new nemesis, Bane: an altogether more serious vision of Gotham's reckoning than the Joker. But as I walked out of that preview and reclaimed my phone from the scary security guard, I couldn't help wondering whether the excitement and the film's hype (which had just been stepped up by releasing those first six minutes) was going to lead to a rather disappointing destination. I'm glad to say that – if anything – the full film was even better.

I'm acutely-aware that in writing this review, I must steer clear of anything that remotely resembles a plot spoiler and I will do my very best not to spoil anyone's experience of what is a tremendously-enjoyable film. Set eight years after the events of The Dark Knight, Bruce Wayne has hung up his cape after taking the rap for Harvey Dent's death. But as Bane, a new terrorist leader, surfaces and begins to threaten the city of Gotham, Batman must wrestle with his personal conflicts in an effort to save the city that made him an outcast.

I'll begin by saying that everything in this film is big – biblical, in fact. I reckon it's the loudest film I've ever watched and every bang, crash and note from Hans Zimmer's epic score shook my seat – and myself – to the core. Such an overwhelming assault on my ears brought out the imagery on-screen even more: the aerial shots of Gotham and the screeching of high-speed chase sequences left me awe-struck. The film's director of photography, Wally Pfister, has done a superb job on the cinematography, which was almost a character in itself. The composition of each shot was comparable to any work of art hanging in the Louvre and really helped to set the dark, brooding and exhilarating tone of the film.

Christian Bale is, once again, on fine form as Batman and Tom Hardy's Bane was rather menacing. Much has been made of his unusual voice (speaking, as his character does, through a mask) and all I have to add to the subject is that I've heard many a call-centre operative who has been more difficult to understand. Anne Hathaway's Catwoman was a nice injection of the feminine into a world which has, up-to-now, been male-dominated. Creating many laughs and commanding the screen in a way only she could, Hathaway's performance was energetic and focused. With quite a few Inception alumni in the cast, Nolan's direction has drawn fantastic performances.

At 164 minutes, The Dark Knight Rises is Nolan's longest film and as it progressed, the tension seemed to ratchet up a notch every time Bane appeared on-screen. Whilst I did feel that the narrative slipped slightly during the middle section, the fantastic beginning and end sections acted as strong bookends and held the whole film together. Most importantly, the film never felt as though it was dragging, although it wouldn't have suffered by losing fifteen minutes or so. In terms of the plot (and again, no spoilers), the screenplay concentrated enough on the emotional dimensions of the characters to make the action sequences and their outcome more exhilarating and, crucially, matter to the audience. I'm not going to go into the politics of the film because, quite frankly, more articulate and intelligent articles exist online about the subject and are much better than anything I could write.

I did, however, have some reservations. The film did, in places, feel as though it had grasped too many ambitious ideas and had let several slip through its fingers, without ever fully dealing with them. Certain issues were never completely engaged with and appeared sidelined in favour of another punch up that had little relevance to their resolution. On another (and perhaps more critical) level, I felt there just wasn't enough of Batman himself. Sure, his name isn't in the title and yes, Nolan's trilogy was always about more than just a man wearing a bat suit, but at the end of it all, that's what the main attraction is: a millionaire fighting bad guys with all his cool bat weapons.

Nolan has clearly triumphed with the last film in his Batman trilogy. Jaw-droppingly spectacular, intelligent and incredibly loud, The Dark Knight Rises deserves every praise and is definitely a superhero film for adults. Dark, beautiful and enthralling in equal measure, things would have been just a little bit better had the Batman made more of an appearance in his suit. Nevertheless, those six minutes last December promised much and Nolan and his team have definitely delivered. 

Clapperboard Rating: * * * *  (I've just spent twenty minutes deciding on this star rating. Would love to give it another half-a-star...)