The Hunger Games

With John Carter set to become one of the biggest flops in cinema history (I really don't think it's that bad: http://tinyurl.com/7we6qsp), Lionsgate are set to release The Hunger Games this coming Friday, which they hope will fare much better than Disney's $250 million Martian epic. Sci-fi, I have to admit, is not one of my favourite genres; I have never understood why people get so involved and attached to a fictitious world which has less chance of existing than an on-time train. And don't even get me started on Trekkies... Anyway, it is with a slight air of indifference that I went to a preview screening of The Hunger Games, which many are calling the new Twilight or Harry Potter. And, you know what? I really enjoyed it.

Based on the best-selling book by Suzanne Collins and set in a post-apocalyptic future America, The Hunger Games sees the Capitol of the nation of Panem force each of its twelve districts to offer up a teenage boy and girl as 'Tributes' to compete in the annual Hunger Games contest. The Games are televised and each Tribute must fight the others until only one survivor remains. When the younger sister of sixteen-year-old Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) is drawn to compete, Katniss takes her place and must use all of her courage, skill and determination to survive.

Directed by Gary Ross, The Hunger Games struck me as being atypical of most of the drivel which Hollywood churns out and hopes will become a blockbuster. Transformers, in all three of its hideous incarnations, is living proof of this. The philosophy that if you stick enough loud bangs, crashes and pretty girls prancing around cars with not a lot on will guarantee a good film and, more importantly, make a shed load of money is not what cinema is about. Fair enough if you have all this, but a bit of depth doesn't hurt.

The Hunger Games is a film which has all the action, adventure and thrills that you would expect from a film based on kids running around a forest and killing each other, but it also delivers an unsettling message. Taking the visuals first, the action sequences are entralling and are really well executed. Distinctive shaky-cam cinematography pulls the audience into the disturbing events of the film and really makes you feel involved with the characters and their situations. Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss is faultless and delivers a performance which is both assured and vulnerable as she becomes both the hunter and the hunted. Donald Sutherland leads a well-rounded supporting cast who never stray into the trap of toning down their performances in order to boost Lawrence's own. Quite frankly, you could shove the top ten best actors of recent years in a room with her and she'd hold her own.

On another level, the whole film looks beautiful. From the dense, oppressive greenery of the forest to the colour and modernism of the Capitol, the production designers have done a fantastic job, creating a world which is so alien and yet worryingly recognisable. The idea of humanity breaking down to the point of savagery is a key idea addressed by The Hunger Games and not since John Prescott was informed that 'Greggs' had sold out of steak pies has violence been so harrowing. The film's 12A certificate meant that blood splatters had to be reduced but, in a strange way, this made the killing of the 'Tributes' even more disturbing. I have always maintained that it is what the audience doesn't see which has the biggest impact and the flashes of brutality which punctuate the fight sequences are genuinely difficult to watch. Whilst the ending didn't have the powerful punch that it perhaps should have had, this is a minor point in what was otherwise a well-crafted narrative.

The Hunger Games is not your run-of-the-mill action/adventure blockbuster. Its strong and dynamic central character, bucking the trend of the hapless teenage heroine in need of a man to save her (Twilight, cough, cough), together with its dramatic action and emotional core is a pleasure to watch. The odds for a sequel are looking good (Collins wrote a trilogy of books) and if ticket pre-sales are anything to go by, the film may well be one of the biggest this year. Sci-fi may not be my cup of tea, but The Hunger Games has left me wanting seconds...

Clapperboard Rating: * * * * 

We Bought a Zoo

Many people sneer at film critics, suggesting that their opinions are out of touch with cinema audiences and that they will hate any film which doesn't address humanist existentialism from a post-structuralist angle (no, I don't have a clue what that is either). The film critic is seen to dislike popular culture, in favour of film as art: to be discussed and debated rather than to simply entertain. Now, in the case of We Bought a Zoo, it would be very easy to dismiss the film as a piece of 'film-making by numbers' – that is to say, a film with big name stars which will easily recoup its cost to make but, ultimately, be of little real value. A quick look on RottenTomatoes.com and you will see that many critics have, in their 'elevated' positions, slated the film for its predictability and mawkishness. Many of these critics would have gone into a screening of We Bought a Zoo with minds firmly made up: the film would be rubbish and I have to say that I entered a preview screening with similar feelings. How wrong I was...

We Bought a Zoo is based on the true story of Benjamin Mee who, after his wife died, decided to buy a struggling zoo on Dartmoor and renovate and run it with his two children. Taken from a book written by Mee, the film translates the story from South West England to sunny California and throws in Matt Damon and Scarlett Johansson for good measure. Before I begin, let me just say that I've no interest whatsoever in animals. I don't get why people have dogs or cats, wandering around their homes and leaving hair on every surface imaginable. Even worse is the habit of kissing a dog – why anyone would want to catch a staphylococcus infection from Fido's slobbery tongue is beyond me. Many complain about having to hoover the house twice a day just to keep the carpet from disappearing under a sea of pet hairs. Want to solve the problem? Just get rid of the dog! Anyway, my point is that I'm not that into animals. And so, a film about a zoo and people's love for animals was always going to be a hard sell to me. As I watched the film, however, I realised that this wasn't important and that the human characters were more than enough to engage me in the narrative.

The performances, especially from Damon, had a sensitivity and depth which was pitched at the right level: never melodramatic, nor too mellowed. Colin Ford, who played Benjamin's difficult teenage son Dylan, was a highlight of the cast (who were all very self-assured and dynamic). Johansson was suitably 'plained-down' for her role as head zoo keeper Kelly and provided an interesting on-screen relationship with Damon. It was very nice to see Damon in a role other than that of Jason Bourne which has, for better or for worse, come to define him as an actor. His slightly enigmatic but always emotionally-fulfilled performance as a father struggling to provide for his family but also follow a dream, was a pleasure to watch and certainly made for a few teary eyes in the audience.

Some have criticised the film's sentimentality and patent emotional-manipulation with little substance to support it. This judgement is, in my mind, unfair. Every now and then, we all need to watch a film which is as predictable as the UK's defeat in Eurovision and to just sit back and enjoy a warm-hearted and inoffensive two hours of entertainment. Whilst a flash-back sequence did jar a little with the overall feel of the film, it was a minor point in an otherwise well-constructed film. The plot was perfectly fine, as was its sensitive handling of issues such as death and family in a script which was very funny in places. The distinctive soundtrack composed by Sigur Rós frontman, Jon Thor Birgisson, was as schmaltzy as it gets but, do you know what? I didn't care. The music swelled in all the right places and did exactly what I wanted it to: reinforce the safe drama which was playing out on-screen.

We Bought a Zoo is a no-holds-barred family drama, which haemorrhaged sentiment and emotion faster than an episode of One Born Every Minute. And I loved it. As the kids say these days – it was totes emosh. 

Clapperboard Rating: * * *  

We Bought a Zoo is released on the 16th March 

Wanderlust

Every now and then, something comes along which totally shatters the stereotypical views which we hold about certain groups of people. The belief that, for example, all bus drivers are grumpy and rude so-and-so’s, who would prefer it if their job didn't involve any contact with the general public is dispelled the moment I use public transport and pay with anything other than the exact change. You would guess that Wanderlust – a film which is essentially about a bunch of hippies trying to convert city dwellers to commune life – dispels negative stereotypes and promotes a positive and engaging look at free love and all things organic. Well, I'm sorry to say, you'd be wrong. Dead wrong.

From director David Wain (Role Models), Wanderlust stars Paul Rudd and Jennifer Aniston (oh goodie goodie!) who play George and Linda 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. Billed as a comedy, it is safe to say that this film is unspeakably un-funny. In fact, I genuinely didn't laugh once. At all. I've tried to understand why I didn't; why the 'jokes' were dull and why I was drifting off into a bored stupor. Firstly, the characters were flat and one-dimensional and I felt a total apathy towards them. Actually, I take that back, I did feel something towards them. I wanted to hit them over the head with one of their home-made guitars in the hope it would instil some sense into their dense, pot-fuelled brains.

Let's take, for example, the protagonists: Linda and George. The film opens with the couple buying a studio apartment in swanky West Village. Their reasons for buying in that location? It's close to their favourite coffee shop. I'm sorry but what?! These are characters who base one of the most important decisions of their lives on how easy it is to get a double shot decaf soya latte with no froth, thank you very much. Things don't get much better when they reach the commune and decide at the drop of a hat that they've been living a false life and need to smoke weed to fulfil their life potential. In short, I care more about Manchester's sewage system than I did about Aniston and Rudd's painfully irritating characters.

And then there are the hippies. Every single stereotype about Bohemian living is conformed to in the search of producing 'comedy gold'. However, the insistence by Wain and fellow screenwriter Ken Marino to load the screenplay with crass and totally un-funny dialogue in an attempt to raise a few laughs about a nudist wine-maker was depressingly average at best. As I sat there, watching ninety-eight painful minutes of characters I found totally un-engaging, doing things I couldn't care less about, I felt myself slowly wasting away, as if the hippies were sucking all the life out of me to make their own annoying peace-loving and hairy lives even more grating. I was not amused.

Wanderlust is a truly awful film with about as much entertainment value as cleaning a cheese grater with your tongue. Its narrative is predictable, un-involving and mind-numbingly tedious and its characters will drive you to distraction. All the prints of Wanderlust should be thrown to the bottom of the deepest ocean and forgotten about as a mistake that Jennifer Aniston made in her otherwise unblemished career. Hang on, did I just say that or have I been eating too many macro-biotic bean sprouts?!

Clapperboard Rating: *

The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel

Don't get me wrong, I think it's great when cinemas attract audiences of all ages. From children on their first trip to experience the magic of cinema, to film veterans who saw Casablanca when it was first released, a visit to the cinema should be an all-inclusive experience. However, until a film such as The King's Speech comes along, mainstream cinemas are usually devoid of the presence of anyone over the age of forty-five (in 2007, 65% of 15 to 34 year olds visited the cinema at least once a month, compared to just 15% of over 45 year olds). Crazy. Either middle-aged people stay at home watching repeats of Bargain Hunt or don't visit their local World of Cine because there simply aren't enough films aimed at their age bracket. It is pleasing, then, when a film such as The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel comes along.

When I went to a screening of The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel I was most definitely the youngest audience member by about forty years. It was as if I had walked into a retirement home, with a massive projection screen in place of the TV. And what a well-behaved audience they were! No annoying mobile phones being flashed every five minutes, no rustling of popcorn or crisp packets (indeed, many had chosen to bring packed lunches instead!). And never before has an audience mirrored a film so well. The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel sees a group of retired Brits who decide to up-sticks and move to a hotel in India which promises a golden environment for their golden years. However, on their arrival, the hotel is less than luxurious but still manages to charm its guests in unexpected ways. The most striking feature of this film is its cast, which seems to have been assembled from a who's-who of British acting veterans, including Maggie Smith, Judi Dench, Tom Wilkinson, Celia Imrie, Bill Nighy and Penelope Wilton. Not since Laurence Olivier's funeral have so many top names been seen together. The presence of these acting greats certainly makes the film and every cast member gives a strong and humorous performance. Dev Patel as the hotel's somewhat dysfunctional manager provides much comedy and his energy and dynamism on screen is infectious.

Written by Ol Parker (wrote several episodes of Grange Hill wouldn't you know?!) and adapted from a novel by Deborah Moggach, the film is very funny and it made me laugh out loud on several occasions (although not as many times as the woman in front of me who, every time she laughed, sounded as if she was having a helium-induced asthma attack). The film is, in general, well-paced and captures the essence of India and its vibrancy superbly. Some have attacked this stereo-typical 'tourist' representation of India, arguing that the film does little to find the 'real' India and relies too heavily on the stereo-typical colours, sounds and smiles of the Indian people. I don't agree with this interpretation as the whole film is centred around the idea of ageing Brits throwing themselves into the unknown and so India, with its rich culture and bustling streets, would appear to them in this way. The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel was never going to be a ground-breaker: indeed, it's as conservative as Maggie Smith's character's views about foreigners (i.e. not exactly PC), but this doesn't devalue the film in any way.

The script is competently constructed and contains a clear message without being overly-preachy and is genuinely funny, something which many comedies these days are not. Whilst I did find a few of the plot lines slightly predictable and clunky, the acting made up for this and the sensitive cinematography was very easy to watch. Maybe this is both the success of the film and its main problem. The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel is a charming and mellow film which will be perfect Sunday night viewing and yet, this 'playing-it-safe' attitude is both unadventurous and slightly flat. The film lacks a spark and vitality (I know the cast are hardly spring chickens, but still) which would have lifted it up a level. I couldn't quite put my finger on it but I left the cinema slightly mellowed by the whole experience. Not the greatest criticism of a film but neither a great selling-point. Nevertheless, The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel is a charming and witty film, with its heart in the right place and I'm sure you'll be smiling throughout. Just don't laugh too hard or you may well lose your dentures...

Clapperboard Rating: * * *

Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close

If a film deals with a powerful, emotive or disturbing subject it does not, by definition, mean that the film will be any good. Take last week's The Vow, for example. A potentially moving subject (that of a woman trying to fall in love with her husband again) which was treated with all the sensitivity and skill of a toilet brush. Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close deals with the September 11^th attacks and the grief of a young boy who lost his father. I'd love to say that it does so in a powerful and genuine way but I'm afraid that if I did, it would be like saying Titanic is one of the best films ever made: it's simply not true.

Directed by Stephen Daldry (Billy Elliot and The Reader), Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close sees nine-year-old Oskar (Thomas Horn) begin a quest to search the whole of New York for the lock to a key which his father left behind after he died in the World Trade Center on 9/11. His search leads him on a journey of self-discovery, allowing him to sustain his last link with his father and deal with his existential grief and...hang on! Sounds like I'm writing the film's press notes. This is what the producers would like you to think but, in reality, the film doesn't live up to its ambitions. Firstly, the film is half-an-hour too long (it's just under two hours, ten minutes) and lurches along at a pace which would rival your grandma's mobility scooter. The film is unashamedly emotionally-manipulative and throws sentiment at the audience like it's going out of fashion. Now, I'm all in favour of a bit of cinematic manipulation (after all, comedies manipulate you to laugh) but when it's done with as much tact and diplomacy as a visit to China by Prince Philip, it becomes grating and annoying.

There are, however, some fantastic performances, especially from Horn who plays the mildly-autistic Oskar with great energy and drive, something not often seen in actors of his age. His character did get mildly-annoying and was, at times, difficult to empathise with but, on the whole Horn carried it through. Tom Hanks stars as Oskar's father and Sandra Bullock gives a very emotionally-charged performance as his mother. Bullock has really matured and grown as an actress in recent years (her performance in Crash is a personal favourite) and her portrayal of a grief-stricken mother, struggling to deal with the loss of her husband and a challenging son, is first-class. The Clapperboard award for Best Actress, however, has to go to Viola Davis (The Help) who, despite only being on-screen for around fifteen minutes, steals the film. Her seismic on-screen presence is a joy to watch and she, for my money, is the Adele of the film world...just without the voice. The film's cinematography was very striking and crisp, with a perfect balance between Oskar's claustrophobic, isolated feelings and the wide scale of the city.

Having just blasted the film's overt-sentimentality, I have to say that a few – and only a few, mind you – of the ideas and concepts explored within the film were genuinely touching. An exchange between Oskar and his mother (which comes towards the end of the film) was, without giving anything away, very moving and you could have cut the atmosphere in Screen 4 with a knife (had two elderly women remembered to turn their hearing aids on so they didn't have to shout at one another throughout the film). Oskar's attempt to prolong his 'last eight minutes' with his father through embarking on his lock-finding quest was also an interesting idea but, in the end, the film's length and lack of real drive let it down.

Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close is neither a masterpiece nor a failure. It clearly knows what it wants to be but, ultimately, leaves you cold and becomes too wound-up with sentiment to become an engaging and dynamic piece of work. To return to my opening thoughts, Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close is not damaged by its dealing with one of the worst terrorist attacks in history but its attempt at addressing the issue does not give it any special merit or make the film any more effective. Mr Daldry, I'm afraid it's not enough to hide behind powerful subject matter. Sorry. 

Clapperboard Rating: * * 

The Vow

I always try to go into a film with an open mind, holding no prejudices or prejudgements about what I am going to see. This is, of course, easier said than done and is on a par with trying to not lick your lips whilst eating a doughnut...okay, you get what I mean. It is with this astronomically-open mind that I watched The Vow, starring Rachel McAdams and Channing 'Totem-Pole' Tatum. And oh, what fun I had.

Happily married Paige (McAdams) and Leo (Tatum) have a near-perfect relationship until a car accident leaves Paige with no memory of her life with Leo and leaves the couple in a fractured state of existence, with Leo having to win back Paige's heart and make her fall in love with him all over again. Sounds like an interesting and emotive plot, doesn't it? It wasn't. The main problem here was the script which was, at best, limp and dull with dialogue which felt stilted and had as much life as a dirty washing-up bowl. Although McAdams and Totem-Pole's performances were totally acceptable, any hope of a thoroughly-engaging performance from either actor was lost in a cloud of loved-up trash which spilled out of their mouths. The result was two main characters who I couldn't care less about and who, quite frankly, would have avoided all this mess if they'd worn seatbelts.

My empathy for the characters' situation was not enhanced by the fact that Paige's only problem in life before her accident was her inability to finish a sculpture she was working on. Poor girl. Tatum's character was equally insufferable and was far-too-nice to be even remotely believable. The one thing in this film which will save it from total damnation on Doomsday was the inclusion of a sub-plot which involved Paige's parents. Here lay a moral question of second chances and betrayal (surprising, I know) which provided a slight respite from the sickening dialogue. The film, however, barely scratched its surface. The Only Way is Essex probably does a better job in addressing such issues.

Now, before I get accused of 'not understanding the film's target audience', let me just say that I have seen many a romantic film and believe me, there are far better films of that genre out there. The Vow is so cheesy, so full of schmooze and so unbelievable (ironic for a film 'inspired by true events') that even a sixteen-year old school girl with an obsession for Jennifer Aniston and the idea that opposites do indeed attract, will find this film as enjoyable as a sandpaper bikini wax. The film's pacing is all over the place and for the last forty-five minutes, I found myself studying the auditorium's emergency lighting system which was far more interesting than watching a plot 'revelation' which was far-fetched and too late coming. Whilst the film was proficiently shot and contained some nice visual imagery, this was simply not enough to keep my interest going. Some may argue that the film is what it is, and shouldn't be criticised in its use of predictable and clichéd plots, characters and dialogue. But, I'm afraid, The Vow isn't even what it wants to be: an emotive, involving and thought-provoking film – a great shame as the initial premise of the film could have allowed the director Michael Sucsy to create a genuinely interesting and heart-wrenching film.

The Vow, whilst not on the same level as the vomitous filth that was New Year's Eve, holds little merit and I left the cinema feeling robbed of my £6.20. I should have saved my money to buy a pair of pliers to pull my fingernails out. Would have been more fun. 

Clapperboard Rating: * 

Like Crazy

I have been a very, very bad person. As I was buying my ticket to see Like Crazy at my local multiplex, the woman behind the counter (whose name badge informed me that her name was Kevin and that her favourite film was The Godfather) asked if I was interested in their 'premier seats' which, she said, were 'bigger, more comfortable and offered a better view of the screen'. If I had wanted this privilege, it would have cost me a further £1.10 on top of a ticket price which already could have easily fed a family of four for a month in Outer Mongolia. I declined. However, as I entered the auditorium (which was in complete darkness as the adverts had just finished), I found it impossible to locate the seat which I had been allocated. And so, I did a very bad thing. I sat in a premier seat. Which I hadn't paid for. And you know what, with a headrest which seemed to have been taken from a mortuary examination table and a view which would have been no different if I had been sitting in the foyer, I'm glad I didn't.

Anyway, to the film. Like Crazy is a strange little film. Starring Felicity Jones and Anton Yelchin, the film follows British student Anna (Jones) as she falls in love with American student Jacob (Yelchin) during her time studying in the US. Anna overstays her student visa and, as a result is unable to return to the US and the pair are forced to have a long distance relationship. First off, the performances are universally first-class. Felicity Jones, however, steals the show and I have to say I do have a bit of a soft spot for her...okay...she's amazing. First seen on screen in The Worst Witch (and known to millions of mothers as Emma Grundy in Radio 4's The Archers), Jones is destined to become one of Britain's most promising and dynamic stars. Her talent for simple dialogue delivery, whilst conveying a whole host of emotions is superb and I am sure that, one day, she will make it to the Oscar podium.

There is, however, a problem with the film. Never, ever have I seen a film with a plot which jarred with me to such a great extent. Here we have two characters who seem to fall in and out of love every five minutes, both have other relationships and then decided to marry/separate/get back together as if nothing has happened. The story jumps back and forth between Jacob and Anna, both of whom seem to change their minds about one another more quickly than Lady Gaga changes outfits and no matter how good the performances are (and trust me, they're great), I found it hard to connect with the characters and empathise with their situations. Sure, a long-distance relationship isn't easy and the film tries to address their conflicting emotions and relationships with other people but, in the end, the whole thing seems a bit contrived.

The film was distinctively shot, with jump cuts being the norm. I quite liked this as it gave the film, paradoxically, a more naturalistic feeling. This idea of realism was furthered by the fact that the dialogue in the film was entirely improvised which gave a real sense of naturalistic rhythm to the words and the interactions between the characters. This may put some people off but if you didn't know this prior to seeing it, you'd have never guessed and on an overall level, the effect is charming. The film's ending has caused problems for some but I feel that it does the film a great credit: this isn't idealised romance as seen in so many films of this genre.

Like Crazy is an admirable attempt to go against the trend of romantic films and is shot in a refreshing and energising manner. The improvisation is a treat and totally works within the context of two young lovers trying to work out their personal issues. But it is the plot which, despite having a good premise, ultimately lets the film down and left me shouting at the characters to buck their ideas up. But I don't mind. Like Crazy is the ideal platform to raise Felicity Jones' profile to the level it deserves. She will be a star. Trust me.

Clapperboard Rating: * * *