Review Category: Movie

Review: War of the Worlds – Goliath / Cert: TBC / Director: Joe Pearson / Screenplay: Joe Pearson, David Abramowitz / Starring: Adrian Paul, Adam Baldwin, Elizabeth Gracen / Release Date: TBC

Imagine what a steampunk War of the Worlds would be like, and you’ve basically got War of the Worlds: Goliath. Directed by Joe Pearson and starring Adrian Paul, Adam Baldwin, Elizabeth Gracen and many others, this brilliant re-imagining of a timeless story takes viewers on a thrilling adventure through a very different Earth. Pearson’s world-building inspires and amazes, and it won’t take long to become completely immersed in his vision.

It’s 1914. The world is still reeling from a devastating attack by Martians decades before. Various world leaders (Nikola Tesla being one of them) know another, deadlier invasion is inevitable, so they put together a strike force to combat and stop the invasion before it’s too late. Almost on cue, the Martians return, this time in greater numbers and with even more firepower than last time. Led by a ridiculously outgunned group of soldiers, the human resistance find themselves overwhelmed by Martian foes and must take a noble stand against the forces trying to steal their planet from them.

The film’s voice cast is, for the most part, more than competent, but some of the minor players desperately needed to be recast prior to the movie’s release. Luckily, their screen time doesn’t take up much of the film’s 82 minute runtime, so the lack of talent or energy on their end is easily overlooked. The main cast, on the other hand, shines and establishes a deep connection between audience and character that just isn’t common in modern cinema. Wilson (skillfully played by Adam Baldwin), Patrick O’Brien (Adrian Paul) and Eric Wells (Peter Wingfield) stand out as the best of the bunch, blending humour with an almost off-putting sincerity that fosters genuine sympathy from the viewer.

Pearson’s inventive take on the classic alien invasion tale focuses almost entirely on the militaristic side of the conflict instead of showcasing the terror of Earth’s citizens, which could have been an absolute disaster. Luckily, he makes the heroes interesting and lovable enough that viewers likely won’t mind.

A minor quibble we have with this otherwise phenomenal movie is that it moves too fast. The climax feels slapped together and predictable, slightly soiling an otherwise incredibly imaginative film. It’s mildly disappointing, and definitely had us scratching our heads at the derivative and soulless approach Pearson took to closing his movie.

All in all, though, War of the Worlds: Goliath is top-notch animated fare, complete with gorgeous animation and some truly memorable characters. We just wish everything came together a bit better.

Expected Rating: 9 out of 10 stars

Actual Rating:

Review: Pompeii / Cert: 12 / Director: Paul W.S. Anderson / Screenplay: Janet Scott Batchler, Lee Batchler, Julian Fellowes, Michael Robert Johnson / Starring: Kit Harington, Emily Browning, Kiefer Sutherland, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, Carrie-Anne Moss, Jared Harris, Sasha Roiz / Release date: May 2nd

January and February typically act as a dumping ground for the major US studios’ unloved outputs. The Lego Movie managed to buck the trend this year but usually cinematic turkeys such as I, Frankenstein or A Good Day to Die Hard are rushed out under cover of winter darkness to indifferent audiences while the punters patiently await the summer blockbusters. None of which bodes well for Pompeii. That sinking feeling only grows when the dreaded words “A film by Paul W.S. Anderson” appear on screen, but despite initial appearances, this is no rehash of the Resident Evil films with volcanic lava standing in for waves of zombies. For a start Milla Jovovich is nowhere to be seen, the film instead focusing on Kit Harington’s Milo, essentially Jon Snow from Game of Thrones, missing his big fur coat and with his stunning abs on prominent display. Orphaned by evil Romans, Milo has grown up as a slave and a gladiator, proving his mettle in the dank province of Britannia before being shipped off to greater glory in Pompeii.

Once he arrives, the film turns into an enjoyable mash-up of Gladiator and Titanic, as it takes the arena combat from Ridley Scott’s epic (lifting the siege of Carthage arena sequence almost verbatim) and the star-crossed lovers, an imminent disaster and a scheming, moustache-twirling villain from James Cameron’s watery romance, as Milo must deal with the other gladiators, abusive handlers, scheming parents and a delightfully hammy Kiefer Sutherland in his quest to survive the coming storm, and hopefully romance Emily Browning’s Cassia in the process.

The film spends a surprising amount of its time setting up the players and the world of Pompeii before springing the inevitable cameo from our old friend pyrocastic flows in a small but essential role, and the film is all the better for it. The effects are well done with the Roman times well realized and some political shenanigans thrown in to reflect the coming fall of the Roman empire. Moss and Harris are adequate as Cassia’s parents and Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje fits the Djimon Hounsou role from Gladiator like a glove. As for the rest of the cast, all the Romans appear to be graduates from the James Mason school of Roman acting, all clipped English accents and over-pronunciation. Kiefer Sutherland takes this one step further by seemingly adding pebbles to his mouth for a cartoonish, lispy performance as Senator Corvus; war criminal, scheming would-be husband to Cassia and chewer of scenery. Sutherland’s over the top performance borders on comical but is so completely different to the scowly, rasping characters he’s been playing since Jack Bauer that he is a joy to watch and thankfully he doesn’t manage to completely destabilize the film.

Once Vesuvius does pipe up, it’s a race against time to reunite the separated characters and escape Corvus and the city before it’s too late through numerous actions scenes and false escapes. The inclusion of a mini-tsunami does come off a little crass after all the terrifying footage from the Japanese tsunami of 2011 that was seen around the world, but apparently it has some basis in fact.

Anderson directs competently and clearly, with action scenes where the audience can actually see what is going on and his camera drinking in the devastation wrought by the volcano, without making it too flashy. He is ably assisted by Clinton Shorter’s score, which never quite scales the heights of Hans Zimmer’s Gladiator soundtrack but does manage to elicit the appropriate emotions without coming across as cloying.

All this, along with a very surprising ending, hopefully marks an increased maturity and the start of a new chapter for Anderson as a director. He’s managed to create an enjoyable historical disaster movie, rather than a disastrous one.

Expected Rating: 5 out of 10

Actual Rating:

Review: Only Lovers Left Alive / Cert: 15 / Director: Jim Jarmusch / Screenplay: Jim Jarmusch / Starring: Tom Hiddleston, Tilda Swinton, Mia Wasikowska, John Hurt, Anton Yelchin / Release Date: Out Now (Limited)

Legendary indie director Jarmusch gets in on the vampire film in his own unique way, and comes up with a brilliant transcendental experience.

Adam and Eve (Hiddleston and Swinton) are a married couple living on different continents. Eve in Tangier, living a bohemian but solitary lifestyle, Musician Adam in Detroit, composing on his archaic, analogue equipment and much more reclusive. Adam’s only friend, Ian (Yelchin) acts as his portal to the outside world, securing his fix of expensive, rare guitars, and accepts a commission to produce a wooden bullet. The pair are centuries old vampires, living off a diet of safely acquired blood; Adam’s from a hospital, Eve’s from Elizabethan poet and fellow vamp, Christopher Marlowe (Hurt). Sensing her beau is depressed, she travels across the world to be with him; their idyllic lifestyle only broken when Eve’s wayward sister, Mia (Wasikowska) turns up.

Trust a maverick like Jarmusch to produce a vampire film that, while it lacks bite and fright, is thoroughly engrossing and immersive. It’s a dialogue-led film, but has so many rich flourishes which mesmerise, and an equally stunning score by Jozef van Wissem. The similarities of the vampire lifestyle and addictions are obvious, and handled with the director’s usual wit; a nightclub scene, for example, has ‘dealer’ Ian selling a rare vinyl record as if it were heroin. It’s a film which will appeal to the hipster crowd, who will no doubt delight in the retro-chic of Adam’s abode (his laptop is connected to an old CRT television and he has reel-to-reel recording equipment lining the walls) and numerous cultural references (“There’s Jack White’s house”). However, it’s coolness has substance, and never feels forced. Although, it’s melancholic, brooding atmosphere may be heavy going for casual viewers.

Both leads are brilliant; Hiddleston no doubt destined to be a poster boy for the post-Edward crowd with his rock star flowing locks and sullen demeanour and Swinton is enigmatically resplendent in her usual, unique, kooky way.

While it’s not a film for every taste, like the very best O’negative, it is absolutely delicious.

Review: I Declare War / Cert: 15 / Director: Jason Lapeyre, Robert Wilson / Screenplay: Jason Lapeyre / Starring: Siam Hu, Kolton Stewart, Gage Munroe / UK Release Date: May 9th

Who doesn’t wish they could still spend their days playing guns in the woods on long hot summer days with their buddies? I Declare War takes you back to childhood, mixing the reality of sticks, stones and name-calling with the fantasy of real guns, real explosions and real war. With red liquid-filled balloons at the ready, when these kids clash there will most definitely be blood. But as tempers fray, insecurities rise and jealousy boils, will the wounds be real or fake?

A group of 12 year old friends play ‘Capture the Flag’ in the woods, armed only with sticks, balloons and a simple set of rules to stick by. Their imagination fills in the blanks and I Declare War treats their rivalry as reality with real risk injected by the presence of genuine guns in their hands instead of the twigs they actually hold. P.K. (Munroe) leads one group with knowledge of generals from Patton to Napoleon ingrained in his brain. On the opposing team are leader Quinn (Aidan Gouveia), mutinous Skinner (Michael Friend) and the only girl of the group; Jess (Mackenzie Munro).

I Declare War has everything a good war movie should. There is friendship, rivalry, conflict, heartbreak, strategy and sacrifice. In the minds of these kids, the war, the weapons and the stakes are as real as the emotions they feel while playing them. It’s like Lord of the Flies but the kids can just go home anytime or The Hunger Games without the very real threat of death. Call of Duty has nothing on the power of their imaginations.

Some take it far more seriously than others; P.K. is a little boy on a big power trip and Skinner is letting resentment and insecurity affect his ability to play by the rules. Meanwhile when Jess wants a juice break, she simply stops playing and takes a juice break.

From P.K. to Paul to Skinner and Jess, the characters are neatly drawn but the script never reaches out to make any bigger or bolder statements about the games they play. The performances and script make the boys and girls come to life with as much verve as their vivid daydreams but at the end of the day, I Declare War is forever just child’s play.

There are moments where the threat of real violence rears its ugly head and as a result there is some tension as the war builds through minor skirmishes to bigger battles and finally a showdown. However I Declare War is really all about immersion in imagination. From the opening sounds of helicopters and gun shots to the laser gun eyes of one boy, these kids rarely step out of the world they create in their heads. Their emotions may be real but the violence and the threat rarely is. Co-directors Jason Lapeyre and Robert Wilson excel at blending fantasy and reality but stop short of making these kid’s games mean anything. Like playing war in the woods then, watching I Declare War is mostly harmless fun; at times tense and exciting but most importantly far more enjoyable than sitting at home playing a video game.

Expected Rating: 6 out of 10

Actual Rating:

Review: The LEGO Movie / Cert: U / Director: Phil Lord, Christopher Miller / Screenplay: Phil Lord, Christopher Miller, Dan Hageman, Kevin Hageman / Starring: Chris Pratt, Elizabeth Banks, Will Arnett, Morgan Freeman, Will Ferrell, Liam Neeson, Charlie Day, Nick Offerman / Release Date: Out Now

The very concept of a LEGO movie seemed absurd. What else could it be but a crass marketing ploy to extend the reach of the ubiquitous building blocks even further into the hearts and minds of children everywhere, as well as into the wallets of their parents? Yet screenwriters and directors Lord and Miller have achieved the seemingly impossible and assembled a genuinely funny, touching, inspirational and absolutely lunatic love letter to those tiny bricks, as well as to imagination and creativity in general, that can’t help but bring a smile to even the most stony of faces.

In a genius use of verisimilitude, everything in the world of the film is made up of LEGO pieces (with a few very well-explained exceptions) and the animation style of the movie stays true to the restrictions this imposes. Unlike the successful line of licensed LEGO video games, from LEGO Harry Potter to LEGO Star Wars, the dimensions of the minifigs are never obviously distorted for the sake of portraying drama. Characters will never close their claw-like hands around an object, instead “snapping” onto it. Neither will they bend their non-existent elbows to scratch their face or develop a knee to bend for the sake of a dramatic pose. It really does look like a movie made out of LEGO with everything, including elements like fire and water, all available in a box of LEGO somewhere.

In this world Emmet Brickowski (Pratt) is an unassuming citizen of Brickburg, working on a construction site, blindly following “The Instructions” for every aspect of his life until he accidentally happens upon “The Piece of Resistance”, the only thing capable of stopping Lord Business’ (Ferrell’s) evil plans. Emmet is then swept up in an adventure to different LEGO worlds, such as “The Old West”, learning to embrace his creativity, encountering numerous concussions and meeting a host of heroes along the way.

This simple synopsis belies a host of incredible detail as every step on Emmet’s journey is lovingly filled with blink-and-you’ll-miss them background sight gags and laugh out loud jokes for all ages. The clever plot focuses on the importance of creativity and imagination and constantly throws surprises at the audience. It may be a cliché to say that providing any further detail would ruin the surprise, BUT the story takes some truly mind-boggling turns near the end that need to be experienced to be believed. A constant sense of “How did they get away with this” accompanies almost the entire movie.

What can be said is that The LEGO Movie must have been some lawyer’s nightmare, as characters from all the various lines of LEGO get to interact with each other. Dumbledore and Gandalf share a scene; Superman appears numerous times, becoming increasingly irritated with Green Lantern and in an unexpected move, not only is Batman (Arnett) present, but he is one of the main characters and a major source of humour in a film littered with characters and clever references that demand repeat viewings.

The rest of the voice cast are uniformly excellent, Pratt and Banks carrying the movie easily but Liam Neeson AND Morgan Freeman really shine. Neeson gleefully sends up his recent hard man image as both sides of the Good Cop/Bad Cop trope, while Freeman’s tie-dyed hippy Vitruvius plays on all the wise old man stereotypes that Freeman himself has contributed to over the years. If you listen carefully you might even catch a mini-reunion from another Lord and Miller film, 21 Jump Street.

The LEGO Movie confounds expectations and shows that there is still plenty of originality, inventiveness, fresh humour and most surprisingly of all, heart left in modern blockbusters, and it will inevitably result in a tonne of LEGO being sold.

Expected Rating: 6 out of 10

Actual Rating:

Review: Mr. Peabody & Sherman / Cert: U / Director: Rob Minkoff / Screenplay: Craig Wright / Starring: Ty Burrell, Max Charles, Ariel Winter / Release Date: February 7th

There are certain readers out there who will see the images and adverts for DreamWorks’ Mr. Peabody & Sherman and not even realise it is based on anything. And why should they? The advertising has not even alluded to these characters’ roots and thus it seems this is only a big occasion for the party faithful. To fill in anyone in the dark, Mr. Peabody & Sherman is based on the Peabodies’ improbable history segments that were a regular part of the late ’50s/early ’60s Rocky and Bullwinkle cartoon series. The premise was simple, the world’s smartest dog (award-winning scientist, Olympian and businessman) Mr. Peabody adopted an orphan boy called Sherman and together the two travelled through history using their own time machine.

Here things are a little different. The father-son dynamic between Mr. Peabody (Burrell) and Sherman (Charles) is far more dwelt upon and there are certain differences to the source material throughout. The plot sees Peabody and Sherman encounter trouble throughout history when Sherman’s classmate Penny (Winter) gets in between the two time travellers. Mr. Peabody & Sherman in some senses is a hard sell, in a market stuffed with animated features, but in many other ways is easy peasy – talking dog, time travel, Leonardo da Vinci acting like a prat… While fans born and bred on the original cartoons will undoubtedly find fault in the character tweaks, voices and plot, there is a lot to enjoy in Minkoff’s film.

Mr. Peabody & Sherman is warm, unoffending, family viewing. The film offers some very worthwhile and admirable messages for younger audiences, about respecting parental figures and accepting our guardians. Its greatest achievement is that it might just engage kids in certain historical events, whilst adults can have a chuckle at some of Peabody’s delightfully corny puns (who doesn’t love a punning Beagle?) and historical observations.

Undoubtedly the film has its problems, of which there are a few. For instance, the plot is zippy and energetic but the final third really becomes somewhat chaotic, combining too many historical figures and elements for its own good. As well as this, the character of Penny initially grinds your gears – it was not the best tactic, introducing her in a somewhat realistic bullying scene. The plot is pretty unoriginal, and so the parental issues and adventurous mishaps are all as expected; that being said we shouldn’t forget the intended audience. As a family offering Mr. Peabody & Sherman is a nice safe bet for fun. At 92 minutes the pace is steady, the 3D is not garish and despite some liberties with the source material, this is not the hatchet job that Top Cat – The Movie 3D was (no prison rape gags here, thankfully).

If you were to draw a direct comparison to any other film, Mr. Peabody & Sherman is like 2001’s Jimmy Neutron: Boy Genius. The energy is constant, the voice work is snappy (particularly Burrell as the Sherlockian pooch Peabody) and Craig Wright’s screenplay is incessantly silly but occasionally warm, witty and it even makes time for a slight Raiders of the Lost Ark homage. You may not be talking about Peabody & Sherman when 2014 ends and it makes no solid impact of any kind but you’ll have inoffensive fun with the family and that has to be worth the trip. Plus you get an amusing Oedipus gag, can’t be bad!

Expected Rating: 5 out of 10

Actual Rating:

Review: RoboCop / Cert: 12A / Director: José Padilha / Screenplay: Joshua Zetumer / Starring: Joel Kinnaman, Gary Oldman, Michael Keaton, Samuel L. Jackson, Abbie Cornish, Jackie Earle Haley, Michael K. Williams, Jennifer Ehle, Jay Baruchel, Aimee Garcia, Zach Grenier / Release Date: February 7th

For those few not familiar with the 1987 original, José Padilha’s RoboCop mostly follows the same plot – it’s 2028 and crime and terrorism are still rife. In Detroit, a large corporation called OmniCorp is developing the warfare technology of tomorrow – large robots accompanying trained men into battle. Only, they’re not very popular with the public, especially when they shoot people who aren’t perceived threats.

What they need is a man inside a machine. A more human touch. Some sort of… robot cop (well, cyborg actually). Step in Alex Murphy, a dedicated police officer who meets his untimely demise at the hands of the ruthless gang he’s chasing. If this rings any bells, that’s about where the similarities with Verhoeven’s version stop.

As expected, the 12A classification of the film severely inhibits the dark humour and ultraviolence that made the original so popular. For starters (spoiler), Murphy is not sadistically blown to pieces, or even killed, but is blown up by a car bomb. In a change from the first film, his family are well aware of his situation, as Murphy is himself, with Joel Kinnaman displaying some great acting amongst an all-star cast as the emotionally turbulent man living on in a cybernetic suit, unable to forget his attempted murder.

Unfortunately, you’re not really rooting for him though – the street criminals are tossed aside in favour of the corporate bad guys, updated to a more PR/brand-concerned team of creatives headed by CEO Raymond Sellars (Keaton). The anger and desire for revenge is missing – while the ‘bad guys’ certainly lack ethics, they also lack personality, reflecting a more disinterested modern generation. What is interesting is how the date of RoboCop is unchanged – 2028 – the real-life bankruptcy of Detroit presumably making the sci-fi vision seem closer to reality.

There is no sense of cruel dystopia however, another theme from the original that added to the world Murphy inhabited and made you more interested in his fate, and the fate of those who deserved to be taken in, dead or alive. There are a few hit-and-miss nods to the original, such as several (but largely unimportant) ED-209s. Disturbing questions about the nature of humanity still raise their heads. Elements of cynicism remain – some are relatively hidden (look out for news ticker tapes), and some are more obvious and welcome, such as Samuel L. Jackson’s brilliant right-wing TV anchor Pat Novak. However, there are no happy families playing Nukem and nothing is bought for a dollar.

Despite impressive CGI and a quick reimagining of Murphy becoming half-machine, Padilha’s RoboCop only really gets going halfway through. A scene featuring a battle test for RoboCop impresses, and there’s a brilliant sequence where he scans a friendly crowd for potential criminal suspects. RoboCop 2014 is sleeker and more driven by empathy than revenge, with a lot of emphasis on human relationships – particularly with sympathetic Dr Norton (Oldman), abrasive soldier Rick Mattox (Haley) and Murphy’s loving wife Clara (Cornish). There is no shortage of action but it is somewhat unfulfilling without a solid purpose, and although the ensemble cast’s acting is exceptional, perhaps surprisingly so for an action movie, the film doesn’t keep the momentum going when it should.

One can only wonder what Darren Aronofsky would have made of this, or even what Hugh Laurie may have added to the film, if anything. Fans of old may already be smirking (‘It’s a 12,’ ‘The suit’s black,’ ‘He has his hand,’ ’Lewis is a man!’) but the film is definitely worth a watch on its own merit. The reboot is here, and it would be nice to see Robo kicking ass again (preferably an ass belonging to a nastier, certificate 18-rated bad guy). 

Expected Rating: 6 out of 10

Actual Rating:

Review: The Strange Colour of Your Body’s Tears / Cert: TBC / Director: Hélène Cattet, Bruno Forzani / Screenplay: Hélène Cattet, Bruno Forzani / Starring: Klaus Tange, Ursula Bedena, Joe Koener, Jean-Michel Vovk, Birgit Yew, Sylvia Camarda, Sam Louwyck, Anna D’Annunzio, Manon Beuchet, Hans de Munter / UK Release Date: April 11th

One of the most bizarre films in recent years, The Strange Colour of Your Body’s Tears is directors Cattet and Forzani’s follow-up to Amer. It follows a man called Dan Kristensen (Tange – who looks like a cross between the Bounty Hunter from The X-Files and Peter Capaldi) searching for his missing wife.

After waking up with no recollection of what’s happened to her, he begins to investigate the mysterious old Belgian apartment block where they live, alerting a police detective (Koener), who begins to suspect him.

The search turns into a nightmarish journey as Dan encounters strange characters with equally weird tales as he starts to witness a terrifying world of sex and violence. Despite this, the film is not as pornographic or gory as you might think, with an overtly arthouse tone – Videodrome meets Delicatessen, with the surrealism somewhere in-between.

There are several shots of eyes in-between fast cuts, disorientating camera angles and overbearing, uncomfortable music straight from Irreversible. The film starts strongly, both intriguing and foreboding, but the rest of it is hit and miss. Some scenes are shown over and over again – particularly one with an annoying doorbell – and there is a sudden, self-aware sidestep into another story (at which point Dan knowingly asks ‘What has this got to do with my wife?’).

The experiments with colour, sound, stop-frame techniques and some leather S&M that Pinhead would be proud of all contribute to a thoroughly fascinating film that pays homage to ’70s European horror, but unfortunately the audience is often left confused and unsatisfied when the tension has started to build only for the direction of the story to be suddenly interrupted. A shorter, more focused film would perhaps be more satisfying but then again, this film wasn’t meant to follow the rules.

Expected Rating: 6 out of 10

Actual Rating:

Review: I, Frankenstein / Cert: 12A / Director: Stuart Beattie / Screenplay: Kevin Grevioux, Stuart Beattie / Starring: Aaron Eckhart, Bill Nighy, Miranda Otto, Jai Courtney / Release Date: January 29th

When a film so clearly takes its “inspiration” from those that have gone before, it’s not unreasonable to expect it to add something to the formula. Not so with I, Frankenstein.

Like the eponymous monster I, Frankenstein is a hideous assemblage of spare parts, in this case from the Underworld films and 2004’s Van Helsing. It takes some of their visual styling and the motif of a secret war between legendary monsters, replacing vampires and werewolves with demons and gargoyles (yes… gargoyles!), spliced together with the concept from Van Helsing that Frankenstein’s creature somehow holds the key to the war. I, Frankenstein adds nothing to this mix and even fails to meet the expectation set by the worst moments of either of those films.

Jumping off from where Mary Shelley’s novel ended, Frankenstein’s monster returns from the frozen North in 1795 to bury his creator, only to be set upon at the family plot. One of the attackers helpfully melts his own face off to reveal a demon head underneath and the battle is joined by winged stone creatures, who whisk the monster away for a horrendous infodump from Miranda Otto’s Leonore.

Charged by the Archangel Michael to battle demons, Leonore is leader of the order of the gargoyles who fear what plans the demons have for the monster. After being named Adam and taught how to “descend” the demons back to hell, the monster stops off at the weapons shed and returns to the generic “North”.

After 300 years hiding in the wilderness, an attack prompts Frankenstein to return to the city to stamp out all the demons. No other motivation is given for his return, our “hero” does not come to some great realisation, he simply decides after a second attack by demons that now they must be wiped out, and it’s not just the monster’s motivation that seems half-baked. The whole film feels badly thought out and hastily arranged. The dialogue is lumpen, the plot plods from A to B to C to D (and sometimes back to C a number of times), never taking any narrative chances or surprising the audience in any way, and the whole thing is completely lacking in humour. There are some minor glimmers of style in some of the fight sequences but most of these consist of slightly moving slowmo images with fire and flying monsters, without much of the feel of an actual fight. All of this combines to make the film feel like a series of events happening just so the next set piece or infodump can occur while ignoring all the questions and issues raised by earlier scenes.

Why do the demons looks like the Wishmaster? Why do the gargoyles bother turning into humans with a CGI budget-friendly sweep of their wings, seeing as they seem to have no undercover lives? Why can’t either side get reinforcements from their respective bosses? Why has no one realised the demons’ lair is ten minutes’ walking distance from gargoyle HQ? Why is Adam seemingly indestructible in one scene and easily harmed in the next? Why does the whole film go out of its way to avoid naming the city, or even the country that the story takes place in? When trying to escape and backed against a window why does Adam bother to wait for Bill Nighy to finish his speech before jumping through it? Will Jai Courtney have any career left after this and last year’s A Good Day to Die Hard? Why did Aaron Eckhart agree to do this?

Eckhart delivers a raspy performance as the monster, the minimal makeup not quite hindering his attractiveness, but he’s not given all that much to do. He growls and glowers from scene to scene, while Otto poses and Nighy faxes over a copy of his performances as Viktor in the Underworld films, minus the violent neck twitching.

Any interesting ideas raised by the film, such as whether it’s possible for Adam to have a soul or not, are completely glossed over in favour of another unimpressive action scene in this lazy and aggressively dumb film.

Expected Rating: 5 out of 10

Actual Rating:

Review: Devil’s Due / Cert: 15 / Director: Matt Bettinelli-Olpin, Tyler Gillett / Screenplay: Lindsay Devlin / Starring: Zach Gilford, Alison Miller / Release Date: Out Now

Fears that the found footage film fad had faded appear to be unfounded in the wake of the recent release of the umpteenth entry in the Paranormal Activity franchise, quickly followed by this must-try-harder effort from Bettinelli-Olpin and Gillett, whose contribution to the original V/H/S anthology showed much more promise than this feature-length debut delivers. Devil’s Due superficially looks a sure bet for the Halloween season crowd but on closer inspection it reveals itself to be little better than any number of similar cheapo horrors which lurk unloved in the nether regions of straight-to-DVD world.

It starts off brightly and breezily as loved-up newlyweds Zach (Gilford) and Samantha (Miller) set off on their honeymoon in the Dominican Republic. Naturally enough, they’re filming every minute of it for the delight of future generations. On the last night of their holiday they take a taxi back to their hotel but find themselves taken to a dingy underground nightclub where much illicit booze is quaffed and an unconscious Sam becomes the centrepiece of an eerie supernatural ritual. Back home in the good ol’ US of A the couple’s lives are disrupted by the unexpected news that Sam is pregnant. Family and friends share their joy… and then the creepy stuff starts…

The trouble is, we’ve seen all this creepy stuff before. Devil’s Due manages to build up a decent sense of creeping dread as the audience waits for the first signs of inevitable funny business and we can almost tick them off the list of horror movie clichés – spontaneous nosebleeds, ferocious tempers, suspicious barking dog, demonic eyes, banging and crashing. The ‘found footage’ gimmick itself creaks here like an old barn door and the script has to leap through too many unlikely hoops to maintain its illusion that the story’s all been recorded on Zach’s camera, car park CCTV, supermarket security cameras and the phalanx of secret cameras rigged up around the couple’s house by the mysterious and unexplained cult who have engineered Sam’s unfortunate predicament.

Any fragile subtlety flies out of the window in the last act as Devil’s Due can’t decide whether it wants to be The Exorcist, Rosemary’s Baby or Paranormal Activity, so instead decides to pilfer liberally from all of them. But despite all the blood, the shrieking, the demonic possession and scenes of people flying through the air, Devil’s Due just ain’t scary because it’s doing nothing new with its box of tricks and seems happy to just wheel out familiar clichés with no real idea what to do with them.

To give the film its due though (ha), it passes the time, the performances are better than they really need to be but, like this reviewer, your soul may die just a little at the end at the realisation that a lot has been left unresolved and that the way has been paved for the inevitable sequel. Devil’s Due 2 anyone?

Expected Rating: 6 out of 10

Actual Rating: