This book was hyped a lot but afterward I was a bit disappointed. The initial style seemed a bit simplistic, but soon I got into it and was really enjoying the descriptions of life growing up in the various periods of Amir’s childhood. The pivotal events were shocking and heart wrenching, and quite emotional. However the second half of the book as the sequelae of the earlier events played out was too unconvincing, too corny, too “hollywood” for my liking. Maybe it will make a good movie as audiences sometimes can accept these faults in a film in exchange for the style, the visuals and cinamatography and performances of the actors. However as a book it lacked a bit for me.

Finally got around to seeing this after a long time! After all the hype I wasn’t disappointed. It is a touching, sometimes brutal, and beautifully made film. My only criticism is the story became somewhat predictable but this didn’t really detract from the enjoyment of going on the journey as it were.

This just hit the Wii virtual console in Europe (July 07). A classic of it’s day on the N64, and forerunner of Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door, and now upcoming Wii game Super Paper Mario. It is a classic japanese-style RPG but with a typical Mario storyline. Hits most of the right spots for die-hard fans. Unlikely to convert non-believers.

A nice film, covering important subjects in an entertaining but not too Hollywood way. Kind of in the same emotional ball park as The Constant Gardener. Good performances all round. I think Leonardo di Caprio is getting better as he is getting older. I liked the Howard Hughes film he did too. Also this is two Ed Zwick films in a row for me that get the thumbs up, the other being The Last Samurai.

I think I liked this, only I’m not quite sure. The initial premise was interesting, the acting was good and characters interesting. The direction (by one of my fave directors Alfonso Cuaron) was great with some amazing long one-take shots. However something left me a bit unfulfiulled by the end. I either missed something fundemental in the progression of the story, or just not much really happened. Like one of the other posters here, I was a bit disappointed by the ending. Hopeful, maybe but not in a big way. Still, worth consuming.

Being a fan of superhero /comics, and fantasy movies in general, I was quite looking forward to this. It suffered from what a lot of recent comic and fantasy movies have suffered from – i.e. not a lot happens, all flash and not much substance. I felt the casting was good especially Brandon Routh who really carried the torch of Chris Reeve without completely copying him. Kate Bosworth as Lois was totally different to the old movies, but I didn’t mind that. I was part of bringing the movies up to date. The special effects were generally good as you’d expect from a multi-million dollar blockbuster, but these days eye popping effects are the norm, and not sufficient to carry a movie. Kevin Spacey was OTT as Luther but again I had no reall problems with this.

My main disappointment was that the plot seemed just … thin.
Without spoiling it, Superman comes back on the scene, a bit of getting to know you stuff between CK and his old friends, same old “people trying to guesss who he is” etc. Luther comes on the scene and hatches an inexplicable and unlikely plot to tak eover the world again, and Supes thwarts him. Yes I know that probably is the plot for most superhero movies but really there needs to be some kind of original take on proceedings. Or some more depth to the character development.

Oh well, this seems to have turned into mostly a moan, but it was quite fun, so as I said in the title… not bad, not great (3/5)

This was a bit of a departure for Brosnan, as he hasn’t done much comedy. It wasn’t as good as The Thomas Crown Affair although he was much more playing to type in that as a suave rich playboy.
In this he is a wise-cracking semi washed up assassin who stumbles upon regular guy Kinnear (who does well in this mostly straight role). It’s one of those few movies that make assassins into “nice guys” and in that respect it’s obviously a lighthearted movie. It does however have a few moments of greater depth which make the whole quite nicely balanced. OK, the twists of the plot are a bit predictable, but as a nice, slightly unusual buddy movie, that is light, but has a bit of heart it does well.

Since those pesky stars always go missing… I give it 3.5/5

I finally got around to watching King Kong, on DVD. First, I think that maybe seeing it on the small screen made it less of the spectacle it should have been, and this is definitely one to see in the cinema. On the other hand, at least in my living room I could take a break… in the movie house you are locked in there for the whole 3 hour stretch…

Anyway, overall I liked it. It was entertaining. The effects were mostly top notch, the action was non-stop (that is also one of my criticisms) and the acting was generally good.

Like most others the biggest problem was the length. I liked the first half. Yes, the bit with no monkey, only people. I liked the set up of the characters and I thought Jack Black was good in a non-goofing around role. Naomi Watts was excellent. I haven’t seen the original, but I hear this material was where this version differed most from the original.

However the action after reaching Skull Island was just a tad too much for me. Ok much of it may have been in the original, but did it really need to go on so long. I have “action fatigue” after the middle section. For me the stampede of the dinosaurs through the canyon was too comical and unrealistic for me. I know it is fantasy but those guys dancing in and out of the dino’s feet was just too much. Also, the dino pile up was also unintentionally funny. The flailing dino limbs seemed to be made of jelly or plasticine and appeared to lack solidity.

Then there were the insects, then the bats, then the head-sucking creatures. And both Kong vs. dino battles. One would have sufficed. All good on their own, but one after the other got a bit tiring.

The transition from capturing Kong to New York also seemed very abrupt. I happened to catch the second half of the 1976 remake starring Jessica Lange and Jeff Bridges recently and enjoyed the scenes on the boat while Kong was being transported back to the US.

On the good side was the New York scenes. The recreation of period New York seemed very authentic, and this part of the film snapped along at a better pace. The climax at ESB was well done and looked beautiful. If I had a nit-pick it would be how come Kong can climb up these sheer buildings one handed. Ok, ok, I’ll get my coat now…

3.5/5 I look forward to some small scale PJ films in the future.

For those who, like me knew very little about Che Guevara, other than he was a “revolutionary” and of course that iconic image, this will be an educational movie, revealing something of of his early years, and some of the experiences which may have shaped his later life. More so however it is an enjoyable film, with nice performances from both the leads as Ernesto “Che” Guevara, and his older friend, the slightly wacky biochemist Alberto Granado. It is nicely shot with moving scenes of the various mostly poverty stricken places the pair visited and the people they encountered. It is funny in a lot of places although becomes more serious and emotional later on, and overall is a gem that deserves to be discovered by more.

4 stars.(/5)

This was so slow I fell asleep. The plot was empty, and the “twist” was crass and unbelievable. Very poor and a waste of time. I liked the Sixth Sense, and Unbreakable. I even quite liked Signs, but I will be avoiding Lady in the Water like the plague…