EddieMink

I'd advise anybody (even the most ardent Ali G fans - as I am one myself) not to buy this DVD. Purely because it consists of cut-offs and unfunny sketches which weren't available before because they either didn't work, or weren't funny. At all.

This DVD was only put together to capitalise on the success of the movie, and to make a little more bread.

Nevertheless - the DVD contains one of the finest moments in televisual history - the David and Victoria Beckham interview from last year. Every second of it is pure gold.

But bear in mind that it only lasts 10 minutes.

Buy this. And watch it. If you don't find it hysterically funny, then you must be dead. There are no two ways about it.

This will probably get the recognition it deserves in a few decades time. Which is a damn shame.

This movie is by no means truly awful. It just often feels like it. It is directed with a real verve, and there are one or two genuinely fresh touches which threaten to lift it into the same area as something watchable. But at the end of the day, the one word that describes this movie accurately is "stale".

The "script" is a horrible misfire. It tries (and fails miserably) to:

*Be hip

*Contain likeable characters

*Rip off Pulp Fiction / Human Traffic / Anything you can imagine

*Be profound

So. How do you build a film on foundations like that?

Exactly. You can't. What more can you say?

It looks nice, some of the better (Who the hell cast this movie?!) actors try hard, and the locations ring far truer than the whitewashed London of, "Notting Hill".

But trust me, you'll be bored.

Nothing is worth your time on this film. Bad performances, a deeply shocking screenplay (you'll hate the characters, be bored by the "plot" and despise the "dialogue") and its shot in the most unimaginative way well, imaginable.

Tough talk - but THIS is exactly what is wrong with contemporary British cinema. Its so sad that tripe like this is allowed to exist. Career car crash for all concerned is whats needed, as unpleasant and spiteful as that sounds.

Don't believe me? Seek it out.....

Did you like Guy Ritchie's fabulous, "Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels"?

Want to see it butchered by people that obviously have no idea what they're doing?

I was alerted to this film by a few Kiwi friends (who else?). They obviously take a lot of pride in it. They were clearly not happy when I gave them my verdict.

"Stickmen" is EXACTLY the kind of trash that should be avoided at all costs. All areas of it are derivative. The performances, the style, the "dialogue". Well, the attempts at all of the above anyway. All are forced, unfunny and lack any sense of narrative coherence.

It "looks" nice (although that look itself is stolen from Richies film). But thats it.

If my verdict was one of those amusing "smilies", it'd be the one with the eyes planted firmly upwards. As it happens, all I have are numbers. Thus:

1/10.

Right, lets get this straight; M Night Shyamalan is a fantastic film maker. He is subtle, clearly has respect for his audience, and tells stories that are always deeply rooted in exploring the potential realism of the work of a fantastical imagination. There is nobody like him currently working in the business. His work deserves to be celebrated.

'Signs' is no different. But, it is kept back from greatness by perhaps its greatest (financial) asset; Mel Gibson. While Joaquin Phoenix is truly excellent in the film, Gibson is overwhelmingly poor. And therein lies the problem. Phoenix is an actor and Gibson is a movie star. His performance (as a priest struggling with his faith no less) was abominable. He still walked, talked and acted as if he was supposed to be a hero. Not a man trying to come to terms with his ethical and religious decisions. He merely toned himself down. And left us with far too many pregnant silences which hinted at a pretension that simply wasn't there. The man cannot act. Its that simple.

And this was truly a shame, because there was so much to admire about this film. The ending was overly hokey, but as far as flaws go, thats it. The film was expertly crafted, fascinating, and all of the performances shone brightly. Bar you know who.

Such a shame!

...and that is by no means a bad thing.

'Predator', once seen as the cheap and cheerful bastard son of 'Aliens' and a like, is now picking up speed on its way to becoming regarded as something much more, and can now be mentioned in the same sentence as Jim Cameron's film without fear of the standard cine-(il?)literate snob mockery. Its about time.

'Predator' is such a huge success for the same reasons as McTiernan's other 80's masterpiece (Hey! Deal with it), 'Die Hard'. Firstly, McTiernan (the most underrated Hollywood film maker by a country mile) knows how to crank up tension and suspense like nobody else. Secondly, the film is suitably ridiculous, and everyone involved is in on the joke. Thirdly, Schwarzenegger is easily at his most appealing here - attitude and pure charisma dripping from his every word and movement. Fourth, the editing is truly superb and fifth, the predator itself is an all time great movie monster. Oh, and the script isn't too shabby either, for what it is.

And thats it. Besides PERFECTLY epitomising 1980's Hollywood product to an absolute tee, 'Predator' is nothing other than what it is supposed to be - a wonderfully entertaining Saturday night rollercoaster.

The term "classic" has been used to describe far lesser works.....

Gently amusing gangster parody - that deserves a wider audience. Why on earth hasn't this been released on video OR DVD? The nice performances and sharp direction make this a very decent little flick. Seek it out! Somehow!

Having followed Larry Clark's work in photography with great admiration for many years, when he finally unleashed "Kids" on the world, I couldn't have been more disappointed. Clark did his job just fine, but the script was so meandering and desperate to shock that the film itself lacked any kind of narrative focus, and did inevitably seem almost entirely dedicated to being shocking, and nothing more.

What though, I asked myself, could Clark achieve with a focused script, a bigger budget and some more accomplished actors? "Bully" is the exhilarating answer.

Although shot in the similarly gritty style of his debut - Bully has so much more going for it in every conceivable department. All of the actors involved give truly phenomenal, frightening performances. The script is dark, honest and thematically uncompromising. Clark's visual sense has sharpened ten fold, revealing a film maker with an astonishingly accomplished grasp of both linear narrative storytelling, and cohesive, relevant stylistics. The best examples of both occur in the film's finale, when (for the first time in the film) Clark resorts to using incongruous pop music on the soundtrack. As the film slowly slips away, and the music eases us into the relaxed reality that we were, "only watching a movie", the film's final image throws up a shattering caption which hits home like a fist in the throat.

Its tough. Its utterly uncompromising. Its one of the finest films I've seen in the last ten years.

I urge everyone with an open mind to go and seek it out.

I mean, really? What can you say about a videogame that truly transcends its medium?

Eternal Darkness is a masterpiece of storytelling. The best way to describe it is as an interactive novel. I personally don't have the time or the interest to play videogames right through until the end normally, but this one... BOY. I was hooked. I didn't stop playing until I finished the baby.

There were great moments, like there are with any piece of cinema, when the use of music, dialogue and story subversion created moments so exhilarating and original, that it suddenly becomes incredibly sad that it isn't going to reach the wide audience that it so deserves.

Go. And buy it now.

I love this movie. Why?

The reasons are legion. Its just so refreshing to find a sci-fi flick so utterly lacking in pretension, and so deeply committed to doing just one thing perfectly (being entertaining) that I can't help but love it more than many "classic" movies which deserve much more critical kudos.

Dolph Lundgren makes for a very competant hero, and as far as "acting" goes, he does a surprisingly admirable job of making his character far more human and warm than many of his contemporaries could ever manage. Brian Benben is great value as his cocky sidekick, and the supporting cast all pull their weight in a highly inventive and very self aware sci-fi flick which (please!!) will hopefully attain a new life and reputation when it eventually hits DVD.

The fond memories I had of this flick from my youth were not disappointed when I finally caught up with it again recently.

Its simply a great kids adventure. Many claimed at the time that it was little more than a rather enormous advert for Nintendo, and it is. But they bothered to make a decent movie out of it as well. I remember how excited I was at the prospect of Super Mario Bros 3, and this movie plays up to those expectations very entertainingly.

If you love videogames, the film is a fascinating cultural artifact. If you are a youngster, you should thoroughly enjoy a very well maintained adventure, with surprisingly few flaws.

It may sound pretentious, but for what it is, it is near flawless. Go figure!

Saw this when I was but a wee nipper - and I remember loving it dearly. It never insulted my intelligence, and the plot has momentum.

Would love to see it again now, were it not impossible to find!