AVickers

Take a good book, and throw everything away except the title... (and a few names), then write a dismal movie to replace it.

In the book, Kelly's family are killed in a tragic accident; as John starts to rebuild his life he falls in love with a recovering drug-addicted girl, who is recaptured by the gang who held her, and murdered. Kelly becomes a one-man army dedicated to wiping out the drug dealers.... absolutely none of this made the movie. There's a brief scene where John pees on his trousers and soaks himself in booze before pretending to be a drunk homeless guy - a central part of the book, but it just seems weird and out of place in the movie.

Setting aside the fact that the movie tells a completely different story to the book - the film itself is not as dreadful as some reviews suggest. The acting is, mostly, decent enough; and whilst the story is weak and contrived, the action kicks along at a decent enough pace. Points awarded for more realistic effects of being shot than most Hollywood films can manage (no-one is running around with half a dozen bullet holes in them, put it that way), and even though this film fails to do Clancy, and especially the book after which it is named, justice; it was good enough to keep me watching to the end.

That all said - do yourself a huge favour, and seek out the book: It's SO much better, and deserves to be transferred to the big screen - or even the little screen as a mini-series. Let's hope someone does it justice one day, even if they can't use the name.

Sky TV isn't exactly the first name that springs to mind when you think of quality British period dramas. In fact, if you answered anything other than "The BBC" then you'd be considered mad. And yet, even as Aunty's star seems to be waning, so Sky is stepping up its game - and productions like this can only do it the power of good.

As I write this, the third episode of this 5-parter has just aired, and it just keeps on getting better. Despite the emphasis on the gangs/underworld in the plot synopsis, so far we've primarily followed Cathy's life (she, after all, being the title part). And, what a roller-coaster her life is... Sadly, the abuse she is subject to is entirely believable for that era - it probably still goes on to this day - goodness knows how many Cathys there are out there who never had the chance to run away.

If I were to level any criticisms at the programme, they would be these:

• Keith Allen is not 100% convincing as a ruthless underworld gangster. He looked daft with the syrup (wig), and after loosing that he looks more like a kindly uncle than a ruthless villain. - Joanna Vanderham - who looks absolutely stunning throughout, and what a find! She's got a long and brilliant career ahead of her - looks significantly older than the 14 she's supposed to be at the start of the series. In fact, none of the characters appear to have appreciably aged, despite the apparent passage of time.

And, that's about it really, for the complaints. There is some violence, but only enough to tell the story; and it's cracking along at a fair old pace.

If you enjoy good drama, in the style that the BBC used to do so well, then The Runaway will appeal to you. I think it's an excellent miniseries, and I hope it can find a larger audience than just Sky 1 viewers.

The trailers made Outcasts look like it would be an exciting new SciFi drama from the BBC. Which, I suppose, just goes to show that they did manage to make at least 30 seconds worth of decent film...

Shame the remaining 59:30 was so awful.

Many of the reviews concentrate on the woeful Episode 1 - and rightly so, because it was unremittingly awful.

So, with a deep sense of foreboding, I decided to watch Episode 2... with one question in mind: Could it be worse than the first one? I'm happy to report, it delivered in spades.

In theory, the situation the survivors find themselves in should provide ample drama to keep a 10 part series stuffed to the brim. This is completely glossed over, and some rubbish "human drama" is injected, including a hilariously contrived situation involving a poorly baby. In fact, after around 50 minutes in which the tension rose to almost detectable levels (OK, I lie. There was no tension at all), the situation was resolved in a suitable manner. I think I can safely say, without needing spoilers, that the resolution was utter nonsense and completely unbelievable.

I'll never get the two hours back I spent on this series. I - and most of the other viewers - would save you that loss. Move on. Find some wet paint, and watch it dry. Or just head for your local park and watch the grass grow.

Oh, and in case you've not seen it, here is a verbatim quote from one of the characters - the "President" talking to his (female) director of security, spoken over a rising swell of heavy orchestral music:

Stella: "Reproduction. That's all it comes down to in the end. Endlessly copying ourselves"

El Presidenté: "We're alive, Stella. Lilly's alive. That tiny baby with its heart thumping in its ribcage pushing the blood around the, oxygen to its growing brain, she's alive. That's all it's ever been about. Every terrifying glorious minute of it. Human life."

Whoever wrote those lines, whoever let them stay in the programme, deserves to be shot without trial.

Even the Department of Trade and Industry South Africa - who apparently assisted, "does not accept any liability for the content". I don't blame them.

Conclusion: Dreary beyond belief. Avoid.

I happened to catch Sunshine last night on Sky Movies, almost by accident. The TV guide review gave it 4 stars, and it's a SciFi, so TV dinner in hand, I settled down to be enlightened.

Sadly, it was not to be. The first shadow of doubt occurs very early on, after the voice-over, and after we see Earth looking pretty fine thank you, despite the allegedly serious lack of sun (hint: an ice age would start very, very quickly following any serious perturbation in the Sun's output).

From here, the darkness spreads. We are treated to a pointless and overly-dramatised shot of a chap sunning himself in the observatory. Quite where the sunlight comes from, given the Icarus is lurking behind a massive shield, is not made clear. But I'll let that one go (maybe there's a window in the shield), because of the plot problems, it's by far the smallest.

The crew, as we are introduced to them, actually seem to be relatively stable, sane, and - surely not - trained? Not that that lasts, of course, and pretty soon stupid decisions and petty fighting come to rule the roost. In fact, I got the impression I was watching Eastenders in Space; lots of shouting and hollering, and not a lot of brainpower being engaged.

The shouting match following the course change/sun shield incident was the final straw for me - and I switched it off. Ah, blessed darkness.

What should have been a great film - with a good plot (fixing the sun), descends into formulaic mediocrity (that's before the plot twist I've since read about - I turned off before that bit happened). As a Brit, it does seem to me that a large number of more recent American films (particularly scifi, but not exclusively) revolve around a small number of people who simply abandon their "training" and start arguing with and shouting at each other. Not my idea of entertainment. Of course, again as a Brit, we're not exactly immune from that sort of screenplay ourselves.

However, compare/contrast the tight storyline of, say, the Bourne films; verses the argumentative, divisive and swiss-cheese-holey storyline of Sunshine (the first half, at least). Bourne manages to keep you engaged right to the end of the film and beyond (you WANT TO KNOW what happens to Bourne afterwards); whereas by 45 minutes into Sunshine I couldn't have cared less if they burned.

My final verdict on Sunshine, in case you hadn't already guessed (and assuming you're even reading this right now) is: Avoid at all costs.

I had high hopes for this film, having basically enjoyed (in a total suspension of disbelief kind of way) the original films, and the New Adventures spin-off TV series. I wish I'd seen the comments on this site before I saw it, however.

First, some good points. Brandon Routh is a pretty lookee-likey for Christopher Reeve. The opening sequence is spectacular, if a little over-long and over-done at times - rather like the rest of the film.

Unfortunately, it's down-hill from here on in. I'm a big fan of Kevin Spacey; but unfortunately the writers haven't given him anything to work with - other than a couple of nicely comic touches (pure Spacey), such as the scene where the lights go out in the basement.

Most of the rest of the cast are lacklustre at best. Routh is fine as Superman/Kent, but all of the other main characters at the Planet - and in Lex Luthor's "gang" are eminently forgettable. I finished watching the film a little over an hour ago, and I can't actually remember a single line of dialogue.

The plot... well, I won't reveal it here, but suffice to say it lurches woodenly and illogically from one rescue set-piece to another. The action, on the odd occasions that it occurs, is predictable and simply doesn't provide the edge-of-the-seat suspense that even the 1978 original managed despite the appalling special effects.

Speaking of special effects, these are - naturally, for a film made in 2006 - very good. Indeed, I rather suspect that the entire budget was spent on CGI and Kevin Spacey, leaving only a few battered fivers for the script.

In summary, this is a film best avoided - especially if you're a fan of the Superman genre. There is nothing new here - no character development worth speaking of; indeed, compared to New Adventures of Superman, the characters have completely unravelled, becoming mere 2-dimensional flickering celluloid images.

1/10 - a complete waste of celluloid.

My mother taught me - if you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all.

Therefore, I have nothing to say about this film...

Unfortunately, IMDB insists that I provide four lines, so I will have to say something after all... Basically, it's simply not worth watching. The acting is lousy, the script is terrible, even the credits seem to bear no relation to the rest of the film.

Not worth 1 * out of 10.

Despite the summary above, this film actually does have some saving graces - 3 of them. Well, if you're a young male, that is...

It's not worth talking about the plot of this film, there isn't one. It's not worth talking about the acting, there isn't any; not even from Robert Englund, who (frankly) ought to know better.

However, young men take note: There are 3 pairs of deliciously natural-looking breasts on display at various points in the film. All totally unnecessary for the furtherance of the (non-existant) plot, but nice to see anyway...

Oddly enough, if you're willing to ignore 1h29m of drivel, the final twist at the end actually bears a semblance of originality. Also, watching Jerry Trimble apeing Kurt Russell (albeit badly) is a hoot!

If this film could be awarded zero stars, frankly that'd be all it deserved. One star is way to generous, but as that's the minimum I can give it, that's what it's got.

I wasn't quite sure what to expect of this film, looking at some of the comments about it. I'm glad I did, though...

It starts badly - confusingly, even - but improves as it goes on. A certain suspension of disbelief IS required regarding the drug of the title. Ignore comments about Samuel L Jackson "sleepwalking" through the movie; he looked like he was having a fun enough time.

It definitely helps to have a reasonably sound knowledge of Brit culture - after all, how many Americans would understand why a Scouser (that's a Liverpuddlian) would cause a fracas in a Manchester pub just before Man United played Liverpool at football (soccer)?

I'd rate this film 3 of 5 stars - it has it's moments, both good and bad, but on balance it works out as a bit of (foulmouthed, bloodthirsty) fun.

*** Contain spoilers (not that that's really possible with this film) ***





Let's face it, this movie is dire. If it were possible to give a negative stars rating on IMDB, this would truly be a -5* film.

Let me quickly run through the plot, such that it is:

1) Big fancy computerised train goes out of control when the computer is short-circuited by a fizzy drink (but the GPS & control-room comms keep on running, luckily). Of course, all of the safety systems fail-dangerous (the opposite of fail-safe).

2) Engineer (that's "driver" if you're British) falls off said train, whilst looking at a BFO fuse which blows up in his face; as fuses tend to do.

3) Robert Ulrich (Glen 'Lucky' Singer, ho ho ho) runs around trying some things out, then falls off the train (which is supposed to be travelling in excess of 80mph). Not one to let such a minor mishap get in his way, he runs up a hill, and jumps back onto the train. (You think I'm making this up, don't you? Well, I assure you, I am not).

4) Control room have option to set a switch ("points" for the Brits) which will fire the train into an embankment, killing all on board. If they don't, it will career of a cliff onto a hospital. Umm, OK then. Our valiant hero is convinced he can do something else, however. Although the points have already been changed, they are reversed - just in the nick of time, of course.

5) Using a convenient SkyCrane helicopter as a brake, Ulrich blows up the carriage/locomotive couplings with some C4 explosive he just happened to have/found (I forget which). Although the rope snaps, the carriages stop anyway, much to the relief of the obligatory critically ill passenger (who seems to make a remarkable recovery towards the end of the flick).

6) Still that loco... Fortunately, by exploding the fizzing remnants of the computer, Ulrich forces the train to jump the track into a convenient gorge on a completely straight piece of track no-where near the hospital. His mate in a helicopter (another one, not the SkyCrane) helps him to safety.

Some films are so bad, they actually become must-see (e.g. "Plan 9 From Outer Space"). This one, however, fails even to make that grade. It's pure twaddle, with absolutely no saving features whatsoever. A jelly is more suspenseful, watching your front lawn grow is more exciting.

Plenty of deep jungle scenery, tense army guys shouting at each other. Even the "shooting the bushes" scene is there, only without the minigun this time.

In fact, this is not a particularly bad film. The acting is a bit middle of the road, some of the characterisations are comically over the top, but if you're willing to let some of the bigger plot holes by, it's actually quite watchable. Just don't expect your intelligence to be stretched...

If you're reading this, the chances are you've recently seen the film for the first time (that'd be me then), you're already an afficionado, or you accidentally came here looking for the Nicolas Cage remake.

Well, c'mon in, pull up an outlandish '70s armchair, and sit back for the ride of your life...

First off, let's get the bad parts over & done with. The acting's lousy, the sound muffled (very badly, in places), the hairstyles/attitudes are seriously dated (what did you expect? '74 was the absolute pinnacle of bad taste...), and in the much-trumpeted final chase scene, there's one enormous, howling continuity error (more later). There's good reasons for all of the above: H.B. Halicki (writer, director, producer & star) was working on a budget that probably wouldn't even run a car in 21st century UK...

Despite the non existant budget, and dreadful acting, however; Halicki has managed to create what has to be the ultimate car chase sequence. Forget all the other scripted nonsense, this is for real. Cars get and stay damaged. It would appear that the entire Palm Beach police force were out chasing this man in the 40-minute blinder which switches from urban to highway to wasteland back to highway to car dealership to highway and so on and so on. This chase alone is worthy of a place in cinematic history. Watch this film, if only to see how a car chase *should* be done.

*** spoilers below, skip this part if you've not seen the film ***

And now, the biggest continuity error I've seen in a car chase film, bar one....

Observe as Halicki piles into the intersection crash, launching Eleanor into the air. Observe the landing - no problems yet. However, in the from-front sequence, Eleanor starts to spin and - if you look closely - it's obvious that Halicki still has all the power on, hence the enormous cloud of tyre smoke, into which Eleanor disappears....

The film then chops back to a full-speed section, in which we see Eleanor land more or less straight, to power off into the distance.

Oops!

I did say the biggest blooper bar one: Funnily enough, Cage's jump in the inferior remake is that one. If anyone seriously imagines a Shelby GT500 can land nose-down from 7ft or better in the air (probably nearer 20ft to get the distance), and not be even slightly banana shaped afterwards clearly needs their head examined.

Anyway, niggles aside, watch this film. Or at least, watch the last 39 minutes and 60 seconds....

I'm at a bit of a loss as to what to write, quite honestly. I'm not an American, I've never met a "'Nam Vet" (at least, not that I know of), so by rights this film should do nothing for me.

Quite the opposite...

It should be mentioned that this is an extremely graphic film. There is lots of blood, lots of death, lots of burnt soldiers. It is also extremely harrowing. The scenes towards the middle of the film, when the wives are receiving the dreaded telegrams, are more emotionally powerful than any I've ever seen before in a film.

I'd read many of the reviews on this site before I saw the film. It's interesting - and quite worrying, in a way - that many of the veterans are saying "this is a realistic film". If so, I can honestly say thank god I've never experienced war.

Somehow, I missed many of the early Farscape episodes, so I'm seeing them in all sorts of orders as they are repeated on various channels. I first caught it - entirely by accident - whilst lounging in a hotel room. The first 10 seconds had me completely hooked - THIS is what SF is all about.

The characters are strong; and Moya/Pilot the living ship is what Lexx should have been. The plots vary in quality, but none falls below excellent in my opinion. And I have to mention Rygel - what a gloriously irreverent character! None of your smarmy sugar-coated Star Trek aliens here, this is the real deal - cynical, self-serving and replete with disgusting personal habits, Rygel is the creation of a genius.

Last week the SciFi channel showed "Out of their minds" (the body-swapping episode). A true classic, I couldn't stop laughing from start to finish...

Long may Farscape grace our screens!

Reading through the reviews, I am surprised no-one has compared Andromeda to the '70s classic Blake's 7. Although the premise is different, the stories are remarkably familiar. One ship with its tiny crew against the Universe...

I wanted to like Andromeda, but I find myself being a bit disillusioned by it. Seeing Gene Roddenberry's name was the first disappointment - I've too often been let down by the formulaic nature of his work. Despite this, the first episode opens well, with a good strong story line.

Sadly, the characters let the piece down - and this is ever-clearer as the series progresses. Let's see: We have Dylan Hunt (Sorbo) as the archetypal calm captain, possessing infinite courage and wisdom. Beka Valentine (Ryder) as the fiery 1st officer. Seamus Harper (Woolvett) as the genius - complete with irritating personality and galaxy-class ego. Trance Gemini (Bertram) as the cure-it-all doctor. Rev Bem (Stait), last seen in the guise of Deanna Troi. Andromeda (Doig) who - let's face it - is lifted directly from Zen (the intelligent and sarcastic computer from Blake's 7). And Tyr Anasazi, token hard-man and would-be traitor (alias Avon, also from Blake's 7).

The plot doesn't vary from week to week. Andromeda gets in a pickle and breaks down/gets attacked/whatever. Hunt saves the day with his oily diplomacy, aided and abetted by some new invention from Harper (teleport? time travel?) and a splash of sickly-sweet philosophy from Bem, whilst sparring with Valentine and Anasazi. The Good Guys always prevail, and Harper's amazing inventions never get used again.

So, having roundly criticised it, why do I keep watching it? Well, for all its faults, lack of originality, and occasional bad acting; it's still a good romp through space and time. And it's the closest thing to a Blake's 7 sequel that there's ever likely to be.