Newcomer director Neill Blomkamp is a native of South Africa. Together with his co-writer, Terri Tetchell, they came up with a satirical “mockumentary” with a touch of political undertone in a very original science-fiction piece.

His choice of locations, the dusty and harsh environment, the people and their accents, every detail onscreen added on to the tapestry of the place. Together with cinematographer Trent Opaloch, scenes are delivered from mini-handhelds to black-and-white surveillance cameras (but nothing as shaky as Cloverfield).

The aliens were all created out of CGI and seamlessly blend into the realistic urban world of Jo’Burg. But why are they here? How smart are they? Why are they stranded? The story let you ponder and decide for yourself.

Blomkamp deals a lot with the human psychology in his debut feature. It was reflected clearly in and around his lead character Wikus. From his initial arrogance and ignorance, to a change in perspective with his change in appearance; followed closely by his struggle to stay alive; and to finally realising what he needed to do.

That’s where Blomkamp really came through with his storytelling. He took the audience on a journey to see Wikus’ growth in character, which undoubtedly was the best part of the whole movie. The audience was able to feel disgust first for Wikus and then rooted for him towards the second half as he became the proverbial protagonist.

And Sharlto Copley did a fantastic job with his portrayal even when this is his first acting job. Unfortunately though, his character was the only one that was fully developed in the whole story.

There never was any indication that the aliens bore ill will or they would have used their technologically advanced weaponry against the humans. But the dark side of human nature was abundantly clear.

It started simply with the derogatory term, “prawn”, given to the aliens because of their appearance and their scavenging nature. Then there was the curiosity, the thirst for power and control; characteristics that ultimately destroy humanity and bring on mass destruction, as shown in this movie.

Blomkamp’s first movie is out with a resounding bang. It takes you in a direction you wouldn’t expect; and after the whole experience, it will take a while for the movie to really sink in.

Rated R for reasons never out of context, District 9 had everything from drama and touching moments to humour and some violence, and a big action piece towards the end to close it off.

But most importantly, it had a compelling story and is very well told. Blomkamp has just made himself as someone to watch out for.

Reviewer’s Rating: 9 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

And with that success, producer and director Michael Bay planned to give exactly what the fans want in the second instalment, but on an epic level. How did that translate into the silver screen? Bigger robots, bigger explosions, and bigger action sequences.

In the first movie, the plot was so straightforward that the audience was able to fully enjoy the action and visuals without having to divert attention to the plot. Let’s face it, nobody would go into a Michael Bay movie expecting a heavy storyline.

However, in Revenge Of The Fallen, there was just too much going on and involved too many locations and differing agendas that constantly distracted the flow of enjoyment with their incoherence. Scenes jumped from action to comedy to melodrama whenever Bay felt like it without proper build-up or giving them enough time to reach a natural conclusion.

To Bay’s credit, this is his biggest and most explosive movie to date. There were a few set pieces which were really commendable. From the opening chase sequence in China to a sword-battle in the forest between Optimus Prime and three Decepticons, and finally to the long action sequence in the desert; the seamless CGI was at least a few steps above the first movie.

The only problem with the action scenes was differentiating the individual robots other than the more obvious ones like Optimus and Bumblebee, so what more the difference between Autobots and Decepticons. Because the sub-cast robots did not have significant roles, it’s impossible to tell who was knocking the spare parts out of who until one stood victorious. And Bay’s shaky camera movements only made things worse.

Even though we still see a few of the human actors a lot more this time, but their roles weren’t as prominent compared to the robots. In the first movie, Shia LaBeouf managed to constantly remind his audience that he was the main star of the movie – bringing the human touch, so to speak. But his character this time wasn’t allowed to flourish as before.

And those twin Autobots, “Huey and Dewey”, are irritating as hell. Why only Autobots have stupid personalities?

Bay’s signature move of swirling camera action was even more pronounced here but they were hits-and-misses at best. The soundtrack once again was cleverly inserted to emphasise the appropriate scenes. And the script has improved slightly, though tacky lines like, “I rise, you fall” still popped up one too many times.

The first Transformers movie proved that a loud, gimmicky movie can be fun. But with Revenge Of The Fallen, Bay just wanted to make things as big and as loud as he possibly could; ignoring logic and substance for flashy and style. The result, a soulless piece of machine.

Rating: 6 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

So, just a short recap on the special abilities that were more like rules of the game. “Movers” can move objects without touching them. “Sniffers” can recall the past by sniffing on one’s possession. “Watchers” are clairvoyants who sketch out images of the future. “Pushers” can create believable lies in the minds of others. “Bleeders” are banshee-like individuals who use their screams as weapons. “Shifters” temporarily change appearances of objects. And “Stitchers” can heal as well as they torture.

The setting resembles a lot like the first season of Heroes. There is even a line in the opening sequence that may as well have been verbatim to the hit TV series’ catchphrase, “Save the cheerleader, save the world.”

It is refreshing to see a superhero movie that was not from a pre-existing comic book, therefore there was a lot of room for the storyline to take liberties. But even though terms like “mutants”, “telekinesis” and “psychics” were avoided like a plague; it still reminded a lot of X-Men, thus making Push feels second-rated.

It was quite obvious that director Paul McGuigan tried hard to inject style and grit into the progressions, but some scenes worked well while others not so much.

However, working with his photography director Peter Sova, McGuigan managed to show the chaotic Hong Kong suburbs as picturesque and photogenic. Plus, using the concept of “indie” filmmaking, he definitely created a niche appeal and a good substitute for green-screen special effects.

Writer David Bourla, left to his own devices for the first time, has done well in creating a setting whereby one particular class trumps another, just like a game of rock-paper-scissors. Unfortunately though, it became apparent that he was in way over his head as plot holes after plot holes started to surface. Especially his storytelling towards the end that became too confusing and didn’t hold together well.

Camille Belle as the “key” to it all suffered the most from the script as she appeared bland and aloof. Djimon Hounsou once again took on a role that wasted his massive talent. Fanning as the world-weary young teenager on a daunting rescue mission needed a lot more for her character to be interesting, and Evans seemed to be struggling with the weight of the movie on his shoulders.

Perhaps with a better writer, this movie may just have been the beginning of a new and original franchise. But sadly the end result of this very promising premise was far from being the next big thing.

Rating: 4 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

Like the new series of James Bond and Batman movies with Daniel Craig and Christian Bale respectively, the writers reviving this franchise have decided to go further back in time and start off with the origins of the two leads, James T Kirk and Spock.

The movie paced out steadily with almost the right balance between storyline and fast-paced action. The set pieces for the new Enterprise compared to the old had the familiar feel but with a modern facelift, and looked technically more up-to-date. Gone are the dorky and dull costumes as these new uniforms, though remaining faithful to the old designs, looked less of an eye sore.

James Kirk had the cocky and roguish air about him early on but grew rapidly as the story unfolds, and Chris Pine brought him to life with charm and confidence. The unemotional Spock was delivered spectacularly by Zachary Quinto with subtle emotions that spoke louder than words.

The unrecognisable Eric Bana stepped into the protagonist character with much devotion and conviction, making Nero looked less insane but fuelled by the mission to avenge his planet’s destruction.

However the script wasn’t perfect. Like the weapons used should have been of the future but instead there was a fencing sword involved. (This was where lightsabers were truly missed.)

Science and logic also seldom was an issue as more often than not the action sequences took over to become planned distractions. One good example would be when James was chased by an unimpressive alien monster which was at least four times his size and yet had trouble catching up to him.

But with the talented young cast who were virtually unknown delivering interesting characters that were affectionately true to the TV originals; and with a very fresh and remarkable script that was surprisingly matured and sophisticated, J J Abrams has given all Trekkies the best instalment yet, and a new lease of life for the series.

Reviewer’s Rating: 8 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

This was what Knowing did to me.

Right from the beginning, the colour and texture had this creepy, classical horror movie feel to it. That little girl was hauntingly good. Everything about the setup for the rest of the movie was just perfect.

The director Alex Proyas seemed to have studied M. Night Shyamalan (or whoever M. Night studied) because on the whole, that’s what it felt like. The way the camera angled or the way a scene was shot, just like what M. Night would have done. I love M. Night so this was meant to be a compliment though I’m sure none of the above will see it that way.

And when we finally got a close-up of the alien being, it was M. Night’s Signs all over again.

Throughout the movie, I’ve had so many goosebump moments that I’ve lost track in count. But I’m definite no other movies have given me this many. All the coincidences of events made for an intriguing and interesting topic and they were all well done.

The two disaster scenes were great given that the budget of this movie wasn’t as generous as other CGI movies (I can only assume). The first one was fantastically horrific and the second one was equally scary that I’m surprised this was actually a PG-13 movie. But both gave the audience such a dark ride that made the movie even more. Proyas really made it work under whatever circumstances or budget constraints.

The accompanying music in the background suited the bleakness of the theme and added to the effects. The actors all did a competent enough a job.

The only downside of the movie was the heavy religious undertone. Especially the last five minutes of in the end, which was totally unnecessary. The movie could have ended with Cage saying goodbye and that’s it. The rest of those ten minutes didn’t really do much for me.

But this is one movie I wouldn’t mind re-experiencing again soon.

Rating: 7 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

And when the one-eyed Gort appeared (which was supposed to be the coolest sci-fi cinema robot from the 1951 original), that’s when I completely shut down. Not even competent acting could make me care this time.

Sure this role suited Keannu Reeves’ acting style well because he always seem aloof and detached – exactly like how an alien would be occupying his body; and Kathy Bates and Jennifer Connely did keep the human aspect of things afloat, barely, throughout the movie. But Bates never got her chance to shine and it was all up to Connely in that sense, who failed because, as a whole, the script failed her.

This updated screenplay did nothing to make the audience care, much like the updated version of The Invasion, with too many loopholes that it just got frustrating instead.

Apart from some nice CGI work, this is one of those movies that the direction and storyline just don’t come together. It wasn’t entertaining, nor introspective as I’m guessing that’s what it was inteded to be.  Another fine example of how screenwriters today can botcher up sci-fi oldies that were so successful in their time.

Hopefully no one will ever think of remaking E.T.

Rating: 3 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

Though this new effort is nowhere near what Eternal Sunshine has achieved in terms of storyline and intellect, but Gondry still comes with originality and charm as his vision comes alive through this B-grade movie-look-alike that is far from being a B-grade.

Jack Black’s performance was nothing new, though he never over did it and his character required the right amount of zeal. But Mos Def quietly stole the show as being very genuine and relatable. He balanced off Black’s crazy character well and they played off each other perfectly.

Overall logic may be kicked out the window when the electrical power plant turns Jack Black’s character into a magnetically-charged walking disaster (it is science-fiction after all); and while logic has never been Gondry’s worry here, he does keep realism intact and avoid making the movie too happy and sweet.But it is still an obvious departure from the surrealistic psychological magnificence that was Eternal Sunshine. Nevertheless, from its production to its cast members, they made the experience somewhat enjoyable and wholesome. And there are still those subtle meanings behind the story that may or may not amount to much.

Rating: 6 / 10(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

I for one don’t see how anything felt at all like 24 but he got one thing right, it’s a movie that’s to be bashed.

The first half where all the mysteries surrounding the girl was kept the audience hooked to the movie. But once the mysteries started to get solved, that’s where it all went downhill. And it just felt like it was time to walk out of the cinema.

The worst part of the movie was the final one-third. It had nothing. The plot lost itself, there was no continuity with each scene as the pacing took giant steps forward, the action was weak and nonsensical, and how it ended made no sense at all.

Having Michelle Yeoh in an action movie is to let her kick ass. She had limited chances of doing those, especially in the final fight. Of late her career in Hollywood has taken a downward spiral. All her three movies were just plain bad. It’s time she be a bit more picky about selecting her script.

Vin Diesel, as the lead character Toorop, had problems saying his own name with a straight face. He looked lost in the movie most of the time. His feelings for the female character never transpired, so that one scene where it was supposed to be affection looked like lust.

While the Hollywood producers probably wanted to make this into an action movie and French director looking for Hollywood fame Mathieu Kossovitz wanted a proper drama-thriller, the movie ended up being caught in the middle, and it really showed.

And Gerard Depardieu looked unrecognisable by the way. What’s up with the makeup?

Rating: 3 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

There’s not much you can say about this type of movie because it follows a strict set of ingredients in making it. No twists or turns that is going to surprise you; you even know exactly what the twist will be, when it will happen and how the story is going to end. What’s left to entertain is the literal entertainment from what the movie is all about – the thrill of the violence. But even that it was just passable entertainment.

One thing for sure was that, even when the vehicles themselves weren’t the main focus of the movie, and I’m wondering now why they weren’t made to be (there should have been proper introductions to each vehicle and what they could do); but they became the most entertaining bits whenever they were onscreen, and that’s saying a lot.

And here’s a movie-making flaw which directors should just come up with a new way of doing it: When the girls first came off the bus, their deprived counterparts were cheering and grabbing onto themselves as if they’ve never seen them before when in the story, they were there almost everyday. Their reaction just wasn’t consistent with the facts.

As for the acting, Jason Statham was doing what he has always been doing ever since arriving in this side of the ocean. It’s about time he did something else for his own sake. Joan Allen as the uptight bitch should have been more “down and dirty” in this setup than being “high up there” with the corporates. Ian McShane was uneffective and Tyrese Gibson was, well, Tyrese Gibson. And nothing here will help newcomer Natalie Martinez except announcing to Hollywood that she’s got the goods.

Rating: 5 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.

The only way one adult can enjoy this movie is to dumb down a little so that the logic-less storyline will not frustrate. Yes, the normal shutting-down of the brain is not enough here, otherwise a lot (and I do mean a lot) of questions will arise.

The saddest part was the inclusion of Elizabeth Banks in the line-up. Banks, after her rave reviews in Definitely, Maybe, definitely did not need something as sad as this in her repertoire.

And as for the other familiar faces, their talents were wasted. Sure they managed to bring out the occasional chuckle; but with an overall material this bad, so what?

But this movie was all about showing off Eddie Murphy as “Dave”. But why does Murphy keep going for roles like these. He’s not hungry for work. He’s not a has-been. Is it passion? For this?

There should be a clause for this movie saying “strictly for children”. Now that would achieve a different rating.

Rating: 3 / 10

(all images from imdb.com)

Click here to view the embedded video.