The Guard

PCMR Verdict:A sharp script, a fun story, and Gleeson is excellent in the lead role. This is the movie equivalent of going for a quiet pint, and then ending up on session.

PCMR Rating: 8/10

PCMR doesn't envy the label of 'character actor'. For men, this label represents the velvet rope division between the elite group of VIPs with jaws just square enough and appeal just sexy enough to be called leading men, and the rest of us. It has less to do with acting ability, more with how traditionally good looking you are. Steve Buscemi is a character actor: you know, the one in Fargo who was “kinda funny-lookin'.”

There can't be many such equivalents in other professions. PCMR struggles to imagine people being refused the role of team leader in the I.T. department because they're not handsome enough. “It's just that, we think of you more as the team leader's best friend. You know... helping with his character's exposition, without stealing the limelight.”

Despite his undoubted talent, and being in possession of that ephemeral quality of innate likeability, Brendan Gleeson has found himself in the character actor bracket throughout the higher-profile side of his career. In his Hollywood roles, he has dutifully provided exposition opportunities to leading actors in an impressive string of high profile productions such as 'Braveheart', 'Troy', 'A.I.', '28 Days Later' and, more recently, three of the Harry Potter movies. (Surely, there is no better nod to one's standing in the Acting Firmament than a recurring Potter role).

In Irish productions, by contrast, Gleeson's place on the billing is often more reflective of his abilities, and he has taken the lead in some fine movies to emerge from these shores in the last twenty years: 'I Went Down' and 'The General', among others.

In more recent years for Gleeson, Martin McDonagh's 'In Bruges' has upset this dichotomy, providing him with a lead role in an Irish movie that has deservedly enjoyed international recognition. Also, it seems a family dynasty was created with that movie, because McDonagh's brother, John Michael, is the man behind 'The Guard', and in PCMR's humble opinion, it is just as good a movie, even if it is an entirely different animal.

Gleeson plays Gerry Boyle, a small-town country copper with a penchant for Dublin whores, who finds himself embroiled in a drug-smuggling investigation so big that the FBI are interested. Don Cheadle is the imported FBI agent who finds himself dealing more and more with Boyle, and tellingly, he declares that he can't decide whether Boyle is “really smart, or really fuckin' dumb”. It's essentially a cops and robbers story, with the gangster contingent including the workaholic, omnipresent Mark Strong, as well as a couple of other, more familiar Irish bad buys, Liam Cunningham and David Wilmot (more character actors!).

It has to be said though, the story of the Guard plays second fiddle to the really excellent dialogue, which gives the characters... well, proper characters. The phrase 'inner life' probably best describes this by-product of good writing, where the actors have room to breathe around their lines, and the audience can enjoy guessing whether they're telling the truth, or leading someone up the garden path.

The excellent writing gives Gleeson all the material he needs to reminder us just how good he really is, and he's excellent in this. Cheadle does well in support, and the three gangsters (Strong, Cunningham and Wilmot in particular) all seem to be enjoying themselves, but Gleeson and McDonagh are the big winners here.

The Guard is punchy, witty film-making, and deserving of your attention. Gleeson is at his endearing, charismatic best, and if this doesn't get him bigger, better roles in Hollywood movies, then I'm not sure what will.

Fright Night (2011)

PCMR Verdict: Good fun, bring low expectations and you'll enjoy your popcorn.

PCMR Rating: 6/10

The 80's was something of a heyday for low-budget horror. PCMR spent many a happy evening in my tweens browsing the local Xtra-vision with a few buddies, trying to resolve the weekly debate of whether '976-Evil' was going to be better than 'Braindead', for example. We'd either choose by the cover alone or by trailers, neither of which was foolproof. (That said, the terrible ones were usually more memorable.) Before Arnie and all those dumb 80's actioners came on the scene, horror was very much the coolest section in the video store.

Despite all those evenings in the horror section, the original 'Fright Night' somehow passed me by. I was vaguely aware that it was a vampire movie though, and with Colin Farrell in the lead 'vampire next door' role. I was quietly hopeful he might play it with his own accent. (A Dublin vampire would be bleedin' sound, so it would!)

Before giving the skinny on Fright Night, let me just set out my vampire stall. Like most right-thinking people, PCMR is of the opinion that movie vampires should be a little bit more 'Lost Boys' than 'Twilight'. So, no, Edward, when you step into sunlight you don't become an emo discoball. The, reality (ahem) is that you burn. Horribly. I know this is true because I've seen Near Dark and The Lost Boys. And Salem's Lot. And er, The Monster Squad. It's the rules, and you can't just go re-writing this stuff. And as my final word on this whole unnecessary debate, I'd just like to point out that I live on the street where Bram Stoker wrote Dracula, so I win.

Happily, 'Fright Night' also subscribes to this old-school point of view, neatly ignoring the Stephanie Meyer (spit) 'vampire-as-emo-dreamboat' rulebook. The Fright Night vampire, thankfully, is a hungry, lecherous carnivore who will eat your mom if he's invited in. Colin Farrell plays the bad man without a hint of camping it up, which to his - and Fright Night's - credit.

Fright Night's teen hero is more than a little unlikeable, which means you're never quite sure if he's going to redeem himself, or get some of the just desserts treatment that's so often dished out in horror movies. Anton Yelchin plays it quite well, although the best the audience can hope for in this type of movie is that he's not annoying. (He's not). His hot girlfriend is also quite good (the amusingly named 'Imogen Poots'. Tee hee) and his mom is Toni Colette, who in Hollywood speak, is a banker. (Although not literally).

David Tennant also throws in a decent turn as a Russell Brand-ish Las Vegas Vampire Hunter, and sneakily gets a Hollywood movie under his belt, the wee pup. (And life after Doctor Who used to be so difficult). So a good cast then, and we haven't even got to McLovin yet.

All in all, Fright Night is a decent popcorn movie, and it manages to steer clear of enough vampire horror cliché to retain interest. The story rumbles along at a decent pace, with some decent twists and turns, but it's never really genuinely scary. The comedy's nicely played, and even though the plot has so many holes it's letting in an alarming amount of sunlight, the whole thing builds up to a satisfying finale.

So, all told, low expectations required, but it does the job.

Superbad

The verdict: Sub-par stoner comedy with a few good gags, and a couple of decent performances. More like super-average.

The rating: 5/10

The Seth Rogen/Judd Apatow axis marches on. After the one-two of The 40-year-old Virgin and Knocked Up, they quickly followed up with what looked like being the sucker punch: Superbad . Written by Rogen this time, with Apatow producing, it unfortunately fails to live up to the promise of the previous two movies.

It's a teen gross-out comedy, with Arrested Development's Michael Cera in one of the leads. Sounds good, right? Well, unfortunately, the ideal audience for Superbad is either under sixteen years old or drunk. If you're neither of these things, I don't think you'll like it.

For a start, there have already been so many other movies with this kind of story, summed up by imagining one nerdy kid saying to another "dude, we totally need to get laid before we finish high school." 'Superbad' follows on from a less than illustrious, but long line of similar gross-out comedies, some of which were funnier.

Cera is likeable as Evan, Jonah Hill less so as the loud-mouthed Seth. The two are on a quest to get beer, and are aided by their mate with the fake i.d., Fogell, played by Christopher Mintz-Plasse. Not a name that you'll remember easily, but while Cera unfortunately only gets a few decent scenes to work with, the Fogell character generates most of the funniest moments in Superbad, f'sho.

The thing is, it's dumb, incoherent, and generally populated with idiots. Now, sometimes this is a starting point for good comedy, but not in this case. It has a few warm moments to counterweight the many many dumb, crass jokes, but not enough plot to make it interesting.

Superbad was a huge hit last year, but didn't come close to living up to the hype for me. Then again, I was sober when I watched it...

Waitress

The verdict: Heartfelt, bittersweet comedy with a likeable ensemble cast, and a really great lead performance.

The rating: 7/10

Before I start, let me just say, any movie that can incorporate a pie-eating contest is alright by me.

Right, so 'Waitress' tells the story of Jenna, a southern girl who has somehow ended up working a dead end job, married to the wrong guy, and without much happiness in her life. She works at a local diner, doing what she loves best: making pies. Now, by all accounts, Jenna's pies are pretty great, good enough to win competitions maybe, so she plots to scrimp enough cash to get to a local competition, where the prize is $25,000 - enough for her to start a new life maybe... Unfortunately, she suddenly realises she's got one in the oven, and I don't mean a souflee.

Waitress is such a simple slice-of-life story, that I don't want to give away much more, but it is set primarily in the Diner where Jenna works, and despite the relatively serious subject matter, is actually a bittersweet comedy. The other two waitresses at the diner (played by Curb Your Enthusiasm's Cheryl Hines, and writer/director Adrienne Shelly) share their relative highs and lows in finding a partner, while dealing with their demanding customers and loudmouth boss as best they can.

All the central characters share something in common - the simple need to be loved, and they're all finding the answer to this need in weird and wonderful places. Now, I'm aware that this description sounds dangerously close to 'romantic comedy', but don't be fooled readers, Waitress is better than that short-hand description might suggest. For a start, it's very well written, creating a relaxed, off-beat mood right from the kick-off. It's undemanding, warm, and full of likeable, flawed characters, with the likeable ones figuring things out as they go, and the rare one or two who remain stuck in their rut.

Keri Russell is great in the lead, and Hines and Shelly give decent support. Nathan Fillion plays the new doc in town, doing himself no harm, and even Matlock shows up! Yep, that's right, Andy Griffith plays the grumpy old diner regular, with enough Schadenfreude to make a paparazzi journalist look like a boy scout.

The balance between comedy and drama plays out well, and you should be interested in what happens to Jenna, as Keri Russell is more than watchable, and her character is realistic and likeable.

Somehow, this movie appears to have been completely overlooked last year, but for an off-beat, relaxing dvd that the missus would like as well, you could do far worse than 'Waitress'.

Ratatouille

The Verdict: Excellent stuff. If you liked the Incredibles, you'll really like this.

The Rating: 8/10

In sport, as in the entertainment industry, success is often a double-edged sword. Moments of triumph are fleeting for those with that winning mentality, with successes becoming former glories faster than James Cameron can say 'I'm King of the World!!' No sooner has the ink dried on the rave reviews than the sports star or creative artist must pick themselves up and ask "what's next?".

Brad Bird followed his much lauded directorial debut, 'The Iron Giant', with a real gem of an animated feature. 'The Incredibles' won Brad Bird huge critical acclaim for producing an unpatronising piece of family entertainment, and picked up the Oscar for best animated feature. Easy to forget, however, that his script for The Incredibles was also nominated for Best Original Screenplay that year.

Bird was possibly unlucky to be in the same category as Charlie Kaufman's 'Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind' that year, but the nomination is a reflection of his ability to produce family entertainment that has something to offer kids and adults alike. At first glance, The Iron Giant and The Incredibles are straight-forward kids' entertainment, but scratch beneath the surface, as with many kids movies, and there are clear moral messages to be taken away. Thankfully, Bird's 'messages' are subtle enough to often remain implicit to the story, and the two movies I've just mentioned never descend into preaching.

However, with the success of 'The Incredibles', Bird essentially cranked up the spotlight and pointed it at himself. What next? Well, with 'Ratatouille', in my opinion he has raised the bar. It tells the story of Remy, a rat with highly developed senses of smell and taste, who dreams of more than just living on garbage and stealing food. No, Remy's idol is a chef on the Cookery Channel named Gusteau, the best chef in France, and owner of a prestigious Parisian five-star restaurant, who believed that 'anyone can cook'.

In the first few minutes of the movie, Remy is separated from his family and friends, and is surprised to find that he has been living in Paris all along. He somehow finds his way to Gusteau's restaurant, and manages to befriend an inept chef working there. Together they begin cooking gastronomic masterpieces that begin turning around the fortunes of Gusteau's restaurant, which hasn't been doing so well lately. However, the current chef at Gusteau's suspects something is up (smells a rat? - Ed), and when uber-critic Anton Ego (voiced by Peter O'Toole) gets wind of the new chef at Gusteau's, he decides to sample the wares of the new chef, providing Remy with his greatest challenge yet.

As with all involving stories, it sounds so simple, but the main characters in this movie, especially Remy (pictured above) are excellently drawn and animated. There are a million little touches in the animaton that I imagine will reward the repeated viewings of a million kids and their beleagured parents once this movie is released on DVD.

Ratatouille is a wonderfully paced, entertaining story, and Bird has pitched the moral barometer just about right, delivering his lessons more with a roadmap than a baseball bat. It's funny, immersive, and should have enough to keep kids quiet for a couple of hours, while providing more than a few laughs for the adults to boot. Of particular note for the grown-ups is Peter O'Toole's speech at the end of the movie, in which Bird insightfully describes the role of the restaurant critic, in a delightful reference to the role of any critic (ahem).

So, two hearty thumbs-up for Ratatouille from me. This movie should provide a breath of fresh air to the genre of kid's animated entertainment now that the Shrek franchise has gone more than a little stale.

Ratatouille is released in Irish cinemas on 12th October

Knocked Up

The verdict: Warm, funny and engaging. Don't believe all the hype, but this well written, well acted, romantic slacker comedy shouldn't disappoint.

The rating: 7/10

Judd Apatow's rise to the top of Hollywood's comedy crew has gathered so much momentum of late, you could be forgiven for thinking he came from nowhere, but that's not quite true. He's already produced and/or written a few movies for Jim Carrey and (ahem) Will Ferrell, but he first sharpened his pencil on some quality tv shows, writing for both 'Larry Sanders' and the short-lived but under-rated 'Freaks and Geeks'. However, it was with 'The 40 Year Old Virgin' that Apatow became something of a name that audiences would recognise.

Many of the same crew from that movie - except, save a pretty funny cameo, Steve Carell - are re-united here, and the slacker themes are also revisited. Seth Rogen takes top billing this time, as Ben, a twenty-something bong-smoking Canadian jew, living illegally in the U.S. on the proceeds of an personal injury claim until his fledgling porn website (flesh of the stars.com) is launched. Meanwhile Alison, played by the beautiful Katherine Heigl, is promoted to presenter on the E! Network, and decides to celebrate by going out on the town with her older sister Debbie. In the club, the paths of these two characters cross, one thing leads to another and.. well.. I'm not spoiling anything here am I? I mean it's called 'Knocked Up', but it's not about tennis, you can guess what happens next!

The concept of this movie is so simple, it's amazing that it's any good. Essentially following these characters' efforts to cope with the imminent arrival of a big change in their lives, if the people involved weren't realistic and likeable, this film would be a disaster. Thankfully Apatow's script and an excellent cast make this a fun, enjoyable movie.

Rogen and Heigl are both great in the leads, and Paul Rudd is another familiar face from 'The 40 Year Old Virgin' making a welcome appearance. Rudd and Rogen's trip to Vegas in particular is a memorable sequence, and if you've never heard of 'pink-eye' before, then you may need to see this film.

The sense of humour is part 'The Office', part 'American Pie', but what makes Apatow's comedy so engaging is that each character has an identity, rather than just a 'motivation', or a plot-related reason for being on screen. Even the bit players have a personality, such as the candidate gynaecologists, or Ben's slacker buddies, and these aren't simple stereotypes such as 'the jock' or 'the nerd', each character has idiosyncrasies that make them funny. It's a subtle, but effective approach, and needs a good cast to pull it off. (Fnar fnar! - Ed)

I'm not sure how much more I need to say on this one really folks. If you enjoyed 'The 40-Year-Old Virgin' and you're looking for the perfect date movie, read no further, just get out and see this one...

However, be prepared for next year, because Judd Apatow has 'arrived' in Hollywood, and he's cranking up the production line to eleven. Next summer he'll be churning em out for Jack Black ('The Dewey Cox Story'), Will Ferrell ('Step Brothers') and *cough* Adam Sandler ('You Don't Mess With The Zohan'). The jury's out as to the potential quality of any of those (The Will Ferrell one should be good - Ed) but right about now, Apatow is pretty much the guy Hollywood comedians need to work with.

Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

The verdict: Savvy, slick street-wise comedy actioner with a good sense of humour, this is pretty good fun.

The rating: 6/10

For some reason, I filed 'Kiss Kiss Bang Bang' in the 'maybe' category when it was released, and so never quite caught up with it. However, more recently I've seen Robert Downey Jr. in the brilliant 'A Scanner Darkly' and the thoroughly great 'Zodiac', and he's considering he's soon to star as the hero in the upcoming 'Iron Man', I figured it'd be remiss of me to let the movie that relaunched his glittering post-rehab career pass me by.

Also of interest is the comparitive lack of success that Val Kilmer has enjoyed since this - critically acclaimed and financially successful - movie was released.. I mean, have you seen him in anything recently? What's that? You mean you didn't see him in 'Ten Commandments: The Musical'? Shame on you reader, shame on you.

Anyhoo, Shane Black wrote and directed this movie, and this guy also wrote 'Lethal Weapon', back when the buddy cop movie was a fresh idea, and the origins of this genre are widely credited to him as it happens. Black also wrote what was so nearly Arnie's greatest moment, 'The Last Action Hero'. Sadly, that movie missed its marks, and was widely hailed as a turkey, but he did pen 'The Last Kiss Goodnight', one of those 'actually not too bad' movies you occasionally catch on d'telly.

It's safe to say that 'Kiss Kiss Bang Bang' is a better movie than Black's other writing credits, and as writer and director here, he has to take much of the plaudits for this, because it is very well written and looks great. The dialogue is sharp and crackles with wit and energy, delivered effortlessly by Downey Jr., who also plays the role of the self-conscious narrator. Kilmer has some great lines as the gay private detective 'Gay Perry', and Michelle Monaghan is only occasionally annoying as Harmony, the aspiring actress embroiled in the same nefarious Hollywood goings on as Downey Jr., and with a few dark secrets of her own to boot.

It's essentially a mystery suspense thriller type of deal, but so tongue in cheek that it's difficult to get too worried about what happens on screen, with Kilmer and Downey Jr.'s scenes together particularly good fun to watch. Downey also has a good chemistry with Monaghan, and there is a particularly good scene featuring a spider that made me laugh out loud. The story twists and turns with ruthless efficiency, and all builds towards a set-piece finale, with the efficiency of a well-oiled Hollywood machine, at times veering towards pat story-telling, but always with a few dry one-liners to keep the audience smiling.

Black has very obviously been influenced by Guy Ritchie's 'Lock Stock' and 'Snatch', and there were moments here evoking memories of those movies. Someone losing a finger shouldn't make you laugh, for example, but in Shane Black's world, as in Ritchie's, this type of incident seems quite easy for the audience to take on board, and is used as a comedy prop.

I found the whole thing good fun and it trundled along at a nice pace. However it was wrapped up a little too easily in the end with an improbable and jarring action sequence. Also, even though it was set in L.A., against the vacuous backdrop of aspiring actors and actresses, the whole thing just felt a bit lacking in substance. Black has improved his comic delivery, and polished the packaging of his movie to look shiny and new, but at the end of the day, this film is not much more memorable than his previous offerings. That said, it's not a bad dvd choice for a night in, you could definitely do a lot worse.

Dirty Sanchez: The Movie

The verdict: It's puerile, disgusting, moronic and stupid. On the downside, it's a little short.

The craziness: Full-frontal male nudity, ladyboys, a beer enema, liposuction, fish-hooks, samurai swords and paintball guns.

The rating: 7/10

Mainstream Hollywood comedies have become more skilled in 'grossing-out' audiences of late. Even only since the 90's, Cameron Diaz has used Ben Stiller's little swimmers as hair gel, Jason Biggs has dipped his wick into an apple tart, and Borat has had a large Kazakhstani man's bits in his face, with audiences loving it all. These are just three recent cases, but the three movies I've just mentioned have been all phenomenally successful examples of audiences going to the cinema en masse with the promise of seeing something really disgusting..

Jackass tapped into this little area of the zeitgeist, and created a show so low-brow, it turned out to be one of MTV's most successful franchises. Essentially, their spin on candid camera was to engage in slapstick pranks that would involve the protagonists getting hurt, embarrassing themselves in public, or more likely vomiting a lot. The first time I clearly remember being 'grossed out' by jackass was the sketch where three people each tried to drink five gallons of milk in one sitting. One had plain milk, one had vanilla and the other chocolate. Things proceed along at a pedestrian enough pace while they start drinking the milk, until the vomiting starts... and keeps going for a full two minutes, with the low-budget, d.i.y. style only making the viewing experience more visceral.

Dirty Sanchez is of the same ilk as Jackass, and came along at the peak of that show's popularity, so it would be easy to think the two shows were identical, but there are differences. The lads are Welsh for a start, but their brand of stunt is more based on pain and humiliation than Jackass' inventions or slapstick set-pieces... I can imagine that this doesn't make Dirty Sanchez sound like a barrel of laughs, but permit me to digress here for a moment. (Make it quick! - Ed)

Everybody knows of a stag night story where the groom-to-be - after inviting his best friends in the world to celebrate - ended up on the receiving end of a particularly evil prank. The fact is, that when men get together to have fun, they generally do it at someone else's expense. If you fall asleep early on a stag night, you may as well say to the others present: "hey lads, please shave off one of my eyebrows." There's some part of a bloke's DNA that just enjoys that sort of thing. But when we tell our girlfriends, we were only really watching someone else do it, and of course, we thought it was terrible, juvenile behaviour.

Dirty Sanchez: The Movie is a sequence of scenes that attempt to tap into that DNA. The movie is a shock-fest and you constantly wonder where it will all end, but to their credit, the four lads - idiots though they are - appear all too aware of their own shortcomings. Even from the very first scene, they display an awareness that they may have to set limits for themselves, or they'll possibly end up dead. This is the extent to which they suffer for their, ahem, art.

The premise - for what it's worth - is that the lads must travel the world and experience the seven deadly sins, which gives them an awful lot of leeway. Oddly, pride turns out to be the most difficult to watch, although they're all pretty disgusting. There is an added edge to prceedings however, and its the relationship between Dainton and Pritchard, which is so typical of two mates who completely know how to wind each other up. The pranks they play on each other are particularly vindictive, and all the funnier for it, with the world record attempt for the highest number of paintball shots taken by one person a very funny sequence indeed.

I would heartily recommend this movie to fans of Borat, Southpark, or Jackass, because it taps into the same responses as those movies. You'll be watching between your fingers at times, you'll be shocked regularly because it does occasionally go too far, but the audience is well prepared for those moments in advance.

Let's be honest, if you've heard of 'Dirty Sanchez', you probably already know whether you'll watch this movie. All I can say is, I watched it after a bellyfull of beers and I laughed my ass off. I didn't learn much from the experience, except possibly to be very careful if I ever find myself drinking with a Welshman. (Most people would know that already though - Ed)

Blades of Glory

The verdict: Cracking stuff, Heder and Ferrell are a superb double-act, and this is laugh-out-loud funny.

The rating: 7/10

Man, just lately it seems Will Ferrell can do no wrong. He's top of PCMR's list of Hollywood funny men, with 'Talladega Nights' and 'Stranger Than Fiction' both providing seriously good entertainment in 2006. Next off the production line is a movie that sounds so formulaic that it just couldn't be any good.. right? The premise of 'Blades of Glory' is really quite simple: two men figure-skating as a pair. Now, there is the potential for a comedy turd here, and in the hands of the wrong cast, this might have been an offensive Rob Schneider vehicle waiting to happen. Thankfully, some inspired casting, an excellent script, and just the right dose of Ferrell's brand of improvisation have turned Blades of Glory into what might just be the best comedy of 2007.

Ferrell's co-star, Jon Heder, is probably best known for his iconic performance as 'Napoleon Dynamite', but here he plays the skating wunder-kind Jimmy MacIlroy. Jimmy was plucked from an orphanage age 4, adopted by a millionaire horse-trainer turned human-trainer, and given the kind of training montage Rocky would be seriously proud of.

Jimmy's main rival is Chazz Michael Michaels (Ferrell), a sex addicted tornado (his words) and the only champion figure skater to win an adult movie award. Whereas MacIlroy's routines are graceful and delicate, with Sarah Brightman's voice to accompany his twirls and pivots, Michaels' is all about tha masculinity, baby. His moves are all pelvic thrusts flame-throwing and fist-punching, and are more likely to be accompanied by something by Aerosmith than Andrew Lloyd Webber.

The two are naturally fierce rivals, but fall from grace when they are banned from the sport for fighting on the Olympic winner's podium, when they tie for a Gold medal. Disgraced, they each follow their own downward spiral until three and a half years later, when Jimmy's stalker points out that he has only been banned from figure skating in his own division... meaning pairs skating is an option.

A chance encounter between MacIlroy and Michaels leads to another public scrap, and this one is caught on tv by MacIlroy's former coach. When he sees these two idiots throwing each other round a room backstage in some regional ice-rink, he gets the idea to pair the two of them up, and things start kicking off from there.

These two characters couldn't be more different, but the spark between the two leads is excellent, and they work extremely well together. No-one does angry bickering quite as well as Ferrell, and for the first half of the movie, his scenes with Heder are just a constant sequence of jibes and digs, with not all of them making perfect sense. Heder holds his own though, and this performance bodes well for his future, which looked bleak when 'Benchwarmers' was released.

The bickering scenes in this one reminded of the scene in 'Talladega Nights' where Ferrell's Ricky Bobby sparred with Sacha Baron Cohen's gay French Nascar driver, and the two were barely restraining their genuine laughter. I got the same sense of enjoyment from the two main actors on this one.

Ferrell's moments of improvisation are dotted around this movie, but the script is also genuinely good, with many memorable moments - the sex addicts meeting springs to mind, or Chazz Michael Michaels describing his love for his hairbrush, or the JFK and Marilyn Monroe routine, all quality. Also, the direction and special effects are excellent, capturing the details of the performances on the ice brilliantly, including close-ups of the two leads disgusted faces during some of the more intinmate moments of their routines. This part of the comedy, which could have been a homophobic disaster, is subtle and never over-played.

There are some recognisable faces in the support cast too. Rob Corddry from the Daily Show has a wee part, Romany Malco from 'The 40-Year-Old Virgin' also turns up, and 'Arrested Development's Will Arnett has a great turn as one half of MacIlroy and Michaels' main rivals: the creepy and weird Stranz Van Waldenberg.

Ferrell seems to be working his way through popular sports for his source material at the moment, with NBA basketball next on the list. Semi-pro is out next year and sees Ferrell star alongside Woody Harrelson (excellent! - Ed) and André Benjamin, otherwise known as André 3000 from Outkast (hmmm - Ed). Heder's been busy lately too, with three more movies coming out this year. (And he can draw ligers... mwa haaa - Ed)

In the mean-time, PCMR is bigging up 'Blades of Glory' as a comedy of genuine quality, and wonders, how long can Ferrell's dynamite run last? He's overdue a turkey, but this ain't it. Two hearty thumbs-up from me and a recommendation to go see this one.

The 40-Year-Old Virgin

The verdict: A great example of slap and tickle feel-good comedy with a smashing lead performance from Carell and a hugely funny ensemble supporting cast.

The rating: 7/10

'Car-crash comedy' has spread like wildfire on both sides of the Atlantic since the 90’s. This particular brand of comedy gets real glee out of placing the audience in awkward situations, to the point where the viewer is squirming in their seat, watching through their fingers perhaps, and bordering somewhere between horrified and disgusted at what’s going on on-screen. Borat is possibly a good recent example of this kind of comedy, where the audience is in on his joke, but still, how can he say the things he does, and keep a straight face? When good-hearted people genuinely try to respond to his insane questions, we as the audience are left groaning and laughing simultaneously, possible even hoping the hapless individual will discover the joke, but not before giving us a good laugh or two.

But this brand of comedy has been in the works for some years. Steve Coogan's Alan Partrdige character, Ricky Gervais' 'The Office', and more recently Larry David’s 'Curb Your Enthusiasm' and Mitchell and Webb's 'Peepshow' are all good examples of sit-coms, but with that total car-crash element. The Office in particular, featuring the groovy Slough middle-manager David Brent, put the audience through the grinder, by placing us right there in horrendously awkward situations with this man, this.. horror-show. As a result of this relentless pressure on the audience, our laughs are possibly more out of disbelief and shock, very much 'laughing at' as opposed to 'laughing with'.

Steve Carell donned the mantle of David Brent in the American version of The Office, and as far as UK and Irish audiences went, the decision was met with some derision. Even the idea of re-making the Office was seen as a bad one. In sniffy tones which would remind most Americans of their favourite anti-European stereotypes, we proclaimed that 'they wouldn’t get the humour' or possibly, 'no-one else could play Brent'. However, having seen some of the episodes of the American version, I have to say it's not that bad… Carell does stand out from the rest of the cast though, and he is the perfect choice for a tragically unhip man such as Brent.

Carell differs from someone like Will Ferrell, in that he brings a natural loser quality to his roles, not because of the way he acts, but more so from his general demeanour. Even when he smiles confidently, there is an apologetic, hang-dog quality to him. (See the poster for this movie above..) For a role like Brent, this quality is essential. In Little Miss Sunshine too, he found a role to play to his strengths, and he was one of the best things about that movie.

His natural pathos is also at work in 'The 40-Year-Old Virgin', and this is possibly to be expected, given that he plays the title role. However, this is a comedy of the dopey kind. Think the Farrelly Brothers on a good day (Me, Myself and Irene, There’s Something About Mary) and you have an idea of the sense of humour on display: juvenile, but playful and with a good heart to it. This is not the comedy of Epic Movie, or pratfalls in fatsuits, it just happens to be puerile, juvenile and a good source of belly-laughs.

Andy (Carell's character) inadvertently reveals his aforementioned status to his work colleagues, and they set about trying to get him laid as soon as possible. As you could exepct, their half-assed attempts (pardon the expression) only end up landing poor old Andy into a few dodgy scrapes. Meanwhile, Andy has actually met someone nice. Trish, played by Catherine Keener (who is always good value for money) works in the store opposite Andy, and seems to like his dorky ways. While his colleagues continue on their mission to get Andy laid, he starts dating Trish, but bizarrely they agree not to have sex until the 20th date, an arrangement that suits Andy down to the ground. The question is, when it comes down to getting down, will Andy have the chutzpah? Will he be able to tell Trish the truth before the main event?

Amid all the awkward situations and classic one-liners, the 40-Year-Old Virgin makes some decent points about the pervasiveness of sexuality in daily life. The chats between the four lads in Andy’s workplace in particular are priceless, with everyone telling massive porkie pies, but only Andy unable to maintain a realistic façade. When these hormonally-motivated emotionally retarded imbeciles (standard blokes then – Ed) get involved in Andy’s private life, they unintentionally influence his decisions to stay faithful to Trish, and pursue something more than just 'putting the pussy on a pedastal', if you’ll pardon the expression... This invasion into his private life causes Andy a lot of distress, particularly when his boss discovers his vestial virgin status… (I won’t spoil it, but she has some brilliant moments in the movie.) But there's also a nice warm fuzzy message in there about taking risks in life, getting out of your comfort zone and going after stuff... you know, follow your dreams and all that.

So there are some great funny moments, and Carell is particularly good, but the support is all great, and the atmosphere of the movie is such that - like with Me, Myself and Irene or Anchorman - you get the feeling that the cast all enjoyed themselves making this movie. I’m aware that describing comedy as 'feelgood' can be a bit of a turn-off for some, but the schmaltz isn't overbearing in this one. For those that feel it gets a bit much towards the end, stay in your seats for the musical number in the closing credits, and you’ll see that the writers had their tongues firmly in their cheeks for the final scenes.

Incidentally, Steve Carell also wrote this one, and his career is really taking off since his time on 'The Daily Show'. He's next to be seen in the up-coming sequel to Bruce Almighty, Evan Almighty, as well as re-uniting with the other highlight of Litte Miss Sunshine, Alan Arkin, in a remake of Get Smart. (Hmm, not so sure about either of those really though – Ed).

The 40-Year-Old Virgin might be car-crash viewing at times, but there are plenty of puerile belly-laughs in there, and all in all, you could do a hell of a lot worse for a dvd night in. It gets two thumbs up from PCMR and a hearty recommendation.

Iron Ladies

The verdict: It does have some redeeming qualities beyond the novelty value… it’s fairly well acted (except for the coach) and the theme of acceptance is handled well for roughly half the movie, getting heavy-handed towards the end, where the zaniness also ruins it a little.

Craziness: It’s pretty crazy, but not always in a zany sense, just the concept (which is a true story)… and most of the characters… and, um, the musical number.

The rating: 6/10


'Iron Ladies' is the true story of the male volleyball team that won the Thai National Championships in 1996 against all the odds. So you might be forgiven for thinking it's in the mould of inspirational rise-of-the-underdog Hollywood sporting stories such as 'Remember the Titans' or 'Coach Carter'? Weeellll… not… quite. I might defer to the blurb on the back of the DVD case here, and I quote: "Their skills and talents of playing volleyball are second to none. What matter is that most of them are gays."

Ahem... 'nuff said really. Essentially Iron Ladies tells the story of a group of guys who were good at a particular sport, but not allowed play because they batted for the other side. (And not in a sporting sense. Mwaa ha! – Ed). Not to be put off though, the lads clubbed together, and formed a team good enough to win the national championships, and gain massive media attention, winning over the Thai nation in the process.

The team members pretty much represent the entire spectrum of homosexuality, from the token straight guy, to the guy still in the closet, the openly gay one, the flamboyantly open, the flamboyantly feminine, the transgender one, and of course the camp triplets. I didn’t make any of that up by the way, and neither apparently did the film-makers, as this story can be verified by the archive newsreel footage that plays during the closing credits. These guys are represented pretty faithfully by the looks of things, and the archive footage is almost better than the movie to be honest.

The story is from a very familiar boiler-plate, but with such a fundamental variation from the traditionally alpha-male dominated sports flick, that it almost manages to hold the interest through to the end, despite being eventually loaded with clichés, bad acting and one very sketchy musical number.

The first half of the movie is the stronger, with two friends Mon and Jung deciding against a move to Bangkok because they want to try out for the district 5 volleyball team. Mon is used to rejection for being gay, despite being great at the sport, and is ready to quit, but Jung, an irrepressible flamer - pardon the expression - with a mouth as foul as a Glasgow welder, persuades him to stay and try out for the district 5 team.

The lads try out, and are picked, but the macho alpha male Mann persuades everyone on the team to quit, possibly in protest at having to play for a team that isn’t quite sure which showers to use after practice. Actually, not everyone quits, one guy stays because he can’t stand the homophobic views the posturing Mann. (So he ends up being 'the only straight in the village?' Tee hee – Ed) So, the lads are forced to assemble a team themselves, and this leads to the eventual assembly of a crew so damn motley, even Tommy Lee can't watch.

'Iron Ladies' plays with the audience's curiosity factor in the team's novelty value, in that there is a real sense of awe that this film is actually unfolding on screen in front of your eyes, but also the double whammy of it actually being a true story. This reflects the media treatment the Iron Ladies got when they went on to go on a successful run in the Thai National Volleyball championships in 1996.

There are themes going on here too though, mainly in the first half of the movie. Jung's parents are totally accepting of their son's situation, and are great with him, but Wit – the kid still in the closet – isn’t so lucky, and the media coverage the rest of the Iron Ladies enjoyed didn't work out quite so well for him. The acceptance of the tournament organisers is questionable too, and this leads to some fairly predictable panto-style cum-uppances in the second half of the movie. (Ooh, pardon? More tea, vicar!? – Ed)

So it does descend into sports movie cliché eventually, but the first hour of the film is very likeable, with the main characters not just comically camp cardboard cutouts, but actually displaying genuine personality under the flaming facades.

The musical number towards the end is kind of car-crash viewing, but I don’t know, maybe that’s normal in Thai films… (Not in Tony Jaa movies – Ed). Thankfully, either the lighting is so bad, or the international DVD quality so poor that I couldn’t really see it all that well. Unfortunately, the sound was fine….

Eventually it all becomes a 'be yourself and you can achieve anything' Hollywood-style movie in the same vein as something like 'When Saturday Comes' except with Sean Bean replaced by Dale Winton, and the rest of Sheffield United team played by Frankie Goes to Hollywood, the Pet Shop Boys, and those lads from Little Britain. (Sounds like a Bafta vehicle to me – Ed)

Unsurprisingly, given its domestic success, Iron Ladies has spawned a successful sequel (prequel actually - Ed) in Thailand. However, though this one had serious novelty value, I won’t be rushing out to get my hands on the next Iron Ladies outing. (Oooh, Pardon!? More tea Vicar!? … ahem – Ed)

Idiocracy

The Verdict: Mike Judge's future-shock view of American Idiots, good but not great.

The Rating: 6/10

It's a crazy world we live in, folks. I don't watch much television, but I've seen the trailer for Eddie Murphy's 'Norbit' on tv at least twice now, an indication of the kind of promotion budget this movie has garnered. A spectacularly brainless exercise in boiler-plate movie-making, almost completely devoid of any creative intelligence, Norbit has ingredients lifted from 'The Nutty Professor' (multiple characters all played by Eddie Murphy), but its essentially a rip-off of the detestable Martin Lawrence fat-suit car-crash that was 'Big Mommas' House' (or possibly the imaginatively titled sequel - 'Big Momma's House 2' - Ed). Meanwhile, 'Idiocracy' is struggling to survive, having slinked onto American cinema screens last September without so much as the existence of a poster or trailer. It tanked, but the lack of promotion budget can be explained quite simply after viewing the movie, which lampoons big corporations such as Fox Television quite excellently. (Hmmm - Ed)

The writer and director of Idiocracy, Mike Judge, is essentially a satirist, possibly best known as creator of 'Beavis and Butthead', or the far superior King of the Hill. However, he has also directed a great movie comedy, 'Office Space'. This little gem suffered the same distribution purgatory story as Idiocracy, but has since attained a real cult status on Dvd.

Idiocracy is a very different egg to 'Office Space', however. Set in the future, it's a comedy about an army officer named Joe - your average everyman, played by Luke Wilson - who agrees to undergo an experiment. Together with a female civilian from 'the private sector' - a hooker named Rita - the two are cryogenically frozen, with the intention being to defrost them after a year. However, the experiment goes awry, Futurama-style, and the pair wake in the year 2505.

The main premise of the movie is that the evolution of America is favouring the dumb. While the idiots conspire to totally neglect family planning, and conceive offspring at a frightening rate, the intelligentsia consider the decision to have kids interminably, and often end up not having any kids at all. The result of this syndrome? Greater numbers of idiots, and ever decreasing numbers of smart people. Mike Judge's simple premise provides a fair few laughs in this alternative vision of the future, quite different from the usual sci-fi fare where the world is either a post-apocalyptic charred hulk, an advanced industrial dystopia, or a culturally elevated, technologically advanced utopia.

In Judge's vision of the future, the idiots, quite literally, rule. Language has devolved into a hybrid of street vernacular, valley girl slang, and grunts. Corporations own government departments, the most popular tv show is called 'Ow, My Balls', and the big Oscar-winning movie in the year 2505 is called 'Ass'. Guess what, it's an 80-minute close-up of a bum, which farts occasionally... Somehow, Judge managed to include the brands of existing large corporations, such as Fox themselves, as well as 'Starbucks' and 'Fuddruckers' (an American fast-food chain), although his vision of how these corporations will manifest themselves in society in the future is possibly a little close to the bone of how they actually behave today... Although I'm not sure if Starbucks are offering 'Adult Lattes' just yet.. (I think I see why Fox wouldn't promote this movie - Ed)

Judge is satirising the Jackass-style dumbing-down of the world, and he hits a few sweet notes in this movie. The production design is far larger in scale than 'Office Space', with the use of CGI effects in a number of wide shots to emphasize the state of the nation in 2505, after the idiots have taken over. Luke Wilson's character is imprisoned for 'talking faggy', and his compulsory IQ test on admittance proves him to be the smartest man in the world, but what will he choose to do with this new-found - albeit relative - intelligence?

Wilson is amiable enough in the lead role, and Dax Shephard is also quite good as Wilson's guide, one of the future-shock idiots who happens to be Wilson's lawyer. (You may remember this guy from 'Punk'd', Ashton Kutcher's MTV show). Maya Rudolph is capable enough as Rita, the hooker who is convinced her pimp is still going to find her, even though she's 500 years into the future!

The movie itself is a pastiche of great ideas, and Judge's satire of the outcome of the dumbing down of American culture hits the mark. He makes his point quite well, and from quite early in proceedings, the main premise is simply reinforced by a large collection of visual gags, of which there are enough to hold the interest of the audience. Unfortunately though, there aren't that many belly laughs to speak of.

Also, I got the impression the plot was a little light on, well, character, exposition and resolution... There is a plot with a beginning middle and end, and there are three main characters, each with their own story, but the events of the story are pretty much used as vehicle for Judge to portray another satirical idea on screen.

All told, it's intelligent in it's satire, but a little lacking as a coherent piece of movie entertainment. It's quite ironic that Fox has decided not to promote this movie, however, as it contains an ominous picture of what the world will look like after 500 years of movies like 'Norbit'. (Yeah yeah! Ummm... that movie sucked! Or something.. mm hm, he he mm he! - Ed)

Hot Fuzz

The verdict: smart, funny, a good laugh and a great cast, but a tad long.
The rating: 7/10

Simon Pegg’s star is definitely rising at the moment, and PCMR would argue that this is no bad thing. I remember the short-lived TV series 'Hippies' a lot more than the more successful 'Spaced', but the clearest memory I have of that show is a stand-out performance from that man Pegg and his energetic, earnest comedy routine. He also had a small but memorable enough role in '24 Hour Party People', which PCMR would heartily recommend.

But then came 'Shaun of the Dead', inspired by a short sketch from Spaced, and possibly also from numerous sessions on the couch playing Resident Evil with best mate and co-star Nick Frost. Shaun was a clever, good-humoured pastiche of tributes to well-known zombie movies, and was a massive hit for Pegg, Frost, and director Edgar Wright. Personally, I always felt Shaun of the Dead to be just a tad over-rated, but still a very enjoyable film nonetheless. PCMR’s opinion didn’t stop the movie from being a runaway success on both sides of the Atlantic, however, attracting interest from Hollywood big-shots keen to capitalise on a post-Ricky Gervais wave of affection towards British comedies.

In promotional interviews immediately after making Shaun of the Dead, Simon Pegg quipped about what he was going to do next, joking that he would fly off to Hollywood and make 'Mission: Impossible 3'… or something. Well, as it turned out, reality sometimes is stranger than fiction. JJ Abrams, the producer of MI:III, counts himself among a legion of American fans of Shaun of the Dead, and he invited Pegg to Hollywood to do exactly that.

So, with a credible internationally acclaimed home-grown hit, and a big-budget Hollywood blockbuster under his belt, the inevitable question had to be asked: what next for Pegg, co-star Frost and director Wright?

Well, the trio have set out to pay homage to a different genre, the buddy-cop movie, and the result is 'Hot Fuzz'. The story is devilishly simple, Nicolas Angel (Pegg) is an over-achieving London copper, is forced to transfer to a quiet rural small town because his exceptional arrest rates are making the other London cops look bad. He arrives in the village of Sandford still tuned in to big city ways, constantly on the look-out for underhanded goings-on, but all that Sandford appears to offer in terms of criminal activity is under-age drinking and.. well… that’s about it really.

But then, people start dying, and the townsfolk appear more than willing to dismiss these events, stating that "accidents happen all the time". Angel starts to become convinced that something sinister is going on under the surface of the quiet town of Sandford, but is this all just a product of his hyper-sensitive London beat cop instincts, or is he quietly going mad at the prospect of his failed career?

Sandford, like most small rural towns, is populated with its fair share of eccentrics, and this is a source for much of the humour in Hot Fuzz. Angel’s partner, played brilliantly by Nick Frost, appears to be a dim-witted, but good-natured simpleton, constantly questioning Angel as to whether he’s jumped through the air while firing a gun, and such and such.. The supporting cast is impressive, however, with Edward Woodward, Jim Broadbent, Bill Bailey and Paddy Considine all enjoying themselves thoroughly on-screen. Special mention must go to Timothy Dalton though, who revels in the role of roguish upper-class jaguar-driving supermarket chief Simon Skinner.

The movie is essentially a comedy, and for the first two thirds, introduces the array of characters, sets the scene, and essentially sets up the third act. In these early scenes, PCMR picked up on more than a passing reference to 'The Wicker Man', and I don’t believe for a moment that Edward Woodward’s casting was an accident!

In the third act, the movie becomes a balls-out homage to the crash-bang-wallop buddy-cop explosion-fests that Nick Frost’s character loves watching on DVD, such as 'Point Break' and 'Bad Boys II' for example. The action is very well put together, and although large amounts of disbelief must be suspended, there are also a fair amount of laughs in this section of the movie.

What Hot Fuzz has in common with Shaun of the Dead is something that many big-budget Hollywood blockbusters lack. At the same time as trying to make the audience laugh, or give them a wave of excitement, the film-makers are aware that the audience has – cough – actually seen other movies! Referring to other movies is not something Wright and Pegg appear to shy away from in their writing. Quite the opposite in fact, and some of the funniest moments for me were when these movies, which have obviously provided the inspiration for Hot Fuzz, were referenced, either directly in the dialogue, or implicitly in the action scenes.

As a comedy, it is a success, and PCMR would venture that it is funnier than Shaun of the Dead, with quite a few laugh-out-loud moments. Like Shaun, the comedy almost gives way to action roughly two thirds of the way through, but there is still room in the action sequences of Hot Fuzz for some belly laughs, and these contribute to the relentless pace of the final twenty minutes or so.

My only real quibble of the movie was the running time. At two hours, Hot Fuzz felt a little too long for me. Also, because the first two acts were so long, when the action kicked in, it jarred a little, given that the audience had possibly settled into a nicely paced eccentric comedy. Suddenly there’s all sorts of gun-wielding lunatics, massive explosions and cheesy one-liners to be had. I’m not debating the merits of these things, just that they could probably have shed fifteen minutes or so, and ended up with a leaner, punchier movie as a result.

So, it’s funny, but it’s also quite violent. However this violence is in the classic tradition of gross-out movies, in that it’s almost cartoony in its shock value. Fly-kicking a granny in the face might not seem like such a funny thing (Eh? – Ed) but it gave PCMR quite a good belly laugh in the context of Hot Fuzz.

Pegg’s performance is really great though. You would expect him to be good in the more comedic sections of the movie, and he doesn’t disappoint there. However, when he gets pissed off and starts kicking ass, Pegg is quite believable as the action copper, and gives a very good account of himself in some fairly stunt-heavy scenes, inevitably delivering the odd cool quip here and there, to great effect.

So, I’d recommend it because it’s smart, funny and will reference other movies you may have seen. The two leads are great, the script is smart, and the supporting cast are terrific. PCMR predicts big things beckoning for this trio of Pegg, Frost and Wright, but in particular, you can expect Simon Pegg to feature in a few Hollywood outings in the not too distant future. And with a performance as good as this, why the hell not?

Slither

From time to time, people can be honestly seen to 'surf' the internet. The Arctic Monkeys are riding on the crest of a wave that was in part made possible from their Myspace page. The ubiquitous 'Numa Numa' kid's popularity ballooned so rapidly from a three minute internet spot he recorded miming to a europop tune, that he was eventually offered an appearance on Jay Leno. More and more companies are using viral commercials, or downloadable e-mailable versions of ads that would never air on tv, and these too have a tendency to spread like wildfire throughout office inboxes all over the world.

All these examples are variations on a theme, a commodity held in the holiest of sacred regards by movie-makers: 'internet buzz'. This is another way of referring to the interminable claptrap spouted by 'bloggers' like me, a member of a community that regards itself as slightly less inferior to the dreaded 'message-boarders'. Once the ripple of buzz is picked up on a topic, you will see forum postings, message boards abound with variations on a theme such as 'dude, OMG, like, I can't wait for this one', or 'is SOAP gona be better than LOTR???!?!' The classic example of this buzz getting out of control was prior to the release of 'Snakes on a Plane'. Now, I haven't seen the movie, so I can't comment on its quality, but the impression I got from seeing Sam Jackson talk it up on The Daily Show is that it's a b-movie, trying to be intentionally tongue-in-cheek, but that the idea sounded, well, pretty boring.. Why, then, did the message-boarding fanboys and bloggers embrace 'Snakes on a Plane' so fondly, giving it that most loving of internet fanboy thumbs-ups, an abbreviation (SOAP) and generating all sorts of excitement in advance of its release? Who knows folks, for the internet is a strange place. What's stranger to me though, is that a movie like Slither, which provides all the laughs and grisly enjoyment that Snakes on a Plane promised, never generated a single ripple of internet 'buzz', at least none that registered on my, um, sonar.

Slither is an irreverent comedy horror in the same vein as Sam Raimi's 'Evil Dead' trilogy, or perhaps Peter Jackson's 'Braindead'. It's a monster movie, of the genre that Troma studios have been churning out for years. For Troma movies, think 'Redneck Zombies' or 'The Toxic Avenger' and you get the idea of the tongue-in-cheek approach that they take to entertainment of this type. Slither borrows a lot from the Troma style, and indeed, one of the movie's characters is relaxing at home watching a Troma movie before she meets the monster of the piece.

Essentially, Slither doesn't take itself too seriously, and is all the more enjoyable for it. The self-awareness displayed by writer-director James Gunn probably comes from his own experience as a writer/director on Troma movies. Although he debuted with the not so memorable 'Tromeo and Juliet', Gunn did go on to bigger things, penning the script for the 1994 remake of George Romero's 'Dawn of the Dead', which was a big box-office success. He also provided a bit of bankability for himself by penning the two live action 'Scooby-Doo' movies, work of a more mercenary nature perhaps, but of the type that allows you more freedom in Hollywood, freedom to do your own thing.

And with this freedom, Gunn has put together a creditable addition to the comedy-horror genre. Slither is a pastiche of homages to many well-known monster movies, with throwback scenes to movies such as Romero's 'Night of the Living Dead', 'Halloween', 'The Toxic Avenger', '28 Days Later' even, all the movies Gunn obviously has affection for.

The movie is set in a backwater southern u.s. town named 'Wheelsy', where the residents pretty much all look like zombies even before they get infected by the mutant space monster that's on the prowl. The town is policed by Bill Pardy, played by Nathan Fillion, who you might recognise from the under-rated 'Serenity', and who is soon to be seen in the questionable sequel 'White Noise: The Light'. Fillion seems to be cultivating a reputation for himself as a bit of a b-movie icon, but he gives a good account of himself in Slither.

The monster effects on display (and lets face it, they may as well be a cast member) are very good, and there are also a few genuine moments of suspense and horror amidst all the tongue-in-cheek sarcastic humour.

The story trundles along at a decent pace, and from the get-go, you're never more than a couple of minutes away from something gross! Speaking of which, the monster of the piece, the unfortunately named Grant Grant, is played by Michael Rooker, one of those Troy McLure type supporting actors you will recognise, but be unable to place from anywhere specific. He plays the role well though, even if he becomes unrecognisable about a third of the way into the movie!

I'm painfully aware though, that even if I sing this movie's praises, it's going to be difficult to convince you to see it if you're not a fan of the horror genre. Perhaps that's one of the reasons why Slither tanked at the box office, despite its obvious quality. It seems surprising to me that it didn't generate any kind of internet buzz, however, as it is one of those movies that would seriously benefit from good word of mouth..

So here's my contribution to hopefully starting a wave of DvD interest for Slither. It deserves it, mainly because it's a funny, entertaining way to spend ninety minutes. The gore is extreme, the monsters are frightening, the jokes are funny, and the victims, for the most part, deserve what they get! If these characteristics do not a good monster movie make, then my name's Freddy Krueger.


The Verdict: for fans of monster horror, this is great fun.
The rating: 7/10

Stranger Than Fiction

In an earlier review of another Will Ferrell movie - Talladega Nights - I portentously predicted that 'Stranger Than Fiction' would be the 'Truman Show' moment of Ferrell's acting career. In other words, after capably demonstrating his ability to do comedy in all its mad-cap hilarity, Ferrell was about to dip his toe into more serious waters, much like Jim Carrey did to critical acclaim in 'Man on the Moon' and to more widespread audience approval in 'The Truman Show'. Now both those movies had an effect on Jim Carrey's longevity, but the effect of audience reaction to The Truman Show on his career cannot be understated. It's impossible to know if Carrey would even have been considered for 'Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind' had he not played Truman Burbank so, well, straight. In Eternal Sunshine, there are very few moments where Carrey plays for laughs. In fact, much of his character's screen-time is spent in earnest, haunted pursuit of Clementine, the girlfriend who has tried to erase her memories of his very existence. This is a long way from prat-falls and rubber-faced gurning, and is by a very long way Jim Carrey's best movie.

There's definitely something about a comic actor turning in a respectable dramatic performance that really appeals to audiences. Even Adam Sandler has done it, in his career-best movie 'Punch-Drunk Love', a bittersweet, off-beat comedy that deserved a lot more love than it got. Sandler played a soft-spoken lonely guy, browbeaten by his family. He has a real desire to better himself, although he perhaps lacks the capability or the social skills to achieve this goal. His story in Punch-Drunk Love is enthralling and beautifully filmed, but his performance is surprisingly subtle and eminently watchable, a galaxy far far away from 'The Waterboy'.

Will Ferrell can do comedy, of that there's no question. 'Anchorman' is anarchic, sexist, irreverent and Ferrell is at his manic best. In 'Talladega Nights' however, he showed his ability to really carry a movie, and gave a glimpse of something more under the surface of the lunacy.

While I might have predicted that 'Stranger Than Fiction' was going to be the Truman Show moment of Will Ferrell's career, I'm going to modify that prediction. Stranger Than Fiction is a better movie than The Truman Show. I would more readily compare it to 'Eternal Sunshine'.

I don't say this lightly. 'Stranger Than Fiction' is a complex, nuanced story which swerves between comedy and tragedy in a manner as sure-footed as double o'seven doing parcours. The driver of the story is essentially Harold Crick's (Will Ferrell) realization that he has begun hearing a narrator in his mind. As he brushes his teeth, this narrator describes his thoughts, and as he crosses the street, the voice describes the squeaking of his shoes.. all very innocuous and amusing you may think, until the narrator mentions Harold's imminent death.

Harold's reaction to the news sends him on an enthralling and unpredictable path. His quest to find the author of the story he's appearing in sends him first to the Human Resources manager in his company for a chat, and then quickly to a psychiatrist. But Harold is a serious guy, and Ferrell does not play the character for laughs. He appears genuinely unsettled by this turn of events, and although the idea is fantastic, it is grounded well in reality by Ferrell's performance, as he never over-reacts, even when he tries in vain to make the voice speak..

Ferrell is ably supported in Stranger Than Fiction. Dustin Hoffman is excellent, and shares some of the funniest moments in the movie with Ferrell. Emma Thompson, too, is in excellent form, and this may be the best performance I've ever seen her turn in. (I don't really do Jane Austen though, so I might be wrong about that!).

Maggie Gyllenhall, too, is really lovely in this one. Having only seen her in the decidedly strange 'Secretary', I wasn't certain what to expect, but she appears to be the real deal, and delivers a balanced performance, despite her character perhaps not being the strongest in the movie.

Where Stranger Than Fiction really delivers though, is in the script. The plot appears at first to be a conventional comedy, but very early in the movie we move from 'Bruce Almighty' territory to more alien terrain: we suddenly become sympathetic to Ferrell, and concerned to see how his situation will pan out. His performance is pivotal in this regard, and I believe this is his biggest success in a role where, generally, he is playing it straight. From the moment where Ferrell's character takes a holiday from his job, the movie unravels enthrallingly, with equal moments of tension, emotion and humour. The narrative is evocative of something Charlie Kaufman might have produced, but on one of his better days. 'Being John Malkovich' was clever, and 'Adaptation' also played with narrative, but in my opinion, the devices employed in 'Stranger Than Fiction' are more successful than in either of the two Kaufman movies. The difference being that the narrative never becomes confused or fantastic. The plot is always immediate, linear and has a very definite beginning, middle and end. More like Spotless Mind in fact, but with a plot device that is more readily acceptable to a movie audience in that a voice-over is normally used in much more mundane ways to move a plot forward.

The fact that I'm comparing Stranger than Fiction to 'Eternal Sunshine' in favourable terms is an indication that I really liked this movie. I'm a big Charlie Kaufman fan, and this movie is definitely inspired by, or indebted to Kaufman's work, perhaps with a little of Wes Anderson thrown in. This is no bad mix though, as long as the execution is good. Well, happily, Zach Helm's script is well rendered by director Marc Forster, and the acting is excellent. This movie is intelligent, funny, and will leave you wanting more. Perhaps it's a little early to add it to the favourites list just yet, but 'Stranger Than Fiction' is definitely in the same ball-park as 'Eternal Sunshine' and 'Punch-Drunk Love'.

Even if you don't like Charlie Kaufman, and thought Eternal Sunshine was drivel, I would urge you to go see 'Stranger Than Fiction'. It will surprise you. If you are a Charlie Kaufman fan, and enjoyed 'Eternal Sunshine', I have no doubt you'll enjoy this movie too.


The Verdict: It's great. Go see it.
The Rating: 9/10

Clerks 2

Kevin Smith has had an interesting relationship with the movie business over the last fifteen years or so. In 1996, he announced his arrival onto the silver screen with an accomplished little gem of a sleeper comedy named 'Clerks'. Packed with witty dialogue, memorable characters, novel set-pieces and daringly shot in black-and-white, Clerks attracted Smith a bit of a cult following, and much of the internet fanboy 'buzz' that goes with such a fan-base.

Smith followed Clerks with 'Mallrats', which, to be brutally honest, wasn't that much of a departure really.. it was in colour, but all the corner-stones of Clerks were still present: slackers making witty remarks in suburban New Jersey, kidults wondering what to do with their lives, Jay and Silent Bob, insightful criticism of other well-known movies... essentially Clerks, but from the other side of the counter.

Since then, much has been made of Smith's creativity somewhat dying on the vine. Although 'Dogma' was a pretty big hit, 'Chasing Amy' wasn't bad, and 'Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back' didn't do too badly for him, an air began to grow about Smith that cynics might say smacked of a lack of fresh new ideas.

What followed was perhaps Smith's attempt to move on from Jay and Silent Bob, but the results were less than auspicious... Tim Burton has his creative partner in Johnny Depp, and Steven Soderbergh has his in George Clooney, and these relationships have developed into creative alliances producing arguably their best work. Unfortunately for him however, Kevin Smith developed a bit of a creative relationship with, ahem... Ben Affleck. 'Jersey Girl' is the product of their second outing together (after Dogma)... and may have contributed to the demise of Affleck's career in Hollywood... (he's overdue a reinvention by the way, what price an Affleck career renaissance in the next 18 months!?)

So when your career is floundering in the Tinseltown water, what can you do? Well, you can ring the Weinsteins for one. And you can offer to make that sequel he's been asking you about all these years... hmmm... how much pride is swallowed before a call like that I wonder?

Kevin Smith is unique enough among apparently bigshot Hollywood directors in that he mixes it with on-line fans pretty regularly, giving updates from the sets of his movies, and diligently defending himself against the lunatic fringe of the internet. I'm not sure what his motivation for doing this is really, except maybe that he's a bit of a nerd himself, and he enjoys it. (Nothing wrong with that). However, I've read tirades he has written against semi-literate 'fans' from Hicksville, USA when they dare to criticize his work, and he doesn't hold back. His verbal onslaughts vary in severity from a tirade such as the ones Randall would deliver in Clerks 2, to something of a terse one-liner of the stoner variety from the likes of Jay, but these insults are always infused with the defensive vernacular of the regular internet forum poster.. now if you have ever read an internet forum, you will understand that arguments between varying stages of pond-life often develop, over such weighty topics such as 'Matrix vs. LOTR wich iz betr?' and such and such. This is why, although I admire Kevin Smith's wish to get closer to his audience, I would question his decision to roll his sleeves up and mix it in arguments with these people..

So, here's my frank admission folks, I'm not a big Kevin Smith fan. I loved 'Clerks' though, and the sequel got good reviews, so I thought, what the hey, I'll give it a go... And, to be honest, it didn't suck too badly. But it's just infused with the kind of personality that Smith has developed through spending too much time on the internet. The movie references are sometimes funny, but the targets are too simple, too obvious, and the diatribes lack the many insights offered in the script of the first Clerks movie.

I remember an excellent speech made by the Randall character in the first movie about innocent workers on the Death Star in 'Star Wars' getting wiped out by Luke Skywalker's rebels. Randall was questioning who the actual bad guys were, and this was a funny insight, a different way of looking at the movie. In the sequel, Randall insults a 'Lord of the Rings' fan in slightly more basic terms, by describing what the Hobbits should have done to each other at the end of the third movie... and it's not that this is completely unfunny, but the ideas in first movie were a lot better. It's like the writers of 'Frasier' were switched with those from 'That 70's Show'... "Sick burn, dude" etc etc. (And yes, that line is used in Clerks II).

I hesitate to suggest it, but I think Mr. Smith may possibly be trying to pander to an internet fanboy audience here... but no, that couldn't be right, could it?

Aaanyway, that said, there are funny moments on offer in this movie. The new female characters don't have a hell of a lot to offer in terms of comedy (or drama for that matter), but Randall and Dante's colleague in their new place of employment has some good moments. Elias (played by Trevor Fehrman) is a God-fearing christian and a virgin, a fan of Transformers and Lord of the Rings, and takes copious and regular abuse from Dante and Randall, the two main characters. His is the best performance in the movie, and if there's any justice, he'll survive the association with Kevin Smith, and go on to have a Hollywood career. However, the abuse levelled at Elias throughout the movie smacked of the diatribes of Mr. Smith I referred to earlier, and I got the impression the script of Clerks II contained a lot of speeches contrived by Smith to allow him to vent forth against his least favourite nerds, the ones that perhaps touched some nerves in those internet forums.... (perhaps one of them had the handle 'optimus_prime'?)

Jay and Silent Bob are back too. The Jay character gets a couple of laughs, and Kevin Smith is actually relatively funny as Silent Bob, but the joke is pretty old at this stage. Something inventive was needed to make these two as funny as they were in the first Clerks movie, and whatever this required inspiration was, it was not found for Clerks II. They make you smile, sure, but through mundane familiarity almost.

Dante and Randall, the two main characters from both movies, are pretty much unchanged since the first movie. Randall is as cynical and juvenile as ever, as well versed in Hollywood blockbusters as he is in internet porn and still living at his mom's at the age of thirty-three. Dante, on the other hand, has a fiancee, and wants to make something of his life, get married, move on, all that stuff. But is there a little spark between himself and his rather lovely boss, played by Rosario Dawson?

At it's heart, Clerks II is about growing up, knowing what's good for you, and knowing who your friends really are. So amid the pithy put-downs and knowing sleights on more successful movies, there are moments of emotion in the movie. Randall's worried that his best friend is leaving to marry a girl for the wrong reasons, and Randall is also worried about being left alone. Dante isn't certain he's marrying his fiancee because he loves her, or simply because it's the grown-up thing to do, and Dante's boss, who apparently doesn't believe in romantic love, seems to carry a torch for Dante... Emotions run high towards the end of the movie, but it didn't really convince me to be honest, mainly because the acting is generally quite poor.

There are a number of interesting cameos, however, including an entirely superfluous appearance by Mr. Affleck himself. The best of these is by Jason Lee, who you may know from the TV show 'My Name is Earl'. His 'pickle-fucker' story is so horrific, it must have an element of truth to it, although I'm sure names have been changed to protect the innocent!

So is 'Clerks II' worth watching? Well, as a straight-out comedy, it will appeal to fans of gross-out humour, and as a romantic comedy, it probably won't really appeal to many. It's not as if it was overly ambitious, it's just that in my book, it didn't really hit the marks it was aiming for.

I don't mean to be too hard on Kevin Smith, but he should perhaps get his ass out of the internet forums and the comic book conventions, and go watch something really worthy and inspirational, like 'Southpark'.. or, like, whatever. (OH yeah! ... totally sick burn!)


The verdict: not funny enough to be a good comedy, and not heart-warming enough to be romantic. Just plain average.
The rating: 5/10

Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan

You've got to love that title. And really, you've got to love this movie. For once folks, I may break my own rule here by talking about bits from this movie, so if you haven't seen Borat yet, go now, while it's still in the cinema!! You'll have to wait two months otherwise!!

Borat has crashed onto cinema screens at a time when comedy was really in need of something fresh. 'The Wedding Crashers' was possibly the best comedy of 2005, and oh lordy, that says a lot. 2006 has been a little better, but the two best comedies of the year for me so far have one man in common: Sacha Baron Cohen. This name is now associated with big fat dollar signs in hollywood, and with good reason. Talladega Nights was Will Ferrell's baby, and a massive hit, but Cohen was a scene-stealer in that movie. 'Borat' is now that mythical being most comic actors (unless you're Jim Carrey, Will Ferrell or Ben Stiller) generally only aspire to: a $100 million dollar picture. DVD sales will probably double that amount, so you can expect to see Cohen loitering with intent around Hollywood for a little while yet.

Amid rumours of an Best Actor Oscar Nomination for Sacha Baron Cohen, I thought I should finally drag my lazy ass to the picture-house to see Borat, and although I watched it in the company of perhaps only twelve other cinema-goers, I could get a feel for the effect this movie was having on audiences. Everyone there reacted viscerally to the images on screen in front of their eyes.. when their eyes weren't covered that is!

In many respects, Borat is something of a redemption for Cohen, as his initial foray onto the big screen with Borat, in the lamentably awful 'Ali G in Da House' didn't live up to the expectations generated by the successful television show. As I've mentioned previously though, failure can be a great motivator, and Cohen has picked himself up, dusted himself down and produced a comedy of a quality that, in my book, hasn't been seen on cinema screens for a few years.

The guile of Cohen's creation is extremely duplicitous, as Borat appears initially to be such an innocent. His nationality is unimportant, but perhaps it was useful for Cohen to pick a country most people in the U.S. would have had little or no knowledge of. However, Borat's behaviour is so foreign, and his slightly off-colour English so amusing, that he becomes instantly disarming to the people he meets, and this allows his interviewees to immediately feel culturally superior to him. Borat's apparent innocence reveals character traits in people that they may not have been aware of, and manages to make them voice beliefs of which they may not have previously been conscious. This is Cohen's evil genius at work. By asking simple questions about his interviewees basic behaviour, and why things are the way they are in the U.S. and A, Borat elicits responses that are possibly more revealing about his interviewees than they would like to admit! Perhaps this explains the amount of litigation that the movie has attracted, from people who were paid, say, $500 to appear in a little movie playing themselves! I doubt they ever expected the finished product to end up looking like this!

Also, as to the physical humour on show in Borat - and there is a lot on show at times! - don't be fooled by the crap in the plastic bag being simply a toilet gag. What Cohen is aiming for is a test of the limits of how nice his party hostess can be, and she does admirably well, despite the massive pressure of explaining to a six foot six Kazakhstani oaf in a small toilet "how one wipes one's behind".. this is priceless stuff.

However, it is when Borat helps uncover the less attractive side of people that the awkward comedy of the 'car-crash' variety is really generated. His questioning of a car and gun salesman would have most people telling him to sling his hook, but they hardly blink, focussed instead on the sale they're about to make, and perhaps remembering the story 'for the guys' later. These are instances of politeness perhaps going a little far, in that Borat is so outlandishly weird to American beliefs, that he becomes little more than a caricature of something 'foreign'. His encounter with a southern gentleman at a rodeo raises eyebrows in particular, as the man's deep-seated prejudices simply vent forth, packaged with a smile and a southern twang.

The gatecrashing of the mortage broker's conference is worth the admission price of Borat alone, and you will not see this scene coming. I really did think something around my stomach area was going to burst I was laughing so much.

As to the script, well, it's very coherent and not simply a smattering of set-pieces hastily cut together to make an 80-minute slap-stick vehicle. Borat has a beginning, a middle and an end, with vital moments in the movie continually providing turning points for the central character. He learns along the way - despite his appearance of an imbecile! - and because he is motivated by simple things, love, learning and the fear of loneliness, we can relate to his mission. Also, because of his truly foreign attitudes and behaviour, we never really see Borat as a bad guy, even when his wife passes away. (High five!)

And in the middle of all the belly laughs are some genuinely nice moments, ones which are not really played for laughs. You'll know the ones I mean, after gatecrashing the broker's conference, and after getting kicked out of the 'etiquette' party. Despite these heart-warming moments though, Borat goes through the ringer in this movie, make no mistake!

Leaving the cinema, I knew I had missed parts of the movie, not because I wasn't paying attention, but because I was literally covering my eyes. The humour in Borat literally grabs you, and while other movies make you laugh, this one will evoke many emotions at once: disgust, disbelief, shock, surprise, awe, but mostly just pure enjoyment. So, I was left with the feeling of needing to see it again, and for me, this is a rare and great feeling for a movie to generate. I associate this feeling with some of the movies I'm really attached to: 'Twelve Monkeys', 'Pi', '28 Days Later' and 'Seven', among others. (What can I say, I like movies with numbers in the titles!)

However, my favourite comedies are the ones I can watch when I need to be cheered up, or simply when I want to have a good belly laugh: 'SouthPark', 'Airplane!', 'Napoleon Dynamite' and Monty Python's 'Holy Grail' to name the few that spring to mind most readily. I would have no hesitation in putting Borat in the same category as these, and would heartily recommend it as an intelligent, boundary-pushing comedy to make you laugh and cringe in equal measure. No, actually scrach that, you'll laugh more than you'll cringe.. I think!

So.. I liked it, can you tell!? But the real question we should now be asking about Borat is: will it stand the test of time? In five, ten or twenty years time, will we be talking about Borat in the same terms as other classic and enduring comedies such as 'Blazing Saddles', 'Trading Places', 'This is Spinal Tap', 'Airplane!' or, dare I say it, 'The Life of Brian'? Well, in my opinion, for however much it counts, I believe Borat will withstand the rigours or time, repeated viewings, and the verbose analysis provided by idiots like me. Put it this way folks, 'Shaun of the Dead' still makes it onto british film critics 'top 50' lists. For me that was an good comedy.. but not great, not.. 'Spinal Tap', and definitely not as good as 'Borat'.


The verdict: Great success, high five etc etc. A seriously good comedy with brains, balls, belly laughs and a heart to boot. Thank you Borat, and chin quee.
The Rating: 9/10