MY TOP TEN OF 2009

(The films that qualified for this list all opened in Australia in 2009, despite possibly having been released internationally either before or after that year)

1. INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS

Tarantino tricked mainstream cinema goers into seeing what is essentially a multi-lingual art house film, and we loved every minute of it! Many critics pronounced the boy wonder down and out after the commercial failure of Deathproof and mixed reaction to The Kill Bill franchise. Instead of churning out a safe sure fire action extravaganza,Tarantino produces what is perhaps his riskiest work to date; changing the history of the second world war, 20 + min scenes, multi-lingual dialogue, a cast comprised of mostly unknowns, Eli Roth! But Tarantino delivers on all counts making Inglourious Basterds the most interesting, original and enthralling film of 2009.

2. NOWHERE BOY

Debut feature film director Sam Taylor Wood creates the most movingly poignant portrayal of John Lennon to date, blasting through the myth, revealing the superstar at his most human. Wood's achievement lays in the fact that you forget you are watching a film about a rock legend in the making, instead focusing on the story of a complex young man torn between the women he loves. Stellar performances come from all, particularly a break out performance by Aaron Johnson who does well to avoid caricature, making Lennon his own. Add one of the best soundtracks of the year and you have an absolute must see.

3. DEFIANCE

Based on the true story of Belorussian partisan fighters the Bielski brothers, Edward Zwick crafts a tense but moving tale about the will to survive in the face of overwhelming odds. Where Defiance succeeds the most is in character development as you grow to love each of the brothers played superbly by Daniel Craig, Liev Schreiber and Jamie Bell. Whilst the script could have been tighter the power of the story alone will keep you gripped to your seat from beginning to end.

4. SHERLOCK HOLMES

Guy Ritchie churns out a rollicking, fun-filled adventure flick that is by far the most superior popcorn movie of the year. Every pre-conceived notion you thought you had about Holmes mythology flies out the door (for the better i might add) as Ritchie's vision contains far more laughs, action and thrills than poor old Basil Rathbone or any other Holmes imitator could ever hope to imagine. Despite meandering a little through the second half of the film Robert Downey Jnr and Jude Law chemistry as well as Ritchie's signature film making style make this one of the most enjoyable film experiences of the year.

5. PRIDE AND GLORY

Widely criticised for being too generic, Pride and Glory still managed to pack more punch than any other thriller in the marketplace this year. The movie, which centers around corruption in the New York City police force, showcases actors Edward Norton and Colin Farrell at their finest. The script is tight and the film fast paced. A tense cat and mouse game features throughout, keeping you enthralled from go to woe. Despite featuring quite a few formulaic conventions indicative of the genre, Pride and Glory delivered much bang for your buck.

6. JULIE AND JULIA

Perhaps the film that surprised me more than any other this year was Julie and Julia. Far from playing like your typical romcom the film makes for one of the most delightfully heartwarming experiences of the year. Nora Ephron, rebounding from the disastrous Bewitched, manages to deliver a film that is sweet without being corny, delivering genuine laughs along the way. The stories of Julia Child's Parisian exploits in the 1950's and post nine eleven cubicle worker Julie Powell are interwoven seamlessly with Meryl Streep proving why when it comes to acting, she is in a class all by herself.

7. GRAN TORINO

Gran Torino is the perfect example of a movie that is not exactly film making at it's finest, but is so entertaining that you can't help but forgive it's many flaws. Ok, so it's basically Dirty Harry retired and living in supurbia, but it still makes for great viewing. Eastwood does his usual shtick as the disgruntled tough guy determined to rid his neighbourhood of a dangerous gang of youths. It's his picture, and he is the reason the film works so well despite rather lackluster performances from the supporting cast.

8. THE LOVELY BONES

This film is an example of a good film that had the potential to be so much more than the finished product. That being said, The Lovely Bones will still make for one of the most interesting film experiences of the year in that you will not forget it easily. The subject matter is tough and the film as a whole is rather haunting. It's a shame Jackson couldn't have spent less time on rather mediocre special effects and more time on character development but all in all, considering the generally run of the mill lackluster fare flooding the marketplace, the originality alone of The Lovely Bones qualifies it as a must see.

9. MAO'S LAST DANCER

The little Aussie gem that could, Mao's Last Dancer will make you long to get out your dancing shoes and pirouette around the house. The film tells the story of Chinese ballet dancer Li Cunxin and his struggle to stay in America where he can pursue the career he desires, free from Communist party dictates. Despite some of the pivotal moments in the film falling rather flat, the beautifully choreographed dance sequences as well as the inspirational tale of Cunxin itself makes Mao's Last Dancer a cracking piece of entertainment.

10. THE BOY IN THE STRIPED PYJAMAS

John Boyne's amazing novel is brought to life in a beautifully crafted film by director Mark Hermann. The film chronicles certain events of world war two as seen through the eyes of a young german child. The performances are exceptional particuarly the two young children, Asa Butterfield and Jack Scanlon, who in many ways carry the film. Other notable mentions must go to Vera Ferminga as a naive wife and Rupert Friend as a sadistic young german officer. The film is well paced and the script is heartbreakingly poignant. The main fault of the movie lays within the fact that everyone has a British accent despite the German setting, this is to often done in films today and serves to destroy much of the credibility of the picture.

SHERLOCK HOLMES REVIEW

SHERLOCK HOLMES
Director: Guy Ritchie
Cast: Robert Downey Jr, Jude Law, Mark Strong
Screenplay: Michael Robert Johnson, Anthony Peckham, Simon Kinberg
Running time: 128 min
Rating: M
****/*****

ANYTHING BUT ELEMENTARY

Fresh from the superbly crafted RocknRolla, Guy Ritchie churns out a hugely entertaining, high voltage thrill ride which is by far the most superior popcorn movie of the year.

After the capture and execution of criminal mastermind Lord Blackwood, reports surface that the evil genius has somehow risen from the grave. With Watson in tow Sherlock Holmes sets about solving a series of murders somehow related to the case whilst dealing with an old flame who has mysteriously re-entered his life.

Over the course of the film every pre-conceived notion you thought you had about Holmes mythology flies out the door (for the better i might add) as Ritchie's vision contains far more laughs, action and thrills than poor old Basil Rathbone or any other Holmes imitator could ever hope to imagine. For want of a better word Holmes and Watson kick butt, majorly. Not many directors do action better than Guy Ritchie and the sequences in the film has his unique stamp all over them.

The film gets off to a cracking good start, both fast paced and intriguing. Unfortunately it begins to meander during the middle as the increasing number of elements to the case become more and more convoluted. The film also spends more time setting up for a sequel than other movie in recent memory. The faceless villain Moriarty, who is all set to be Holmes next nemesis, nearly gets as much screen time as Lord Blackwood! Despite the poorly paced second half, the chemistry between Robert Downey Jr and Jude Law is enough to keep you watching.

Downey Jr makes the role of the infamous detective all his own whilst retaining much of what made Holmes so special in the first place; superior intellect,wit, arrogance and petulance. Physically Downey Jr is about as different as you can get from the popular yet unsubstantiated Holmes iconography that we are usually presented with in adaptions. Yet this new Holmes is so darn likable that you really wouldn't want him any other way. Jude Law is also a far cry from the image of the balding, middle aged doctor we usually associate with Watson. Law invigorates the role, playing seamlessly off Downey Jr. Their relationship is reminiscent of the great buddy films of yesteryear and is one of the highlights of the movie.

The supporting cast does not fare as well. The usually scene stealing Mark Strong is kind of a ho-hum villain. We do not spend enough time with his character or know enough about him to consider him a real threat, especially after sitting through endless acts of genius by Holmes, you never really fear that he will get the better of the wonder detective. Rachel McAdams is also miscast as Irene Adler, Holmes love interest and rival. Adams does not possess the maturity in her performance to make you feel as though she is the street savvy, criminal genius that she is made out to be.

The look of the film is fantastic. Cinematographer Philippe Rousselot does a superb job at capturing 19th century London in all it's glory; from the docks, to the gritty mean streets to even Buckingham Palace, the film is rich in colour and authenticity. Ritchie's frequent editor James Herbert is back, bringing with him the techniques that make the film look typically Ritchie esque. From the action sequences to the interweaving of past and present timelines, the editing is top shelf. To round of the high quality productions is super composer Hans Zimmer's musical score, which is one of the best of the year and adds to the overall excitement of the picture.

So if your in the mood for a rollicking, fun filled adventure flick that is anything but elementary, you won't do much better than Sherlock Holmes this holiday season. FOUR OUT OF FIVE STARS

NOWHERE BOY REVIEW

NOWHERE BOY
Director: Sam Taylor Wood
Cast: Aaron Johnson, Kristin Scott Thomas, Anne-Marie Duff
Screenplay: Matt Greenhalgh
Running Time: 100 min
Rating:M
*****/*****

THERE IS NOWHERE ELSE YOU SHOULD BE ON BOXING DAY

Visual artist Sam Taylor Wood has crafted the most entertaining and thought provoking piece of Lennon mythology to date in her debut feature film Nowhere Boy.

The movie chronicles the adolescent years of John Lennon. Having been brought up by his Aunt Mimi, John's world is turned upside when his free spirited mother Julia re-enters his life, ripping him open and pulling out his artistry as well as pain, anger and frustration.

A number of films and documentaries have tried and failed to make a definitive statement about John Lennon the human being. The reason why Nowhere Boy is so successful is because we are presented with a complex and multi faceted young man, who was a number of things to a number of people and impossible to pigeonhole.

Based on the novel by John's sister Julia Baird with the script penned by Matt Greenhalgh, Nowhere Boy possesses an enormously strong emotional undercurrent that is missing from many films of the biopic genre. The Lennon legend has risen to almost unparalleled mythical heights within our culture and Greenhalgh does a superb job at humanising the story, so much that you forget that you are watching a film about a legend in the making, but rather the story of a young boy caught between the women he loves.

The women in question are John's Aunt Mimi played by the ever brilliant Kristen Scott Thomas and his mother Julia, brought to life in a star making turn by Anne-Marie Duff. Though much of the acclaim seems to be percolating around Duff's performance, Scott Thomas deserves to be equally praised for making the incredibly complex character of Mimi relatable and sympathetic. In the wrong hands Aunt Mimi could have come across as highly unlikeable considering she can often appear distant and cold, but Scott Thomas juxtaposes these instances with such an understated kindness and warmth that we as the audience realise that Mimi is a very caring person who has the misfortune of finding it almost impossible to express sentimental feelings. On the other end of the spectrum Julia appears to be everything Mimi isn't- a free spirit who flouts convention and lives for a good time. Julia is a flirt. She flirts with life, men and even her own son. There is a rather incestuous undercurrent to her and John's relationship such as when she lays on top of him, lost in ecstasy to the tune "I Put A Spell On You". The scene is uncomfortable, as is many aspects of their relationship. In many ways she seems more like a girlfriend to John and as the movie progresses we begin to understand more and more Mimi's misgivings. In many ways Julia has never really grown up and only knows how to engage with men in this seductive manner.

John Lennon is played by relative unknown Aaron Johnson, mainly associated with his role in Angus, Thongs and Perfect Snogging. Johnson breaks free from the shackles of his teen pin-up persona and delivers a mature and layered performance worthy of accolades. Johnson fully embodies Lennon's complexities; he is both good and bad, insecure and arrogant, sensitive and brutal, caring and careless. From Lennon's wit to his magnetism, pain, anger and sarcasm, Johnson gets it all. Considering Lennon is one of the most imitated celebrities of our time Johnson does well to avoid caricature, creating a version of Lennon at his most human. Johnson's vocal abilities also sound eerily reminiscent of a young Lennon, making him an excellent choice in more ways than one.

Taylor Wood is definitely a talent to watch as she not only elicits fine performances from her cast but also manages to capture the essence of post war Liverpool in a vivid and imaginative way. Gone are the bleak greys, squalid mean streets and endless rows of two up two down houses that usually characterises the depictions of the area. Instead we are presented with a much more colorful and vibrant depiction of Liverpool, a City just beginning to discover the charms of rock and roll. The excitement in the air is palpable.

One of the greatest attributes of Nowhere Boy is the soundtrack, crammed with classics from Elvis Presley, Screamin' Jay Hawkins, Jerry Lee Lewis and Eddie Cochran. Coupled with these original rock songs are covers sung by Aaron Johnson and Thomas Sangstar as their respective characters.

Nowhere Boy is an absolute gem of a film that will hopefully find the audience it deserves. You'll laugh, cry and kick yourself for not learning guitar in your youth. Possibly the most touching film of the year, there is nowhere else you should be on Boxing Day. FIVE STARS OUT OF FIVE

AVATAR REVIEW

AVATAR
Director: James Cameron
Cast: Sam Worthington, Zoe Saldana, Sigourney Weaver
Screenplay: James Cameron
Running Time: 162 min
Rating: M
*** 1/2/*****

BANG FOR YOUR BUCK!

Deja-vu anyone? Overblown budget, cutting edge special effects, rumors that Cameron had lost the plot, rumors that this was to be an Ishtar for the ages. Yes, history seemed to be repeating itself during the shoot for James Cameron's latest eye popping thrill ride Avatar. But instead of sinking like the ship in Cameron's now comically iconic predecessor, Avatar comes up trumps.

Sam Worthington stars as Jake Sulley, a paraplegic marine who is promised the use of his legs back in exchange for infiltrating the community of the native people of planet Pandora and gathering information to necessitate their downfall. As he grows to love his new way of life Sulley becomes conflicted between following orders and protecting his new people.

I didn't expect to like this film. In fact i expected to hate it considering Avatar combines two of my least favorite genres- science fiction and animation-coupled with a mammoth running time. But James Cameron has managed to create such a visually magnificent feast for the eyes that you would be hard pressed not to become engaged by what is playing out before you.

Cameron takes the art of motion capture CGI to new heights of excellence, producing quality of colour and dimension the likes of which has yet to be seen. The planet of Pandora is an exotic paradise, so lush with native flora and fauna that you long to jump through the screen and touch it. The animated characters are more emotive and realistic than ever before thanks to this new technology which allows every nuance of the actor's facial expressions to be captured and transferred onto the screen.

Sam Worthington does well in the lead. Whilst his performance is nothing exceptional, he makes a solid effort at holding the film together. The fact that you are always routing for Sulley despite his conflicted loyalties is a testament to Worthington's likability. However the real show stealer is Zoe Saldana, quite a feat considering her character is entirely animated. As Neytiri, Jake's Na'vi love interest Saldana's emotions are so incredibly powerful that they blast straight through the screen, enabling the audience to relate to the film on a much more basic human level. Another notable mention has to go to Sigourney Weaver, re-teaming with the man who brought her initial super stardom twenty-three years ago, she plays Dr Grace Augustine, a scientist with an innate love for the native people of Pandora. Her performance reminds us why she is one of the best actresses around for bringing strong, independent female characters to life on the big screen. Rounding out the cast is Stephen Lang as the larger than life, ultimate film villain Colonel Miles Quaritch. Lang hams it up big time, but this serves the character well.

The majority of Avatar's appeal lays within the visual aspects of the film. Cameron's script is not great. The dialogue is rather bland and the story formulaic. The nearly three hour running time is mainly for visual showcasing rather than allowing the quite simple plot to unfold. The films underlying themes of corporate greed, science and religion and the adverse affect of man on nature are hammered home in a loud and obvious way. Yet Avatar still possesses more of an emotional pull than most big budgeted action epics manage to communicate.

This film may not be for everyone, but even Cameron's greatest cynics must give the man props for his vision. If you dislike the genre the running time might get to you, but even so you'd be hard pressed not to feel like you got plenty of bang for your buck. THREE AND A HALF STARS OUT OF FIVE

AN EDUCATION REVIEW

AN EDUCATION
Director: Lone Scherfig
Cast: Carey Mulligan, Peter Sarsgaard, Alfred Molina
Screenplay: Nick Hornby
Running Time: 95 min
Rating: M
***/*****

YOU MIGHT BE A LITTLE LOST AS TO THE LESSON, BUT STILL GLAD YOU WENT TO CLASS ANYWAY

An Education is a flawed yet cracking little independent gem that makes for one of the more enjoyable and original film experiences of the year.

The film chronicles the girl to woman transformation of sixteen year old wannabe sophisticate Jenny (Mulligan). Upon meeting the much older David (Sarsgaard) Jenny is introduced to a high rolling world filled with culture and glamour far beyond her wildest dreams. Jenny must soon decide whether her new lifestyle is worth sacrificing her academic ambitions for.

Based on a memoir by Lynn Barber, An Education explores the themes of first love, social expectations and femininity in the 60's in both a smart and entertaining manner. It's sociopolitical subtext of the plight of women during the era never comes across as preachy or takes away from the more comedic aspects of the film.

Director Lone Sherfig's recreation of swinging 60's London is so vibrant and visually pleasing that, like Jenny, you can't help but be swept up in the magic of the atmosphere. Sherfig's film is well constructed and well paced, whilst managing to evoke the feeling of a film from Hollywood's golden era. Whilst the narrative is maintained effectively throughout, it's themes are slightly lost due to some poor casting choices.

While An Education attempts to chronicle the coming of age of school girl Jenny, due to the mis-casting of Carey Mulligan in the lead there is no discernible coming of age evident. It is certainly not due to lack of talent, as it is obvious that Mulligan possesses the acting chops and screen presence of someone destined to become a major star. The problem is that Mulligan portrays Jenny so sophisticated, confident, sensible and worldly wise right from the get go, that the character never seems to undergo any sort of discernible change or personal growth. The only difference between Jenny the school girl and Jenny the sophisticate is a new hairstyle and some impressive haute couture. Because Jenny oozes this maturity and wisdom from the start, it is even more inconceivable that she would be swept of her feet so easily by by David, especially considering that Jenny always comes across as far more intelligent and charismatic than him. This is partly the fault of Peter Saarsgard who is fatally miscast as David in the fact that he does not possess the charm or charisma to make you believe that Jenny would consider throwing away her academic dreams for him. The pair are severely lacking in chemistry and apart from possessing the financial means to provide Jenny with her dream lifestyle, David does not appear to be exceptional or interesting in any other way that would make him appealing to a young girl of Jenny's intellect.

The supporting cast fare much better. Alfred Molina is brilliant as Jenny's well intentioned but misguided Father, providing much of the comedic relief as well as some of the more poignant moments of the film. Cara Seymour delivers a beautifully understated performance as Jenny's mother with Emma Thompson and Olivia Williams making notable turns as the teaching faculty at Jenny's school. Also well cast is Rosamund Pike and Dominic Cooper as Davids glamorous friends. Pike plays the blond bimbo to subtle perfection whilst Cooper plays jack the lad Danny with such a fun, sleazy charm that you can't help but thinking that the movie would have fared better if Cooper reversed his role with Saarsgard.

Nick Hornby's script is fast paced and witty. The snappy dialogue contains a unique mixture of light and dark sentiments to keep An Education an intriguing tale. Whilst most scenes are well thought out, the film comes across as rather hastily thrown together towards the end. The much talked about trip to Paris consists of a two minute montage and the conclusion of the film seems rather abrupt and forced.

Costume designer Odile Dicks-Mireaux is in much need of an Academy Award nomination for providing designs reminiscent of the garments adorning Hollywood legends such as Audrey Hepburn and Elizabeth Taylor. The style and sophistication of the costumes surpass any other film in recent years and deserves to be recognised.

All things considered An Education is a good film that is almost great but had the potential to be exceptional. But in a marketplace littered with shiteous romcoms, dull action offerings and torture porn, it is definately one of the more smarter choices for your movie dollar. THREE OUT OF FIVE STARS.

THE INVENTION OF LYING REVIEW

THE INVENTION OF LYING
Director: Ricky Gervais & Matthew Robinson
Cast: Ricky Gervais, Jennifer Garner, Rob Lowe
Screenplay: Ricky Gervais & Matthew Robinson
Running Time: 99 min
Rating: M
*/*****

IT'S A SHAME THAT GERVAIS COULDN'T INVENT SOME LAUGHS

The golden boy of comedy loses his shine with this debacle of a film, proving that he is indeed fallible.

In a world where there is no such thing as lying, down on his luck writer Mark Bellison (Gervais) discovers that he possesses the ability to do so. Bellison quickly discovers that he can utilise his new gift to change his life for the better.

Alot of Gervais's shtick revolves around making fun of the character he is playing. Whilst this may have produced comedic gold in previous outings such as The Office and Extras it plays to disastrous effect in The Invention Of Lying. Unlike previous Gervais creations, David Brent and Andy Millman, the character of Mark Bellison does not deserve the antagonistic attitudes or blatant humiliation he is constantly subjected to by friends, co-workers and even his mother. If Gervais intended the many insults afforded to nice guy Bellison to be humorous he was sadly mistaken as they just serve to leave a bad taste in your mouth. The romance in which the film centers around also feels shockingly off note as the object of Bellisons affections Anna (Garner) is terribly unlikeable. When she's not telling Bellison that he's short and fat with a stubbed nose and not attractive enough to procreate with, she's making fun of those inferior to her. In her defence she is forced to tell the truth as she sees it, but considering at one point she is contemplating entering a loveless marriage in order to produce genetically superior children, you have to question why exactly Bellison is desperate to be with her?

The concept of the movie may be original but it's fatally thin. Gervais couldn't even bother to come up with a reason as to how or why Bellison is suddenly able to lie, we are just supposed to take it for granted that he now can. There is really no plot to the film, merely a plethora of un-amusing set ups that play out like a bad episode of Saturday Night Live. Gervais and his co-writer Matthew Robinson also unsuccessfully try to make some kind of social comment about the superficiality of human nature and the contradictions of Religion that are not as clever or original as the writers obviously think they are.

Not even a stellar all star cast can elevate the enjoyment factor of this comedic dead zone. In their brief appearances Tina Fey and Jonah Hill seem to be nodding off in their roles, whilst Rob Lowe manages to make the allegedly charismatic Brad Kessler fatally uncharismatic. Meanwhile Jeffrey Tambor is wasted in a ho-hum role as Bellison's boss and leading lady Jennifer Garner fails to make her character Anna even remotely enjoyable to watch.

The only shining light in the film comes from brief cameo appearances by Edward Norton, Phillip Seymor Hoffman and Jason Bateman. It's not so much that their cameo's are particularly good, rather that they momentarily distract you from this ultra dull offering. If you are fan of Gervais you than may be able to suffer through this, if not save yourself the bother. ONE OUT OF FIVE STARS

2012 REVIEW

2012
Director: Roland Emmerich
Cast: John Cusack, Amanda Peet, Chiwetel Ejiofor
Screenplay: Roland Emmerich & Harald Kloser
Running Time: 158 min
Rating: M
**/*****

A DISASTER FILM IN MORE WAYS THAN ONE

Roland Emmerich's latest overblown "look it's the end of the world, what we need is the most average guy you can find with a dysfunctional family to save the day" offering almost borders on satire as we are inundated with everything that is ridiculous about the disaster genre repeatedly over the course of almost three hours.

The year is 2012 (obviously) and the world as we know it is coming to an end via a succession of natural disasters. The film chronicles mankind's struggle to survive.

It's a shame that the films of Roland Emmerich have become increasingly overblown and self indulgent over the years, for he once showed great promise in being able to intertwine solid dramatic content with large action sequences in his earlier outings like The Patriot. However as 2012 and last years dreadful 10000BC show, Emmerich has forgone all ambition of producing anything of quality, instead seeming more concerned with producing the most mind numbing special effects that the ridiculously large budget of 200 million dollars could buy. It's painfully obvious where most of Emmerich's attentions lay as the multiple human narratives in 2012 fall shockingly flat.

We all expect disaster movies to be somewhat ridiculous. After all they are so formulaic that the only thing that really changes is the disaster itself. 2012 is no exception as we once again are presented a bunch of stereotypical characters attempting to survive a flurry of natural disasters whilst mending their relationships. But the problem with 2012 is not so much that it adheres to every disaster movie convention in the book, but rather that we are subjected to sit through them for almost three hours. The plot is littered with so many pointless characters, sub plots and "we're a family" pep talks that the running time is unforgivable. In between the tidal waves and earth tremors the film lags endlessly, so much so that you are actually welcoming the complete annihilation of the world so you can leave. It also appears that Emmerich wasn't sure what tone he wanted for the film. On the one hand he tries to add in a plethora of 'emotional scenes', exploring-in a bad after school special sort of way- the big issues of corporate greed, heroism, self sacrifice, redemption and science and religion. On the other hand he adds in so many cheesy one liners, cringe worthy dialogue and absurd set ups e.g a Russian Paris Hilton look a like risking her life for her chihuahua , that you can't help but think the joke may be on us.

Unfortunately the cast can't do much to elevate the enjoyment factor of the film. Let's face it, disaster films are paycheck films and in exchange for the millions paid to them the actors do their best to look serious. John Cusack (the reluctant hero), Amanda Peet (his estranged wife), and relative newcomer Chiwetel Ejiofor (the scientist) do their best to make their stock disaster movie characters look suitably worried throughout, but the relatively bad dialogue and ridiculous situations more than renders any attempt to give a worthwhile performance futile. Oliver Platt does his best to stand out as the token greedy bureaucrat whilst Woody Harrelson provides some comic relief as a drugged up conspiracy theorist. It's Thandi Newton however who receives the award for the most pointless role of the year, as the presidents daughter (much like her role in W) Newton seems to merely hover in all the major scenes contributing nothing.

Whilst the film fails on many levels the special effects department manages to deliver. Cinematographer Dean Semler manages to make tidal waves and earthquakes almost beautiful in their destructive glory.

If your in the mood for some mindless bit of fun and don't mind a sore backside then you may enjoy 2012. For everyone else perhaps wait for DVD when you can employ the use of the fast forward button on your remote control. TWO OUT OF FIVE STARS.

MAO'S LAST DANCER REVIEW

MAO'S LAST DANCER
Directer: Bruce Beresford
Cast: Chi Cao, Bruce Greenwood, Amanda Schull
Screenwriter: Jan Sardi
Running time: 117 min
Rating: PG
***/*****

DESPITE IT'S FLAWS YOU WOULD BE HARD PRESSED NOT TO WANT TO PIROUETTE DOWN THE AISLES

Just when we thought all was lost, the Australian Film Industry is provided with a flicker of hope thanks to the release of Mao's Last Dancer.

The film chronicles the rise of Ballet star Li Cunxin. As the impoverished son of peasant labourers in Communist China, Cunxin is plucked from obscurity to attend The Beijing Dance Academy. Chosen to represent his country as an exchange student for the Houston ballet, Li soon begins to question the Communist dictates on which he has been raised.

Whilst Mao's last dancer is one of the best Australian produced movies to emerge in about a decade, it is not without it's flaws. Bruce Beresford's direction is rather hit and miss. Whilst producing many heart warming scenes coupled by beautifully shot dance sequences, many moments that should come across as highly dramatic fall somewhat flat with others feeling more contrived than organic. Screenwriter Jan Sardi's script consistently builds dramatic tension throughout, such as when communist party dictates begin to infiltrate the dance academy as well as Li's standoff at the Chinese embassy, only to have such story arch's be resolved with disappointing anti climaxes.

Despite the scripts faults, Beresford deserves a pat on the back just for tackling the project considering he had the unenviable task of finding a bilingual actor who could carry the picture, whilst needing to be one of the best ballet dancers in the world. His prayers were answered when he came across Chi Cao who not only bears a striking resemblance to the real Cunxin but also attended the Beijing Dance Academy where Li was taught his craft. Cao's acting inexperience is obvious in certain scenes, but his natural charm, screen presence and undeniable dancing talent makes him an extremely likable protagonist whom the audience longs to see succeed. The casting of Amanda Schull is rather more questionable. Thirty year old Schull, known mostly to audiences as Jodie Sawyer in Center Stage, is rather miscast as Li's eighteen year old love interest Elizabeth. Although Cao is also thirty in real life he is far more successful at pulling off Li's youthful naivety than Schull is at Elizabeth's. At one point in the film when she informs Li that she's a virgin you can't help but think... really? After watching her set the screen on fire with her dancing prowess in Center Stage it is almost cruel to cast her once again as a ballerina and not have her dance a single step throughout. The film possesses a strong support cast that includes Bruce Greenwood as Li's American mentor and Kyle MacLachlan as a savvy international law attorney. Their performances enrich the movie and add much needed weight to this independent production.

Mao's last Dancer is beautifully shot, particularly in it's dance sequences. Beresford uses a unique blend of live action and slow motion capture shots to fully encapsulate the performances. The cinematography by Peter James also assists in elevating the routines and is never so effective as when capturing the vivid Chinese landscape.

One of the best attributes of Mao's Last Dancer is the hauntingly beautifully and often rousing musical score of Christopher Gordon. It is rather criminal that more than likely Gordon will be overlooked at next years Academy Awards-mostly due to the fact that the film has yet to garner much attention outside of Australia- as his original music is amongst the most beautiful ever to be committed to celluloid.

Despite it's flaws Mao's Last Dancer is a thoroughly enjoyable piece of entertainment. This can mostly be attributed to the story of Cunxin itself, which is so inspirational and uplifting that it would be almost impossible not to leave the cinema without a smile on your face and a fervent desire to do a pirouette. THREE OUT OF FIVE STARS.

NEW MOON REVIEW

NEW MOON

Director: Chris Weitz

Cast: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner

Screenwriter: Melissa Rosenberg

Running time: 130 min

Rating: M

***/*****

WEITZ SAVES HIMSELF FROM A MAULING

Weitz delivers a solid and faithful adaptation of Stephanie Meyer's insanely popular novel. Whilst much of what was good about the book is kept in tact, many of it's faults were transferred over as well.

In New Moon Bella is left nursing a broken heart after her beloved Edward skips town. Fearing he was putting her in constant danger Edward decides to end their romance, leaving Bella's childhood friend Jacob Black to pick up the pieces. As their relationship grows increasingly complicated, Bella is amazed to discover tha Jacob is harbouring a secret of his own.

The Twilight novels were always destined to work better as films than as books, mainly due to the fact that we are spared Meyer's unfortunate habit of waffling e.g. Bella's miserable, for the next one hundred pages I'm going to keep baffling on about just how miserable she is in case you missed the basic idea of the concept. Screenwriter Melissa Rosenberg once again does a superb job of adapting Meyer's novels by snappily summarising the poorly paced book, mostly retaining the charm and skipping the yarn. Unfortunately like the book, the middle of the film seems to drag on, but this does seem unavoidable considering how true to events Rosenberg's script remained. New Moon is also flawed in the fact that, like the first film, many serious moments appear unintentionally funny which serves to dampen the quality of the picture.

After the relative Ishtar that was the Golden Compass, Chris Weitz has managed a return to form proving that he can be trusted with a big budget and beloved source material. Weitz manages to retain much of what was loved about the first Catherine Hardwick adaptation-snappy dialogue with a unique balance of light and dark moments-whilst putting his own visual imprint on the film. Also remaining from the first film are the cast which has a lot to do with Twihards acceptance of Weitz's vision.

Kristen Stewart once again pulls of the inordinate task of making the insufferable character of Bella from the novel like able. Stewart brings a certain strength to the character that is sorely lacking in the books. Robert Pattinson however is devoid of the charm and charisma that made his first outing as Edward so memorable. In Pattinson's defence the character is chronically depressed and mopey throughout the film. However, as you watch the gamut of his acting abilities range from a frown to a scowl and back again you can't help but get the impression that he doesn't really want to be there, and considering the constant hysteria and media attention that plagues the actor's personal life, perhaps he doesn't. This film was Taylor Lautner's time to shine and he makes the most of his opportunity. As Jacob Black he brings great warmth and likability (as well as some crazy muscles) to the role that makes him a real competitor for Bella's affections. As an audience member you almost dare to think the impossible- perhaps Bella would be better of with this quintessential boy next door than the perpetual sad sack she pines for throughout the film. New addition to the franchise Michael Sheen delivers a spot on performance as Volturi leader Aro whilst child prodigy Dakota Fanning turns in a suitably creepy performance as the sadistic Jane. The rest of the supporting cast once again do well to add most of the comic relief to the often bleak events the film depicts.

New Moon is visually stunning. Cinematographer Javier Aguirresarobe manages to give the dreary town of Forks a lush, almost otherworldly quality. The beautiful visual quality is emphasised when the story shifts to Italy and we are inundated by majestic scenery and vibrant colours. The only real disappointment are the quite poorly done CGI werewolves which looked about as real as Pamela Anderson's breasts.

All in all Twilight fanatics should be pleased with the latest installment whilst Summit Entertainment should sit back, relax and start counting the Benjamen's. THREE OUT OF FIVE STARS

WHIP IT REVIEW

WHIP IT

Director: Drew Barrymore

Cast: Ellen Page, Marcia Gay Harden, Alia Shawcat

Screenwriter: Shauna Cross

Running Time: 111 min

Rating: M15+

DON'T COUNT ON WANTING TO SPEND ANOTHER ROUND IN THE RING!

The news that Drew Barrymore was about to make her directorial debut was greeted with a fair amount of skepticism within the industry. Her freshman effort however is not the complete clunker predicted by many nor does it herald a highly anticipated new career path for Barrymore. Instead she delivers a predictable and mediocre coming of age yarn that is not worthy of the talent it attracted.

The movie follows the girl to woman transformation of Bliss Cavendar (Ellen Page). Forced to participate in beauty pageants by her overbearing mother (Marcia Gay Harden) social misfit Bliss finds herself much more at home in the rough and tumble world of Roller Derby's. Facing strong opposition from her parents Bliss makes it her mission in life to join the local league and become her own person.

Whip It boasts an all star cast, although you have to wonder whether or not they would have even considered the material had Barrymore not been behind the helm. Perpetually misunderstood youth Ellen Page essentially plays Bliss Cavendar as Juno without the confidence (or the pregnancy). Despite this Page is obviously talented and makes the character likable enough, however she is completely upstaged by Arrested Development star Alia Shawkat who completely outshines Page's Oscar nominated behind as her wise cracking best friend Pash. Veteran actors Marcia Gay Harden and Daniel Stern are comically brilliant as Bliss's well intentioned parents with Juliette Lewis making us realise that she's one of best and most under appreciated actors working today as Bliss's devilish rival Iron Maven. Rounding out the supporting cast is rapper turned actor Eve, Tarantino stunt women extraordinaire Zoe Bell, Barrymore herself and the forgotten Wilson brother Andrew.

One of the biggest problems with Whip It is it's pacing. At times the film seems to drag on endlessly, making you question why a rather simple plot takes almost two hours to unfold. The more enjoyable moments come from the friendship between Bliss and Pash as well as the actual Roller Derby matches themselves. Barrymore succeeds so well in making you feel as though you are inside the ring that you can almost smell the sweat and blood. However these moments are often few and far between and we must instead watch a poorly developed and rather pointless love story unfold between Bliss and local musician Oliver as well as numerous sequences showcasing how 'wild' the derby girls are (they skate and wear heavy make -up, we get it!)

Barrymore's direction is certainly not bad, it just comes across as a little schizophrenic. It's almost as though she really wasn't quite sure what the end product should be, as such we are introduced to too many themes and ideas. While no great prodigy she should certainly be given another chance at directing as there is obvious potential evident. Barrymore certainly manages to elicit fine performances from her cast and should be applauded for the fact that she didn't turn Whip It into a self serving vanity project as most other actor/directors have a tendency to do.

Whilst nothing spectacular, Whip It is nonetheless enjoyable fare. Just don't count on wanting to spend another round in the ring. Two and a half stars out of five

JULIE AND JULIA-THE RANT-SPOILERS

I didn't want to see this film. I didn't expect to like it. In fact i expected to leave half way through it as i was merely killing time whilst waiting for my train. Once it began however I was thoroughly shocked to discover that i was loving it, providing me with my biggest shock reaction of the year.

After the utter travesty of Bewitched i had lost all faith in Writer/Director Nora Ephron. Anyone who manages to elicit a performance from Nicole Kidman more frozen than her face should be viewed with utter distrust!

Another factor in my initial dismissal was perhaps one of the worst trailers of the year. The editor seemed to piece together the most boring scenes of the film coupled with Julia's most outrageous moments, leading me to believe that perhaps she was suffering from some kind of mental disability.

Julie and Julia however signals a return to form for Ephron as both a writer and director, managing to deliver one of the most charming films of the year.

Ephron had the unenviable task of telling two autobiographical tales within the one film, a fete she manages with flawless gravitas. The alternate stories interweave perfectly with both managing to engage equally. This being said it's Meryl Streep's turn as Julia Child however that really manages to steal the show.

Streep once again proves that she's the greatest living actress of all time. There's talent and then there's Streep talent. I give her much kudos for avoiding the tendency of actors to turn real life subjects into caricatures of themselves. Amazingly she manages to make the larger than life Child endearingly human. You can't help but fall in love with the character who Streep plays with such humor and yet subtle poignancy that a sixteenth Oscar nomination seems well on the way.

Adams is much less successful in her role as Julie Powell. In fairness to her the character is not particularly likable. Considering it's Powell's job to deal with people suffering great tragedy in the aftermath of 9/11 on a daily basis, you'd think that her biggest problems (the fact that she lives in Queens and isn't where she wants to be in her career) would be put into some perspective. But alas, she mopes around as if she's in a Russian Gulag most of the time, acting as though surviving the trauma of turning thirty is tantamount to surviving cancer. Whilst Adams can't help the way the character is written her performance lacks the charm necessary to help the audience forgive her characters faults. Usually one of the best things in any movie, Adams performance falls uncharacteristically flat. She is given good support in the form of Chris Messina as her 'saint' of a husband Eric, but the couples relationship seems somewhat off, due to the fact that Eric is always playing second fiddle to Julie's juvenile whims and complaints. It's not a good sign in a Romcom when you want to say to the guy "I so would not blame you if you had an affair". After a rather bad fight between the two Julie admits her faults and wins her husband back after he leaves. You think that perhaps this signals a change in her character but no, even more complaints and self centeredness abound for the rest of the film.

Coming across far better is the relationship between Julia and her husband Paul played by Stanley Tucci, one of the finest and most under appreciated character actors working today. In the wrong hands his role could have been completely buried next to Streep's tour de force performance. Their relationship is one of the best things in Julie and Julia providing some of the most humorous and touching moments of the entire film.

The movie languishes a little in the second half, as the writing of Mastering The Art of French Cooking seems to take as much time to portray on film as it took to write in real life (eight years)
The ending itself also manages to seem somewhat abrupt, alost as if someone said "Shit it's going to long! Just end it here"

Despite this Julie and Julia is the best Romcom of the year. After the shiteous likes of The Ugly Truth and The Proposal, Julie and Julia gives us hope that Romcoms can be something more than shameless excuses for a paycheck for past their prime actors and actresses. It also qualifies as the film most likely to give you the munchies. I felt like i gained a pound just from watching it! Definitely worth seeing

JULIE AND JULIA REVIEW

JULIE AND JULIA
Director: Nora Ephron
Cast: Meryl Streep, Amy Adams, Stanley Tucci
Screenwriter: Nora Ephron
Running Time: 123 min
Rating:PG

AN IRRESISTIBLE RECIPE

With the sound of Nora Ephron's past two cinematic catastrophes Lucky Numbers and Bewitched still ringing Code Gigli in my ears, i was undoubtedly skeptical about her latest foray into the Romcom genre. Julie and Julia however signals a return to form for writer/director Ephron who has managed to produce one of the most charming films of the year.

Julie and Julia tells two alternating tales. One involves Julia Child's rise to Culinary fame whilst the other chronicles blogger Julie Powell's mission to cook every recipe in Child's 'Mastering The Art Of French Cooking'. Although the stories are set decades apart-Child's in 1950's France and Powell's in post 9/11 New York-each woman shares a common bond of wanting to better their lives by pursuing their shared passion of food in different yet equally rewarding ways.

The task of having to tell two biographical tales within the one film was not an enviable one, yet Ephron's screenplay succeeds flawlessly in interweaving the two vastly different plots. Child's exploits in France and Powell's personal and professional trials and tribulations manage to engage equally, thanks in large part to the quality of the performances.

As Julia Child, Meryl Streep reminds us all that as far as actresses go, she is in a class all by herself. Streep is an early favorite to receive her sixteenth Oscar nomination for the role, and deservedly so. You can't help but fall in love with Child as Streep manages to bring to the perfect combination of wit, intelligence and poignancy to the role. Streep also manages to avoid the tendency of actors to caricature real life subjects, making the larger than life Child endearingly human.

Unfortunately Amy Adams as Julie Powell succeeds less in winning the audiences affections. In fairness to Adams, the character herself admits that she can be 'self absorbed' and a 'bitch'. Her performance just seems to lack the charm necessary to help the audience forgive the character for her faults. Her emotional range never seems to stem further than a mopey/perturbed combination contributing to her performance as a whole falling somewhat flat. Relative unknown Chris Messina is quite likable, lending good support as Powell's 'saint' of a husband. Still, you can't help but question what exactly his character is getting out of a relationship in which he is constantly playing second fiddle to Julie's relatively juvenile problems. Perhaps it is more the fact that it is human nature to root for the underdog that helps Powell's story to succeed, rather than the likability of the character.

The relationship between Julia and her husband Paul-played by Stanley Tucci- is far more endearing and is the underlying heartbeat of the movie. Tucci, one of the best character actors in the business, shines in a role that in the wrong hands could have been completely buried by Streep's vivacious Child. The scenes between these two masterclass actors provide some of the most humorous and touching scenes of the film.

Like any good recipe, everything in Julie and Julia just seems to gel. Editor Richard Marks does a superb job of fitting together what was undoubtedly a jig saw puzzle of a film. Costume designer Anne Roth and the films make up department are exceedingly good at recreating 1950's Parisian chic couture as well as the less glamorous New York contemporary fashion. Finally Stephen Goldblatt's cinematography makes for a vibrantly colorful and fresh looking film, almost good enough to eat!

Despite the film languishing slightly in the second half and a rather abrupt ending, Julie and Julia makes for thoroughly enjoyable viewing. Managing to be sweet without being corny and touching without being soppy, it's feel good viewing at it's finest. It also happens to be the film most likely to make you gain weight, so don't be surprised if you are hit with a massive attack of the munchies afterwards! Four out of five stars
****

FAME 2009 REVIEW

FAME 2009
Director: Kevin Tancharoen
Cast: Kay Panabaker, Megan Mullally, Bebe Neuwirth
Screenwriter: Allison Burnett
Running Time: 107 min
Rating: PG

YOU WON'T WANT TO LIVE FOREVER AFTER WATCHING THIS!

Fame 2009 should serve as a warning to any studio attempting a remake, re-imagining or re-invention of a classic. Far from capturing the magic of the original we are instead presented with the biggest Turkey of the year so far.

The premise is similar to that of the 1980 film. A bunch of fresh face hopefuls are accepted into the prestigious New York City High School for the Performing Arts. Their professional and personal lives are tracked throughout their school experience as they seek fame and fortune in the big city.

The problem with Fame 2009 is not the fact that it fails to live up to it's predecessor. It's fault lays within the fact that it plays like a hastily put together, two hour MTV video trying to make a quick buck of the name of a beloved franchise.

The first fault with Fame 2009 is it's director. To date Kevin Tancharoen's most prestigious credits happen to be "The Search For The Next Pussycat Doll" and "Britney Spears Live From Miami". However adept Tancharoen may be at zooming a camera in on pop tarts behinds, he is painfully unqualified to helm a fifteen million dollar musical in which you have to deal with real actors. He manages to illicit even faker performances from his young cast than any contestant on one of his reality shows could have ever been capable of.

The casting in itself is a train wreck. These teenagers are supposed to be attending a talent school, yet not one among them seem to be particularly talented. As a matter of fact you can't help but wonder if the list of successful applicants was confused with the list of rejects and then no-one had the heart to tell them. None of the young cast possess the appeal or charisma to actually make their roles memorable. Not even the support of Kelsey Grammer, Megan Mullally or Bebe Neuwirth could elevate the quality of the film. They languish away in small, thankless roles which makes you wonder why they even bothered to waist their time.

Another major blunder is Allison Burnett's script. Whilst the original Fame broke ground by incorporating classic musical numbers with gritty subject matter, Fame 2009 comes across as something schlepped together by the Disney channel as a follow up to High School musical. The content seems insipid, with the highest source of tension being "I want to sing but my parents want me to play classical music!" Cue the violins. Character development is also so atrocious that by the end of the film you couldn't really care a less about anyone. Numerous sub plots are introduced at an alarming pace, yet not one of them are adequately explored or resolved. After spending over three years in the lives of these kids, their is no discernible growth or change in anyone. You'd even be hard pressed to remember their names.

The final nail in the coffin have to be the films musical numbers. You could expect the same quality from any High School production. It's not a good sign when you leave the cinema feeling you could have been a better choreographer when the closest you've come to a dance routine is the Macorina.

If your feeling nostalgic for leg warmers, sweat pants and the vocal styling of Irene Cara i suggest you bypass this offering and rent the original. Save your time, save your money and save yourself! ONE STAR OUT OF FIVE

FAME 2009-THE RANT-SPOILER ALERT!!-GET READY FOR SUICIDE WATCH!

It never ceases to amaze me how films like this manage to get made. At what point does no-one stand up and say "Ok guys we've got a real Turkey on our hands here! Something needs to be done!" It's almost as though the producers thought that we'd all be so distracted by Frasier not being Frasier and Karen not being Karen that we'd somehow miss the crap fest being played out before our eyes.

Adding to my dislike of the film is the fact that it has completely bastardized the concept of the original 1980 Fame, marketing itself as an update. I can't help but feel like Director Kevin Tancharoen took a whizz on a Picasso.

Producers need to get their heads examined for choosing Tanchareon in the first place. His most prestigious credits to date include "The Search For The Next Pussycat Doll" and "Britney Spears Live From Miami". Just because you can zoom a camera in on a pop tarts ass does not qualify you to helm a fifteen million dollar musical in which you have to deal with real actors, a fact that is painfully obvious throughout the film.

The musical numbers are boring and unimaginative. You could expect the same quality from your local High School production. You are not really supposed to leave a musical feeling as though you could have done a better job on the choreography when the closest you've come to a dance routine is the Macorina.

Next on my hit list is screenwriter Allison Burnett. Did she even watch the original Fame? It was gritty and real! It dealt with a variety of tough issues such as sex, drugs, violence, class divide and interracial relationships. This is not exactly the typical subject matter that you'd associate with a musical which is why it was so groundbreaking. Fame 2009 on the other hand comes across as something the Disney Channel schlepped together as a follow up to High School Musical. The greatest source of conflict in the film is basically "I want to sing but my parents want me to play classical piano!" Cue the violins. Now don't get me wrong. There's nothing wrong with a family friendly musical, but the various plots were executed so badly it makes me appreciate the nuances of Glitter!

The script is a disaster. We are introduced to a number of characters whose plots go nowhere. After supposedly spending three years in the lives of these people their is absolutely no growth or discernible change in anybody. In fact, character development is so atrocious that after two hours you couldn't care a less about anyone. In one scene a dancer makes a hastily considered attempt at suicide. As an audience member you think "Gosh i guess i should want you to stop but i don't really know who you are because I've only seen you in like two other scenes and being told that you haven't made an improvement doesn't real seem like a reason to end your life but hey i don't really care"

Another major blunder is that the talent school possesses no students that are particularly talented. As a matter of fact you can't help but wonder if the list of successful applicants was confused with the list of rejects and then no-one had the heart to tell anyone. Producers opted for a cast of unknowns and there is a reason why are they are unknown and most probably will remain unknown. None of the young cast possessed the appeal or charisma to actually make their roles memorable. Not even the likes of Kelsey Grammer, Bebe Neuwirth or Megan Mullally could elevate the acting standard from a code Gigli. I felt like i wanted to throw them a parachute and scream "Get out of the burning plane you can still have a career!" Their small and thankless roles may even leave you scratching your head as to why they'd waist their time with it in the first place.

Fame 2009 should not have been made, but it was so we must all suffer the consequences. Save your money, save your time, save yourself!

COUPLES RETREAT REVIEW

Couples Retreat
Director: Peter Billingsley
Cast: Vince Vaughn, Jason Bateman, Malin Ackerman
Screenwriter: Vince Vaughn, John Favreau, Dana Fox
Running Time: 107 min
Rating: M15+

YOU WILL ENJOY THE EXPERIENCE BUT WON'T RUSH BACK FOR ANOTHER BOOKING!

You may feel a certain dejavue upon viewing a preview for Couples Retreat. Vince Vaughn is playing, well, Vince Vaughn-a charmingly quick witted slacker who doesn't appreciate his beautiful partner or their lifestyle. His best friend is John Favreau playing, well, John Favreau. Add in a host of fish out of water situations, some wise cracks and a lesson learned and you basically have the formula for the last five Vaughn Romcoms. Couples Retreat is slightly elevated from usual fare however, thanks in most part to a stellar ensemble cast.

In a desperate attempt to save their marriage Jason and Cynthia (Bateman and Bell) decide to enrol in a Couples Retreat. In order to receive a discount they convince their friends Dave and Ronnie (Vaughn and Ackerman) and Joey and Lucy (Favreau and Davis) to accompany them. Believing that the trip will be all fun in the sun, the group are chagrin to discover that they must participate in couples therapy or leave. Almost immediately each couple soon begin to discover that their relationships are not as strong as they thought.

Couples Retreat does not deserve the critical mauling it has received. It's almost as though critics have been struck with a case of sour grapes. After all Vaughn and Favreau have written a script that has allowed them to go to a tropical paradise with their best friends, surrounded by beautiful women. This is hardly justification for labelling it the worst film of the year! Fame 2009 anyone?Anyone?

Couples retreat is far from flawless. The first half of the film succeeds well in holding interest as we too are eager to view what awaits for our couples on this tropical paradise. However once we are are there and the initial awe of the lush green fauna and sparkling blue water have worn of, we-like our couples-must accept that what comes next is not so good. The second half seems to drag on aimlessly until you find yourself wondering what the actual point of the last half hour has been. The ending is also so contrived that you can't help but thinking Vaughn, Favreau and Fox just pulled it out of their backsides so that they could go back to sun baking.

The film also suffers from the fact that the female characters are far more underdeveloped than their male counterparts. Ackerman comes across as bland while Bell is your stereotypical neurotic and Davis desperately tries to shake of her good girl image as the lustful housewife. The actresses are just not given the chance to showcase their full potential, making it clear that their main purpose in the film is to look pretty.

The men come of far better. Even though Vince Vaughn is doing his usual shtick, he's so gosh darn likable you just can't begrudge him for it. Bateman turns in his best performance since his Arrested Development days, bucking his usual habit of sleepwalking through his roles. Favreau manages to make his very unsympathetic jock character likable and Faizon Love turns in a genuinely hart warming performance as the well intentioned Shane.

Vaughn regular John Michael Higgins and cult comedian Ken Jeong deliver hilarious cameos as councilors with Carlos Ponce receiving some of the films most cringe worthy laughs as Salvadore, a sex addicted Yoga instructor. Not faring so well is Jean Reno as retreat instructor Marcel. He seems miscast and his lines fall flat.

But the film does try to make some meaningful statements about relationships e.g the grass is not always greener, it is better to be with someone than alone. It also teaches us that average looking guys always have super hot girlfriends and that all women are size two with ripped abs.

Despite it's flaws, there is also much to like. A stellar cast, beautiful locations, hot bodies (if your a guy) and yes even a few laughs! Couples Retreat never pretends to be anything more than what it is-A highly enjoyable, if rather forgettable Romcom perfect for a date night. Three out of five stars.

***

By Catherine Brown

COUPLES RETREAT-THE RANT-SPOILER ALERT!!! NOT A CRAP FEST! NOT A PICASSO! JUST A ROMCOM!

I am not someone who listens to critics. However, the critical response to Couples Retreat has been so damning that i thought we may have another Code Gigli on our hands. Empire Magazine even went as far to say "The collective shipwreck that this creates makes Four Christmases, Ghosts Of Girlfriends Past and The Ugly Truth almost worth a return visit" Well I'm here to tell you that this statement is horseshit. Not only is Couples Retreat far more enjoyable than the aforementioned films but we all know that we would rather consume large quantities of cyanide than make a return visit to a look at me I'm shirtless McConaughey or no one will love me because I'm so uptight Heigl Romcom.

I feel the harsh critical reception mainly stems from a case of sour grapes. After all Vaughn and Favreau have written a script that has allowed them to go to a tropical paradise with their best friends, surrounded by beautiful women. This is hardly justification for labelling it the worst film of the year! Fame 2009 anyone?Anyone?

Couples retreat is far from flawless. The first half of the film succeeds well in holding interest as we too are eager to view what awaits for our couples on this tropical paradise. However once we are are there and the initial awe of the lush green fauna and sparkling blue water have worn of, we-like our couples-must accept that what comes next is not so good. The second half seems to drag on aimlessly until you find yourself wondering what the actual point of the last half hour has been. The ending is also so contrived that you can't help but thinking Vaughn, Favreau and Fox just pulled it out of their backsides so that they could go back to sun baking.

Character development is also another problem. Favreau's Joey and Kristen Davis's Lucy are so at odds and seemingly devoid of love throughout the entire movie that their hasty reunion in the last ten minutes seems completely ridiculous. After spending an hour and twenty minutes trying to get into bed with anyone of the opposite sex, all it takes is for Joey to see Lucy dancing with another man for him to realise his undying devotion. To make matters worse Shane-played by Faizon Love-has his divorced wife Jennifer appear completely out of the blue professing her undying love. What the? Jason Bateman's and Kristen Bells marital problems are resolved so fast after a long downward spiral that you can't help but wondering why he couldn't just of told her he loved her in the first place and save everyone the trip. The women are also seriously underdeveloped in comparison to their male counterparts. If you asked me to describe Malin Ackerman's character my response would be a blank stare. Vince Vaughn once again plays... Vince Vaughn but is so gosh darn likable you just can't hold it against him.

It is also plainly obvious that the film is written by men. Four average looking guys with smoking hot girlfriends? This is plainly evidenced in the drop trow scene. The women of course all possess super ripped size zero bodies, their male counterparts....not so much. Men with bad bodies are hilarious but a women with a bad body or even an average body would be disgusting and wrong!

But the film does try to make some meaningful statements about relationships. While it uncovers nothing new e.g the grass is not always greener, it is better to be with someone than alone-you can't help feel a little bit warm and gooey inside by the end.

Despite it's flaws, there is also much to like. A stellar cast, beautiful locations, hot bodies (if your a guy) and yes even a few laughs! Couples Retreat never pretends to be anything more than what it is-A highly enjoyable, if rather forgettable romcom perfect for a date night.