60-second cinema

2 out of 10 Gratuitous, over-the-top, up its own arse, pretentious, art-school bullshit that I'd expect from an immature, attention-seeking student, not a seasoned, successful film-maker. Is Lars von Trier like this all the time, I wonder? The film would like to think it's deep and challenging, but... it's just not. Visceral maybe, but also quite missable. Oh, and it's got a close-up slow-mo of Willem Dafoe 's erect penis and swinging balls in it too — you have been warned. That aside, some of the scenes were quite beautifully shot. Some of the acting in the earlier parts of the film was pretty good too. Pity it was all wasted in this nonsense of a film.

8 out of 10 Feels strange reviewing this film as a film rather than as an extended episode of a TV series. Regardless, let's carry on and climb the mountain of conflict. This film is great. But then, I love The Thick Of It too. Drawing from, but hopefully caricaturing, the real-life absurdities and politics of... well, politics, the film follows a relatively lowly minister in the UK government who finds himself drawn into controversy. The controversy in question relates to the likelihood, or otherwise, of the UK and US going to war in the Middle East. You'd be right to think this is based around the recent war in Iraq. It blatantly is; and the writer's said as much. Given that, it feels like the black comedy on show should have been as painful as it was funny, but... it wasn't. Or rather, it wasn't for me . That's worrying in itself, because it really bloody should be painful viewing. The incompetence and deceipt that's played out really should frighte

the odd minor spoiler I've always been a bit of a sucker for special effects in films, but — if you'll pardon the pun — they've got to be effective to really command my respect. Whether that's through inspiring awe, horror, or merely by being unnoticeable, they've got to work in the context of the film. Otherwise, they're just some kind of self-congratulatory distraction. Humour me while I share some of my favourites (and feel free to add your own in the comments). Probably the first effect that made a real impression on me was that of the fighting skeletons in Jason and the Argonauts . Those buggers gave me nightmares. More recently, Hannibal managed to be the only film ever to truly repulse me with the believability of its gross depictions. Of course, I can watch that scene quite happily now, but at the time, it was enough to make me look away from the screen. The recent War of the Worlds remake is another film whose effects have me in awe. However,

7 out of 10 Completing my viewing of Park Chan-Wook's vengeance trilogy , Mr Vengeance is probably the simplest, plot-wise, of the three films. A young man struggling to find — and pay for — a kidney for his dying sister goes to unwise lengths to help her. Initially duped into swapping one of his own kidneys plus cash for a compatible donor kidney (which nevers turns up), he then resorts to kidnapping to raise the cash for a legit transplant. At which point, it all starts going seriously pear-shaped. Despite the film's title, there are actually multiple vengeances being sought here. And you can sympathise with all of them. The film remains entertaining and gripping throughout, but its relative simplicity felt like a slight let-down after seeing Oldboy and Lady Vengeance . Or maybe I was just up to speed quicker with this one. Anyway, as this rounds out my viewing of the vengeance trilogy, I feel I can now say it's a seriously good set of films. Granted, each is unr

5 out of 10 *Sigh* This should have been good. Carpenter writes, directs, and provides the 80s-synth, Precinct 13 style, theme. We're on Mars, heading to a remote mine, to arrest a bad guy who isn't. We've lost contact with the mine, but that's ok - we have guns. But somehow, all the promised strands never seem to go anywhere. Take for example Pam Grier's butch police commander. Was that a gay lust theme starting there on the train? Not that it matters. She soon "disappears" before re-entering as an unsurprising head-on-a-stake. When I say "disappears", I mean exits, stage right. That's it. No drama, no suspense, just left the stage. Instead of on-a-stake, perhaps Pam's head could have flown around attacking the laid back good guys with alien burn-spittle. Ok, lame, but a little less obvious. Thankfully, some action kicks-off. Cannae help but feel these bad fella s'no trying very hard. One goodie gets a circul

5 out of 10 How can a film with so many good things in it be so... average? Tricky one, but Watchmen manages it. And it pains me to give such a low mark. :( For those not in the know, it's a dark, noir-like story of crime-fighting, superheroes-cum-vigilantes — although some of these characters hardly deserve to be called heroes. Based on a graphic novel whose tone is said to have inspired the latest Batman movies, it sounds like it should be brilliant, but... it just feels pretty flat throughout. The pacing isn't exactly snappy and a good chunk of the first hour or so is spent filling in backstory. And then there's the narration from one of the key characters, given in the form of journal entries, which had me thinking more of Dick Spanner than the developing story. Rounding off the negatives, a few of the superheroes are... well... a bit wet, frankly. And, for people who are superpower-free, they're all unrealistically able to withstand long falls. Must have a