Best movie from each year of my life tag!

So this is one movie for each year of my life that I absolutely love! I hope you like my choices! It was pretty tough.

1990: Ghost

This is one of my all time favourite chick flicks. Sam and his girlfriend Molly have just moved into a flat in New York when Sam is suddenly murdered, the suspect his best friend...this movie is so much more then that though, it's a beautiful love story, Patrick Swayze is wonderful as Sam and Whoopi Goldberg is absolutely hilarious as a psychic. Ultimate chick flick.

1991: The Addams Family

This was a tough choice for me! You all know how I feel about "The Addams Family" it's my all time favourite film. I must have seen it at least a hundred times, it's actually quite ridiculous. It's incredibly creative and imaginative, the characters are great, just like the ones from the original show, it's highly entertaining, a perfect family film.

1992: Forever Young

This year was really hard to choose! There are so many great films from this year! I had to go with "Forever Young" though it's an absolute favourite of mine. Mel Gibson plays a US Pilot who is chosen to take part in an experiment where he is frozen for a year, something goes wrong and he's frozen for almost 60 years, when he wakes up in 1992! It's absolutely fantastic, one of his best movies by far! Definitely check it out if you've never seen it! Starring Jamie Lee Curtis, Elijah Wood and Mel Gibson.

1993: Mrs Doubtfire

I love this movie! I really love it! Robin Williams is one of my favourite actors, he's absolutely hilarious in this. I could quote this movie all day! Easily my favourite comedy film! I was so sad to hear the passing of Robin Williams, he was a remarkable actor, his characterization in this is incredible, I've permitted myself not to watch it whilst under the influence of any food or drink because I'll probably end up wearing it.

1994: Richie Rich

Again a very tough year to choose a film. I had to go with this one. It's a firm favourite of mine. I must have seen it a hundred times as a child and love it even more as an adult. One of Macaulay Culkin's last films. Richie has his own Rollercoaster, a bubblegum machine, his own McDonalds, it's got just the right amount of drama, action and comedy, it's excellent!

1995: Pocahontas

Personally this is one of the most stunning films made by Disney! It's remarkably powerful, I cry every single time. It's very easy to forget that Mel Gibson was the voice of John Smith too, you get so wrapped up in the characters and the storyline. It's a shame he hasn't voice over work for anything else since really because he's very good at it! Perhaps after his directorial comeback with "Hacksaw Ridge" we might see more of him?

1996: Space Jam

Another movie I have seen a daft amount of times. I seriously love this film. I've seen this well over a hundred times, I'm not sure what it is that I love about it so much! It's highly entertaining, I love the soundtrack, the cross over of real life and animation is absolutely awesome. It's just great. It reminds me so much of my childhood and I always find myself singing along to Quad City DJ's song "Space Jam", it's fantastic!

1997: Air Force One

I first stumbled across this on Netflix, I'd wanted to see it for years and one night decided to give it a go. I was thoroughly impressed. It's action packed from start to finish, I love the climax, Gary Oldman is absolutely amazing, an incredible character actor. One of Harrison Ford's best films. It sounds cliched but its very entertaining! Highly recommend!

1998: A Bug's Life

Oh my gosh! I could ramble on about this movie for ages! My sister and myself owned this on video and I'm more then convinced it started jumping because we'd seen it that many times. Easily one of my favourite films from my childhood! The animation is gorgeous, the characters are really funny, the storyline is awesome, it's just fantastic! If you've never seen this movie I cannot highly recommend it enough. It's amazing! "Slim, Slim, Slim, where are you?"  "I'm the only stick with eyeballs"

1999: Passport to Paris

I mentioned this film in another post. When I was a kid I was a big fan of the Olsen twins. They're two of the richest woman in the world now, when I was a kid they were fashion icons and serious role models. They went through a phase of making movies, this was one of them, where they took a trip to Paris. Great chick flick!

2000: The Beach

I'm currently re-reading the novel, personally the book is just as good as the movie! I had a crush on Leonardo Dicaprio when I was a kid, yes I was into boys when I was ten! This movie never gets old, the more I watch it, the better it looks! I love it! I've seen it countless times. Danny Boyle is amazing! If anything it'll inspire you to go to Thailand.

2001: Harry Potter: The Philosophizer's Stone

Who doesn't love Harry Potter? Okay, so there are some people who aren't fans. This is my favourite. It's always been my favourite. It's really magical, I can't believe how young everyone looks. There's something very nostalgic about this film, there was so much buzz when it was released, Harry Potter was on everything and anything. Bertie Bott's every flavour beans, I'm convinced I eat one that tasted like grass once. Can you still get them?

2002: Scooby Doo: The Movie

There's probably a growing trend here, I love family films! This is a favourite of mine. Here's the strange thing I never really watched the original cartoon series. I wasn't really a fan of the second movie, but this I can watch over and over again, it never gets old. The characterization is amazing, they've nailed the characters.

2003: Pirates of the Caribbean: Curse of the Black Pearl

I can remember watching this in English at school, I thought it was amazing at the time. It's definitely my favourite in the franchise, although I am really looking forward to seeing the new one coming out very soon! Johnny Depp is absolutely fantastic as Jack Sparrow! He's an incredible character actor, one of his best films!

2004: The Polar Express

One of the most beautiful Christmas movies ever made! It touched my heart. The animation is gorgeous an the storyline is magical and heartwarming! Tom Hanks is amazing as the conductor! I watch it every Christmas. If you've never seen it, I cannot recommend it enough. Stunning! Your children will believe in Father Christmas forever after viewing. It's enchanting.

2005: Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

I love Tim Burton! He has such a unique approach to directing. We each have a different imagination, it's wonderful to see someone else's approach to a popular story. It's bright, it's eccentric, Johnny Depp is absolutely brilliant as Willy Wonka, it's dark, there's just the right amount of comedy, it's excellent and it looks absolutely gorgeous on Blu-Ray.

2006: Children of Men

A very powerful film! I only stumbled across this a couple of months ago and immediately fell in love with it. It's an incredibly unique story, Set in 2027, in a chaotic world where woman has become infertile. It's slightly unsettling. The acting is incredible though and the storyline is excellent! I'd highly recommend this movie.

2007: Surf's Up

Penguins who surf! I know right, how awesome? The storyline is absolutely fantastic, it's really funny and you'll find yourself falling in love with the characters. It's a little bit underrated personally, it's not a movie often shown on TV, but is easily one of the best animations of the past ten years. It's a wonderful family film!

2008: The Dark Knight

This was really tough, I had to choose between Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight" and "The Boy in the Striped Pajamas", in all honesty though, I love a good "Batman" film, this is definitely my favourite. The late Heath Ledger was phenomenal as the Joker, his characterization was absolutely incredible, he's sinister and sick, his character is portrayed beautifully on screen. Firm favourite.

2009: Avatar

James Cameron's "Avatar" is one of the most stunning films I've ever had the pleasure of viewing. I respect some people have a hard time getting into this film, I can understand why, there is a lot going on all the time. If you can persevere with it though, I would highly recommend it! I'm really excited for the new couple of films coming out, hopefully not too long!

2010: Inception

Inception is incredible! A dream within a dream. I love everything about this movie, the soundtrack is thrilling, the dream sequences are absolutely phenomenal, Leonardo Dicaprio is amazing, an incredibly unique approach how we dream. It'll definitely have you thinking. The climax is fantastic too! Not one to be missed!

2011: We Bought a Zoo

Where do I start? I'm going to be honest here, this makes me cry. It's incredibly touching, it really will touch your heart! The animals are gorgeous, the storyline is realistic and genuine. Based on a true story, but set in America instead of the UK. If you've never seen it, I cannot highly recommend it enough, it's absolutely gorgeous! Starring Matt Damon!

2012: Argo

This was a tough choice! I had to go with Ben Affleck's "Argo", upon first viewing, I honestly didn't think it was going to be something I'd enjoy watching, I was on the edge of my seat! It completely took me by surprise. The storyline really had me gripped! Beautifully shot, I was thoroughly impressed!

2013: Insidious: Chapter 2

I am a huge fan of James Wan! This is my one of my favourites. It's absolutely terrifying! If your into horror movies this will be right up your street! Genuinely very scary! I love the concept of the storyline too. Unique and imaginative!

2014: Into the Woods

A musical fairytale! What more could you want? Very imaginative and fun. Another film I wasn't too sure if I would enjoy but was pleasantly surprised after viewing. Fantastic film!

2015: The Revenant!

You know you always get that one movie that has you hanging on the edge of your seat? This was it for me, wow! Leonardo Dipcario's performance is absolutely phenomenal, he completely and one hundred percent deserved that oscar. I'm looking forward to reading the novel, the film was truly incredible! An absolute must watch!

2016: La La Land

I love my musicals! La La Land reminded me of "Singing in the Rain" it has a wonderful feel it to it, it's entertaining, I like that it takes a few twists and turns, it's not too simple. Ryan Gosling's performance is fantastic and Emma Stone does a great job. Had me tapping my foot through out the whole film. If your a fan of musicals, you'll love this!

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 1

Cast: Chris Pratt, Vin Diesel, Zoe Saldana, Bradley Cooper, Dave Bautista and Lee Pace.

Director: James Gunn

Release Date: 2014

Running Time: 2hrs 1 minute

Genre: Action/Fantasy

Rating: PG-13

Synopsis:

A group of intergalactic criminals are forced to work together to stop a fanatical warrior from taking control of the universe!

In a galaxy far far away, there is a man, with a Walkman. His name is Starlord! 2014 was an interesting year for Marvel with the release of "X-Men: Days of Future Past" and "The Amazing Spider Man 2", personally this movie was my favorite out of the three. Marvel are pretty good when it comes to casting actors in their movies, this was one was no different, with big names like Chris Pratt (Jurassic World), Vin Diesel (Fast and Furious Franchise) and Bradley Cooper (American Sniper), each actor in their own right are absolutely fantastic, Chris Pratt's witty one liners are hilarious, Bradley Cooper is brilliant as animated raccoon Rocket, and Vin Diesel is perfect as Groot. Bradley Cooper is in my opinion underrated as an actor, he's a fantastic character actor, his characterization is great, Rocket is easily the best character in this movie.

The storyline is tremendous, Director James Gunn also helped write the screenplay, it's creative, it's funny and it's highly entertaining. There's just the right amount of humour and action. We're very nicely introduced to the characters, the relationship between characters is awesome, especially Rocket and Groot, they really do make a great pair! Bradley Cooper and Vin Diesel bounce off each other beautifully. The chemistry on screen is spot on! If you enjoy humour, you'd probably find this one a bit more entertaining then some of the other Marvel films out there. John Gunn hasn't done a tremendous amount of directing, in fact before this one he'd only directed a few TV programmes. Very impressive for potentially his directorial debut. I can be a little bit hit and miss when it comes to Marvel films, this one however is one of my favourites. The pace is excellent, the characters are great, the action sequences are funny and entertaining, By far one of the best films released in the past three years.

Visually it's stunning, the lighting adds to the tone of the movie and the storyline, the CGI is gorgeous. The use of colours are beautiful. Galaxy colours, realistic and genuine. The settings are framed very well, the actors look fantastic in shot and the special effects are amazing! James Gunn has relied on special effects a bit more then production design, but that's okay, it works well with the storyline. I wouldn't expect anything else. It really adds to the humour in some scenes too. The transitions between scenes look great too. This is a very, very nice looking movie. Of course I couldn't talk about this movie and not talk about the incredible soundtrack! They couldn't have chosen a better score for it. When Peter Quill (Pratt) is taken, the only thing he has with him is his Walkman, the songs work beautifully alongside the storyline. They're catchy and speak volumes about the film and the characters. Don't be surprised after viewing that you find certain songs stuck in your head on repeat.

Overall this is a fantastic film, easily one of the best Marvel films ever made! It puts the likes of "X-Men" and "The Amazing Spider-Man" to shame. Visually stunning, highly entertaining and absolutely hilarious, perfect for any Marvel fan!

5/5 stars

Sucker Punch

Cast: Emily Browning, Abbie Cornish, Jena Malone, Vanessa Hudgeons, Jamie Chung and Oscar Issac.

Director: Zack Synder

Release Date: 2011

Running Time: 1hr 50 minutes

Genre: Action/Fantasy

Rating: PG-13

Format: DVD

Synopsis:

A young girl is institutionalized by her abusive father, retreating to an alternative reality as a coping strategy, envisioning a plan to help her escape.

Sucker Punch! One of the best steam punk movies ever made. The concept for this story is a unique one. Alternate reality's. A dream within a dream. Directed by "Batman vs Superman's" Zack Synder, starring Emily Browning, Abbie Cornish, Jena Malone and Vanessa Hudgeons. At a glance, it'd be easy to assume this movie was directed by Tim Burton, it's dark, it's strange, it's creepy and it's remarkably imaginative. If you are familiar with Snyder's work though, chances are you'll be able to tell it's definitely his work, the lighting is very similiar to that in "Batman vs Superman" and "300", it's very rare these days that you'll see a steampunk film. Visually it's very similiar to Lemony Snicket's: A Series of Unfortunate Events. Imagine being in an alternate reality, in real life you're weak, in your reality you're strong, in real life you always loose, in your reality you always win!

Babydoll (Emily Browning) is terrified, she's come from a very abusive background, now put into a mental hospital, where she's not being looked after as such but told she has to perform with a bunch of girls essentially in a burlesque show to promote Blue Jones's (Issac) prison. Browning's performance is really good although she doesn't speak for the majority of the film. Synder has relied heavily on visuals instead of dialogue. Jana Malone is an actress who I feel is typecast a tiny bit. There's something about her role in this movie that reminds me of her role in "The Hunger Games" series, the characters are different yes, but it's almost like the personalities are the same. Oscar Issac's character Blue Jones is a slimy sleazeball.

I love how everytime Baby doll closes her eyes, we're introduced to a new alternate reality, it's fantastic. An alternate reality that is essentially helping them cope with their time in the prison and finding a way to escape, to be free. The storyline is absolutely fantastic, it's very imaginative and original. It's very steampunk, the cinematography, the costumes, the set design, it's great! If you love action movies you aren't going to be dissapointed, there are plenty of amazing action sequences, the choreography is really good, it looks neat and tidy and works well on screen. Just imagine World War 2, in a steampunk setting, the whole concept is incredible.

The soundtrack is exquisite and speaks volumes about the storyline and the characters. The soundtrack could tell the story all on it's own. There's a pretty cool remix of Queen's "We will rock you", or should we say a steampunk version? The pace is absolutely perfect, there isn't an ounce of this movie that will leave you sat there bored, there's loads going on, plenty to look at and lots of really cool and interesting characters. It's a little bit disappointing that  we don't really see much from Vanessa Hudgenons who plays Blondie, she barely talks. That doesn't mean to say that she isn't shown on screen though, as she very much is in frame at all times.

It's original, it's unique, it's fun, it's imaginative, it's creative. The cinematography is absolutely outstanding, it's beautifully shot and the storyline is amazing. It's a clever strategy of cat and mouse. For some, steampunk is something they might not have come across before, it's different, in all honesty your either going to really love it or hate it. Easily one of Zack Sender's best movies, if you wern't a fan of his latest superhero movie don't be put off, this is a whole other ball game. Highly entertaining and fun!

5/5 stars

Confessions of a film lover tag!

1. "Yeah well that's just like your opinion man" - The Big Lebowski.

Your most unpopular film opinion?

Okay here we go! Please don't hate me for this. I'm not the biggest "X-Men" fan, it's not the characters, it's not the way it's shot, it's the storyline. For some reason, I wasn't a fan of "X-Men: Future Days of Past, it bored me so much. I felt like it was far too long. I couldn't get into it. I didn't feel like there was enough action. People however rate this movie as being one of the best in the franchise, which is absolutely fine. It just didn't do anything for me.

2. "The limit does not exist" - Mean Girls

A guilty pleasure film that you can watch over and over again?

Guilty pleasures. I have more then one. Two that spring to mind though are "Passport to Paris" which starred the Olsen twins. I have seen this movie so many times it's actually ridiculous. I haven't seen it in years, however it's definitely a favorite of mine. The second movie, is Disney's "George of the Jungle" which starred Brendan Fraser, it's highly entertaining, it's imaginative, it's creative, I just can't get enough of it.

3. "Are you not entertained?" - Gladiator

A movie that is universally loved that you found boring?

This is a strange one for me. You may be surprised by my choice. I was a massive fan of the original movie, but the remake just didn't quite do it for me. Disney's live action remake of "The Jungle Book", visually it's absolutely stunning, but the performances just weren't there, I felt like some of the original songs were ruined, actors were cast wrongly in their roles. It's not an awful movie, but I think everyone else enjoyed it a lot more then I did.

4. "Sorry my Prada's at the cleaners! Along with my hoodie and my "fuck you" flip flops you pretentious douchebag - The Social Network.

The most pretentious film you've ever seen?

There are a few, but one that springs to mind is "Divergent", my goodness there was so much hype when this movie came out. People went crazy for it, here's the thing, it really wasn't up to the standards that everyone said it was. I don't particularly like the way it's shot. I don't like the actors and I don't think the soundtrack works with the storyline or the shots. I can't stand this movie or the rest of the series.

5. "That's bingo"  - Inglorious bastards

A director who has never let you down?

One director? Oh that's a tough one. I'm going to have to go with James Cameron, he's an incredible director. I love the effort that he goes to, to make his movies truly amazing. I cannot even tell you how excited I am for "Avatar 2", hopefully we don't have to wait too much longer. Terminator is an absolute firm favorite of mine along with Avatar, Aliens and Titanic. I'm yet to find a movie of his that I don't like.

6. "Don't believe his lies" - Memento

A film you were told that was bad but you loved?

Trainspotting. I wouldn't necessarily say people didn't like it, but a lot of people that I spoke to, weren't a huge fan of this movie. It's about drugs. I'm extremely anti drug. There is however something very special about this movie. The cinematography is fantastic, the acting is truly fantastic, and the soundtrack is amazing and memorable. It's not just about drugs. It's a powerful movie.

7. "It's only forever, not long at all" - Labyrinth

If you could only watch one movie for the rest of your life what would it be?

One movie? God that's tough. The Addams Family. I've seen that movie so many times it's actually ridiculous. Everytime it's on TV, I have it on Blu-Ray, it's amazing. I could easily watch this movie over and over for the rest of my life if I had to.

8. "Were you rushing or were you dragging?" - Whiplash

A long film you thought was perfectly paced?

The Revenant, an extremely powerful film, everything about this movie is amazing, the acting, the cinematography, the pace was just perfect, not for one minute are you left bored for a movie that is almost 3hrs long it's extremely impressive. I'd recommend it to everyone. If you haven't seen it, you need to.

9. "As you wish" - The Princess Bride

Your film dream team? (Director, Writer, Genre, Actors, Music)

Director James Wan, Writer Leigh Whannell, Thriller, Leonardo Dicaprio, Vera Farmiga and Keanu Reeves, Composer Hans Zimmer.

25 questions tag: About me

What is your middle name? Marie

What was your favorite subject at school? I loved Drama and Maths.

What is your favorite drink? Caffeine free Coca Cola

What is your favorite song at the moment? Coldplay - Midnight

What is your favorite food? Roast Chicken, Red Velvet Cake, Kinder Bueno Choco Bons and Cheese and Onion crisps.

What was the last thing you bought? Foreign sweets to try.

Favorite book of all time? The Beach by Alex Garland

Favorite colour? Mint Green

Do you have any pets? We have a dog, Toby.

Favorite Perfume? Chanel Chance

Favorite Holiday? Christmas.

Are you married? I'm engaged.

Have you been out of the country? If so how many times? Five times.

Do you speak any other languages? Nope.

How many siblings do you have? Two.

Favorite restaurant? Our local Italian. It's amazing.

When was the last time you cried?  Couple of months back.

Favorite blog? Milk Bubble Tea

Favorite Movie? Hacksaw Ridge, The Beach, Blue Crush, The Parent Trap and La La Land

Favourite TV show? X-Files, Arrow, The Flash, The Addams Family and The Munsters.

PC or Mac? Mac

What phone do you have? You know...a standard phone?

How tall are you? 5ft

Can you cook? Yes, my fiance and myself make a mean Spaghetti Carbonara

Psycho 3

Cast: Anthony Perkins, Diana Scarwid, Jeff Fahey and Roberta Maxwell

Director: Anthony Perkins

Release Date: 1986

Running Time: 1hr 33 minutes

Genre: Horror

Rating: R

Format: DVD

Synopsis:

Norman Bates is back again, this time he falls in love with a nun, which makes his "mother" jealous.

You know what they say? Three's a crowd. The third installment to Alfred Hitchcock's "Psycho" was definitely one too many. Anthony Perkins was amazing in the original movie but I don't think he had to go as far as direct his own movie? I'm not entirely sure why Perkins thought he had to go to great lengths to make the third installment such an adult film? Is it supposed to be about sex?  I do however appreciate how writer Charles Edward Pogue went into more detail about Norman's personality, we get quite an in-depth look at Norman psychologically. It's just a shame the rest of the storyline isn't quite up to the same standards. Perkins's performance like always really isn't too bad, as for everyone else? Well...Diana Scarwid plays Maureen a nun who desperately tried to take her own life when Norman found her and rescued her. Scarwid's performance is pretty standard, although there isn't much characterization shown.

Jeff Fahey plays wannabe rockstar Duane who is also staying at the motel, although he doesn't seem to be playing many instruments, instead he loves playing with girls. The storyline just doesn't work, I know each director has their own way portraying a story, but it really isn't up to the standards of Alfred Hitchcock's original masterpiece. It's rather embarrassing actually. The story is far more psychological then anything else. Once again though if your familiar with the original story, it's just far too predictable. The spotlight has been and gone. You know what's going to happen it practically presents itself to you. It's certainly the goriest out of the three though.

This movie is truly appalling. The majority of the film makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. It's almost like Anthony Perkins dumped a load of random people outside of Bates Motel and said, have a party, have some sex, in the process we'll introduce some murders. It's terrible. Norman Bates has fallen in love with a nun, but guess what? His mother is jealous. I honestly don't know what they were thinking when they came up with the idea for this movie? It's as if someone said let's make a movie just for the sake of making one, hey, even better we'll have Norman Bates...direct himself. Oh dear. The lighting is absolutely atrocious, most of the film is shot in the dark, but here's the thing, you can hardly see anything, so there's absolutely no suspense. Visually it's not that good to look at and the soundtrack doesn't work with the storyline at all. Such a shame.

Definitely the worst out of the trilogy, no suspense, no fear, some scenes are a little bit creepy, but that's about it. Remember how I mentioned before that I didn't like horror movies because most are an embarrassing mess? This is one of them. Highly dissapointed. Anthony Perkins will always be remembered as Norman Bates, but not from this movie. An embarrassing mess. What a shame. It's a no from me.

1/5 stars

Psycho 2

Cast: Anthony Perkins, Vera Miles, Meg Tilly, Robert Loggia and Dennis Franz.

Director: Richard Franklin

Release Date: 1983

Running Time: 1hr 48 minutes

Genre: Horror/Mystery

Rating: R

Format: DVD

Synopsis:

After 22 years of psychiatric care, Norman Bates attempts to return to a normal life of solitude but the specters of his crime, begin to haunt himTwenty two years have passed since the first events took place at Bates Motel. Norman Bates attempts to return to a normal life. After Norman's release the motel is once again up and running. It's very clear that he's haunted by his past. Sadly this movie wasn't directed by Alfred Hitchcock but that doesn't mean to say that it's not any good. Anthony Perkins returns once again as Norman Bates, although he's still running the motel he's also working as a kitchen porter in a local diner. The beginning is a little bit repetitive, Franklin has chosen to use elements from the first movie which is alright considering it's a sequel, but it's not exactly original.

Anthony Perkins performance is fantastic, there is more depth to his character in this film, we're also introduced to actress Meg Tilly who plays young waitress Mary Loomis. Although the performances are great, there isn't the same wonderful feeling of suspense that is shown in the original movie. In all honestly I don't think anyone will ever top Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho. It's very interesting to see this movie in colour compared to the original which was deliberately filmed in black and white. More often then not sequels don't normally work on this occasion however I think it has. The storyline is good as is the direction. It often makes you wonder what the original would of looked like if it had been shot in colour. Alfred Hitchcock chose not to as he believed his movie would be too gory. There is definitely more of a psychological element to this movie then the first.

The storyline is great but the pace is a little bit slow at times, some scenes really drag the movie down, they could easily have been left out, it's what made the first movie so great, Hitchcock chose to focus more on the motel then the outside world, unfortunately that's where Franklin has gone wrong this time, there are too many scenes shot at a police station, there's not enough mystery. Not to mention one character practically spoils the storyline for the original movie by telling another character what previously happened. It works well with the storyline yes, but it also ruins it somewhat too and takes away the magic from the previous film. The best horror movies are the ones that don't give too much away. The audience is sat waiting in anticipation to see what happens next. It's a little bit predictable which is a shame.

The cinematography isn't that great, the lighting isn't that great, the only good thing is the production design. It's nice to see the interior of the motel in colour, overall it's quite a disappointing looking movie. There's absolutely no suspense, It's a shame Hitchcock chose not to make a sequel because chances are it would of been just as good as the first, perhaps the fact that Franklin chose to shoot this movie in colour is what ruins it, of course all movies were shot in colour in 1983, but perhaps there would of been more mystery and suspense if it was shot in black and white?  Overall this is a very disappointing movie, it's nowhere near up to the standards of the first film, Anthony Perkins performance is great but I don't like the relationship that he shares with Mary, its too simple and at times doesn't make sense. It's not thrilling, there's no suspense, the soundtrack is good but it doesn't help to build any suspense. Perhaps I worked out the story a lot quicker then others? After understanding the storyline of the first movie, this one was far too predicable. Disappointing,

2/5 stars

Psycho

Cast: Anthony Perkins, Vera Miles, John Gavin, Janet Leigh, Frank Albertson and Martin Balsam.

Director: Alfred Hitchcock

Release Date: 1960

Running Time: 1hr 48 minutes

Genre: Horror/Thriller

Rating: 15

Format: Blu-Ray

Synopsis:

A Phoenix secretary embezzles $40,000 from her employers client, goes on the run and checks into a remote motel run by a young man under the domination of his mother

Psycho is a movie that everyone should see at least once in their life. Based on the novel of the same name by Robert Block, Alfred Hitchcock delivers us this wonderful masterpiece. I can be a little bit hit and miss when it comes to horror movies. I tend to find the majority of them an embarrassing mess. This movie however pleasantly surprised me upon first viewing. Secretary Marion Crane is on the run with $40,000 when she finds herself at Bates Motel, Norman Bates is an exceptionally complex character, his mother is manipulative and controlling, he hates her, yet at the same time worships the ground that she walks on. Norman Bates doesn't possess the typical behavior of a psychopathic killer that you'd probably find in most horror movies. In fact he appears pretty normal.

Psycho is a mystery as much as it is a horror film. Your lead to believe one thing when really something else is happening all together. Anthony Perkins delivers an outstanding performance as Norman Bates. Janet Leigh too delivers a very good performance as Marion Crane, she too has quite a complex personality, the relationship with her boyfriend isn't going as well as hoped and she spontaneously steals her clients money and goes on the run. It's never quite clear what struck the fear of God into her.  The best thing about this movie is the mystery behind the characters. Norman Bates is frightfully charming. Not unusual when it comes to most serial killers. Anthony Perkins characterization is exquisite.

Upon first viewing Bates Motel may remind you visually of "The Addams Family" mansion, again there's the wonderful mystery behind the Bates house. Does his mother really live there with him? Is it all a figment of his imagination? What are they both hiding? Although based on the novel, the script is very inventive, The dialogue between characters is great, Norman Bates could charm the pants off anyone, including local law enforcement Detective Milton Arbogast. Although "Psycho" is an old movie, it's beautifully shot. Alfred Hitchcock certainly had a way about his movies, the only thing that is a little bit off putting is there are a couple of scenes where they are some lovely close ups of an actor and you can see just the shoulder of the person next to her. The actors don't quite fit into the frame properly. I love that Hitchcock chose to just film the motel and nothing else, it really adds a sense of mystery to the film.

The soundtrack is a little bit eccentric at times, however it's what makes one scene in this movie particularly memorable. The score does work beautifully with scenes, Although it can seem a little bit amusing at times, it works perfectly for some truly suspenseful scenes. All of which you are never expecting to see. There are plenty of surprises in this movie. You'll convince yourself through out the whole movie that you know what's happening, only to be mistaken. Most horror movies these days are very predictable, making for a pretty boring experience for the audience, the best thing about Alfred Hitchcock's "Psycho" is you never see it coming. I can only imagine how good the novel is!

Psycho is a movie not to be missed! A more intellectual take on a horror movie. A masterpiece.

5/5 stars

Insidious: Chapter 3

Cast: Dermot Mulroney, Stefanie Scott, Angus Sampson, Leigh Whannell and Lin Shaye.

Director: Leigh Whannell

Release Date: 2015

Running Time: 1hr 37 minutes

Genre: Horror

Rating: PG-13

Format: 

Synopsis:

The prequel before the haunting story of the Lamberts, chapter three reveals how gifted psychic Elise reluctantly agrees to use her ability to contact the dead in order to help a teenage girl who has been targeted by a dangerous spiritual entity.

The prequel to the original movie. Leigh Whannel's directorial debut. Elise Rainier is a very withdrawn and quiet psychic, due to bad experiences in the past she's stopped her readings, however when Quinn Bremner knocks on her door asking for her help everything changes. The Bremner family is pretty broken after the sudden death of their mother Lily. Quinn confides in Elise in the hope she can contact her mother for her, although she is able to contact the dead, she doesn't contract her mother, instead an evil presence. If you are familiar with the first two movies then you'll certainly be familiar with writer Leigh Whannell who wrote two fantastic storylines for "Insidious" and "Insidious: Chapter two", in all honesty I can't quite tell what went wrong here. It's not a bad movie for someone who hasn't directed a movie before, but even the storyline is nowhere near as good as the first two movies.

Chapter three reminds me too much of "Ouija" by first time director Stiles White. A young girl desperatly tries to contact someone, only for bad things to start happening almost immediately which essentially is what happens in this movie. The only difference being that Quinn doesn't use an Ouija board to contact her mother. Stefanie Scott isn't an actress I am very familiar with, her performance isn't too bad, but it's not exactly oscar winning either. It certainly doesn't compare to the performances in the original movies. There are two many elements in this movie that were completely pointless, Quinn going for an audition at a theatre, that would be fantastic if the movie was more about that, except it isn't. The friendship that she shares with her friends, although they are only seen twice through out the whole movie. A potential love interest that doesn't go anywhere. All pretty pointless really. It's almost like having something for the sake of having it. Although James Wan does make a nice appearance as the theatre director at Quinn's audition. It's just a shame he wasn't behind the camera.

In all honesty I'm quite dissapointed with this film, the first two movies were absolutely haunting, sadly this movie doesn't give off that vibe at all. There are a few moments that are some what scary, but even then it's due to jump scares. The main character isn't scary, there's no backstory, no characterization, there's not even really an explanation as to why she see's this character, all that is explained is that Elise is frightened to help due to an important character that makes an appearance in the other movies, that tries to kill her in this one. Which understandably is where this movie comes in as a prequel. The first two movies were beautifully written, was it poor direction that was the problem here, more so then the storyline? Lin Shaye completely and one hundred percent steals the show in this movie, her performance is just as good in this one as it is in the first two. I love the backstory that was given for her character. The movie itself sadly is quite boring. It takes ages to get going and once it does nothing particularly special happens.

Visually there isn't a lot happening to be honest, it's not a bad looking movie, Whannell has chosen to use some really nice close ups of the actors, but once again nothing special. In all honesty it's a pretty poorly directed movie. James Wan had to pull out due to scheduling conflicts with "Furious 7", sometimes it's best to leave it to the professionals. The production design isn't great, mainly set around Quinn's apartment, it's where the majority of the action takes place, there are however some nice scenes at Elise's house, I love that they've chosen to use the same house and the same elements from the first couple of movies, Elise's reading room, her dice etc. The lighting is good but it doesn't build up any tension or suspense. The jump scares really ruin this movie, it's almost too predictable.

This could have been a really great horror movie, but sadly it wasn't. There wasn't enough focus put into the evil spirit, instead it was just thrown onto the screen for an audience to look at, the whole point of the first two movies was that you truly knew their backstory and you understood why they were after the Lambert family. The characters were complex and frightening. There just isn't anything in this movie to tell the audience that. A couple of wet footprints on the floor, a man who can't breathe, it's a bit disappointing to be honest. Not bad for a directorial debut, but could have been so much better! It's a no from me.

2/5 stars

Insidious: Chapter 2

Cast: Rose Bryne, Patrick Wilson, Ty Simpkins, Lin Shaye, Barbara Hershey, Leigh Whannell and Angus Sampson.

Director: James Wan

Release Date: 2013

Running Time: 1hr 46 minutes

Genre: Horror

Rating: PG-13

Format: Blu-Ray

Synopsis:

The Lamberts believe they have defeated the spirits that have haunted their family, but they soon discover that evil is not beaten so easily.

*May contain possible spoilers*

Chapter two leads on very nicely from the first film. This time however we are introduced to Josh's backstory, he too saw something very haunting when he was a little boy, something that has followed him from the Further into the real world. Although the Lamberts are now living at Lorraine's house, evil has followed them. Chapter two is essentially about the thing that Josh saw when he was a little boy. Patrick Wilson steals the show as Josh Lambert, his character has great significance in this film along with another very important character. If you found the first movie a little bit confusing, don't worry, all will be explained in this one. James Wan is back once again as director, as is screenwritier Leigh Whannel. Although I prefer the first movie, this one is equally as impressive. The characters are absolutely fantastic, we're even introduced to a few new ones. One of which is absolutely terrifying. We sadly don't see as much of the boys as we did in the first movie, the first film was about Dalton, this one is essentially about Josh. Patrick Wilson's performance really is fantastic, he shows fantastic characterization, you can see the subtle change in his character through out the film, Patrick Wilson could easily tell the story all on his own. Parker Crane is a character to look out for in this movie, he's absolutely frightening, his character is very complex, psychopathic and evil.

James Wan has chosen to film chapter two a little bit differently to the first none the less it's equally as impressive as the first. I love that Wan had Leigh come back and write the storyline again, I prefer how the first movie was shot, but I love the storyline to this one much better. It's more graphic and far more frightening. Whannell was very clever when he wrote the first movie, there are moments that don't make sense, however it worked perfectly in the first film, and when explained in this one, the audience find themselves piecing the puzzle together. The movie flows very nicely, it gets straight to the point exceptionally fast, chapter two could of easily have been added into the first film, however it would of made for a pretty long film. Hence chapter two. Wan was able to build up far more suspense and tension in this one then he ever could with the first film. He doesn't necessarily rely on jump scares, but more how each individual scene is shot.

The make up department earn the highest praise for this film, they have done a fantastic job in creating terrifying characters. What's so frightening about this movie isn't what you can't see, but what you can. Wan has gone to great effort to frighten his audience. Most movies rely on making their audience believe one thing is happening when in essence something else is, if Wan wants to show his audience something he will go to great effort to show it. Making for a far more frightening experience. As I've mentioned before I'm not the biggest fan with how Wan chose to shoot this movie, he has however still chosen some pretty unique effects to get his point across, using some scenes from the first film, along with some new ones. Personally Wan could have gone to a bit more effort with the lighting on this film, the lighting on the first movie effected the tone perfectly. It's a shame he didn't choose to use the same effect. Although it's still good it doesn't have the same feel as the first one. Wan also chose to focus on his actors more this time then special effects. It still works very well.

You could really watch this movie first, to understand the elements of the first movie. However there would still be moments in this film that wouldn't make sense. Although there are three movies this one does not lead into the next. Equally as frightening as the first, scarier characters, scarier scenes. Absolutely terrifying. A must have for any fan who loved the first movie.

5/5 stars

Insidious

Cast: Patrick Wilson, Rose Byrne, Ty Simpkins and Lin Shaye.

Director: James Wan

Release Date: 2010

Running Time: 1hr 43 minutes

Genre: Horror

Rating:  15

Synopsis:

A family looks to prevent evil spirit from trapping their child into a realm called The Further.

A horror film is essentially a movie that seeks to provoke a physiological reaction, to induce fear upon us. Unfortunately, horror movies over the years have relied heavily on jump scares as a means to frighten their audience. Director James Wan did something, really quite extraordinary when he made this picture, he managed to somehow merge the paranormal with the real world. Back in 2004, James Wan produced one of the biggest slasher horror movies to date "Saw", a story about the fight for survival, the only way out, is to fight your way out, to escape. What if, our world and another world came together, creating a new dimension? What if, your fight for survival was to find home, to find your body, your inner thoughts? Insidious will take you into a world, that you may not realise has the potential to actually exist.

The Lambert family have just recently moved into their new home when mysterious things begin to happen. Renai (Byrne) and Josh (Wilson) realise something is terribly wrong when their son Dalton won't wake up, doctors believe him to be in a coma, but what if his body is in the real world and his spirit is trapped in the supernatural? Renai and Josh seek the help of psychic Elise Rainier in the hope that she can find him and bring him home. The more their son is without them, trapped in a place called the further, the more a strange turn of events keep happening. Is Elise the only one who can help him, or can his father Josh unlock a memory that might just save him in time?

Starring Patrick Wilson as Elementary school teacher Josh Lambert, Wilson also went on to star in James Wan's "The Conjuring", Josh refuses to believe that anything odd is going on with his son, blocking out his own memories of his childhood as he begins to remember. Realising that his son has inherited his gift of travelling. Wilson delivers a very genuine performance, although not a strong personality you can still sympathise with him, Terrified for his son's well being. Actress Rose Byrne stars as songwriter Renai Lambert, Byrne's performance is excellent you can really see the emotion and fear in her face, she's absolutely terrified. The actors are what really make this film come together, their reactions, their relationships, their genuine fear.

Lin Shaye stars as psychic Elise Rainier, a knowledgeable woman in her field of paranormal activity, she enlists in the help of her two assistants Specks and Tucker. Together, they work as an excellent team, Shay's performance is fantastic, Elise really helps bring the Lambert family back together. Magnificently written by Leigh Whannell, the story is not only original but Whannell has delved into aspects of the paranormal that most filmmakers forget about. The story isn't all about spirits and demons, it goes so much deeper than that to the point it touches on realism, depending on your beliefs. The storyline is very thought provoking and leaves room for lots of surprises.

There aren't many film series that link together as excellently as these do and not necessarily in chronological order either. Wan is exceptionally clever in how he subtly give hints to his audience without them realising, be sure to look out for the subtle hint to James Wan's incredible horror movie "Saw" too. Wan has really relied on his lighting and sound department to build the incredible atmosphere that you seen on screen. The more malevolent the world Dalton is sucked into, the darker the lighting becomes. Wan has relied on the sound department to ask as his jump scares in some cases, although keeping original, the scares are genuine and have great meaning. Most filmmakers rely on jump scares purely to scare their audience for fun. James Wan has been original in his camera work and in his story, one of the best horror films I've seen in a very long time. Excellent.

5/5 stars

Star Wars Episode 3: Revenge of the Sith

Cast: Natalie Portman, Hayden Christensen, Ewan McGregor, Samuel L Jackson, Frank Oz, Anthony Daniels and Christopher Lee.

Director: George Lucas

Release Date: 2005

Running Time: 2hrs 14 minutes

Genre: Action/Sci Fi

Rating: PG-13

Format: DVD

Synopsis:

It's been three years into the Clone wars, the Jedi manage to rescue Palpatine from Count Dooku. Anakin acts as a double agent between the Jedi council and Papatine and is lured into a sinister plan to rule the galaxy.

Revenge of the Sith! The new trilogy comes to an end. This is where Star Wars starts to get really, really good! No? It does for me personally. There is probably some argument in what order you should watch the movies in? Now that "Rogue One" has been released, it all changes. This is where Star Wars starts, this is where it starts to get really good? It's hard to say why people dislike this trilogy over the original's, are there too many special effects? Is that what's ruined it? The fact that the movies from the 70's looked more convincing? I prefer this movie over the previous episodes purely because I love the direction that the characters go in. It becomes clear to audiences that Anakin is turning over to the dark side. Anakin starts to show a very complex personality in "Revenge of the Sith", in the first episode we were introduced to a young boy who had dreams of becoming the best Jedi to ever live. Now he is being lured into a sinister plan to rule the galaxy? His relationship with Padme becomes very complicated, although this might be due to some very surprising news that he receives early on in the movie. Something snaps inside of him, something changes.

Unfortunately I'm still not overly impressed with Christensen's performance, the relationship that he shares with Padme, although it's complicated is still not particularly convincing. Christensen's performance just doesn't support his character of Anakin. The storyline is saying one thing, but his character is doing another. Lucas is a director I am very familiar with, being a huge fan of his hit trilogy "Indiana Jones" it baffles me really as to what went seriously wrong with these movies? Or really, the first two episodes? The pacing and the speed of the film is nicer in comparison to the original two, there's more action and the characters are far more complex, the climax is absolutely fantastic! On first viewing it's not always what you expect. I honestly can't place my finger on what infuriates me so much about Portman's performance, her acting just isn't believable and she has absolutely no chemistry on screen with Christensen. Lucas however really knows how to make a movie look good!

Episode 3 is a stunning looking film, easily the best looking out of the trilogy, the detail in some scenes is exquisite. Its one thing I will never fault about "Star Wars",the visuals are truly stunning, there is so much going on in the background in each and every scene that you have to watch the film several times just to take it all in.  As I have mentioned in the previous two reviews I love how Lucas has chosen to switch between each scene as if turning a page over, it shows the film in chapters really nice and just adds a nice little touch. There is a wonderful close up shot of Anakin, when he's essentially been brainwashed and turns over to the dark side, just from the way in which it's been filmed, you know shit is about to go down, the film really starts to become suspenseful as it builds up to it's climax! The special effects as always are absolutely brilliant, there's nothing worse then watching a film and you can see poorly edited special effects, this is not the case with "Revenge of the Sith" it looks very believable and convincing and adds to the tone of the film fantastically. Everything is in it's place, the effects look gorgeous alongside the wonderful set designs. Everything looks really fantastic. The best films are the ones you get lost in because they are so convincing.

Personally this is the movie I would recommend to those who have not seen the films before to start with, purely because the other two are so awful, however each film does run in order. Full of action, full of suspense and a fantastic climax! Highly entertaining.

4/5 stars

Star Wars Episode 2: Attack of the Clones

Cast: Natalie Portman, Ewan McGregor, Hayden Christensen, Christopher Lee, Samuel L Jackson and Frank Oz.

Director: George Lucas

Release Date: 2002

Running Time: 2hrs 22 minutes

Genre: Action/Sci Fi

Rating: PG

Format: DVD

Synopsis:

Ten years have passed since meeting Anakin, he now shares a forbidden romance with Pademe, while Obi-Wan investigates an assassination attempt on the senator and discovers a secret clone army crafted for the Jedi.

George Lucas is back once again as director and writer, this time with "Attack of the Clones", ten years have passed since we were first introduced to Anakin (Christensen), he now shares a forbidden romance with Padme (Portman) and Obi-wan investigates exactly who is trying to kill her. If you were like myself and didn't enjoy the first movie, chances are you might enjoy this one a little bit more. Director and writer George Lucas may have learnt from the first movie that he needed to add more action to his storyline, because "Attack of the Clones" is full of it. There are however still issues. Hayden Christensen delivers a poor performance as Anakin Skywalker, the relationship that he shares with Padme isn't the least bit interesting or convincing. Where's the chemistry? Aren't they supposed to be secretly in love? Not all the actors in this film deliver a terrible performance though, it's wonderful to finally be introduced to Master Yoda, Frank Oz like always delivers an excellent performance. His character looks fantastic on screen too.

Episode two flows nicely in comparison to Episode one, it's hard to place my finger on what it is exactly that makes the two different, the only possibility being that Lucas has chosen to use more action and due to this the pacing of the film is much nicer and quicker. I really love how the movie has been edited too, the changing of scenes, almost as if turning a page over, it looks really cool on screen and  flows into each scene really nicely. Each scene has been clearly organised, I didn't always feel like I understood what was happening in the first movie, as a member of the audience, I felt like it was much clearer this time what was happening between each character, making for a much more enjoyable experience. The plot is far more interesting. The best thing about "Star Wars" easily the storm troopers, don't ask me why, they just are. It's the mystery behind who's inside. Clones. The costume design is awesome too, they look mysterious and there is almost a feeling of creepiness in the way they look. The storm troopers add to the storyline perfectly.

If there is one thing I can't fault with this movie it's definitely the visuals, "Attack of the Clones" looks absolutely stunning. Director of photography David Tattersall has truly done an incredible job at making this movie look absolutely stunning. Once again, I'm really not too sure what went wrong with the first episode, this one looks incredible in comparison. The production design is amazing, there's so much detail in every single frame, The sets look and feel lived in and look really great on screen. Speaking of set design, there's one scene near the beginning of the movie that reminds me of the set design in "Blade Runner" which ironically also stars Harrison Ford. I shall get to his character soon enough, don't worry! The special effects look amazing, the effects, the set design and the cinematography all really come together in this movie to make it look fantastic, without one, the others just wouldn't work.

I love how Lucas has chosen to shoot this film, there are plenty of close ups of the actors, Yoda being the one that looks the best up close visually. The medium shots in this film even look pretty good. This film for me was when Anakin started to turn bad. It's emphasized more in Episode three of course, but there is something in this film, that you see with his character that changes everything. It's just a shame Hayden Christensen's performance isn't very good. I do appreciate that you see the change in his character in this film though. Nothing good has ever come from wanting to be the most powerful Jedi alive!!! Not my most favourite in the franchise however far more enjoyable then the first film. If like myself you didn't enjoy Episode one, chances are you might enjoy "Attack of the Clones" a little bit more. The storyline is far more interesting and enjoyable and the fact that there is more action really helps too. I don't feel like this one drags as much as the first film did. The introduction to more characters helps too. More going on, more enjoyable, more fun!

4/5 stars

Star Wars: Episode 1 The Phantom Menace

Cast: Liam Neeson, Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Jake Lloyd, Kenny Barker and Frank Oz.

Director: George Lucas

Release Date: 1999

Running Time: 2hrs 16 minutes

Genre: Action/Sci Fi

Rating: PG

Format: DVD

Synopsis:

Two Jedi knights escape a hostile blockade to find allies and come across a young boy may bring balance to the force, but the long dormant Sith resurface to reclaim their old glory.

Star Wars, a franchise so big that even kids to day are still absolutely loving it. Although it seems to go that you either love it or you hate it? Myself being a mixture of the two. If your pretty new to Star Wars, director George Lucas was also responsible for the hit movies "Indiana Jones", the man's got serious talent, however I'm not so sure when it comes to this particular movie. Starring Ewan McGregor and Liam Neeson, it's no surprise really that these films were such a success, the acting however is not what's the problem with this movie. George Lucas was also responsible for writing all of the Star Wars movies, no easy task, but quite the responsibility when it comes to making movies that everyone will hopefully enjoy,

The Phantom Menace is essentially the story of how Anakin Skywalker became the person he is in the later films. Jake Lloyd who you may also recognize from the hit Christmas movie "Jingle all the way" delivers a pretty good performance, I like the level of detail that has gone into explaining his character and essentially why he becomes so powerful, but it's lacking something too. Star Wars, the movie that put Natalie Portman on the Hollywood planet....I'm not going to lie, I can't stand her performance in this movie, I don't particularly think her acting is great, everything is very monotone and deadpan. She's seriously lacking characterization. Personally her performance just ruins it for this movie. George Lucas didn't particularly write the best storyline, I love that he's gone into a lot of detail with Anakin as a child, but personally I think there should of been more a backstory and gone straight into present day of him as an adult. The storyline just drags.

The pacing and the speed of this film is too slow, there are so many moments that just drag, characters sat in a room chatting, not necessarily explaining anything important to the audience either. The dialogue between characters isn't too bad, I love the relationship that Anakin has with Qui Gon Jinn (Neeson), Anakin admires him and it really shows on screen between the two actors, I do however think perhaps Lucas should have gone into more detail about the two of them and Jinn really teaching Anakin on how to become a great Jedi, instead there are some truly boring scenes that just let this movie down.

Visually all of the Star Wars movies look absolutely incredible, the CGI is amazing. It is however not quite as good as the others. The use of colours are beautiful, the costume designs are amazing especially of those worn by Natalie Portman. I love the creativity that went into creating her character and how she looked. It works beautifully alongside the storyline and acting. The movie itself is beautifully shot, Lucas might not have written the best story, but he really knows how to make a movie look good. Production designer Gavin Bocquet has done an incredible job at creating very convincing looking set designs, I'm not too sure if he was in control of designing a light saber, however none the less, everything looks convincing and real and goes into great detail.

The most disappointing thing about "Phantom Menace" is the action, there isn't an awful lot of it, I respect it's a story explaining more about a character, then anything massive particularly happening like a war for example, however  I do think it could be what this movie is lacking, there doesn't seem to be an awful lot going on, the only really good scene in the whole movie is a race that goes on between Anakin and a few other characters. It really lets the film down. The special effects are amazing however there isn't anything that really stands out compared to the other films. It still looks pretty awesome on screen though.

Episode one is easily my most least favourite in the franchise, it just isn't all there for me personally. Perhaps I like that characters have grown and developed in later movies? Personally Lucas could have written a much more action packed storyline. You really do love Star Wars or you hate it. It's a no from me.

2/5 stars

Ouija: Origin of Evil

Cast: Annalise Bosso, Elizabeth Reaser, Lulu Wilson, Henry Thomas and Halle Charlton.

Director: Mike Flanagan

Release Date: 2016

Running Time: 1hr 39 minutes

Genre: Horror

Rating: PG-13

Synopsis:

Set in Los Angeles, 1967, a mother and her two daughters add a new idea to bolster their seance scam business, inviting a very evil presence into their home.

Mike Flanagan is behind the camera this time as he directs the prequel to "Ouija", "Ouija:Origin of Evil" is the backstory of the characters Lina and Doris Zander. Alice Zander runs a scam seance business fooling her customers into believing that she can contact the dead. Alice soon stumbles across an Ouija board when she decides it might be fun to add it to her act, however pretty soon some pretty spooky things start happening. It becomes apparent pretty early on that Alice is widowed and it's had quite the impact on her two girls, her eldest daughter Lina has a hard time telling her mother that she's interested in boys, one boy in particular, Mikey and Doris is bullied constantly at school, by class mates who believe her mother is a witch.

Lulu Wilson steals the show as Doris Zander, her performance is pretty good, there are plenty of spooky scenes involving her character and her sister Lina. Henry Thomas you may recognize as the young boy from Steve Spielberg's hit movie "E.T", Thomas plays a father who works at the girls school and before long starts talking their mother into what she's doing is wrong and dangerous. The acting in the first film really wasn't that great, unfortunately for this movie its not the acting that's the problem, but more the storyline. Flanagan really has no right into fooling his audiences into believing this is a prequel to the original movie. The characters are there but the storyline sadly isn't. Unfortunately the storyline isn't even remotely interesting or believable, making for a pretty boring experience for audiences. To say this is a horror movie is quite an embarrassment.

I'm not particularly impressed how Flanagan has chosen to direct this film, it's almost a backstory within a backstory. There's nothing particularly impressive about how the movie is shot apart from some nice close ups of Doris Zander communicating to an evil spirit and some pretty cool special effects. The film itself however is lit up quite well, although the lighting doesn't always add to the tone of the film. The most disappointing thing, is the fact that the storyline isn't even remotely scary, it's not thrilling, it's not chilling, it's almost like Flanagan chose to take moments from "Inglorious Bastards" and "Insidious" and add it to his script. The production design looks very tacky and poor the only similarities is that it's the same house from the first movie, just like the original storyline explains.

One of the most disappointing horror movies I've seen in a very long time, the acting isn't always on point but for the majority of the film is pretty good, sadly that and the special effects are the only good components of this movie. Too many directors copy one another and assume if they have a possessed character talking like an evil spirit it will add to the suspense of the movie, sadly it doesn't. There's nothing original about this film at all. Very, very disappointing.

2/5 stars

Ouija

Cast: Olivia Cooke, Ana Coto, Daren Kagasoff, Bianca A Santos, Shelley Hennig and Douglas Smith.

Director: Stiles White

Release Date: 2014

Running Time: 1hr 29 minutes

Genre: Horror

Rating: PG-13

Synopsis:

A group of friends must confront their most terrifying fears when they awaken the dark powers of an ancient spirit board.

Stiles White's directorial debut. Ouija is most likely a movie that you'd expect to be pretty awful, be very predictable and down right cheesy? Not quite. Don't go expecting this to be like James Wan's "Insidious" and "The Conjuring" you've got to give White credit considering it's his first movie and he's used to normally being behind the camera, having been production coordinator on hit movies like "Inspector Gadget" and "Lake Placid", at the end of the day this isn't a bad horror movie. Best friends Debbie and Laine are caught messing around with an old Ouija board when they freak each other out and swear to never use it again, however years later Debbie is still messing and communicating with the board when it ultimately leads to her death. On the day of her funeral, her friends decide they must find the board and desperately try to communicate with Debbie in hope of finding out what truly happened to her that night, what could possibly go wrong right?

You may recognize lead actress Olivia Cooke from "Bates Motel" where she stars alongside Freddie Highmore and Vera Farmiga. Cooke's performance in all honestly could have been much better, her acting isn't particularly convincing, her performance in this movie is very similar to her role in "Bates Motel" there's barely any characterization which is a little bit disappointing. Unfortunately most of the actors don't show very good characterization or good acting skills. It seems to be a very common occurrence when it comes to horror movies. It seems to be getting harder and harder for directors to produce a very scary looking horror movie. The storyline itself is pretty good, it's not too predictable, there are however some very surprising characters. The conversations between characters are a little bit cheesy and simple but none the less it works well with the storyline and the acting. In hindsight White really should have used his backstory as the main storyline, it would have made for a more scary and enjoyable experience for the audience.

It's no surprise really that White has had more experience working behind the camera, the best bits of Ouija are easily the special effects and the production design. The special effects themselves look really really good, alongside some pretty cool effects from make up artist Leslie Devlin and head make up designer Anthony Gordon. Despite the movie itself not being one of the best horror movies in recent years, the special effects are far better then some of the effects used in recent movies. The editing at times is a little bit choppy but nothing too noticeable. Considering this was White's first movie it's safe to say he really hasn't done a bad job and has the potential to make some pretty good looking movies in the near future.

Ouija is nowhere near one of the best horror movies ever created, it's a shame because White chose to use two very big producers from hit movies "Insidious" and "Texas Chainsaw" , I like that subtle hints were dropped regarding James Wan's "Insidious" especially with actress Lin Shaye making a brief appearance in the movie. It would be nice to believe that they could all be potentially linked, but they aren't. Overall this is an entertaining movie but I do think the movie was let down a little bit by the lack of storyline and back story. Perfect for those who are easily scared!

4/5 stars

Earth to Echo

Cast: Teo Halm, Astro, Reese Hartwig, Ella Wahlesdet, Algee Smith and Jason Grey-Standford

Director: Dave Green

Release Date: 2014

Running Time: 1hr 31 minutes

Genre: Family/Adventure

Rating: PG

Synopsis:

After receiving some very odd encrypted messages, a group of kids embark on an adventure with an alien who needs their help.

Four friends, Alex, Tuck, Munch and Emma and devastated to hear that a freeway is going to be built right through the middle of their neighborhood. This is the story of their last week together. Like most alien movies it starts with electrical items acting strangely, why one would assume that if aliens came to Earth, everything on Earth would automatically stop working? In their case, there phones start barfing. The most obvious thing about Earth to Echo is that the whole movie is filmed in POV style. It can be extremely offputting for some audiences. In this case it's understandable, Dave Green wants the audience to believe this is essentially Alex, Tuck,Munch and Emma's video log. What's a little bit annoying is the fact that it goes from looking like it's been professionally filmed to making it seem like Green has handed the actors camera's, surely it should be one or the other?

The storyline isn't too bad, but in all honesty it could have been written a lot better. Henry Gayden had all of the right components for a fantastic script but failed miserably. It reminds me a little bit of a cheap family version of a movie filmed very similarly called "Area 51" unfortunately both movies are very similar, which doesn't make this movie very original. The acting isn't fantastic, the actors probably aren't familiar to most audiences, unfortunately it's very common for a movie filmed like this. Sadly as a member of the audience you can't warm to the characters, well maybe Echo, but that's it. It shocks me that Dave Green went from directing this to "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the shadows" perhaps he learnt from this movie on how to correctly direct a movie.

Visually the movie doesn't look too good, you may find yourself feeling a little bit sick or dizzy whilst viewing. Although it's filmed from a POV perspective, the camera still moves incredibly fast, you'd be lucky if you understood what was actually meant to be going on for the vast majority of the film. There's no need to shake a camera around so much. You could be easily fooled into believing a famous youtuber produced this movie or fooled you into thinking it was one of their vlogs. The special effects however are actually pretty good, there's a pretty cool scene involving some musical instruments and a couple of flying objects. It's a shame the acting and the storyline aren't as good. You'll be dissapointed to know that for the majority of the movie you see next to nothing, which makes for a pretty boring experience for the audience.

Overall this is a pretty disappointing film. It's a very cheap looking movie, there is next to no production design, the only really cool looking thing is "Echo" , visually it could have been filmed so much better and cinematographer Maxime Alexandre could have produced a nicer looking movie. Most of it is shot in the dark and at the best of times due to the camera moving about so fast, you can barely even see what's supposed to be happening. It doesn't really add to the mystery of the movie, it just makes it look poor. Absolutely fantastic for children and families, or anyone that is looking for a simple movie for a bit of fun. It's a no from me though. Echo out.

2/5 stars

Deep Blue Sea

Cast: Thomas Jane, Saffron Burrows, Samuel L Jackson, Michael Rappaport and LL Cool J

Director: Renny Harlin

Release Date: 1999

Running Time: 1hr 40 minutes

Genre: Action/Sci Fi

Rating: R

Format: DVD

Synopsis:

Desperately searching for a cure for Alzheimer's, a group of scientists in an isolated facility become food, when intelligent Shark's start to fight back.

A group of scientists in a remote location are desperately trying to find a cure for Alzheimer's disease. Dr Susan McAlester (Saffron Burrows) really thinks she's close to a cure when she invites Avalanche survivor Russell Franklin to the facility to have a look around. He's soon introduced to shark mad Carter Blake (Thomas Jane), Chef Preacher (LL Cool J) and scientists Tom Scoggins ( Michael Rappaport) and Janice Higgins (Jacqueline McKenzie), it becomes apparent that none of the scientists can work out how a shark got out of the facility considering how high the fences are around the facility, however that is the least of their problems. The scientists are hoping to restore the brain cells that are damaged, pumping almost double into the shark to see what will happen. Probably not the wisest of moves. LL Cool J easily has the best role in this movie as Chef Preacher, probably more famously known for his music, his performance in this film really isn't too bad, his characterization is absolutely brilliant, his acting really supports his role. He's a firm believer in God and believes everything happens for a reason.

Thomas Jane steals the show as shark mad Carter Blake, probably the only man at the facility who really knows what the sharks are capable of. Jane's performance is a good one, he shows fantastic characterization and passion for the sharks, his acting is very convincing and realistic, his acting really does support his role, he doesn't have the best relationship with Susan though, there's some serious tension between the two of them from the get go. The characters are very chalk and cheese. Samuel L Jackson's role in the movie is certainly an interesting one, he's very full of himself and believes he's been given another chance at life after surviving an avalanche disaster. The sharks really take a liking to him in this film!!! In all honesty though he's done much better performances, this definitely isn't one of his best roles, however it works for the movie and his acting supports the role very well.

The conversations and the dialogue between actors really isn't too bad, at the end of the day this is a science fiction movie so don't go believing everything you hear. Plenty of what's said between characters is going to sound absolutely ridiculous it is however what really brings this movie together. What in God's creation? Oh no...not his...ours! That line is enough to tell you on it's own that they've made a very bad mistake, they've essentially created the smartest creatures on the planet, except these aren't monkeys, they are man eating sharks.

If your looking for plenty of action, you won't be dissapointed, this movie gets straight to the point pretty fast and certainly doesn't leave it's audiences hanging. One would argue this is probably a very predictable movie, some scenes are very predictable but that doesn't take away the entertainment of the film. As a member of the audience your in for quite the ride with this movie. Nothing is simple. Visually it honestly doesn't look too bad, however the vast majority of the film is CGI. The only big real disappoint is the fact that the sharks don't even look remotely real, however it kinda adds to the charm of the film. Don't go expecting Steven Spielberg's "Jaws" that's for sure. This is far from a masterpiece. Although this a pretty thrilling film, there's plenty of humour wrapped into it too. Look out for a scene where Preacher is trapped inside an oven.

The sets feel lived in and believable. The whole film is set inside the facility. It's certainly not the most amazing look set design, but it works well for the movie. The camera work is very nice, director Renny Harlin has chosen a mixture of close up shots, medium shots and aerial shots, particularly that over the facility. The underwater scenes really don't look too shabby, although it is hard at times to tell what is genuine and what is CGI. Little bit disappointing. Deep Blue Sea reminds me a lot of Barry Levinson's "Sphere" visually the two don't look that different. I really like how the rooms/labs are very tight and confided allowing for a real feeling of claustrophobia. The coloring and lighting really adds to the tone of the film, it helps that the majority of the film is shot underwater/underground, the fact that there's no sunlight really adds to the tone of the film, I love that the audience are never aware when a shark is coming. It's dark and gloomy, with very little light.

The soundtrack works very well with the mood of the movie, the majority of the film has a really good score which works really well the acting and the action scenes. LL Cool J doesn't just make an appearance as an actor but as a rapper too. His song "Deepest bluest" appears during the end credits, it's catchy and adds to the tone of the film perfectly. Overall this really isn't a bad movie, it's not a masterpiece, but it is still very entertaining and full of suspense. Deep Blue Sea is one of those movies that most will probably admit to having on their guilty pleasure lists. I know it's on mine. Go in with an open mind, don't go expecting too much, you'll end up enjoying it a lot more!

4/5 stars