About time I got this finished - apologies for the delay but I'm here now so here goes:

Centurion
I'm including this one as I've just recently seen the new trailer and it looks pretty good.  Another movie about the real-life disappearance of the 9th Legion in the Scottish Highlands.

The Losers
Another comic book adaptation but not a superhero in sight.  Instead this could be a "grittier A-Team" as Dark Horizons put it.  Trailer looks at least promising and Peter Berg has a couple of solid movies behind him

Paul
Simon Pegg and Nick Frost - enough said.  Admittedly without Edgar Wright, but still count me in for this tale of UFO buffs finding an actual escaped alien just outside Area 51.  No release dates or trailer yet.

Predators
Sequel from Robert Rodriguez, who has a lot of credibility riding on this one.  Please let it be good!

Scott Pilgrim vs The World
What Edgar Wright did while Pegg and Frost were making "Paul".  This is likely to be the major geel hit of the summer, and as I know nothing of the plot or the original comic book I'll leave it there.  Trailer imminent.

Shutter Island
Scorcese does psychological horror.  Saw the trailer for this in front of "The Wolfman" this weekend and liked the look of it - an on-form Decaprio and an adaptation from the writer of "Mystic River" and "Gone Baby Gone" make this a must see I think. Hoping for good brooding fear rather than constant jump-shocks (yes "...Wolfman", I'm looking at you...)

Toy Story 3
Pixar.  Enough said.  Check out the trailer

Tron:Legacy
The original is legendary for properly introducing the world to computer generated effects.  The teaser from ComicCon shows the updated light-cycles.  This will be something to see in 3D Imax no doubt.

So that's that.  I highly recommend you check out the full list on Dark Horizons, as I've only scratched the surface here with a few that appealed to me.  The original list is very detailed and a terrific bit of work.

I considered writing a short piece looking back at 2009, but eventually decided against it as it was a pretty lousy year for me all in all.  On the work front, a major crisis in February didn't help, I lost some long-term friends through that, but did make some new ones so I guess that balances out.  It was an odd year that I'd rather put behind me.

There were some great movies last year though - most notably "Zombieland", "Let the right one in" (definitely my film of the year), "The Hurt Locker", "Watchmen" (the 4-hour full version anyway), "Benjamin Button", "Up", "Star Trek", "District 9", "Terminator Salvation" (not a good Terminator film, but a good generic action movie), "Moon", "Sherlock Holmes", and of course "Twilight" (heh, just kidding folks!!!).  There were some others I saw which I thought were ok, a couple of outright disappointments, and some which I missed which I will definitely be getting on disc (Coen Bros "A Serious Man" being top of that list).

All in all a pretty good year for movies, even most of the big "blockbusters" were actually worth the time and money of going to the cinema.  3D is seemingly back in a big way, only time will tell if it's going to stay a gimmick used to cover up lazy plotting and lack of characterisation, or if it will actually be used inventively to enhance a great film instead of just shoving things in your face because it can.

So, 2010.  "Dark Horizons" movie site has been running a multi-part guide to the upcoming movie goodness for the next year, so I thought I'd post a few things that have caught my eye:

Number one on my can't-wait-for list is "Kick Ass" - just wait until the Daily Mail get a load of Hit Girl, a foul-mouthed 12 year old chopping bad-guys legs off.  Here's the second trailer, but I seriously recommend checking out the Red Band trailer:

"Kick Ass" - UK April 2010(?)


The re-imagining of the A-Team just looks like fun...
"The A-Team" - UK July 2010


One of my earliest cinema memories is Clash of the Titans, and I'm a bit protective of it.  However, the director Louis Leterrier didn't make a bad job of "The Incredible Hulk" (which I liked very much until the two very badly done CGI monsters started smashing the city up at the end) so here's hoping.
Clash of the Titans - UK March 2010


"The Eagle of the Ninth" - in 140AD an entire Roman legion disappeared in the highlands of Scotland.  I remember reading about this when I was at school so it has my attention - plus it has Kevin MacDonald directing, who made the excellent "Last King of Scotland" and "State of Play".  No trailer or UK date yet.

The Expendables - as Dark Horizons says "Stallone's $80 million tribute to 80's action cinema is a much-anticipated love letter to a time when men were men, computer effects were non-existent, and hard R-rated violence and politically incorrect humour was the norm.".  Might just have to switch my brain off for this one:


Inception is Chris Nolan's follow-up to "The Dark Knight".  He seems to be keeping his cards close to his chest with the odd but striking imagery in the trailers.  Definitely one to see on as big a screen as possible:
"Inception" - UK July 2010


The first Iron Man movie was a hoot-and-a-half, this looks to follow on nicely.  Anything with RDJ in it is high on my list anyway:


Dark Horizons sums up "The Killer Inside Me" nicely - "Everyone figures Lou Ford, a West Texas sheriff, to be a normal kind of guy. They don't see the ruthless, sociopathic murderer underneath and as victims pile up, suspicions begin to emerge.".  Extended trailer below really piques my interest.


That's enough for now - part two to follow.

I should prefix this by saying there are a few minor spoilers if you haven't seen the movie, but nothing that will completely come as a surprise or ruin a first viewing.

I held off seeing Avatar until almost a month after it's release for a few reasons.  Main one was I've become much more hype averse over the past 5 years or so, seemingly my brain has caught up to the notion that it's usually in the media's interest to go on and on and on about something even (or sometimes especially) when it's below par.  Secondly, after my original thoughts when the trailer came out I was waiting to see if it did actually fall on it's arse.

It didn't.  Guess that told me, eh?

I'm very, very glad I saw it in IMax 3D.  This is really the way the film is supposed to be seen, and I really cannot knock the design or execution of the effects at all.  It is genuinely mind-blowing at times.  I did have a problem with the 3D at the very start and in the initial sequences in the base, every object seemed to be demanding attention from my eyes and it was quite tricky to follow things at first.  This did change a lot in the forest, and the effects really come to life (excuse the pun) there.  The plant life is astonishing both in design and look, and the 3D really works perfectly.  Best examples are the anenome-like creatures floating around, and the ash falling in the aftermath of the first major battle.  Beautiful.

We are so close now to having digital actors it's untrue - many, many times during the film it seemed that Zoe Saldana's Neytiri was just her wearing prosthetics and makeup, it looked that good.  They've fixed the dead-eye problem too.  I did feel that the other Na'vi weren't quite as good but that is to be expected I suppose as even a $500m movie has to constrain somewhere.  Sigourney Weaver's avatar looked spookily like her but this meant that it looked to me like more of a caricature rather than a believable creature.

Being able to achieve all of these remarkable effects is the very reason James Cameron waited 14 years from original idea to finally being able to realise his vision.  It sure as hell can't have taken 14 years to put the story together - in fact I would love to see the original idea notes for the film from way back then as I would be surprised if it wasn't a massively different plot, certainly not the bundle of old ideas he's put together here.  It seems as if in the past decade spent filming in remote areas and underwater JC has developed a healthy respect for the Earth but also a massive loathing of humankind.  It's fair enough to produce a film dealing with environmental issues and taking a swipe at the blood-for-oil mentality, but it is another to try and pass it off as something original by wrapping it up in (admittedly astonishing) special effects.  It felt at times as if the film was just a big 3D shovel with "Humans Bad, Nature Good" written on it, hitting me in the face.

There are enough posts on the web pulling the plot apart and showing that it's just a rehash of "Pocahontas", "Dances with Wolves", "Fern Gully" and so on, so I'm not going to bother with all that.  I will say I found the story very predictable at every stage - not once did I think "wow, really didn't see that coming", everything from Jake being accepted into the tribe, to getting the girl (and how he did it), to what came thundering out of the forest to finally see off the troops at the end of the battle.  The "Noble Savage" thing has been done to death, but in this the Na'vi were just protrayed as SO GOOD it was untrue - even when it became clear to the main Big Warrior Na'vi that this fake half-breed thing was going to take his bird he didn't do anything about it!  No demands of a fight to the death or anything!  Then when all the tribes (which had only been vaguely mentioned once in passing until then) were visited there was not a hint of any bad-blood between them.  What are the chances of that?  Even if you look at untouched tribes on Earth that's not realistic, they're still animals for pete's sake.  Or is it just me being cynical?  The people who feel suicidal that they can't go and actually live on Pandora would probably disagree with me, I'm sure...

Obviously people go to see films for different reasons, some just want a firework show which they go back to see again and again because it's so pretty, but I like to think back a week, month, year later and think "That film was just great, the character of xxxx was so great", and remembering dialogue or set-pieces.  I've thought almost nothing about Avatar at all over the past week except for today when getting ready to write this.  It's mostly gone from my mind already, which is a real shame for something that is actually an important moment in cinema.

Still, I didn't actually pay for the ticket, and I can't complain about losing 3 hours of my life or anything.  I think people should go and see it, but only in the way it was intended.  I doubt I'll see it again, and definitely won't be getting the Blu-Ray.  That just won't work until we have 3D TV - I'm kind of reminded of the Simpsons episode where Homer quits drinking and tries to watch a baseball game while sober, "I never realised how boring this game is...".

Anyway, I'd like to see the following things happen next:

1 - It should clean up the tech awards at the Oscars, but definitely NOT get anywhere near the Best Film award.
2 - JC makes "Battle Angel Alita" next before (or instead of) 2 more Avatar sequels as he has threatened.
3 - Give David Fincher the money and this technology for him to go and take another run at "Rendezvous with Rama".  That story actually deserves the treatment
4 - Keep Michael Bay and Roland Emerich the hell away from this tech, on pain of death.  At least Cameron knows how to direct an action scene.

8/10 in IMax 3D.  5/10 if I'd seen it in 2D or on DVD.

Ok, own up.  Who has kidnapped Guy Richie and replaced him with someone who can make appealing movies?  Seriously, I only decided to go see this because of Robert Downey Jr (who along with Ed Norton is my favourite actor working today), but I have to hold my hands up and say that I loved it.  Not something I've been able to say about a Guy Richie film since "Lock, Stock...".  Getting rid of that sinewy hag (Madonna to you and me) has clearly done the man good and the creative block has been lifted.

RDJ and Jude Law are both on top form - and it's really not often I have good things to say about Jude Law, believe me.  RDJ is clearly loving every minute of this re-imagined character and makes it completely his own.  This is not Holmes in the classic Basil Rathbone / Jeremy Brett tradition.

Sherlock Holmes is a lot more fun than it has any right to be.  They seem to have taken inspiration from a couple of places.  Firstly and most obviously, Holmes has basically become Batman.  He's off-the-chart smart but he also fist-fights, is stealthy, and survives explosions that would have killed normal people.  Sounds tacky but hey this is fantasy and it works well.  Having done a bit of digging however, it seems that in the original books and stories, Holmes was an accomplished fist-fighter and martial artist, so clearly this interpretation has gone back to the basics but then taken a different path from earlier adaptations.

The second inspiration seems to me to be from "House", the medical drama starring Hugh Laurie.  Now, given that "House" is directly inspired by Sherlock Holmes, things have come full circle.  It's most obvious in the Holmes / Watson relationship, which mirrors quite closely the House / Wilson relationship in the TV show.  If you're familiar with the show you'll see what I mean when you watch the film. 

The plot, about a practitioner of Black Magic, walks a thin line - at times it could go either way but for me it never slipped over into ridiculous.  Instead it reminded me of some of the classic Hammer Horror movies, like "The Devil Rides Out", as did the main villain (an excellent Mark Strong who I had never heard of until now).  It's intriguing, and you don't have the ending telegraphed to you, which makes a change.

Special effects - top notch.  There is a sequence with a boat which was especially spectacular, and the look of London is astonishing.  The whole film looks lush.  Even Mr Richie's trademark slow-fast-slow editing doesn't detract - in fact this works really well when you're being shown Holmes train of thought through flashback or flashforward.

So there you are, go see it.  This is definitely on my must-buy list for the New Year, hope they can get the BluRay out before Summer - but I may well go see it again at the cinema before that, that's how much I liked it.

Trailer below:

As a bit of a geek, I've been quite looking forward to the two-part Doctor Who adventure being broadcast over Christmas and New Year.  I don't watch a huge amount of TV, but there are some things I will take the time out to sit down and watch.  Ideally I'd like to be able to watch this with no preconceptions but I've been prevented from doing so by an almost pathological insistence by the media and the internet to tell me almost every detail of what is going to happen.

I've noticed this getting worse over the past few years. One of the worst offenders in my realm of interest has actually been Doctor Who - Russell T Davies seems completely unable to contain his excitement about what he has just written, and how clever he is, and how every Who fan is going to be excited that just about everyone to ever set foot on a Doctor Who set would probably get screentime at one point or another.  The BBC cannot stop releasing teaser trailers, taking full-page ads in Radio Times, spilling info to the red-top press, etc.

By June (at the latest!) you usually know who the Big Bad in the Christmas Special is going to be.  This year we knew that the Master was coming back, and so were the TimeLords (no, no, not the KLF spinoff).  Previous years it was the Daleks, the Cybermen, the Cybermen (again) plus the Daleks (again), Davros (guess who he brought with him?).  Does any of this actually make you want to watch and heighten the experience when you do?

I'm not sure it does.  Having almost all the information about a show presented to you well in advance doesn't make you sit and think "I can't wait, I wonder what will happen".  No, what it does is make you mentally fill in the gaps, then almost always be less than impressed when the missing pieces are different from your imaginings, or even worse, don't make sense.  This is fine when you only have one or two pieces of information about the show or movie because you cannot formulate the entire story, but when you have 80% of the story, plus speculation from the internet, plus interviews of the actors and writers and you only have bits left to fill in the capacity for being disappointed is increased immensely.

I had the inverse experience a few weeks ago while watching the latest season of Dexter.  In case you're not familiar, Dexter is an American TV show about a blood-spatter analyst working for the Miami Metro police department, who just happens to be a serial killer on the side.  He only kills other killers who escape the justice system, so that's alright then.  It's a terrific show and I recommend it very highly.  From previous seasons of the show you know that Dexter will usually be pursuing a killer or other bad guy throughout the series.  Of this I knew in advance only that John Lithgow (from Third Rock from the Sun) was signed up to be the Big Bad, Dexter's nemesis for this season.  Nothing else.  No other tidbits.  I watched it week-to-week, and it was one of the most tense things I've ever seen.  A couple of episodes literally left me staring open-mouthed at the screen as it faded to black.  Astonishing stuff.

The one single time when this was broken was when I accidentally caught a trailer for the next episode.  This was edited to include what turned out to be the MASSIVE cliffhanger at the end of the next episode!!!  I mean, what the hell is the point?  I really wish I'd not seen it as the effect it had was for me to sit watching that next episode waiting for it to hit all the points in that trailer.  I told friends who were also watching Dexter to make sure they avoided it, as it really took the edge off.  Admittedly, it does give you a frisson of excitement at the point you're watching it, but that is only diluting the effect that the show itself will have.  Surely something good is worth waiting for?

I also believe that with the right kind of personality (ie, mine), spoilers heighten your cynicism.  Recent example, Avatar.  I've still not seen it.  I'm not that bothered precisely because of the trailers, spoilers and hype.  I've heard from people who's opinion I trust on films that it is actually pretty good, but I know I'm still going to go in there arms folded thinking "right, impress me then Jim!".  It's kind of depressing.  All because I know (or think I know) too much about it.

As usual I blame the internet.  Forums, blogs, Twitter, YouTube, Facebook - too much instant in-your-face information which reveals far too much even at the most cursory glance.  It's back to the Information Overload thing I wrote about a while back, which is both a blessing and a curse.  It's all about having things right now, not having to wait, and the short attention span effect that has, such that we have to keep being shown more and more to make us actually pay attention to the final product.

I have some more to say about this but that will have to wait until another day, in a post I'm working on about procrastination - oh wait, sorry, [SPOILER].