Better Living Through Chemistry review

Written and directed by Geoff Moore and David Posamentier

Starring Sam Rockwell, Olivia Wilde, Michelle Monaghan

Age difference between the romantic leads: 7 years between Rockwell and Wilde (just on the cusp of acceptable) but 15 years between Rockwell and Wilde (absolutely unacceptable).

Sam Rockwell is one of those rare actors that can turn a film around all on his lonesome. Whether starring, featured, or even part of an ensemble, there's something about his energy and charisma that just makes any film he's in slightly better. So any time he's front and centre, I want to see that film. This film is no different.

It is a film that revels in his watchability, giving him the same arc (but through slightly different means) of Lester Burnham in American Beauty, and in doing so providing a real opportunity for a great performance. It's an opportunity he takes. Whether as a meek, trodden-upon nobody, a confident, kinda-dicky rebel, or a hungover and repentant junkie, he's a joy to watch throughout.

In fact, there's not really a bad performance in the whole film. Olivia Wilde is initially a typical trophy wife, but develops well to show hidden depths, Ray Liotta gives a nice twist in his small role, and Michelle Monaghan, someone I knew previously as the Love Interest from Source Code and Mission Impossible, proves herself to be a revelation, demolishing her role as a controlling, determined cyclist who is such a dick you're fine that she gets dumped on for much of the film. Plus it's got Ben Schwartz, who doesn't have a lot to do but does it splendidly. Who doesn't love Ben Schwartz, huh? Send them to me and I'll fight them.

It's well written, with lovely sequences, great performances and keeps everything going logically for the most part (except how easy he finds it to bond with his kid again, and how badly Olivia Wilde's character gets treated). It won't blow you away, but it's a very decent film indeed, and I wholeheartedly recommend you watch it. It's always a shame that you have less to talk about with the films that are good. Spectacular films you can talk about, rubbish films you can talk about. Good films, they're just good. I give it...

4 things out of 5

Before We Go Review

Starring Chris Evans and Alice Eve

Written by Ronald Bass, Jen Smolka, Chris Shafer and Paul Vicknair

Directed by Chris Evans

Age between the romantic leads: 0 years. That's right! They're the same age! Saints be praised!

I like Chris Evans, I like Alive Eve, this film is around an hour and a half long. I was always going to click on this on Netflix at some point.

Now, my relationship with rom-coms is involved. I personally am of the opinion that when it's done right, watching two characters fall for each other on screen is one of the most joyous things it's possible to witness. The difficulty is most rom-coms don't do it well. It's too obvious, or not believable, or has Ashton Kutcher in it. And this film, from the poster and the fact it's really a film that has only 2 characters for the vast majority, seemed like it was absolutely going to head down the too obvious route.

The first 5 minutes did little to assuage my fear. Attractive man meets attractive woman, they connect because of serendipitous happenstance, and they don't really get on too well at first (BUT THERE'S A CHANCE THEY'LL START TO LIKE EACH OTHER BEFORE TOO LONG). But then the film changes, and there are husbands and issues introduced that suggest that this film will be the rarest of beasts: a film about a man and a woman that doesn't result in a love story. It was different, and interesting, and kept everything going relatively logically and entertainingly. Yes, there were points where the dialogue and the situations were a little too contrived (the song, the 'phoning your past self' section) but this is a film that could almost be a play, and in every play I've ever seen there needs to be unrealistic dialogue to move the plot forward when we're with two characters for an extended period of time. And everything was moving in a fun, entertaining, allowably realistic direction.

But then (and I don't think this is too much of a spoiler) the mutual attraction thing raises it's head, and the film suffers massively for it. Whilst this film earns a mutual attraction more than others, the story it sets up shouldn't have it, or at least shouldn't have it stated to explicitly. Hints at an attraction would have done far more for the two leads' stories than what we eventually get. The whole thing hints at a film that is stuck between telling the story it wants to tell, and telling the story Hollywood wants it to tell. The two pairs of writers credited with writing the film seems to confirm this, with the second pair brought on to make it all a little more familiar to audiences who want to see their attractive people kiss, dammit!

The leads are both good in their roles. Alice Eve paints a picture of a full, flawed character, who isn't sure how to solve the situation she finds herself in. The decision she ultimately makes is one that not everyone will agree with, which makes it all the stronger. And I've yet to see a bad Chris Evans performance. He's charismatic, likeable, and always interesting to watch.

It's also his directorial debut, and he performs the job acceptably. I'm not sure what choices he could have made with the script, but ultimately this isn't a film that you will come away from citing the direction as a big plus point. Not great, not bad, just ok. The only decision he seems to have made is to tell the cinematographer that he loves bokeh (the circles light turns into when it's not being focused on). The majority of the film looks like Evans and Eve conversing in front of a light up Twister board, but is cute nonetheless.

Overall, the film is in two parts. I'd give 4 things to the majority, and the film it could have been, and 2 things to what the ending makes it. So splitting the difference I give this film:

3 things out of 5

Preview Review: Nine Lives

So this is... a thing. It's not often that a trailer really floors you. Much of the time it happens for a good reason, like the music's amazing, or there's a really good joke, or Batman slowly stands up RIGHT IN FRONT OF SUPERMAN. But sometimes a trailer floors you for another reason, and that reason is that Kevin Spacey has signed on to be the voice of an animated cat in what looks to be an incredibly by the numbers family comedy. 3 things:

1. Kevin Spacey must be really hard up for money. I mean this is Kevin Spacey. He's a proper actor. Oscar winner, amazing in supporting roles (Glengarry Glen Ross, LA Confidential, Seven) as much as lead ones (American Beauty, Usual Suspects, House Of Cards), and even a damn fine voice actor (Moon, A Bug's Life). He doesn't need to do this kind of thing. Except if he does because he's spunked his money away on drugs or whores or charity.

2. There is a 13 year age gap between Jennifer Garner and Kevin Spacey. HOLLYWOOD! PEOPLE ARE SOMETIMES IN RELATIONSHIPS WITH PEOPLE THEIR OWN AGE! A personal gripe, and something that becomes more of a niggle with every passing year of my life, but Christ on a Segway this really annoys me.

3. Walken is so amazing that he doesn't need to be in a good film to be good. That's the joy of Walken. Always watchable.

Verdict: The trailer's actually not that bad. Broad and family friendly, but it doesn't give away too much and sets up the premise and tone well. The weird stuff doesn't actually have anything to do with the content. So overall this has to be:

THANK YOU, PREVIEW!

Quick Wrestlemania 32 thoughts

So last night was it. The biggest wrestling event of the year: Wrestlemania. I'm going to be podcasting about it at length with my long suffering wife (gawd bless her) but I wanted to put out some initial thoughts about the Artist Formerly Known as The Granddaddy of Them All. Spoilers ahead!

IC Title Ladder match:

This was a great way to start the show. High energy, crazy bumps, and a nice fast pace made sure that the crowd were into this the whole way through. In a ladder match, there's always the danger that something will go wrong, some ladder tilting a little too much, someone having to reposition quickly, but nothing stands out as an issue at all. Loved seeing Sami Zayn and KO facing off, as ever, and Sin Cara had both of the biggest spots in the match. Great to see a complete swerve with Zack Ryder winning, putting the seed of doubt in people's minds that the show wouldn't finish as obviously as they'd suspected. As much as I love KO, it makes sense to take the belt off him, as he's a strong enough character to not need the belt, especially going into what will hopefully be a nice long feud with Sami Zayn.

Jericho/Styles:

Having fought each other several times before, I was surprised this didn't have some kind of stipulation on it to differentiate it from what has come before. As it was, whilst the match was good, and built to a nice crescendo of near falls, it felt a little played out, and was a little sloppy in parts. It feels mean to be too harsh on them, because this was still a very serviceable match, but it needed a little bit of something extra to make it a Wrestlemania match. Also, I'm not 100% on the logic of having AJ Styles lose his first Wrestlemania match, but again, not a huge problem for me.

New Day/League of Nations:

I doubt many people were salivating at the prospect of this match. The New Day are good, but are still in the midst of their Face turn, and haven't really adapted their style to be out and out good guys. And the League of Nations is a mess. Classic 'we don't know what else to do with them' booking, making jobbers of some very solid, formerly main-event level wrestlers. They either needed to be pushed as a massive faction of monster heels and kill everyone, or give up. The former isn't happening, so let's hope the latter does. The match was solid, if forgettable, and like the Y2AJ match was too similar to many matches we've seen on TV in recent weeks. The League of Nations won, and then everyone moved on with their lives. Almost immediately in fact, as the WWE legends Stone Cold, HBK and Mick Foley came out to decimate the full time wrestlers WWE wants us to take seriously. It baffles and annoyed me in equal measure how much WWE is willing to sacrifice in the name of nostalgia. I understand people love seeing the old guys, but they didn't need to beat anyone up, and even if they did could they not beat up The Social Outcasts, already comedy characters? No, three men, all of whom are in their 50s, easily dismantled 3 upper mid-card wrestlers, who themselves had just won a match over 3 other wrestlers. How far down the pecking order does that push The New Day? Annoying and without merit.

Street Fight:

Now this was always going to be something of a disappointment. For me, when the words 'Street Fight' are mentioned, my mind immediately races back 16 years to the Royal Rumble match between Triple H and Cactus Jack, an absolute classic. There was blood, barbed wire, thumbtacks and carnage. It was amazing. Now with us being in the PG era, that was never going to be what we got today. Which begs the question why make this a street fight in the first place? Why bother setting up the barbed wire baseball bat and a chainsaw in the prior weeks if we know there's absolutely no way that they'll be used? As it was, this was a fun match, featuring Brock flinging Dean Ambrose around like a stuffed animal, and Dean desperately trying to fight his way back. Whether I think it told the right story or not, a story was definitely told, which means I enjoyed it. It could have gone a little longer, and (whilst I've never been a big one for blood in wrestling) I feel like it definitely would have added an extra level to this match to see one or both of them wearing the ol' crimson mask, I enjoyed this.

Women's Championship match:

Going in, I suspected this might be the match of the night, and I wasn't disappointed. Aside from a couple of botches, all 3 women worked incredibly hard here, had some great spots, and kept the pace right up for the majority. Becky especially looked phenomenal, which was needed as she'd been built up in the last few weeks the weakest. Again, there are slight niggles (I would have preferred a new champion, and definitely a clean victory without Old Man Flair getting involved) but this was magic. Easily the best match of the event, and one of the better triple threat matches I've ever seen.

Hell in a Cell:

This was the biggest headscratcher going into the event, with both competitors being faces with a lot to lose. Who were we supposed to get behind? If Taker wins, The Authority stay in control of RAW and the great change that Shane has been talking about for weeks doesn't come to pass. If Shane wins, The Undertaker doesn't have any more Wrestlemania matches. It was lose/lose, and that made for an awkward crowd response. This is making me sound like a completely depraved blood-lover, which I'm not, but I do feel like a Hell in a Cell without blood damages the impact of the match type. It's supposed to be one of the most foreboding match types there is, it should be a war inside the cage. For them to finish the match just tired means it's not that different from any other match. That aside, it felt like the story they were telling was that Taker was dominant, but because of Shane's indomitable will, he couldn't keep him down for 3, but it was a little blurry, and Shane had too much offense. Ultimately, as everyone knew it would, the match spilled out and Shane jumped off the cage. He's entirely insane, but it looked amazing. And then Taker won. It was all a little anticlimactic, which seems odd to say after someone took a 25 foot bump, but Shane came back with such momentum, to have him lose is a real mystery. I'm confident there'll be more said on RAW, but on the night it was a little strange.

Battle Royal:

This was the piss break match everyone thought it would be, but a few things cropped up:

Entrances. If you're only giving entrances to a few people, make sure the guy who wins is one of them, especially if he's a surprise entrant. See also: Tatanka.

Damian Sandow: The biggest loser in a night full of them. How bad do management have to think of you to get eliminated immediately by a non-wrestler?

Darren Young: This is 2016. Don't ever do a back rake again. Just... no.

The Rock kills time:

I love The Rock. He's one of my favourite all time wrestlers, and I totally understand the WWE wanting to cash in on his ridiculous success. I don't begrudge him being there, I don't even begrudge him wasting 10 minutes setting his name on fire with a huge flamethrower. The event is 5 hours long, there's a lot of time wasting. Also, if I'm honest, him wrestling someone unannounced was worth it just to get him ripping his stripper trousers off to reveal his wresatling gear underneath (is the implication that he is ALWAYS ready for a match?) But why oh why do you need to offer up the Wyatt Family as a sacrifice for him? Aren't there other people? And if they are to face him, at least let them beat him down before Cena makes the save. Give them SOME strength. But no, again they are shrugged off as an afterthought. I love Bray Wyatt, and it does annoy me to see WWE once again proving they have no idea what to do with him. I feel like he needs to leave for a bit, get off TV, give people time to forget him, retool the character, recruit some more people. Just something!

Main event:

Everybody Hates Roman. I do feel bad for him, because the majority of the scorn is nothing to do with him, more just what WWE are doing with him, but people don't hold back in letting him know how they feel. Again, this was a lose/lose situation for the fans. If Roman wins, he's still not proven himself as a reliable main event face presence. If HHH wins, it hurts the company (in the same way they've done twice already in this event) by claiming that an old wrestler can come out of retirement and be a genuine world champion again because no one on the current roster can hold a candle to the old guys. So they were onto a loser from the start, and didn't do themselves any favours by booking the match at such a slow pace at the end of a 5 hour event. I imagine it was done to protect both Roman (who might not be able to work a fast paced match yet) and Hunter (who is, as much as WWE doesn't want us to realise, 46 years old). It was an only-ok match headlining the biggest event of the year featuring a good guy no one likes. It was never going to work. But to their credit, the finish was good (good lord Steph took that spear like a boss).

Overall:

Not great. There were highlights (women's match, Shane's bump, IC title match) but not enough to mark this out as a great card.

As I say though, I'll be podcasting about this in the next few days hopefully, on my brand new wrestling podcast, so stay tuned for some more detailed thoughts!

Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice review

View fullsize

Artist unknown

Directed by Zack Snyder

Written by Chris Terrio and David S Goyer

Starring Henry Cavill, Ben Affleck, Jesse Eisenberg

Age difference between romantic leads: Henry Cavill is 9 years YOUNGER than Amy Adams! What the hell is going on, Hollywood? You're slipping! It's still too much, because I'm taking 7 years as the maximum difference, but I'm going to let it slide because it's the other way around and whilst that doesn't make it ok, it's a nice change.

This film felt like a long time coming. Announced in 2013, seemingly in an attempt to cash in on the multi-hero formula of Marvel's triumphant Avengers film of the previous year, the 3 years in between have felt like an age for many of us. Superman and Batman are 2 of the most iconic characters in fiction; the average non-comic book reader on the street could pick them out of a lineup and tell you something of their respective stories. A film featuring both of them? For the first time ever? This was big stuff.

But immediately, there were reservations. And a large part of it boiled down to that little letter in between their names. V. Versus. Against. Implying conflict. Now, a well-worn trope of any superhero team up is the initial squabble. Hero A meets Hero B. There is a misunderstanding of some kind. The heroes fight briefly, long enough to satisfy fanboy what-iffing, but cut short before any arguments can be officially answered. The heroes then realise they're on the same team, and combine their powers to tackle the real villain of the piece. It happens in the majority of team ups, and it didn't take a genius to surmise that this film would be no different. But that V. That V said that the fight would be the focus of the film, and not a trifling matter that occurred early. That could present problems. Still, the announcement was made with a direct quote from Frank Miller's celebrated book The Dark Knight Returns, which culminated in a fight between Bats and Supes, and would serve as excellent inspiration.

The intervening years brought more concerns. Rumours that Wonder Woman would feature. Rumours that Aquaman would feature. Some kind of Robin, maybe The Flash, The Joker perhaps. The cast list for the film, and my list of worries, got longer and longer. The film would be directed by Zack Snyder, whose Man of Steel film was a joyless affair with a third act fight between Superman and Kryptonian villain General Zod that levelled most of Metropolis. But for every worry, there was seemingly something intriguing to restore faith. The casting of Ben Affleck as an older, world-weary Batman was something we hadn't seen before on the big screen. Similarly Jesse Eisenberg as a younger Lex Luthor. Jeremy Irons as Alfred, bringing yet more acting respect to the film. By the time this year rolled around, the film had risen to the very top of my 'Most Anticipated' pile, just to see what kind of film this bubbling stew of ingredients would produce. My expectations were low, as ultimately the director dictates the direction of the film and Zack Snyder had shown 'form' in being able to take incredibly exciting elements (sexy gun-wielding, katana swinging action girls, zombie Nazis, giant samurai, dragons, robots, Oscar Isaac) and crafted something truly putrid out of them (Sucker Punch).

Even with my expectations ankle-low, I was disappointed.

As expected, with the million and 9 things the film has to fit in, it's incredibly bloated and messy. It doesn't have time to give one of it's main characters (prominently featured in promotional material) any kind of a name. It doesn't have time to give its main protagonist any real development or motivation for having a grievance against either hero. It doesn't have time to logically bring the heroes back onto the same page after their tussle, instead giving one of them a complete 180 degree turn in allegiance with a single line. What it does have time for however are dream sequences, flashbacks, and teasers for future films.

As expected, because of that pesky little V, the fight has to occur a decent amount into the film, which means the action preceding it is incredibly drawn out and laboured. Story line wrinkles in the first hour or so seem uncommonly stupid and nonsensical, even for a film of this type. I don't know whether that's true, or I was just more attuned to them because I wasn't having a good time, but there was Fridge Logic all over this. The main two characters are set up well enough, but the personalities they present mean that when the fight actually happens, you're not cheering for either of them. If you have the choice between an introspective whiner and a quick-to-judge fascist, who do you pick? I found myself hoping Wonder Woman would come along and tell them both to pack it in and stop being such idiots.

No film is all bad, and I do give this film credit for rumbling on at a good pace and not allowing you to get bored at all. Ben Affleck is good in his role (even if his role doesn't seem a lot like Batman to me), Gal Gadot performs well in her limited screen time and Jeremy Irons and Lawrence Fishburne provide some much needed levity when all around them is po faced and sullen. The costumes are spot on, the score is excellent (especially the Superman theme, reprised from Man of Steel) and there are some incredible images, as only Zack Snyder can produce.

It's just a shame that the rest of Zack Snyder's hallmarks (desaturated colours, excessive slow mo, a lack of concern for character and story) are present and accounted for as well. At the end of the film, Luthor is disregarded entirely for (as spoiled in the trailers) Doomsday: a giant, mindless engine of destruction, placed into the story simply to create some gigantic, difficult-to-follow action that, like Man of Steel, definitely indulges anyone's Destruction Porn fix. I feel like that sums up the film as a whole. Spectacular, visually dynamic, but without any thought or character.

But ultimately, it doesn't matter what I think. The movie has already made all the money, and will be making a lot more before all's said and done. It's a mindless spectacular, with big action and crazy superpowers. It's the Transformers of superhero films. Maybe I'm too influenced by the baggage I brought into the film, maybe I am a Marvel fanboy after all. But the fact is I didn't enjoy my time in the cinema with this playing in front of me, which is why I can only give the film...

2 things out of 5