Fast Five

(M) ★★★½

Director: Justin Lin.

Cast: Vin Diesel, Paul Walker, Jordana Brewster, Dwayne Johnson, Tyrese Gibson, Chris "Ludacris" Bridges, Sung Kang, Gal Gadot, Joaquim de Almeida.

The argument about who used the last of the baby oil spilled out into the street.

THERE'S a formula to the Fast & Furious series: hot cars, hot women and... well... that's about it.

The first film succeeded because it felt fresh with its cops-versus-street-racers set-up, but interest waned until Diesel returned to re-fuel the tank for the fourth installment.

Now we have F&F5, but before you yawn, hear this: it may well be the best one of the series so far.

It picks up where F&F4 left off, with ex-cop Brian O'Conner (Walker) and his buddies freeing Dominic Toretto (Diesel) from a prison bus and going on the lam to Rio de Janiero.

Unable to resist the temptation, Brian, Dom and Dom's sister Mia take a job stealing cars from a train, which lands them in the crosshairs of Brazilian crimelord Reyes (Joaquim de Almeida) as well as some American agents (led by Dwayne "No Longer The Rock" Johnson).

Where F&F5 gets interesting is when it effectively becomes an Oceans film, embracing the heist genre to excellent effect. By bringing together a who's who of the previous four films, facing them off against two sets of antagonists, and throwing in a bank job unlike any you've ever seen before, the film-makers have found a way to re-inflate the series' tyres while giving it a new paint job at the same time.

In taking a new tack (which was starting to happen in the previous film), the F&F team have also broadened the appeal of the series. No longer just an extended piece of car porn for rev-heads, the movies are becoming broader action capers that finally put the characters and their situation ahead of the shiny automobiles.

Don't go looking for anything particularly deep beneath the sleek exterior though. A few moments saluting the importance of family - whether you're brought together by blood or a thirst for crime - are the only relief from the action, which is wall-to-wall.

But that's what you go to a film like this for - the foot-to-the-floor adrenaline - and that's why this succeeds. The final heist is a ripper, the opening car-vs-train set-piece is very cool, and the favelas of Rio once again prove to be the perfect setting for some running and gunning.

It's big, loud, dumb, over-the-top and mostly substanceless. But it works, perhaps better than ever before.

Thor

(M) ★★★★

Director: Kenneth Branagh.

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Stellan Skarsgard, Idris Elba, Kat Dennings, Anthony Hopkins.

Thor's mashed potato sculpture left a lot to be desired.

A SIGH of relief. That's what you'll hear from many Marvel movie fans after they see Thor.

Expectations were high, yet there was this niggling fear among some - how will the film-makers reconcile a Norse god/superhero from another planet/plane with the more realistic approach of the Iron Man movies and The Incredible Hulk?

So that sigh is because they found a way. And not just any way. Thor is exciting, entertaining and enjoyable, plus it puts the Marvel movie series back on track after the miss-step of Iron Man 2, and edges us ever closer to the Biggest Comic Book Movie Event ever, The Avengers (due next year).

For those not brushed-up on their Norse mythology or their Marvel comics, Thor (Hemsworth) is the son of Odin (Hopkins) and the brother of Loki (Hiddleston). He wields a big hammer called Mjolnir, loves smashing Frost Giants, and he can fly.

But unfortunately, he's also brash and cocky (you would be too), and after re-sparking a war with the Frost Giants through his own arrogance, Thor is banished from his home in Asgard, stripped of his powers and dumped on Earth.

There he meets a team of scientists (Portman, Skarsgard and Dennings) and takes a lesson in being human as he battles a force that is trying to keep him from returning home.

Thor's secret weapon is its sense of humour, plus the surprise pick of Branagh as director. Best known for his love of Shakespeare and fopping about hilariously in one of the Harry Potter movies, Branagh proves an ideal choice to helm this. There is something definitely Bard-like in Thor's plot machinations, with its familial and regal twists and its themes of humility, jealousy, and proving one's worth.

It's not without its flaws, of course. There are probably too many characters - aside from Thor's immediate family, there are also his warrior off-siders and a gatekeeper, plus the Earth-bound trio of scientists and SHIELD's Agent Coulson (Marvel series regular Clark Gregg) - and few get developed as much as you'd like, particularly Portman's Jane, but the cast does a great job with what they've got, which is doing a lot with a little.

Strangely, some of the special effects are rubbish. In this day and age, with this kind of budget, that shouldn't happen. Also, Branagh goes crazy with the lens flares - an ever-increasing bad habit, seen most prominently in Michael Bay movies and the recent Star Trek. Sure, a couple are okay, but when directors go over the top with them they just become distracting.

But there is a lot to like here, especially Hemsworth. He is excellent as the hammer-wielding god of thunder, making one of Marvel's more far-fetched characters eminently believable, and is ably met by Hiddleston as his brother Loki.

And lens flares aside, you can't help but feel Branagh has done a superb job at grounding its more fantastical moments, and ensuring nothing feels too silly or over-the-top.

Fans rejoice. Not only do you get a great movie here, but there is also a neat cameo and a very revealing post-credits scene that points towards The Avengers. Bring on Captain America in July.

BlogalongaBond: Thunderball

Way back in 2011, my favourite film critic The Incredible Suit figured out there were exactly the same amount of months preceding the release of Skyfall as there were Bond films. And thus BlogalongaBond was born, in which international film critics from around the world (hence the international bit) reviewed one Bond film a month until Skyfall dropped.

Being the top bloke that I am, I convinced my then-girlfriend (now wife) to take part in BlogalongaBond with me, seeing as how she hadn't seen a Bond film before, or couldn't remember having done so.

Her: Well, that was actually a good one. I enjoyed that.

Me: And yet you fell asleep halfway through it last week and we had to try again.

Her: I got tired. Sorry.

Me: That's ok. I'm just glad you actually liked it. Maybe this whole James Bond thing is growing on you.

Her: Maybe - let's not get carried away. But yes, Thunderball is, in my opinion, the first really good one.

Me: Even better than Goldfinger?

Her: Yeah. I mean, that underwater battle at the end is great. I've never seen anything like that before.

The 1965 synchronised swimming finals were a bloodbath.

Me: Indeed. And how cool is Bond in that sequence, just cruising through the fight, stabbing a guy here, cutting off a dude's oxygen there. It's brilliant - we get to see 007 in a whole new scenario.

Her: Plus I think the plot in this one is great. None of this "irradiating the world's gold" nonsense - just some good old-fashioned nuke stealing.

Me: I like the way the plot sort of rolls along. Bond happens into it all by chance really, and then detectivates his way closer and closer to the nuclear missiles.

Her: "Detectivates" isn't a real word.

Me: So what? Neither's "Thunderball".

Her: Whatever.

Me: Did you like the Bond girls?

Her: Yeah. The red-headed assassin chick (Volpe) is great because she seems like the first real equal to Bond, even more so than Pussy Galore. And Domino was a good character. But that Paula chick - she was useless. Why was she even in the film? Her character could have been cut and it wouldn't have made any difference.

"Umm ... what the fuck are you doing, James?"

Me: True. Although I found Felix Leiter mostly useless. Although he often is in the Bond films, except to pop up conveniently and save 007's arse.

Her: Do you think this is a good Bond film?

Me: Absolutely. It's certainly on a par with Goldfinger and I rate that one highly. The formula is set, Connery's on a roll, and they haven't gone totally berserk with trying to up the ante on the previous films.

Her: Except for the rocket pack?

Me: What about it? Those things were real.

Her: Oh come on. That bit was naff.

Me: Whatever.

Her: Well, what did you like about the film... other than the stupid rocket pack?

Me: Thunderball has my favourite line of any Bond film: "Do you mind if my friend just sits this one out? She's just dead.". That's awesome.

Her: What else?

Me: The aforementioned underwater battle is very cool. And the SPECTRE meeting is so iconic, especially with the explosive chairs. Tom Jones does a great job with John Barry's hastily written theme song - that last note is a killer. And Largo is an excellent villain - you can't go past a villain with an eye patch. But the beauty of his role in the film is similar to Goldfinger's. In both films, they get to share a lot of time on screen with Bond, sussing each other out while remaining gentlemanly and polite. It creates great tension and fleshes out the villains a bit more, so they're not just cardboard-cut-out bad guys.

Her: And what didn't you like?

Me: That final bit on the out-of-control boat... that hasn't aged well, with its shoddy rear projection and horribly sped-up footage. But I can't think of much not to like about Thunderball.

Her: Well, I'm glad we watched it.

Me: And I'm glad you stayed awake.

BlogalongaBond will return in You Only Live Twice.

BlogalongaBond: Goldfinger

Way back in 2011, my favourite film critic The Incredible Suit figured out there were exactly the same amount of months preceding the release of Skyfall as there were Bond films. And thus BlogalongaBond was born, in which international film critics from around the world (hence the international bit) reviewed one Bond film a month until Skyfall dropped.

Being the top bloke that I am, I convinced my then-girlfriend (now wife) to take part in BlogalongaBond with me, seeing as how she hadn't seen a Bond film before, or couldn't remember having done so.

Her: I thought you said that was a good one.

Me: Are you kidding? That's a great Bond film. It's quintessential.

Her: I still don't see the appeal. I mean, the movie's okay but I don't get the Bond thing. Bond is a sleaze. He tells a woman that it's time for "man talk" and then spanks her on the arse as she leaves.

Me: Yes, yes, the '60s were terrible, all men are pigs, hooray for feminism, blah blah blah, but don't you think Goldfinger is another step forward for the Bond films?

Her: Sure, it's better than the other two... wait - did you just flippantly dismiss feminism?

Me: I would never do such a thing, honey buns.

Her: Ahem.

Me: Joking. Look, I agree with you totally on the sleaze thing. But why do you think Goldfinger is better than Dr No and From Russia With Love?

Her: Well, it flows much better and the script is sharper, for all its cheesiness.

Me: There are some great lines in there.

Her: Let's not get carried away....

Me: What about "Do you expect me to talk?", "No, Mr Bond I expect you to die!". Gold. No pun intended.

Gold, you say.

Her: Ha. But I must say the fight scenes are rubbish. There's no music over most of them so all you hear is scuffle, scuffle, thwack... and they fight like rubbish.

Me: I'd never noticed the lack of music, but the fights are very of-their-time, before Hollywood started paying attention to how Asian cinema filmed fight sequences. But what about the rest of the film - did you like anything else about it?

Her: Pussy Galore was great. Best acting of a Bond girl so far, and a good character... even if she did still let Bond shag her in a scene bordering on sexual assault.

Me: Yes, well, sexual assault aside, Pussy Galore is definitely a great Bond girl.

Her: And the story's pretty cool. Yeah, it's okay. But what's with all the... umm... what you movie nerds call them... green screens?

Me: Actually this is before green screens - they're using a techinique called rear projection, I believe.

Her: Whatever, movie nerd.

Me: Ahem. Yes, well, there is quite a bit of unnecessary rear-projection work in the Miami hotel scenes, but I guess they must have blown the budget on the Fort Knox set and couldn't afford to fly Connery back for re-shoots.

Not pictured: Connery in Miami.

Her: That's a lame excuse. What did you think of the film?

Me: I think it's a great Bond movie - certainly one of the best. It flows better than the previous ones, it looks better, it's iconic and has so many memorable aspects to it that set a new benchmark for Bond. There's the girl killed by being covered in gold, the laser scene with Bond strapped to the table, the larger than life villain in Goldfinger, and the tricked-out car with the cool gadgets. Oh, and Oddjob.

Her: Hmmm... I still don't understand how Oddjob could throw his hat and decapitate a marble statue and yet when he threw it at that Masterson girl in the forest, it just knocked her out. I wanted to see her get decapitated.

Me: Maybe he had his hat set to stun.

Her: You're a nerd.

Me: You know, some people have suggested that you're in fact fictitious and that I've just been having imaginary conversations with myself for these blogs.

Her: Maybe I am fictitious. How would you know?

Me: Well, if you are fictitious, then I'm a better cook than I realised. And I had no idea masturbation could be so good.

BlogalongaBond will return in Thunderball.

BlogalongaBond: From Russia With Love

Way back in 2011, my favourite film critic The Incredible Suit figured out there were exactly the same amount of months preceding the release of Skyfall as there were Bond films. And thus BlogalongaBond was born, in which international film critics from around the world (hence the international bit) reviewed one Bond film a month until Skyfall dropped.

Being the top bloke that I am, I convinced my then-girlfriend (now wife) to take part in BlogalongaBond with me, seeing as how she hadn't seen a Bond film before, or couldn't remember having done so.

Her: I don't get it.

Me: Huh?

Her: So the Russians are stealing some machine from themselves?

Me: No, SPECTRE is stealing a Lektor decoder from the Russians with some help from James Bond. But he doesn't know it.

Her: When did they say it was a decoder? And what does it decode?

Me: It was at the start in the briefing with M. And it decodes Russian codes.

Her: I don't get it.

(Five-minute discussion about the plot and the Cold War omitted for brevity.)

Her: Ok, I think I get it.

And here's the rest of our post-film discussion (re-written in a mostly fictitious fashion):

Me: So?

Her: You know, I've heard so much about James Bond, he's supposed to be it-and-a-bit and awesome and everything, and everyone knows who James Bond is, but I'm not that impressed.

Me: Really?

Her: Yeah. Look, don't get me wrong, Connery's great - I mean, the man's a stud - but the two movies so far haven't impressed me that much. From Russia With Love has too much shit at the start and not enough shit at the end.

Me: What?

Her: Ahh... there's too much quick dialogue that I didn't follow at the start and then a few too many naff action scenes at the end.

Me: Oh, okay. I don't know about the dialogue at the start - I thought it was good, and the script overall is great and a marked improvement on Dr No - but the end does kind of sag. From where Robert Shaw's Grant gets on the train until the end of his fight with Bond, it's great, tense, action movie stuff. But the helicopter sequence and the boat chase are a bit lame and the end of the film suffers as a result.

Her: Yeah, that's what I meant. That boat chase was so lame. Who decides to pull their boat over next to some highly explosive barrels? Seriously? That was rubbish.

Me: Good point. And why would you save a grenade to drop on James Bond after you've already flown a helicopter perilously close to him on numerous occasions?

Her: True.

Me: Did you like the stuff on the train?

Her: Yeah, that was pretty good.

Me: I love that fight scene on the train between Grant and Bond. Once Grant gets on the train, the movie steps up a notch, and then that fight is incredible - so close and intense, like some kind of Bourne predecessor.

"I said 'try the veal!'."

Her: Agreed. Do you like From Russia With Love better than Dr No?

Me: I think Dr No has more spectacle, but From Russia With Love is a better film overall - the script is sharper, the direction has improved, and the characters are more solid. Kerim Bay is an excellent Bond sidekick, Grant and Colonel Clebb are brilliant villians, and Tatiana Romanova is a much better Bond girl than Honey Ryder.

Her: You're just saying that because you think Romanova's hotter than Ryder....

Me: It's not just because of that but fair point....

Her: You know something that bugs me in the two 007 movies we've seen? It's the women. I'm no bra-burning feminist, but the chicks in the first two Bond films just frustrate me. Why do they act so subserviant and puppy-dog-ish? Did women really act like that in the '60s?

Being a woman in the '60s was no bed of roses.

Me: Well, I know I'm getting on in years, but - believe it or not - I wasn't around in the '60s. However, that element of the Bond films is very dated, whether women really acted like that or not. Does that get in the way of your enjoyment of the films?

Her: That statement presumes I'm enjoying the films in the first place.

Me: Are you?

Her: Well, I haven't said "will you just piss off with the Bond films already?" yet, have I?

Me: No.

Her: Look, they're okay. But I don't see what all the fuss is about. They don't live up to the mystique of "James Bond", this supposedly awesome movie character. The movies so far are like Paris - you spend all your life hearing about Paris and how wonderful it is and then you get there and it is wonderful but it doesn't live up to the expectations that everyone's been crapping on about. James Bond is like Paris.

Me: Nice analogy. The good news is that they get better. While From Russia With Love - and Dr No to some extent - are sometimes regarded as the best Bond films ever due to their simplicity and lack of over-the-top gadgets and the fact they have solid scripts, I think the best is yet to come. The next two - Goldfinger and Thunderball - are among my favourites because they seem more quintessentially "Bond". The first two films do feel a bit like the film-makers were still working on the formula. All the elements are there in the first two movies, but they're yet to coalesce into a complete project yet. Having said that, it's impossible to dismiss Dr No and From Russia With Love because they're groundbreaking films that created and defined some of the cinematic rules for action movies.

Her: You're doing that thing again where you make up a massive spiel to sound like a movie blogger, even though you didn't say any of that stuff in our real-life conversation.

Me: Shh, don't tell anyone.

BlogalongaBond will return in Goldfinger.

BlogalongaBond: Dr No

Way back in 2011, my favourite film critic The Incredible Suit figured out there were exactly the same amount of months preceding the release of Skyfall as there were Bond films. And thus BlogalongaBond was born, in which international film critics from around the world (hence the international bit) reviewed one Bond film a month until Skyfall dropped.

Being the top bloke that I am, I convinced my then-girlfriend (now wife) to take part in BlogalongaBond with me, seeing as how she hadn't seen a Bond film before, or couldn't remember having done so.

Me: So what did you think?

Her: I almost fell asleep.

Me: Really? That bad?

Her: Oh, no - I was just really tired.

Me: Oh.

Her: But it was okay.

Me: What didn't you like about it?

Her: Some of the acting was pretty bad. The photographer, that chick at the start (Sylvia Trench)... and how come the woman who came out of the water (Honey Ryder) was talking without her lips moving properly sometimes?

Me: She was dubbed because her accent was considered too strong.

Her: Why didn't they just use a different girl without an accent?

Me: I think it was because they thought she had the right look.

Her: You're telling me they couldn't find another attractive blonde without an accent?

Apparently this is the only attractive blonde woman alive in 1962.

Me: Good point. That bit where she comes out of the water is pretty sexy though... it's an iconic moment in cinema.

Her: Yeah, I was a bit disappointed by that actually. I thought that was supposed to be a super-sexy scene. I reckon it was sexier when Halle Berry came out of the water in a bikini.

Me: I thought you said you hadn't seen a Bond film.

Her: I haven't. I saw it on an ad or something.

Me: Not all the acting's bad though....

Her: No. That girl that came out of the water was good.

Me: And Connery?

Her: Who?

Me: Sean Connery.

Her: Who?

Me: You know... that Bond guy.

Her: I know. I was just messing with you. Yeah, he's pretty good. Bit of a sleaze though.

Me: Yeah, I guess his attitude towards women is very "of it's time". And Quarrel - the way Bond spoke to him reminded me that this was an era where the Commonwealth still thought of black people as someone to be potentially colonised. Some elements of the film haven't aged very well. Like that car chase in the middle is pretty bad... I mean, I don't mind rear-projection, but that chase is edited poorly, lacks suspense, and the sound of screeching tyres on gravel - that just got on my nerves.

Her: And why did Bond insist on turning the steering wheel so much when the car was supposedly going straight ahead? I hate it when they do that in movies.

Driving the absolute shit out of it.

Me: Me too. Maybe that's how you drive movie cars. So what did you like about the film?

Her: Hmmm... it was entertaining. I dunno - I was pretty tired. But it was good. I think I may have missed part of the plot.

(Five minute discussion about how Felix Leiter fits into it is omitted for brevity.)

Her: Ah, I see. Yes, that makes sense. Sort of. But why did Bond sleep with that girl if he knew she was a double agent?

Me: Yeah, I don't know. He just does that kind of thing.

Her: So, did you like the film?

Me: Definitely. It's flawed and gets a bit flat in the middle, but Connery carries it all beautifully and his head-to-head with Joseph Wiseman as Dr No is great. That line about which side of the glass you're on is gold, too. And there are so many iconic elements to the film. The set design of Dr No's lair is remarkable, the music is truly special, and the plot is surprisingly solid. And there are a couple of scenes that really stand out as being fantastic - the brief conversation he shares with Moneypenny is spot-on for capturing the nuances and weird friction of their relationship, and the belated introduction to Bond is perfect. Although I will add that Quarrel is annoying and his character is too poorly defined to make him anything other than a Jar Jar Binks precursor.

Her: You didn't say those things during our actual conversation - you just made them up when you wrote this to seem smart.

Me: I know.

Her: You sound like a movie blogger.

Me: I know.

BlogalongaBond will return in From Russia With Love.

Predators (2010)

(MA15+) ★★★

Director: Nimród Antal.

Cast: Adrien Brody, Alice Braga, Topher Grace, Laurence Fishburne, Danny Trejo, Oleg Taktarov, Mahershalalhashbaz Ali, Walton Goggins, Louis Ozawa Changchien.

Who brings a sword to a Predator fight?

FORGET Predator 2 and all that Alien Vs Predator rubbish - this is the sequel that the Arnie-starring '80s actioner deserved.

Sure, it's not brilliant and it's not as inventive or original as the first Predator, but it shares that film's explosive spirit and dark sense of fun while adding a new twist or two of its own.

The opening sequence is certainly a heart-starter, beginning with soldier of fortune Royce (surprise action hero Brody) waking up mid-parachute drop.

He's soon in a jungle with seven other equally befuddled tough guys (and one tough gal) wondering where they are, how they got there, and why.

But what's more important is staying alive, because something unseen is hunting them, picking off the eight protagonists one at a time.

Anyone with a passing knowledge of the Predator story will figure out where it's all heading ahead of time, however Robert Rodriguez's script manages to hold interest by unfolding in a few pleasantly unexpected ways.

It's a shame the characters are a bit translucent - they may as well have been slapped with numbers indicating the order they're going to die - although the cast does a spirited job of trying to keep things lively, particularly Grace and Fishburne, with the latter contributing a short but effective cameo.

Brody proves to be a handy action star, adding brains to the brawn, even if he does follow the Crowe & Bale School of Action Movies by enunciating every line in a low-octave whisper-growl.

The Predator effects and action sequences are solid, and the film's Cube-esque premise adds enough intrigue, while the underlying notion that the prey are a sort of predator themselves is interesting.

As a blockbusting actioner, Predators has its moments and is decent enough to appease fans who have been waiting for the dreadlocked otherworldly hunter to finally get a worthy follow-up.