Iron Man 3

(M) ★★★

Director: Shane Black.

Cast: Robert Downey Jr, Gwyneth Paltrow, Guy Pearce, Ben Kingsley, Don Cheadle, Rebecca Hall.

It's better than drinking alone.

THE good news is Iron Man 3 is better than Iron Man 2. The bad news is it still can't live up to the excellence of the first film.

It's a shame really. This could be Robert Downey Jr's last film as Tony Stark (his contract is up) and if he should bow out, it would have been great to see him go out on a high.

Not that Iron Man 3 is a total misfire. It features some of the best moments of the trilogy, but it does feel a bit like a missed opportunity. There is so much good material in here - almost too much - that the story barrels along like a learner driver, hanging on for dear life and only just keeping things under control as it swerves wildly through traffic, jumping a few kerbs along the way.

The set-up involves Stark struggling to deal with the fallout from the alien attack on New York (as seen in The Avengers), which has left him with insomnia and a kind of post-traumatic stress disorder.

While he compulsively tinkers and builds in his Iron Man workshop, a terrorist dubbed The Mandarin (Kingsley) has been unleashing terrifying explosions across the US, including one that severely injures Stark's friend Happy (Jon Favreau). This leads Stark to issue a threat against The Mandarin, jeopardising himself and his girlfriend Pepper Potts (Paltrow).

There's so much to like here. Stark's issues following the events of The Avengers make for an intriguing character development, the use of the Extremis virus (much-loved in the comics) is interesting, and the rogue's gallery of villains such as The Mandarin, scientist Aldrich Killian (Pearce) and a team of Extremis soldiers is enjoyable.

Also thrown into the mix well is Captain Rhodes (Cheadle), whose Iron Man-like persona of War Machine has been rebranded as Iron Patriot, much to Stark's amusement.

The level of comedy that has been a consistent triumph of the series is certainly here, although the film does tend to the wacky end of the humour spectrum a few times.

And with such a talented cast, it almost goes without saying that the performances are uniformly excellent, particularly Downey Jr, Pearce and Kingsley.

As for those "best moments of the trilogy" previously mentioned, a "barrel of monkeys" skydiving sequence is awesome, the final battle has some cool pieces, and there's some Spielberg-like magic in Stark's interaction with a young boy named Harley, although it's wonderfully subverted by director Shane Black and Drew Pearce's script and zippy dialogue.

So where's the problem?

Well, there are plot issues that are difficult to discuss without giving away spoilers, but one example is the government's efforts to find The Mandarin appear to have been non-existent until the story called for them, yet Stark can find him when he needs to. The involvement of certain characters is also questionable, while the finale's wrap-up of everything is way, way too neat to the point of ridiculousness. There are other leaps made and it's hard to tell after one viewing whether the script is being subtle or asking the audience to fill in a few too many gaps.

Iron Man 3 almost suffers from Too Many Villains Syndrome, which is a common affliction with superhero sequels, and the film struggles to keep all its characters and subplots in focus throughout. As mentioned, it seems to be a case of having too much good material.

Having said all that, the more I think about Iron Man 3, the more I like it. The initial feeling walking out of the cinema was one of mild disappointment. There were questions, things that didn't stack up. It probably begs a repeat viewing, in which case I reserve the right to change my star-rating down the track.

But for now, my gut tells me this is a three-star film, and hopefully not the last time we see Downey Jr as ol' Shellhead.

The Croods

(PG) ★★★

Director: Kirk DeMicco, Chris Sanders.

Cast: (voices of) Nicolas Cage, Emma Stone, Ryan Reynolds, Catherine Keener, Clark Duke, Cloris Leachman.

Outside the cave - McDonald's restaurants, as far as the eye can see.

SCHOOL holidays are usually a time when you put away the learnin' books and break out the fun, which makes The Croods the perfect school holiday fare.

That's because despite being set in prehistoric times and focusing on a family of Neanderthals, you won't learn anything about life 100,000 years ago, but you may enjoy yourself.

This is the latest computer-animated feature from Dreamworks Animation, who have been on a winning streak of great family films lately (their last five films are Megamind, Kung Fu Panda 2, Puss In Boots, Madagascar 3, and Rise Of The Guardians).

The Croods is a weird blend of familiar ideas, where a Flintstones-like family goes on an Ice Age 4-type adventure through an Avatar-esque world. They are led by Grug (Cage), whose motto of "never not be afraid" has kept his family alive while secluded in a cave.

But the curiousity of his eldest daughter Eep (Stone), combined with a serious case of continental drift, means The Croods are about to discover there's a great big world outside the dark hole they call home. History gets replaced with fantasy in this version of prehistoric Earth, which is populated by turtlebirds, owl cats, piranhabirds, giant sabre-tooth kittens, mouse-aphants, and crocodogs. 

It's a weird world but it generates a sense of wonder via its lush animation. Equally fantastical is the movie's portrayal of its prehistoric humanoids. One minute, The Croods are presented as being like animals, the next they're discussing their feelings and emotions, and behaving like a thoroughly modern version of mankind.

Less uneven is the film's sense of humour and adventure. It barrels along at a solid pace, stopping appropriately for its emotional notes, but all the while embracing a bone-breaking level of slapstick.

Luckily these characters are seemingly impervious to all injuries and accidents, including falling from great heights and being crushed by giant rocks... repeatedly. This does take some of the sense of danger out of the film, but does provide some good laughs.

Nic Cage's distinctive delivery is slightly distracting, but there is humour to be had from Stone's Eep, love interest Guy (Reynolds) and his cute pet sloth called Belt, and the comic sidekick grandma (Leachman).

It's this knack for laughs and a rollicking good time that helps the film overcome its deficiencies, which also include a distractingly over-the-top score from Alan Silvestri.

Another plus is the strong characters, who cover up for the movie being too ludicrous in places. If only the film had been brave enough to go for the super-powerful, stick-in-the-memory ending that it flirts with instead of the silly way out it took, then we might have had something truly worthy on our hands. Instead, this is just uneven fun. Nothing more, nothing less.

Oz The Great & Powerful

This is a version of a review that aired on ABC Ballarat Breakfast on March 15, 2013.

(PG) ★★★

Director: Sam Raimi.

Cast: James Franco, Mila Kunis, Michelle Williams, Rachel Weisz, Zach Braff, Joey King.

Hobart sure did look pretty this time of year.

A PREQUEL to The Wizard Of Oz? Who would be fool enough to try to emulate such a landmark piece of movie-making?

After all, such cinematic lightning has never struck twice for the many reimaginings of L Frank Baum's beloved story through the years. The dark 1985 sequel Return To Oz, the 1976 Aussie rock'n'roll version Oz, the 1978 African-American take The Wiz, The Muppets' Wizard Of Oz - the best any of these has achieved is a status as a cult favourite, and none of them have come close to reaching the lofty heights the 1939 classic.

This belated predecessor would like to think it's cut from the same cloth as the film that it's prequeling, but really this is more like Tim Burton's recent adaptation of Alice In Wonderland. It collects familiar tics and tricks from its source, tries to mould a solid story to some sketchy background information, and it does it all with an over-abundance of shiny computer-generated imagery.

In the context of what it's up against, what had come before, and what director Sam Raimi and scriptwriters David Lindsay-Abaire and Mitchell Kapner are trying to do, Oz The Great And Powerful is as good as it could be.

It tells the story of how a carnival magician named Oscar Diggs ended up in the magical land of Oz and ended up becoming its Wonderful Wizard.

In spite of the film's propensity to answer questions no one was asking (Why is the wicked witch wicked? Why does she fly on a broom? What's the deal with that wizard guy?), it's a solid-enough look at one man's journey to overcome his own caddishness and become a good man.

Standing between Oscar and the incalculable riches of the Emerald City are three witches (played by Kunis, Williams and Weisz), and the movie's main conceit is figuring out which one is good, which one is wicked, and which one is a homicidal maniac.

The familiarities are innocuous enough and mostly endearing - the black-and-white real world changing into the colour of Oz is done well, there is a selection of anthropomorphic creatures to join Oscar on his journey, there's a reference to a cowardly lion, and the tricks that the wizard would later hide behind are used as plot points.

Wisely, Oz The Great And Powerful is not a musical, and it makes a slightly predictable but still worthwhile joke about the fact.

It certainly looks a million dollars (or $200 million apparently) and most of the CGI is pretty good, even if it is over-the-top and filled with unnecessary detours as opposed to necessary details.

There are some decent family laughs in there and the characters are fleshed out reasonably well. Franco is good and gets strong support from the trio of witches, particularly Kunis and Weisz.

Overall the film is decent-enough. It was never going to be exceptional and it was going to be impossible for it to match the wonder of its 1939 follow-up. The story is too constrained by what comes next when Judy Garland's Dorothy arrives to be surprising or feel fresh, but Oz The Great And Powerful is adequate for a film that no one was asking for. 

Cloud Atlas

(MA15+) ★★

Director: Tom Tykwer & The Wachowskis.

Cast: Tom Hanks, Halle Berry, Jim Broadbent, Hugo Weaving, Jim Sturgess, Doona Bae, Ben Whishaw, Hugh Grant, Susan Sarandon, James D'Arcy.

Rainbow Serpent Festival was really going off this year.

DAVID Mitchell's tour de force novel Cloud Atlas is a sprawling, epoch-spanning marvel that's as entertaining as it is ambitious.

It's also one of those books that was always going to be difficult to turn into a film.

As a movie, Cloud Atlas is as bold as the novel. However, it is predominantly a noble defeat - compressing Mitchell's six segments and endless interwining themes into a streamlined narrative proves beyond the grasp of The Wachowskis (The Matrix trilogy, Speed Racer), Tom Tykwer (Perfume, Run Lola Run) and a willing cast.

The six stories span almost five centuries and in Mitchell's book they run sequentially forward, then back again to the beginning, but in the film they are edited together into a mass of parallel stories that jump back and forth between each other.

In 1849, lawyer Adam Ewing (Sturgess) is battling illness on a trans-Pacific voyage. In England, 87 years later, musician Robert Frobisher (Whishaw) is reading Ewing's journal while helping composer Vyvyan Ayrs (Broadbent) write his symphonies. In San Francisco in 1973, journalist Luisa Rey (Berry) discovers Frobisher's letters to his lover while she investigates corruption at a nuclear power plant.

Luisa's story ends up as a manuscript in the hands of publisher Timothy Cavendish (Broadbent) in present day England, where Cavendish is fleeing unhappy clients only to end up trapped in an old folks' home. His story is eventually made into a movie that transfixes Sonmi-451 (Bae), a clone in Neo Seoul in 2144, who is whisked from her regimented life by a freedom fighter (Sturgess) with the intention of using her as a figurehead and catalyst for social upheaval in the corporatocracy they live in. And finally there is Zachry (Hanks), whose people worship Sonmi in a post-apocalyptic 2321.

As you can likely guess, jumping back and forth between these tales is disconcerting, distracting and disruptive. Despite the best efforts of the directors and their editor, Cloud Atlas struggles to maintain momentum or allow an ongoing connection with the characters.

It does allow the film to play up the links that run through the segments though, which are tied together by ideas about past lives, reincarnation, and an undying spirit of survival and determination that runs through humanity, as well as themes of prejudice, love, regret, redemption, freedom, and oppression.

It's these ideals and concepts that give Cloud Atlas a depth that may come to be appreciated over multiple viewings (if you can handle the 172-minute running time). Moments fly by, narratives are set aside almost randomly, and the individual vernacular and style of each story thread can take some time to adjust to, particularly Zachry's post-apocalyptic tale, which is told in a pidgin English that is a struggle to follow at times. But going back to soak it in again and again could make this film a rich experience that rewards over time - it's likely this is destined for cult status.

Watching it first time through, however, will leave many cold. It's scattershot approach is distancing, despite the best efforts of the cast, who appear in multiple roles though some ingenious make-up work, further highlighting the links between the different time periods, albeit in an occasionally distracting and slightly confusing way.

There's a lot to like about Cloud Atlas and the effort to adapt Mitchell's novel should be applauded. Unfortunately it doesn't quite fit together - it's big ideas and ambitious plotting fly by at the expense of having an engaging story that builds emotion and connects to an audience.

Ultimately, it's a scattershot film that courageously tries to incorporate as much of the novel as possible, only to find it doesn't translate well from the page.

BlogalongaBond

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.

For the sake of posterity, I have collected our BlogalongaBond blogs here. To be honest, they're probably some of the best bits of film criticism on this site, which isn't saying much. But they were fun to write. And who doesn't love making one's significant other watch movies they don't want to watch? No one, that's who.

Click the poster to choose your Bond.

And the post-BlogalongaBond 007 reviews (ie. my wife doesn't watch Bond with me any more):

Spectre

No Time To Die

Rise Of The Guardians

This is a version of a review airing on ABC Ballarat on December 14, 2012.

(PG) ★★★★

Director: Peter Ramsey.

Cast: (voices of) Chris Pine, Alec Baldwin, Jude Law, Hugh Jackman, Isla Fisher.

Quicksilver vowed to never join a superhero group via Craigslist ever again.

THE Avengers isn't the only super-powered ensemble to impress on the big screen this year.

In fact, Rise Of The Guardians is a lot like a "childrenised" version of Marvel's blockbuster team-up — instead of Thor, Iron Man and The Hulk joining forces, we have Santa, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy combining to battle evil.

As with The Avengers, each of the characters is given their time to shine and is nicely developed, while a tidy sense of humour sparkles on top of the darker undercurrents of the story.

The big bad here is Pitch, aka The Bogeyman, deliciously voiced by Law and hell-bent on infesting children with his nightmares in the hopes of becoming properly "believed in".

Standing in Pitch's way is North (aka Santa, voiced by a Russian-accented Baldwin), a boomerang wielding Easter Bunny (Jackman), the silent yet powerful Sandman, the birdlike Tooth Fairy (Fisher), and reckless newcomer Jack Frost (Pine).

It's Frost who is the central figure, with his search for identity and meaning in his life one of the key themes in this surprisingly deep and thoughtful children's adventure.

Duty, selflessness, teamwork, finding your purpose and overcoming your fears are often standard go-to ideals for a kid's flick, but in Rise Of The Guardians they feel fresh thanks to being dealt with intelligently, with the dumbing down kept to a minimum.

While few of its ideas are original — its characters are tweaked classics and even its "power of belief" plot was handled more cleverly and satirically in Terry Pratchett's Discworld novel Small Gods — the combination of its elements is exciting for all ages.

Pitch is a particularly intriguing character, artfully shaded to look like he's stepped out of a black-and-white film noir and developed enough to be more than a caricature.

Law's voicework is excellent, and the broad Russian accent Baldwin brings to North is good fun. Jackman is allowed to let his ockerness run free, which borders on being a bit too "Strine" at time, but it's only Pine's too-mature voice that's really out of place.

The spectacle is excellent, from its single-take chases to its hyper-powered battles. It should go without saying in this golden age of CG films, but Rise Of The Guardians looks amazing. Equally, the sound design is impressive, as is the use of light throughout — kids movies don't usually have this amount of visual flair to them.

It's not perfect — it's ending is too convenient and predictable and doesn't really make sense in the global scale of the movie — but it's thoroughly enjoyable, no matter how old or young you are, and that is the makings of a great family film.

Now, all we can do is sit back and wait for the inevitably disappointing sequels.

BlogalongaBond: Skyfall

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: Congratulations! You've made it the end of BlogalongaBond!

Her: Whoopee.

Me: Thanks for watching every Bond film with me.

Her: Thanks for nothing.

Me: Oh, come now, grumpy. Surely it hasn't been that bad?

Her: To be honest, they all tend to bleed together a bit. There were stand-outs, obviously, and memorable moments... but don't ask me to name the best ones because I can't remember the names. They're all "Tomorrow Is Never Enough" and "You Only Live Another Day" and "Golden Thunderlove". Having said that, Skyfall is a good one to wrap up this painful project because it's probably the best one.

Me: Really?

Her: Sure. And if it's not the best, it's certainly well up there.

Me: What makes you say that?

Her: Well, it's got a great villain, who's actually really freakin' scary. He's not trying to do something stupid like start wars to sell newspapers or bite people with his metal teeth. He's just a psycho who likes to kill people. And he's got a weird face. And mummy issues. It's a perfect recipe for a bad guy.

Bond had let himself go a bit though.

Me: Silva is certainly memorable and disturbing. And Bardem does an outstanding job in walking that fine line of the over-the-top villain, balancing between chewing the scenery and underplaying things too much. What else did you like about Skyfall?

Her: Nah, that's it really?

Me: What? How can you say it's one of the best....

Her: I'm kidding. Jeez, relax.

Me: Sorry.

Her: I liked the new Q. And Judi Dench's M is always great, but especially in this one.

Me: What else?

Her: I dunno. I guess I just liked the fact it wasn't stupid. And that it wasn't seemingly edited by a blind toddler with epilepsy, like Quantum Of Solace.

Me: Yes, well, the less said about Quantum Of Solace the better. Casino Royale was far from stupid - is Skyfall better?

Her: Maybe. This one had a better villain.

Me: You didn't rate Le Chiffre?

Her: Who?

Me: The villain in Casino Royale. He wept blood. And pummelled Bond's nuts.

Her. Meh. He played cards - ooh, scary.

Me: But the nut-pummelling!

Her: Look, Silva's better. Skyfall wins.

Me: Ok.

Her: Are you agreeing?

Me: Not really, I still think Casino Royale is better than Skyfall. But this one is certainly more Bond-ish, which was one of your criticisms of Casino Royale. And I did enjoy that.

Her: So what are the downsides of Skyfall?

Me: I'm a bit torn over that. I liked that it took it's time, but it also felt a little slow in places. And it was nice to see a Bond movie with an actual narrative theme - old versus new - but it felt a bit overused.

Her: You're just being picky.

Me: Maybe. I have to say Skyfall looked stunning though. We've never seen a Bond fight that looks as good as the one staged in silhouette among neon signs, plus the whole last act in Scotland - probably the most unglamourous Bond locale we've seen - looks great.

"Remind me again as to why we're not filming in the Bahamas."

Her: Speaking of the last act, that pretty much blows up your theory about each Bond being a different guy who just assumes the mantle of "James Bond".

Me: Maybe. It could just be a coincidence that they found an orphan called James Bond to become James Bond.

Her: Oh come on!

Me: Whatever. Look, thanks for watching all those movies with me. I know you didn't enjoy them all, but I've enjoyed our little chats.

Her: Yeah, well, it wasn't a total waste of time.

Me: Agreed. So, now that you've seen all the Bond films... will you marry me?

Her: Are you serious?

Me: Yeah. Will you make me the happiest man alive and agree to marry me?

Her: Because I've seen all the Bond films?

Me: Well, no. But now that that's all out of the way, I just thought I'd propose.

Her: Hmmm. Sure.

Me: Really?

Her: Yeah ok.

Me: Cool.

(PS. Ok, so it didn't quite happen like that - there was a ring, a restaurant, and I got down on one knee - but we really did get engaged after seeing Skyfall and wrapping up our BlogalongaBond conversation. It was a few hours after, but you get the point, which is "how can you ask someone to marry you if they haven't seen every 007 movie?".)

That's the end of BlogalongaBond, but you can read my review of Spectre here.