'Non-Stop' directed by Jaume Collet-Serra

'SHE'S BEEN TAKEN!!'

No, wrong review...

Non-Stop, is however another film emerging from the ever developing sub genre of Liam Neeson action thrillers, of which this is a functional and respectable edition.

Neeson plays Bill Marks, an air marshal (essentially an in flight policeman) with an alcohol problem and a difficult personal life. Bill gets on a trans-Atlantic flight bound for London, meeting Jen (Julianne Moore), a businesswoman who is at a similar point in her life and then, rapidly and predictably, bad things start happening.

It turns out that one of the passengers wants a large amount of money to be deposited in his account by the agency that Marks works for. Otherwise, he will kill one person on the plane every twenty minutes until his demands are met. He makes these demands known through a series of malicious text messages.

What follows is a fun, if somewhat predictable run through the various suspects on the flight. Bill Marks investigative techniques essentially involve pointing his gun at people and waiting for them to talk, which is an effective if terrifying technique given that on a plane you are one stray bullet away from disaster.

The suspect is something of a tech genius, so he then makes it seem as though Marks himself is stealing the money and causing the hijack of the plane. What follows is a tense investigation of these allegations with Marks' allies Nancy (a flight attendant played by Michelle Dockery) and the aforementioned Jen.

Unfortunately, not everyone on the flight is on Marks' side and this results in some rather egotistical ranting by unreliable NYPD cop Austin Reilly (Corey Stoll), who believes the rumours spread by the criminal that Marks is behind the hijack.

This is where the film is at its strongest, as the passengers struggle with the panic of being held hostage at 25,000 feet. Marks himself has profoundly little control over the situation, which, as Jen observes, reflects the wider state of his life in general.

These two make an interesting pair and it's refreshing to see a romantic sub plot on screen for two middle aged characters who have already been through a lot in their lives. This is a fairly unusual step in any widely released film.

These well developed characters raise it slightly above the level of Taken, which whilst interesting was ultimately about one man on a revenge mission. Bill Marks is a far more sympathetic character who is acting to protect those around him despite the dreadful state of his own life.

Ultimately, as you can see from the picture that goes with this review, it is a film about Liam Neeson shooting things but there seems to be more of a reason for Liam Neeson shooting things, which makes it an enjoyable, interesting and worthwhile action film.

'300: Rise of an Empire' directed by Noam Murro

Contrived and rather pleased with itself, the 300 franchise has provided us with it's second edition, some eight years after its first instalment.

This time rather than just the SPARTANS!! being involved and the focus being exclusively on the Battle of Thermopylae (or a hilariously inaccurate depiction thereof) this film encompasses the wider narrative of The Persian War and in particular Themistocles' Athenian led defence of his home city.

Not that the 300 series is in any way rooted or bound by historical fact. Some of the critics who have lined up to dismiss these films on this basis forget that these stories are based on a graphic novel and whilst graphic novels have much to say for them, sticking to realistic or accurate depiction of factual events is not a speciality of the genre.

Nonetheless, the film opens with a depiction of the Battle of Marathon, ten years previous to the events of the first film, which was a tremendous Athenian victory that drove off Xerxes' father Darius' invasion. The film would have us believe that Themistocles (played with a hilarious movable accent by Sullivan Stapleton) killed Darius personally and this is what transformed Xerxes into the weird bloke we see sitting on a floating gold throne in the first film.

Anyway, much back story then follows, which gets a little tedious whilst Artemisia, a Persian warrior princess (played with a grim malevolence by Eva Green) becomes the power behind Xerxes' throne. The two of them decide that pure evil is the best way to advance their plans for the conquest of Greece and that actually they are a bit tired of waiting for an opportune moment so they launch a huge invasion force on nasty looking ships.

Queen Gorgo (Lena Headey - Leonidas' wife from the first film) is narrating all of this and even she sounds a bit bored. This section, which encompasses around the first half hour, fails to command much attention from the audience. Indeed, failure to command catches on with the Persians as they continue their high levels of military incompetence from the first film in the opening naval battles.

That is with the exception of Artemisia, who seems to take quite a perverse pleasure in seeing the men under her command die. It turns out that she is purposely losing the war cause she has a bit of a thing for Themistocles. This is a 300 film so I will leave you to guess what happens next between these two...

Then Themistocles makes a lot a speeches (about 93) which all essentially say the same thing - that the Athenians are fighting for freedom and democracy against tyrannical Persia. All of which is at the very least vastly overstated given that ancient democracy only ever enfranchised a couple of hundred men (not women, slaves or freed slaves) in Athens at any one time.

It was therefore very disappointing to note that these speeches transposed modern democratic values onto a a system that, whilst revolutionary for its time, was nowhere near as free or as representative as this film has made out.

Nonetheless, I have criticised others for attacking inaccuracies in the film so back to the review... and by this point, after Themistocles' many, many speeches, we have finally reached the Battle of Salamis - a final naval engagement between the Greek and Persian forces. You do not need to have any knowledge of Ancient History to guess which way that one is going to go.

There is a fun intervention from the Spartans at this point and it is good to have Lena Headey and David Wenham back. This is the strongest of the battle set pieces and it cannot be argued that these sequences are not an interesting watch.

Unfortunately, the script simply does not lend any depth to these scenes. The characters (both major and minor) are wooden, two dimensional war film clichés. Having enjoyed 300 for it's sheer levels of camp, Rise of an Empire takes itself far too seriously to be a truly remarkable watch and it does not seem to be able to decide if it is a genuine attempt at depicting ancient warfare or a blood and guts comic like it's predecessor. Add to this some average direction and it is ultimately impossible to escape the conclusion that the series has become a victim of its own success.

NB: I do not own the rights to the photo used in this review and will remove it at the request of the rights holder.

'Love in the Time of Cholera' by Gabriel Garcia Marquez

This book, set in Columbia at the start of the 20th Century, explores the many and varied forms of love that exist between men and women through the experiences of its protagonists – Florentino Ariza and Fermina Daza.

The story begins during Florentino’s teenage years, with a description of the kind of listless pursuit of love that only teenage boys are capable of. His early attempts to woo Fermina involve a relentless letter writing campaign and the composition of various pieces of music on his violin.

Fermina, whilst initially flattered, does not feel amorously for Florentino and, after humouring him for a while, she rejects his suit, seeing him as an immature hopeless romantic. This rejection devastates Florentino, who instead focusses on his career at a local shipping company. After a time, he moves on and develops something of a reputation locally as a womanizer, despite his feelings for Fermina remaining unchanged.

Meanwhile, Fermina has met her future husband, a practical man by the name of Juvenal Urbino – a doctor by profession who is, by contrast to Florentino, composed, self-possessed and an important figure in the local community.

The rest of the novel goes on to explore the divergent lives of these two characters as they grow older. Fermina’s tale in particular is populated by scores of difficult relatives and cynics who attempt to manipulate her and her husband. Yet, Marquez has created an intriguing woman in Fermina - she is fiercely independent and possessed of a rare conviction about her opinions, usually to the exclusion of the wishes of her husband.

Among the cynics, Fermina’s father, Lorenzo Daza, is a particularly memorable creation – a driven, self-made man whose primary concern is the advancement of his business. His treatment of Florentino in the early chapters of the book is particularly striking and the interplay between the two over Florentino’s pursuit of Fermina is a fascinating confrontation which is one of the strongest sections of the book.

Florentino’s development as a character as he ages is certainly curious. He goes from being a slightly clueless but ultimately sympathetic character as a young man to being something of a user of women, who he seems to view as collectively as distractions from Fermina, who is beyond his reach. He is by no means a consistently moral character and comes across as something of a hypocrite when he offers his true opinions on love to the various women he sleeps with.

Overall, this novel, whilst slow and a little laborious as a read, is an interesting meditation on love and the effects thereof on different characters. Although the dialogue sometimes feels a little off and some of the incidents seem to have been lifted straight out of a soap, it is rich novel by a highly accomplished author.

It will, however, take even the most committed reader at least a week to read so it is worth picking up when there is plenty of spare time available.

N/B: I do not own the rights to the photo used in this blog entry and will remove it at the request of the rights holder.

'Rush' directed by Ron Howard

This film, which explores one of the most famous rivalries in the history of F1, is an interesting character study of two very different men who were much closer in real life than this story suggests.

We are introduced first to James Hunt, played with relish by Chris Hemsworth, in what is a gift of a role for any actor. Hunt was notorious for his womanizing and we are quickly given, well, shall we say, an insight into this aspect of his character as he revels in his carefree if slightly feckless lifestyle.

By contrast, Niki Lauda (Daniel Bruhl) is portrayed as something of a tortured soul. A man driven to win by a combination of his peerless knowledge of cars and an intense self-belief which often comes across as arrogance.

He finds himself alienated from other people as a consequence of this attitude and has a reputation as something of a loner on the F2 circuit on which he and Hunt are initially competing.

It is not long until both of them are signed up for F1, a process which does not initially reflect Lauda in the best light. Hunt quickly catches up with his rival and before long, they are competing against each other for the 1976 world championship.

In the meantime, Lauda has found a wife, who is gradually curbing his difficult personality. Hunt has also married, albeit less permanently, as he continues to sleep with about half of London.

These scenes are interspersed with the main event - the races that come to define both Hunt and Lauda's career. Particularly the 1976 German Grand Prix, in which Lauda is badly burnt in a petrol fire.

As Lauda recuperates, Hunt catches him up in the race for the title, forcing Lauda back into the car to try and beat him before the end of the season - a comeback that is against medical advice, against the wishes of his wife and... well, you get the picture. Nonetheless, there are just the right number of sports film clichés to be able to sit through this one.

The accident changes both Lauda and Hunt as their grudging respect turns into a developing friendship. Lauda seems calmer after the accident and whilst some of the scenes with Hunt become more extreme at this point - particularly his violent (if merited) treatment of a journalist, they never become so absurd as to make these versions of real people into caricatures.

There are however a few scenes here that are pure fiction and it has been acknowledged that the film is not entirely true to life. However, the high risk feel of F1 in the 70's has been well executed, the race sequences are well shot and, in my opinion, more interesting than real F1.

The acting is excellent and there are particularly enjoyable turns from Stephen Mangan and Olivia Wilde amongst a strong cast. My only major issue with Rush is that at times it seems obsessed with its leading characters. Hunt in particular seems to get away with being some kind of James Bond figure who rarely experiences the consequences of his actions.

Nevertheless, the film is interesting and exciting. Whilst Ron Howard has taken some liberties with the truth, he has directed a vibrant tale of rivalry between these two very different champions.

Disclaimer: I do not own the rights to the picture used in this blog post and will remove it at the request of the rights holder.

'Alan Partridge: Alpha Papa' directed by Declan Lowney

Alan Partridge, for those of you that are unfamiliar with his small screen outings, is an egotistical, seedy and unsympathetic fictional radio DJ. He is nonetheless portrayed in altogether more generous terms by this film adaptation, which, to my relief, also maintains the wonderfully crap veneer of the TV series.

In truth, a character such as Alan (played by Steve Coogan) could only emerge from a country as self-loathing as Britain. He is a man who channels many of the anxieties and petty concerns of the Daily Mail reading section of our population. Yet, he is so harshly drawn that he always verges on caricature, which is where the humour of the absurd hostage thriller plot of this film comes into its own.

On a normal day at North Norfolk Digital (Alan's Radio Station), Alan finds out that the station is about be taken over by a ruthless corporation. In swift order, he locates a list of possible targets for redundancy. Distressed to find that he is on it, he instead targets the other man on the list Pat Farrell (played with a kind of unhinged menace by Colm Meaney) who, unaware of this betrayal, strikes up a kind of bonhomie with Alan regarding his coming dismissal.

It is at this point, during a launch party for the re-branded radio station, with the shockingly meaningless post modern new name 'Shape: The Way You Want It To Be' that Pat Farrell takes several hostages at gunpoint. This is an attempt to blackmail the new owners into giving him his job back. He decides that he will only communicate with the police through Alan as a mediator. This, of course, is an opportunity for publicity that Alan cannot resist.

What follows is an hour of the pithy one liners and public humiliations that the TV series had previously mastered. Alan, not naturally acclimatised to the sensitivities of others, offers his usual mix of haughty derision and contempt for the general public when forced to continue his show at the point of a gun by Pat Farrell.

All of the other hostages are a mixture of the ignorant and the foolish as only Steve Coogan could come up with. They include the new owner of the radio station, Jason Tresswell, who gnaws at Alan's ego as he praises him for the way that he is handling Farrell. Appealing to the better part of Alan's nature is his agent Lynn (Felicity Montagu) who, as always, is patient to a fault with Alan's ill treatment.

Another series regular, Michael (Simon Greenall) makes his usual strange cameo appearing from a cupboard and Phil Cornwell offers an excellent turn as Dave Clifton, a drug addled DJ in permanent rehab. It is a testament to how well written the script is that Alan Partridge often comes across as one of the lesser grotesques on display.

So, this excellent British film is really very entertaining. I do not believe it will necessarily travel well, given the low tech nature of the comedy and the local jokes in the film. Nonetheless, it deserves box office success in the UK for adding an altogether more sympathetic dimension to the wonderfully understated awfulness of the world of Alan Partridge.

Disclaimer: I do not own the rights to the picture used in this article and will remove it at the request of the rights holder.

'Man of Steel' directed by Zack Snyder

Without wishing to put too fine a point on it, I suspect that this film has garnered at least part of its box office success from the appearance of its leading man - Henry Cavill - a man so muscular that in the words of my date for the evening 'his chest kind of looks like a butt.'

So, despite some reservations about what the content of Man of Steel would actually consist of, it turned out that there was some very interesting, and previously unexplored, back story to take a look at, which was handled well by Russell Crowe as Jor-El (Superman's father) in full Gladiator mode. Essentially, Russell's sub plot involves a lot of shouting and looking serious, which he executes with his usual aplomb.

Zack Snyder handles these scenes quite delicately, which was an unexpected bonus given that his filmography contains some efforts that lack coherent structure and emotional depth (Watchmen, anyone?). This prelude on Krypton leads eventually to some slightly less apocalyptic episodes from Superman's childhood on earth.

By this point, he is of course known as Clark Kent, under the care of loving parents. Unfortunately for Clark, his classmates and neighbours do not share such understanding. Clark, well aware of what he is capable of, has to stop himself at every turn from using his powers to hurt those who upset him. Although, it is good fun to see him using them more passively on a trucker who acts inappropriately towards a girl Clark carries a torch for.

As he enters adulthood, it becomes harder for Clark to hide his true nature. Rumours abound regarding his powers and, soon enough, he finds himself the subject of a pursuit by Lois Lane, a fearless and often feckless reporter.

Amy Adams' take on Lois is a refreshing one given that she is usually a damsel in distress figure in most screen adaptations of Superman. She is ruthless about getting her story yet she has enough moral direction to realise the damage that she could do if knowledge of Clark Kent's powers was to become more widely known.

And unfortunately, Lois Lane is not Clark's only pursuer. Enter the malevolent General Zod, played with a wonderful moustache twirling villainy by Michael Shannon. His performance is nonetheless frightening as a character whose sole intention is genocide for the human race.

It is upon Zod's arrival that Clark realises who he must become. Their fight is one that will define the future of the human race and yet, for the most part, humans are essentially bystanders to the all powerful aliens doing battle in their midst.

These scenes are well executed as Superman realises that he must breach his own moral code in order to beat Zod. Henry Cavill, whose performance is for the most part fairly wooden, comes alive as his character's limits are tested.

Cue various ridiculous CGI special effects that are a bit disorientating. This is, however, a superhero film, so that be forgiven. It was also impressive to observe that Zack Snyder and his team were brave enough to examine how humanity as a whole would react to the presence of Superman. This was quite refreshing in that it was honest enough to acknowledge that his reception may not be universally positive.

That is the perhaps the strongest part of what is a very watchable blockbuster which, whilst a bit inconsistent in terms of quality from one scene to the next, was nonetheless worth the ticket price.

Disclaimer: I do not own the rights to the photograph used in this review and will remove it at the request of the rights holder.

'The Unlikely Pilgrimage of Harold Fry' by Rachel Joyce

This poignant fable is by turns heart breaking, hilarious and uplifting. On the surface, the story of Harold Fry is that of an ordinary pensioner who is stuck in a loveless marriage with Maureen, his wife of forty years. He worked for the same company in the same position for his whole career and has retired six months before this novel is set.

On a seemingly normal day in this retirement, he receives an unsolicited letter from Queenie Hennessey, a former colleague who Harold owes a debt of gratitude to. The letter reveals that Queenie has terminal cancer. She is in a hospice and her prognosis is grim.

So, Harold, being a quiet individual, trots out to post a reply. As he covers the familiar roads of his town, he begins to realise that the process of walking is bringing a number of memories back to his mind, most notably of his son David, from whom he and Maureen are estranged.

Upon hearing the inspiring story of a girl working at a garage who he stops to talk to on the way, Harold decides to walk from Kingsbridge where he lives to Berwick upon Tweed, where Queenie is convalescing, in order to try and save her.

This seemingly futile exercise holds a much deeper meaning for Harold, as he comes to confront his present loneliness and the vast difficulties of his past. As he walks, he encounters many people who are inspired by his quest and it is in these minor characters that Rachel Joyce's creation really comes to life.

She is also excellent at allowing us access to Harold's rich and troubled inner life. On the surface, Harold Fry is an everyman, seemingly dull and lacking in imagination. We find out with Joyce's help what makes him appear that way and why he seems so wracked with fear through every step of his journey.

At home, Maureen's quiet resentment of Harold continues to stir and we are given her perspective on why her marriage is failing. Maureen is not always a sympathetic character but her take on Harold's adventure is one that changes as he gets closer to succeeding in his task.

Her friendship with Rex, the Fry's next door neighbour, is touching and well realised. As Harold walks through Britain and the two of them track his progress, Maureen comes to reconcile herself to Harold not only for what he is currently doing but also for his actions towards her in the past.

It is the journey itself that changes Harold's perspective on the world and by the end of the tale, his life is irrevocably changed. The end is handled with the same delicate sensitivity that Rachel Joyce uses in the rest of the book.

A moving and rewarding novel.

Disclaimer: I do not own the rights to the photograph used in this post and will remove it at the request of the rights holder.