Seven Psychopaths

             Harrelson, Rockwell and Walken all good....Farrell, not so much!

 

From Martin McDonagh comes another brilliantly developed movie with the characteristics similar to that of  In Bruges (2008).

 

Let's start by saying upon the release of the trailer, there wasn't a movie that looked as unattractive as this one. I mean I did not want to see this movie, in fact I passed this one up to see Rise Of The Guardians at one stage. Why? well an apparent dark and twisted comedy just didn't look that funny. I have been wrong before, and I am yet again.

 

Seven psychopaths tells the story of a struggling screen writer who through-out the mundane events in life has lacked the activity of the pen. Based in Los Angeles, Marty (Colin Farrell) is mind-set on creating a love story, with a touch of violence. The movie? seven psychopaths. Although a writers block refrains him from lifting off, it seems a designated plot comes round when friends Billy (Sam Rockwell) and Hans (Christopher Walken) steal a Shih-Tzu from the wrong guy.

 

Running a corruption business that involves a rob and return routine, the guys are unaware of the gangster reputation behind Charlie (Woody Harrelson). Marty gets caught up inadvertently, leaving a mess that he Billy and Hans must clean up (to stay alive).

 

The introduction to McDonagh's four year return immediately describes the sheer madness to come. Seven psychopaths is hilariously gory and extremely unpredictable. Marty is an alcoholic character who is centred as the main character and carries a storyline that could have done without his presence; maybe it was the Irish accent I couldn't take to? I have seen Colin in some decent flicks, but his original-self didn't blend so well with the other characters.

 

The characters of both Walken and Sam Rockwell give this movie the psychotic premise the critics are labelling it as. The comedic performance from Rockwell is the highlight of a movie narrated so well by Farrell, but I simply didn't fancy is performance. The bloody graphics and Harrelson's bipolar villain is enough to convince you.

 

This might sound crazy but the movie appeared made up the longer it went on. I felt that way because it was that crazy. The wonderful concept is yet again the dark and twisted humour, offering some cracking dialogue between certain characters, particularly Hans who, behind his criminal lifestyle  cares for his cancer stricken wife.

 

Overall: Seven Psychopaths is one of the most surprisingly enjoyable movies of 2012. With quite an original concept, and a fine cast of veterans, it is a nice send off to what has been a fantastic year at the movies.

 

8/10

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Holy Shit! Man of Steel - Official Trailer #2

Rise Of The Guardians

        Rise Of The Guardians rekindles the imagination we thought we had lost

In a world outside of the norm, the North Pole to be exact, Santa and affiliates are forced to regroup in a bid to prevent the Boogieman from taking over the world. The only problem is they ain't strong enough; introducing Jack Frost to help the rise of the guardians!

Dreamworks creates yet another fantastic animation that shows once again Disney does not rule the imagination of the audience.

Jack Frost (Chris Pine) is bewildered to the fact he possesses a rare power, although it becomes a point of acceptance 300 years later. Given to him by the moon, his perks involve invisibility, flying and to pretty much turn everything to ice. However Jack is part of a collection of guardians but doesn't know it yet.

The North Pole is home to North aka Santa (Alec Baldwin). North is the Leader of the guardians;  Tooth (Isla Fisher),  Bunny (Hugh Jackman) and the Sandman who all thrive on making the lives of children very happy. However when Pitch (boogieman) played by Jude Law shows up, a year by year agenda of celebrations take a turn for the worse as he sets on vanishing any such beliefs in the guardians, creating an impact of nightmares for the children. It is then that the "Moon" decides to invite Jack Frost as the new guardian in a bid to save the world from utter darkness. Much to the dislike of Bunny and Co, the guardians are forced to accept Jack as their own in a desperate fight against the dark and brilliantly humorous, Pitch.

An original tale, Rise of the Guardians is brilliantly told through the eyes of Jack Frost and other imaginative characters we have all believed in. Santa is visioned far from the jolly old fella we have all waited on Christmas eve; he holds an egotistic personality with a funny accent. Both naughty and nice, the pros of being a historic figure to children is still referenced nicely through-out. Bunny, as in the Easter bunny was my favourite character. Ironically perceived as an Australian Kangaroo, make no mistake he is a grumpy bunny and even more so when he confronts Jack in numerous altercations.

Jude Law plays a boogieman that only a child could have imagined; making Rise of The Guardians all the more appropriate. Aside from Yetties instead of Elf's, and Bunny's boomerangs instead of Eggs, this short tale is a consistent ingredient of comedy and originality with 97 minutes of wonderful CGI animation.

Overall: Rise of the Guardians is beautifully constructed with scenes that pull off with, or without 3D glasses. Just one of many animated movies this year, Rise of The guardians will stand out in terms of the originality involved.

7/10

An Interview with Owen Roddy

 As part of an assignment, we, the journalism students of Colaiste Dhulaigh constructed an interview with a personality of our choice. Myself, Jaime and Ray decided to set up an interview with Owen Roddy; an MMA fighter. On top of competing amongst the best fighters in Ireland and the UK, Owen (right) also runs Primal; an MMA gym located in Finglas.

 ^  Click the link above to listen to how we got on  ^

Return Of The Tournament: Mortal Kombat Season 2

Mortal Kombat legacy is set to return for a second season, with director Kevin Tancharoen reprising a web series that raked in more than 60 million views in 2011.

Fans of last years web-series are in for treat, with Tancharoen set to take the series back to its original concept - tournament style. With fan favourites such as Liu Kang and Ermac on board, Tancharoen reveals a nostalgic return, he said; "Fans are in for a real treat with the second season of Mortal Kombat: Legacy. With added visual effects and storylines that dive deeper into our warriors as they make their way to the tournament, we’re taking this series to a whole new level. I'm really looking forward to showing fans the first clip during the Streamy Awards on February 17."

What was an unsuccessful pitch to Warner Bros in 11", Mortal Kombat: Rebirth supplied an original imagination, but it was on the brink of disperse following the online teaser. Although Tancharoen's original agenda had failed, Rebirth went viral with out-cry for a theatrical release. Failing to re-invent Mortal Kombat to the big screen, Tancharoen was giving the go-ahead to shoot a plethora of web series, leading to where we are now. However I still wouldn't rule out the possibility of an MK re-boot.

"Machinima and our audience have been eagerly awaiting the next chapter in this series, and I’m thrilled to announce that Mortal Kombat: Legacy 2 will return to its original home on Machinima," said Allen DeBevoise, Chairman, Co-Founder, and CEO of Machinima

Although I am a die-hard MK fan, and with the "Legacy" failing to impress me on many occasions, Tancharoen's second pop looks set to make a significant mark and some what a redemption for what has been a mediocre adaption in 95" followed by a terrible sequel.

MK Legacy season 2 will see Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa reprise his role as Shang Tsung. Those who remember the theatrical release will have vague images of his introduction following the "Fight music"? you know, "Your soul is mine!". He was bad ass and should retain that image in February of 2013.

In the mean time, it's an MK Legacy catch-up for me.

Happy Birthday Richard Pryor

Fans and Hollywood personalities will be taking time out today to reflect on Richard Pryor and the life he lived; leaving behind an influential path for those to follow. Just as Bill Cosby did for Richard, he did the same in his wake with comedians such as Eddie Murphy and Chris Rock to name a few. A large majority have embraced and represented the on-stage ego of Richard Pryor.
Richard carried a life of mixed montages, with multiple marriages and a media established drug addiction. However concerts such as Richard Pryor Live on the Sunset Strip (1982), Richard Pryor: Live in Concert (1979) and Richard Pryor... Here and Now (1983) created the comedic icon we fell in love with. Richard is one of the stand-out most influential comedians to ever brace a stage.

                                   Richard is 65 today. Happy Birthday and RIP (1940 - 2005)

College: House at the end of the street (267)

Elissa (Jennifer Lawrence) is the first to find conspicuous events surrounding the landscape of their new home and the rural town within. Her mother Sarah (Elisabeth Shue) is desperate to remain optimistic and sees it a fresh start.

Elissa is more than helpful after learning a murder had occurred in their new home, leading to flirty chats between herself and ideal genre heartthrob Ryan (Max Thieriot) - the son and last remaining member of the murdered family. The suspect is Ryan's younger sister who has not been seen since the killing. While a myth of sister lurks the backyard of the woods, we see Ryan is holding her on basement arrest.

With the plot praying on a routine escape from the enslaved sister, most of the movie focuses on a developing relationship between Elissa and Ryan. The film gets to the point where you forget there is a girl being starved in Ryan's basement. The movies backbone is depending on the occasional fright from the sister while trying to balance a chemistry of love that blends together like Tabasco and tea!

The majority of the film was rubbish as the Gremlins offers a more suspenseful taste than this.

With an old school introduction that was quite pleasing on the eye, the majority of the film was rubbish. The twist at the end does not make up for the first 95 minutes. The Gremlins offers a more suspenseful taste than this

Overall; a mundane attempt at a tiring genre. Another cheap concept involving suspense and characters that where downright careless. Wait for Sinister!

Read my extended review.

College: What Richard did (281)

                                          

Lenny Abrahamson is known for mastering the independent classic, Adam and Paul (2005). He looks to grab your attention to a different topic. We follow Richard (Jack Reynor) and his "Molly coddled" lifestyle.

Richard (Jack Reynor) lives a charming life with wealthy backgrounds; he spends his summer days with friends and having the "craic" in the family beach home. His sights are on Laura (Roisin Murphy) who to his unfortunate circumstance is tied up with Connor (Sam Keeley).

It centres upon numerous images and silent embarks of Richard reminiscing at his beach home, driving his car, eating cereal, and smoking silently as he stares into oblivion in almost every shot. It got so boring first off I began to believe that all of these activities are what Richard actually did.  He gets closer to Laura; however the dramatic portrayal of the movie finally kicks in when an argument outside a party leaves Connor dead.

The suspense and the dramatic follow up is what makes the first half feel terrible to the second half, and unfortunately it is. We see the acting skills from numerous actors including Jack Reynor and his father Peter (Lars Mikkelsen), who both create probably the only seen worth remembering.

The problem with the film is not the acting, but the plot was so weak. The movie was quite short in 87 minutes and lacked development between any characters, resulting in a lack of emotion for such a serious premise.

Overall; beautifully shot no doubt, but really slow on developing a lack of emotion and dull scenes of practically nothing. However Jack Reynor gives a performance that does convince you of an enjoyable portrayal of character.

Read my extended review.

For full review

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 2

The release of Twilight Breaking Dawn - Part 2 can only call for one thing - celebration. Cinema-goers around the globe will be celebrating the end of a terrible franchise, for now. However there is a large minority who will probably shed a tear while they try and get to grip with life after Edward. So before I can truly celebrate, an important review is beyond my eager finger tips; Breaking Dawn part 2, or as the french would say, part deux.

Life in the Cullen house is no different, well, beside from a reformed Bella (Kristen Stewart) and the kid she shares with Edward (Robert Pattinson). Vampires and wolves go about there day to day mundane lives as life in the woods is just never ending (literally).

It's an introduction to soft, yet twisted music as we are thrown into the bond that both Bella and Edward share. We learn the once bookish sweetheart is now a greedy blood sucker (that's my girl!). Although many of lifes ambitions are now at her advantage, Bella is yet to control her thirst for blood as she fights to avoid the hunger for humans. This comes as a disadvantage to her as Jacob (Taylor Lautner) is guarding Bella's daughter Renesmee (Mackenzie Foy) in fear of Bella's thirst. However the Cullen house is never dull for long as the relationship between Bella, Jacob and Edward form a family unit that focuses on what is best for Renesmee; who is half human half vampire (apparently that's extraordinary).

A plot we have seen once too many in the franchise arrives at our door, snapping the letterbox in desperate need to sell us something. When a false accusation gets back to the Volturi, the affiliation is sent into panic. They believe a child like Enesmee will damage the existence of the Vampire race beliveing she holds a unique power that is not worth the risk. Leader of the Volturi, Jasper (Jackson Rathbone) is determined for answers and leads the cult toward Bella and the Cullen family. While there is only so many happy montages we can take in a Twilight flick, enough is enough as word gets back to the house concerning the safety of Enesmee. Edward an co begin to recruit Vampire families from around the way to support an possibly fight against the Volturi.

The majority of Breaking Dawn part 2 is a round up of silly sequences between Jacob, Bella and Enesmee as we get a glimpse of Edward's ridiculous attempt for a smile every so often. The movie begs for interest with the introduction of the Volturi, but you just know that even the antagonist will have no impact in this follow-up. Twilight continues to centre around a fake romance that involvs everyone; family, friends, vampires, wolves, the lack of chemistry as well as acting skills is down right disgusting.

This review is analysed by a movie fanatic so I look for aspects in every film, good and bad. They say a males perspective of Twilight will always differ from that of females, but I understand what the entire franchise has tried to offer; imagination, romance, masculinity and a tear-jerking plot. If you are looking for what I have listed, you will not find it in Twilight because if you are judging the movie for what it truly is you will know it is a story taken from a book. The fantasy novel held the responsibility of a good possible story line, however the onscreen adaption has failed upon two vital ingredients; acceptable acting and acceptable plot. I failed to accept either.

In my Breaking Dawn review I said the previous flicks are mundane and sometimes quite bearable. I then followed up on saying I might regret saying that. I do. However my honesty will still prevail and will admit to saying that the original Twilight is not all that bad (I might regret saying that). Just like the one previous, Twilight continued to offer nothing new with the same irrelevant characters (and actors) with a plot that just spells laziness and quite silly and hilariously boring.

I said the same with the BD part 1 review; "I would fail to understand why twlights' biggest fanatics could even enjoy this trash" (echo)

Overall: A less than half decent ending could not change my consensus. It is a terrible film in every way shape or form. Robert Pattinson and Kristen Stewart are more irritating than ever. Just like it's predecessors, Twilight Breaking Dawn part 2 is hopeless!

2/10

Poster Madness 2012/13

Ouch!
What looks like a night on the town gone wrong, Ryan Gosling poses as a troublesome crime lord slash boxing gym owner. With a plot we know all to well, one man, Nicolas Winding Refn reunites with Gosling for what we hope is a similar premise supporting the disturbing concept of Drive (2011). For the full article see - Empire - Only God Forgives.










Horror Remake: Evil Dead
The Evil Dead poster dropped yesterday with a tag-line that begs to convince fans of the original franchise not to judge so quickly. It is easy to point the finger at yet another horror remake while consistently shouting "Bullshit, Bullshit", however with Sam Raimi's writing skills on board, director  Fede Alvarez can hardly go wrong...can he?. The plot is basic horror standard following a group of idiotic teens getting picked off in a spooky cabin. We wouldn't have it any other way...would we?

Evil Dead is set for release April 19th. See Empire's Evil Dead for the full article and teaser trailer.






Horror Remake: Carrie
After celebrating Halloween with a review on Carrie (1976) and with the release of the teaser trailer for the upcoming remake, I would be lying if I told you I was looking forward to it. While the 1976 masterpiece was fresh on my conscience, it was probably wrong to watch the teaser for one reason; it gives very little away but does immediately exaggerate the concept that made Carrie so original. Anyway I will shy from more pessimism and remain optimistic until the theatrical release. The poster however is not much to think about.









Oz: A mind boggling poster
Just one of many posters, the imagination within these images awaits the observers, revealing a wonderful cast and dream-like concept that promises to be one of the best movies of next year.
Sam Raimi recuperates an unlikely adventure in which I hope is supplied with nostalgic nit-picking in relation to The Wizard of Oz.











"Your Talking to god, so you might as well swear to me"
If you haven't noticed, "Gerry's reviews" is a huge fan of Mr Gosling, however he will be tested by a certain veteran of cinema both on and off screen - Sean Penn. Gosling and Penn are just a taster compared to the overall cast. The whole cake includes Josh Brolin, Nick Nolte and Emma Stone in a movie that is sure to deliver where "Lawless" had failed. Penn's character resembles that of Guy Pearce in Lawless, however Gangster Squad looks to run away with a plot that will surely out-way the movies of 2013 and the forgetful movies of 2012.

See the trailer here - IMDB - Ganster Squad

Don't Miss: Dublin City Rap Battles - Thursday 15th

Tomorrow night sees the return of the rap battle scene. RCI (Rappers comp Ireland) present an Ireland v UK battle scene. The Scene? King Seven bar, Dublin.

It has been a while since Dublin hosted such an event, proudly referencing the work put together by Redzer, who opened the doors for those of lyrical quality to make their "spit" carry recognition. DFI (Don't flop Ireland) brought a unique force of talent to clubs around Dublin as I hope to see Redzer's association with the Battle scene go viral once again - Irish rappers revealed

But for now, RCI have provided a line-up that gives enough motive behind why this will be an entertaining event. Here is why:

Rapthor goes up against Chronikill in the main event. Redzer battled Chronikill in London last year when Redzer walked away the winner after a crafty performance that held consistent horse jokes. Rapthor however will not be out of his depth as his own flow of lyrics is held by a multisylibic ingrediant. Coming off a couple of RCI battles, one alongside Carl French, Rapthor's  DFI appearance was a brief and memorable debut when he slayed an effortless Gwame who went up against Rapthor with a 3-2 record.

Simon Young, aka Big Siyo goes up against Gwame. Certainly a battle of the humorous with Siyo going in with the upper hand. Coming off two battles; Barmageddon - a July event which seen Siyo travel to Wolverhampton to battle Eek. A fine performance from both battlers, however the result lead to a defeat for the Artane man. However three months prior, Siyo destroyed Bowski in Leeds using a plethora of fat jokes which proved simple but very affective. "Cause your a big bearded puddin, ya greed for the gluton, I could fit a full pack a polos inside your belly button!". One of Siyo's best performances I am sure he will agree. Gwame on the other hand goes into battle with a lot to say but struggles to land an effective climax. However Gwame could have useful tactics referencing the The Undutchables (Justin Casey, Siyo and Sean O' Leary) who have come under scrutiny from the guards and "Snobs" following their recent busking activities. These events could benefit Gwame when he battles on-form battler, Siyo.

Other battles to look out for: Nash V Carl French, Sam Lav V Chronikill and Genesis V Row B.

The event promises to be one of a kind with the doors opening at 8pm.

For full details on tomorow nights event, see Here

Empire's Breaking Bad podcast special

 

Following 8 episodes of sheer delight, we eagerly sat around the house browsing the TV series category of Netflix. Why? well, let's just say things haven't been the same since Walter Heisenberg deserted us once again. However, it delights the "Curious" blog to reveal Empire's latest podcast. Empire got a hold of Bryan Cranston for a Breaking bad podcast special. A 30 minute reflection on the first four seasons with the man himself. The link below will take you to the Christmas present Empire has so gratefully given us.

30 minute interview with Bryan Cranston - http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=35707

MovieNewz; Mortal Kombat Reboot (Finally)

Warner Bros have confirmed quite an unlikely reboot. Thankfully, for fans of the roughed up series, Mortal Kombat is back in the pipeline with a generous budget at hand. Mind-set on a new bloody adaption of the cult-classical video game, Warner Bros executive Lance Sloan is hopeful with their appointed director; “We're preparing right now for the film with Kevin Tancharoen, [who] directed the digital series for us"

  While the success of the video games are welcomed more than the majority of fighting games of that genre, some might say the movie adaption, Mortal Kombat (1995) was not all that great. However it is a debate I am willing to challenge because in terms of effort as well as the history concerning game to movie conversions, Mortal Kombat tops the lot of them. Nit-picking at such a fine attempt is unfortunate, however Christopher Lambert' Raiden and Robin Shou as Lui Kang was quite the entertainment, not forgetting the fight scenes; that somehow managed to flow without the use of human decapitation.

The sequel, MK Annihilation, was well and truly Annihilated! For more entertaining news see my MovieNewz.

For more on the Mortal Kombat reboot see Total Film.

The Ramifications of Arsene-al

Let's touch on something different here at Gerry's reviews. As an Arsenal fan I have been optimistic for the team at the worst of times, an yet I feel I have betrayed myself for even considering such optimism. All I ever wanted was to convince myself of the positivity within the current squad. The act of team spirit was witnessed on October 30th when Jason Roberts made our defence look like a back four of that guy from the cheese string add, you know, the cheese string? anyway it was a Capital cup match with nervous giggles. We fought back with Reading fighting even stronger. Sure, we had a weak team, (Arsene's philosophy, sigh). I mean any team with Chamakh leading the fore front is far from threatening, however even he scored two goals trying desperately to convince us he isn't the depressed camel he makes out to be! A fine tally of strikes concluded a 7-5 victory. "It may be one of my greatest victories during my time here," said Wenger.

It's about making a statement: Arsenal Vs Manchester United. It had the potential to be a bold game and at times, regarding Van Persie's move, it was quite predictable. However, somewere in the back of my mind I felt like the team had to go out there and prove to the fans that Arsene Wenger isn't crazy and that we have the potential to at least pretend Van Persie was never there. Sadly the potential is not in the team, as it rarely was when Robin was there. The result on Saturday didn't prove much while the play and some of the the managers decisions where absolutely laughable. Arsene's stubbornness is a factor we as Arsenal fans have grown to accept, however the line-up on Saturday was far from acceptable.

Take Theo Walcott and all this talk about extending his contract. I was quite reluctant to see that happen myself, but seeing Walcott play against Reading I figured we are gonna need this guy. Arsene had every opportunity to repay Theo's contribution by starting him against United but he didn't. Instead he played Ramsey, who to my knowledge is more comfortable in centre midfield no?. We needed pace against such a skilled Ferguson creation and we didn't have it. The only bit of pace we had was sitting on the bench. Don't get me wrong, Ramsey is coming on (slowly) but not quick enough to jump Theo.

Achilles heel: Just when we thought the whole Steve Bould jibe was coming on, an unlikely individual had a serious dose of laxy-daisy; Thomas Vermaelen. However we can accept a bad game from him once in a blue moon, it was the sight of Andre Santos that really had me asking questions. No doubt if Kieran Gibbs was available he would have played; a lad with pace for days. Instead we had Santos, and again we watched as a better choice looked on from the bench, Carl Jenkinson. So what was the result of Andre's input? zilch! The over-weighted Brazilian will be having nightmares for weeks about Antonio Valencia. The experience is there, however the knowledge of position, track-back and basic defending isn't. I am beginning to wonder whether this lad was ever a defender.

If amateur defence wasn't enough, we were asked to put our trust in strikers Olivier Giroud and club flop Lukas Podolski, who to be quite frank the German International was anonymous all game. Are these not questions that we need to nail down? I mean Arsene Wenger, giving his and Arsenals history against united, chose to play the wrong players, and not for the first time.

A bitter pill to swallow: Let's go cliche on this one. Written in the stars, and so it was as Van Persie came home to break our hearts. (Like they weren't already broke...Robin, it hurts.). From the off, two minutes to be precise, it was destined to happen and the "Traitor" deserves it! It was never a problem who or how United would score, but the response we would give back. Minor additions such as Jack Wilshere was a joy to watch however he was always going to be a liability, and damaged our hopes he sure did. Reflecting back to team selection, Wilshere should have still been on the bench while Ramsey takes his position while Walcott takes Ramsey's. Simple and probably more affective. Oh, and we would maybe have Wilshere available for a steady 90 minutes against Fulham this weekend.

So what are the repercussions of Wenger's decisions? another player down and out for stupidity, and a more damaged and even more unpredictable presence of strikers. I can't help but touch on Marouane Chamakh; a guy that I would have expected to go out on loan instead of Nicklas Bendtner. However, he didn't and what he did do was guide us through what would have been a show case of embarrassment and serious Wenger backlash if we lost against Reading. Wenger talks of a confidence boost for the Moroccan striker so why didn't he at least consider him ahead of Giroud on Saturday? I mean Giroud is hardly coming off great goal form, and to be fair, Chamakh is. It is quite logical and the fans want to see goals. It seems it is about proving a point from Wenger. He wants the fans to believe in our latest additions, such as the signing of Giroud, Santos and Podolski.  Surely a change of form means a change of player? Hence the depressed camel. (Sorry Chamakh). When Wenger seen the distraught faces in the Arsenal stand he poured more salt into the wounds by bringing on Arshavin "here here"!

We have seen before, one man can't win us trophies. Hats off to Santi Carzola, who in truth has so far show cased what Arsenal football club is supposed to be about. Unfortunately for him, he will be used to full extent and taking advantage of. Why? well, he continues play to his abilities and looks like the only one mind-set on scoring. I hope that is not the case, however he is one of very few midfield play makers that will be used in and out until the guy gets injured.

What now? Strive on potential and continue to believe in the current squad. We have no choice. Manchester United was never going to be an easy game, so we need to regroup. However the choice of players from Arsene Wenger is crucial. Heck why not answer Theo's question by actually sticking him up front? see how it goes. At the moment we have every right to rotate strikers because Giroud, at the moment, is unreliable. I think we can all trust he will get there, but it is now we want the points because Manchester is running miles and we would like the title!

There have already been ramifications from Wenger and his silly choice of tactics, and last year's 8-2 is just the tip of the ice-berg in fact a tease on what our conclusion could be if we don't show desire against Fulham and so on. If a revival of belief is needed, we should buy in January. We need to show we are here to compete. It is no good Wenger telling us about the future. The future is now. We need to grab it before we are once again asking questions in next summers tabloids.

COME ON THE GUNNERS!

The Video below sums up the stupidity and utter shambles of some of our players. why don't you just shove "a dagger through my heart" Santos"?

SkyFall

Daniel Craig returns as Bond, James Bond in Skyfall; the third in Daniel Craig's realistic portrayal of a world supporting guns, gadgets, villains, loose women and Judy Dench's M.

Stepping up to the plate is Sam Mendes; the third director in the modern franchise. I have not seen the previous two nor am I a James Bond connoisseur. However I went into this movie with an open mind as I rode the same bandwagon as anyone else in terms of expectations.

Skyfall hits the ground running with exhilarating pace as we are introduced to James Bond (Daniel Craig), who is hot on the trails of a former agent who, like a majority of bogies are involved in terrorist activity across the globe. However, an act of retrieval goes wrong as Bond is caught up in a high speed scuffle and mistakenly shot by rookie agent Eve (Naomie Harris). The incident sees Bond disappear and declared dead.

Pulling the strings behind MI6 is M (Judi Dench) and associate Gareth (Ralph Fiennes) who are facing fierce criticism from the prime minister in relation to their anonymous actions and private missions associated with the agents within the high-profile organisation. While it would seem Bond's  death could benefit M16 in terms of the media frenzy, it isn't long before they reunite in a resurrection that sees M doubting the once skilled James Bond. With echoes of Gareth labelling Bond a liability, M is reluctant but needs Bond to investigate a series of threats surrounding MI6, with fingers pointing at one specialised culprit, Silva (Javier Bardem), the man behind the curtain.

Silva is classed as the "He" by James Bond cameo hottie, Severine (Bérénice Marlohe). Bond develops a convenient fling with Severine in order to buy a meeting with deranged lunatic, Silva.

A touch clever than Bond and co could have expected, Silva keeps the iconic agent on his toes as Bond is destined to meet the mysterious Silva in what becomes a more personal status that could damage the reputation of M and everything she built around James Bond.

Skyfall is a refreshing take on what the critics labelled its predecessors; Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace as "acceptable". The introduction is a wonderful taste of brutal and ecstatic action scenes that soon follow. Sam Mendes's product is a realistic dumbed-down portrayal of an agent who was once at the top and had to fall to really find himself; it's a simple story which was pretty dramatic, direct and very effective.

The James Bond franchise had parodies over the years and rightly so if you look at the plethora of different Bond concepts. If fans of the previous twenty movies expect a similar creation, I think they will be slightly disappointed. However Skyfall does reference numerous subjects, past characters and products relating to Bond's movie history.

Although the return of Q (Ben Whishaw) can be highly significant to some, the gadget concept is pretty much deceased in Skyfall which is not such a bad thing in terms of the grittiness and realism surrounding the seriousness of the plot. However the action scenes are brilliantly shot, while the movie offers some of the best acting performances of the lot; Javier Bardem who plays a terrific villain once again. Javier's on screen presence would send shivers down the back of anyone. Both Daniel Craig and Javier Bardem developed a wonderful chemistry even though the presence of Javier is not seen through-out the events of Skyfall.

Although the hype surrounding Skyfall was ridiculous first off, I can understand why because Daniel Craig's reprisal as James Bond is tremendous, supporting a production of great quality with the door left open for a return of the same entertainment. For me however, Javier Bardem steals the show, who introduced that "Ledger Joker" maniac character with a consensus that only he knows will end. The female presence in the movie was not highly significant and at times quite irrelevant, unless you are the charming Judy Dench. It qualifies successfully with the presence of the female characters. Your attention is more so turned to acknowledge the introduction of Javier Bardem; a fine one it turns out to be.

Overall; Skyfall is a delightful resemblance to Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy. Daniel Craig can do no wrong as special agent Bond. Just as Nolan did, Sam Mendes provided a Bond reprisal with tremendous action scenes and the ingredients of modern drama. However the final consensus of Skyfall would not have been greatly positive without Javier's demented character, Silva.

8/10

What Richard Did

Lenny Abrahamson is known for mastering the independent classic, Adam and Paul (2005). He looks to grab your attention to a different topic, one that we know all too well. The concept is one of considerable debate as we follow Richard (Jack Reynor) and his "Molly coddled" lifestyle made up of happy families, true friendship and desperate love.

Richard lives a charming life with wealthy backgrounds; he spends his summer days with a group of friends having the "craic" in the family beach home. With his charming personality he sets his sights on Laura (Roisin Murphy) who to his unfortunate circumstance is partly tied up with Connor (Sam Keeley).

The calm before the storm is numerous images and silent embarks of Richard reminiscing at his beach home, driving his car, eating cereal and smoking silently as Richard stares into oblivion in almost every shot. It all got so boring first off I began to believe all of these activities are what Richard actually did, but no. Richard starts to believe in his charm after numerous dates and gossip has gotten him closer to Laura, however the dramatic portrayal of the movie finally kicks in when an argument outside a party involves himself and Connor, leaving Connor well, ultimately dead.

The suspense and the dramatic follow up is what makes the first half feel terrible to the second half, and unfortunately it is. We see the acting skills from numerous actors including Jack Reynor and his father Peter (Lars Mikkelsen), who both create probably the only seen worth remembering.

The problem with this film is not the acting, but the plot was so weak, and ran at such a slow pace. Maybe it was my own fault for building my hype for, well, such a hyped film. A movie that was quite short in 87 minutes and did not have enough input to develop any characters resulting in a lack of emotion for such a serious concept.

Lenny's latest flick touches off a very important subject, just like he did with Adam and Paul, but besides from the incident that took so long to get to, a message that was supposed to be sent out kind of went in no direction. However he hit the nail on the head with creating a stereotype within Richard and his friends; Slightly posh rugby heads who drive daddy's car and wear tight T shirts with grey tracksuit bottoms. As he created that stereotypical ego of Richard, a harsh reality surrounds him as he, just like any real human being would, comes crashing down to earth after realising the reality and possible consequences surrounding his stupidity.

Overall; beautifully shot no doubt, but really slow on developing a lack of emotion and dull scenes of practically nothing. However Jack Reynor gives a performance that does convince you of an enjoyable portrayal of character, but not the film.

4/10

A Trick-or-Treat Review; Carrie (1976)

As we continue to celebrate Halloween, let's look at another classic of the 70's; a year in which most original concepts of horror had come about.

Released in 1976, Carrie is a tale of vulnerability at the highest as we follow the path of Carrie (Sissy Spacek); a reclusive high-school student who through-out has had her fair share of incidents regarding her lonely persona which seems to attract malicious bullys.

Not much help in her troubled life is her mother Margaret (Piper Laurie) who has strong, sadistic religious beliefs. The controlled paranoia of Carrie's mother is particularly seen when she features in one of many sinister moments between mother and daughter; Carrie is sent home early due to a scene in the schools showers when she freaks out after getting her first period, attracting the attention of heartless students to laugh and throw things at her. (Yep, quite sad really).

Margaret can only see her daughters situation as a sin, while constantly revealing her regrettable desire of killing Carrie as a child. Margaret condones intimate relations, viewing such an act as extremely sinful.

While Carrie is sometimes forced into repeating her mothers religious chants and locked in the "Sin" room for forgiveness, Carrie begins to notice a telekinetic change in her mind, revealing an extraction of movements and powerful forces.

While not fully understanding the sheer power behind this, it is when Carrie is suddenly asked to the dance by Tommy Ross (William Katt). Carrie mistakenly sees this a glorious opportunity to be accepted and for once in her life, sociable. However the events concerning Carrie and a minority of bully's change the course of her haunting ability.

From start to finish Carrie offers an original spookish concept of ones desire and utter portrayal that leads a reclusive to believe in sociability outside the home her mother continues to rule. The constant Psycho resemblance is seen through-out an plays a wonderful tribute to Hitchcock's masterpiece, referencing the "Eeek" almost slash sounds occurring through-out the films time line.

Directed by Brian De Palma, with Stephen King's novel at hand, Brian creates a fantastic jerk of back-forward scenes that involve Carrie at the happiest of times, even though you know deep down this girl is tormented by pretty much everyone surrounding her. The terrifying jingles of emotions are heard and witnessed by Carrie alone in her bedroom, then a couple of brief reflections of the teens in high-school who are truly enjoying themselves but oblivious to Carries haunting presence.

I was quite surprised to see a goofy John Travolta appearance. He plays Billy Nolan; a puppet alongside high-school popularity queen Chris (Nancy Allen) who some might know as Murphy, aka Robocop's annoying partner. It is more so the antics of Chris who is hell bound on destroying further-more the reputation of Carrie.

The haunting element of this classic are carried out by the freakish chemistry between Carrie and her brain-washed mother. Although the finale results in a memorable cinematic climax, you never forget the performances from both Sissy Spacek and onscreen next of kin, Piper Laurie.

Overall; Another horror classic that leaves a frightening taste before bed. If it isn't the conclusion of this short masterpiece that gets you, it will be the onscreen performance of Carrie's mother that will stay with you for a very long time.

John Carpenter's Halloween

John Carpenter's suspenseful masterpiece consisted of some real quality, cold blooded quotes. Quite simple ones also, and very misleading to the eyes of some; Tommy - " Laurie, what's the boogieman?   Laurie -  "There's no such thing."

How wrong was Jamie Lee Curtis's vulnerable high school sweetheart to think that. 1978 brought absolute terror to cinema-goers around the world.  A good ten years before my time, Halloween night never appealed to me very much, however the video tape of Carpenters classic, in which was kept hidden from me for years due to child-hood trauma, the creation of sheer terror was really upon me the day I watched it. (I was brave, but not enough to watch it at night)

The quiet suburban neighbourhood of Haddonfield was about to become quite an iconic scene; a young Michael Myers is about to lay the path for a dramatic return to his home town 15 years later.

Only 6 years old, nobody knew what drove the mind of such a young boy. His dark and twisted mind would drive him to stab his 16 year old sister, carving a whole new perspective to the way the town would celebrate Halloween.

Institutionalised for almost 15 years, Michael Myers escapes the outskirts of Illinois as he makes his way back home, hoping to arrive on a very convenient date; October 31st, 1978, Halloween.

Laurie Strode (Jamie Lee Curtis) is your stereotypical book worm slash high school virgin who chooses babysitting over drunken nights any day of the week. Softly spoken and well behaved, she is unaware of the danger about to curse Haddonfield that very night.

Michael Myers, played by Tony Moran is off the grid, however it is the introduction of his doctor, Sam Loomis (Donald Pleasence) that makes the night a nerve wrecking cat and mouse chase as he seeks to find Myers before he reeks havoc in Haddonfield. Desperate for assistance, Loomis contacts Sheriff Leigh Brackett (Charles Cyphers) to warn him of Michael's presence to be, believing that Michale will reenact the murder of 1963.

Dr Loomis - I met this six-year-old child, with this blank, pale, emotionless face and, the blackest eyes... the devil's eyes."

Sheriff Brackett is not fully convinced of Sam's accusations, however it is no convenience of the friendship between his daughter Annie (Nancy Kyes) and Michael's target, Laurie.

A series of events leads to the category of classics Halloween will forever remain. When Loomis finds out Michael's motive for escape, he is hell bound on preventing the murder of another family connection, Laurie Strode, who is oblivious to any past the psycothic killer had created.

Hot on the trail of Michael, Loomis is adamant to get in contact with Laurie as she spends her Halloween night babysitting Tommy Doyle (Brian Andrews). However it is not all horror movies and pumpkin making as Laurie converts into survival mode as when Tommy told her he had seen the boogieman previously, she should have believed him.

My favourite horror movie, if you want to call it horror? unlike a majority of Horrors of that era, Halloween was so original in terms of frightening you with nothing other than suspense. John Carpenter did not need a truck full of fake blood to convince the audience of the dangers of someone with a psycothic frame of mind. A simple concept; an average joe in a Captain Kirk mask. Let's not forget the anticipation of the classic theme tune which proved another simple way of terrifying the audience without revealing anything.

Halloween is also one of the originals to introduce what lurks in the background. Like I said, Michael Myers is an average Joe with a twisted heart. The concept of someone watching you, but yet not knowing, will always give me goose bumps. Of course a lot of movies are created on the monsters of our dreams, and done it so well, but Halloween will always frighten me with its short, yet mediocre plot that proves a possibility along with a more realistic chance of being stalked by the unknown.

In so many parts of this movie, Loomis sums up what he is feeling, and somehow you believe in his disturbia, hoping his presence will prevent the horror that eventually follows.

Dr Loomis - "I spent eight years trying to reach him, and then another seven trying to keep him locked up because I realised what was living behind that boy's eyes was purely and simply... evil."

The acting is mundane but acceptable. Jamie Lee Curtis was so amateur in this movie but some how I believe there could have been no other. The sequels, threequels etc that would follow eventually made Laurie strode out to be some sort of "Sarah Connor" when in fact the original shows the conversion of  vulnerability to survival mode that leads to a dramatic conclusion in the film. However it was not fully a bad thing they opened the door for a sequel, I enjoyed the follow up, but the rest were pure garbage. In fact I think it is sometimes fun to watch the apparent trilogy to really embrace how much a qualitative piece of work John Carpenter created back in 1978.

Overall; John Carpenters Halloween is and always will be one of the best horror/suspenseful thrillers ever made. Along with The Thing and Psycho, this can not be missed come October 31st.