In Cinemas This Weekend: It's time for the Avenger's Initiative.

There are 3 new films released into cinemas this weekend but let's be honest here, there is only one film on everybody's mind. That's right it is time for our ensemble of superheroes to defend the world. Other films released this week I'm sure will have a tough time at the box office due to this, but then again six superheroes fighting a super villain with a space army is not everyone's cup of tea. Have a look at the films below.


1. It is the biggest release of the week, and a highly anticipated super hero action flick. AVENGER'S ASSEMBLE brings back the superheroes who have had their own movie; Iron Man, Thor, Captain America and Hulk, teams them up with two others; Black Widow and Nighthawk, in order to defend the world from annihilation by Thor's brother Loki. The initial worry of too many heroes fighting for screen time have been dashed and the film has received nothing but positive reviews so far. Starring: Robert Downey Jr, Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson & Jeremy Renner. Have you been waiting for this?


2. Attempting to fight against the above film is ALBERT NOBBS. Starring Glenn Close, this film follows her posing as a man in the 19th century, where women were not allowed to be independent. When she meets a handsome painter however she must find a way of revealing that she is putting on a front in order to gain some much needed acknowledgement. Also starring: Mia Wasikowska, Aaron Johnson & Antonia Campbell-Hughes. A serious reverse on Mrs Doubtfire?





3. Finally is the story of a trio of girls set to change a male dominated college campus in DAMSELS IN DISTRESS. The trio attempt to rescue the students from falling into depression, grunge and low standards. Starring: Greta Gerwig, Adam Brody, Analeigh Tipton & Megalyn Echikunwoke. Want to see male dominance crumble?





Seems rather ironic that two films based around women trying to overthrow men are released the same weekend as the male dominated film Avenger's Assemble. Coincidence? Regardless I'm sure there is only one film on each persons lips this weekend. I'm sure I will be seeing it so come back Monday and read my review of it.

THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD movie review

The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford

Starring: Brad Pitt, Casey Affleck, Sam Shepard, Mary-Louise Parker

Running time: 140 minutes

Year: 2007

Directed By: Andrew Dominik

Written By: Andrew Dominik

                                       The Assassination Of Jesse James By The Coward Robert Ford trailer

In 1881 Jesse James (Pitt) was an outlaw. He was known to steal and murder. In 1881 he took part in his final train robbery, with his brother Frank (Shepard) and a new crew of his, after the death or arrest of his previous crew members. One of these new members is Charlie Ford (Sam Rockwell). Charlie's brother is Robert Ford (Affleck), a twenty year old in complete awe of Jesse James, being able to cite his stories and his trivia off the top of his head. He asks Jesse to join his gang and when Jesse accepts he does all he can to prove his worth, so much so that after the robbery Jesse asks Robert to stick around with him whilst the other members scatter across the country. Jesse seems to like the attention Robert puts on him. It makes him feel celebrity like. However after a while Robert's infatuation becomes too much and Jesse begins to wander about his new friend. He sends him off to join his brothers as the star struck Ford becomes too much.

Over the next few months the Ford brothers live at home with two other gang members who are constantly at each other's throats. So much so that one day it ends in one of their deaths. Meanwhile Jesse scales the country, killing those who are likely to betray him. He finally catches back up with the Ford brothers and asks them to accompany him on a bank heist. They set off to Jesse James house, for refuge until the robbery will take place, where Jesse's brutality, unpredictability and intimidation shine through, turning Ford from one time stalker to a potential killer. Ford's new emotions toward Jesse and a huge reward prize over his head, leave Robert Ford only one option. An option he must take before it is too late.

You may think I have given away too much there, but if you read the title you will realise I have not. We all know that the story is about Jesse James murder, and how he was betrayed by one of his most faithful partners, Robert Ford. This just shows you how and why it happened. You may already know if you have researched into this outlaw but if you don't this film is the exact story of his death, including the aftermath where Ford is labelled the coward.

The film is really brought to life by the performances. There are other good things about it, but the best aspect is the acting talent. For starters Brad Pitt is fantastic. He plays James with a sense of mystery and fear. The look in his eyes allows you to register what he is thinking without giving too much away. He also starts off as charming and ends up as a man you hate. The performance alone does all of this, even the dignity shown in his death when he either realises that his time is up, or he is testing Robert Ford's bravery. The entire performance is one that shows us so much. One of Pitt's best to date. Sam Rockwell is also very good as the slightly brain-less Charlie Ford. His reactions when lying are realistic, and they make us feel as if he really is hiding something. Jeremy Renner also pops up in a small role and is also very good, except from when he is obviously wearing a fake beard. The surprise breakthrough however comes from Casey Affleck who seems every bit Robert Ford. He begins timid, stuttering through his lines, in awe of Jesse, and as the film continues you can physically see him hide deeper inside himself before plucking up the courage to commit his deed. The events shown after the death are some of Affleck's best work, where he expects applause for shooting his gang leader but is surprised to see himself branded a coward. His slide back into his cave is brilliantly shown by Affleck. He is a great acting talent and here he really shows it. The cinematography is also beautiful showing us some lovely shots in wide open lands to show how isolated these characters really are.

The problem with the film then lies in the running time and the dire middle sector. The opening thirty minutes and the final forty five are great but the middle seventy minutes become dull. Too much time is spent away from the two leads, following characters that are not as integral to the plot. Sure they all have reasons for being there but we spend too much time concentrating on them when we really want to see the two leads. During the entire middle sector Pitt and Affleck hardly share a scene and they are the two you are really there to see.

The acting of this film pulls it through the middle slump, and I only think that if the film was cut slightly it could have been better. The bookends of the film are riveting but the middle becomes boring and the film becomes a drag, which is a shame considering the positives within this film. People seem to slate Pitt's acting talents and I advise them to all watch this to see how good he actually is. They will also be pleasantly surprised to see a man with the surname Affleck actually can act.

3 / 5

Next film to review: THE DEVIL'S ADVOCATE

THE ILLUSIONIST movie review

The Illusionist

Starring: Edward Norton, Jessica Biel, Paul Giamatti, Rufus Sewell

Running time: 110 minutes

Year: 2006

Directed By: Neil Burger

Written By: Neil Burger

The Illusionist trailer

The Illusionist fights a losing battle from the minute you press play. The automatic problem it has is that it is so similar to The Prestige that you instantly compare them. Unfortunately for The Illusionist, The Prestige is such a fantastic film; meaning from the start The Illusionist doesn't live up to expectations. I know you shouldn't really compare films but these two came out within six months of each other, both are period setting, and both about the art of illusion and magic. The Illusionist was released first, so maybe if you saw it first you will like it, however for those who saw it second will only be disappointed.

The Illusionist follows an illusionist called Eisenheim (Norton). As a child he fell in love with a young girl named Sophie. Their friendship was frowned upon due to their substantial class differences, so he found himself running from town to perfect a new found talent; magic. Fifteen years later he returns to Vienna to perform a new magic show. When he asks for a member of the audience as a volunteer, the new fiancée to the Crown Prince (Sewell) steps forward, she turns out to be none other than Sophie (Biel). Instantly their love for each other comes flooding back, and Eisenheim begins to mock her fiancée using his tricks. Knowing that Eisenheim is attempting to win his girls affections, the Crown Prince attempts to find out his secrets and shut him down using Chief Inspector Uhl (Giamatti). As Sophie begins to choose Eisenheim over the Crown Prince, Eisenheim must devise a plan to leave with his girl, especially since the Crown Prince is known for indulging in murder when he doesn't get what he wants.

I don't want to delve into too much detail of the plot as I don't want to give away whether or not Eisenheim is a master trickster or a man with supernatural power. The whole second half of the film Eisenheim raises spirits, and changes into a man of few words. Is it actually an illusion? This second half is where the film seems to run out of steam though. The film is based on a short story and it is very noticeable that it is as the film does begin to wear thin. The characters aren't very well developed and the plot seems very flat. Also the final twist to the film was very predictable, and came around all too easily. The characters spent the whole film unaware of what was going on and then all of a sudden someone understands it.

The acting was very average. Norton was not his usual self. His delivery of lines seemed to lack tension, but that could have been due to his accent he was putting on. In the second half however, where he mutters minimal words, he is much better as his eyes and facial expressions do the talking. Biel was average and shows that she can do period films as opposed to just teen romantic comedies. Giamatti is in first gear as was Rufus Sewell. I think overall the entire film was a disappointment really, but I think my problem is me comparing it to The Prestige, because I have to say this is nowhere near as good.

Some of the illusions are impressive, especially when Eisenheim removes his gloves, throws them in the air and they turn into crows. These tricks are all impressive but others, where he manipulates reflections in a mirror, have no explanation and it seems a little too unrealistic. This is where I much preferred The Prestige as at least they explained how the tricks worked, here he just raised spirits, and we never know how or why. I suppose maybe a magician never tells his secret.

I was expecting much more than what I ultimately got. I believe that I may have been harsh on this due to my love for Christopher Nolan's period magician piece; however this film could still have been as good if it had managed to make me believe in it. Unfortunately it did not. With a film exploring a plot like this I at least expect a fantastic pull-the-rug-from-underneath-me twist, but I'm afraid the ending seemed an easy way out and was guessed at the half way point. Regrettably The Illusionist failed to wow me.

2.5 / 5

Next film to review: THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD

NEWS - The Dark Knight Rises to show over an hour of IMAX footage

The main news of the week evolves around the most anticipated film of the year, The Dark Knight Rises. Christopher Nolan returns to the bat cave for his final installment which stars Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne/Batman, Tom Hardy as Bane and Anne Hathaway as Catwoman. Marketing material has been slow at the moment but it is rumoured that the new trailer will be attached to Avenger's Assemble which is released today, so maybe the marketing campaign is about to hit top notch again. We have also heard that the film will run at over 2 hours 30 minutes long, which is longer than The Dark Knight. It will be a bum numbing ride but if it's as good as The Dark Knight then I'm sure the screen time will flyby.

The main news about the film thought is that over an hour of the 2 hour 30 minute film will be entirely IMAX footage. Other films of the year including The Amazing Spiderman, Prometheus, Men In Black III and Dark Shadows will also be screened in IMAX but The Dark Knight Rises is the only one to have been filmed using the giant IMAX cameras. Christopher Nolan has begun to use IMAX cameras as if it his new directorial trait. He was the first director to use these cameras, whilst filming The Dark Knight, in which a handful of scenes were shot using it. He then upped the ante filming Inception where he filmed even more in IMAX, including that fantastic spinning hallway scene. Now he has raised the bar yet again and has over an hour of footage to show us. The film is gaining much pant wetting anticipation and excitement, and these new little bits of information have made those undergarments even wetter. Still there is a few months to wait for the biggest film of the year. It is released on 20th July. I suggest you all go out and grab tickets to see this in an IMAX cinema. Watch it how Christopher Nolan intended it. Just make sure you leave me a ticket.

A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET movie review

A Nightmare On Elm Street

Starring: Heather Langenkamp, Johnny Depp, Robert Englund, John Saxon

Running time: 91 minutes

Year: 1984

Directed By: Wes Craven

Written By: Wes Craven

A Nightmare On Elm Street trailer

Towards the end of the seventies and beginning of the eighties, we were blessed with some great horror films that have become cult classics today. First off there was Halloween, that introduced us to Michael Myers. Secondly was Friday the 13th which gave birth to Jason Voorhees. Next came A Nightmare On Elm Street which unleashed a demon into our dreams in Freddy Kruger. Looking back on this film now, after having Freddy Kruger being a huge horror villain as I grew up, I see that in the very first film he is nothing like he is interpreted today. The sequels seem to have ruined the character slightly as in the first film he is frightening, unpredictable and kept in the dark for most of the film, leaving you anticipating his next move. There are none of the wise cracks that he is resembled with today, and he is nothing like the version we saw in the 2010 remake. This is Freddy Kruger at his best.

For those who don't know, the film follows a girl called Nancy (Langenkamp) and her group of friends. One by one they begin to have nightmares, each involving the same man, Fred Kruger. This man is heavily scared, wears a hooped red and green jumper, a tatty hat, and has knives for fingers. As the group begin to realise they are dreaming of the same guy one of the girls is killed in her dream by Fred Kruger, which kills her in real life. This is shown in a fantastic scene where this poor girl is dragged across the ceiling, blood spilling from her but no other person in sight. Once this girl is killed her boyfriend becomes the main suspect and he has no way to prove his innocence. The only one that believes him is Nancy, who has now started to have these nightmares more frequently, and finds herself attempting to stay awake for days on end in order to avoid her nightmare. Once the truth about Freddy is revealed she devises a way to finally bring a stop to her nightmare and sets up a trap involving her boyfriend (Depp) to finish Kruger once and for all.

What makes this stand out from other horror films of its time is that it explores the notion of dream against reality. At times during the film you are unaware of which reality we are in and this really adds to the visuals of the film, especially when we see Freddy's destruction in reality and he isn't even there. We are also introduced to another horror icon who doesn't remain silent throughout, and walk like a machine hell bent on death. We have a killer insistent on laughing at the poor children he is tormenting, and one that also looks feeble in comparison to other icons. He may not be as scary as Michael Myers but something about Freddy Kruger really sends a shiver down your spine.

Considering the film was made nearly thirty years ago, it is still pretty scary. Scenes that show a blood soaked girl calling out from inside a body bag is chilling, and the scene when she is dragged around the room by nobody is incredibly disturbing and one you won't be able to shift from you minds. The opening scene played with the opening credits prepares you for what you are about to see as Freddy makes the knives which become his fingers, a great way to set this character up. Other scenes however aren't as scary and can look a little comedic, but I think that is due to the low budget and standard of film making back then.

Robert Englund, who plays Freddy, is brilliant in this film. He brings the character to life and I'm sure would scare children if they watch this film. The make up for him is brilliant and his costume is now very iconic. Langenkamp unfortunately is not great in her role as Nancy, and it is her kind of performance that stereotypes today's horror female leads as poor actors. Her delivery of lines at times is amateurish which makes you struggle to route for her. Really all you want to see when you get into the film is Kruger. Depp is average in his performance, and it is hard to see the Depp of today in his performance here.

The film is full of clichés but you can over look these as horror in the eighties was designed like this. To watch it now you would cringe or roll your eyes at the character decisions to venture into the dark due to a noise, but when this was made that was brand new and wasn't as frowned upon. There are some scenes which are bad though and can't use the excuse of when it was made. One scene Nancy manages to set up a house full of booby traps in ten minutes, which includes setting a sledge hammer up above a door. There would not be enough time to set this up and certainly not if she had to find the items to use as well. Also she lives alone with her mother, what use would they have for a sledge hammer. It is parts like that in movies which is really frustrating. Also the ending disappointed me. I know it was supposed to be a twist but it didn't really make sense with the rest of the film. This ending also shows the worst piece of special effects on show.

All in all I can see why this is a classic. We are introduced to a new villain, and asked to believe in the notion of dreams being real. To look at it now it isn't as good as it would have been thirty years ago, but it is still better than the poor remake. The poor effects of this film really do add to the suspense of it all. Halloween this is not, but an influential horror film it certainly is.  

3 / 5

Next film to review: THE ILLUSIONIST

QUESTION: What is the best science-fiction film?

The new film Lockout was a science fiction action film, and when I came to think about it sci-fi is probably the most subjective film genre. People either seem to love it or hate it. If you are willing to suspend your belief and enter the world of space and futuristic components, than it can really be a fantastic experience. Also some of the best films made are science fiction, so what I want to know is what do you think is the best science fiction movie? Pick from the five below or add your own nomination in the comments.







1. ALIEN - In space no one can hear you scream. A space shuttle lands on an empty planet only to pick up an uninvited guest. A guest that likes to hug your face and bust open your chest.











2. BLADE RUNNER - A deep thinking philosophical science fiction film starring Harrison Ford. Ford plays a blade runner who must track down and kill awol artificial humans known as replicants.








3. STAR WARS - Following Luke Skywalker and Hans Solo in their quest to rescue Princess Leia from Darth Vader, who is also determined to destroy the galaxy.











4. THE MATRIX -Keanu Reeves is 'the one' called Neo, who is awoken to what the real world is actually like; a post apocalyptic world run by machines. The matrix is simply the illusion that the world is how we see it now.








5. THE TERMINATOR - Arnold Schwarzenegger plays the terminator. A cyborg sent back in time to kill Sarah Connor; the woman whose son will eventually destroy the cyborgs in the future.









All of these films have their loyal fans, and each one is pretty good. All have influenced lots of films around today, and I'm sure will for years to come. Tell us which one is your favourite in the comments below.

New on DVD this week: The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo

Again only 1 main DVD release this week, again starring Daniel Craig only this time a much better film. I can understand why this film is the only release of the week. Taking a hit at the box office the marketers will be doing all they can to gain DVD sales in order to get a sequel going. I suppose they hope that with it being the only release people will choose to buy it. In some respects I do think you need to get out and watch this film, it is pretty good.


Highly Recommended
THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO - Daniel Craig and Rooney Mara star in the remake of the Swedish thriller. Craig plays a journalist who is given the task of investigating into the disappearance of a wealthy man's niece. Craig needs all the help he can get, especially as he delves deeper into the mystery, and hires a socially inept, punk girl called Lisbeth Salander, played by Rooney Mara, possibly one of the greatest characters invented.

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo trailer