FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS

Friends With No Strings 

Review by: Jade

When I got the screening invite to Friends with Benefits – the new romantic comedy starring Justin Timberlake and Mila Kunis – I called James to see if he was going to do this review.

Jade: Are you going to the screening of Friends with Benefits?

James: I’ve already seen it. I watched it on the plane.

Jade: What did you think? Was it good?

James: I could only watch the first 20 minutes. Then I turned it off.

Jade: I’m really surprised it’s on planes already? It’s not released in cinemas for another month and a half.

It turns out James was talking about No Strings Attached – another romantic comedy starring Ashton Kutcher and Natalie Portman.

So off I went to the screening with my buddy Mel in tow. Why? Because she had seen No Strings Attached and I needed a cheat sheet to see how similar Friends with Benefits was to No Strings Attached. Some people have commented it is the same film. And if I’m really honest, I just wanted to evaluate how vague James is (I know, I know. Mila and Natalie were both in Black Swan. Mila and Ashton were both in That 70’s Show. It’s not hard to get it all confused). 

Friends with Benefits is the story of… well friends with benefits. Sexual benefits. Jamie (Mila Kunis) is a corporate head-hunter who recruits Dylan (Justin Timberlake) to New York to take a job at GQ magazine. Of course Dylan knows no one in New York. So of course Dylan and Jamie become friends. And of course they take a stab at that whole mythical idea of being friends who have sex without commitment or complication. Sound like another Hollywood rom-com? Kinda.

The opening scene stars brief appearances from Andy Samberg and Emma Stone who play Jamie and Dylan’s ex-partners respectively. So the first 5 minutes of the film set my expectations high. I LOVE this cast!

MILA – Hot! And her Awards season wardrobe was KILLER this year. And she dated Macauly Culkin.

JT – He dated Britney, ditched a great music career to star in Facebook and then bought into myspace? Random!

ANDY – THE LONELY ISLAND!!!

EMMA – What hot blonde goes back to being a ranga? That’s pretty cool. And she’s just such a spunk.

I have to admit I was fairly distracted throughout the film and can’t really remember a lot about it (note to self: write review after seeing the film, not 4 weeks later).

TOP 5 DISTRACTIONS DURING FRIENDS WITH BENEFITS

1. Richard Wilkins had his shoes off and his feet on the seat – which just so happened to be near my head. It was thoroughly disgusting. I think I may have spewed in my own mouth.
2. Jamie & Dylan go to Café Habana which is one of the many restaurants James, Mel and I have occupied in NYC together. OMG the corn there is SO good. SO good. It’s unbeatable. In fact I started thinking about all the corn I’ve tried in Australia recently. The Norfolk (shit), MsG’s (ok), Mama Sita (pretty good) – but none of them stack up to Café Habana by a long shot. I’m hungry now. I can’t wait to meet James for KFC after this. God, am I really going to eat chicken though? I’m vego. But KFC is hardly chicken is it. Ok I think I will have a burger. Or maybe a drumstick. I wish there was frozen coke here.
3. What ever happened to JT’s music career? Man, the I Think She Knows interlude after Lovestoned is so good. 3.28 is the magic number I use to jump to just to hear my favourite part. I should listen to that when I get home. Oh that’s right, I let my ex keep all my CDs and records http://youtu.be/QUuKvHHt8Sk
4. Is Jenna Elfman still a scientologist? And is she still friends with Kate Cebrano? Yumi and I use to talk about joining Scientology. We were mildly obsessed.
5. James. I wonder how similar this film actually is to No Strings Attached. And how James is so NOT my friend with benefits – that’s not entirely true. He helped me move house. And most importantly he was my wingman when I met my fiancé. He flew to Melbourne with me and went to some random festival where we knew no one just so I could tune some guy. Now that’s my idea of a real friend with benefits.

Ok back to the movie. Sorry!

Despite being a fairly traditional rom-com plot, there are elements of the film that set it apart and allow it to be more than just another rom-com. The dialogue starts off witty, funny and smart. They even make stabs at rom-coms and Katherine Heigl. There’s spunk and sass and the characters are confident and brash. It doesn’t seem as clichéd as you would expect from a rom-com.

The casting is exceptional. Patricia Clarkson (who played Emma Stone’s mother in Easy A) plays Jamie’s mother. Jenna Elfman plays Dylan’s sister. And Woody Harrelson plays Tommy, the gay sportswriter at GQ who probably wants to be Dylan’s friend with benefits too. Woody does not disappoint. He’s hilarious and lovable. And pro snowboarder Shaun White shows that some sport stars actually can act (not like Tony Hawk who starred in a film I worked on once – bless him, he can skate like a demon and run a business worth billions, but acting just ain’t his bag). Shaun is surprisingly very good though.

Ultimately this is a couple trying to defy the clichés of a Hollywood romantic comedy. They think they can do a casual sexual relationship with no emotional attachment. And hey, they wouldn’t be the first. But the sad thing is, they do end up being the Hollywood cliché. Which means the film does too. And Jamie, who starts out as an empowered, strong, funny, independent woman suddenly becomes another crazy, needy, psycho. Nooooo Mila, I love you!

At the end of the day, I love a good rom-com… on a plane. And this is one I would happily watch and enjoy while eating my vegetarian meal that makes me bloated and constipated and has no chocolate or cake (vego does not mean I want an apple for dessert!). It’s not amazing. It’s nothing new. But it’s not terrible and it’s easy to watch.

It turns out Mel didn’t think Friends with Benefits was that similar to No Strings Attached. Although the ending may be the same, the plot is slightly different. Mel rated No Strings Attached as the funnier film and reckons Ashton Kutcher is a better actor than JT. But James turned it off 20 minutes in? But he also told me it was Friends With Benefits?

I guess James is somewhat vague.

3 STARS

SYNOPSIS: Friends take a shot at casual sex with no emotional attachment

WHO SHOULD SEE IT: Those flying, rom-com fans, Medynski, those who enjoyed No Strings Attached

RELEASE DATE: In cinemas today

THE RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES

Time to go a little apeshit

Review by: James

I have two thoughts going into this film. The first: "If this movie is just Freida Pinto in a lab coat doing data entry for 90 minutes, I'm ok with that." I understand that is unlikely. But let’s be honest, she is an incredible looking young woman. I have never been to India, but I imagine that as well as a rich cultural fabric and majestic landscape and history, there are also heaps of babes in Saris. That might be totally unrealistic and completely ill informed, but with a population that huge, by my calculations it would require just 1% of Indian women to be mildly Freida Pinto-esque, and then we are talking about 600 million hotties just wondering the streets of Mumbai, or Delhi or Thiruvananthapuram. And you wanted to go to the Ukraine to find a wife. 

My second thought is “Why? Why are we doing this again?” This is like the 6th attempt at this franchise? I mean how many cracks at Planet of the Apes does Hollywood want? Guys, it’s over.  While the first one is a cult classic, with its frontal lobotomies, dodgy make up and Charlton Heston trying to fuck a monkey,  Tim Burton’s 2001 remake is clunky, uninspired and a massive let down. So you gotta wonder if another version is needed. But that’s never stopped Hollywood before. So lets just put that aside and watch this thing. I mean, why am I even having thoughts before I go into a movie anyway? That usually doesn't happen. Stupid brain. Shut up for a minute will you?

Anyway, as it turns out, Rise of the Planet of the Apes (could you have a more confusing title?) isn’t really a remake at all, its a completely new premise that just sort of borrows the Apes title. James Franco plays a brilliant scientist (already we have to suspend disbelief) who is using chimps to find a cure for Alzheimer’s which has struck down his father (John Lithgow. The man does some real good crazy). After an experiment with the new drug goes haywire, Franco ends up adopting a chimp in order to save its life. He names it “Caesar”, after his favourite salad, and forces it to wear trousers. Things quickly unravel though, as the supposed cure has made his pet chimp smarter than Rainman and as nimble as a 12 year old Chinese gymnast. Being too clever and too powerful for his own good, Caesar finds himself taken to monkey prison, and that, is where shit gets crazy. Caesar, backed into a corner, alone, confused and angry, somehow turns into the Che Guevera of chimps, and orchestrates an uprising against the humans, in order to finally be free. Of trousers.

Or something like that. Freida Pinto is not in it nearly as much as I would have liked, but she’s pleasant as the vet/girlfriend, and makes me even more enthusiastic about my holiday plans to India. Franco is likeable enough, but in the end, the god honest truth is that he is acted off the screen by a monkey. Quite seriously. The real star of the film is the chimp (played by Andy Serkis with the help of Lord of the Rings CGI team WETA). And its here that the movie succeeds, as all the emotional pull that’s required, the tense undercurrent that powers the whole thing, only works if the chimp is believable, which he totally is. Serkis was also “Gollum” in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, so he’s sort of the go to guy if you need someone to play a creepy, needy hominoid. In fact, the entire cast of CGI apes are pretty amazing, proving that WETA Digital is the best thing to come out of New Zealand since Dave Dobbyn.

Although the trailer makes the movie look like some sort of action extravaganza – a battle royale between humanity and a dangerous gang of ‘roid rage apes – it in actual fact is a compelling emotional drama about the struggle for freedom and fighting to find your true self. Apes, despite having the potential to have been a popcorn shitpuddle, is a pleasant surprise. Plus it also features a Gorilla tackling a Helicoptor mid air. And you can’t tell me there is any part of that sentence that isn’t awesome.

3 STARS

SUMMARY: Project X meets Limitless

WHO SHOULD SEE IT: Primate aficionados,  Sci Fi fans.

RELEASE DATE: In cinemas today 

CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE FIRST AVENGER

U-S-A!! U-S-A!!!

Review by: James

This year, it feels like too many of the movies I’ve watched at the cinema are just comic adaptations. It has been an onslaught of comic book character films -  The Green Hornet, X-Men: First Class, Thor and Justin Bieber: Never Say Never.

Luckily, the standard overall has been pretty good, but I do wonder if we are veering a little close to burn out. There’s only so much superhero stuff that people can take before the backlash begins. But before that happens, let’s take a moment to realise how lucky we are that things are this bright. Think back just a few years, and you’ll recall that for the comic book superhero genre, things got really, really, really bad. Remember the filthy depths of bong resin we were subject to?

Oh dear.

Top 5 worst comic adaptations (The Golden Era 1997-2007)

5. Daredevil.

Its weird, they cast Ben Affleck, Jennifer Garner and Colin Farrell as the leads and it still didn’t work.

4. Catwoman.

Halle Berry makes a bad Best Actress decision. Even if she returns the Oscar, and shows you her boobs again, it still won’t make up for this film crime.

3. Ghostrider.

So bad, it could be Nicholas Cage’s worst film. I know!!

2. Batman and Robin.

Responsible for the career deaths of Alicia Silverstone and Chris O’Donnell. So maybe it’s not so bad.

1. Elektra.

Every Christmas, thank Santa that you never saw this cinematic Chernobyl.

Of course there have been comic book films worse than these, the 80’s and early 90’s is littered with corpses (Captain America even had its first go in 1990. Not good.) 

But the more recent abominations prove how quickly things have turned around. Thank god for Marvel Studios, they’ve almost single-handedly restored the genre, and Captain America: The First Avenger sees them stay the course.  Sort of.  A touch better than The Incredible Hulk, on par with Thor, but nowhere near Iron Man. 

The First Avenger sees weedy but honest Steve Rogers, (a CGI scrawny Chris Evans), get recruited by the army to be part of an experiment to create the super soldier. Hand picked because of his pure heart, they put him into a tanning bed, twist some knobs and he come out a few minutes later looking like a man raised on a diet of steroids and Fitness First memberships. MEGA BUFF!!!  Taller, faster and with super human athleticism, (think a white Ben Johnson circa 1998) He transforms into Captain America, which is cool, but from this point on in the cinema I develop a strong sense that I have very little idea what is going on, but I also have a stronger sense that it no longer matters. It’s something about our hero locating and destroying secret factories that convert mystical energy into Nazi powered laser guns (of course!!). Everything moves along so fast that it’s hard not to get swept up in it all, as our brave Captain tries to destroy Redskull (played by an excellent Hugo Weaving) while attempting to bone his English Rose love interest (played by generic attractive brunette – aka Hayley Atwell).

Ultimately, the movie floats because square jawed Chris Evans could only have been more perfect as Captain America if he was also an NFL quarterback who is dating Reese Witherspoon. And secondly, having Rogers chosen for the job because of his essential goodness, not his ability or bravado, ensures that even before he becomes a hero, were rooting for him.  The movie, like Captain America himself, is well meaning, highly attractive, not hugely interesting, but worth a go. And for those of you who had any lingering doubt about the United States being the greatest fucking country on earth, you can go shove it. Captain America proves that USA is still number one! U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A! What colour is freedom? Excuse me? Of course you would ask that you bleeding heart, commie-loving lefty asshole. Go help your wife with her shopping. U-S-A!!!!!!

(If you’re playing at home, the colour of freedom is Red, White and Blue).

3 STARS

SYNOPSIS: America Rules!!! Shield chucking fun.

WHO SHOULD SEE IT: Skinny guys, Americans.

RELEASE DATE: In cinemas now 

Additional Notes from Jade: I also saw the film with James. We saw it in 3D and to be honest I spent the first 25 minutes of the film trying to figure out if my 3D glasses were working. The 3D in this film is pretty pathetic and not really worth the worry. However I was impressed that the glasses were multi-ethnic fitting - that's right they actually fit very nicely on an Asian's face despite the fact Asian's have no real nose bridge and generally need to wear glasses on their cheeks. 

I didn't think Hugo Weaving was that great. In fact his German accent sucked balls. Why can't actors do good German accents unless they actually are German? 

James is right - it's better than Hulk. But not better than Iron Man. Although I am not a comic book nerd (and apologies to all those comic book nerds, because I know you hate being called nerds), I know this is the lead in film to The Avengers (also because if you stay for the long credits you are rewarded with a teaser from the next instalment starring Samuel L Jackson and Robert Downey Jr). It does feel like Captain America is simply the set up for The Avengers - which I think looks awesome! Iron Man standard. My friend Sam is a comic book nerd and I couldn't help but wonder what he would have thought of this film. He was probably grumbling and dissatisfied - that's kinda Sam's vibe. 

I also had the misfortune of seeing The Green Hornet recently. I love Michel Gondry - and prior to this film, I have loved every music video and film he has directed. He is a brilliant director and I love his vision. But I guess every great director succumbs to the Hollywood big budget piece of shit at some point in their career. And this is Gondry's. 

Basically The Green Hornet is the story of a rich pratt who becomes the owner / publisher of a newspaper after the sudden death of his father. Fast-forward and he becomes a masked vigilante fighting crime. Cameron Diaz plays the token hot female. 

Seth Rogen plays the son who is so unlikeable and punishing - even when you're suppose to come around and like him in the end, you don't. The only word that I could think of was "yuck". What a punisher. Not funny. Still arrogant. 

The film is a cross between Billy Madison and Kick-Ass but without the humour of Adam Sandler and without the awesomeness of Nicholas Cage. 

It's by no means close to the calibre of Iron Man or even Captain America. It's a watered down, boring take on a superhero film. And it just makes me hate Seth Rogen's guts. He was way better when he liked pies. 

THE TREE OF LIFE

Cosmic hocus pocus + Suburban Focus + Diplodocus =

Review by: James

2 points before we start.

1) I think Terrence Malick is just fantastic. His Pocahontas epic The New World is great, and The Thin Red Line is my favourite war movie ever. Apart from Stripes.

2) I'm terrified of the retail clothing store "Tree of life". Even being near it makes me uncomfortable. Crystals, feathers, kaftans. It just makes no sense to me at all. But I guess Angus and Julia Stone need to get their outfits from somewhere. 

I disclose the first point however because it means this review is probably biased. Whatever. The second point however was probably unnecessary. (Seriously though, what the fuck is that store? Anyone??) 

Set in a small town in Texas, The Tree of Life follows the story of three young boys, growing up in American suburbia in the 1950's. It centers on the oldest boy, Jack, (Hunter McCracken) who is struggling to come to terms with what is becoming an increasingly complicated world. Split between a wondrous, loving mother (Jessica Chastain), and a stern, driven father (Brad Pitt), Jacks confusion, and discovery, become part of something else much bigger, as we dip in and out of time, and space. Yes space. Did I mention there are dinosaurs? Not in the 1950's. But heaps earlier. So yeah. Sprawling middle-American family drama with dinosaurs.  For a kid, the acting of Hunter McCracken is totally brilliant. As good as you'll see from a young actor. In fact the performances from everyone are excellent, except for maybe Sean Penn, who spends most of his screen time looking like a man who can't remember where he's parked his car. 

 At times, The Tree of Life jumps around without explanation, and it can feel a bit bewildering, but if you can disregard your uncertainty about what’s happening, and trust that you're in good hands, then everything becomes much more enjoyable (much like an unsolicited back massage). On the other hand, there’s a genuine sense of beauty and wonder throughout the whole thing. Every single shot seems to be designed to evoke an emotion. And I love that. I also love just how polarising the response to the film has been. Some people talk about it like they've had some sort of highbrow cinematic orgasm, whilst others seem to hate it more than The Last Airbender. About 5% of audience goers in the States are even walking out mid movie, which I really don't get. Anyone whose heard a little bit about it, or about the director, understands that like his previous movies, it’s a slow, very deliberately paced film. Surely you know what you're getting into before you buy your ticket? Its like that time Jade and I went to that fried chicken place in Nashville (Prince’s) and ordered the extra-hot chicken wings:

Chicken Guy: "Are you sure about that? They are super hot." 

Me: "I'm pretty good with Spicy food"

Chicken Man: " Yeah, It's just that sometimes people find them a little too much...”

Me: "Dude, I think I can handle your chicken wings ok?"

So I ordered the chicken wings, and I you know what? They were waaaaay too spicy. My lips felt like they were being tasered and my eyes were all watering and I was sweating and I couldn't even finish eating the whole thing.  You know what I mean?

The Tree of Life might not be the easiest thing to watch, but it’s unlike anything I've ever seen. Which I guess is a pretty big wrap. I saw it three days ago, and I'm still thinking about it. I'm thinking about my own childhood and the feeling that came with it. I'm thinking about how everyone and everything shapes what we become. I'm thinking about dinosaurs. And I'm also thinking about the fact that the popcorn at EVENT cinemas could only be more expensive if it was coated in cocaine instead of sea salt. (11 bucks? Are you fucking kidding me?)

Will you like it? I don't know. What do I look like? The Mentalist? (I don't even own a waistcoat.) What I do know is that The Tree of Life is challenging, full of emotion, stunningly beautiful but also at times confusing and even a touch boring. Probably a bit like dating Jessica Biel.

4 stars

SUMMARY: Discovery channel meets revolutionary road meets Koyaanisqatsi meets Stand by me

WHO SHOULD SEE IT: Jessica Biel fans, spicy chicken lovers. 
RELEASE DATE: In cinemas now

WOULD YOU RATHER Leo, Matt or Mark?

This week The Cheap Seats revisits one of Yumi's favourite films The Departed. Which leads to the fairly obvious question... WOULD YOU RATHER shag Leonard DiCaprio, Matt Damon or Mark Wahlberg?

Which of course then leads to the question... WOULD YOU RATHER Cuba Gooding Jnr or Freddie Prinze Jnr?

Due to the controversial nature of the surrounding content, we were unable to reveal Yumi's second answer. But just so you don't feel ripped off, she would rather Cuba Gooding Jnr.

CHICK FLICKS PART 3: Bridesmaids, more than just another chick flick

Here is the final part of our behind the scenes videos on Chick Flicks. We're finishing with the film that inspired this series... that's right, the awesome Bridesmaids.

If you've seen advanced screenings of the film or are seeing it this weekend, make sure you tell us what you thought. You can comment here on our blogspot, or on our twitter or facebook. So many options!

In this final Chick Flicks video Yumi explains why Bridesmaids is more than just a chick flick and why James will love it (but will he?)

CHICK FLICKS PART 2: The Rules of Chick Flicking

James still seems confused when it comes to Chick Flicks. Face munching? Anne Hathaway's boobs? Sheesh. Yumi tries to explain the rules of chick flicks 

CHICK FLICKS PART 1: James' Top Chick Flicks

We told you we were going bananas over Bridesmaids.

In this week's behind the scenes video, James and Yumi talk chick flicks. In not 1, not 2 but 3 videos!

Part 1 sees James share his favourite chick flicks with Yumi. Who would have thought robots, cars and prostitutes all equal chick flick?! And people wonder why he's single?!

BLANKIE TIME!

This was Yumi's pick for our show title. Blankie Time and Sloppy Meats. Obviously she was out-voted on both counts. The Cheap Seats it is.

James & Yumi are currently watching The Hangover Part 2. We know there's currently controversy surrounding this film. Australian stunt man Scott McLean who plays Ed Helm's stunt double was seriously injured whilst performing a scene in Thailand. McLean's family are upset the scene was still used in the film after it left the stuntman in a coma with a brain injury. McLean is apparently on the road to recovery and is now walking again. Get well soon Scott!

Although this news has put a dark cloud over the film, here at The Cheap Seats we're striving to keep things fun. If you've read our review of The Hangover Part 2 or seen the film then you know that Zach Galifianakis steals the show. This performance inspires Yumi to share with James her Top 5 Fat Guys she would sleep with. Video coming very soon!

Yumi has also been lucky enough to see Bridesmaids and we'll be sharing her awesome review with you next week.

Don't forget to check out our other videos and reviews and feel free to join in on the conversation here or on our facebook & youtube pages. We wanna know what you think too!

http://www.facebook.com/cheapseatstv
http://www.youtube.com/cheapseatstv
http://www.twitter.com/cheapseatstv

TOP 5: Ways To Dispose A Body

After watching Snowtown together, James & Yumi discuss the Top 5 ways to dispose a body

THE HANGOVER PART 2

SAME SAME BUT DIFFERENT

Review by: Jade

The title says it all. The Hangover Part 2 is essentially the same story and same premise as the original. So what's different? Well I can't tell you because that would spoil it.

What I can tell you about this film is this...

- I laughed out loud 5 times but I laughed on the inside maybe 10 times

- It's all about Alan. I didn't laugh for the first 10 minutes of the film until Alan appeared – just the sight of him makes you want to roll around on the floor. Especially with his awesome yellow Labrador t-shirt and his pronunciation of Thailand

- A smoking monkey will always win hearts 

- Mr. Chow is back but his Engrish accent just isn't up to scratch

- Bradley Cooper is sexy but you can’t help wondering if maybe he’s gay

- I have a friend who looks uncannily similar to Alan and it kept scaring me

- Mike Tyson sings in the film. This was one of my 5 laugh-out-loud moments 

- As far as sequels go, it’s pretty good

The other day I came home to hear my flatmate Mel screaming uproariously and rolling around on the couch watching the original Hangover. She almost fell off she was laughing so hard. And since James stood me up, I took Mel along to see The Hangover Part 2.

Set in Thailand, it would be a crime if the film weren’t riddled with Asian gags, clichés and stereotypes. 

James and I have actually been to Bangkok together with our own Wolfpack and had our own version of the Hangover. But we were not getting married. And Mike Tyson was not there. But we did go to a strip joint. And we did see two ladies "performing" to My Heart Will Go On. I spent more money at the strip joints than I did at the shops (which says something considering I brought home 2 extra suitcases). The girls obviously thought I was one of them and would always ask me for money - not James or any of the other 4 men I was traveling with. No, they thought I would understand and be sympathetic. Which brings me to my next point - I was with 5 white men - making me look like the best whore in town. 

We also met some Australasian med students who tried to push their drugs on me (in fact they were drugs that help us Asian's break down alcohol because apparently 50% of us don't have the enzyme that does break it down).

This is the only photo I took on the entire trip. 

We went superclubbing where a band was playing in the ladies bathroom. We went to a fight in a bar. One of our friends met the love of his life. And on the plane home, we watched My Friend Flicker, which brought James to tears.

TOP 5 MOVIES I WATCHED ON A PLANE THAT MADE ME CRY

1. Morning Glory

2. Marley & Me

3. The Back Up Plan

4. Valentines Day

5. The Ugly Truth

I’m not sure what it is about rom coms that makes me

a) want to watch them on planes and

b) cry (and I’m talking genuine, real sobbing kinda stuff where I have to blow my nose on the cheap blanket they give you)

Anyway this really has nothing to do with The Hangover Part 2. Except to highlight that maybe our trip to Bangkok was just as fun as the real Wolfpacks. Only we came home with all our fingers and none of us got buttfucked (although I can't really vouch for all the guys).

And maybe the other reason I told you about mine and James' trip was because I really don't have much to say about this film without giving the good stuff away - because let's face it, if you've seen the original you already know the storyline. Anything worth mentioning will ruin it for you.

The Hangover Part 2 is fun, ridiculous and it will make you laugh. Mel laughed. But she didn’t fall out of her seat. Me I'm bias - I still think Chin or the Ranch is funnier.


Oh and here's some background for those who do not know what P.F.Changs is... It's a Chinese restaurant chain in the US that specialises in Western-made shit Chinese food.

STARS: 3 stars

SUMMARY: Two nights in Bangkok 

WHO SHOULD SEE IT: Fans of the original Hangover. Racists.

RELEASE DATE: Out Now

WOULD YOU RATHER a chin or a ranch?

James tells Yumi about George Lucas' latest plans for Star Wars and also poses an interesting question...

SOURCE CODE

STATE RAIL AND PEAK HANDSOME

Review by: James

I reckon you can watch the trailer for any movie and within 30 seconds decide two things:

1) This movie is going to be unreal/terrible and 

2) I am going to love/hate this movie.

And normally if a film is terrible you are going to hate it, and vice versa. Strangely though, this is not always the case.

Recent Example: Battle: Los Angeles.

Upon seeing the trailer, I knew immediately that is was going to be a terrible film. I also knew immediately that I would love it. And yep, nailed it. Correct on  both fronts. (Yumi would argue that I’m being ridiculous and there is no way you could like this film. She would be wrong.)

But just when you think you have honed your YouTube trailer watching snap judgement skills to a ninja-like precision, a film comes along and fucks it all up. Before seeing Source Code, I watched the trailer and had the immediately certain reaction “that looks woeful and I will not enjoy it”. I’d decided it was like a sci-fi version of last years  very average Unstoppable. I was wrong on all counts.  Nice one brain.

Source Code begins when Jake Gyllenhaal, wakes up on a train. He knows not where he is, who he is or what is happening. There is an attractive woman in front of him.  This has never happened to me. The last time I woke up on a train not knowing who I was or what was happening, I was trying to get home drunk from Homebush Bay. There was someone else’s blood on my shirt and stale Doritos in my hair. There was no attractive woman. It was a horrible night. If only I could have woken up as Jake Gyllenhaal.

For the first part of Source Code, this scenario plays itself out over and over again.  Jake and I are both thinking “What the fuck is going on here?” but together we start to make sense of it all. Sort of.  Turns out Jake is a soldier being used in a revolutionary physics distorting experiment where he can go right inside someone else’s body (not like that.) There’s a bomb on the train you see, he’s got to find who planted it, and save the girl. Or does he? By the way, you’ve  only got 8 minutes.

Michelle Monaghan, who is like a hot version of Katie Holmes is the bewildered but patient girl on the train. Vera Farmiga , my second favourite Ukranian-American actress (behind Mila Kunis) is Jake’s military contact to the outside world.  I like the cut of her jib.

Have you noticed that Jake Gyllenhaal gets more handsome every year? He is currently 30, and at this rate I imagine at about 38, he will enter an illustrious zone called “Peak Handsomeness”. This is the small but fantastic 18 month period where you are as hot as you are ever going to look. The tricky part is that you only know you were there after it ends. After that point it is a very slow but deliberate slide in the other direction. It is truly a glorious, golden time for any actor/model/hornbag. And although many movie stars stay attractive well into their late 40’s and beyond, that high watermark of hotness, the summit of your aesthetic Mt Everest is a wondrous, fleeting time. Some examples of Peak Handsomeness in film are:

- Although outrageously ripped in Fight Club, Brad Pitt’s peak handsomeness actually occurred during Oceans Eleven. He was 37.

- You want to say Out of Sight for Clooney, but it actually didn’t happen till he was 44 in Goodnight and Goodluck.

- Depp is a tricky one, as there seems no end to his exquisiteness trajectory. But he was never more arse-clenchingly (not really a word) gorgeous than at 36 in Chocolat

- Steve Buscemi has either not yet reached peak handsomeness or it happened very, very young.

As for Source Code… Director Duncan Jones (who was behind 2009’s truly excellent Moon) makes sure its tense, never dull and that it falls into one of my all time favourite film categories: Movies under 100 minutes long (more on that in coming weeks).

Probably the best time travel body displacement action adventure film of the year. So far.

STARS: Not quite 4 but more than 3 stars sounds like too many. 3.75 stars.

SUMMARY: I didn’t know what was happening either.

WHO SHOULD SEE IT: Fans of Groundhog Day. People who like trains.

RELEASE DATE: In cinemas now  

PAUL

Finally…

Review by: James

Alien films fall into two categories. They end up being either the greatest films EVER made e.g. Predator, Alien/s, Starship Troopers, Close Encounters, ET, My Stepmother is an Alien OR they fall into the basket of films so bad, you would happily fetch the vaseline for your own anal probe rather than have to sit through them: Signs, The Chronicles of Riddick, Skyline, Meet Dave, Alien Vs Predator and Species I,II,III and IV (Can you believe they made 4 of those fucking things? But not a single sequel to Top Gun? Jesus. Priorities guys!)

PAUL, cinemas latest extra terrestrial offering, somehow dodges both camps and finds its way squarely in the no mans land that is mediocrity. Not bad, not great, sort of funny but not actually.

After the success of Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz, Simon Pegg did some fairly questionable Hollywood films (What's the one where he is fat and has to run a lot? It was like an ep of The Biggest Loser) but here he reunites with buddy Nick Frost for a back to basics Brit-fish out of water bromance. They play sci-fi loving, comic reading nerds, on a roadtrip across America. As part of their ET fascination, they visit famous UFO crash sites where people claim to have contact with aliens, when, NO WAY!! they actually meet one on their travels. What are the odds? Enter computer generated comedy Alien (with the voice of Seth Rogen) Paul, who needs their help. He is on the run from the Government operatives who want to smash him open like a crab.

YUM!! You know it Harry!!

Secret government agents, explosions, car chases across the dessert... It rolls along like some distorted version of cannonball run.  But Burt Reynolds is Simon Pegg and Farrah Fawcett is an alien. Actually, that’s a terrible example. Do kids even know what the fuck Cannonball Run is?  That movie came out over 30 years ago, and they legally let people into nightclubs who were born in 1992. How is that even possible?  Fully grown humans that were born in 1992!! That’s just stupid. So on second thoughts, Cannonball Run is not such a great example. It’s too ancient. Plus to be honest, this movie bears very little resemblance to Cannonball Run. Except that Farrah Fawcett IS an alien.

The whole thing is sort of pleasant without being memorable. They best bits are the self referential geek jokes, the gay nerd subtext and a cameo from Sigourney Weaver, who at 62 still looks hotter than a $10 stereo. I wonder what it is with all these actresses who manage to stay totally sexy despite being as old as everyone I knows mum.  Impressive, but strangely freakish at the same time. Oh dear Yumi, My word count is crying out for a TOP 5...Can't. Hold out. Any.Longer....

TOP 5 Most Chronically Bangable Actresses Over 60

1. Goldie Hawn. She's still pretty smoking. Or is it her daughter that’s really hot? I'm pretty sure I can't tell the difference.

2. Kim Bassinger. You'd totally have a go and then tell everybody.

3. Hellen Mirren. You would, but probably wouldn't tell everybody.

4. Sigourney Weaver. Have you SEEN the deltoids on her? 

5. Dame Judy Dench. Nuff said.

Look, to be honest, its a bit of fun, I just felt a bit let down at the end. Like when you try to jerk off in bed when you're really drunk. In the end I think my biggest problem is that it’s honestly pretty hard to watch the CGI alien do these jokes and not visualise Seth Rogen. Just like it’s pretty hard to watch a new Seth Rogen film and not visualise the chubby Seth Rogen, who I totally prefer. Is it wrong for me to like Seth Rogen more when he was fat? When he was tubby he reminded me of the guy who used to work in the computer section of Harvey Norman at the Moore Park Super centre. Helpful, smiley, dorky, and just a hint of possible sex pest. And who doesn't like a guy like that?

Stars: 3

Summary: Pottymouth ET with an RV OR  Seth Rogen needs more pies 

Who should see it: Guys who work behind the counter at an EB games store.

SCREAM 4

CRAVEN ANOTHER BLOODY SEQUEL?
Review By: James


Its hard not to wonder if this is really necessary. I mean, the original Scream was pretty awesome. It took the piss out the whole history of horror and won. It was smart, it was funny and perhaps best of all Drew Barrymore gets gutted like a fish 15 minutes in. (Seriously, its the only way to get her to shut up.) But just like any slasher film that does pretty well, you have to find a way to turn it into a sequel, and then a trilogy, and if you can, just keep going. And going and going. I think they just made SAW 7 last year. SEVEN! How crazy is that? Crazier still, that cash cow has grossed something like $800 million dollars, but proves that if you suck on a teet long enough, eventually all that's going to come out is puss.  

So despite the let downs of the two previous Scream sequels, someone in Hollywood  who gets paid to come up with new and exciting cinema ideas suggested "Its the ten year anniversary of the first film, so what about....wait for it... Scream 4" and after some awkward silence, Bob Weinstein shat his pants at the idea and the money he could make. And he would not be alone. The other man to shit himself with excitement in that meeting was the agent of David Arquette's, who realised, for the first time in a long time, that he could finally call David and offer him something other than a WWE SMACKDOWN event. 

And there is the story of how Scream 4 got made. (Please do not wikipedia that. It'll only be embarrassing for you.) But that's not the point, the point is that all your favourites from the Scream trilogy are back!!  Sidney, Dewey, Monica from friends and of course.... Ghostface Killer!

 No not that one.

This one.

And he has the same lust for the sweet, sweet blood of cheerleaders. (But seriously, who doesn't?) Neve Cambell is also back as Sidney Prescot, still angry at herself for doing Wild Things, she returns to her home town of Woodsboro as a writer, a decade after the killings stopped to promote her book, and lo and behold, the murderous rampage start AGAIN. Oopsy!! Why didn't you just stay away Neve? Why? Oh you did. For ages. Weren't you even in an episode of Medium? It looked heaps like you hey.

Anyway, it looks like Sidney herself is the main suspect which means David "God darnit I'm just so perpetually confused" Arquette has to try and sort out this bloody mess. The town gets suspicious of Sidney from here on its its pretty much back to formula from here, (stab, stab, twist, red herring!! stab, cute outfit! joke, stab, TWIST) but director Wes Craven keeps it smart enough and funny enough to make sure that we don't descend into the complete shlock of the last two movies. 

Did I laugh? TICK.

Did I squirm uncomfortably? TICK.

What more can a slasher film ask? (Apart from maybe "Did you get a boner?" Ummm. gross. That’s disgusting I can't believe you even asked me that.)

In the end, there is so much self-referential stuff and nodding humour that the whole thing is kind of a clever commentary on not just modern horror films, but Hollywood, and the use of violence as exploitation. Either that, or its just an excuse to see pretty Emma Roberts getting blood all over her brand new sweater.

SIDENOTE - I'm just not sure how hard it would be to solve this crime anyway. Did you see the knife the killers wielding? You can't just buy that shit at Barbeques Galore. That's not the sort of blade mum has in her Wiltshire block. That's a top of the range, super pricey chefs knife. It slices through small intestine like warm butter. Your first step in the investigation would be simply locking up all the head chefs in Woodsboro. They're your prime suspects, that ought to stop the slaughter. And even if it doesn't, it’s no great loss. The food there is TERRIBLE.

STARS: 3.5 Stars

SUMMARY: Better than the last two

WHO SHOULD SEE IT: Cheerleaders, Chefs, David Arquette fans

RELEASE DATE: In Cinemas Now