No. 362 : We Are Your Friends (2015)

 

We Are Your Friends at the IMDb

Time for a bit of a rave now at the W Movie Blog as Zac Efron takes us on a whirlwind tour of a vapid DJ’s rise to stardom.

 

The film’s hero, Cole, is listed as 23 with the 28 year old Efron looking all of the five years older than he’s supposed to be. I guess it would look a bit sad if someone was nearly 30 and still struggling with ‘what will I do with my life’ type issues.

Cole is a DJ and looking for a big break. A chance encounter with a superstar DJ gives him some hope, but of course the famous DJ has a sexy girlfriend that Cole lusts over. Whilst trying to spin the wheels of steel, (he's actually more of a laptop man) Cole tries to arrange some DJing gigs with his friends and generally hangs around a lot. The gang do get a job at Jon Bernthal’s boiler shop property business, but our guys are better than that!

 

Are they though? They seem like a bunch of drug taking wasters! Cole gets offered a big gig but makes an arse of it by sleeping with the superstar DJ’s girlfriend and by calling him a has been. Later some more drug taking claims a victim and Cole re-evaluates his life choices – can he make the record that will seal his DJ credentials?

 

I must admit to quite enjoying this film despite it’s overly familiar premise and unlikeable cast of characters. For a start it’s always sunny and everyone is gorgeous, so there is that. The plot is so familiar you’ll think that you have seen this before, but given its box office, you likely haven’t. It does however ask little of the audience and it has a banging soundtrack, albeit one that relies of the euphoria burst style of music a little too often.

There were some decent touches such as Cole’s voice over animated description of how DJing works – and it’s not just sticking on a load of records people! There was also a fun sequence where Cole takes drugs, and the scene becomes slowly animated as he gets more and more mashed.

The subplot of the exploitative mortgage scheme didn’t go anywhere, and Jon Bernthal was largely wasted. It did teach the kids that capitalism is wrong however and they’d be better off in clubs and taking drugs.

 

Efron is good as Cole but he is a bit too old and I didn’t really buy his character who seemed like a sneaky and ungrateful wee shit. His epiphany at the end that his killer tune should be sounds from real life was a bit silly and I doubt many of the punters in the Glasgow Tunnel would have indulged his five-minute build up and the track which included sound bites from his pals.

All in all it was a vacuous and pointless exercise, but the kicking soundtrack and bikini clad ladies made it a passable experience – but only just!

Best Bit - Pool Party

W Score 13/23

No. 361 : Wake Up Dead Man (2025)

 

Wake Up Dead Man at the IMDb

 

This is the third film in the ‘Knives Out’ franchise, with the first reviewed in my Michael Shannon blog and the second’ Glass Onion’ not bothering the scorers. I have now watched them all, and although they qualify as decent entertainment, I doubt they could be seen as the event movies that Netflix seem to have them down as, or worth their $200m budget. In fairness that money is all on the screen, given Daniel Craig earned a reported $1m a minute for his less than one hour screen time.

Still, budgets aren’t all, and if you can get a fun murder mystery on screen who cares what it costs? Well, Netflix shareholders only, as my £6.99 subscription is the same whether I watch this or some 70’s sex farce from the UK.

Craig once again plays his flamboyant detective Benoit Blanc who, whilst presumably French, has a ridiculous and wavering accent and a dress code that Dick Emery would have issues with. Craig doesn’t appear for the first 30 minutes as the murder, with which the film is concerned, is played out. The narrative is that familiar style of someone writing a letter as we dissolve to the action. A young priest with a chequered past is sent to a new church to assist Josh Brolin who is as convincing as a priest as Kenneth Williams would have been as Dirty Harry. Brolin makes the younger cleric take his confession, which is mostly about him wanking a lot.

 

Brolin is assisted by church elder Glenn Close, and he has several parishioners to contend with including Andrew Scott, Thomas Hayden Church and Hawkeye off ‘The Avengers’. You can’t say the cast list isn’t stuffed, but it does seem like overkill to have so many familiar faces shoehorned in. You could argue it’s like a panto or old Agatha Christie film, but it does take you out of the action when Mila Kunis shows up as the cop and Jeffrey Wright as the Archbishop. I’m guessing there will be no prizes for the casting director here!

The victim is Brolin and the young priest is the prime suspect. For reasons unclear Blanc is in town and keen to solve the case with his customary and annoying arrogance. He asks the priest to write out everything he remembers and that takes us full circle to the letter writing opening.

There are a couple of decent twists and several unlikely ones. Various cast members get bumped off and a convoluted story about an $80m diamond is revealed – that’s so much money you could get nearly two Daniel Craig performances! Some of the twists are telegraphed like the impenetrable tomb which can be easily opened from the inside – remember that throwaway fact for later kids!

Overall, this was a decent offering, but it was probably my least favourite of the franchise. I think the re-treaded formula is wearing a bit thin, with the players and the murders laid out before the inevitable denouement where twist upon twist is unravelled before we learn the contrived truth.

 

The murder here seemed awfully unlikely and dependant on a lot of chance events falling into place. It plays out OK at the end, but in reality many of the moving parts would have derailed the intricate plan long before the murderer and fate of the diamond were decided – I managed to figure out both, and I’m a bit slow at this stuff!

The plot was thin for an over two hour run time, and I may have dozed off for five minutes in the middle – that was fine though, as everything is explained in minute detail at the end for the thick people and those who’d fallen into a turkey coma. These films are an ensemble piece, and it is always fun to see your favourite actors ham it up and play in the dress up box. That said, it is debateable whether this is worth a large chunk of your TV viewing allowance and if this was the end of the franchise, I doubt I’d notice or be upset.

W Rating 13/23 Best Bit : Confession Time

No. 355 : Weird : The Al Yankovic Story (2022)

 

Weird : The Al Yankovic Story at the IMDb

This film was offered up to me by Amazon who are obviously aware of my dubious tastes. I am not immune to the acquired taste of Weird Al and I can honestly say that ‘Hardware Store’ is a rock solid classic.

I was a bit reticent about Daniel Radcliffe playing Al in this parody bio-pic though. I’ve never rated him as an actor and I’m sure all of his career stems from the fall out from his stint as Harry Potter. It must be easy to get a film green lit when you have such an established fan base behind your star. He also seems unlikeable as a person and regardless of your position on the debate I think his behaviour against JK Rowling, who effectively gave him his entire career, is indefensible.

 

Still, we all like a laugh so let’s have a look. The film lost points for me right away when it was clear that our old friends the non-linear narrative and the unreliable narrator were being employed. The film opens with Al being rushed to surgery but as so often happens the narration guides us back to the subject’s childhood. This sees a young Al being held back with his parents with his Dad assaulting a door to door accordion salesman. I appreciate that this was done for laughs but when the film is a biopic it annoys me when stuff gets totally made up. How can you trust anything that’s said going forwards?

 

The film doesn’t concern itself with accuracy however with Al’s affair with Madonna and his dealing with Pablo Escobar covered in detail. There were a few laughs as Al’s fledging career is helped by Rainn Wilson’s ‘Dr Dememto’. His parody and polka-based songs soon take off and there is a knowing nod to his niche popularity when a star-spangled pool party has all the celebs, such as Devine and Pee-Wee Herman fawning over Al.

 

The film was produced by ‘Funny or Die’ and they clearly used some of their influence to get a load of guest stars who showed up for a single scene such as Jack Black, Michael McKean and Conan O’Brien who managed a very poor impression of Andy Warhol. The pool party was the best scene and it went downhill from there. Basically, as soon as Evan Rachel Wood’s Madonna shows up you should bail out.

 

The film sees Al rise to greatness and then succumb to the temptations of stardom. He overcomes Michael Jackson parodying his song ‘Eat it’ with the inferior ‘Beat it’ and manages to reconcile with his father. Will All see a happy ending, or will it be one awards show too many?

 

This film was OK, but I thought Radcliffe was miscast. They clearly used Al for the songs and Potter’s buff body didn’t really suit the wimpy character he was playing. I could see the argument that the casting added to the self-serving bio-pic nature of the film but he just looked like a British guy in a wig.

 

The format and narrative of the film was a lot like ‘Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story’ and it was about as 20% as good as that stone cold classic. It also borrowed heavily from Howard Stern's 'Private Parts' and again it doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as that wonderful film.

 

Al himself shows up as a music executive who turns himself down for a contract and it almost seemed that the whole film was nothing but wish fulfilment on the part of the Polka Prince. I would have preferred more laughs and less self-reverential stuff barely disguised as satire. It was fun for the many cameos, but I came away learning little about the subject and having had too few laughs to justify my 100-minute investment.

 

Best Bit: The pool party.

‘W’ Rating: 13/23

No.345 : We Belong Together (2018)

We Belong Together at the IMDb

Fatal Attraction rehash time now, as a recently sober college professor makes the mistake of falling for a student who happens to be a mentalist.

We meet our hero Thomas as he’s being awarded his 90 day chip at his AA meeting. We learn that his drinking caused him to separate from his wife and children but his new found sobriety has opened up the prospect of a reconciliation. He is allowed access to his kids and is slowly winning back his wife who has now moved in with her mother.

Trouble is just around the corner however in the shape of Tracy, a 26 year old stunner with a military background who has signed up for his classes. He finds her a job in a diner and is soon subject to some pretty full on flirting from his sexy student. An early chat is interrupted by his assistant but she is soon beaten up and chucked over a balcony by a mystery assailant - could it be our mad stalker?

Thomas tries to act all professional but quickly folds when Tracy shows him her bra. The pair then have a really tame sex montage with Tracy keeping the sheets tightly wrapped to her body. Maybe she has a big mole or they’re after a PG rating?

Anyway, Thomas tries to make inroads with his family whilst being increasingly alarmed by his new squeeze’s behaviour. Is she nuts and the killer or is that just what they want us to think? Details of a troubled past are sprinkled liberally about with her character not being developed as much as it is exploded like a Claymore mine. She undoes our man’s sobriety and gets off her meds - we know this isn’t going to end well. Well, it didn’t start well so that’s a fair assumption.

Given the title of the film it’s not hard to guess that we are dealing with an obsessive here - but is it the one we think or is she a victim herself of PTSD and of lazy writing? Dreya Michele wasn’t convincing in the lead and seemed a bit shy for a supposed sexual psycho predator. She is attractive but didn’t convince as a 26 year old - she was 33 at the time of filming. The levels of obsession and nuttiness were well done with every man no doubt flinching each time Thomas got a raft of increasingly manic voicemails.

Soon the ex-wife is injured in an off screen accident and in a coma - who could be causing all of this misfortune to the women in Thomas’ life? It can’t be that obvious, can it? Thomas tries to end the relationship and after an hour we hear the title of the film. How far will the obsession go and who will survive the fallout?

This was a decent offering but it was very by the numbers. From the off we knew the girlfriend was going to be crazy and she was. I was hoping for a bit of misdirection or even a small wrong foot but instead the film went from A to B to C without even a sideways glance.

I didn’t have much invested in the pissed up professor and his troubled times were more funny and inevitable than concerning. It was the standard ‘led by his dick’ male getting his comeuppance with little added in the way of colour or invention. As Thomas’ life fell apart we were meant to marvel at the elaborate scheming in play but it really was just a mad woman behaving badly before her inevitable demise so all the men can return to Tinder without worrying of the consequences. Apart from VD.

The film was 80 minutes and well enough made and paced that it never became an unwelcome distraction, but overall there isn’t anything you haven’t seen before and done better. The finale does leave open the possibility of a sequel so maybe don’t open that Bumble app just yet.

Best Bit : I’ve got a surprise for you! ‘W’ Rating 13/23

 

No.340 : Wonder Wheel (2017)

Wonder Wheel at the IMDb

Towards the end of this film Kate Winslet’s character says “Save me the bad drama” - if only she’d given this advice at the start! This offering, from writer and director Woody Allen, was decent but a bit derivative and for the most part, poorly acted.

The film, set in the 1950s,  starts with Justin Timberlake addressing the viewer and telling them he has a story for them. This breaking the fourth wall approach is rarely a good idea and I’ve no idea why it was employed here. Justin plays Mickey, a lifeguard at the beach on Coney island, near to where the titular ‘Wonder Wheel’ fairground ride is situated. Winslet is a waitress in a clam bar and she’s married to Jim Belushi who operates the merry-go-round. They live in a small apartment at the fairground with Winslet’s young son, who has a penchant for fire raising.

Their set up is disturbed when Belushi’s daughter, Juno Temple, shows up. She hasn’t seen Pop for five years since she left to marry a mobster. She has now left the hood and is on the run from his retribution, given she’s spoken to the Feds and all. After some reconciliation Juno moves in and gets a job at the clam bar. She wants to better herself however, and starts attending night school. Winslet meanwhile is approaching 40 and is resentful that her fledgling acting career has given way to a life of washing dishes.

Things look up for Kate however when she’s spotted walking the beach by Timberlake who quickly starts boffing her under the boardwalk. Kate falls for the lifeguard who himself is looking to further his writing aspirations. Things reach a head when Trousersnake takes a shine to Juno and the mob, in the shape of Paulie Walnuts and Bobby Bacala, start to zero in on their target. While the doomed love affair(s) survive and can happiness be found while the wheel keeps on turning?

I was hoping for more from this film given its decent credentials, but it turned out to be a sub par ‘A Streetcar Named Desire’ with all of the shouting and lost ambition but none of the drama or characters.

Winslet was decent in the lead but she fell apart at the end with her motivations flying all over the place. “I’ve been drinking” she slurs at one point - well that’s no excuse really. Jim Belushi basically yells his whole script in a dirty vest and I was expecting him to bellow ‘Stellla!’ at any point. Timberlake’s character was thinly written - they tried to pitch him as a wannabe Eugene O’Neill but he was basically an extra from ‘Baywatch’ banging the local talent.

The script, which saw laughable mob hit men stalking the boardwalk, was poor and the line between drama and comedy was breached several times. I think this was mostly unintentional, although the fire raising child did have a couple of moments of levity to break the kitchen sink drama.

The costumes and locations were decent although the main apartment was obviously a set and the summer set film looked like it had been shot in the middle of the winter.

Overall it was a decent distraction, but ultimately a disappointment and another to add to the lengthy footnotes of Allen’s career.

Best Bit : Under the Boardwalk with Kate ‘W’ rating 13/23

 

No.332 : Winter of Our Dreams (1981)

 

Winter of Our Dreams at the IMDb

In the pretentious title stakes this one fall short of current incumbent Winter of Frozen Dreams but given it is all set in Sydney, Australia they couldn’t go with the ’frozen’ bit I assume. Bryan Brown stars as a renaissance man who runs a book shop and plays chess against his computer. He does of course drink beer and womanise so as not to turn off the bloke demographic. I doubt this would have been an easy sell to the average Ozzer so plenty of topless ladies are thrown into the mix, including some random topless sunbathers lying on a bit of grass.

Bryan is busy playing chess and selling books when he hears about a dead woman, who had been pulled from the harbour a week ago, being identified as a women he knew ten years ago. He used to be a political agitator but has now married and settled down with Gretel. The two have an open marriage which sees Gretel spend time with her young and hunky boyfriend. Not to be outdone Bryan wanders about with his shirt off most of the film but he doesn’t see much action between the sheets.

Anyway he goes to the girl’s funeral and later meets up with fellow attendee, prostitute Lou (Judy Davis). Bryan’s dead girlfriend had been on the game after they broke up and he is keen to learn about her decline and his involvement in her eventual demise. There is no murder angle as it is established early on it was suicide, but Bryan has to dig about his past to try and get some answers.

Some of these come from Lou who has the dead girl’s diaries, and unfortunately, her guitar. The focus alternates between the two leads with scenes of Bryan’s relationship interplayed with Judy struggling to get drugs and to understand her own life and prospects. She reads through the dead girl’s diaries and plays her maudlin music on some tapes.

Lou and Bryan spend a long weekend together where she gets off the junk and he rebukes her advances. Can these troubled souls find the answers they need to move on with their lives?

This was a decent slice of life but I didn’t learn anything or become invested in the characters. Judy Davis, who we know from Lewis Collins starrer Who Dares Wins, was good as Lou but I couldn’t get used to her tight ginger perm. She was pretty skuzzy as the drug addled whore, although I struggled to have sympathy for her character. Bryan did his usual serviceable performance but I got no emotional resonance from him and he seemed to be the same character he usually plays, chugging beer and being blokey.

It was fun to see Baz Luhrmann as Judy’s occasional flat mate who couldn’t get it on with the lady of the night. As an actor he makes a great director.

All in all this was an essay in damaged people trying to move on and therefore hardly what you’d consider to be classed as entertainment. There were decent performances, and sunny Australia looked nice, but overall you won’t learn much or invest in the largely one note characters.

Best Bit : Lou tries to pay her rent   13/23

No.324 : White Oleander (2002)

 

White Oleander (2002) at the IMDb

When you carry out a Google search on ‘W’ films, one of the most prominent is ‘White Oleander’. For some reason I’ve always avoided it. It does have a heady IMDB rating of 7.1 and boasts a stellar cast of Michelle Pfeiffer, Robin Wright Penn and Renee Zellweger as well as Billy Connolly; but it has never appealed.

Still, needs must, so here we go. To start with a ‘white oleander’ is a poisonous plant and the film concerns a girl’s journey through a succession of care homes after her mother (Pfeiffer) is put in jail after killing her boyfriend, Connolly - maybe he left one too many wee jobbies in the toilet for her liking? - the matter isn’t fully explored.

Our old friend the non-liner narrative is employed so a lot of stuff has to be pieced together, but we soon get the idea that a broken childhood is in play and that emotions and relationships are the main focus, which will need some careful analysis. You can see why this one was well down the ‘must see’ list!

To be fair the film does  keep a decent pace and your buy in is committed to early on. Alison Lohman is excellent as our main protagonist, Astrid, and you’ll probably know her from being the young Jessica Lange in ‘Big Fish’ and from ‘W‘ favourite ‘Where the Truth Lies'. The film is told from her perspective and, initially, her world seems all askew as her mother is carted off to the clink as she is placed into a succession of foster families. The first family host loads of troubled kids and they try to teach their charges the benefits of the good book. Alas the ‘good book’ seems to be the Karma Sutra as a lot of shagging and associated jealousy goes on, that sees Astrid cast out of this home and into several others.

Meanwhile Pfeiffer is writing to Astrid from prison to explain her actions and to beg forgiveness. We also get snippets of her explosive relationship with Connelly which don’t really ring true, but are fun all the same. Despite her miserable existence in a care home, Astrid does find some happiness in a fledgling relationship with Patrick Fugit, who still has his ‘Almost Famous’ haircut present and correct.

Things look up when Astrid (who at this point looks at least 20 - the actress was in fact 23) is placed with a new foster family - Renee Zellweger and her husband. This was never a promising placement as the husband was probably already having an affair, and when Zellweger goes to meet Pfeiffer in prison, we know things won’t end well. When Zellweger achieves the Guinness World record for ‘longest lie-in on record‘, Astrid is again back in the system - can she ever find happiness and freedom from her jailbird Mom who has a svengali type influence over her?

If you like ‘problem people’ this film will be a hit for you - I thought everyone involved was a bit whiny and needy, and I was glad when it was done. To be fair it was well made with the confusing and non-linear narrative well laid out, with Astrid’s suitcase dioramas being explained as the film progressed. I didn’t really buy her relationship with the boyfriend and Connolly was woefully underused - I don’t think he had a single line to camera - he's only seen in the background, being abused by Pfeiffer. Nice work if you can get it.

Pfeiffer was the standout as the chilling and controlling mother although she looked a bit too well scrubbed after years in the big house.

The main killing was only touched on and we have at assume Connolly had been fed too much of the titular plant. The point of the film was the mother-daughter relationship and it’s fair enough that the focus was on that. There just seemed to be several more interesting films going on in the background that were tantalisingly just out of reach for this viewer.

A decent effort that will no doubt resonate with many who have mother issues. I just felt it was a bit dull and unsatisfying.

Best Bit : Fun Times With Renee ‘W’ Rating 13/23

No.274 : Winchester (2018)

Winchester at the IMDb

Helen Mirren is always good value for fully immersing herself in a part and for doing what is necessary to show that she is free spirited and invested in the role. She doesn’t often let the lads go home empty handed, so to speak, This isn’t one of those films however, and I doubt she has ever been more buttoned up in her illustrious career.

She plays the title character, Sarah Winchester, who wears mourning clothes throughout this film which is set at the beginning of the 20th century. I was familiar with the premise of the story from my ‘Big Book of Weirdos’, but it’s fair to say that the writer of this effort took a few liberties with the plot and characters, hence the ‘Inspired by actual events’ title card.

The film is Australian but set in San Jose, California. I thought it was all sets and models but I see from the IMDb page that some scenes were filmed in the actual Winchester house which is now a tourist attraction. Most of the cast are Aussies however and the locations look a lot more Oz than L.A.

The real Sarah Winchester inherited the Winchester firearms fortune on the death of her husband. Her child died soon after and, feeling cursed, she set about trying to appease the spirits of those killed by her company’s products, whom she blames for her misfortunes. Rather than get in a good exorcist she chose to expand her home to allow the ghosts somewhere to stay. To keep them happy the building work continues around the clock and did so for more than 30 years before her death.

I can accept that this in itself may not be that an exciting film so the writer has chosen to imagine a lot of stuff including zombies and possession.

The story unfolds through the eyes of  Dr Eric Price, a boozed up psychiatrist who has grief issues of his own. The board at the Winchester Company are worried about the mad widow spending all their cash and hire Eric to check her out and to see if they can get her ruled incompetent. Owing to large debts Price agrees but we get the sense that despite the boozing he has retained his integrity and he won’t just rubber stamp her ticket to the Nut House, as the board require.

Price is at first sceptical, but over the course of a few days he sees things that start to challenge his pre-conceived notions. Is the house truly haunted or is he suffering the effects of coming off the booze and drugs? Sarah starts off a bit standoffish with him but after a few experiences involving her possessed nephew, some common ground is found.

Can the possessed boy Henry be saved? - get rid of those milky contact lenses for a start! - and will Sarah be removed from her sprawling home and the company’s board? Will Eric find his own redemption or is he destined to haunt some old house himself?

I quite liked this film but it was, like the house, a bit of a mess with too much stuff tacked on and other bits going nowhere. It was good that they used the original house and the bits they recreated were well realised with stairs going nowhere and doors opening onto sheer drops. The sense that work was always ongoing was well done, although there was a lot of pointless hammering and painting onto bits that had already been completed - that’s tradesmen for you I guess!

Jason Clarke as Eric was good - you’ll recognise him as John Connor from ‘Terminator : Genysis’ - or maybe not; I can’t remember it either! His dishevelled haunted drunk act was decent but he was undone by lots of cheap scares as a zombie faces poked out every time he looked through a window or keyhole. Mirren looked like she was going thorough the motions, dealing with a script that was mostly complete bollocks. They left any pretence of dealing with a woman with mental health issues to having it a full on haunted house with bogey men in every room.

I guess they’d call it a re-imagining of the story but it’s a disservice to a troubled widow to have the cast of ‘The Walking Dead’ wandering through the house at all hours. There is an element of ‘is she mad?’ Is Eric mad? Is everyone mental, especially those who stick it out to the end?

Given a true life story was used here it seemed a bit off to have such extreme elements added - why not just do an original story without making a real one seem ridiculous? It was passable entertainment with nice sets and decent straight faced performances, but overall you came out knowing less about the story, with the facts lost amid a lot of supernatural gubbins and jump scares.

Best Bit : Room full of loaded rifles? Bound to end well.
W Rating 13/23

No.238 : When the Lights Went Out (2012)

When the Lights Went Out at the IMDb

Paranormal activity in 1970’s Yorkshire now in this British frightener.

The film opens with  a husband and wife traveling to their new home with their teenage daughter. It’s 1974 and times are tough, although some affluent neighbours do have satellite dishes! The family is struggling financially but hope to have a fresh start in their new council semi.

Unfortunately for them they have moved into a home occupied by a cliché obsessed poltergeist who goes through the usual routine of slamming doors and moving stuff about. The 13 year old daughter is more attuned to goings on and soon sees a spooky figure in the TV - maybe it was ‘Top of the Pops’? The initially skeptical family soon start to believe when they each have an encounter with the spirit, although to be fair it does do a good job of stripping wall paper.

The torn faced daughter confides in her lovely teacher Martin Compston who does some research and takes the class to an old monastery where the girl has a vision of a monk being hanged. There is also a fortunate museum exhibition with lax security which leads the girl to believe her poltergeist pal is the ghost of a 13 year old landowner’s daughter who was killed by a mad monk. She steals the girl’s pendant from the museum as it’s bound to come in handy or she can swap it for some Spangles at the very least.

The case starts to get some coverage from the press and soon the marriage is under stress due to all the nocturnal fumblings that take place when the husband is away - that old excuse again! As the frequency and potency of the attacks increase can a seance or even the Catholic church save the day?

This was an OK, by the numbers, low budget haunted house tale. It was no ‘The House that Bled to Death’ but it went pretty much as you’d expect and had a decent finale that looks like it soaked up 95% of the budget.

The 1970’s were fairly realised but it was a mistake to throw in lots of ‘funny’ lines about avocado bath suites and ugly curtains just so that we in the present day can have a cheap snigger. It was incongruous and took you straight out of any sense of buying into the film’s reality. There were also a plethora of 70’s toys scattered about for the nostalgia effect only including a fully loaded Buckaroo that went off in the night - who ever left their Buckaroo piled high overnight?!

The plot was slight and although less than 90 minutes the film needed some padding to make it to feature length. The solving of the mystery was somewhat pat and the good versus evil battle at the end hadn’t been fully fleshed out for it to make sense. The special effects were quite good although a bit off kilter compared to the rest of the film - we went from muddy 70’s sepia to Industrial Light and Magic for the last couple of minutes.

All in all this was a decent effort but if they wanted something really scare from the 1970’s they should just have recreated the Radio 1 road show.

Best Bit : Uh-oh Slinky attack!
‘W’ Scot 13/23

No.218 : Would You Rather (2012)

Would You Rather at the IMDb

Would you rather read the rest of this review our have a sharp stick shoved in your eye?

First up that title needs a question mark or at the very least an ellipse.

Sharp stick starting to look somewhat tempting eh?

The high concept of this film is that a gruop of random strangers have to make choices which ultimately may bring them wealth at the expense of the other participants. I'm sure they want to provoke discussion along the lines of ‘What would you do?’ but to that the easy answer is ‘Watch another film’.

Our player in the game is Iris, played by an anonymous Brittany Snow, who looks after her sick brother. His case is hopeless without an expensive bone marrow transplant but rather than move him to Britain for free treatment she engages with the mysterious stranger who is in her doctor’s consulting room. He says his family foundation may offer assistance and invites her to his mansion that evening. She smells a rat but after a job falls through she decides to go along.

She is the last of the eight candidates to arrive and we get a brief summary of each before the enigmatic Shepard Lambrick begins his parlour game. Things start innocently enough with a vegetarian offered $10k for eating a steak but we know more sinister trials await, as the movie poster shows eyeball with a razor blade against it.

Each character is offered a moral conundrum of hurting themselves or another and soon the numbers start to dwindle. There is a weak sub-plot about the doctor getting an attack of conscience but he turns out as much use as a cock flavoured lollipop.

After a few gruesome trials we are down the last two - who will triumph and will the prize be worth having?

I quite liked this film and it was certainly thought provoking to some degree. I think the execution was somewhat weak however and I don’t think the people would have acted as rationally as was depicted. I think as soon as the first guy hit the floor everyone would go mental regardless of how many henchmen there where. Instead people carefully considered their options without thinking that the nutter in charge would most likely kill them all regardless.

There were a couple of recognisable faces including Darnell out of ‘My Name is Earl’ who for some reason still sported the same mad haircut - brand recognition I guess. You also get one off ‘The Walking Dead’ and the dad out of ‘Home Alone’ so you can appreciate this isn't exactly a mega budget affair.

The low budget also explains the lack of flair in the ‘games’ - essentially it’s pretty low key torture and self mutilation - and the action is confined to one room for the majority of the film.

It did however zip along and keep me engaged to the far fetched and unsatisfying ending. That is more that is more than most manage, however it did fail in its endeavour to be a talked about film or the next ‘Saw’ franchise - I've started to forget it already.

Best Bit : Snotty Son gets his.

‘W’ Score 13/23

No.201 : Whole Lotta Sole (2011)

Whole Lotta Sole at the IMDb

Fear not spelling fans - we have that title correctly spelt. A fish based pun in the title - this comedy promises plenty!

Set in Belfast, the film follows a variety of characters whose paths are destined to cross. The least appealing but most watchable is Mad Dog a foul mouthed Irish gangster who runs an amusement arcade and illicit casino. He decks his wife for saying he fires blanks and clearly parenthood is a touchy subject.

Meanwhile in his casino, young dad Jimbo is losing his money and getting deep in the hole. Mad Dog threatens to kill him unless he can raise the £5k in two days - his only option may be to rob the titular fish market. To this end he engages his hapless pal and visits his ex-IRA granddad who thinks the troubles are still ongoing. The old man gives them his tommy gun but insists on tagging along.

Elsewhere Bostonian Brendan Fraser is in town minding an antiques shop for his cousin. We know he has a dodgy past but he seems a decent bloke and certainly impresses the local Ethiopian lovely. Added to the mix is cantankerous police chief Colm Meaney and his community policeman son and a gang of gypsies who may or may not be up to no good.

The robbery goes down badly with little money to be found, but a battered case may be the real prize. As the players converge on Brendan’s shop a hostage situation ensues - will the right people go down and will all the relationships be mended? Hope so!

This was a decent slice of fun that lacked any real ambition. They must have netted Brendan Fraser on his holidays because the rest of the production looks like it shared the budget with an episode of ‘Father Ted’. It did start brightly with some colourful characters and situations introduced. Mad Dog played by David O’Hara had some real menace although his baby snatching plan lacked credibility. I liked Jimbo less, mainly because he was played as a loveable scallywag but came across as a feckless arse. His pal and Grandfather offered more laughs and for the most part Jimbo just shouted ‘be quiet’ a lot as his feeble brain checked through his options.

Colm Meaney did his usual stand up job although the subplot involving his relationship with his son could have been jettisoned with no loss whatsoever. It was good that he got experience of sieges as he’s on the opposite side of one in the new Alan Partridge film. Fraser was OK but I didn’t engage with him on any level. He was meant to be sympathetic and bit mysterious but he came across as largely disinterested.

For me the film lost its way when the siege started and given that took up the last hour of the 90 minute film it was always going to struggle to get a positive review. That said it did have a certain charm and at least two laughs which is better than most. I think if this was caught as a TV movie you’d feel you’d done well but as a cinema or DVD outing you can’t help but feel a bit short-changed.


Best Bit : Cod Knows   ‘W’ Score 12/23

No.187 : Waiting for Forever (2010)

Waiting for Forever at the IMDb

If you are into films with car crashes, explosions, hot sex scenes and zombies you’d be best to avoid ‘Waiting For Forever’. If however you like people with issues exploring relationships set against and endless indie music background - and who doesn’t?- then you might just want to give it a look.

The film opens with an over saturated flashback with lots of jumpy cuts to pictures of young kids on cine film. We learn that two brothers were orphaned when their parents were killed in a train crashed spelling an end to their idyllic childhood of endless summers and sentimental music.

We arrive at the present day and meet Will. Will is very annoying and wears pyjamas and a bowler hat. He’s portrayed as an innocent who comes out with words of wisdom but he’s essentially a tit who juggles. Will wanders around America following his childhood sweetheart, Emma, who has gained modest success on a TV show that she herself dislikes. She is in a destructive relationship with a cast member and has had an affair with one of his friends. He finds out and confronts the friend while Emma flees to her parent’s house with Will in hot pursuit.

Emma doesn’t know of Will’s puppy dog devotion with the misfit happy just to be in the same town as his fantasy girl. Sadly juggling doesn’t pay much so he’s forced to freeload with his friends at their furniture shop - good to see the chubby one out of ‘Hairspray’ has found gainful employment at last! He also meets up with his banker brother who is unhappy at his sibling’s choices. He’s meant to come across as a dick but frankly he talks a lot of sense, despite no support from his wife who’d presumably be happy if her husband ran off to join the circus.

Emma’s home life isn’t much fun either with her warring parents at each other’s throats. The mum is a bit neurotic and the Dad, who played the same role in ‘Six Feet Under’, clearly doesn’t have long for this world. The mum is star struck when the boyfriend arrives to reclaim his cheating girlfriend but she throws a hissy fit and runs off, only to meet the creepy juggler in the street. The pair hit it off to some degree as they recount their lost youth but she steps away slowly when he starts talking to his dead parents - strange that.

We learn in a flashback that the cheated on boyfriend actually killed his love rival and poor old stalker Will is in the frame. Will Emma choose the right man and will Will beat the rap? Is there time for one more number from the dull, trendy but forgettable soundtrack before the inevitable enigmatic and romantic ending?

I’m sure some people will  love this film but I’m too cynical to see beyond its glaring plot holes and unlikely character developments. The cast are young and attractive but it was a mistake to hang the film on a guy in pyjamas and a bowler hat. He may be an innocent who speaks great words of insightful wisdom but he’s damn creepy too.

The pace of the film was good and although not a lot happened it passed by easily enough, not asking much of the viewer. The slight element of peril was brushed away in five minutes and only the mystery of why the girl goes looking for the twat in the hat remaining. The settings and sunny outlook were all well done and the cast was mostly likeable apart from all of those who were thinly drawn - douche bag banker and control freak boyfriend, you know who you are!

This isn’t a terrible film just a forgettable one. I wasn’t willing anyone on at the end and although the pat conclusion was seen a mile off there was no way it could have gone any other way. Simple rom-com stuff with no com to speak of.

Best Bit : Vagabond Will gets grilled by the cops
‘W’ Score 13/23

No.178 : Wrath of the Titans (2012)

Wrath of the Titans at the IMDb

 Off to the olden days now as we take a look at this sequel to the remake of ‘Clash of the Titans’ - they don’t make them like that any more - oh wait they do. I haven’t seen the original remake probably due to it’s lack of Harry Hamelin or indeed a ‘W’ initial.

We don’t get much in the way of a recap, but it seems 10 years have passed since that film when Perseus slayed the Kraken and saved the day. He is now a widower and father to a young son. Despite being the son of Zeus he is living the simple life of a fisherman, so we are in for a dull film. But wait! Stuff is happening!

Zeus, played by a disinterested Liam Neeson, pops by to see the grandson and warn of bad omens. It seems that people have wised up and stopped praying to the Gods lessening their powers. The bad guys are taking advantage of this and plan to destroy the world. After getting the brush off from his idiot son, Zeus heads off to the underworld to have a chat with his brother Hades, played by an even more disinterested Ralph Fiennes. Bad mistake! Hades has his own plans and takes Zeus prisoner at the behest of their father Chronos - it’s like the Jeremy Kyle Show in that family.

The ominous portents prove truthful when, with their added Zeus powers, the bad guys unleash the titans - basically a pile of CGI monsters. These attack Perseus’ village and he soon has to don the leather chaps that signify he’s off to battle - or The Blue Oyster Club - it’s not made clear. The rest of the film is basically a quest as he gathers some support from the lovely Rosamund Pike, a poor man’s Russell Brand (if such a thing is possible) and Bill Nighy who hams it up horribly.

Soon our heroes are in the underworld and ready to free Zeus who has been connected to a Santa making machine that’s given him a long white beard. Can the siblings get together and gang up on Dad before no one believes in them anymore and condemns them to a dusty fate? Will Perseus remain at his nets with his son or will the passing of the thunderbolt tell him there is more to life than haddock?

This was a very much by the numbers swords and sandals epic and although it had a raft of stars and some decent action the whole thing was far less than the sum of its parts. Sam Worthington, late of ‘Avatar’, didn’t hack it as Perseus for me with his Aussie accent most jarring in the ancient world. He didn’t impress as the reluctant hero and his character’s arc where he went from fisherman to action hero to reluctant heir didn’t convince.

Liam and Ralph were obviously just in it for the pay cheques and you could sense their embarrassment as they apologetically delivered their laughable dialogue. Better was Rosamund, who although miscast as an Amazon warrior queen, did look most fetching in her leather mini skirt.

The bests bits were the action sequences with the opening and closing battles good fun. Both were totally pointless in the course of the film but you can’t see enough eight legged monsters getting a stick in the eye as far as I’m concerned. Despite a seemingly massive budget some bits were decidedly shoddy with a totally unconvincing flying horse only beaten in the crappy stakes by some fake looking Cyclops giants and some ropy wire work.

I’m not sure of the market this film was aimed at - there were long passages of dull chat with occasional CGI battles thrown in to keep the tempo up. The violence was cartoon at best and apart from Rosamund’s skirt there wasn’t any sexiness either.

Overall ‘Wrath of the Titans’ had a few watchable moments but ultimately it was a pointless exercise, unless you have ‘O’ level classics on Monday.

Best Bit : Oh me skirt keeps flapping up.
‘W’ Score 13/23

No.177 : Walter (1982)

Walter at the IMDb

A lightening of the mood now with this happy tale of a mentally challenged man who ends up in a loony bin wiping bums - wait! That’s a terrible fate!

Ian McKellan plays the title role in this film which was made for Channel 4’s first night of broadcasting. Why anyone tuned in for night two is a mystery. The tone is set from the off when a caring mother sets her handicapped son on a wall as a train approaches beneath. Once the train passes and the steam clears (for it is the olden days) she is dismayed to see the lad hasn’t fallen to his death - mother of the year she is not.

We learn this was the highlight of Walter’s upbringing and meet him again as a middle aged man with two less than doting parents. Dad has largely switched off and Mum is as harsh as ever - at least she’s generous with her toffees! Walter can talk a bit but is prone to anxiety attacks and is definitely a bit slow in virtually all departments - expect pigeon fancying.

He has a job in a warehouse; but it’s mostly charity and his fellow workers, including a young Keith Allen, are all cruel to him. Soon Dad is dead and it’s just Walter and Mum. They spend this quality time wailing and slapping and it’s no surprise when Mum pops her clogs too. Well it is to Walter who, rather than accept being alone, moves all his pigeons into Mum’s bedroom to keep her corpse happy.

Eventually social services catch wind, or probably the smell, of Mum’s demise and Walter is moved to a sanatorium. This environment is even worse than home and although he gets a bit of action on his first night from a rapist dwarf it’s downhill from there as bum wiping and patient murders are all he has too look forward too. Can we see some hope in Walter’s tale? or is the message that life is hell and you shouldn’t bother getting out of bed?

I must have seen this film 30 years ago and it was grimmer than I remember. It’s basically some poor sod going through hell for 70 minutes with a five second interlude of pigeon affection squeezed in to offer some respite.

McKellan is excellent as the troubled Walter but it’s such a desperate role that it is hard to empathise with the character. Sure you feel sorry for him but he offers nothing in the way of redemption and you can see why his unsupportive parents can’t wait to shift off the mortal coil. The message, if there is one, is nihilistic at best and at worst an exercise in thinking ‘thank God that’s not me’.

The director, Stephen Frears, certainly doesn’t hold back in the stark reality stakes and if there is a shittier bottom in movie history I’ve never seen it (thankfully). The cast, especially those in the latter scenes in the institution are a terrifying bunch given the environment they are placed. Rapes and slashings are prevalent among the inmates apart from the innocent Walter who tries to grin through it all with his buck teeth. Jim Broadbent shows up as an orderly and is possibly the only half decent person on show.

The film closes with a chat between Jim and Walter where the meaning of life is discussed but for the most part this is a depressing downward spiral that offers nothing apart from an excuse for more Prozac. Wikipedia tells me that a sequel was made but frankly I don’t think I could handle anymore - thank goodness then it doesn’t start with a ‘W’!

W Score 13/23
Best Bit - Dead Mum gets a bird shit makeover

No.174 : Welcome to the Rileys (2010)

Welcome to the Rileys at the IMDb

Next up we have a bunch of what Alan Partridge would describe as ‘problem people’. Not only do they have problems but they also have issues and need a bit of healing. If this already sounds like a hard slog you ain’t seen nothing yet!

Tony Soprano is living a dull life as a bathroom fittings supplier. He has no relationship with his wife, with their interaction down to her nagging about smoking in the garage. She is on the pills and socially withdrawn. Her nosy hairdresser asks about her daughter when she finds the child’s room but the stony silence tells us something is up.

Tony is getting his jollies with a waitress and by playing poker and frankly what is shown as an empty life seems all sorts of fun. That can’t last and when his waitress lover drops dead he realises his life is a nightmare - especially when he visits her grave to see his own tombstone already in place. ‘I ain’t dead yet’ he cries with little conviction. We learn that the couple lost their 15 years old daughter in a car crash and they haven’t started to rebuild their lives since.

Tony sets off for a convention in New Orleans and finds it hard to interact with his colleagues so heads off to the local strip joint - yes that old excuse. It’s here that he first encounters the skuzzy Kirsten Stewart who hustles him for a private dance and Champagne before sending him off with a flea in his ear when she suspects he’s a cop due to him not wanting to get jiggy with her.

Luckily they frequent the same diner and soon a fledging relationship begins to develop. We learn that Kristen is on the game and is 16 years old - not unlike Tony’s dead daughter (apart from the on the game bit).

Meanwhile back at the family home, Tony’s wife Lois is starting to come out of her shell. Tony dumping her was her wake up call and she resolves to drive to New Orleans to get him back - well if she can get the car out of the drive first at any rate. By now Tony has moved in with Kristen and tries to fix her plumbing in a totally non-metaphorical sense. He tries to teach her stuff like cleaning and not swearing so fucking much, but makes little headway with the headstrong ho.

Eventually Lois arrives and rather than get upset at her husband living with a whore in a squat she moves herself in too. Will these broken people find some hope and salvation in each other. Let’s hope so and in double quick time please!

This had ‘awards consideration’ rote large all over it but it was done in such a broad and ham-fisted manner that even a coma victim who be able to guess the blaring subtext that the couple were substituting the wayward wench as their lost daughter. Fair enough you might think, but the stretches of credibility were such that the cast must have been asking ‘really?’  when the next outrage was met with good natured rebukes and the offer of more money to make things right.

The older couple’s relationship was well observed at first but it soon spiralled into a ridiculous sequence of more and more blatant example of how damaged they were and reliant on the other when they maybe didn’t know themselves. Healing that’s what they need - and a better script.

The wife was woefully written with her venturing out only to be flummoxed by the big bad man’s car. She then crashes it twice in a scene that wasn’t so much about empowerment as it was about hiding your car keys. Tony was poor too but at least he ditched his fake accent halfway in. His motivations weren’t clear and although we were meant to applaud his patience and kindness he just came as a mark being taken for a ride by a prostitute - and not in a good way!

‘Twilight’ heroine Stewart was more ‘heroin’  here, and although her performance was no doubt lauded as ‘brave’ I wasn’t buying - takes more than some bruises and a potty mouth to convince as street trash Dear!

All in all this film had a very formulaic three acts and the bits of redemption you expected for each character were duly delivered, and in a fashion so obvious it wouldn’t be clearer if Tony wrapped them in the ribbon from his regifted suitcase.

THE Tag Line : You’re Welcome to the Riley’s

W Score : 13/23

No. 150 : Wake of Death (2004)

Wake of Death at the IMDb

Good old Jean Claude Van Damme, he’s never one for lofty aspirations like doing Shakespeare or Brecht, he knows his audience and sticks to a strict formula for every film. ‘Wake of Death’ is as you’d expect a revenge thriller with high kicks and a high body count but what did you expect?

To give some credit they do try and be a wee bit clever with a big car chase and deadly peril for JCVD right at the start. Before he cops it the film flashes back and it’s over an hour before we get back to the opening scene again. I hope Jean Claude’s fans weren’t too confused by this non-linear experiment but don’t worry it’s not ‘Memento’ or anything, just a cheap way to open with an unearned bang.

Anyway Jean is a club owner who has just retired from his job as a hench man for the local mafia boss. He has a pretty wife and young son and wants to be nice. Fat chance! The wife works at immigration and when a boat is found full of Hong Kong refugees she takes a little girl home, like you do. But no! This little girl saw her Dad kill her Mum and she’s on the run.

Nasty Dad touches down in LA minutes later and sets about reclaiming his daughter. After some gratuitous sex Van Damme heads to work only for his wife to be killed by the baddie with his big stiletto knife. Claude has about 30 seconds of blubbing and flashbacks to happier times before a chinaman jumps through his window with a samurai sword and it’s game on.

The rest of the film is basically Jean and his pal high kicking their way through the Yakuza. He uses his underworld contacts to do some pretty nasty torture on his behalf and lets his pal do most of the high kicking as he’s getting on a bit himself. As the end nears and we pass the bit we saw earlier we have to wonder if Jean will reclaim his son, save the nice little girl, get the bad guy and have a little bit of redemption for himself.

If you put your brain in neutral you’ll have a good time with ‘Wake of Death’. It ticks most of the boxes with some good fights and explosions. You also get a small dose of angst, some nudity and a man being stabbed in the balls. The plot is as predictable as they come but at least some effort is made to show that Jean isn’t a totally nice guy and some of the deaths are brutal to say the least.

The villains are a bunch of oriental caricatures but this was never going to be a film with a layered and fleshed out bad guy. The ending on a ship, in the fog at night was a straight lift from ‘Lethal weapon 2’ and ‘The Usual Suspects’ with every door offering a fresh seaman for a colourful dispatch. The ending may have a small element of surprise but that’s the only bit in this workmanlike, straight forward and highly enjoyable thriller.

Best Bit : Wife makes up for the Chinese Takeaway
‘W’ Rating 13/23

No. 148 : Wendy and Lucy (2008)

Wendy and Lucy at the IMDb

I’d have loved to have seen the original pitch for this movie. I guess it was ‘Woman loses dog and then finds it, the end' and the movie executive shouted ‘Solid gold!’. If that plot summary sounds simplistic it’s not really. The whole film takes place over a couple of days and hardly moves from a supermarket parking lot where it begins. Michelle Williams plays the titular Wendy a kind of oddball loner who is travelling to Alaska to get work at a fish cannery.

She stops overnight in Oregon and sleeps in her car with faithful pooch, Lucy. She's awoken by a security guard who wants her to move off but her car won’t start. This starts a series of events that try the patience of both Wendy and the viewer as she tries to keep body, soul, dog and car together. Her downfall is her own fault when she tries to secure a bit of five finger discount at the supermarket. A vigilant employee, who’s meant to come across as a dick but really isn’t, insists on handing her over to the cops.

The cops takes ages to process our light fingered heroine and by the time she gets back to the supermarket, where she left her dog, it has gone. The remainder of the film concerns the quest for the canine as Wendy gets frantic with worry for the fled fido. While the search is on her car is under the mechanic and it’s not looking good. Can the dog be found and will the car be fixed. Can we bear the suspense of these life changing questions?

This is a pretty decent slice of life that’s pretty inconsequential but an interesting insight all the same. We don’t get much back story to Wendy so her motivations aren’t that clear although we suspect something was afoot with the brother in law given her sister’s frosty reaction to her call. She’s not particularly likable with the shop lifting and general mooching all a bit of a turn off. She obviously cares for the dog but everyone else is just a means to an end.

It could be viewed as a fable for our troubled economic times but I thing that would be mining a subtext that isn’t really there. You could also see her as a modern day Blanche Dubois relying on the kindness of strangers. I was reasonably engaged by the film and keen for the inevitable reuniting scene, but as it approached the sense of a ‘Sophie’s Choice’ ending became overpowering and true to form it delivered.

I thought Michelle Williams was decent as the lead although I never really got the sense of desperation from her that her character seemed to be demanding. The rest of the cast were only bit parts although I did like the nicest car park guard in movie history.

Not a film to cheer you up or offer comfort at a time of belt tightening but as an exercise in ‘at least I’m better off than her’ it does a pretty good job.

Best Bit : Shopping the cheap way
‘W’ Rating 13/23

No. 145 : Werewolf of London (1935)

Werewolf of London at the IMDb

Having recently reviewed one of the most recent werewolf films let’s have a look at one of the earliest. ‘Werewolf of London’ dates from 1935, several years before Lon Chaney Jnr. made the monster famous in ‘The Wolf Man’. This effort is very dated and seems more like a comedy than the horror that the dramatic score suggests. It doesn’t even have Warren Zevon on the soundtrack - what a rip off!

We open on a sun baked ‘Tibet’ which looks suspiciously like that California desert where they always film ‘Star Trek’. On checking I found that the whole effort was shot in California so let’s hope for some authentic London touches later on. Anyway, our hero is an adventurer botanist who is in Tibet to locate a rare flower that only blossoms by moon light. He manages to find one in a valley where no one has ever emerged from but gets bitten by a man in a mask for his troubles.

Back in London our hero, Dr Glendon, holds a society bash and is met by a mysterious Dr Yogami who needs some of the flowers to help some werewolf men who are terrorising London. Clearly seeing him as a nutter Glendon sends him n his way but gets a bit concerned when his hands go hairy - mother always warned me about that. He finds that the juice of the plant stops the onset of wolfiness but is in trouble when an unseen robber steals the last of the blooms.

The next full moon Glendon transforms and after scaring a society lady chooses to kill a well dressed street walker instead. The police are obviously baffled and choose to ignore the young detective who guesses the wolf related problem at once. Glendon reads up on his situation and sees that he’s most likely to kill the one he loves most and so chooses to move away to a remote boarding house run by a nice drunk lady. After another killing he returns home to get some more flowers, only to be met by Yogami who has a similar need for the blooms. We learn the two have met in the past and soon realise that there is only one way this is going to end.

Although by no means a classic there is a lot to like in this film. It’s very of it’s pre-war day with the ladies knowing their place and everyone being very mannered except for the working classes who are all drunks. There are only two killings, both off screen, and both victims ‘deserved it’, one being a prostitute and the other an adulteress. The werewolf itself is extremely non scary with the costume consisting on some hairy gloves and a wig. The transformations are done in a very rudimentary fashion with cuts visible as our man passes some pillars, growing more hairy at each shot. Later on match cuts are used but these look too obvious to be convincing.

The wolf man himself is a strange creature, choosing to put on his coat, scarf and cap before heading out on a blood frenzy - doesn’t he realise that he’s got a fur coat on? He’s also a bit wimpy getting beaten up by an upper class twit - I guess they had to show these common wolf types their place. ‘London’ looked OK and they wisely kept away from any landmarks. The streets are all fog and carriage lamps and there are enough English character actors peppered about to keep things somewhat on topic.

Most of the acting is dreadful with a lot of dramatic pauses where the actors struggle to remember their lines or at least utter the fanciful dialogue they’ve been given. Worst of the bunch was Warner Oland as the enigmatic Dr Yogami whose slow delivery accounts for about half of the film’s 70 minute running time. He is better known as cinema’s Charlie Chan, a stereotype far more suited to abilities.

Many of the familiar werewolf conventions are missing with no silver bullets in sight although he does go to visit wolves in the zoo - a scene laterreprised in ‘An American Werewolf in London’. The film doesn’t scare in the slightest but as an oddity it’s quite interesting both in terms of the genre and of the period as a whole. The class divide shown is unimaginable today in terms of the portrayal of the working classes and their expendability. The toffs on the other hand are a bunch of party going gadabouts, so no change there then!

Best Bit : Boarding house banter
‘W’ Rating 13/23

No. 144 : Werewolf the Devil’s Hound (2007)

Werewolf The Devil's Hound at the IMDb

When you undertake a worthy quest like watching over 100 movies that start with a ‘W’ you inevitably see a lot of wolf and wolf-men based pictures. The standard of these vary considerably and quite often the pass/fail tightrope is judged by the creature effects and the deviations from the standard template.

This film is by no means a masterpiece but at least it attempted to do something a teensy bit different with a tired old genre. That’s not to say it doesn’t have its flaws but, as with a lot of cheapo horror flicks, the restrained budget can be half the fun.

The film opens “in the near future” - why, I have no idea as it looks exactly like today. The opening scene is in ‘Germany’, although I suspect it’s the director’s back yard, and three men with night vision goggles are on a hunt. A familiar lupine howl is heard before one gets a really sore throat from a beast that looks a lot like Chewbacca’s albino cousin. Another man manages to tranquillise it and stick it in a big box reminiscent of the one in that ‘Creepshow’ film. I doubt this was a homage though but simply the box they had. After making a vague comment in fractured English about transformations he sends the box off to an unspecified destination.

Meanwhile in the States a man is awaiting a delivery of some big boxes of fireworks for his pyrotechnics business. When too many appear he thinks he’s getting a good deal but that extra box looks a bit familiar! Predictably the beast is soon on the loose and bites the hand of Kevin who thinks it’s his neighbours dog. Obviously he has never done a ‘W’ movie quest as the wolfie symptoms of acute senses and a feeling of invigoration completely fail to warn him of the wolf man curse that now flows through his veins. Elsewhere the hungry beast is racking up the victims with a lazy fire officer and a lady the first snacks.

The middle third of the film is a bit slow as our man slowly realises that he is becoming a werewolf which causing obvious ructions with his wife, especially when he hooks up with the werewolf, who is a foxy chick in her day clothes. It is worth sticking with the film though as the last half hour is totally nuts with all sorts of weirdness going on. I liked the werewolf fighting the robots which the company had in stock and when the Germans appear for the finale any sense of realism goes out the window. Things pan out as you’d expect, if you expected aliens and explosions.

The actors were uniformly awful and I’d be surprised if there was one trained thespian among their number. Especially bad was the nerdy intern who at least offered one laugh when he arrived with some Sellotape to help secure the door which was being attacked by wolfie. The lead did a poor job of conveying his angst and surprise at being a werewolf, as was his dad who didn’t seem fazed in the slightest.

Although this film seems to have a budget in the hundreds rather than the thousands I did quite enjoy it, especially its quirky touches like an impromptu animation to explain a small plot point. I also liked some of the direction which made the most or rather the least from the wolf suit (that looked more like a yeti than a wolf man) - disguising it by only showing it during gun shot flashes was a decent way of not ruining the illusion.

Sometimes the director goes a bit far, with the arty shots coming thick and fast like he’s running through his film school idiot’s guide on speed. The film enjoys a meagre score of 3/10 on IMDb and that seems harsh when you consider some of the crap that gets a mighty 4/10. I’d say half marks for a good honest effort which doesn’t take itself too seriously would be fair. The film does end with an ominous ‘The End?’ - let’s leave it there chaps even our low limits can be tested!

Best Bit : Nerd loses his head
‘W’ Rating 13/23

No. 134 : Whisky Galore! (1949)

Whisky Galore! at the IMDb

Here’s another 'always on on a wet afternoon but I’ve never seen it before' ‘W’ classic. You’ll be familiar with the plot which sees a bunch of drunken Scotsmen try to outwit the forces of the excise office.

Set on the fictitious island of Todday in the Outer Hebrides during the second world war the film opens with the islanders learning that their whisky has run out. As you’d expect this is a disaster with people fainting and sobering up all over the place. Fortune smiles however when a cargo ship runs aground with its cargo of 50,000 cases of whisky. The locals have to leave it be for the Sabbath but despite their Christian leanings they are not against a bit of theft as they begin to clear the ship the following day.

The ships sinks in dramatic model endangering action the soon afterwards but local busybody, and proto-Captain Mainwaring, Captain Waggett seeks to upset the party and reports his suspicions to the excise department. Meanwhile Gordon Jackson (off the Fine Fare ads) is being smothered by his overbearing mother and an off duty soldier tries to woo the girl of his dreams.

With Captain Waggett retuning with a posse of spoilsport duty men it’s up to the locals to hide the whisky lest it be confiscated and returned to its rightful owners. Can the drunken Scotsmen stay drunk? And can the war be won with this bunch of shiftless yokels manning the home front?

As you can probably gather I’m not too impressed at the moral ambiguity going on here. Yes they are all loveable rogues but the idea that a whole Scottish community lives or dies by its whisky intake is patently ridiculous. We do see the occasional drunk asleep on the beach but no one dying of liver disease, beating their wives or spewing up all over the place.

Although the film is 80 minutes long even that is only achieved with some lengthy padding. The ship doesn’t sink until half an hour in and the real crux of the story only really gets under way with twenty minutes to go. Of course with a paper thin plot you do have to have some good characters to win the audience over and this has a few but not enough. Gordon Jackson is a bit wishy washy although his harridan mother is great. Basil Radford as the lead is poor but has little to work with as his role is basically the English twit foil for the canny Scots.

I did laugh a couple of times but more at the dated sense of values on show and at the general bad behaviour - at one point with the customs at the door one man frantically guzzles two bottles of Scotch. Dead in a week guaranteed. The film does end with a moral and the suggestion that craving whisky, as has been shown for the entire film, might not be a good way to go after all. Well, duh!

The film is generally a gentle good humoured romp with a smattering of stereotypes and mild laughs. Nothing great and morally dubious but a decent distraction and cultural oddity.

Best Bit : Stashing the Scotch
‘W’ Rating 13/23