Arrival (2016)

"When mysterious spacecraft touch down across the globe, an elite team - led by expert linguist Louise Banks - is brought together to investigate. As mankind teeters on the verge of global war, Banks and the team race against time for answers - and to find them, she will take a chance that could threaten her life, and quite possibly humanity."

So, I watched 2 hours or more (trust me, it felt longer) of this utter shite based on a novel about alien octopusses which look like the Cloverfield monster, and I can now safely say that it was boring as shit and didn't make any fucking sense whatsoever.

I'm not some fucking thickie who can't decipher movies, but "The Arrival" is such a fucking artsy-fartsy, tangled mess that there's no explanation possible for what it's supposed to be about without drifting into some obscure philosophical bollocks which nobody normal knows about or has ever read anyway. No moral, no message, none of the most obvious questions answered, nothing memorable, just piss poor storytelling. It doesn't even have Charlie Sheen in it!

Here come loads of spoilers because fuck this movie.

She looks about as happy as I did watching this horseshit.

Basically, some ovaloid spaceships appear all over the world, and the aliens inside look like scary octopusses, or walking hands, or spiders. Take your pick, they are all nasty. The ugly motherfuckers walk like disembodied hands and squirt ink. Whatever the fuck they are, you wouldn't want one swimming up your arse.

A woman linguist (played by Amy Adams) with no make-up (because she's a scientist and clever, yawn!) and a bunch of other nondescript scientists go aboard one of the ships and attempt to communicate with the octopusses, but because the military are involved, someone (predictably) sets a bomb off during one of their missions, and the story starts again, and again, and again. Not like "Groundhog Day", but like someone fucked up editing it all together.

There's a little girl involved and a baby who may be the same person, and both are the linguist's daughter or the linguist herself. Both or all of them are destined to die of some horrible incurable disease which probably came from the octopusses. I'm fucked if I know. By this point, I'd developed a serious case of Forest Whitaker eye (yeah, he's in it too) and didn't care about anything. No action, no ray guns, no boobs, no blood, no cats. Why does something like this even exist? Oh yeah, because nerds and cucks like sci-fi.

After a scene more of less straight out of "The Abyss" (another slow movie which is also boring as shit), the aliens communicate with subtitles then leave. The linguist phones a Chinese scientist guy to tell him what his dead wife's last words were, and we're back to the linguist, and the little girl, and the baby again. Apparently she's married to the Jeremy Renner scientist guy now too, because that isn't predictable at all.

And none of it makes any fucking sense!!!!

Why are they here? Fucked if I know.

8.4 on the IMDb? Give me a fucking break. It's not even worth 1 out of 10. This is complete and utter shit from beginning to end. Allegedly, it rips-off Samuel R. Delany's "Babel 17" too.

I can't wait to see how badly director Denis Villeneuve fucks up the "Blade Runner" sequel with more style over substance now. Actually, I'm not. I won't be watching it.

Ex Machina (2015)

"A young programmer is selected to participate in a breakthrough experiment in artificial intelligence by evaluating the human qualities of a breathtaking female A.I."

If you are looking for a really talky but R-rated version of Steven Spielberg's "A.I. Artificial Intelligence" (2001), or just want to see Kike Maíllo's far superior "Eva" (2011) rehashed with a couple of different twists, "Ex Machina" is for you.

It's not that "Ex Machina" is a bad movie per se, since the camerawork is great, the sets and effects are perfect, and the acting is totally convincing. It's just that there isn't really a lot to this extremely slow-moving sci-fi, and there isn't enough of anything apart from some brief nudity and a nifty disco-dancing routine to make it memorable. It's definitely more of a drama than anything else, and like "Maggie", it makes you wonder if the story and its tropes couldn't have been played out on a purely human level without any gimmicks.

Why make the robot a beautiful girl? Why make her sexual? All that is explained in the dialogue at some length, and it's important to the plot, but I'm sure that the fauxminists will still bitch and whine about this aspect to get pageviews. Good luck to them. Nobody cares. It's only another movie with no deep and meaningful political agenda unless someone wants to make more out of it than they should. And sadly, with over 300 external reviews of "Ex Machina" currently posted on the IMDb, I know that at least one person already has done. Pathetic.

Obviously, Alicia Vikander almost steals the show as the beautiful robot Ava, but it's fair to say that Domhnall Gleeson (as Caleb) and Oscar Isaac (as Nathan) hold up well against her. In fact, the double-twist makes the whole ménage à trois (albeit with some minor characters) worthwhile. It's very predictable in the the way that you kind of expect what happens to happen but not in the way it does, and most people probably won't see the ending coming. In that respect, the story is very well played indeed.

Directed and written by Alex Garland (of "28 Days Later" and "Dredd" fame), what "Ex Machina" lacks in originality, it makes up for in uncluttered calmness and downplayed spectacle. There's even a bit of sexual tension here and there but not too much. Kids could watch this. They won't understand most of it, of course, but an R-rating seems unnecessarily harsh. Oh wait, it's America, so healthy nudity is the most heinous evil ever and violent death is perfectly acceptable. I get it now.

In short, "Ex Machina" is another robot with artificial intelligence movie but is none the worse for that. The better robot movie is still "Eva", and "Bicentennial Man" (1999) is arguably the emotional best, but "Ex Machina" is a competent addition to the sci-fi genre.

Recommended for a rainy Sci-Fi Saturday night.

My Top Ten Sci-Fi Films

I'm not the biggest fan of sci-fi. Spaceships, robots, laser guns, little bleeping machines, and aliens with funny-shaped heads have never done it for me. I don't actively collect sci-fi movies, and I've tended to avoid the SyFy channel like the plague even when it actually used to show sci-fi movies instead of wrestling and "Ghost Hunters" episodes. Sci-fi is just not my thing.

When I think of sci-fi, it makes me remember the times when I've had to compromise on my choice of rental movies. Sometimes I was forced to hire sci-fi movies because I'd already seen all the horror available, but on other occasions, when girlfriends have wanted some lame romantic-comedy and I wanted the grisliest horror known to man, middle ground was only reached by choosing something that neither of us really wanted to see. That kind of sums up the only reason I can think for the existence of the genre; sci-fi is only something to watch when you can't have what you want.

Having said that, and pissed off all the basement-dwelling neckbeards and nerd-girls who read my blog, there have been a few sci-fi movies which I've found entertaining over the years.


1. RoboCop (1987)

"In a dystopic and crime-ridden Detroit, a terminally wounded cop returns to the force as a powerful cyborg haunted by submerged memories."

"RoboCop" is the only movie from any genre which I've watched twice in a cinema. I went to see it on my own, but I was so blown away by it that I went straight to the pub afterwards and dragged a bunch of my mates back for the next showing. None of us had seen anything like it before, and it's obviously still my favourite sci-fi/action film of all time.

If I had to isolate the reasons why "RoboCop" gave me the "post-movie buzz", I probably couldn't come up with anything other than it being more spectacular and exciting than anything I'd seen theatrically before. I went in expecting it to be a ripoff of "The Vindicator" (1986)—which it is—but I was gobsmacked by the effects and gloriously gory violence.

I didn't like "RoboCop 2", but "RoboCop 3" and the crappy TV series killed the magic so much that I ended up burning my RoboCop action figures from Woolworth's on a bonfire.


2. Equilibrium (2002)

"In a Fascist future where all forms of feeling are illegal, a man in charge of enforcing the law rises to overthrow the system."

I can't believe that "Equilibrium" is 11 years old now! I think this was the first Christian Bale film that I ever saw. I may be wrong about that though because "American Psycho" and "Reign of Fire" had started showing up on Sky TV channels around the same time.

With a modest budget of only $20,000,000 (yes, I know!), the world represented by only a few sets and clever camerawork feels a lot bigger than it actually is, and the now overused washed-out blue and grey hues add even more of a coolness factor to the cinematography. The only valid criticism I can think of is that the plot liberally borrows from dozens of other famous sci-fi stories and merely adds some very nicely choreographed fight scenes. But as I'm quite ignorant about most sci-fi, none of that matters.

Not only was I totally into the gun-kata action scenes, but I even bought an Android Alien watch like the one Christian Bale's character wears. Just to be different, I have a blue-dialled one rather than a black-dialled one. Unlike the movie version, it doesn't have an alarm on it, it's very uncomfortable, it's too hard to see the time, and it kind of sucks in real life.


3. Village of the Damned (1960)

"In the English village of Midwich, the blond-haired, glowing-eyed children of uncertain paternity prove to have frightening powers."

"Village of the Damned" is one of those movies which used to show up on BBC2 on rainy Saturday afternoons, although I have a feeling that I first saw it on Channel Four sometime in the '90s instead. They probably showed it to coincide with the release of John Carpenter's remake which I've never seen in its entirety.

There's probably a word for people who loathe children as much as I do, and I'd guess that it isn't a very nice one, but I really got a lot of sadistic pleasure from the ending of this movie.

Considering that it's such a classic, I'm slightly ashamed to admit that I'd never even heard of it before. If I hadn't seen John Wyndham's name credited for writing "Village of the Damned", I would have been none the wiser about that either. "The Midwych Cuckoos" isn't the most enticing book title for someone like me, and I only knew of John Wyndham from the BBC TV adaptation of "Day of the Triffids". Let's face it, I'm not a sci-fi book reader.


4. The Time Machine (1960)

"A Victorian Englishman travels to the far future and finds that humanity has divided into two hostile species."

Another BBC2 regular from when they used to show classic sci-fi movies at 6pm in the early '80s. I also saw it at some point when I was too young to understand what was going on, and it was only by accident that I ended up watching it again and realising what it was all about.

Apart from Alan Young's weird Scottish accent, I can't find anything to complain about in this movie. Rod Taylor makes a good hero, and Yvette Mimieux is absolutely gorgeous as Weena. Okay, she has a very silly name, but I'm not going to make any obvious jokes involving "Rod" and "Weena" because I'm no longer 12 years old. I'll just snigger about the double entendres in my own mind.

When you look at the state of today's younger generation, and note how they aren't far off being food for the Morlocks, there's also a prophetic warning here for sure.


5. Planet of the Apes (1968)

"An astronaut crew crash lands on a planet in the distant future where intelligent talking apes are the dominant species, and humans are the oppressed and enslaved."

Having seen the TV series first, I didn't realise that the film predated it or that there were originally books and comics too. In my infant mind, all I knew was that Galen wasn't being called Galen but Cornelius! Where were Alan and Pete? And who was this Charlton Heston guy? Well, of course I know now, but I didn't then.

It took me many years to accept that this movie was better than the TV series, but I still prefer Roddy McDowell as Galen rather than as Cornelius or Caesar. Whatever the case though, Roddy McDowell was born to play a talking chimpanzee!

I've seen all the "Planet of the Apes" movies (even Tim Burton's shitty remake) on TV dozens of times, so I'll probably never buy them on DVD.


6. Timecop (1994)

"An officer for a security agency that regulates time travel, must fend for his life against a shady politician who has a tie to his past."

Back in the day, you were either a Stallone fan or an Arnie fan, but then "The Muscles from Brussels" came along to keep girlfriends who hated action movies quiet for a few minutes. Thus, "Timecop" became the first Jean-Claude Van Damme movie that I ever saw.

"Timecop" is full of plot holes, but it's really just an action movie in disguise anyway. The failures in the mechanics of its time travel elements don't bear thinking about, so it's best not to. None of the flaws are that noticeable unless you are a pedantic nerd, in which case you'd be better off watching "Doctor Who" anyway.

Ron Silver's McComb character is easily his best performance in anything, but Jean-Claude iconically standing on one leg to kick a baddie in the face is the most memorable part for me.


7. Cube (1997)

"7 complete strangers of widely varying personality characteristics are involuntarily placed in an endless kafkaesque maze containing deadly traps."

In many ways a precursor to the "Saw" movies, this Canadian sci-fi has a few horror elements which my girlfriend at the time didn't appreciate. She whinged so much that I didn't get to finish watching "Cube" until three years later! Neither of us realised that it had so many gory horror set pieces, but I still got the blame for choosing it instead of "Men in Black". To this day, I still haven't seen "Men in Black", and I never will.

Clever use of only one set and coloured lights, combined with a cast of relatively unknown British and Canadian TV actors, apparently created a big splash among the "low-budget" fanboys. I was unaware of any of that nonsense because "Cube" was just something I picked off the "New Releases" shelf after scanning the back of the VHS artwork for the usual guff and a synopsis. The fact that it wasn't a kiddified American comedy was all I needed to know.

"Cube" has become a bit dated in places (although it's still miles better than its sequels), but I might revisit it and write a full review eventually. I've said that about a lot of movies though and never have.


8. Starship Troopers (1997)

"Humans in a fascistic, militaristic future do battle with giant alien bugs in a fight for survival."

Although "Starship Troopers" was described by some wags at the time as "90210 in Space" due its plethora of popular young TV actors in leading roles, I'd never heard of any of them before. The names of Casper Van Dien, Dina Meyer, and Denise Richards meant nothing to me as a Brit who was more into watching "Xena: Warrior Princess" and "Hercules: The Legendary Journeys", but I knew who Michael Ironside was and just wanted to see the giant bugs. I wasn't disappointed by either.

Thus, Paul Verhoeven struck gold with another action film about a dystopian future which I almost went back to see again theatrically. I didn't ever go back because the cinema closed down soon afterwards (leaving my hometown without one until a couple of years ago), but I did buy "Starship Troopers" on VHS. I also bought the first sequel which sucks balls.


9. Blade Runner (1982)

"Deckard, a blade runner, has to track down and terminate 4 replicants who hijacked a ship in space and have returned to Earth seeking their maker."

I'm not sure how many variations there are of "Blade Runner", but I've only got the director's cut on DVD. I'm not sure if it's better or worse than any other because I only saw the theatrical version once and can barely remember the differences. I do know that the "happy ending" from the original has Deckard and Rachael driving off into the countryside, but I'm sure that everything else is much the same. If it isn't, feel free to let me know.

I must admit that it took a while for "Blade Runner" to grow on me. I used to think it was boring apart from Rutger Hauer—and Harrison Ford's monotone voice could put me to sleep on a good day—but I now appreciate the film noir elements and melancholy atmosphere. Things change as you get older, and "Blade Runner" never struck me as being a young person's film. It's too depressing and preoccupied with death for one thing.

Visually, there isn't much to beat "Blade Runner" other than Fritz Lang's "Metropolis" (1927). If you're wondering why I haven't included "Metropolis" on this list, it's because I've only seen the tinted version with Georgio Moroder's soundtrack. I don't think I could make it through the most recent restoration with its original orchestral score. "Metropolis" has more to say about 1920s Berlin than being a proper sci-fi movie anyway.


10. Trancers (1985)

"Jack Deth is a kind of cop/bounty hunter in the bleak Los Angeles of the future. He's become obssessed with chasing Whistler - an evil criminal who uses powerful hypnotic powers to convert people into zombie like creatures known as trancers."

Since "The Terminator" (1984) was just a ripoff of two episodes of "The Outer Limits" written by Harlan Ellison, I don't see anything wrong with this lower-budget clone of the same subject matter. Most time travel movies share the same plot anyway, even last year's "Looper". If you've seen one, you've seen them all, but as this is the third one on my list, I must kind of like them.

In this case, it's Tim Thomerson's performance as Jack Deth which makes "Trancers" worth watching. He has some very memorable lines and great chemistry with Helen Hunt in her first film role.

Essentially a very entertaining "B movie" with plot holes and goofs aplenty, the cult following which "Trancers" has gathered over the years is well deserved. I like all the "Trancers" movies (even the 6th one!), and I'm looking forward to seeing the unfinished "Trancers 1.5: City of Lost Angels" when Full Moon release it later this year.


I've obviously seen a lot more sci-fi movies, but most of them are sci-fi/horror fusions which deserve their own top ten list. Just off the top of my head, "Alien", "The Last Man on Earth", "The Fly", "Event Horizon", and "The Thing" would be more highly placed than any of the titles above if I had included them here.

If you're into sci-fi, let me know which movies you like. Or, if there's something you think I should watch, leave me a comment below.

Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)

"An origin story set in present day San Francisco, where man's own experiments with genetic engineering lead to the development of intelligence in apes and the onset of a war for supremacy."

I'm not what you'd call an expert on the "Planet of the Apes" franchise although I've seen all the films (and the TV series) so you'll just have to bear with me as I go outside the horror genre for a few moments.

Having just watched "The Rise of the Planet of the Apes" reboot (or whatever other term you want to use for this remake of "Conquest of the Planet of the Apes"), I absolutely loved it. It was much better than Tim Burton's crappy remake from 2001, had as many nods to the original as a fanboy could hope for, and even created a few unresolved hooks in the plot in case of any sequels.

Since this is a new film, you may not want to read anything else after this paragraph as I can't avoid giving a few spoilers. You just have to know that the CGI monkeys in this were amazing. I almost forgot that I was watching computer graphics at all as these were the best example of them that I've ever seen.

One thing which was very different to the original films was how this Caesar was an accidentally created mutation caused by injecting his mother with a cure for Alzheimer's disease. Apparently the writers decided to ignore the time-travel story which tied the other films together. Unfortunately, this may prove to be the undoing of any attempt to make more sequels but the alternative timelines were never exactly set in stone anyway.

I did like the fact that this was more about "creationism" than any bogus evolution story and also that the reason for this all kicking off to begin with was the Frankenstein-esque obsession of James "Son of Green Goblin" Franco's character (whose name I can't remember) who wanted to cure his senile father (John Lithgow).

There were a lot of other recognisable faces in this film including Brian Cox, the girl from "Slumdog Millionaire" and even the kid who played the evil blond Draco in the Harry Potter films. I don't know the names of everybody (and don't really care enough to look them up) since "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" was all about the monkeys and, in particular, how much emotion a computer generated version of a chimpanzee could convey. It was a lot and I was very impressed.

Of course it was all a load of sci-fi silliness really but, strangely, it was very easy to suspend disbelief enough to accept everything on screen as if it was real and just enjoy the ride. I picked up on all the famous lines from "Planet of the Apes" (1968), noticed the mission to Mars spaceship had been lost, and gleefully accepted the potentially apocalyptic virus. Basically, enough was done to fit "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" into the existing series should a sequel never be made.

It was also very satisfying to finally see that spiteful Harry Potter kid get his comeuppance as should anyone who is cruel to animals. I really enjoyed that bit. I loathe anything to do with Harry Potter too so it was a double bonus.

Obviously this wasn't a horror movie so I've only reviewed it for the sake of keeping current. There were a lot of references to how dangerous chimpanzees are which I don't think anyone has any doubts about anymore after seeing what happened to that woman who got her face bitten off by one a couple of years ago. That was some real life horror right there. Coincidentally, I just read online that she's now had a face transplant. That would have been science-fiction itself only ten years ago.

The bottom line: "Rise of the Planet of the Apes" wasn't much more than "Spartacus" with CGI monkeys and a happier ending but it was done very well indeed.

Alien (1979)

"A mining ship, investigating a suspected SOS, lands on a distant planet. The crew discovers some strange creatures and investigates."

If someone ever told me that they had never seen the original "Alien", not only would I not believe them, but I'd probably laugh at them too. This sci-fi slasher movie has been available in so many formats, shown on TV thousands of times all over the world, and has so much merchandise available for it that, even if you haven't ever watched it, you'd still know exactly what it was all about and who was in it just through hearsay.

When VHS tapes started to get replaced by DVDs, "Alien" was actually the first DVD that I ever bought although I had to return it several times to get one that worked properly. It seems that DVD authoring errors have plagued this movie right up to the famous HMV recall of the "Alien Quadrilogy" box set which is a shame.

I now own three different DVD versions of "Alien" due to changing countries and because I'm greedy. I chose to rewatch the "Director's Cut", and without Googling, I really can't tell you the differences between it and the original theatrical release. Any additions or cuts are either so subtle that I missed them, or I've seen "Alien" so many times that I just wasn't paying enough attention. I think Veronica Cartwright slaps Sigourney Weaver in the "Director's Cut" but not in the original although, as far as I care, it might be the other way around. Whatever version of "Alien" you watch, it's still the same story.

Now I may well be a bit of an expert when it comes to horror movies purely due to the sheer number of them that I've watched over the years, but when it comes to science fiction, I usually couldn't care less about it. Yes, I know that the space ship in "Alien" is called the Nostromo and its crew are made up of some kind of "space truckers", but as for the little technical details about who they are working for or what happened between now and the future that the whole thing is set in, I have no idea. "Alien" is just a horror movie set in space as much as it matters to me. It could be the same scenario on a plane, a boat or set in a cabin in the woods, but it's still a slasher film with a big predatory monster doing all the killing rather than some deranged guy in a mask.

I also know that the alien itself was designed by H.R Giger, and although I'm not consciously familiar with anything else that the Swiss surrealist artist has done, I'd bet a ton of money on the fact that it was probably the best work he ever did. Giger's alien is now such a ridiculously iconic figure that the few glimpses that you actually have of it in "Alien" don't really matter. You know that it's something big and nasty with several sets of teeth and claws which is going to hurt you severely if you are stupid enough to get yourself caught by it.

If "Alien" has any flaws at all as a movie then it's simply the cliché of a group of people who should know better deciding to split up into smaller groups to try and track the monster down and kill it. That scenario had been done to death even before Ridley Scott had the genius idea to set the whole thing in space where "no one can hear you scream".

Of course, only a few years earlier, Steven Spielberg did much the same thing with "Jaws", but whereas his shark put people off going into the water, I've never had any yearning to become an astronaut and go alien hunting anyway. Therein lies a subtle distancing that might put a lot of people who hate science fiction off wanting to watch "Alien" in the first place. Since it's hardly another "Star Wars" or "Star Trek" filled with funny looking people with weird heads, you'd really be missing out on one of the scariest and most adrenaline pumping horror movies of all time if you dismissed this film so easily.

Some of the jump scares which worked for me initially have become almost comical over the years especially John Hurt's famous chestburster scene. It seems that when it was filmed, Veronica Cartwright had no idea what was going to happen and her response is as real as it gets. Personally, I hate spidery things so I was already quite anxious from the previous facehugger stuff, and it made me jump when I first saw it too. I was, however, quite relieved that it was a snaky thing and not another spider.

Here's an autographed picture I have of one of the most memorable moments in film:

I remember, back in the '80s, loads of people buying t-shirts with latex chestbursters hanging out of the front of them as what used to be one of the most frightening movie moments began to lose its impact somewhat. Darlene's choice of Hallowe'en costume from one of the "Roseanne" TV shows sums up exactly how most kids felt about it. Watching the chestburster scene now just has me on titter alert and I actually find the baby alien that pops out to be quite cute. How it shrieks and scuttles off now has quite the opposite effect on me to what was originally intended.

Other notable memories for me were obviously based round Sigourney Weaver's extremely ugly and far too small knickers. Watching "Alien" again as a fully grown adult doesn't really do the same things to me that it did when I was going through puberty. I still don't really like Ripley as a character until "Aliens" but can appreciate Veronica Cartwright in a much more sexual way instead.

But I'm getting ahead of myself. All the claustrophobic stalking and killing is what makes "Alien" special, and it's that which you really want to know about. Well, I'm not going to tell you about it because you just have to see it all for yourself and experience it. If the action scenes don't get your heart beating faster then you've simply been spoiled and burnt out by too many torture porn movies.

"Alien" is over 30 years old now, but I still recommend it as a horror movie that everyone should have in their collection. Try to forget all the sequels (except "Aliens") and wish that all the "AVP" nonsense had never happened because the original "Alien" is still one of the best horror films you will ever see.

Exam (2009)

"Eight talented candidates have reached the final stage of selection to join the ranks of a mysterious and powerful corporation. Entering a windowless room, an Invigilator gives them eighty minutes to answer one simple question."

It's funny what Netflix suggests for you based on "your taste preferences", isn't it? Since I've been watching a lot of streaming "Dark, Suspenseful, Psychological Thrillers" recently, I was presented with "Exam" as one of my options. I'd never even heard of it and didn't really have much interest in watching it but, since I had another snow day with nothing else to do except see how honey cheese flavoured cheesy poofs I could get into my mouth in one go, I fired up my laptop and clicked "Play".

Starring nobody you've ever heard of outside of the UK (including a lot of TV actors from things like "Eastenders", "Holby City" and "Doctor Who"), "Exam" is an obviously low-budget, almost "Twilight Zone" sci-fi drama with a "Ten Little Indians" feel to it. I was immediately reminded of "Lifeboat", "Lifepod" and the "Cube" films and, due to the presence of Colin Salmon, "Resident Evil" too. As soon as I saw him, I remembered a "Doctor Who" episode that I'd seen him in recently and I knew that I was in for something good. It's funny how one actor can make that much of a difference even if, in this case, he isn't actually on screen for very long.

I was also quite impressed with how the various characters were shown getting dressed during the opening credits sequence. It's intimate, emotive and it very effectively added more exposition than any dialogue could ever do. I remembered just how it felt to get ready for examinations I have taken myself, the nerves involved, the anxiety, and how I wouldn't even be able to sleep properly the night before. I think this all added a lot to how I was willingly able to suspend my disbelief about the extremes these characters would go to later on.

One thing I don't like about watching movies on my laptop is that when they are filmed with so many extreme "warts and all" close-ups, I start to judge people by their skin pores, teeth, and any blemishes I see before they even begin to act. There are four absolutely beautiful girls in this, but because of the camerawork, I found myself completely unattracted to any of them. The same thing happened to me during the kissing scene in "Jennifer's Body" as pimply faced Megan Fox made me feel a little bit queasy. I'd be interested to know if anyone else notices things like this.

Anyway, to cut a not so long story even shorter, the whole thing is about a group of very different people all stuck together in one room trying to work out how to pass an exam to get a top job. If you imagine the worst people possible from "Big Brother" doing one of their weekly tasks then you get the idea. There are clever ones, nasty ones, natural leaders and followers, but all of them want to win at any cost. Keep that in mind when you pick your favourites at the beginning and be prepared for a few surprises should you choose to watch "Exam" yourself.

Another film that this reminded me of was "The Breakfast Club". It's probably the setting more than anything else but I'd even go so far as saying that the way the backgrounds of each character came out were quite similar. Admittedly, there's no hint of romance and not a lot of comedy in "Exam", but I did feel that it could have gone that way a few times if the script and direction hadn't been as controlled as it was. I wanted something to happen between Luke Mably and Nathalie Cox, and there certainly seemed to be some subtext there. Unfortunately, it didn't turn out to be what I thought it was at all.

Luke Mably may be known to American TV viewers for his role in "The Gates". I still haven't watched a single episode of it so I couldn't tell you who he is in it or whether the show is any good or not. In "Exam" he's absolutely excellent though, and you'll love and hate him at the same time. He pretty much eclipses all the others apart from former "Eastender" Jimi Mistry, but this is one of those stories where the characters you don't really notice turn out to be the most important.

You'll never guess the ending which is de rigueur for this genre unless you are one of those annoying people who can work out who the villain is in "Scooby Doo" cartoons or something. I'm sure there are a lot of reviewers who would lie and say that they worked out how it was going to end right from the start, but I'll happily admit that I didn't have a clue myself. I was too wrapped up in watching everyone solve the puzzle to even think about what it would lead to, and that is both the film's major strength and its weakness.

The slightly futuristic setting and the revelations about what is going on in the world outside which has lead the eight people to be taking this particular exam was a very inspired idea. The downside to this was that, ultimately, I didn't really care and found it to be a little bit far-fetched. The final scenes are somewhat of a cop-out, but at least they don't end up dead and living on an island or anything ridiculous like that. I had a horrible feeling that they would be when Jimi Mistry almost turned into Sayid at one point.

If you noticed how I've highlighted a lot of similarities between "Exam" and other films and TV shows then you'll probably realise that "Exam" isn't all that original. It really does borrow its best points from things we've all seen before. Having said that, all these elements have been so skilfully put together that most people wouldn't even notice. I suppose that's the curse of watching as many things as I do inside and outside of the horror genre. After a while, there really is nothing that original any more, just how it is presented with a slightly different spin on it.

Before I end this review, I have to mention that Adar Beck who plays "Dark" (they are all named after their hair colour or racial type) has some absolutely stunning photos of herself on her IMDb profile. I don't know anything about her since "Exam" was her first real film appearance other than a short which I've never seen, but I hope that she's in more good things in the future. Yes, I do now have a little crush on her, but it won't effect my rating of "Exam" in any way.

I'm happy to give "Exam" a pass mark of 7 out of 10. It has some great performances, looks good, and it held my interest all the way through. For someone like me who has the attention span of a gnat with ADHD, this is a great achievement. It only loses marks because the emotional payoff at the end didn't do anything for me as a hardened horror fan without much compassion for the human race in the first place. I'd obviously rate it even higher if Luke Mably's character, White, had been even more like me.

I recommend that you all take a small break from watching horror movies and give "Exam" a try. It's probably not something you'd want to buy or watch more than once, but it's certainly worth renting or adding to your Netflix queue.

InCRAPtion (2010) - Movie Review

Plot: NONE whatsoever. Just make it up as you go along like the director did.

Tagline: Paying $10 to be this bored is a crime.

Review:

There's something very wrong with people. I've known it for a while now but I thought it might be me who was the mental one not them. But as the only Classically trained horror movie reviewer on the planet, I thought I'd give this so-called "Science Fiction" movie a try and see if I could figure it out. I couldn't. It's crap. I'm still sane and everyone else who thinks this film is the second-coming in celluloid needs to be locked up for their own safety.

I'm not just saying this to get a rise out of people. I've wasted over two hours of my life on this confused mess of filmmaking with no entertainment value whatsoever and I feel it's my right to tell people what I think. In fact, it's more than my right, it's my duty to warn people not to waste their money watching "Inception" at all because it's all a hoax.

"Inception" is not a movie at all but just a bunch of disjointed set pieces that wouldn't fit into any other movie all joined together to use up a load of money and fool the public into spending more money to see it. It's as bad as getting people to believe in wartime that their silk knickers were being turned into parachutes or their knives and forks were going to be made into bullets. It never happened. You were conned. If you paid to see "Inception", you were conned again. You'll believe that man walked on the moon next.

Was this some master plan to boost the economy I wonder? You have to hand it to the producers or the Illuminati who control Hollywood because they've created a scam of such epic proportions that people are right now voting a load of 10s and 9s on all the movie sites to keep this junk in vogue. Theories abound on the ending as if it even matters and hordes of sweaty teenagers are begging their parents for money to go and see the most intellectual film of their lives. Boy, are they in for a shock.

Is it mass hysteria or was there some subliminal message being passed through the movie into everyone's unconscious? Was this an "inception" for real? Let me tell you what I got from the film - NOTHING!

I didn't buy into all the pseudo-Platonic mumbo-jumbo about different levels of reality or dream states and I certainly didn't get any enjoyment out of being treated with such contempt by one of the most inadequate directors since Ed Wood. Actually, that's an insult to Ed Wood. Christopher Nolan is up there with M. Night Shyamalan in the "creator of the most boring, meaningless drivel" category.

For the first 40 minutes of the film my mind refused to work at all. All it could do was scream, "What's going on?" There were no answers. All I was getting were mumbles from some unintelligible Japanese guy, some words about nothing I could understand from that kid from the Titanic movie who I thought had retired, and then that awful Juno girl appeared being just as bratty as she was in every other movie that she's been in. Yes, I know their real names but I don't even care. One trick ponies like this need to be put out to grass not given more roles. Anybody else would have been more watchable. ANYBODY! Even a Baldwin or an Arquette! At least it didn't have that weird looking mannequin with hooded eyelids from "28 Days Later" in it... oh GOD, yes it did.

Things started to pick up a bit around the 50 minutes mark. I still didn't know what was going on but I've seen "eXistenZ" with the delightful Jennifer Jason Leigh in it so I felt safer. This was going to be a mixture of that story plus "Dreamscape", "The Thirteenth Floor" and presumably "The Matrix". I thought I might be able to get some answers at last to what was going on at the beginning. But again I was wrong!

Mannequin Murphy was kidnapped and being asked for numbers, the Japanese mumbler was on the ground dying and everybody was talking about Limbo. I saw no reason for dancing and I was pretty sure this wasn't a Catholic film since Mel Gibson wasn't the director. What was going on? Next they were in a hotel and Titanic-man was being all aggressive looking while telling Mannequin that they were in a dream. Well, good for them. For me, I was in some kind of nightmare. Juno was looking pretty though.

And then things really went mad. There was a van full of all of them turning over, a snowy James Bond mountain lair thing and they were all there too, and yet they were all still in the hotel. Then they were all fighting in mid air and walking up walls, and well, I just wanted out.

At this point I decided to mentally retreat back inside myself and think about different flavours of English crisps. I was savouring the thought of Prawn Cocktail while Titanic-man was shouting a lot in three different locations, and bullets and snow and God knows what else was all flying around everywhere. Then he was with his wife who had some kind of accent, maybe French, and she was dying. I have no idea why or how and I didn't care. I remember some talk of her thinking that the real world wasn't reality and jumping off a building to get back to Barbieland or whatever the hell it was but here she was again? How? Why? Again, who cares? I kept checking my watch but it seemed to be going backwards. I tried to sleep but some monstrous CGI kept appearing and waking me back up again.

Did I see some guy pull out a bazooka gun thing from the "Predators" movie?

More stuff was happening on screen, bullets, car chases, some talk about fathers and empires... It was all over my head. Oh, they decided to show a James Bond movie in the middle. Yay! Skiing and guns and Bond music. Why? They kept talking about "kicks". I know I wanted to kick someone.

Mannequin Murphy got shot. Yay? Juno started yapping about defibrillation and being all authoritative. I have no idea why since all she did was ask questions every other time she was on screen.

Then the wife was back again playing with a doll's house and it seemed Titanic-man killed her with a spinning top. Floating bodies got put in a lift, a van fell off a bridge and there was more shooting in James Bond land.

The van went underwater and everybody got wet. But, yay for them, they had a scuba tank and they all got out apart from Titanic-man who got himself drowned again. Typecast?

The next thing I knew, some old Japanese guy who mumbled even more than the original mumbler, mumbled something to Titanic-man and they all woke up on a plane. Where'd the plane come into it? Did I blink and miss it? Probably.

Mercifully, the film was at an end. Titanic-man didn't hit an iceberg this time and was now back in America, Michael Caine had two kids which he gave to him for some reason and there was a spinning top on a table. Ok then...

What did I learn from this? Well, your ass gets pretty numb after more than two hours of sitting in a cinema seat and you should never get the $7.50 size of Pepsi if you only have one bladder. Was I supposed to think this was the greatest movie ever made? I think not. Was I supposed to wonder if the final scenes were real or a Bobby Ewing dream? Why should I even care?

I didn't understand any of it, didn't enjoy it and I couldn't hear half of what anybody was saying in it because of some irritating background music that never seemed to stop.

The only thing I got from it is that I would probably bang Juno if I got the chance or the blonde from the hotel that turned into a guy. Yeah, I know, but beggars can't be choosers, right?

So guess what I'm rating "InCRAPtion" on the IMDb?

Carriers (2009)

"Four friends fleeing a viral pandemic soon learn they are more dangerous than any virus."

I've seen way too many of these "Apocalyptic Virus" movies over the years, but I must admit that I'm a bit of a sucker for them. There's just something about having 99% of the human population wiped out and having free reign to do what you want with all the toys they've left behind that appeals to me.

Back in the '70s there was an epic BBC TV series called "Survivors" (which has since been remade) which did this subgenre to death. If you watch that, all these movies from "28 Days Later" to "The Crazies" are just samey.

There's nothing about "Carriers" that makes it stand out either although it did try for a more sympathetic angle by focusing on a small group of survivors and trying to make you feel sorry for them. Unfortunately, I didn't like any of the characters very much and couldn't have cared less if they lived or died.

It didn't have any scares, was done pretty cheaply as far as I could tell, and although it had decent acting, it just felt pretty slow.

One of the highlights for me was seeing Christopher Meloni who I remember from HBO's "Oz" playing a far nicer role. If there is a character to feel sorry for in this film then his is it. I didn't really recognise any of the other actors in it, but (after checking their credits on the IMDb) I discovered that they've all been in various TV projects. A couple of them have even appeared in some of the more forgettable horror movies that I won't go into here.

Basically, "Carriers" is just a road trip drama with no real action scenes, gore or anything other than a lot of talk for the PG-13 crowd. I suppose it could have the ability to make you question your own morals and what you would do in a similar situation but it didn't work on that level for me.

Strangely enough I did actually enjoy it. I wouldn't buy this on DVD or anything, but I can recommend it as a rental.

Predators (2010)

I'm not sure whether "Predators" was supposed to be a reboot, a remake or just yet another sequel in a franchise that really should have ended with "Predator 2".

There was too much CGI, not enough of the predators themselves, and a storyline pretty much lifted straight out of the "Cube" movies. It all looked good though.

I thought the acting sucked right across the board with miscastings in every direction. Adrien Brody was no Arnold Schwarzenegger by any stretch of the imagination and Topher Grace was even less credible than when he tried to play a bad guy in "Spider-Man 3".

The pacing was all over the place too. There were some deadly dull moments where nothing was happening and then big rushes of action sequences which were over too fast. At nearly 2 hours long, it's a real ass-numbing experience with very little to justify it.

I expect all the "Aliens" and "Predator" fanboys loved it but there wasn't anything in this film for me. The gore was minimal, there was no sexiness, and even the swearing wasn't really enough to make it adult.

Action scenes were all camera effects, quickcuts, noise and mess. Though not as bad as the "AVP" movies, they were still pretty terrible. The predators seem very easy to kill compared to previous incarnations too.

Nimrod Antal, the director, has still only made one film that I've enjoyed. No, not "Vacancy" which was lame but "Kontroll". I'm also starting to associate Robert Rodriguez's name with total crap now too. In fact, as soon as I see him listed as a producer on anything I lose interest immediately. I can't understand the following he has as I honestly don't remember a single movie that he has had anything to do with that I've liked.

"Predators" is just another stupid "Summer movie" which will get a few seats filled up in the cinemas mainly because there's nothing better to watch at the moment. I won't buy it on DVD when it comes out because it was just another throwaway story which showed complete contempt for the audience.

I'm not going to list all the plotholes, pitiful cameos, or total lack of imagination that went into this film as I'm sure you'll see all these faults for yourself.

If I had to rate "Predators" out of 10 then it would be a 2. I didn't enjoy it, was actually quite bored most of the time, and was very disappointed. It's not going to fail at the box office but it doesn't really deserve to make anything. It's another one destined for the Wal-Mart $4 DVD bin or be combined with the "AVP" sets just to get rid of it.

Splice (2009)

"Elsa and Clive, two young rebellious scientists, defy legal and ethical boundaries and forge ahead with a dangerous experiment: splicing together human and animal DNA to create a new organism. Named "Dren", the creature rapidly develops from a deformed female infant into a beautiful but dangerous winged human-chimera, who forges a bond with both of her creators - only to have that bond turn deadly."

Yet another so-called horror movie that turned out to be Sci-Fi and had all the fanboys wetting their knickers over a bit of nudity and bestiality. Don't get me wrong, it's not a bad film, but it adds nothing new to the "Frankenstein" subgenre.

"Splice" is little more than a ripoff of David Cronenberg's "The Fly" but with genetic scientists rather than a teleporter splicing animal and human DNA together. Mercifully, however, there isn't any techno-babble or anything to really make the science involved seem credible. I'm sure that something like this might be possible one day but certainly not in the very near future.

So what are the fanboys on about? Well, it's all about the creature, Dren ("Nerd" backwards!), who gets produced from this gene-splicing experiment. She's a girl, and she's sort of pretty, so that's enough for some people. Yeah, you get to see her nude too. Whoopity-do! Without giving too much away, she later has sex with her "father" and "mother". Yeah, okay, so that really did give it away, but that will be the only reason anyone will want to watch this film in the first place. It's not as if I've told you how and why.

I suppose the acting is competent even if the characters aren't all that likeable. The practical effects look good as well, but without checking in to it, there seems to be a lot of CGI too. I might be mistaken about this, but I really don't see how else some bits were accomplished.

The story itself is, as you've gathered, about scientists playing God and getting their just deserts in the end. Maybe there's a moral message in there, maybe not. There's certainly some outright satire about corrupt corporations, but that will probably be wasted on most people who just want to see "the creature". I noticed it, and it made me a little bit angry. I only wanted to see the creature too.

Anyway, the bottom line is that "Splice" isn't a horrible film, but it's very derivative and not the "saviour of the horror genre" in any way. It's worth a rental, and maybe a purchase, but it's not something I would ever want to watch again.

The Happening (2008)

"The Happening" is a simple film with a simple plot: mankind has ruined the planet so much that plants now see us as the enemy and are giving us a warning that if we don't stop then they can (and will) wipe us all out.

The plants are releasing a neuro-toxin into the air which causes people to kill themselves rather than each other (which is a bit different to most plague-based horror films). In some ways it was similar to the vignettes in James Herbert's "The Fog".

I enjoyed it for what it was. It wasn't horror just science-fiction with an over the top "green" message. But it was no worse than an extended "Twilight Zone" episode and reminded me a lot of the "Quatermass" TV series from the late 70s. Just replace John Mills with the much tamer Mark Wahlberg and you pretty much have the same thing,

Zooey Deschanel (Emily "Bones" Deschanel's sister) was really beautiful in it and it was nice to see John Leguizamo and his deformed grinny-gog mouth committing suicide too. David Eigenberg would have been less distracting and a lot more believable in the role especially as his voice sounds identical.

I wouldn't buy "The Happening" on DVD when it comes out because I'm not much of an M. Night Shyamalan fan anyway but it was certainly a lot better than "Lady in the Water".

People are bitching about this film all over the internet. I think it's just become trendy to bash M. Night Shyamalan's films now. The only negative thing I'll say about it is that if it was meant to be a horror film then it really needed some more gory deaths. As a teenage-friendly sci-fi flick with a blatant environmental message I think it succeeded even if it was a bit slow overall.

Death Race (2008)

For those of you who don't know, back in 1975 there was a woefully inadequate futuristic car racing movie called "Death Race 2000" where the drivers got points for running over pedestrians.

In fact that's pretty much all that it is remembered for apart from David Caradine playing a "not disfigured at all" character named Frankenstein. Others remember it for one of Sylvester Stallone's earliest roles. The least said about that the better. The whole thing was low-budget and only attained "cult" status because the idea was better than the execution.

This "Death Race" is totally different. Rather than being a direct remake, it borrows heavily from the idea of televised (or webcast) executions as used in Stephen King's "Running Man" and the Japanese "Battle Royale". The "pedestrians as points" idea is abandoned completely in favour of some other gory death scenes, big loud guns, lots of explosions and, most importantly, some high-octane car racing action. This is big-budget stuff and, even if you don't like cars, guns, sci-fi or Jason Statham, you'll still find something to enjoy in this film. I don't particularly like any of those things myself yet I still got the post-movie buzz which I haven't had since the days of "Robocop".

This remake of "Death Race" has also pretty much allowed Paul W.S. Anderson to do the impossible. Not only is it 200% better than the original but he has created a decent film at last after all those awful "Resident Evil" movies. Those people who have written him off lately and placed him in the Michael Bay category will now need to re-evaluate their opinions.

I do agree with the critics that say that 'Death Race" is derivative. Every prison story from "Spartacus" through to "Papillon" and from "Brubaker" to "The Shawshank Redemption" has had an influence on this movie and none of those are very original either. The idea of a futuristic prison where an innocent man gets the better of the evil warden has been done to death by films like "Running Man", "No Escape", "Fortress", "Wedlock", and even "Battle Royale". They are all much the same. For fans of less talky pseudo-political bullshit who, just like me, prefer movies like John Carpenter's "Escape from New York" and "Escape from L.A.", this is great. It's about a million times better than Neil Marshall's "Doomsday" as well.

I certainly don't agree with the critics who have been slamming this film for being a live action version of the "Twisted Metal" computer game. For one thing, I've never even heard of that game, let alone played it, but I can imagine that it was itself based on the infamous "Carmageddon" which we all played about 12 years ago. Since "Carmageddon" (especially "Carmageddon 2000") was inspired by "Death Race 2000" anyway, it's obvious that there would be similarities. Nothing is original in this movie or anywhere else nowadays anyway so get over it.

What else is there to say about "Death Race" other than it has a minimal plot like all action films and just routine performances? It's not that you need to be able to act to be an action hero anyway, Schwarzenegger and Stallone proved that years ago by churning out the same pulp over and over again. All you have to do to be an action film hero is look the part and Jason Statham certainly does that. In fact, he just does his usual "hard man" act which was started in "The Transporter" and is none the worse for it. The only person who could possibly have done a better job is Vin Diesel and he looks much the same as Jason Statham anyway. The accent is an important part of the film though.

The only thing that really annoyed me as a fellow Brit was the irritating pronounciation of the words "offence" and "defence" by Ian McShane. Overstressing the first syllable for "OFFence" and "DEfence" is jarring to the ears and really makes our Lovejoy look like a fool. He did the same thing in "Kung-Fu Panda" recently by completely forgetting how to say his Ts and replacing them with Ds. Ian McShane, you are not an American in spite of being in "Dallas" for all of five minutes so please pick an accent and stick to it!

The Island (2005)

Even though it was so obviously using the basic idea of "Logan's Run" with the added twist of cloning, I still enjoyed most of what "The Island" had to offer. Not to be confused with the 1980 Michael Caine film of the same name with pirates in it, this movie had lots of exciting action scenes and quite a few in-jokes about Ewan McGregor's love of motorcycles... actually far too many as it wears pretty thin after the first time and there were about half a dozen references to it. Sean Bean played a nasty guy for once and did it well though I found his character very reminiscent of the evil boss in "Equilibrium" (which, strangely enough, also featured Sean Bean!). He wasn't quite up to his 006 standard but it was a good role for him. Steve Buscemi also had a nice little role in it too but is slightly too comic to be credible. Ewan McGregor of course used all his boyish charm to good effect and even Scarlett Johannson had some nicely done comic moments. The only real problem for me was that it was so obviously "Logan's Run" (also mixed with a bit of "Brave New World" and "Gattaca"). Let's have a bit of a breakdown of the two:

Comparisons	The Island	Logan's Run
Names:	Lincoln Six Echo, Jordan Two Delta, Lime One Alpha etc. (in Brave New World they are also Greek letters)	Logan Five, Jessica Six, Francis Seven etc.
Place:	An underground "city" without any sunlight populated by people who all dress the same	A domed city without any sunlight populated by people who all dress the same
Deaths:	Nobody lives past 30 because they take part in Carousel in the hope of being reborn which no-one survives	They take part in "The Lottery" to go and live on "The Island" which no-one survives
Storyline:	The hero and heroine escape into the real world	The hero and heroine escape into the real world
Denouement:	The hero and heroine return to save the others by showing them that what they have been told is a lie	The hero and heroine return to save the others by showing them that what they have been told is a lie

In spite of this obvious "borrowing" it was all very enjoyable to watch and I do, in fact, recommend it as "The Island" is actually better than "Logan's Run" in many ways, not only for the great set designs but also for the moral angle. But even that idea was also "borrowed" from a badly made 1979 film called "Clonus" (in case anyone is interested).

It's still a very good film though but not a great one. And nothing will ever beat Jenny Agutter in her skimpy dress...

Jason X (2001)

"Jason Voorhees returns with a new look, a new machete, and his same murderous attitude as he is awakened on a spaceship in the 25th century."

After watching low-budget films, "Jason X" seemed like a masterpiece! It may only be the same old slasher story again but it's all done really well.

Although the acting was a bit below par and characterisation was lacking, I did enjoy the CGI effects in this one. What? I enjoyed CGI? Well, in a science-fiction film like this I found that it actually worked. The nanobots and the holodeck scenes were really good though the latter screamed "Star Trek ripoff!"

Talking of ripoffs, the whole plot was really just lifted from the "Alien" series, but I was enjoying it so I just let that one pass for the most part.

There were a couple of jokes which lightened the mood considerably, and it all looked suitably futuristic. The kick-ass android girl, Kay-Em, was a really nice addition. I'd like to see more of her!

Anyway, it's a 4 out of 10.

Eve of Destruction (1991)

The IMDb says: "Eve is a military robot made to look exactly like her creator. When she is damaged during a bank robbery, the robot begins to use more of the memories she has been programmed with by her creator, the dark, angry ones. She will also become a killing machine if anyone tries to stop her. Gregory Hines is assigned to stop the robot and with the scientist who programmed her tries to think what she will do next."

and more:

"Eve is a robot, modelled on her creator. Eve's armoury includes a nuclear bomb, which for unexplained reasons is on-board during Eve's testing. When things go wrong during the tests, Eve is lost in the big city. Enter the rescue team, which includes the real (human) Eve. They must find and disarm her before she goes bang. Eve is programmed to protect herself at all costs, so when she runs into a problem, she resorts to her super strength; hence the destruction."

Ooh, doesn't it sound exciting! Unfortunately this film from 1991 is so s-l-o-o-o-w that it has taken me until now to finish watching it. I found it half wound in my old video drawer and thought I'd give it another go... I wish I hadn't.

I don't think I've ever heard actors deliver their lines quite so slowly ever before. I now have a new thing to add to my "Things said in front of the telly!" blog: "For God's sake, spit it out and get on with it!" Of course this would be better suited to my "Things said in front of porn" section especially as the "heroine" of the title is Dutch... but that's another story.

In spite of the fact that the Eve robot (and the sexy Eve doctor) is played by the gorgeous Renee Soutendijk from "Spetters" (1980), and this film also starred the late Gregory Hines (no, I didn't know he was dead either. I wondered where he had gone!), it was a complete and utter bomb (no pun intended).

There is very little suspense even though we know that the robot contains a nuclear device which could explode at any time. The biggest trouble is that it just doesn't explode soon enough to spare the audience from watching the rest of the film.

The script is nothing better than you'd get on something like an episode of "Torchwood", mind you, it's no worse either. Having the director as a co-writer should have made things easier to get right. Unfortunately the director was Duncan Gibbins who is known mainly for pop videos including the 80s classic by "Wham!" - Club Tropicana! I rest my case!

It really is the acting, or lack of it, that lets this down though. It's so deadpan that they might as well all be in Pet Shop Boys video (or maybe that was the idea!). You get the feeling that that once they'd all got dressed up the actors decided that was enough to earn their money and gave up on the rest of it. I can't say I blame them either.

To see Renee in something good though I recommend "The Girl with the Red Hair" (about the Dutch resistance in World War II). Couple it with "Soldier of Orange" with Rutger Hauer and then watch "Spetters" (with both of them in!) for a fully satisfying evening! I also recommend her in "The Fourth Man" (the forerunner to "Basic Instinct") if you want something a bit sexier!