Say what you will about Tom Cruise but thereâ??s no denying that his choice of projects have always been bankable. Throughout the 80â?²s and 90â?²s most of his films and performances were of a particularly high standard. The same could be said of the 00â?²s as well. However, over the last three years, cracks are beginning to appear; â??Knight and Dayâ??, â??Rock of Agesâ?? and â??Jack Reacherâ?? have failed to register any form of quality. On the surface, â??Oblivionâ?? has all the hallmarks of the Cruiser getting back on track but, unfortunately, proves just as lacklustre as the aforementioned duds.

In the year 2077, Earth has been obliterated by an alien race and the surviving members of humanity have moved on to inhabit Saturnâ??s moon, Titan. Jack (Tom Cruise) and his wife Victoria (Andrea Riseborough) have remained on earth, though, to protect machinery harvesting the planetâ??s resources before Jack begins to suspect that his mission isnâ??t as straightforward as he thought it was.

Director Joseph Kosinski follows up his previous science fiction film â??Tron Legacyâ?? with another venture into the future. He works from his own graphic novel and delivers an intriguing premise that pays homage to classic Sci-Fi movies like â??2001: A Space Odysseyâ?? and â??Planet of the Apesâ??. His setting is suitably bleak (captured beautifully by cinematographer Claudio Miranda), his use of visuals are striking and his tone is perfectly sombre. In fact, Kosinski actually assembles a good addition to the science fiction genre. Unfortunately, his assembly soon falls apart due to a script thatâ??s devoid of any substance or characters that we can invest in. The pace is lethargic, to say the least, which only really registers that a lot of the film is just padding. Nothing happens for a good chunk of the movie and when the plot is finally opened up, it fails to make sense or hold any form of coherence. Even if it did, your likely to have lost interest by that point anyway. Cruise wanders around aimlessly (presumably in search of characterisation) and the likes of Morgan Freeman and Nikolaj Coster-Waldau neednâ??t have turned up at all. The most frustrating thing overall, though, is that the big reveal is one that weâ??ve seen many times before and all, but completely, rips-off Duncan Jonesâ?? far superior â??Moonâ??. The similarities are almost shocking and I wouldnâ??t have been surprised to have seen Jonesâ?? name on the screenwriting credits.

Kosinski is a director that may yet find his feet. He certainly has an eye for sumptuous visuals and can stage a fine action set-piece. However, he really needs to work on a coherent narrative and one that isnâ??t as dull or desolate as the landscape that his characters roam.

Mark Walker

Predominantly known for his horror stories, writer Stephen King released a book in 1982 called "Different Seasons". It contained four novellas, three of which, went on to become successful Hollywood movies which were very far from most other adaptations of his work. One was Bryan Singer's "Apt Pupil" another was Frank Darabont's "The Shawshank Redemption" and the third - originally entitled "The Body" - became Rob Reiner's "Stand By Me".

Four young friends, Gordie (Wil Wheaton), Chris (River Phoenix), Vern (Jerry O'Connell) and Teddy (Corey Feldman) go on an adventure together to find the dead body of a local boy who was supposedly hit by a train. By following the tracks, the friends' journey becomes more about them and their personal struggles and soon, the boyish adventure becomes about their experiences of entering adulthood.

Delivered with a wonderfully nostalgic narration by Richard Dreyfuss and a good feel for 1950's Americana, this inviting and honest, coming-of-age, tale captures the spirit of youth like very few others. Reiner's feel for the time and the material is pitched so perfectly that you are completely transported back to this era. It's imbued with a sublimely evocative soundtrack of classic 1950's songs, ranging from; Jerry Lee Lewis' "Great Balls of Fire" through Buddy Holly's "Everyday", The Chordettes' "Lollipop" and, of course, Ben E. King's "Stand By Me". It's this very attention to detail that truly brings this affectionate and sentimental film to life, while completely involving you in the trials and tribulations of the four, endearing, youths at it's centre. The four youths in question are embodied with charm and nuance by Wheaton, Feldman, O'Connell and, especially, Phoenix. They are so natural in their deliveries that the failed careers they would go on to have didn't merit the performances delivered here. Phoenix was the only one of the four who would receive critical praise, but sadly his life was cut short at the tender age of 23, making his performance all the more poignant.
Rarely has a film captured the innocence and growing pains of young boys on the road to manhood and rarely do you ever get such a rich and heartfelt delivery. It doesn't matter if you didn't experience the 1950's; stepped foot on an Americana front porch or played mailbox baseball. What matters, is that you identify with the characters' rite of passage and that it still perpetuates it's relevance.

A wonderfully rustic and nostalgic gem, that's still as inviting and honest as it was on it's release. This is one of those timeless cult-classic's that will always find an audience to resonate with.

Mark Walker

In making it to the screen, World War Z wasn't without it's problems; firstly, there were complaints of it's very loose take on Max Brooks' novel, then it's violence was toned down to achieve a PG-13 certificate; a script rewrite happened half way through production; cinematographer Robert Richardson left to work on "Django Unchained" and the likes of Ed Harris and Bryan Cranston dropped out due to scheduling conflicts. As all these problems piled up, the expectation was that the film would be an absolute disaster. Well, quite simply, it's not. Despite it's problems, it's actually quite a tense and impressively handled thriller.

Gerry Lane (Brad Pitt) is a former UN worker, happily spending some time at home with his family, until the sudden outbreak of a zombie plague takes over his home city. They are forced to flee and Gerry manages to get his family to safety but news breaks that the world over is suffering the same outbreak, forcing Gerry back into the field and using his experience to find a cure.

After a brief introduction to our protagonist, Forster doesn't waste time in getting down to business. Within minutes we are thrust into an absolutely exhilarating opening sequence of the rampaging undead overtaking Philadelphia (actually filmed in Glasgow, where I witnessed them shooting) and it's from here that you realise that there's plenty of potential in this summer blockbuster. It doesn't matter that there's a lack of blood or gore because the suspense is handled so competently and effectively that you're still on the edge of your seat. In fact, it's the perfect example that less can be more sometimes. What's most impressive, though, is the epic scale in which it's delivered. There are several intense action set-pieces where hordes of zombies leap from rooftops, clamber over walls and rampage through an aircraft mid-flight. As an action movie, it certainly delivers the goods and also finds the time to incorporate geopolitics as the epidemic goes world wide. Anchoring all this mayhem is a solidly understated, central performance from Pitt. Having produced this movie - throughout it's spiralling budget - his commitment to make it work comes across in his performance. He's entirely believable and identifiable as a family man desperate to survive his chaotic surroundings. Nobody else really gets a look in, including a severely downsized role for Matthew Fox and a brief cameo from, the always reliable, David Morse. Ultimately, the film rests on Pitt's shoulders, though, and he handles it with aplomb. So much so, that the lack of blood splattering and zombie flesh eating takes a back seat to a character driven dramatic thriller. Due to it's production difficulties, plans for a sequel were shelved. However, having now become a box-office summer smash, the sequel has been given the go-ahead. I, for one, welcome it.

Against the odds, this manages to be a satisfyingly tense addition to the zombie sub-genre. It doesn't go for the jugular in a gratuitous manner, instead it works on your nerves and focuses on telling a relatable story. Die hard horror fans may want more from it, but it delivered just the right amount of thrills for me.

Mark Walker

Itâ??s been over 30 years since director Sam Raimi gave us his cult horror classic â??The Evil Deadâ?? in 1981. Now, like most other films of the genre, we are given the unavoidable remake. Raimi is on-hand again, with producing duties, but the same can said of most remakes, in that they neednâ??t have bothered in the first place.
In order to kick her heroine habit, Mia (Jane Levy) and a few friends head to a remote cabin away from society and any temptations. Itâ??s here, that they stumble upon some strange goings on in the cellar and find the Book of the Dead, which once opened, releases a demon intent on possessing them all.
The difference between this and the stylishly imaginative original, is that Raimiâ??s was shot on a shoestring budget by a bunch of college students, intent on experimenting and pushing boundaries. This, on the other hand, throws in the bucks and itâ??s use of gratuitous gore simply doesnâ??t have the same impact or originality of itâ??s tongue-in-cheek predecessor. The approach that debutant director Alvarez takes is the filmâ??s biggest issue: it has an innate inability to laugh at itself. Itâ??s far too serious and as a result has to be judged on that. Itâ??s one of those horrors were you know not to expect logic, reasoning or any form of a sensible decision by itâ??s characters. Theyâ??re merely there as fodder for some soul devouring evil entity. It is what it is, and thatâ??s fine, but when you ask an audience to fully commit themselves, then you have to offer them something in return. If it was in touch with itâ??s sense of humour then this could have been a wild ride in a similar vein to â??The Cabin in the Woodsâ??. Unfortunately, it isnâ??t and its serious, po-faced approach comes across as ludicrous. Added to which, itâ??s a horror film that has very few genuine frights, a surprising lack of suspense and itâ??s use of jump scares are glaringly obvious and redundant. To be fair, it does bring some laughs to the table, but those laughs are entirely unintentional.
One for the torture-porn generation that have no interest in characterisation or plot development. Itâ??s main agenda is to deliver gore and plenty of it. In that respect, it delivers but on every other level it fails miserably. Unequivocally, the worst film of 2013.

Mark Walker

Having co-founded Studio Ghibli in 1985 and directed 11 films himself, the highly unique animator Hayao Miyazaki has announced his retirement. The forthcoming "The Wind Rises" will be his last venture, so it now seems like a good time to look back at arguably his best film.
Chihiro is a 10 year old girl who is moving to a new neighbourhood when her father decides to take a short cut and gets the family lost in an abandoned theme park. Helping themselves to food that's on display, Chihiro's parents are transformed into pigs and it soon becomes clear that they have stumbled into an alternate reality. Chihiro is then forced to find a way to free herself and her parents and find a way back to the human world.
Quite simply, Miyazaki's "Spirited Away" is a triumphant, fantastical, masterclass. Not only is his hand drawn animation as gorgeously refined and refreshing as ever, but his storytelling incorporates everything from the mythical to the magical, taking us on a truly breathtaking visual and intelligent journey. As his later film "Ponyo" would channel the likes of Hans Christian Andersen's "The Little Mermaid", here, Miyazaki has undoubtedly crafted his version of Lewis Carroll's "Alice In Wonderland" and it's in this similar realm of imagination that he is able to flourish. We are introduced to a myriad of fantastical figures from Gods, Spirits and Witches to a Sea Dragon, an enormous baby and strange little coal miners, known as "Sootballs". Despite the rich hand drawn animation, though, it's not all played for fun. It's a rights-of-passage tale about the progression of a child to adulthood while finding the time to comment on the economic downturn of Japan and the increasing loss of it's culture to the western world. It's this very complexity that makes this Miyazaki's near masterpiece. The only issue with the film is that it's overlong, resulting in periodic disengagement - especially for younger viewers. It's runs just over the two hour mark and this is with several parts of the story cut out- the original version of Miyazaki's story would have run over the three hour mark. That being said, this is still one of animation's true classics and thoroughly deserving of it's Academy Award for Best Animated Feature in 2002.
A breathtaking tour de force from one of the finest and most imaginative storytellers that animation has ever seen. Sadly, there will be only one more outing from Miyazaki but thankfully we've had to the pleasure to enter into his creative genius at all. Such accomplished cinematic experiences will be sadly missed.

Mark Walker