The plot follows Agent J (Will Smith) and Agent K (Tommy Lee Jones) once again fighting aliens and keeping society safe as a part of the agency’s plans. But when one day he realises that an occurence back in 1969 has led to Agent K not being alive in the current timeline anymore, J has to travel back in time and meet up with the younger version of Agent K (Josh Brolin) and team up with him to defeat Boris the alien who is planning a full scale invasion on planet Earth and is hellbent on revenge.

Agent K and Agent J are back to save the world and there's time travel involved.

The first MIB was quite enjoyable in its own right and was something different at that time in terms of tone and plot, making Will Smith even more of a star than he originally was. The sequel, however, was terrible and was another example of a bloated ‘let’s be bigger than the first’ installment that fails to deliver. Does the third installment fare any better? Well, it’s lightyears better than the second installment.

The series has always thrived itself on quirky sci-fi blended with humor and the scope of a summer blockbuster, and thankfully that tone is present here as it was in the first film. The script is easy going as we are treated to the first act where J and K are partners but have issues connecting even after all these years. We are also treated to the villain this time around, who is unfortunately the most underdeveloped villain the series has seen. He looks threatening, but he’s completely one dimensional and has no role other than being annoyingly loud with his hoarse voice and look creepy. This first act is pretty substandard and actually feels oddly paced as if they’re trying to set some things up before they reach the actual film, which is actually kind of true. Because the time travel segment of the film is much better constructed.

Owing heavily to ‘Back to the Future’ and ‘Terminator’, the film transports J back in time to meet the younger version of Agent K so that he can save his life. Here, Agent K is played by Josh Brolin who is the highlight of the film. His impression of Tommy Lee Jones is spot on and the way he reacts to things is very interesting. A sensible plot takes a backseat here to a lot of effect heavy action scenes and situational comedy, most of which is actually pretty funny. A scene with Andy Warhol (played by the hilarious Bill Hader) is very effective and memorable. The comedy works in favor of the film throughout.

But at the same time, you can’t deny the feeling that there’s something missing from the equation. Sure, you’ve got Will Smith back and a huge budget for the effects but it never feels like the big sequel that needed to be made that it should have. The pacing is haphazard thanks to a very brief runtime that never lets things seep in nor plot points to actualy make any sense. There are hints of an alien invasion, but the scenes are so brisk and half-baked that they never ring true. The finale takes place outdoors and feels very tacky instead of organic. In fact, the entire film feels that way – a cash grab sequel without much thought put into it which isn’t smart or witty but made because it’ll make money either way. Instead of a generic time travel plot, something set in the present that forwards the story would have been a better bet.

Josh Brolin is excellent as younger Agent K.

But you’ve got to give it to Will Smith, because it’s his charisma and energy that is largely responsible for the film being fun. He gives it his all and shines in scenes that require his style of humor and expressions. Another mention is necessary to the character design department of the film, which is very imaginative and keeps the film fresh. There’s all kinds of strange aliens throughout the film, and my only complaint is that there’s an over-abundance of CGI that doesn’t look believable enough and a little too cartoonish for the film.

In the town of Collinsport, living a lavish life in the massive Collinwood Manor, Barnabas Collins (Johnny Depp) aims to seek revenge for the death of his parents from an evil witch ex-lover (Eva Green). But she puts a curse upon him and his lover, turning him into a vampire and imprisoning him in a coffin for 200 years. Waking up in the 1970’s as a blood-thirsty vampire, he returns to Collinwood Manor to live with his dysfunctional new Collins family who don’t take to his return very well. But he realises that the witch is well and alive and may once again try to stop Barnabus from finding true love.

One one hand, there's dark and brooding moments like this.

At first thought, ‘Dark Shadows’ is perfect material for director Tim Burton. It has all the dark gothic tones that he is already familiar with and the plot directly evokes memories of his previous dark effort ‘Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street’ which is an excellent film and the best musical I’ve ever seen. But ‘Dark Shadows’ is an example of what ‘Sweeney Todd’ could have been if it had gone wrong during the screenplay stage itself. Because while ‘Sweeney Todd’ had a primary focus in its plot – Todd seeking revenge for the death of his wife – ‘Dark Shadows’ is seemingly about that but then goes into a hundred different tangents with no consistency to speak of.

The film starts off with a strangely abbreviated voiceover narration that sums up the entire backstory of the movie in a matter of five minutes, not giving you enough time to connect with the characters well enough. Just after that, we switch protagonists to the re-incarnated Victoria in the 70’s as we are introduced to the Collins family. While all of this was dark and serious, the movie strangely shifts into physical campy humor with numerous fish out of the water jokes as Barnabus is resurrected as he struggles to adapt to the modern world. The tone here is jarringly different and tries to appeal to a mass audience. While it goes against the feel of the source material since it stands out like a sore thumb, everything else in the movie is so mediocre that these actually end up being the memorable bits of the movie. But then comes random bouts of quite violent and gory sequences where Barnabus goes out to kill random humans and they suddenly take you out of the quirky humorous tone that preceded it. The movie can never decide what genre it wants to primarily be and this constant juggling act leads to a mess of a film for the most part.

Even the plot itself has many issues, since there is literally no forward momentum in the screenplay. Yes, Barnabus has returned to the family and wants to avenge for his curse. But at the same time, we have this large ensemble family that he caters to. Each character is given enough screen-time, yet the script never develops them above face value. None of the characters are more than caricatures of themselves, which is why the overblown finale and some twists about the characters doesn’t make sense nor do you care. And there are bloated subplots that constantly keep the film unfocused including Barnabus and the witch re-uniting, his love for the re-incarnated Victoria, running the family business, adapting to the modern world and a whole lot of that. In the end, it leads to the audience getting bored way before the film comes to an end and it’s truly a shame because ‘Dark Shadows’ had all the potential to be a classic.

On the other hand, there's out of place humor like this.

That’s not to say that there are moments that you won’t enjoy, because an excellent cast makes sure to elevate above the material they’ve been given. Johnny Depp is excellent as Barnabus Collins and is the only thing that keeps the film alive at times when it’s failing in terms of script. His unique sense of humor works well during those above mentioned comic moments while he also has the intensity to provide depth to those darker moments. You just wish he had been given something stronger to do. Actors like Michelle Pfieifer and Chloe Moretz do a good job with their characters that are terribly underwitten. Even Tim Burton’s regular Helena Bonham Carter feels underused. But a mention goes to the beautiful Eva Green who plays an excellent and quirky villain and does full justice to her role, making the film more enjoyable in the process. Beautiful visuals are something that Burton always thrives in and definitely delivers in that regard, but we’ve come to expect more from the director than just eye candy.

‘Dark Shadows’ is a missed opportunity for a classic thanks to a screenplay that never focuses on what it should and can’t settle on a consistent tone for itself. Despite the efforts of the cast and suitably slick visuals by Tim Burton, it’s a failed effort at a gothic blockbuster and will be remembered as such.

On a normal morning in London, the railway authorities get a call from a man who is Aakash Rana (Ajay Devgn). He tells them that he has planted a bomb in the passenger train that will explode the moment the train goes below the speed of 60mph and demands for a lot of money to deactivate it. While the entire police force and authorities are in a frenzy to handle the terrorist situation and locate the identity of the person, Counter Terrorism Command Arjun Khanna (Anil Kapoor) is on the hunt to foil the terrorist plot once and for all and discovers that there’s a tortured story to the Aakash that has forced him to do this.

Ajay Devgn plays antihero well.

Like ‘Players’ was an official remake of ‘The Italian Job’, ‘Tezz’ is the official remake of ‘Speed’. But instead of slavishly sticking to the plot of the original, it only takes one important element from the original – a vehicle will explode if a minimum speed isn’t maintained. The action is shifted from a bus to a train, while the point of view of the film is through the antagonists rather than the police for the most part. It’s an entirely different movie in terms of how the story unfolds. One positive for the film is that it keeps a fast pace in its first hour in particular, where we are quickly treated to a flashback and thrust straight into the action as Aakash calls the authorities and announces the bomb in the train. The resulting events are taut to watch and are gripping in terms of how they unfold and how authorities handle a situation like this. But if you’ve seen a lot of Hollywood movies, there’s nothing special here. In fact, the film is pretty much a mix of the Japanese 1975 film ‘The Bullet Train’, ‘Speed’, Tony Scott’s ‘Unstoppable’ and ‘The Taking of Pelham 123’ with a bit of Naseerudin Shah’s excellent thriller ‘A Wednesday’ thrown in. By actually being set on a focused location in a small amount of time, the film is helped with that sense of immediate danger and quick pacing in the first half.

But the main thing that surprised me is how slick the film looks and how effective some of the action sequences in the film are compared to usual Bollywood standards. But then upon noticing that the filmmakers hired Gareth Milne for the action, it isn’t the surprise. The guy is responsible for the action from the Bourne movies, which are probably the best modern action movies ever. As a result, there are some highlight action sequences in the film which are the primary reason the film is decent to watch. There’s a particular sequence where a female evades the cops on her bike and it almost feels like a Hollywood film in the way that it’s framed and put together, actually having you engaged throughout. A fistfight in the end also feels gritty just like Bourne did and that’s got to a compliment for the filmmakers here. Some of these efforts are let down by subpar editing though, where scenes are sped up for no reason to add a feel of speed to them and look completely hokey and cartoonish because of that. An example of that is the parkour scene with Zayed Khan and ruins a potentially interesting scene. Add to that some very awful CGI during the train sequences. It feels like they ran out of budget somewhere between the actors’ fees and the action scenes, because it’s one of the most amateur CGI I’ve seen in a major film like this. It takes away from the feel of the film a little bit.

Anil Kapoor in an actually large role, unlike 'Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol'.

It’s in the second half where the film begins to feel unfocused as it goes on. While the first half has the speeding train with a bomb as the main plot, it takes a bizarre backseat during the second half as the focus shifts on the terrorists themselves and what’s happening with their backstories. We are treated to pointless subplots about their relationships and how the police is planning to attack them while there’s no mention of the train for a long time. Pretty soon, the train storyline becomes a subplot that ends in the most anticlimactic way possible and the film is now about a cop chasing these terrorists. Which would be interesting, but the film focuses way too much on the past of Aakash and the romantic subplot, which is actually surprisingly underwhelming and bland to watch considering how much they hyped it up. It tries to hammer audiences with the visa immigration theme and doesn’t really feel like reason enough for them to actually risk their lives with such a terrorist attack. The entire backstory falls flat despite looking interesting when the film began. It’s things like these that end the film on a mediocre note and take away from a pretty impressive first half.

Ajay Devgn gives a pretty strong performance in the film as the antihero, but he’s bogged down by the uninteresting backstory that pops up every now and then. He’s a competent actor and brings depth to the role. Zayed Khan looks like he tries too hard in the film to be that bad-ass guy, but props for the effort. But the real surprise here is Sameera Reddy, a usually terrible actress who gives a surprisingly strong performance here and fares very well in her action oriented scenes. Anil Kapoor is intense as a cop and does well, while Mohanlal gets utterly wasted in an unintentionally hilarious role of a random cop. Kangana Ranaut doesn’t add anything to the movie.

‘Tezz’ is better than most Indian attempts at a slick action movie, but a slack second half and plot issues derail it into barely decent territory.

When Loki (Tom Hiddleston) descends upon Earth with an army of otherwordly creatures with plans for world dominance and destruction, S.H.I.E.L.D. has no option but to activate the Avengers initiative with the help of Nick Fury (Samuel Jackson) and Agent Coulson (Clark Gregg). They enlist Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.), The Incredible Hulk (Mark Ruffalo), Thor (Chris Hemsworth), Captain America (Chris Evans), Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) and Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson). Despite their differences in opinion that sometimes leads to disagreements within themselves, they have to band together to save the world from the biggest threat it has ever seen.

Things did not end well for those who just outside that frame.

Marvel has been planning ‘The Avengers’ since they unleashed ‘Iron Man’ into cinemas and made sure that every single movie that followed was strictly in the same universe and riddled with interconnecting references that can later be resolved. While ‘Iron Man 2’ heavily suffered with the studio’s interference by adding needless Avengers subplots into that film, the rest of the films fared better and were enjoyable on their own right. But all eyes were on fan favorite director Joss Whedon to work on something this big in scope and deliver a film worthy of the sky high expectations that it was burdened with. And you’d be happy to know that he passed with flying colors.

With an ensemble cast of superheroes like these in the running, it’s very easy to lose sight of them individually and skimp on character development. And here’s where Whedon turns your assumption around with his masterful screenplay for the film. Whether it’s a cock Tony Stark or a confused Steve Rogers struggling to survive in the modern world or a conflicted Thor fighting his brother, the script gives every character enough time and development to shine on their own. Each character has a stark (zing!) personality to it and some of the best moments of the film come when two characters disagree over something and clash over it. It’s great to see two superheroes like Captain America and Iron Man in a war of words about what makes someone a hero. At the same time, Whedon wisely keeps the script humorous and light hearted with classic Joss Whedon style of humor that has excellent timing and is surprisingly very effective. There’s witty one liners by every character, well placed sight gags and funny elements like that make ‘The Avengers’ an even more enjoyable crowdpleaser than it is.

But it wouldn’t be a Marvel movie without heavy doses of action and though Joss Whedon is not the first name that comes to mind when it comes to big budget action, he excels in ways most directors don’t. The set pieces here are extremely well thought out and highly memorable. From the first trailers, it looked like he was trying to mimic those big loud action scenes that Michael Bay usually does. But Whedon adds a lot of character dynamics to those normally generic action scenes and elevate them to something great, doing it better than Bay ever could. One of the highlights is a long action scene on the hovercraft that acts as the group’s base and it’s extremely fun to see each superhero actually work on battling a different part of it while at times they’re battling each other. Some of the most memorable scenes are when characters argue and actually pick fights among themselves, including a high flying fight between Thor and Iron Man and later a fight between Thor and Hulk. And speaking of Hulk, goddamn.

Iron Man really shows off his skills in every fight that ensues.

There have been two renditions of Hulk in two different movies by two different actors and while ‘The Incredible Hulk’ was a very good effort as a standalone Hulk film, the potential for the character still felt untapped. This time, Marvel enlisted Mark Ruffalo to play Bruce Banner and he gives a less angst-ridden interpretation of the character than Edward Norton did (which is the one I still prefer). But when it comes to the Hulk himself, ‘The Avengers’ finally understands what the character is all about and how he can be exploited in film form. Let’s just say this – Hulk is the best part of the entire film. Every single scene of him in ‘Hulk form’ not only received loud cheers from a very entertained audience but it was highly amusing to watch him wreak havoc on the opponents.  It definitely makes me forgiven them for shortchanging Edward Norton for the film and actually understand what they were going for. It makes the finale much more exciting to watch. Which brings me to the finale itself.

If you can find a single fault in all the previous Marvel movies, it’s that their finales are usually the weakest. ‘Iron Man’ had a pretty generic robot battle at the end, and the sequel had an even more bland and short boss fight. Even ‘Thor’ wasn’t completely satisfying in its finale and ‘Captain America’ was plain old anti-climactic. But Joss Whedon truly wanted to change that and saved the best for last. The third act of “The Avengers” is over thirty minutes long and is one of the most awe-inspiring finales that the genre has seen just in terms of scope and writing. There’s a lot of CGI and fast-paced destruction, but it’s so dynamic thanks to how the team works together in tackling the threat they face that it’s brilliant to watch it unfold. Add to that the Hulk as mentioned above and this becomes an extremely memorable ride which in itself is better than ‘Iron Man 2’ and ‘Captain America’ combined. If nothing else convinces you to see the film, just watch it for the non-stop action in the finale and you’ll feel like you got more than your money’s worth.

You don't know the definition of 'bad-ass' until you've seen Hulk in action in this film.

The only flaw I can find with the film is the 3-D, in the sense that there wasn’t any. There’s almost not a single 3-D moment in the film nor does it do anything to immerse you into the film. It’s one of the countless post-converted 3D conversions that were hastily added at the end to take more money from audiences and adds nothing to your experience other than dimming the screen. If possible, avoid the 3D viewing and catch it in plain old regular 2D which is what it was filmed to be shown as.

Robert Downey Jr. is excellent once again as Tony Stark and actually gives a surprisingly intense performance when most would expect him to play the same old arrogant playboy schtick again. Chris Evans is more restrained but as the lead of the film and the leader of the group, he’s very effectively and does full justice to his role. Chris Hemsworth was born to play Thor and once again shines in the character although I felt like his character wasn’t given too much to do compared to the other heroes. Jeremy Renner is introduced as Hawkeye and as always gives a physically impressive performance. Scarlett Johansson would usually be expected to just provide eye candy for the viewers but she’s surprisingly effective in her character. Tom Hiddleston is a brilliant character and probably the best thing that ever happened to the character of Loki, and plays his villainous role here with impressive command. Samuel Jackson doesn’t have much to do this time around but even playing a version of himself is a perfect fit for Nick Fury.  As previously said, Mark Ruffalo is actually very different in his rendition of Bruce Banner and though he doesn’t beat the more nuanced Edward Norton performance, he makes the role his own and fits the way Hulk is shown here.

‘The Avengers’ is an astounding achievement for Marvel and sets the bar pretty high for superhero films to come. It’s a highly entertaining summer blockbuster that succeeds on every level and should see record box-office. Which it very well deserves.

Now, Along comes The Raven, a film about Edgar Allen Poe’s stories where Poe himself is a character. Seems like an interesting concept and twist on adapting Poe’s stories.

The film is a fictionalized account of Poe’s last days. 19th century Baltimore is being terrorized by serial killer who bases his murders on Poe’s stories. To track down the serial killer, Detective Fields enlists the help of Edgar Allen Poe (John Cusack) to help catch the killer. The mouse hunt turns alot more personal when the killer kidnaps Poe’s lover (Alice Eve), and forces Poe to write stories based on the murders, all while giving clues to Poe about the next crime.

If you’ve seen any serial killer film, you’ll know exactly how this plays out. Instead of being an Edgar Allen Poe, the film is your run of the mill serial killer film, where Poe happens to be a character. Every serial killer convention and trope is played out by the film, right down to the “reveal” at the end. But hey, there’s cool costumes in it, lots of lots of costumes.

But I like serial killer films, and on that account, I enjoyed The Raven. John Cusack is enjoyable to watch (as he is always), and the film does maintain a decent level of suspense throughout. The film also delivers special treats to Edgar Allen Poe readers, with plenty of subtle (and not so subtle) references to his Poe works.

But the film is still has his flaws, mostly regarding how much potential it wastes. Poe would’ve been a very interesting character to explore on film, but instead of an accurate portrayal of brilliant yet tormented writer whose pessimism was reflected starkly in his works, we get a overdramatic Poe, whose exaggerated actions and mannerisms trump his character development.

Furthermore, Poe was the master of atmosphere, with the grim atmosphere of his stories having immense on gothic literature. Unfortunately, the film fails in this regard, and instead of delivering the crushing atmosphere Poe is known for, the film relies on over the top CGI blood and gore.

The Raven is a decent film, and has a unique take on serial killer films. If does lose points though on its failure to live up to its subject, and for taking excellent material and turning it into a mediocre film.

The film follows Pirate Captain (Hugh Grant), an ambitious pirate of the high seas who explores the waters with his trusty crew ((Martin Freeman, Brendan Gleeson, Russell Tovey, and Ashley Jensen). But luck isn’t on his side most of the time and he almost always struggles in finding fitting booty for his adventures. But things change once he hears of the ‘Pirate of the Year Award’ which leads him to a grand adventure with some shady people including Queen Elizabeth that will make an unlikely hero out of him.

Hugh Grant is entertaining as a not so mighty pirate.

Aardman Animation has made a name for themselves for the charming stop motion adventures they’ve delivered to us in the past including ‘Chicken Run’ and ‘Wallace & Grommit’. So it’s always exciting to see what new they’re working on and this is certainly the biggest project of theirs so far. So how does it fare? Pretty well, I’d say. It has its own charm especially since it actually tries to tell the story of a pirate even though most moviegoers associate that setting immediately to ‘Pirates of the Carribean’. But it isn’t their best work and never really fully impresses during its runtime.

Anyone looking for a laugh out loud ride would be disappointed because the humor here is quite restraint and hardly ever goes overboard in terms of comedy. But it is very funny for the most part and will have you giggling at the witty jokes and one liners that the screenplay delivers on. The characters are very charming and memorable, which can’t be said for most animated movies that aren’t by Pixar. But at the same time, there are quite a few slapstick attempts at humor that fall flat and kill the momentum. There are even stretches where the film is not even funny and very plot-oriented. That would be totally fine usually, but the problem is that the film doesn’t really have a consistently engaging plot. The concept is pretty funny, but the second act of the film feels aimless and has a more slack pacing than the rest of the film. The momentum dies down and it feels more filler than actual plot. These are the things that ultimately keep ‘Pirates’ from being anything more than an amusing adventure.

Still better than 'Pirates 4'.

But right when you’re close to dismissing the film, it delivers a spectacular and exciting finale that redeems the flaws of the second act. The pacing picks up rapidly as we’re thrust into an actual ‘Pirates of the Carribean’-like action sequence which is not only entertaining to watch but well-written too. It’s here that the film finally embraces its sea-combat roots and the result is funny and action-packed. The best part is that the film ends with actually leaving you wanting more, instead of overstaying its welcome after a strong finale.
As you already know, this is stop motion animation and it’s a style that thankfully still is peristent in Hollywood and always carries an ‘indie’ feel. The film looks very good and more epic than most stop motion pictures actually do, thanks to the a blend of CGI when it comes to the skies and the water to make it more realistic. The 3D, however, is an afterthought and doesn’t really feel worth the price for the most part.

The voice cast is solid here, with the highlight being Hugh Grant who gives a hilarious performance as Pirate Captain and steals the show. Other voice actors range from known actors like Martin Freeman to unknowns and all of them are pitch perfect with their characters and actually are a big part of why the characters seem distinctive.

‘The Pirates! Band of Misfits’ feels fresh and original and is a fun film to watch. It’s definitely amusing and you will find yourself having a good time. Just don’t expect any sort of greatness.

The plot follows Perseus (Sam Worthington) years later, now living with his son after the death of his wife. But he has to leave his life of peace and return back to action after his father Zeus (Liam Neeson) is imprisoned by Hades (Ralph Fiennes) and Ares who are offering him to the imprisoned Titan Kronos to achieve immortality. Perseus has to venture into dangerous territory and battle all sorts of creatures to form the ultimate weapon that can defeat the destructive Kronos before he wreaks havoc on the world.

Sam Worthington learns to act better in this action-packed sequel.

There were a number of issues that plagued 2010’s ‘Clash of the Titans’ and horrific post-converted 3D was one of them. It was so bad that it will forever be written as the movie that killed the allure of 3D for audiences thanks to a hasty money-grab of a job that Warner Brothers did with the film at the last minute. But that wasn’t it. The film also suffered from hammy acting, a screenplay lacking in scope or forward momentum,  a wasteful story and weak direction aside from a few standout scenes that included the Medusa sequence. Even the ending was highly anti-climactic and disappointed audiences. So you would be happy to know that ‘Wrath of the Titans’ sets out to fix most of these things and succeeds. But not on all fronts.

First off, there’s a lot better action here and that’s the key reason to watch this film. Unlike the last time, here the scope is actually very epic and the movie finds plenty of great set-pieces to deliver on the action it promises. The film is so much more exciting to watch compared to ‘Clash’ that you wouldn’t even believe it, and I give credit for that to the new director Jonathan Liebesman who brought the flair he showed in ‘Battle LA’ here and nails the action quotient of the film. Right off the bat, you’ve got a huge monster battle which is highly thrilling to watch followed by a foreboding dream that Perseus has about the Kronos which is extremely well done and manages to overwhelm you. Action scenes keep following as the film goes on and is topped by a spectacular finale with possibly the biggest sized villain ever captured on screen in the form of Kronos. It might be too familiar to the first movie in terms of how the finale comes to be but the payoff is much more satisfying in this sequel than it was in the original. Special effects deserve a special mention, because they are very impressive to see on screen. All the monsters look very authentic and perfectly blend into the environment, and the highlight is watching Kronos and the smoke he emits after destroying villages. It must be a very hard task but the filmmakers make sure that the spectacle isn’t cheap at any point, which is something I can’t say about ‘Clash’.
Let’s just say that in terms of action and effects, ‘Wrath’ is light years ahead of ‘Clash’.

But along with that, other problems from ‘Clash’ still linger on in the sequel and one of the key departments is story. While ‘Wrath’ has a much more simplified and focused story than ‘Clash’ which actually works for the movie, there’s still no depth to it at all and is as generic as they come. The entire plot is just an excuse for Perseus to battle a bunch of monsters so he can win. After the first act which actually does a good job at setting up the basic premise, the film shifts into all action mode and never comes back. We are treated to a few dialogue scenes here and there but they are just there to transition into the next action scene, which is the same problem that the original faced. That said, the momentum here is much better and there’s a proper escalation of events that lead to a well-earned finale. Some might say that the movie feels undercooked at a runtime that just flies by and I would agree. It’s the definition of a junk food action movie and is like a ride that’s over before you want it to be.

Another department is character development, which is to say that ‘Wrath’ barely has any. This is something that was much more pronounced in ‘Clash’ but is very much present here as well. We never really learn anything about the new characters introduced including Andromeda and Ares other than the cookie cutter explanations that are briefly offered. Helius is one of the new characters in the film and sadly never has any function in the plot other than provide comic relief. Comic relief actually helps the movie though, as it eases the fast paced overwrought nature of its plot and it’s something that the original lacked for the most part. But at the same time, it’s not too much to ask for our Greek heroes to actually have a three dimensional personality. Speaking of three dimensions, let’s be clear on this – ‘Wrath’ was not shot in 3-D but was post-converted just like ‘Clash’. But just because of the fact that they shot it with 3-D conversion in mind, you’d be surprised to know how effectively they use it in the film. While it’s not a necessity for you to see the film in 3-D, the extra dimension actually makes the film look more epic and all the CGI sequences use it to great effect. If only the original had such kind of a conversion, there wouldn’t have been such bad buzz around it as it was when it got released.

But a lack of a good story and character --- Holy. Shit.

Acting was something that was sorely lacking in the original especially from Sam Worthington who played a very dull and bland Perseus (even he admitted to that in an interview). But here, his performance is majorly improved. Not to say that he pulls a Daniel Day Lewis on us, but he actually nails the character by being the intense and physical hero that the film needs and looks believable in the part without skimping on emotion. Liam Neeson has limited stuff to do here but shines as Zeus, but Ralph Fiennes as Hades impresses and Édgar Ramírez plays an effective villain as Ares. Bill Nighy is the scene stealer here as a small but memorable character and shows once again why he’s an amazing actor whose presence improves a film. Rosamund Pike isn’t given anything interesting to do and in effect comes off as pointless, while the rest of the cast does the needful.

‘Wrath of the Titans’ is a solid improvement over its predecessor by improving on most of the original’s faults and providing at the least an entertaining junk food action movie that’s high on effects and spectacle. But it’s unfortunate that it’s saddled with a weak story and character development that keeps it from being truly godly in terms of quality.

The plot follow the same basic premise the original fairy tale and the Disney 1937 adaptation. Snow White lives with her evil Queen stepmother who is jealous of her beauty. The evil Queen sends an assassin to kill Snow White, but Snow White manages to escape deep in the forest, where she lives with the forest dwelling Seven Dwarves. There is also a prince somewhere.

Mirror isn’t any different than Singh’s previous films, with lush colours, otherworldly architecture, and wonderful set design. But, despite the great art direction, it is Julia Roberts who steals the show. This is probably the first time she’s played an outright villain, and surprisingly she shines in the role. She gives a funny and surprisingly, a relatively subtle performance, as the villainous queen, and is responsible for most of the film’s funny scenes. Armie Hammer and Nathan Lane also stands out, displaying some admirable comedic skills (a very common feat or Lane), with their scenes with the queen being the funniest in the film.

But Singh’s flaws are unfortunately trump his skills, and while his films usually look good, there’s always this problem with his films where they seem to take place in a very confined space. You never get the feel that the characters inhabit a world, but that they move from confined set to confined set. The problem was present with ‘Immortals’, and its present in this film.

As we also found out from ‘Immortals’, he really can’t tell a good story, or create decent characters. Filler plot are no stranger to Hollywood comedies, but one would expect something more from an adaptation of Snow White, but it is difficult to care about anything that happens on screen. With weak plot comes bad characterization. Snow White, the main protagonist, is so bland and two dimensional she makes Twilight’s Bella look like Travis Bickle. Lilly Collins is cute in the role, but she really doesn’t have much to work with. Furthermore, The seven dwarves, instead of being endearing as the protectors of Snow White, they come off as shallow dispensers of the film’s tired humor.

Unnecessary is the word that comes to mind when thinking about this film. There was really no need to attach the Snow White name to what amounts to a generic fantasy comedy. The film does have its laughs scattered here and there, but overall, it really doesn’t offer anything remotely interesting or new. Here’s hoping that ‘Snow White and the Huntsman’ will be better.

Trivia: One of the dwarves in the film is named ‘Grimm’, a reference to the famous Brothers Grimm, who popularized many of today’s most famous fairy tales, including Snow White.

Set in a future world where North America has been divided into thirteen districts ruled by the Capitol, every year happens a deadly game titled ‘The Hunger Games’ where each district has to offer one male and female ‘tribute’ to battle it out until one survivor remains. Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) is a young determined girl who offers herself as a volunteer to protect her younger sister to be selected for the game and has to team up with Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) to win the championship with the help of her mentor Haymitch Abernathy (Woody Harrelson). But the game itself is much more dangerous than she thought.

A well-fleshed out backstory helps personalize the game.

Cinephiles are quick to point out the plot of ‘The Hunger Games’ is more than similar to the excellent cult classic from Japan called ‘Battle Royale’. Both films were about teenagers stranded in a location and are forced to kill each other until one survives while they are being monitored. And while there are striking similarities between them, THG feels like a much different movie with a more epic scope than that film. Here, the world is much more fleshed out and feels plausible even without scenes that dole out exposition one after another. It’s a different beast altogether and even fans of ‘Battle Royale’ (which includes me) should check it out.

Characters make all the difference, and fortunately ‘The Hunger Games’ has a very likable and strong lead character that you actually want to root for. Katniss is determined, strong-willed and is taking part in the games for a noble cause. She knows her strengths and is an underdog that you wish wins the championship. Unlike ‘Battle Royale’ where the games begin right away, there’s an entire hour of set-up here that anticipates the beginning of the game in the sense that we see the characters training and tuning themselves to the rules of the championship. We get to see the other tributes and the dynamics between them , as well as the marketing and publicity that Katniss and Peeta take part in to promote their team and get sponsors. Interview segments are particularly riveting thanks to some great writing that brings out the characters’ traits in smart ways. By the time the game is about to begin, there’s a lot at stake and everything is fleshed out very effectively with you knowing the characters that you’re rooting for. And then it begins.

The game itself feels different in tone from what you see before it and features one of the most thrilling sequences once it begins. As the horn is sounded, we’re treated to a frantic and intense sequence of mass murder that really grips you and puts you straight into the action. You would think that a PG-13 rated movie about teens killing teens has got to be dumbed down, but you’d be surprised to know how close to being R-rated the film actually feels. The trade-off? Shaky cam. Now it depends on whether you like that style of filmmaking or not, but director Gary Ross opts to use a lot of shaky cam during action scenes to intensify the brutality but also to keep the PG-13 rating while still showing quite a bit of gore. This does become irritating at a particular point during the second half where it’s quite overdone, but I was fine with it for the most part otherwise because it really did differentiate the film from being another teenage franchise that dilutes things for the masses. It was surprisingly brutal at times and it really did help the film have a daring feel even though it could have gone a lot further.

One thing that actually did irk me though – and this is most likely a part of the book itself – is how inactive Katniss was during most of the tournament as she went on top of a tree and went into hiding for hours. Sure, it’s the most realistic thing to do for the character but the movie actually spent a lot of time on her sitting around as day and night passes, rather than showing us some of the action that’s happening around her. It dents the pacing of the second half a little bit, but thankfully catches up to speed with a powerful finale which is actually emotional and has a lot of heart to it. There is a love triangle subplot in the film as well which will obviously play out further in the sequel, but it was actually well-done compared to the melodramatic one in ‘Twilight’.

Jennifer Lawrence is masterful and strong in her performance.

But the movie would be a lot less effective without the powerhouse performance by Jennifer Lawrence. She’s excellent in the role and unlike the one-note performance by Kirsten Stewart in the Twilight saga, she actually has a range of emotions throughout the film. She looks cute but strong at the same time and fits the part perfectly, bringing a lot of emotional heft to her complex character. Notable sequences include the scene where she’s being lifted off to the game as it begins and an emotional sequence in the second half where she deals with someone’s death and it’s riveting to watch it play out. Josh Hutcherson gives a good performance but his character obviously doesn’t have enough to do here compared to Lawrence, while Liam Hemsworth is hardly in the film. Elizabeth Banks is brilliant in a quirky Helena Bonham Carter-like performance, and Woody Harrelson gives a predictably strong performance. It actually feels like all the actors in the film did care for their roles which doesn’t usually happen with big franchise films like these.

‘The Hunger Games’ successfully kick-starts a strong new franchise that doesn’t cater only to tweens but is strong enough to break out of its novel’s fanbase. It’s well-directed, strongly acted and a thrilling adventure that also has enough heart to be a memorable film despite its flaws.

The film follows Agent Vinod (Saif Ali Khan), a RAW Agent who is trying to uncover and thwart a terrorist plot to detonate a nuclear bomb in Delhi right after his partner is mysteriously murdered. In his adventures, he meets a mysterious woman (Kareena Kapoor) who hides a tragic secret of her own, traitors among his organisation and a threat that could destroy the country if he doesn’t do something in time.

You can see this as a still clearer than in the film thanks to the awful editing job.

This is Saif Ali Khan’s production, who clearly wanted to make his own James Bond franchise with the film. And he did make sure a lot of the elements are in place – dozens of international locations, slick style, foreign villains, bomb threats, hot women and wisecracking one-liners among others. In fact, the plot is so simple and similar to ‘Ghost Protocol’ – Agent Vinod plans to thwart a nuclear bomb that is being set to explode in Delhi. It’s a straightforward and standard action movie plot, right? But ‘Agent Vinod’ manages to turn that into a convoluted and needlessly complex mess.

Major fault here lies within the screenplay itself, which is filled with redundancies. Instead of having one or two main villains that act as antagonists in the movie, it’s filled with more than a dozen bad guys scattered throughout the film. And I don’t mean nameless thugs that hover the main villain – I mean properly introduced characters played by name actors that you would think are going to be the villains but then proceed to get shot in the face a few minutes later. At one point, there are so many redundant characters in the film that Agent Vinod himself begins to feel like a supporting player. It’s like the screenwriters thought that the way to resolve any plot point is to introduce a brand new character and then killing him off after he’s done. The film also trots all around the globe just for the sake of glamour, and needlessly complicates the plot as it finds excuses to travel to places like Morocco, Russia, Somalia and others. There’s no real reason for things to organically happen other than the fact that they extend the film’s runtime. For example, Agent Vinod decides to take on the identity of a person called Freddie Khambata and there’s an entire plotline devoted to this silly affair, when nothing of note comes out of it. The first half especially has a very slack pacing and it never feels like the action-packed thriller it’s supposed to be like. This extends the film’s runtime to a painful two hours forty minutes and towards the end you’d be wishing for it to just roll credits already.

Which brings me to the editing of the film, which is one of the worst editing jobs I’ve seen since ‘Players’ was on screen a few months ago. While that movie had no idea how to tell a story, this one has no idea how to portray an action sequence on screen. In almost all of the action sequences, the editing is frantic and skips frames to such an extent that it feels like you’re watching a censored cut of the movie. Which is a shame, because there are some moments that would actually look impressive on screen if the editor ever allowed you to see what’s going on. This kills the only element that could have changed the fate of the film – a sense of thrill and adventure. I would give points to the director though, since there are some very quirky moments in the film that stand out as the highlight. One of them include an entire shootout set in a hotel which is shot in one cut which is quite well-done by Bollywood standards. Another of those moments include a tongue-in-cheek moment where the main characters are being chased by the bad guys on the street while a Charlie Chaplin movie plays on a huge screen in the background. This leads to the scene we’re watching itself turn into something of a silent film. It’s a shame that the entire film doesn’t follow through with this inventiveness and resorts to cookie-cutter plotting made worse by a malfunctioning screenplay. There are some comedic moments in the film that are actually hilarious, but it needed a lot more to offset the joyless vibe the film usually has.

Saif Ali Khan is the only committed performer in the film.

Saif Ali Khan is obviously the star here, and honestly also the only actor who gives a very committed performance. He fits the role of a wisecracking Agent Vinod and actually plays his part with a lot of dedication and success. Maybe because his life savings are on the line with him being the producer, but he’s the only person who cares in this entire project. Kareena Kapoor is saddled with an entirely wasted character that has no consequence on the plot at all and is there just for show. It reflects in her performance which is as confused as her character’s reason to be in the story. Veteran actors including Prem Chopra and Gulshan Grover, as I mentioned before, are just there for the sake of it and are given nothing interesting to do.

‘Agent Vinod’ is not the worst action movie to hit cinemas this year since that honor goes to ‘Players’.. While the director’s vision does provide for some enjoyable moments, a messy screenplay and awful editing kill the film. Even the title is misleading because it has what sounds like ‘win’ in it, because what we have here is a completely failed attempt at being a competent spy thriller franchise.