Review: Doctor Who: The Day of The Doctor

Review: Doctor Who: The Day of The Doctor

Director: Nick Hurran

Starring: Matt Smith, David Tennant, Jenna Coleman, Billie Piper and John Hurt

Running Time: 86 Minutes

WARNING: This review contains spoilers! If you haven't seen The Day of The Doctor yet, drop everything and watch it now!

"Waste no more time arguing what a good man should be. Be one."

Go on. Tell me it wasn't as good as you'd hoped. Tell me it didn't meet all, or any, expectations you had. I dare you!

It's not every day that a British TV show gets to celebrate its 50th Anniversary, not least a rather wacky adventure series about a 1200 year old alien travelling around the universe in a blue police box. Nevertheless, Doctor Who has remained a staple of this country's culture for the duration of its existence - yet for all the 798 episodes that had aired up until now, we were still asking the same question that companion Ian Chesterton had asked in the very first story: Doctor Who?

"No More."

With head writer Steven Moffat (bravely) taking the reigns for Doctor Who's 50th birthday, we're definitely much closer to the man himself rather than simply wandering from adventure to adventure every week. Earlier this year, Moffat promised us a "story that would change The Doctor forever." Well, he didn't disappoint.

For this is perhaps the greatest victory for The Day of The Doctor: rather than just taking the lazy route of fan service (something that former show runner Russell T. Davies was notorious for with often disappointing results), this special secures Doctor Who's future. The entire structure of the show has changed: The Doctor is no longer a lonely traveller wandering through the universe; he is now a man with a mission, trying to find his way back to a safe and secure Gallifrey. 

"Soldier...I'm going to need your gun."

That's not to say that Moffat is just ploughing forward without glancing over his shoulder. From a black and white portrayal of the final days of the Time War to the return of David Tennant's beloved Tenth Doctor - and of course "The Curator" - the level of fan service here is at an astronomical level. Yet the important factor remains: it all matters. Every word, every moment and every reference contributes to the story of the episode.

And what a story it is. Every fan surely started watching this episode with a wishlist of things they wanted to see, be it Matt Smith's wonderfully quirky Eleventh Doctor donning his fez again, Billie Piper's return as Rose (well...more on that later), a few cameos from Doctors and companions past and present - perhaps even a glimpse of the future. Sure, their check lists might not have been completely fulfilled (zero interaction between the Tenth and Eleventh Doctors with Rose will surely upset some) but honestly it's impossible to feel short-changed by the time the credits roll.

"He's going through a grunge phase...he'll snap out of it."

Since its return in 2005, The Doctor's story has been plagued by one defining element: he is the last of his kind, a race known as the Time Lords. During the war, The Doctor was in his ninth form (played absolutely marvellously by acting legend John Hurt) and, after what appeared to be hundreds of years of fighting, The War Doctor decreed "No More." As we already know, The Doctor used a device known as "The Moment" to destroy both the Time Lords and The Daleks.

Or did he?!

In a brilliant twist, the War Doctor is visited by the "Bad Wolf" entity (Billie Piper, showing us that she would be a more than capable incarnation of The Doctor herself) who, in a story reminiscent of A Christmas Carol, gives the War Doctor a chance to meet his future incarnations to discover the man he will become after destroying his home planet.

"Are you afraid of the big Bad Wolf?"

This is where the story really picks up, as the Eleventh and Tenth Doctors meet, the former a little miffed at being airlifted without permission and the latter accidentally marrying Queen Elizabeth the first. They're closely followed by John Hurt's world weary incarnation, ironically looking for The Doctor and mistaking his future selves as companions.

Matt Smith and David Tennant in particular shine as a double act, and there was a genuine feeling of sadness in me when Tennant departed again (and how cruel of Moffat to leave Tennant's final line untouched!) as their chemistry was easily the most fun and appealing part of the special. "Oh I'm The Doctor, I'm so cool, look at me, I'm cool, oops I'm wearing sand shoes!"

There's a risk of course, with such bouncy and charismatic Doctors on the menu, that both of them more or less end up being exactly the same. As Piper's brilliant character cleverly points out, Ten is the "man who regrets", while Eleven is the "man who forgets". It's this sort of interplay between them that leads to some of the more confrontational and emotional moments that really hit to the core of who The Doctor really is and what he thinks of the act he has committed. "Did you ever count how many children there were on Gallifrey?"

"Oh, you've redecorated! I don't like it..."

Yet with the Three Doctors together, aided of course by Jenna Coleman's Clara Oswald, a companion who seems to have become the definitive article of what The Doctor's friend should be, it becomes clear that there may be more than one way to end the Time War - and it doesn't always have to end in death.

Meanwhile, Zygons (remember them? Me neither...) are invading U.N.I.T's Tower of London base - an interesting but slightly unnecessary sub-plot that keeps The Doctors moving forward just like any other episode. It does slow proceedings down now and again though, although perhaps characters such as Osgood and the Brigadier's grand-daughter Kate Stewart will slot in nicely next to Capaldi's Doctor in the future.

"We can only agree to live. Sadly we can only agree to die."

It's a complex plot even for a fan who has been keeping up with the show since 2005, but by its thrilling climax featuring all thirteen - yep, you read that right! - incarnations of The Doctor saving Gallifrey from the Time War and freezing it somewhere unknown in the universe, its impossible not to get swept up in the sheer excitement. From the First Doctor's momentary cameo right up to a triumphant debut for Peter Capaldi - a whole two seconds of his eyes sending a cinema full of people into a frenzy - the final moments of The Day of The Doctor will be hard to beat for the upcoming series.

"All twelve of them...no, all thirteen!"

And yet, it was an undeniably shocking and emotional appearance from Tom Baker, the Fourth Doctor (and also the oldest) that really cemented this episode in the hearts of fans around the world. Anyone who knows the history of Doctor Who will know that Baker - like Christopher Eccleston today, without whom minor parts of the special felt sadly empty - spent the majority of his years after his time on the show refusing to be drawn into its spotlight again, so for him to return in the final minutes as a mysterious curator having a conversation with Matt Smith is nothing short of TV history. 

It's not just any conversation either. Sure, it's left ambiguous, but this moment is The Doctor finally finding his mission. As Steven Moffat and David Tennant have quite rightfully said, this is nowhere near the end: this is simply the beginning of chapter two.

Summary

"At last, I know where I'm going. Where I've always been going."

Series seven's cliffhanger left a lot of explaining to do for The Day of The Doctor, but luckily all involved have been suitably up to the task. Steven Moffat has successfully - miraculously - written a story that pays homage to 50 years of sci-fi genius whilst also looking forward to the future with arms wide open.  John Hurt in particular is incredible as the "War Doctor", while Matt Smith and David Tennant's respective Doctors are written and performed in such a way that is hilarious one second and heartbreaking the next. Yet it's the rousing finale featuring all thirteen Doctors which proves that Doctor Who isn't on a nostalgic end of its run at all - this is only the end of the beginning. Here's to the 100th Anniversary! Allons-y!

"Home. The long way around."

10/10 - Fantastic!

Review: Thor: The Dark World

Review: Thor: The Dark World

Director: Alan Taylor

Cast: Chris Hemsworth, Natalie Portman, Tom Hiddleston, Christopher Eccleston

Running Time: 112 Minutes

 Great Odin's raven!

Marvel Studios are certainly on their way to world domination at the moment. With the third highest grossing movie of all time under their belt in the shape of The Avengers, a slate of superhero sequels keeping them busy all the way up until 2018 and their hit TV show Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D dominating American audiences, there's simply no stopping them yet.

Case in point: their latest sequel, Thor: The Dark World, the God of Thunder's second solo outing in three years and his third overall following his participation in the battle of New York. 

Still, as the sequels stack up, surely there is a fork in the road for Marvel and their writers - do they go the Dark Knight route and take their characters down the path of tragic darkness, or do they raise the stakes and throw in as much bombastic, effects-driven action as they can?

For Iron Man 3, the answer was clearly the latter as, while the film was exciting and action packed in equal measure, it failed to deliver any sense of real menace with a disappointing villain and a script that focused too much on comedy to be taken seriously. But Iron Man's Earth-bound story is a completely different beast to the intergalactic endeavours of Thor, a thunder God so powerful it's tough to imagine a threat that could actually shake him to his core.

Lucky then that Thor: The Dark World actually appears to have learned from the mistakes of Iron Man 3 and has provided us with a story worth watching that actually changes things drastically for our hero, while still infusing plenty of humour and action to hold our attention. Thor himself isn't particularly a character to be taken too seriously - Chris Hemsworth strikes a perfect balance between mighty hero and comically confused alien in his third year in the role - but the movie does maintain enough darkness and tragedy to be reflective of its title.

That darkness comes courtesy of Malekith, a dark elf who seeks vengeance for once being defeated by the Asgardians in battle (he's not as tacky as he sounds - Christopher Eccleston's performance makes sure of that). Having been buried since the dawn of time, Malekith stops at nothing to attack Asgard and its people, sending the Nine Realms into chaos and Thor into battle. But this time, Thor can't fight back alone - with his planet and his family in tatters, Thor has no choice but to seek help from his adopted and untrustworthy brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston, owning every single scene he appears in). With the love of his life Jane Foster in peril along with the entire universe (London in particular for some reason), Thor faces the greatest battle he's ever known.

It's a plot with many strands, some of which unfortunately break off and never find their way back. The central story (Thor and Loki vs. Malekith) is exciting and tangible enough, but the seemingly compulsory love story between Thor and Natalie Portman's Jane Foster simply serves to slow proceedings down to an almost unbearable pace. Really, Portman's contribution to the movie is simply to whine about how much she misses Thor and become a damsel in distress. Rinse and repeat as required. Even worse is Kat Dennings' Darcy, a character so bland and sarcastic that it's impossible to find any personality behind all the wisecracks.

Luckily, scenes between Hemsworth and Hiddleston are worth the ticket price alone, as the pair embody the squabbling siblings seamlessly. Loki himself walks the line between jealous brother and slippery villain to the point where his every appearance improves the film hugely, and Hiddleston is sorely missed when he's off screen.

The rest of the cast get a less than fair deal, with some script issues blaring out like a thunder storm amidst the quieter moments. Anthony Hopkins' Odin is, this time, written with such inconsistency that it soon becomes infuriating (the man who once told Thor the value of following his heart is now encouraging him to abandon his feelings for Jane), while Idris Elba, Zachary Levi and Stellan Skarsgard are wasted in roles that hardly realise their potential.

Is it better than the first Thor? Not quite, although perhaps it all depends on what you're looking for in the sequel - where the first delved into the characters and the journeys and sacrifices they're prepared to make, Thor: The Dark World seems more hell-bent on throwing as many CGI scenes and witty one-liners at us as possible. Also, Patrick Doyle's incredible and beautiful soundtrack from the original is missing here, leaving us with a bland, generic and unmemorable fantasy score from Brian Tyler.

That said, there are plenty of nods to the comics here and there and a few cameos - two inevitable, one delightfully and hilariously unexpected - from various other Marvel properties, while the daring cliffhanger ending ensures the fate of the series and the definitive answer to "Will there be a Thor 3?"

Summary

With Marvel's Phase 2 under way, its second sequel packs a damn good punch. Chris Hemsworth knows his role inside out now, while Tom Hiddleston lights up any second of screen time he possesses - it's just a shame that the various other story lines and characters fail to do the same. The plot quickly becomes needlessly convoluted with too many strands flying in different directions, but luckily there's enough humour and action to see us through the main points to the exciting finale and intriguing conclusion. This film, I like it - another!

7/10 - Good

See it if you liked: The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003), Thor (2011), The Avengers (2012)

TV Review: Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D

TV Review: Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D

Season: One

Episode: Pilot

Written by: Joss Whedon, Maurissa Tanchoren, Jed Whedon

Directed by: Joss Whedon

Starring: Clark Gregg, Cobie Smulders, Brett Dalton, Chloe Bennet

"The battle of New York was the end of the world. This...is the new world."

Not content with completely dominating the silver screen, Marvel have extended their reach to to a more accessible audience of television viewers with their Avengers Assemble spin-off "Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D". Written and produced by the Godfather of all things geek (and busiest man in the world) Joss Whedon, the show has finally aired its pilot episode - so with so much expectation, and having been spawned from the third highest grossing movie of all time, how does it fare?

Unsurprisingly, Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D is a 45 minute thrill ride from start to finish, and fans of both the Marvel cinematic universe and Joss Whedon's work as a whole won't be disappointed. Within just a few moments, the wit, humour and action packed spectacle of Marvel's work is realised once again, with a colourful cast of characters to introduce us into...well, the "new world."

The battle of New York changed the world as we know it, you see. As Maria Hill (reprised from the movie by a fantastic Cobie Smulders, presumably for the pilot only) cleverly states to top notch S.H.I.E.L.D agent Grant Ward, humanity used to think the most extraordinary thing in their world was a billionaire flying around in an armoured suit. Suddenly in The Avengers, aliens and demi-Gods are falling from the sky, and New York is being defended by the God of Thunder, some comic-book superhero who seemingly died in the 40's and an enormous green rage monster. 

Agent Ward is about to be upgraded to "Level 7" by Agent Coulson (Clark Gregg, bringing a great humanity to a role which could have been alienating) who has miraculously survived his apparent death at the hands of Loki in The Avengers (more on that later). Ward is recruited to a particular team of agents who specialise in finding supposed "superheroes" and helping them become aware of their powers - and how to use them. 

Such an event is on the go at that very moment, as a factory worker develops superhuman strength with the intention of using it for good. However on investigation, the S.H.I.E.L.D team realise he's actually just been stuffed with various "ingredients" for creating a superhero such as the extremis virus from Iron Man 3 and the super soldier serum from Captain America. An explosion waiting to happen...

Don't be expecting a million cameos from The Avengers, however. There are some nice references here and there ("She's worse than those cosplayers that hang around outside Stark Tower") but Whedon seems adamant that Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D should be its own individual rather than feeding from its associated movies.

The script works all the better for it, too - in true Joss Whedon style, we have a host of characters that are all equally entertaining. Comparisons with beloved sci-fi Firefly are well deserved (fans of that show will be happy to see a few familiar faces in the cast too), as the wit and humorous style of Whedon's writing shines through, particularly in the way he writes Agent Coulson and his intrepid grouping of these individuals. 

Each member has a voice, each actor is sublime at portraying their character and for a show branching off from a movie filled with an ensemble of superstars, Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D manages to make each and every one of its characters an individual worth paying attention to. Plenty of them even have mysteries of their own it seems...

Of course, as is the way with most pilots, those mysteries are left to be resolved outside the first episode. "He can never know," says Maria Hill regarding the circumstances of Coulson's survival. How exactly does Coulson live? And who is spending their time and money fusing together superhero formulas? Other questions for other days perhaps, but satisfyingly it looks as though Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D's life span is going to reach much, much further than episode one. 

Summary

As if last year's triumphant Avengers Assemble didn't make it blatantly obvious, Joss Whedon and Marvel are a damn good match. Whedon knows exactly how to mix a multitude of different genres and characters together and make them blend seamlessly, while some brilliant acting from the cast (Clark Gregg in particular) keeps us grounded into a believable world (even if some of them are unbelievably good looking). It may be a little "too soon" for Firefly fans to call it a replacement, but Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D is about as close as we're going to get to the fantastic quality of accessible sci-fi that television has been missing. They were right: the geek really shall inherit the Earth after all. Welcome to the new world.

9/10 - Brilliant

See it if you liked: Torchwood (2006 - 2011), Avengers Assemble (2012), Iron Man 3 (2013)

Review: 2 Guns

Review: 2 Guns

Director: Baltasar Kormakur
Cast: Denzel Washington, Mark Wahlberg, Paula Patton
Running Time: 109 Minutes

Blimey. Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg certainly know how to have a good time, don't they?

Sure it's not the most heavy handed blockbuster of the summer and it will probably slip under the radar for the general cinema audience, but 2 Guns is probably the most carefree and fun movie to hit our screens for a very long time. It's instantly forgettable and its plot chugs along at standard action-movie pace, but honestly it's impossible not to enjoy watching Washington and Wahlberg's latest.

In fact, they themselves are the most appealing aspects of this thriller - the story is good enough, although there's nothing particularly shocking hidden in its twists - as the two fr-enemies become fairly solid echoes of other buddy-cop heroes. Think Die Hard With A Vengeance updated for the modern age; Wahlberg is Willis and Washington is Jackson. 

Rightfully so: both of them have built huge careers for themselves, having either been nominated for an Oscar or appearing in Oscar winning movies. But it's Wahlberg who seems to have risen the most, his "generic action man" status now just a shadow of his past - seemingly thanks to his leading stint in Ted and an upcoming role in Michael Bay's Pain And Gain, his comic timing is just as formidable as his explosive stunt work.

And stunts there are, with each bombastic gun fight and helicopter shoot-out more exciting than the last, but it's the bickering banter between the two leads that makes 2 Guns both hilarious and entertaining.

When we meet our two heroes, things are just about to kick off as they quietly order food in a diner. The level of real, believable conversation is such that you wouldn't be blamed for mistaking 2 Guns for a new Tarantino classic; we find that the pair are both crooked undercover officers - one from the DEA and the other from the navy - unwittingly leading investigations on each other. Having robbed a bank of over $43Million, the two turn on each other, but they soon discover that the CIA, the navy, the DEA and a Mexican drug lord are all after the money too. 

Cue an occasionally messy plot that feels like a much more action packed, American version of Guy Ritchie's Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, with several side characters all shooting for the same objective. At the end of the day, it's all nonsense but there's something so irresistibly fun about the whole thing that keeps us roped in to their plight. 

That's not to say there aren't darker moments here and there; Washington's character in particular gets the brunt of the heavier scenes, while Wahlberg continues to add the levity in even the most perilous situations. It's an unlikely pairing of actors, but for a quick-fire flick like 2 Guns, it works despite some pantomime side acting and a climax that's more or less over as soon as it's started.

Summary

Come for the actors, stay for the action. Denzel Washington and Mark Wahlberg elevate what would have been a bog-standard shoot-em-up to a hilariously action packed buddy-cop movie which would have fared marvellously in the Lethal Weapon era of film-making. Don't feel bad if you completely zone out during the finer moments of the plot - at the end of the day, the central pair of actors are the reason this film is hitting cinemas at all and despite the narrative pitfalls, it's their dynamic which keeps 2 Guns shooting along entertainingly. 

7/10 - Good

See it if you liked: Pulp Fiction (1994), Die Hard With A Vengeance (1995), Broken City (2013)

Review: Kick-Ass 2

Review: Kick-Ass 2

Director: Jeff Wadlow

Cast: Aaron Johnson, Chloe Grace Moretz, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Jim Carrey

Running Time: 103 Minutes

For a comedic action flick like Kick-Ass 2, it's important to put the "fun" into "funny." Is it amusing to watch Christopher Mintz-Plasse dress up in his mum's gimp outfits and call himself a supervillain? Sure, why not. Is it amusing to watch Christopher Mintz-Plasse drop his pants and prepare to rape an innocent women? Er, not particularly, no.

That's part of the very unique problem with Kick-Ass 2: where its predecessor told the story of an average Joe-turned-hero, the sequel feels like an inane attempt to shock as much as possible, with the profanities, violence and outrageous criminal schemes turned up to eleven. Tonally, it's as imbalanced as its antagonists, with hilarious one-liners suddenly leading to dark, twisted results. 

Still, for its target audience, that's all part of Kick-Ass 2's charm: it pushes the boundaries and luckily it keeps the development of its three central characters, Kick-Ass, Hit Girl and Chris D'Amico (a.k.a "The Motherfucker") moving forward positively. This is helped of course by the performances by Aaron Johnson, Chloe Moretz and Christopher Mintz-Plasse, and a sharp script that not only allows them to hit a huge range of emotions, but fully absorbs the audience into this modern tale of good versus evil.

It's with this trio that we find ourselves once more, as after the events of the first film, Hit Girl is now training Kick-Ass (or Dave) to be a better fighter, while Chris is still grieving and seeking revenge on Kick-Ass for his dad's death. As news spreads of his heroics, Kick-Ass soon joins a vigilante gang, Justice Forever, spearheaded by the eccentric Colonel Stars and Stripes (played hilariously by Jim "I want nothing to do with this movie after I've conveniently filmed it" Carrey), while Chris forms his own team of super villains.

Cue a barrage of ridiculously/hilariously (delete as appropriate) racist alter egos, with Genghis Carnage and Mother Russia leading the charge against Justice Forever. Meanwhile, Hit Girl finds herself up against a very different kind of villain - high school girls.

Escalation seems to be the idea here. Everything is bigger, faster and much, much more explosive as car chases, graveyard gun fights and martial arts-displaying drug raids are the name of the game. Throats are slashed in full view, and baseball bats collide with heads in the most brutal way possible, while the central and supporting cast are surprisingly stunt-efficient.

Speaking of which, Kick-Ass 2 boasts an enormous cast of lesser known acting greats, with Donald Faison, Clark Duke, Steven Mackintosh and Game of Thrones star Iain Glen making large appearances to swell up an already exciting ensemble.

That said, a great cast does not a movie make and while it's funny in places and action-packed in others, that third storytelling void is filled with darkly angry segments that don't quite fit in with the overall hopeful tone that Kick-Ass wishes to project. At any given time, there are three entirely separate side-plots moving at once and while this can be entertaining in broader stories, Kick-Ass 2 gives up far too much time to irrelevant bullet points. After a while, Kick-Ass 2 starts to feel like Hit Girl: The Movie and while that would actually be an exciting spin-off, it's not exactly what we came for this time around.

There's also a little too much repetition here and there as well, as Hit Girl (or Mindy) manages to fall out with both Kick-Ass and her legal guardian Marcus Williams, a friend of her deceased father. "I don't want you to be Hit Girl anymore," says Marcus. "I want you to keep being Hit Girl," says Kick-Ass. Arguments ensue at least five times.

The major story arc is brilliantly realised though, as Kick-Ass becomes the most unequivocally human hero that any comic book movie could ever offer. Couple this excellent character development with an enormous, edge-of-your-seat climax that rivals that of Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight Rises, and Kick-Ass 2 slowly but surely edges ahead of its predecessor in terms of its action and humour.

Will there be a Kick-Ass 3? It seems almost inevitable at this stage that movies such as these come in threes, and luckily this sequel shows that Kick-Ass is no super-zero and his return would be very welcome indeed. Although we could probably manage without any Union J cameos next time.

Summary

Of course it's not perfect, but for its target audience of superhero loving movie junkies, Kick-Ass 2 ticks all the right boxes. Stand out performances from Johnson, Moretz and Mintz-Plasse keep us caring about the characters, while the final battle is truly gripping stuff, expertly executed by Never Back Down director Jeff Wadlow. Tonally it veers off in oddly dark, psychotic directions and there are some unresolved sub-plots that nag the continuity nerves, but overall Kick-Ass 2 is a kick ass sequel to its surprisingly excellent predecessor. 

Sorry.

8/10 - Great

See it if you liked: Kick-Ass (2010), X-Men: First Class (2011), The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)

Review: Alan Partridge: Alpha Papa

Review: Alan Partridge: Alpha Papa

Director: Declan Lowney

Cast: Steve Coogan, Colm Meaney, Felicity Montagu, Sean Pertwee

Running Time: 121 Minutes

"I'm Alan Partridge, I've not been off the TV that long!"

The narrow-minded, accidentally insulting and somehow likeable Norwich Radio DJ Alan Partridge is back on our screens - only this time, it's the silver one. Over twenty years in the making, Alan Partridge: Alpha Papa sees British comedy legend Steve Coogan popping the headphones on once more as arguably his most ingenious comic creation. 

Yet with the character making such an established impact on television, how does he fare when thrown in to a cinematic adventure? 

Well, fans of Coogan's timeless character won't be disappointed, as not only does Alpha Papa act as a genuinely enjoyable movie in its own right, but it doesn't dilute or deflate the origins of the great 80's loving DJ just for the sake of pleasing the masses. The sitcom-to-cinema route is often strewn with misfires (with The Inbetweeners acting as an exception and Mr Bean's Holiday acting as an example), but by keeping the references to the TV show at a minimum, Alpha Papa manages to be both accessible to new fans and pleasing to the old ones.

In fact there are barely any "A-ha!" moments, as it turns out that Alan is a hopelessly appealing character in any medium whether you know him or not - he's like the village idiot that's not actually an idiot, more just desperate for attention. Some would say that the story itself becomes a betrayal of his roots though, as shoot-outs, hostage situations and frantic police chases ruin the quintessentially awkward and hilariously mundane 'Partridge' atmosphere, but ultimately the level of comedy littered throughout the running time ensure that Alpha Papa is nothing less than entertaining.

A brief history of Alan is pretty unnecessary, as the opening moments set his character up rather nicely. He's 55, he's got aggressive athletes foot (something he believes is incredibly important to everyone), his children don't talk to him anymore and his radio station North Norfolk is getting taking over by a hip new broadcasting company called "Shape" ("the way you want it to be!"). He soon discovers that either he or his long-time broadcasting friend Pat are in the line of fire, and encourages the executives to sack the alternative, leading Pat to go on a craze-fuelled shotgun spree inside the station.

Cue Alan's time to shine, as he becomes the go-between for Pat and the cops, resulting in enough quotable punchlines to knock out Muhammed Ali. 

The comedy is cranked up to eleven for this, and it's refreshing to see a movie based on a sitcom which actually stays at home - where The Inbetweeners went on holiday for their big screen outing, Alan stays in Britain and Alpha Papa works all the better for it. Saying that, some of the sight gags (Alan trying to clamber out of a window completely naked for example) feel like they belong in an American Pie movie rather than Norfolk's finest, but even so the subtle comedy hits all the right beats ("Why can't they just merge Jewish and Islam, y'know, call it Jislam?"). There's even a few guest-starring cameos, with Sean Pertwee acting as an exciting addition to the cast amongst all the carnage. 

As for the plot, writers Coogan and Peter Baynham stretch the premise to breaking point - between dream sequences and travelling to a pier, the actual storyline feels extensive towards the end, but luckily the performances and the surprisingly poignant moments (Pat's depression and Alan sorrowfully passing on messages to family members) keep the action moving as much as it can. 

Luckily the running time doesn't outstay its welcome, and an amusingly tense climax sees Alpha Papa rounding off a satisfying ode to the legacy of Alan Partridge and his surprisingly everlasting appeal. Coogan himself is superb, giving a master-class in comedy: every facial tic and every little mumble of disdain acting as the result of over two decades of character building.

Summary

Funny, moving and expertly directed, Alan Partridge: Alpha Papa is simply one of the best comedies of the year, and manages to invite fans both old and new to celebrate Steve Coogan's iconic character. It's not always spot-on, but the film stays true to Alan's irresistibly ridiculous personality and even sees him caught up in those sort of heroic situations he's dreamt of his whole life. This is ruddy hilarious, and exactly what comedy needed on the big screen. Back of the net!

8/10 - Great

The League Of Gentlemen's Apocalypse (2005), Hot Fuzz (2007), The World's End (2013)

Doctor Who: Introducing The Twelfth Doctor

Doctor Who: Introducing The Twelfth Doctor

The wait is over, the announcement has been made - this evening during a live BBC broadcast, Scottish actor Peter Capaldi, 55, was confirmed as the Twelfth incarnation of alien time traveller The Doctor in Doctor Who.

So then...Doctor Who exactly?

Well, fans of television and movies in general won't even need to ask that question. Not only is Capaldi a self-confessed 'Whovian' (definition: dedicated fan of Doctor Who), but he is also an incredibly well established actor in his own right, his most famous credit as the hilariously foul-mouthed Malcolm Tucker in the BBC's The Thick Of It. Other projects include Waking The Dead and, most recently, a supporting role in the summer blockbuster World War Z.

Eagle-eyed Whovians will also recognise Capaldi from appearances in previous episodes of both Doctor Who (pictured below in Series 4, Episode 2: The Fires of Pompeii) and its spin-off Torchwood for all five episodes of its third series. 

Capaldi's casting is an interesting one, as not only is he an established acting talent, but the BBC contacted him and asked him to audition, rather than completely allowing unknown actors to try out for the role. Importantly, Capaldi is a huge fan of the show and he says he could not be happier to bag the most iconic role on British television.

It's about time that an older Doctor was brought to the fore, as the past two incarnations have been assuredly appealing to the "Twilight generation" despite their formidable acting abilities. In 2005, Christopher Eccleston played the Ninth Doctor in the first of the show's revived series; he brought a dark angst to the role following The Doctor's apparent act of genocide in a Time War, killing every single member of his own race.

After one series, Eccleston left due to creative differences between himself and the producers, which allowed fan-favourite David Tennant to take over as the Tenth Doctor. Tennant himself was an up-and-coming star, having played the lead role in BBC 3's Casanova (also written by then-showrunner Russell T. Davies) but Doctor Who was his big break into stardom. 

In 2008, Tennant announced his departure from the show and after four seasonal specials, the Tenth Doctor emotionally regenerated on New Year's Day 2010 into his Eleventh incarnation: Matt Smith.

The reveal of Smith's casting was met with a barrage of head-scratching newspaper headlines: Doctor Who? After his first episode, Smith soon won over all the doubters and immediately made the role his own. Three years later, it's time for Smith to step down and the Eleventh Doctor will regenerate in this year's Christmas special.

Enter Twelve...

So what sort of Doctor will he be? Will he swing towards Smith or levitate towards Eccleston? Personally I'm hoping for the latter, but each Doctor has their own mix of dark and light and Capaldi is experienced enough to put his own spin on every line. Younger fans may find themselves in denial of him at first ("Oh but he's too old, he's not good looking enough!" was a particularly annoying Tweet I came across), but with some good writing and some positive side characters, Capaldi's Doctor will win over the fandom.

With this regeneration, the show is at an advantage. When Tennant left, so did all of the side characters who had supported him during his era - Billie Piper, Catherine Tate, John Barrowman, Bernard Cribbins - none of their characters have been seen nor heard since Matt Smith took over. And that's no bad thing - Doctor Who is all about change. Yet this time, Capaldi will still be aided by Jenna Coleman as the companion Clara Oswald, as well as a few other familiar faces who have proven popular with fans over the last year. The show is not reinventing itself again - more like shifting into a different gear.

Sadly however, we'll probably only see a few moments of Capaldi's Doctor in the closing seconds of the Christmas Special and after that, we have no idea when Series 8 will actually air on TV, although recent rumours have suggested that it'll hit our screens in late 2014.

So then, Peter Capaldi. Welcome to Doctor Who. You are now live aboard the TARDIS.

Please do not swear.

Review: The Conjuring

Review: The Conjuring

The horror genre has seen a spike of interest in recent years, most likely kick started by the surprise hit Paranormal Activity. Since then, the likes of modern horrors such as Mama, Insidious and Sinister have not only done well at the box office, but have impressed the vast majority of critics too.

So amongst all of 2013's summer blockbusters comes The Conjuring, a ghost story that channels those classics like The Amityville Horror both with its narrative and the techniques put into play. Yet to make a good horror movie, there needs to be terror - so the most important question is, how scary is it?

Sadly, The Conjuring is not particularly scary at all. The jump scares are timed expertly of course, and the creepy atmosphere is consistently cranked up to eleven, but the problem is that most of the scares never particularly pay off. The horror audience is far too savvy these days, and we've definitely seen it all before: a door suddenly slamming of its own accord, a child seeing something that the adults can't, a creepy doll staring us out...James Wan's latest horror is just far too "been there, done that" to truly be deserving of the hype, although an effectively creepy clapping game of hide and seek manages to send shivers up the spine.

Still, that doesn't make The Conjuring a bad movie in itself and where the predictable scares can occasionally let it down, the script (which is, of course, based on a true story) succeeds in providing some very enjoyable entertainment. For a change, the plot focuses less on the family and more on the experienced couple attempting to appease the spirits in their home. 

Ed and Lorraine Warren are renowned paranormal investigators called to investigate a dark presence terrorizing the Perrons, a large family who have just moved into their new secluded dream home. When the spirit latches itself on to the mother of the family, the Warrens are caught up in the most horrifying and traumatizing case of their lives.

The strong casting more or less ensures The Conjuring's success, with Patrick Wilson and Vera Farmiga amicably leading the proceedings as the Warrens. In fact, all of the performances are played absolutely straight and credit must be given to the child actors in the Perron family - their terror is truly believable, and where other horrors have had some hammy side acting, The Conjuring makes the best of each of its stars, right down to the doll-bothered girls in a largely unconnected prologue.

And that's just it - a lot of the scares in the plot are completely unconnected. A creepy doll from one of the Warrens' different cases makes a few appearances here and there, but it serves nothing to the story. It's certainly creepy, as most dolls are in horrors, but veering off to an unrelated case at particularly nonsensical moments only serves to throw the plot off course with no pay-off from the beginning right up until the over the top finale that surely stretches the truth beyond breaking point.

Summary

Less a horror and more a supernatural thriller, The Conjuring is creepy at best and, speaking as someone who often sleeps with the light on after a ghost story, you won't lose a wink after watching. Wan's direction is strong, providing the jumps when it matters, but this is best viewed in a cinema full of people where the atmosphere is tense enough to contribute to the fear factor. When all is said and done though, this summer's most anticipated fright-fest is more or less just a more sympathetic hybrid of hundreds of its predecessors - less a bump in the night than a small nudge or two.

7/10 - Good

See it if you liked: The Amityville Horror (1979), Insidious (2011), Sinister (2012)

Hollywood: The Fall of Originality

Hollywood: The Fall of Originality

Reboots, prequels, sequels, novel adaptations, spin-offs and those all-engrossing horror films which are, of course, "based on a true story." Yes, it's the curse of the sequel and while we've been casually enjoying all those expensively unoriginal features, that curse has been consuming Hollywood now more than ever.

In 2013 alone, we're being hit with over fifty massive blockbusters, almost all of which are sequels, prequels or reboots. From A Good Day To Die Hard in February, the unwelcome 5th instalment in the Die Hard series all the way to Anchorman: The Legend Continues in December, it's clear that in these times of economic instability and uneasy executives making the decisions, the movie industry is refusing to take many risks. 

Of course, there are still the usual suspects such as Director/Producer Christopher Nolan, who is currently undertaking a huge new original feature mysteriously called Interstellar which is due for release in late 2014. That said, Christopher Nolan is a safe bet for the movie studios, right? He essentially broke into the mainstream with a reboot of the Batman series, starting with Batman Begins in 2005.

Sure, he loves the characters as much as the next guy, but it's a safe bet to say that Nolan picked up an easily recognisable franchise in order to make his name heard amongst the less movie-savvy audience. He may have come up with one or two absolute winners since (if you haven't seen Inception, drop everything and watch it now), but behind the scenes he is still overseeing the rebooted Superman series Man of Steel. 

Old habits die hard, and with this particular project Nolan is, as many other writers of superhero flicks are, constrained by his source material. Many such genre movies are now falling back on direct adaptations of comics, or at least using most of their characters and storylines - at Comic-Con this month, it was announced that The Avengers 2 will follow the recent Age of Ultron storyline from the comics. What's the point in watching a story on the big screen that you've already experienced in a comic book?

Superheroes are, of course, an easily profitable bunch regardless of the director - most of the time, the face of the character is the most appealing piece of marketing behind the profit. Take Iron Man, for example, the first of Marvel's movies which led to the incredible crossover spectacular The Avengers last year (or Avengers Assemble, for us tea-sipping Brits). With Robert Downey Jr. on board as the man in the can, it was always inevitable that Marvel's billion-dollar crossover franchise would be a success with not only fans of the original comics on which they are based, but the general casual audience as a whole. In fact, The Avengers is the third highest grossing movie of all time - not bad considering it was written and directed by Joss Whedon, a man whose previous televised creations such as Firefly, Dollhouse and Angel were all cancelled before their time.

Moving away from the superhero franchises though, of which there are many, the horror genre has seen an incredible boost in popularity over the last few years, kick started by the original Paranormal Activity movie. Of course, the first was simply a small-budget, handheld camera flick in the style of The Blair Witch Project - a love letter of sorts to the horror classics of old. As is the way though, Hollywood executives saw dollar signs and picked up the franchise. As such, Paranormal Activity has spawned three sequels, with a fourth hitting our cinemas this October. Necessary? Of course not. Profitable? Definitely.

It's a familiar concept, that Paranormal Activity nonsense. Generic characters are terrorized in their own home by a ghost, spirit or demon (take your pick), and through the eyes of security cameras and camcorders, we see how each member is picked off one by one. The audience knows what is going to happen and where the jump scares are going to be - the trailers give far too much away anyway - yet the masses will stay pay their hard earned cash to watch the same thing all over again. So why is it?

Perhaps we crave what we know. Why take a £9.50 risk on some weird, intelligent, obscure sci-fi movie called Oblivion when you could spend it on Paranormal Activity 5 - you enjoyed the other ones, right?

Going by that logic, we're just as bad as the executives and movie studios making the decisions. Why should they pay millions to create an original, fresh and intriguing movie when they could pump more dollars into - oh, I dunno - a reboot of The Lone Ranger franchise? "Should we make it dark, gritty and morally ambiguous just like the original TV show never quite dared to achieve?" asks one fresh-faced producer. "Of course not," laughs an older, wiser executive. "Let's get Johnny Depp doing his wacky Johnny Depp routine, and we'll make sure it appeals to kids with over the top, ridiculous action scenes that physically make no sense. And you're fired."

Why should they pour billions of dollars into a brand new, epic action adventure directed by an up and coming director when they could simply hire Hugh "reliable" Jackman to pump out yet another Wolverine movie that nobody really wanted or asked for? Why should they, when we, the audience, aren't going to be open-minded enough to go and see them?

It's not all bad though - looking back over the last year or so, we have had rather a few original and mind-bending movies to entertain us. They, of course, can't rely on their story alone. Features such as 2012's Bruce Willis-starring Looper and this year's animated Oscar-nominated Wreck-It Ralph featuring John C.Reilly certainly challenged the intelligence and attention levels of the casual cinema audiences, but they still weren't enough to financially combat the heavy hitters, which is presumably why such big name stars were involved.

When you ask any cinema-goer which was their favourite "psychological thriller" over the last few years, their mind will immediately jump to Nolan's Inception from 2011. Not a bad movie by any means, one of the best to come out of recent years in fact, but it seems to be what the mainstream defines as a mind-bending movie, where in fact there are hundreds of independent and/or indie films which raise the bar beyond the reach of even the great Christopher Nolan.

They'll most likely never be seen nor heard though, which is a shame. Just look at the Oscar winners in 2013 - Ben Affleck's Argo nabbed the Best Picture award. Again, it was very well deserved but the point is that Argo is based on a true story. The source material is all there, the witnesses and the historical files - the plot is already mapped out for the writer and there is little creativity to be spoken of other than the technical execution of the scenes.

Amongst the other winners were Life of Pi (based on a novel), Silver Linings Playbook (same again) and Les Miserables (which is, of course, based on the acclaimed musical).

Thankfully other winners included Disney/Pixar's fantastic Brave, although Pixar themselves are falling in creativity levels. With 2011's Cars 2, this year's Monsters University and 2015's Finding Dory, the great animation studio are showing cracks in the concrete of their originality, falling back on sequels and prequels to please the adult audiences who remember the original movies from the early noughties. Still no Toy Story 4? Good!

At the end of the day though, Hollywood will continue to do whatever is most profitable. It's only whenl the masses stop paying for the same old rehashed movies again and again that the studios will sit up and take notice. If not, in ten years, we might be halfway through an American reboot of the Harry Potter series. In twenty years, we could be witnessing yet another Batman origin story complete with a fleeting cameo from Christian Bale. In thirty, a complete retelling of the Star Wars series with Justin Bieber as Luke Skywalker.

Let's hope they've invented space travel by then, because I won't want to live on this planet anymore.