The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies

Friday 2nd January 2015

Director: Peter Jackson
Year: 2014
Stars:  Ian McKellen, Martin Freeman, Richard Armitage, Ken Stott, Graham McTavish, William Kircher, James Nesbitt, Stephen Hunter, Dean O'Gorman, Aidan Turner, John Callen, Peter Hambleton, Jed Brophy, Mark Hadlow, Luke Evans, Ryan Gage, Adam Brown, Orlando Bloom, Evangeline Lily, Stephen Fry, Cate Blanchett, Hugo Weaving, Christopher Lee, Slyvester McCoy, Ian Holm

My first cinema since we went to see The Fault in Our Stars back in June for our wedding anniversary (it seems that a cinema once every six months is about what I can expect now), I quite enjoyed the third and final installment of The Hobbit. I suspect this had a lot to do with the fact that I knew what I was getting, because the movie certainly isn't without it's flaws.

For starters, almost the entire movie is one big long battle scene. I don't remember the book that well, but I know that a lot of this movie isn't adapted directly from The Hobbit. In many ways it suffers from the same problems as The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey; it makes the story much, much grander than the book. For example, the orcs here are on a par with those in Lord of the Rings. In terms of the story, this doesn't work - the orcs in Lord of the Rings were meant to be bigger, better and tougher than anything Middle Earth had seen before. But this wouldn't work with the movie, because it's a prequel - so things filmed here have to be bigger and better (or at least on a par with) those that you have seen before.

There are also some very odd plot holes. For example, half the movie is spent talking about an army that will appear from the north. This seems to turn out to be about 100 goblins that, apparently, two dwarves can deal with all by themselves. If there is essentially no army, why mention it at all? (Better than that to introduce another army when the film is already too long - being 8 months pregnant, my back can attest to the fact that this movie was definitely too long).

Not a bad movie, and if you've seen the other two Hobbits (or even The Lord of the Rings trilogy) you'll know whether you're going to fundamentally like this or not. But there's nothing special to recommend it. Equally there's nothing truly terrible about it to warn you to stay away. Mostly average.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug

Friday 3rd October 2014

Director: Peter Jackson
Year: 2013
Stars: Ian McKellen, Martin Freeman, Richard Armitage, Ken Stott, Graham McTavish, William Kircher, James Nesbitt, Stephen Hunter, Dean O'Gorman, Aidan Turner, John Callen, Peter Hambleton, Jed Brophy, Mark Hadlow, Adam Brown, Orlando Bloom, Evangeline Lily

Another movie that I ended up missing when it was released at the cinema, this is one I've been keen to see for a while. I quite enjoyed The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, and wanted to watch the next installment. Thanks to a netflix trial, now was my chance.

The first half of The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug was a little disappointing. The movie is very grandiose, presumably in an attempt to retain an association with the Lord of the Rings trilogy. Now, as anybody who has read The Hobbit knows, the book isn't grandiose at all. It all happens on a much smaller, more personal scale than The Lord of the Rings, being told very much from Bilbo Baggins perspective.

Thankfully the movie improves in the later stages, and once we're introduced to Smaug it feels a bit like we're back in The Hobbit book territory, and not just trying to make everything seem much grander than it should be. Not a bad movie overall, but not really close enough to staying in keeping with the tone (not so much the story) of the original book for my liking.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5

The Little Mermaid

Sunday 13th April 2014

Director: Ron Clements, John Musker
Year: 1989
Stars: Jodi Benson, Pat Carroll, Buddy Hackett, Jason Marin, Kenneth Mars (voices)

I have a confession to make. Although I have seen The Little Mermaid, I've never really watched it properly. Being at a friend's house with nothing better to do on a Sunday morning, I sat down to watch this - and realised that I didn't really know the story. So this time, I paid attention. And really enjoyed the movie - as I should.

For those of you who, like me, don't know the story (or didn't, until a week ago), Ariel (Benson) is a mermaid who falls in love with a Prince, and makes a deal with a sea-witch in order to become human and meet the Prince on dry land.

Even if you don't know the story, I guarantee you'll know some of the songs. They stick in your head for ages after you hear them.

I imagine you've already seen The Little Mermaid, and know that you love it - especially if you're a child of the '80s. But if you haven't, just go and watch it.

Rating: 4 out of 5

Mirror Mirror

Wednesday 19th February 2014

Director: Tarsem Singh Dhandwar
Year: 2012
Stars: Julia Roberts, Lily Collins, Armie Hammer, Nathan Lane

When I saw this was on TV, I was really, really keen to watch it. Unfortunately I was busy doing something else at the time, so I recorded it to watch later. Since then, it's been sitting there staring at me quietly saying "You know you really want to watch me. You know you haven't really got time". So when I was off work sick for the day, and this looked like the happiest, cheeriest movie on the list, I figured it was time to listen to the first half of that quiet voice.

And I'm glad I did. I really, really enjoyed Mirror Mirror. It's the story of Snow White, but with a contemporary twist. The dwarves have names like Napoleon and Grimm, Snow White refuses to be the one getting rescued, and the Prince gets fed a potion of puppy love. Somehow the movie still manages to remain true enough to the spirit of Snow White so that, if you're a traditionalist, you're probably not going to be too annoyed.

One final thing worth mentioning - Julia Roberts makes an excellent Wicked Queen.

Rating: 4 out of 5

Ever After: A Cinderella Story

Sunday 13th October 2013

Director: Andy Tennant
Year: 1998
Stars: Drew Barrymore, Dougray Scott, Anjelica Huston, Patrick Godfrey, Megan Dodds, Melanie Lynskey

I chose to start watching this because I wanted something easy to put on TV before I began to watch Downton Abbey. It being such an old movie, I assumed I had seen it before. An hour and a half later, I was still watching Ever After, and Downton Abbey was waiting for another evening. Either I have seen this before, but it was so many years ago I don't remember, or I really just missed this movie first time around.

It's not really anything special - as stories go, it is actually just a relatively straight telling of Cinderella, although an attempt has been made to make a little more realistic (the carriage doesn't turn into a pumpkin, and the Fairy Godmother is actually Leonardo da Vinci). You can probably tell from the second half of that sentence that the movie is still pretty whimsical.

All this is fine if what you're expecting is a movie fairy tale. Which I was, and I was perfectly happy with it. Perhaps it's not a work of brilliance, but for me it was a fun and enjoyable (and unexpected) way to spend a relaxed Sunday evening.

Rating: 4 out of 5

The Death and Life of Charlie St. Cloud

Wednesday 24th July 2013

Director: Burr Steers
Year: 2010
Stars: Zac Efron, Charlie Tahan, Amanda Crew

The Death and Life of Charlie St. Cloud is not the most instantly engaging film I've ever seen. In fact, after having watched the first half an hour and been called away for some baby-related reason or another, I dismissed the movie as "not really worth a watch". That didn't stop me recording the next hour and a half though, just in case things improved.

Charlie St.Cloud (Efron) loses his younger brother in a car crash, but for the next five years still goes to meet him and practice baseball. This results in everybody thinking of him as the town oddball, and him giving up his sailing scholarship. But things change when an old schoolmate, Tess Carroll (Crew), appears on the scene.

Things do improve - not tremendously, but enough to keep me engaged on a quiet Wednesday afternoon when I didn't really want to be doing anything else. Once the character of Tess gets properly introduced, things get a little more interesting. They are still completely obvious (although not in the way you think after having read this review), and this really isn't a movie for those who like films to keep them guessing, but it's not a bad choice if you're after a switch-off moment or two.

Rating: 2.5 out of 5

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Sunday 12th May 2013

Director: Peter Jackson
Year: 2012
Stars: Martin Freeman, Ian McKellen, Richard Armitage, Ken Stott, James Nesbitt, Stephen Hunter, Dean O'Gorman, Aidan Turner

In contrast with Sideways, The Hobbit turned out to be better than I was expecting. After hearing a number of reviews when it was released and I didn't get the chance to go to the cinema and see it, I believed it probably wasn't going to live up to all the hype.

Don't get me wrong, The Hobbit is definitely filmed on almost the same scale as Lord of the Rings, when the book really isn't written to the same scale. However, I wasn't bored by the film, and personally I enjoyed the fact that it had such a clear link to the Lord of the Rings movies. This is helped by the fact that all the actors who need to, return to the roles they had in Lord of the Rings

The Hobbit is due to be released in 3 parts, so this movie certainly doesn't tell the full story. Its main focus is on Bilbo's life before Gandalf (McKellen) and the dwarves appear, and how he copes with being dragged away from his home to go in search of a dragon. This isn't to say that there aren't fights with goblins, orcs, and the ever-present Gollum, of course. By the end of the movie the action has fully kicked, and I, for one, will be happy to watch the next instalment, due out this year- The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug.

Rating: 4 out of 5

Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince: Film #166 of Film 365

Thursday 12th July 2012

Director: David Yates
Year: 2009
Stars: Daniel Radcliffe, Michael Gambon, Jom Broadbent, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Bonnie Wright, Alan Rickman, Helena Bonham Carter

We recorded this back on New Years Day, when it was being shown on TV. We did half watch it then, at a friend's house. Having seen it before, I was vaguely aware of what was happening. But having re-watched the rest of the series when they were shown on TV earlier in 2011, I was keen to do the same with the sixth Harry Potter movie. The reason it took so long to get around to doing so was that the movie is nearly 2 and a half hours long - and finding that much time to spare at the moment is no easy task!

I'm glad we finally did find the time though. There's a lot about the sixth movie (and, for that matter, the sixth story) that I didn't really remember. I hadn't forgotten the ending or the broad plot, but most of the details had escaped me. This time round it's (as always) darker than before, with Voldemort (Fiennes) being a very clear, looming threat. Having said that, the story isn't as grand as Harry Potter and the Order of the Pheonix. The focus is firmly back on Harry (Radcliffe), Ron (Grint) and Hermione (Watson) and their relationships - albeit with Harry doing his utmost to help Professor Dumbledore (Gambon) fight back against the Dark Lord.

If you don't like, haven't read the books, or haven't seen the preceeding Harry Potter movies, this probably isn't going to make much sense. But then if that's the case you're probably not planning on watching this anyway. If you are, and have no specific objection to the story, then you'll probably enjoy this. For me, my favourite scenes are those (and there aren't many) between Bellatrix (Bonham Carter) and Snape (Rickman). My only complaint is that there aren't more of them. Thankfully, this improves in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.

Rating: 4 out of 5

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter (3D): Film #164 of Film 365

Sunday 1st July 2012

Director: Timur Bekmambetov
Year: 2012
Stars: Benjamin Walker, Dominic Cooper, Rufus Sewell, Anthony Mackie, Mary Elizabeth Winstead

Lots of my friends have been rather sceptical about this movie. I, for one, was more than happy to see it. It sounded fun to me. So when my husband and I were looking for a movie to go and see on our wedding anniversary, this one just beat the competition. Although I'll admit that the competition wasn't that strong - it is the middle of the summer, after all. I was mildly surprised to find my husband willing to sit through it. Although his acceptance wavered a little when we discovered we had to watch it in 3D, and it was therefore going to cost us a hideous amount of money (this being a Sunday, not a Wednesday with its Orange 2-4-1 offers).

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter does exactly what it says on the tin. Amazingly, it's adapted from a novel - but it's all about a world where Abraham Lincoln goes off killing vampires. Oh, there's a bit in the middle where he stops and fights slavery (turns out the vampires are responsible for that, too), because doing both at once would be, well, silly. It's all very tongue-in-cheek, and although the movie plays it straight, it must know this. It doesn't try to be anything it isn't. Although the scene with the stampeding horses did have me almost laughing out loud for its sheer ridiculousness...

If you know what you're getting, and are willing to accept it, this is a pretty fun movie. I enjoyed the hour and a half by simply taking the movie for what it was. And the 3D was, for me, surprisingly effective. Sure, all the usual "vampires jumping out at you" tricks are employed, but what I really liked were the early scenes where the 1800s are given a hazy, washed-out summer tone, and the 3D makes the figures seem almost unreal.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5 (I enjoyed it, but I'm willing to admit that it's not an example of cinema at its best)

Twilight: New Moon: Film #159 of Film 365

Sunday 13th May 2012

Director: Chris Weitz
Year: 2009
Stars: Robert Pattinson, Kristen Stewart, Taylor Lautner, Billy Burke, Anna Kendrick, Ashley Greene, Peter Facinelli, Michael Sheen, Dakota Fanning

Yes, I've seen this before. And yes, I've blogged about it before - twice. Back in October 2011 and November 2011. I'm including it here though because I think it's a valid contribution to my 365 films.

I'm not going to go over the plot or things I've said previously again, but I will say that I still enjoyed New Moon. It's still not Twilight, and never will be, but it is enjoyable. It was also great to be able to watch it totally uninterrupted on a relaxing Sunday evening.

Rating: 4 out of 5

Dark Shadows: Film #158 of Film 365

Friday 11th May 2012

Director: Tim Burton
Year: 2012
Stars: Johnny Depp, Eva Green, Michelle Pfeiffer, Helena Bonham Carter, Bella Heathcote, Chloe Grace Moretz, Gulliver McGrath, Jonny Lee Miller

If you like Tim Burton, Johnny Depp, gothic movies and schlock, the likelihood is that you'll enjoy Dark Shadows. I'm a pretty big fan of all of the above, so wasn't going to let the opportunity to see this movie go by unnoticed.

Barnabas Collins (Depp) is a 200 year old vampire. He was created back in the late 1700s by an jealous ex-lover (Green), and was been buried alive not longer after he became a vampire. He is dug up by a construction crew in the early 1970s - which is when the majority of Dark Shadows is set.

Dark Shadows is a typical Burton gothic movie in many senses, and this makes it all quite enjoyable. However, the movie isn't without its flaws. The storyline is based on a old 1970s US TV show that, apparently, nobody except Burton and Depp ever watched. And my guess is that it was quite bad.

Elements of the plot in Dark Shadows don't really make that much sense - I'm still confused over exactly who Victoria Winters (Heathcote) really is. Whether that's the fault of the TV show or the movie I'm not entirely sure, but there are aspects to Dark Shadows that continue to frustrate me a little. But as long as you know what you're getting (and are a fan of that sort of thing), you'll probably be happy enough.

Rating: 3.5 out of 5

Ghost Town: Film #153 of Film 365

Wednesday 18th April 2012

Director: David Koepp
Year: 2008
Stars: Ricky Gervais, Greg Kinnear, Tea Leoni

I wasn't expecting much from this. When it was released it didn't exactly open to critical acclaim, and I'm not really a huge Gervais fan (I never really did get The Office the way others did). I was mostly just curious.

Perhaps because my expectations were rather low, I actually ended up quite enjoying Ghost Town. Gervais plays Pincus, a dentist who has a near-death experience and ends up being able to see ghosts who want his help. Which all leads to him falling in love with Gwen (Leoni).

It's not a complicated plot by any means, and at times I'd even go so far as to say the film gets rather dull at times (something of an impressive feat for a short movie). But when Ghost Town is being silly, it's actually quite funny. A pleasant surprise, if not the best film out there.

Rating: 3 out of 5

Thirst: Film #145 of Film 365

Monday 27th February 2012

Director: Chan-wook Park
Year: 2009
Stars: Kang-ho Song, Ok-bin Kim, Hae-suk Kim, Ha-Kyun Shin

Well, this is different. It was part of a vampire triple-bill on Channel 4 one evening- coming after Twilight and Near Dark (both enjoyable vampire movies in my opinion). This is a Korean movie, and the oddest of the three. And, perhaps in some ways, also the most traditional. It features a pretty large amount of death and sex. Anybody who knows their vampire movies (or even vampire novels) will know that this means it's a proper vampire movie.

All this doesn't mean that you will have seen anything like Thirst before. I'm not sure how much of this is down to the fact that the movie is Korean, and I'm not used to their style of film making, and how much is down to the movie being truly unique. But I certainly enjoyed it, and might well seek out other Korean recommended movies on the strength of it.

Thirst begins by telling the story of Priest Sang-hyeon (Song), a man who volunteers for a vaccine development project. He does this to try and help others infected by a specific disease. But, unlike all the other patients who die, a blood transfusion turns him into a vampire. It takes him some time to acknowledge this, and Thirst does a great job of portraying the emotions he goes through in order to get to this point. This is no 2-minute Hollywood plot device at the beginning of a movie to get you to the good vampire stuff. It takes a good 30-40 minutes to get to this point; but you won't feel bored getting there. The movie descends into more of a Hollywood Natural Born Killers style movie when Priest Sang-hyeon meets Tae-ju (Kim) - but even this relationship takes some time to getting going; and watching it become established is all part of the joy.

If you love horror, and specifically vampire movies (like me), but are looking for something a bit different to your standard Hollywood fare, I highly recommend seeking Thirst out.

Rating: 4.5 out of 5

Ginger Snaps Back: The Beginning: Film #141 of Film 365

Wednesday 22nd February 2012

Director: Grant Harvey
Year: 2004
Stars: Katharine Isabelle, Elizabeth Perkins, Nathaniel Arcand, JR Bourne, Hugh Dillon, Adrien Dorval

I'd been putting off watching this for a while, as it felt like just another horror movie. I knew that might be unfair, because I really enjoyed the original Ginger Snaps, and Ginger Snaps: Unleashed wasn't bad either. Anyway, I was reaching the end of my November movies to watch (slightly long story, but I'm watching movies month by month in an attempt to get them watched- and not have too much choice!), so the choice was between this and Thirst- a Korean vampire movie. Which I'm also intrigued by, but keep getting put off because I don't want to have to read subtitles when eating my dinner (which is when I seem to end up watching movies at the moment).

It turns out that Ginger Snaps Back is actually a pretty enjoyable horror movie. It's short, concise and to the point. It's not a jump-out-your-seat scary horror movie (see The Woman in Black for that), but it does do what it aims to rather effectively. The basic story is that two sisters end up in the middle of nowhere of Canada, in a fort looked after by a group of men who are acting, to put it mildly, rather oddly. It doesn't take long to realise that this all has something to do with werewolves.

There perhaps aren't many surprises here - most of them are actually spelt out for you and explained before they happen. But it's still a far more intelligent movie than many, many horror movies out there.

Rating: 4 out of 5

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides: Film #106 of Film 365

Sunday 25th December 2011

Director: Rob Marshall
Year: 2011
Stars: Johnny Depp, Geoffrey Rush, Penelope Cruz, Ian McShane, Kevin McNally

Happy Christmas! On Christmas Day, it turns out that I got hoards of DVDs as presents. This was no bad thing, as they all came off of my Amazon wish list, so I really wanted them all. Now I just have to find time to watch them... admittedly, I have seen most of them before - which is why I was happy to have them on DVD. They're movies I know I will happily watch more than once.

My first chance to watch one came on Christmas Day morning itself, when I ended up having time to settle down to watch the fourth Pirates of the Caribbean movie. This was mostly thanks to the men in the house, who ended up cooking the Christmas dinner. I originally saw Pirates in the cinema this summer, and was mostly happy with it. However, my original trepidation with the movie remained a little before I started watching the DVD. I had only seen the movie once, and whilst I could remember enjoying it, I couldn't really remember exactly how much.

Well, I think it's fair to say I enjoyed it more second time round. Perhaps I was just in the right mood, perhaps repeated viewings of things you like just generally make them better, but my Christmas morning was improved vastly for having a chance to re-watch Pirates 4.

Rating: 4 out of 5

17 Again: Film #96 of Film 365

Friday 2nd December 2011

Director: Burr Steers
Year: 2009
Stars: Zac Efron, Matthew Perry, Leslie Mann, Sterling Knight, Michelle Trachtenberg

I was meant to be doing useful, virtuous things like cleaning. So I collapsed and watched a rom-com instead. And it was great. No, really it was. It was really funny - not something I was really expecting.

17 Again has a fairly simple, overly used concept - a middle-aged man pines for his high school years, so he can get back the life he never had. So along comes his "spirit guide" and gives him his wish. Just like other similar rom-coms, it's about winning the girl - but it's mostly about finding yourself, and how this helps others. No great surprises there then.

What made this enjoyable for me was the fact that the focus was quite strongly on the comedy, with some decent characterisation thrown in. I surprised myself by most enjoying the scenes with Zac Efron too. It's not a masterpiece, but it was fun, relaxing Friday evening viewing.

Rating: 4 out of 5

The Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn - Part 1: Film #93 of Film 365

Thursday 24th November 2011

Director: Bill Condon
Year: 2011
Stars: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Billy Burke, Anna Kendrick, Ashley Greene, Jasper Rathbone, Peter Facinelli, Kellan Lutz, Nikki Reed, Elizabeth Reaser, Sarah Clarke

It was unlikely that I wasn't going to enjoy this. After all, I knew basically what I was going to get. What I didn't expect was an almost empty cinema. We had decided not to go on a Wednesday evening, fearing it would be very, very busy (it was the first Wednesday Breaking Dawn had been released, and because of the Orange 2-4-1 deal Wednesdays are always busy). So we went on a Thursday evening at 8.30pm, and there were only four of us in the cinema.

The film actually started off a little slowly. There were a lot of long lingering shots of the wedding, and the dress, and the guests... it was clearly aimed at 15 year old girls, but after a while it got really rather dull. Thankfully, the film picked up. I quite enjoyed the honeymoon, but what happens afterwards was the most engaging part. Even Dan admitted that that the last half an hour was really quite enjoyable, and a lot more engaging than the first half.

Whilst I do think Breaking Dawn: Part 1 was a little overlong, I do also understand why they have split the book into two halves. The stories divide up in two very clear separate parts, and to fit them both into one movie would have made it overlong. I just wish this had been an hour and a half rather than two hours long. It will never beat Twilight (there's not a lot that will in my mind), but it was still an enjoyable movie.

Rating: 4 out of 5

Twilight, Eclipse and New Moon: Films #88, 89 and 90 of Film 365

Monday 7th November, Wednesday 9th November and Friday 11th November

Directors: Catherine Hardwicke (Twilight), Chris Weitz (New Moon), David Slade (Eclipse)
Years: 2008 (Twilight), 2009 (New Moon), 2010 (Eclipse)
Stars: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Billy Burke, Peter Facinelli, Ashley Greene, Jasper Rathbone, Nikki Reed, Kellan Lutz, Anna Kendrick, Christian Serratos, Dakota Fanning, Sarah Clarke

As I had a fair few free evenings at home by myself this week, it seemed like a good opportunity to re-watch all the Twilight movies - and it felt especially appropriate what with Breaking Dawn being released next week. I've already blogged about Twilight, New Moon and Eclipse - but I also said that I wanted to watch them again when I was by myself, and see if my reactions were the same. I wouldn't always count films that I've watched twice in quick succession; but watching all three felt like enough of a commitment that I could count the movies towards my 365!

Well, my opinion of the movies hasn't really changed. My favourite movie is still the first Twilight - I love the music, the plot, the dialogue, just everything about it. If anything, it's grown on me with repeated viewings. New Moon is second best, but it can't live up to the simplicity of Twilight. Eclipse has grown on me a little, but it still has its problems. Without having read the book, there are things that would annoy me. I found I was filling in the back story in my head as I went along, and as I was doing this I realised that without that knowledge the film wouldn't make half as much sense to a viewer. So although I might give both New Moon and Eclipse an extra half a star after a second viewing, I think it's fair to stand by my original ratings.

Rating:
Twilight: 5 out of 5
New Moon: 4 out of 5
Eclipse: 3.5 out of 5

Eclipse: Film #84 of Film 365

Friday 28th October 2011

Director: David Slade
Year: 2010
Stars: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson, Taylor Lautner, Billy Burke, Anna Kendrick, Ashley Greene, Jasper Rathbone, Peter Facinelli, Dakota Fanning, Sarah Clarke, Bryce Dallas Howard

Eclipse was never going to beat Twilight - just like New Moon couldn't. When I watched Twilight, everything was new and exciting- and the story worked as a simple love story. Now, I know the plot before I see the film, and things are a lot more complex than at the beginning of Twilight. This is no longer just a love story (although at least that element is still at the heart of the plot). I thought it might have an advantage over New Moon though, as it has content that I thought might just work better on film. And Eclipse definitely does have some very visual elements - the beginning, for example, draws you into the Twilight world immediately, and very effectively.

As with all the other movies in the Twilight saga, Eclipse focuses on the relationships between Bella, Edward and Jacob. This time though there's an extra dimension - an army of newborn vampires are being created in Seattle, and they seem to be after something, or someone, in Forks.

There was just something about Eclipse that didn't feel quite right. I don't really know what that thing is- and it may just be that I was a little tired when I was watching, or that I was watching it with the wrong person. There were constant grumblings from that person about how things didn't make sense or quite add up. I can't say I felt this way myself, so I think Eclipse may need another viewing when I'm fully awake, by myself and can enjoy it in peace!

Rating: 3.5 out of 5

New Moon: Film #83 of Film 365

Friday 21st October

Director: Chris Weitz
Year: 2009
Stars: Robert Pattinson, Kristen Stewart, Taylor Lautner, Billy Burke, Anna Kendrick, Ashley Greene, Peter Facinelli, Michael Sheen, Dakota Fanning

After my Twilight post, you'll probably have guessed I was rather keen to see the next two movies in the saga (and the Breaking Dawn movies of course, but I'm going to have to wait for them...). After a ridiculously long wait (and it actually was long - not just "I really can't wait for this so it seems long"), the Twilight saga blu rays made it through my letterbox on Friday morning. So guess what my Friday evening involved? In fairness, I only watched New Moon - it didn't seem fair on Dan to inflict that and Eclipse on him in one go...

For those of you who don't know the story, read the book. And for those of you who don't want to read the book, I'm sure you don't care enough about what the story is anyway. It involves humans, and vampires, and werewolves. It's like an Americanised, PG-13, version of Being Human with more teen angst (note: Being Human fans may well hate Twilight. They may not. I love both).

In fairness, I didn't enjoy New Moon as much as Twilight. Like the book, it's harder to love initially. But the book has grown on me a lot, and I think the film will too. I still enjoyed it enough to willingly give it repeated viewings. I also think that part of the reason I didn't love the film initially is that Twilight was new, and very exciting. I've now read all the books and know I love the Twilight saga. You're far less likely to enjoy (or want to watch) New Moon unless you already care.

Rating: 4 out of 5