What was the last film you watched?

[Mel O'Drama]

ALIEN is even more frightening when you know what's going to happen, and the time it takes to build up to that Very Shocking Scene is almost nauseating.
But it isn't only suspenseful sci-fi horror, it's also a very beautiful space movie.

Spot on, Willie. You've summed up what makes this such a great film. I love the leisurely pacing; the naturalism of the exchanges and the dark, foreboding atmosphere.

As you said, it is very beautiful and even more so when you consider (as I'm sure you had) that it's entirely practical. There's no sweetening it up with CGI. Even the titular character is a skinny man in a suit, filmed very judiciously.

I appreciate this film more each time I watch.

57 years later Ripley wakes up in an eighties movie: irritating characters, juvenile dialogue, ugly and sterile sets and props - and of course there's a kid in it. Is it Drew Barrymore? No, but it could have been.
Gone is the warm and organic atmosphere, this is "let's rock!" and showing more in flat lightening. I think even STARSHIP TROOPERS was more fun than this ALIEN sequel.

Oh, thank God. Aliens seems to be so revered that it's incredibly refreshing to read your opinion. My view on this film is very similar to yours. I find it loud, busy and quite showy at times. Many of the supporting characters are dull, and the little girl persistently making that whistle-like scream does my head in.

Despite being made at Pinewood it feels far less British to me and has a really unattractive brash Hollywood thing going on, which I suppose is down to the voices of the very different directors.

I must confess that I've come to appreciate some of the virtues of the film as I've rewatched it. The Queen in particular is really well done as a terrific and memorable film monster (notwithstanding the fact that it also typifies the film's "bigger and better" approach in attempting to outdo the original). It's also impressive for a film franchise to change genres like this. Still, I do think it's hugely overrated.

I had planned on watching the other sequels too but I think I'll pass.

For what it's worth, I'm quite fond of Alien 3. It was the first film in the franchise I watched, and I saw it at a time when it was still the "final" film in the series and so it made quite an impact on me.

I know it had a troubled production and never quite lived up to its full potential, but like the first film it takes its time, is thick with atmosphere and - being a David Fincher film - looks great (most of the time).

 

[Willie Oleson]

even more so when you consider (as I'm sure you had) that it's entirely practical

Yes, I had a feeling I was watching a model spaceship on a string, but sometimes the most basic trickery is also the most convincing. Or perhaps I should say enticingly convincing.
The awakening scene (which was real) looks like the most beautiful Disney animation.

As always, the funny moments is in the detail, not the joke.
Near the end of the film, when Ripley is both exhausted and completely fired up by her survival instincts, she shouts "goddammit". The panic and frustration is very real and there's nothing badass or lighthearted about the exclamation, but it made me chuckle anyway.
Then there's the name of the spaceship "Nostromo" that sounds like a 1960s Italian vampire film - and it's almost an anagram for "Monster".

I must confess that I've come to appreciate some of the virtues of the film as I've rewatched it.

I'm sure I wasn't disappointed when I watched it for the first time so I guess it was good for the time it was made. Heck, I probably wanted to see more & bigger.
But now, watching them back to back, it's easy to see that one ALIEN film still looks remarkably fresh while the other ALIEN movie looks painfully dated.
Instead of "Disney", the 1986 film gives us "Transformers" the TV series.

For what it's worth, I'm quite fond of Alien 3.

Is that the one where she throws herself (and an alien egg?) into a vulcano or something like that?
I'm not sure if I've watched the third sequel, and I have ignored the two prequel movies altogether, but for no particular reason (though I shudder to think what the ALIEN vs. PREDATOR films look like).

In essence, ALIENS does what a sequel needs to do: return to place where it all went wrong, like they always return to Haddonfield and Camp Crystal Lake (and even Peyton Place). It would not have been possible to make it mysterious again, we know what we're dealing with but that also means it's nothing more than waiting for the kill count to begin. Even if everything about ALIENS was top-notch it would still be the cheaper kind of entertainment.

I'm not saying that ALIENS is a complete failure, I'm sure it's got plenty of "popcorn" value. The seriously bad sequels belong to Poseidon, The Exorcist and Rosemary's Baby.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

I had a feeling I was watching a model spaceship on a string, but sometimes the most basic trickery is also the most convincing. Or perhaps I should say enticingly convincing.

Especially when the model spaceship on a string is lit so enticingly.

Instead of "Disney", the 1986 film gives us "Transformers" the TV series.

Oh yes - that about sums it up.

Is that the one where she throws herself (and an alien egg?) into a vulcano or something like that?

That's the one.

I'm not sure if I've watched the third sequel

I have and I thought it was terrible. It's easily the worst of the original four films and takes the sci-fi stuff too far.

But then, as I painfully discovered when watching the Marvel Cinematic Universe, I'm really not a fan of Joss Whedon's style.

I have ignored the two prequel movies altogether, but for no particular reason

Same here. I've just never got round to watching them, though I feel hopeful that they're decent enough.

I shudder to think what the ALIEN vs. PREDATOR films look like

Oh God, yes. Just the idea of a big film crossover like this seems really juvenile and lowest common denominator. I always feel the writers should stick to playing Top Trumps in their playtime.

I'm not saying that ALIENS is a complete failure, I'm sure it's got plenty of "popcorn" value.

Absolutely. I also think it's well enough made and looks really good. It's just not my kind of thing.

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Christmas With The Kranks (2004)

This was a spontaneous watch, chosen on the fact that Jamie Lee Curtis and Dan Ackroyd both appear. I felt I knew what to expect from the unsubtly wacky poster, and that's pretty much it.

As much as anything, this film feels like an ode to the insanity of Christmas preparations and rituals and all the expectation and pressure that comes along with those. And it does so by inverting the whole dynamic so that the people who opt out of "doing" Christmas end up appearing insane and unreasonable.

Every street has one of those homes with Christmas lights, decorations and garden displays that are so OTT and bright they need to begin setting them up in August. This film presents a kind of Stepford world where this is the rule rather than the exception, and the Kranks' home stands out because it's the only one not covered in lights, with their concession to Christmas being a tasteful wreath on the door.

I'm really not clear if the filmmakers fully understand that the Kranks are the healthy ones, especially since it ultimately equates conforming to Christmas rituals with community (and non-conformity in choosing not to erect a twelve foot snowman on the roof is shown to be a sticky middle finger up at the neighbours). All the same, it does capture the insanity of pre-Christmas perfectly, perhaps best represented by the epic supermarket struggle to obtain the last Hickory Honey Ham (I'd thought this was going to be an actual ham, but the film take the insanity one step further by making this an epic battle for nasty tinned "meat").

The comedy is as broad as one would expect, but the performances make it fly and it got a few genuine laughs from me. JLC and Ackroyd are both great, with the latter representing the push to "do" Christmas. I particularly like that JLC's character is quite unsympathetic, chewing her husband's ear off so that he does her bidding for a quiet life (established well early on when she pushes him to get a soaking in order to obtain her special chocolate chips while she sits in the car and sends him back repeatedly until he gets it spot on). She's also quick to allow him to take the blame when things go tits up, which felt quite truthful. I don't know what I know Tim Allen from. I feel I must have seen him in something, but darned if I know what. On first glance I thought he was Kevin Spacey, but as the film progressed I was struck by how much he looks like William Shatner.

The film is schmaltzy at times, particularly as it gets towards the rather hollow "Christmas good" message and Allen's character finds his "redemption" by doing something nice. Still, it's warm enough and irreverent enough to pull off these moments well. The ailing neighbour's trembling lip on being met with an unexpected kindness was perfectly played.

I'm glad I didn't know this was based on a John Grisham novel or I would probably have expected more and been disappointed. But watching this with no other information beyond the colourful, one-dimensional poster and a couple of cast members it really hit the spot.​

 

[Mel O'Drama]

Nativity! (2009)

I'm not sure what's come over me this year. Other than a biennial screening of the original Black Christmas or The Polar Express and, once in a blue moon, Gremlins, I'm not usually one for festive films at all. I've never watched Love Actually, Die Hard or National Lampoon's Christmas Thingy. Yet here I am watching two overtly Christmassy films in as many nights.

It's a little curious that the film relies on almost identical imagery to that shown in Christmas With The Kranks: a pan across a street of homes all lit up for Christmas, with the protagonist's home in gloomy normality, sans any kind of Christmas glow-up. Again, there's a rather unpleasant implicit message that someone choosing not to go gaudy means that they're a sad creature, worthy of pity and ultimately abnormal, with the film's happy ending all hinging on whether or not he finds Christmas in his heart. Of course, it's an archetype that both Nativity! and Kranks have no doubt lifted from earlier works which may or may not include It's A Wonderful Life and How The Grinch Stole Christmas! to probably the main influence: Charles Dickens.

Any of these works that are "inspired" by A Christmas Carol must hit certain beats: great loss leading to bitterness; someone showing them the error of their ways and what love and Christmas are really all about; being met with forgiveness by those affected by said bitterness, etc. etc. All are present and correct here, and worked into a story that's complex and original enough to make it feel fresh.

The cast - like the film itself - is a Curate's egg. Martin Freeman gives a great performance (if you can overlook the abundance of throat-clearing-to-convey-awkwardness, which I chose to do). Pam Ferris is terrific as the school's slightly pushy headmistress. Ashley Jensen and Alan Carr had just enough screen time (for me less is always more with these two) which meant I enjoyed their performances. Even Ricky Tomlinson has a couple of little scenes as the Mayor.

Here's the bad news, though: this is a film which relies heavily on its characters being endearing and for me there were two key elements where I wasn't on board with this. First up are the kids: Precocious kids with missing front teeth may be adorable with a scene-stealing line here or there, or doing funny things in the background or whatever but I really didn't care for them taking so much screen time in the last act. I realise it's in the title, but I really didn't realise a good portion of the latter part of the film was going to show so much of the actual performance in what felt like real time. I haven't attended a school nativity since I was in one at the age of seven or eight, and watching this I realise that's with good reason.

The other big fail for me was the teacher's aid character. Rather like the kids, his goofing round was endearing at first and could have remained so in small doses, but his stupidity was taken to ridiculous extremes that pushed him into one-dimensional American sitcom territory (think Joey from Friends at his most annoyingly pea-brained and you're on the right lines). I didn't find him particularly likeable and as his acts became more reckless he began to appear genuinely ill-intentioned.

On the subject of extremes, the trip to Hollywood - racing past the security guard at the gate and running round the lot to escape them - feels like it's been done a million times. It took this film out of its own reality and ultimately felt there was little point to it besides giving the actors and crew a holiday to entice them to sign on. These scenes would have been at least as effective if done over the phone.

And here we are. When I added Nativity! to the queue, I also added the second and third films in the series. But now I see that the key character to appear in all three is the teacher's aid. Freeman - the lead character here - doesn't appear in any more, so I wonder if there's any point in continuing. Certainly I feel like I've seen more than enough of the kids and the man-child. I am curious enough to watch on to see how it's re-framed but, given the rule of diminishing returns, I can't help but wonder if continuing would be an act of pure masochism.​

 

[Angela Channing]

Spirited (2022)

Another re-working of Dickens's A Christmas Carol. This one is set in the present day and is a musical so it is very much a new take on the traditional story. The twist here is that Scrooge (played by Will Farrell) has died and is now one of the ghosts whose aim is to encourage a different Christmas grinch each year to change their ways and embrace the joys of Christmas in the same way he did when he was alive. This year's target is played a ruthless media consultant played by Ryan Reynolds. Sadly the songs in the film aren't particularly memorable and I think it would have worked better had it not been a musical. However, I applaud how they tried to do something original with the story and overall it's not bad.

 

[Angela Channing]

The Noel Diaries (2022)

This film contained many of the clichés you find in most Christmas films:

• Lead character lives in the city and heads to a small town.
• Lead character is estranged from one or both of their parents.
• Two lead characters are destined to be together but they have to overcome some obstacles first.
• One or both of the lead characters is already in a relationship with a flawed partner.

Famous author Jake Turner returns to his home town to settle his mother's estate after she dies. They didn't get along and he didn't see her for many years but she left her house to him in her will. She was a hoarder and Jake begins the task of sorting through her stuff. He is visited by Rachel who was adopted and is looking for information about her birth mother who used to be Jake's nanny. Jake finds a diary amongst his mother's possession and it turns out to be written by Rachel's birth mother, Noel. They both decided to go on a road trip to visit Jake's dad, from whom he has been estranged for many years, to see if he remembers anything about Noel. Rachel's boyfriend hasn't been supportive of her search so she doesn't tell him about Jake and the trip. I think you can guess where this story is going.

The film is a pretty lame love story dropped into a Christmas setting. It's not great.

 

[Angela Channing]

This Is Christmas (2022)

This film has several Christmas film clichés but it weaves them into a really interesting plot idea and tells the story in such moving and entertaining way that it felt very original and not the least bit annoying. The clichés featured were:

• Two lead characters are destined to be together but they have to overcome some obstacles first.
• One or both of the lead characters is already in a relationship with a flawed partner.
• Everyone comes together to prepare for a big Christmas event.

In this film a group of strangers travel to work on the same train every day but no one talks to each other. One day, Dean, a young passenger, forgets his season ticket and the conductor insists that he pays for a ticket until another older passenger, Ray, sticks up for him saying everyone knows he has a season ticket from seeing him present it every day and the conductor is persuaded to let Dean off. This gives Adam, another passenger, an idea to organise a Christmas party for all the commuters who see each other daily so they can get to know each other better. At first there is little enthusiasm but it gets everyone talking and eventually friendships develop, the most moving of which is the one between Dean and Ray who become good friends.

Adam is in a relationship with a woman he is not completely compatible with and another passenger, Emma, has a boyfriend who doesn't fully appreciate her. No prizes for guess what happens to them. I loved this film and will probably watch it again at a future Christmas.

 

[Luke_Krebbs_Ewing]

I watched the Doctor Who TV movie recently on Blu-ray.

I was quite surprised how well it stands up.

Paul McGann is an excellent Doctor.

 

[Seaviewer]

Ash is a robot.

I think they prefer the term "artificial person".

I think even STARSHIP TROOPERS was more fun than this ALIEN sequel.
I had planned on watching the other sequels too but I think I'll pass.

IMHO "Aliens" is one of the few sequels to surpass the original, but you're not missing much if you skip the last two.

I shudder to think what the ALIEN vs. PREDATOR films look like).

The first one is surprisingly good. At least it's a different take on the concept.

 

[Angela Channing]

Your Christmas or Mine (2022)

This film is currently being advertised on the side of many London buses so I thought I would give it a watch. Like many Christmas films it contains many of the usual clichés including:

• One or both of the lead characters is already in a relationship with a flawed partner.
• Lead character lives in the city and heads back to their home town.
• A frustrating misunderstanding keeps the 2 lead characters apart.

This was a better than average Christmas film. Student lovebirds James and Hayley, on a last minute impulse decide to surprise the other by visiting them for Christmas and they end up spending the holidays with each other’s families. Hayley ends up with James‘s widowed father who un to now she didn't realised was Lord Humphrey The Earl of Gloucester. James ends up with Hayley‘s working class family, in Macclesfield. James hasn't told his father than he dropped out of military school at Sandhurst and is now studying Drama at university and Hayley hasn't told her family she has broken up with her fiancée and they don't know about James. There are some good laugh out loud moments and a nice heart-warming resolution to the situation.

 

[Angela Channing]

Falling For Christmas (2022)

This film has and abundance of Christmas film tropes including:

• The two lead characters are destined to be together but they have to overcome some obstacles first.
• One or both of the lead characters is already in a relationship with a flawed partner.
• Everyone in the community comes together to prepare for a big Christmas event.
• One of the lead characters is a widow or widower with one or more children.
• The family business of one of the lead characters is in trouble.
• Lead male character rescues lead woman.

Hotel heiress Sierra (played by Lindsay Lohan) and her self-centred influencer boyfriend Tad go skiing and Sierra falls from a mountain top. She is rescued by Jake (Chord Overstreet from Glee) who takes her to hospital. When she regains consciousness they realise she has amnesia so Jake says she can stay at his hotel until her memory returns. We all know that Sierra will dump Tad and end up with Jake and the film is about how they get to that point. There is a nice moment which is reminiscent of the ending of the film It's a Wonderful Life which brought a tear to my eye.

Overall, this film is just a piece of Christmas fluff and the kind of thing that you have on in the background while you are peeling the sprouts for your Christmas dinner. It's unoffensive, unchallenging nonsense but has some nice moments.

 

[Angela Channing]

I've taken a break from watching Christmas films at home and ventured out to watch...

The Banshees of Inisherin (2022)

The premise of this film is simple: the break down of the friendship of two long time friends, Padriac (Colin Farrell) and Colm (Brendan Gleeson). Out of the blue, and for no apparent, reason Colm decides he doesn't want to be friends with Padriac any more and much of the film in finding out why. Colm becomes more and more intrenched in his rejection of his former friend and Padriac becomes more determined to fix things. On reflection, I'm wondering whether the friendship was an allegory for the Irish Civil War but maybe I'm reading too much into it.

The film is very Irish. I grew up in a neighbourhood where there were a lot of Irish people and so many things, like the way the people expressed themselves, their attitudes and their sense of humour, reminded me of some of the people from my childhood.

Although the film is more of a drama than a comedy, it is really funny in places. The performances are first rate and the way it showcases the beauty of parts of the Irish landscape is impressive. Overall, I really liked this film and I can see it doing really well when it comes to awards season.

 

[Willie Oleson]

For a former silent-movie icon retreating in her decaying, Hollywood-Gothic mansion I think she's making a lot of noise - and rather monotonously theatrical at that.
On the other hand there's William Holden's character that tries to give this Hollywood-insider a cynical touch but to me it comes across as an unconvincingly naive woe-is-me story.
Surely even back then they must have realised that some people make it in the business while others don't, and that that could be a matter of talent, looks, nepotism or sheer randomness.
I do like the story itself and I think it would be a great read, but the relentless narration feels like someone reading the story out loud while showing pictures, or showing pictures and then describe what's in it (I'm not sure what's worse).
Ironically, it also makes the story look like second-hand information as opposed to the firsthand information as promised in the opening scene.

To create a satirical freakshow that's also meant to be a suspenseful drama was probably a little bit too ambitious even with all the talent involved.
Perhaps the character of Norma Desmond should never have been materialized on film; living in the shadows of her former glory the only exposure it requires is the sinister secret between the author and the reader which would increase the psychological mystery of "who's-using-who".

From a technical point of view I think the film looks very well made and it goes without saying that I love the interior of Norma's grotesque mansion (high ceilings always do the trick) except for the tacky tiled floor in the hallway.
I don't think I could call it a bad film, but personally I have experienced it as an overly exhibitionist drag that plods along towards its inevitable and not too exciting conclusion.
Having said that, I did kinda like Holden's narration in the final scene. "Funny how gentle people get with you once you're dead" probably being my favourite line of the entire movie.
My favourite image isn't that of the iconic "ready for my close-up", but the moment she descends the stairs. Since the other characters on that very staircase are seemingly frozen in time it almost looks like a motion picture within a photograph.

Rating: 4/10

Here's another film that relies heavily on a character's narration, and not only does it describe the current situation but also what is going to happen.
But in this case the matter-of-factly yet poetically soulful narration is mesmerizing, simultaneously devoid of emotional manipulation.
The story and characters are quite minimalistic and even the various killings are treated without a whiff of terror (although I feared that Kit would trash the rich man's beautiful home).
It's really only in the final act that their murder spree gets some gravity, oddly juxtaposed - or perhaps emphasized - by the way Kit is treated by the authorities.

Even though their romance and the consequences thereof are never glorified, the film is not entirely without issues.
Seeing how they lived they always look unrealistically clean.
The references to James Dean could make the viewer a little bit too forgiving, and Holly's motivaton to join Kit makes some sense at the beginning of the story, but not enough to stay in a situation that's getting worse and worse.
Well, eventually she decides that she doesn't want to anymore, and shortly after that Kit throws in the towel, too. Without Holly he no longer has a purpose, or so it seems. None of this is being spelled out though, and overall the story looks like it just happens, and almost too realistic to be fictional. Apparently it was inspired by the The Starkweather–Fugate case.
BADLANDS is beautifully shot but I won't give them credit for the scenery because the plains and forests and mountains were already there, I'm pretty sure of that.
Despite being a late fifties period drama it's also very much a seventies production, but in this case I consider that two for the price of one.
The soundtrack is gorgeous.
Rating: 7/10

 

[Angela Channing]

Rating: 4/10

It's a shame you didn't like it very much because Sunset Boulevard is one of my favourite films but you do make some really interesting points. I agree with you that the scene at the end when she walk down the stairs thinking all the Press are there to report on her return to films is one of the best but I also like the scenes between Joe and Betty and how she grew closer to him which was eventually Joe's undoing. It's also the first film I watched that I really came to appreciate the work of the cinematographer in creating mood and interest by using different camera angles and deep focus.

 

[Angela Channing]

Christmas With You (2022)

Christmas film cliché watch:

• Two lead characters are destined to be together but they have to overcome some obstacles first.
• One or both of the lead characters is already in a relationship with a flawed partner.
• One of the lead characters is a widow or widower with one or more children.

Angelina is a famous pop star but hasn't had a hit in a while. She received a message from a fan who tell her how much her music has mean to her since her mother died and would love to meet her. Angelina decides to pay her a surprise visit and gets snowed into her house when a storm hits. The girls dad is a music teacher and together they write a song which will be a big hit for her and revives her career. However, will she get love as well as a new chart topper?

Bland, predictable stuff and the song they wrote was immediately forgettable. Probably my least favourite Christmas film I've seen this year.

 

[Angela Channing]

Three Wise Men and a Baby (2022)

A reworking of the French film Trois Hommes et Un Couffin (1985) which was reasonably well remade by Hollywood as Three Men and a Baby (1987) but lack the charm and humour of both of those films.

Christmas film cliché watch:

• Lead characters are destined to be with someone but they have to overcome some obstacles first.
• The wider community come together to contribute to a Christmas event.
• Lead male character rescues woman

The film differs from the original in that the three men are brothers who do not get on with each other. One brother is a fireman and in the run up to Christmas someone leaves a baby with a note asking that he looks after the child. Circumstances mean the brothers have to work together to do this and they bond over the child care.

Not a terrible film but not a patch on the original.

 

[Angela Channing]

The 12 Days of Christmas Eve (2022)

Unusually, even though this film is a reworking of familiar stories it's not really riddled with the usual Christmas film clichés but it does have some:

• Family business is in trouble.
• Boss of business too focused on profits to have any Christmas cheer.
• Daughter is estranged from father.

The film is a combination of Groundhog Day and A Christmas Carol. Kelsey Grammar plays Brian, the owner and CEO of a large electrical repair company who dies in a car crash on Christmas Eve. Santa appears to him and gives him the chance to relive the day up to 12 times during which he must prove he understands the true meaning of Christmas. To achieve this he realises he has to repair his relationships with his family, friends and employees and as each day is relived, he learns from his experiences and gradually morphs from a bad-tempered, mean-spirited individual to a kindly and generous man. Kelsey Grammar is very watchable in the lead role. There are some nice moments of humour and the film was quite good, although quite predictable at the same time.

 

[Willie Oleson]

Probably my least favourite Christmas film I've seen this year.

And yet the film title looks so intriguing.
Seriously, what's going on here? Why is our highly esteemed World Cup of Soaps moderator watching all these super-lame christmas movies?
To quote the worst line from Nicole Kidman's acting career: "what....have....they....done...to you?"

Scuttle it, scuttle it!

The big plot twists are predictable (well, they are in 2022) but the fun part is that the picture-perfect Cutlers are indirectly involved. It's almost a National Lampoon's Niagara honeymoon.
With characters constantly walking in and out of cabins and shops it also has a sense of a whodunnit, as in: where was he or she at this or that particular time?
That relentless force of nature that's almost never out of sight even adds a bit of "disaster movie" to it. The on-screen murder looks surprisingly unsettling.

Then there's the older but exhaustingly energetic couple - Mr. Kettering calls Ray Cutler's wife "Polly-O". Incidentally, Jean Peters reminded me of Lara Flynn Boyle and the strange thing is that I noticed that at the time I was comparing Marilyn Monroe's character to Twin Peak's Audrey Horne.
NIAGARA is entertaining from start to finish.

Speaking of disaster movies...

Weeeeh...what shall I say about this one?
The special effects are awesome but when "it" happens....it doesn't stop! Did I really need to see every tree and building being destroyed?
There are no fabulous guest stars and I disliked every character in this film, especially the kids and their "ain't I mature for my age?" antics.

Additionally....

If someone would tell me what SHREK is all about then I'd probably run for hills (or volcano, for that matter).
But all that classics-mixed-with-contemporary that didn't work for me in the Disney stories (starting with the renaissance films) works brilliantly in SHREK 2.
I assume that one of the reasons is that it's naughtier, which allows them to pick the fun contemporary stuff.
But the humour is in so many details and film fragments, blink and you'll miss it. All the more reason to watch it again.

Of course I'm too old for the fart jokes but thankfully these are kept to a minimum and in a way they are related to the characters.
At some point in the story we can hear Eddie Murphy scream "police brutality, police brutality!" - I'm sure it's not too difficult to connect the dots here. I found it so daring and funny.
Puss in boots is fantastic, I also love his spin-off film. Or is it purr-off?
Everything I hate about MALEFICENT (and what's not to hate there?) looks great in the Shrek universe.
Fairy Godmother as a villainous Hollywood guru who happens to be the mother of the callous and narcissistic Prince Charming, Captain Hook as the local sea shanty singer and Pinocchio as a closeted femboy - these are all pretty interesting twists.
The mixed up world of Medieval and contemporary is over the top and yet strangely believable. Either way, none of it gets so much attention that it becomes annoying.
Before you've had the time to form an opinion, the story has already moved on to another scene.

I watched the first SHREK film on the back of it and I have to admit that it doesn't look very awesome. I'm glad that the sequel was my introduction to SHREK otherwise I may not have bothered.

 

[Angela Channing]

Seriously, what's going on here? Why is our highly esteemed World Cup of Soaps moderator watching all these super-lame christmas movies?

I recently listened to a great podcast series called Christmas Movies Wars about the battle for viewers primarily between the Hallmark and Lifetime channels but also when streaming services such as Netflix and Amazon joined in the fight. It covered a lot about their approach to production, their business plans, the strengths and weaknesses of their output and how they make popular films on a relatively small budget. I decided to watch some of this years Christmas films to give some context to some of the issues that the podcast raised.

The films weren't all "super-lame"; I thought 2 were really good (Your Christmas or Mine and This Is Christmas) and recommended for viewing during the festive season.