Exodus: Gods and Kings [used]

There seems to be an influx of Biblical films coming out of Hollywood recently. I thought Hollywood picked that carcass clean, but here we are. Don't get me wrong, there are some stellar Biblical films out there, namely the likes of Prince of Egypt, The Passion of the Christ and The Ten Commandments. They were films despite heavily rooted in belief, but didn't demand that you believed in the authenticity of their stories in order to enjoy them. They were just great films in their own right. Most recently I also (surprisingly) really enjoyed Darren Aronofsky's Noah. Hugely underrated, beautifully shot and a real treat in terms of performances, it was a film that made me think, “OK, maybe a few more biblical films ain't so bad”. After Exodus: Gods and Kings though I'd rather see Hollywood ravage the comic book world a little more.

Directed by Ridley Scott and out now on Blu-Ray and DVD comes Exodus: Gods and Kings, a film that isn't exactly either good or bad. The biblical story of Moses has been told time and time again, and Gods and Kings does its best to stay true to the original story. But instead of starting with Moses' back-story that involves him being placed into a river, and ultimately being found by the Pharaoh's Queen thus becoming a king, Gods and Kings starts off with an adult Moses. He's a respected leader and alongside his brother Ramasses, they are virtually inseparably and unaware of Moses' Hebrew lineage. However upon learning about his true history Ramasses, now Pharaoh after his fathers death, sends Moses into exile. After 9 years in exile and a wife and child now in his life, Moses happens upon a burning bush, a manifestation of God on Earth that tells Moses that he must return to Egypt and free his people from slavery. You get the picture, right?

There are a few things I like about Gods and Kings. Though a lot of people complained about the fact that the film was essentially whitewashed- and hey, that's a very valid complaint- I at least enjoyed the performances given, namely from Christian Bale (Moses) and Joel Edgerton (Ramasses). Sure they didn't exactly look the part (I mean, Batman is playing Moses after all), but both deliver performances that really do elevate this film way above where it should be. I also really loved the overall look of the film. Much like what Ridley Scott did with Rome in Gladiator, he does the same here with Egypt. He brings it alive with stunning visuals, depicts it in all its beautiful and barbaric glory, and effectively resurrects to how it once was the big screen. This excellent visual style also extends to the costumes, battles and CGI effects. The two big CGI moments in the film naturally come about when God sends the plagues down to torment Ramasses, and then when Moses, with his staff in hand, parts the Red Sea in order for the Hebrews to escape. It's filled with some pretty excellent moments, but to get to these you'll just need to slog through a good deal of crap.

Gods and Kings fails when it's not hitting the major important aspects of Moses' story. Between these moments that can be riveting, moving, action packed and stunningly shot, we get scenes of people just needlessly talking, walking around grand looking rooms, looking moody in low-lit locations and essentially just filling time until Ridley Scott can break into another big God moment. Also, though Bale and Edgerton are genuinely incredible with both their roles, their relationship, and then their sudden lack of one, should have been probed a little more during the film. The same goes for the weight of responsibility that's on Moses' shoulders. Sure, you see him react to the plagues and at times think God is going too far, but for someone who just went from royalty, to a nobody, to directly speaking with God and taking upon a divine mission, you just don't really see the weight of this scenario from Bale, the script, or on screen.

Exodus: Gods and Kings is a blend between the awe inspiring and the mundane. There are scenes that clamp you down to your seat, but there are also scenes that'll have you reaching for you phone. It's pretty much like Prometheus for me- good ideas, some nice parts, but ultimately a failure. It's a real shame too, because this film does contain wonder and beauty, it's only surround by far too much worthlessness. If you ever want to watch the best take on Moses' story, go watch the Dreamworks animated film The Prince of Egypt. Now there's a stunning film.

Exodus: Gods and Kings doesn't cure me of boredom and gets a 2/5.

★★☆☆☆

Denis Murphy

Exodus: Gods and Kings at CeX

Australia India Ireland UK USA

Get your daily CeX at

Google+ Instagram Twitter YouTube Facebook

Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb [used]

Like the titles, this series of films just doesn’t know when to stop. As happens so frequently with franchises, what started as a great concept quickly becomes over used and boring. Transformers did it, Jaws did it, hell, even Indiana Jones managed to do it. Not to say that Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian was terrible, it just wasn’t as good as the first. And now, the third isn’t as good as the second. 

Directed by Shawn Levy and out now on Blu-Ray and DVD comes Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb. Larry Daley (Ben Stiller) is now running a night-time show in a history museum in America. Labelled as a “special effects” show, Daley curates a show in which all the exhibits come to life, and when it matters most, things start to get out of hand. When the problem is identified, the magical tablet is slowly dying, Daley must take his gang of animated exhibits to London to find the only man who can help – Akhmenrah’s father, Merenkahre. As has been the case, if it isn’t fixed by daybreak, they’re all screwed.

Not a terrible plot. It’s nice to exchange America for somewhere else, but if you were hoping for some sightseeing or “I’ve been there” moments you’re out of luck and it isn’t often alluded to that they are actually in London. That being said, it offers up some healthy doses of new characters – such as Dan Stevens as Sir Lancelot, or Rebel Wilson as the security guard who will do everything to be an annoyance. Also thrown into the mix is Sir Ben Kingsley as Merenkahre, who, as always, offers up style and sophistication. And it would be wrong not to mention Robin Williams as it was his last ever performance. What can I say – the man is as consistent and heart-warming as tomato soup on a Winter’s day.

But great performances are only half the battle when trying to win over an audience. We need something to root for, and when we know exactly how it’s going to end, there’s little we can invest in. There’s going to be some kind of battle or race to survive at the end, and they’ll make it with seconds to spare. It’s the kind of film that makes you regret spending seven quid on a cinema ticket. The kind of film you’d have been happy to Wikipedia the plot of.

There are a couple of laughs, but they’re all the kinds of jokes to be expected. Look at Lancelot, he’s British, look at Tilly (Rebel Wilson), she’s lazy. Perhaps I’m not the target audience, and there’s lots going for it as a kid’s film. There’s mild excitement with no real threat, there’s people in silly costumes, and there’s a monkey – they’ve got it nailed. I just wish they’d take some risks with future films (if there are any), but I doubt they will.

No doubt it’ll become a film that is shown on Boxing Day just after lunch time, when the kids are so stuffed they can’t be bothered running around the house anymore, but apart from that there isn’t much going for it. The occasional original joke is undermined by typical, generic slapstick that becomes tedious after seeing it so often in previous films.

Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb is flogging a waxwork horse, 2/5.

★★☆☆☆

Jonny Naylor

Night at the Museum: Secret of the Tomb at CeX

Australia India Ireland UK USA

Get your daily CeX at

Google+ Instagram Twitter YouTube Facebook

The Eichmann Show [used]

In 1961, television history was made. Nazi war criminal Adolf Eichmann, having been captured after 15 years of living under a false name, was captured and put on trial for his crimes. His trial was televised, the first broadcast of such nature. But who were the men behind it? BBC’s latest TV docudrama film, The Eichmann Show, aims to tell us that. Is it another strong BBC production? Or just another cheap TV movie?

Directed by Paul Andrew Williams and out now on Blu-Ray and DVD comes The Eichmann Show, which has a rather uneven, rocky beginning. Straight from the get-go, we know we’re in TV movie territory. It just has that feel to it. With no opening credits and a very brief expositional sequence about Eichmann, we’re dropped right into the film with no fanfare. From this point until the trial, nothing is given any real time and anything that is given time is very rushed.  I know, the trial is what the film is about and the trial is why we’re here. But I would’ve liked a bit more background. Every time any tension was introduced in the first act, it was resolved so quickly it hardly seemed worth mentioning. It felt a bit like “You’re not allowed to film this trial! WE’VE CHANGED OUR MINDS, YES YOU ARE”, as if it were being told by a bipolar storyteller! Throw in some out-of-place threats of murder, and you’ve got a rather messy first act. At this point, I cringed worried that the remainder of the film would follow the same frantic pacing and lack of development.

But, once the trial arrives, so does the quality. The uncomfortable pacing slows down and settles. As we watch the trial unfold, the film-making really has a chance to shine. Archive footage of the historic trial is synced up with the newly shot backstage drama and is astoundingly well executed. Now I’m not saying this is original or revolutionary film-making – I seem to recall seeing a similar style in Oliver Stone’s JFK – but here it worked better than I’ve ever seen it before. It added a level of authenticity to the film and really made it more harrowing. There is some very hard-hitting footage of concentration camps and some deeply upsetting witness testimony, made all the more affecting by their authenticity. One man speaks through his tears of burying his wife and child, and Adolf Eichmann watches without an ounce of remorse. It’s difficult to watch. I’m not going to get deep here because it’s a powerful subject that can’t be covered lightly, but what a horrible time in history the Holocaust was. Truly and deeply distressing. I can’t imagine what it was like.

But, back to the film. The cast are excellent. Martin Freeman, following his phenomenal performance in Fargo, continues his TV drama run with another great performance as TV producer Milton Fruchtman. But for me, it was Anthony LaPaglia who unexpectedly stole the show as Leo Hurwitz, Hollywood director called in to direct the trial for television. LaPaglia shows incredible emotion, as he struggles to come to terms with Eichmann’s lack of remorse or emotion throughout the trial. He says early in the film “I don’t believe in monsters, but I do believe men are capable of monstrous deeds”. As the film goes on, he may start to believe in monsters after all. Despite the fact the majority of the footage of Eichmann we see is real (although the actor who briefly plays him has an uncanny resemblance), the narrative really creates a villain out of this hideous man. It’s because of LaPaglia’s performance that this works so well. Also, I’m always happy to see Andy Nyman, one of my favourite character actors of today, who delivers a great little performance.

As the trial goes on, age-old questions are raised once again. Can one man be tried in court for these crimes, when he was following orders? This question is in the news once again at the moment, as a 93-year old ex-Nazi may be tried for his war crimes. But is following authority and showing obedience a valid excuse? That’s a big question that one could debate for a long time, and was part of the foundation of Milgram’s iconic psychological study (which went on to inspire a Peter Gabriel song). A debate for another time and another place.

My closing thoughts? The Eichmann Show is a deeply affecting production which adds to BBC’s run of increasingly impressive films. Part documentary/part drama, the film serves as a highly informative piece of work giving exposure to a rarely covered piece of television and courtroom history. Whilst the pre-trial part of the film is ridiculously rushed (I feel it could’ve easily been bulked up to a 2 hour run-time), you’re here to watch the trial and that is where The Eichmann Show really excels. The world should not forget the atrocities that happened in those dark years.

My verdict on The Eichmann Show? 4/5, your honour.

★★★★☆

Sam Love

The Eichmann Show at CeX

Australia India Ireland UK USA

Get your daily CeX at

Google+ Instagram Twitter YouTube Facebook

Horrible Bosses 2 [used]

Comedy sequels can be great. But they can also be terrible. Warner Bros’ other three-man tale of inappropriate behaviour is of course The Hangover trilogy. The first film in said trilogy was fresh and original, and a huge success. Then came The Hangover Part II and Part III. Part II was basically just a remake of the first, where Part III was like something out of a completely different trilogy. The first Hangover still has a lot of fans, but the sequels disappointed on almost every level. Anchorman 2 was poor, and the upcoming Ted 2 could go either way. Who saw the first Horrible Bosses? A lot of you, right? And how many of you felt it needed a sequel? …Anyone? Yes, Horrible Bosses 2 comes as a bit of a surprise but a surprisingly pleasant one. It’s nowhere near perfect. Hell, I’m not necessarily even saying it’s a good film in terms of quality, but it succeeds at what it is.

Directed by Sean Anders and out now on Blu-Ray and DVD comes Horrible Bosses 2, a film that doesn’t suffer from the same repetitive plotting that The Hangover Part II did and mixes up the formula in the sense that the characters foolishly attempt a different crime. It would’ve been easy for the sequel to focus on them killing their new bosses. But thankfully that isn’t the case. In the film, our three heroes are now their own bosses, having designed a product and hoping to make their fortune off it. When they’re screwed over by a slimy businessman, they come up with a mad scheme to kidnap his son and hold him for a huge ransom pay-out. But, obviously, things don’t go to plan and hilarity ensues. 

For the most part, the guys still have great chemistry together. For those of you who don’t know or can’t remember, the heroes are played by Hollywood’s current go-to funny men; Jason Bateman, Jason Sudeikis and Charlie Day. Jason Bateman again plays the sensible, serious one of the group – just as he did in Arrested Development, his job is to stare in disbelief at the other oddball characters and make sarcastic comments. Jason Sudeikis (We’re The Millers) and Charlie Day (It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia) are the juvenile and clumsy characters who bring the majority of the comedy to proceedings as they bounce off each other. The supporting cast is excellent, with newcomers Christoph Waltz, Chris Pine and Jonathan Banks alongside returning stars Kevin Spacey, Jennifer Aniston and Jamie Foxx. Everyone seems to be having a good time.

But it’s not all fun and games. The first 20 minutes or so were very weak, with a particularly cringeworthy opening sequence involving a VERY dated and unoriginal joke that even felt old when Austin Powers did it. On top of that, the delivery style of some of the dialogue was irritating. Just like in the first film, Sudeikis and Day’s style is to mumble over each other which gets rather tedious. Whilst we’re on the subject of Day, he’s as annoying as ever for the first portion of the film. But like with all of his performances, you eventually learn to accept him and ignore his shortcomings – and hey, whenever I get angry at him, I remember his character Benny in The Lego Movie and all is forgiven. SPACESHIP!

The film brings nothing new to the table and is quite a predictable and unoriginal romp, right down to the obligatory use of The Heavy’s How You Like Me Now. But hey, most American comedies these days are the same. Nobody watches them for their artistic merit or intellectual entertainment. You watch them for the inappropriate humour and escapism (and dick jokes). Who cares if it isn’t a fresh, unique piece of cinema? It isn’t trying to be!

So, in conclusion, is it better than the first? I haven’t seen the first since its release, but I’m tempted to say yes. Horrible Bosses 2 made me laugh more than I expected, and more than I remember laughing at the first film. The cast are on pretty good form, the script is full of funny dialogue, the plot is decent enough…Look, at the end of the day Horrible Bosses 2 isn’t trying to win Oscars here. It knows what it is. It isn’t a good film. But it’s a good bit of fun. And sometimes, that is exactly what you need. I went in expecting to be angry and bored, I left with a lil’ smile on my face. Who can ask for more from films like this?

Horrible Bosses 2 pulls off the crime and gets 3/5.

★★★☆☆

Sam Love

Horrible Bosses 2 at CeX

Australia India Ireland UK USA

Get your daily CeX at

Google+ Instagram Twitter YouTube Facebook

Big Eyes [used]

I’m going to start with something that could anger a lot of people. Here goes…I don’t like Tim Burton. I don’t like his quirky, gothic style. I don’t like his insistence on casting Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter in everything he does. Okay, I didn’t mind Beetlejuice. In its day it was fresh and unique, but Burton has since done the same nonsense over and over again. However, there was one film Burton made that thoroughly impressed me. That film was Ed Wood. Ed Wood was an excellent biopic of the eccentric director Edward D. Wood Jr, and starred a surprisingly good Depp in the title role. It featured hardly any of the unusual and macabre imagery that usually dominate Burton’s films, and I thought to myself “hey, maybe this Burton guy is alright after all”. But then he gave us the abysmal Planet of the Apes remake and several films of Johnny Depp being weird in strange, dark, trippy worlds. I know a lot of people like that kind of thing and I respect that - it’s a style you either get or don’t. I don’t. For me, all hope with Burton was lost and I gave up on him. But then came Big Eyes. 

Directed by Tim Burton and out now on Blu-Ray and DVD comes Big Eyes, a spectacular return to form for Burton, who delivers another straight-faced biopic like Ed Wood. Serving as an interesting story about ego and jealousy, but also a tale of historical sexual inequality, Big Eyes reminds us how normal Burton can be and, in my opinion, how much better he is in these instances.

Based on true events, Big Eyes recounts the tale of Walter and Margaret Keane. In 1958, Margaret (Amy Adams) was an unsuccessful and ignored street artist, painting portraits of children with unusually large eyes. She meets Walter Keane, a charismatic artist with a head for business who, when Margaret’s paintings gain interest, takes responsibility for the work and becomes a huge celebrity in the art world. As stated in the opening sequence; “the 1950s were a great time if you were a man”, and thus it was a lot easier for the paintings to sell for higher value if people thought a man had painted them. But as the years go by and Walter becomes more successful, the couple begin to tear apart.

The entire cast play it brilliantly but after all is said and done, this is a film of two performances – Christoph Waltz and Amy Adams as Walter and Margaret. Don’t get me wrong, Amy Adams was great. She deserved the Golden Globe she was awarded for her performance. But I can’t help feeling Christoph Waltz out-shone her in every scene as the bitter and short-tempered Walter. Despite his distinctive face and accent, I forgot I was watching Waltz. To me, that was Walter Keane up there. Adams didn’t have that effect on me. But then I’ve seen a lot of her in cinema recently, with performances in American Hustle, Her and more still fresh in my mind - I haven’t seen Waltz since his phenomenal performance in Quentin Tarantino’s Django Unchained. I suppose the more films you appear in, the more your audience will get used to seeing you. And Amy Adams tends to play the same roles in most films anyway, bless her.

Visually, Big Eyes is stunning. The film looks like a living painting, especially during the gorgeous CGI landscape-filled opening credits. But even in dialogue-driven interior scenes, the film’s beautiful colour palette really feels like 1950s technicolour cinema, which when added to the fantastic costume and set design, lends itself to some lovely era authenticity. 

But it wasn’t perfect. There was one rather Burtonesque sequence (ol’ Tim just couldn’t help himself) in which Margaret hallucinates whilst shopping and sees all the other shoppers as having the big eyes she’s been painting. As it was just the one isolated sequence, it didn’t bother me too much. But at the same time, it felt shoved in for the sake of it and only there to satisfy fans of Burton’s wacky iconography. Other than that minor hiccup, the first chunk of the film was great. On par with Ed Wood, even. But around an hour into Big Eyes, the film lagged a bit before suffering a rather messy, albeit brief, tonal shift into almost slasher movie territory. Thankfully, after this sequence the film went back to the quality of the first half and built to a satisfying climax.

In conclusion, Big Eyes isn’t as good as Ed Wood. But on the whole, it reminds you what Burton is capable of without relying on weird shit and Johnny Depp. It’s not perfect but it’s a heck of a lot better than anything else he has put out in the last 20 years.

Big Eyes is an entertaining couple of hours and paints 3/5 onto the canvas.

★★★☆☆

Sam Love

Big Eyes at CeX

Australia India Ireland UK USA

Get your daily CeX at

Google+ Instagram Twitter YouTube Facebook

The Homesman [used]

I love westerns. Always have. Some of the golden oldies sit amongst my favourite films of all time, particularly The Good, The Bad & The Ugly and The Searchers. Like with most genres, TV has been leading the way recently, with the superb Hell on Wheels and Deadwood delivering excellent Western entertainment. But in recent years, the genre has struggled a bit in cinema and for every modern classic we’ve had; there’s been a rather poor attempt somewhere. So with that in mind, how does The Homesman fare?

Directed by Tommy Lee Jones and out now on Blu-Ray and DVD comes The Homesman. Based on the 1988 novel of the same name by Glendon Swarthout, it tells the tale of strong single woman Mary Bee Cuddy (Hilary Swank), and her quest to escort three mentally unstable women to somewhere they can get the help they so need in the Old West. Along the way she meets gunslinger George Briggs (Tommy Lee Jones), who agrees to help her on her journey. But the road is long and hard, and Mary learns that her task is a lot more treacherous than she anticipated.

The film starts out as something of a ‘feminist western’, with a strong focus on Hilary Swank’s Mary and the idea of her living ‘uncommonly alone’ and doing jobs that ‘men should do’. Usually women in westerns are either bad-ass gunslingers (Bad Girls) or damsels in distress. Mary Bee Cuddy is somewhere in between, which is rare for the genre. She’s strong enough to start her journey alone and she won’t take any shit from men telling her she’s ‘only a woman’, but she’s also not too strong that she won’t ask George Briggs to assist her on her adventure. It’s nice to have her as the hero, or heroine as it were, with Tommy Lee Jones playing second fiddle. Nice of him to do that, as he also directs the film. But regardless of him giving Swank the spotlight, he steals each scene he’s in whether he means to or not. That’s just the power of Tommy Lee Jones. He’s fantastic in this – easily the best he’s been for a long time; possibly even better than he was in Lincoln.

This is no bright, colourful, John Wayne-esque western. This film is harsh. More in the spirit of Clint Eastwood’s Unforgiven or the Coen Brothers’ True Grit (two examples of modern westerns done right), The Homesman does not shy away from the harsh realities of the time.  The cinematography is gorgeous, but still undeniably bleak. The film is stunningly well shot and brilliantly produced across the board, with a wonderful score, costume and production design – it really transported you back to the 1800s and makes you wonder how on Earth the human race managed to even survive such dark times. And Tommy Lee Jones’ direction was great for the first half…

However, around the halfway mark, I started having problems with The Homesman. Firstly, the three mad women who are the whole point of this journey felt largely ignored after around half an hour – their screaming and wailing which has been almost constant stopped, they were hardly spoken to or acknowledged, they were hardly even shown. When they were shown, they were just background. It felt a bit unusual they’d be so neglected in the film, after being such a large focus when they were introduced and started the story. Then a big twist happened which I shan’t spoil, but quite frankly it felt poorly executed and rather out of place. Whilst you could argue that there were a few hints towards it earlier in the film, it still felt a bit out of the blue. From that point on, the film truly changed, culminating in another jarring tonal shift that totally changes the sort of person one of the major characters is, and how we perceive them. Like the twist before it, it felt rushed and shoved in with little build-up and didn’t feel right. But hey, I haven’t read the original novel. Maybe that problem lies with the source material, although I do feel like it could’ve been handled better on screen.

On the whole, The Homesman was a harsh, gritty western – how the genre should be – but brought nothing new to the table at the end of the day. And whilst the first half was great; the second half disappointed. The film was stunningly well shot and brilliantly produced across the board, with a wonderful score, costume and production design. But the narrative misfires in the second half just let the film down and made for a rather underwhelming experience.

The Homesman gets 3/5 stars – one for each of the crazy ladies on the journey.

★★★☆☆

Sam Love

The Homesman at CeX

Australia India Ireland UK USA

Get your daily CeX at

Google+ Instagram Twitter YouTube Facebook

The Top 5 Playstation 3 Platformers [used]

With the life cycle of the Playstation 3 winding down after almost 10 years on the market, lets go back and check out some titles you may not have played when they were released. The beauty about discovering these classics is that you'll no doubt nab them at a pretty cheap price at your local CeX store. So, sit back and enjoy as I take you through the best platformers on the Playstation 3. Three of these games are technically re-releases from a previous generation. However, while some of you out there might think that's bit of a cop out, they were all out on the Playstation 3. So yeah, come at me. 

Lego Star Wars: The Complete Saga

First on our list is Lego Star Wars: The Complete Saga. Though there were plenty of Lego games prior to this, this is the game that kicked off the continued franchise/milking of all things Lego. From Lego games of Indiana Jones, Harry Potter, The Lord of the Rings and Jurassic Park, you name it and there's a Lego version if it. It's a bit like Rule 34, really. Lego Star Wars: The Complete Saga plays like every other Lego game, but with Star Wars characters, locations and music. You play through Episode 1-6, take control of basically every Star Wars character ever, get to swing around a lightsaber and even build your own Frankenstein-like Lego character. It's not a serious Star Wars game if you're looking for a perfect adaptation of the films, but it's a really fun game that can easily be enjoyed by all. Oh and you can totally wipe out a bunch of Ewoks. Enjoy.

Jet Set Radio

Originally released on the Dreamcast back in 2000, I bloody loved Jet Set Radio when it was first out. I worried that it might not work on the Playstation 3, what with it being over a decade old at this point. However, Blit Software's port released in 2013 was absolutely perfect. Taking a different approach than most re-releases, it added nothing new to the game, instead simply giving us the high-definition take on the much loved Dreamcast game. Unlike Sega's re-release of Sonic Adventure, Jet Set Radio has aged like a fine wine, and offers players slick roller-skating gameplay, an awesome cel-shaded city to zip around and one of the best, most badass soundtracks to have ever graced a game. The games focus is all about laying down tags across the city using your spray cans, all the while going up against various other street gangs. It doesn't really belong in a specific genre, but platforming is the one that sticks the most.

Prince of Persia Trilogy

Back in the day I loved the original Prince of Persia. Though I never played it on the Apple II on release, I played the Sega MegaDrive port in 1993. It was- and still is- one of the undisputed kings of the platformer genre. Though the series eventually evaporated, it came back with a bang with 2003's Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. It was an incredible game that relied on the same formula of the original, but also threw up a time reversing mechanic to great effect.  This was later followed by two games, Warrior Within and Two Thrones, and all three of these games has been remastered in high-definition in Prince of Persia Trilogy. It's an essential purchase for anyone who enjoys a good adventure game, and one of the most recent examples of a truly perfect platforming formula. Also worth nothing is that in 2010 Ubisoft added to the franchise with The Forgotten Sands, a game that took place between The Sands of Time and Warriors Within. Granted it's not on this remastered re-release, but it's a must if you enjoy this classic trilogy.

LittleBigPlanet 2

What can I say about LittleBigPlanet 2 that already hasn't been said? It's just such a perfect game, and one that bettered the original game in every way imaginable. Essentially, LittleBigPlanet 2 is all about creating levels and games, and sharing those creations with its large and ever growing community. You can just about create anything you want really, ranging from simple platforming games, obstacle courses, full fledged games that can even vary in genre and style and, most surprisingly, creatures and robots that you can rig up to move. Of course, there is a single-player campaign available, and though it is fun, it pales in comparison to the fun you'll have with the level creator. The sky is the limit with LittleBigPlanet 2, and it doesn't just make for one of the best Playstation 3 platformers out there, but also one of the best plaformers ever- period. Again, essential gaming for any gamer out there looking for one of the best experiences on the Playstation 3.

Ratchet & Clank Collection

Here's another re-release I never played when it was out originally. Developed by the same team that brought us the iconic Spyro the Dragon, Ratchet & Clank Collection contains the first three games of the series Playstation 2 games; Ratchet and Clank, Going Commando and Up Your Arsenal, and they're all gloriously upgraded in high-definition. Throughout my years of gaming on the Playstation 2 I guess I didn't know what I was missing, as this series, much like Spyro the Dragon, is genuinely one of the best examples of a platformer done right. From superb level design, excellently funny characters and a huge badass array of weapons to choose from, the series is all about fast action and awesome thrills. Ratchet and Clank Collection packs three awesome games into one singular release, helping some of us lazy gamers to catch up with the series. Now just six games left...

Get your daily CeX at

Google+ Instagram Twitter YouTube Facebook

State of Decay: Year One Survival Edition [used]

Since the TV series of The Walking Dead started zombies are everywhere, so much so that it already feels tired, overused and boring. I stopped watching The Walking Dead because of this. I forget which season I stopped at, but it was just after the point in which the Governor died. It was still a decent series, but the gigantic influx of zombie related films, games and TV series was just too much. Zombies just don't have their scare factor anymore, and have been relegated to the same place as the Xenomorph from Alien- a once feared creature that has been so used and abused that it's nothing more than a caricature of itself now. So when this latest game popped up on my radar, I can't say I was dying to jump into it. But in the hopes that zombies can be scary once again, I nonetheless got together some supplies, fashioned a pointy stick out of a table leg and ventured off into heart of the flesh eating horde.

Developed by Undead Labs and out now on Xbox One comes State of Decay: Year One Survival Edition, a game that, while not without a few hiccups and bugs, is an excellent stroll through a flesh eating, joy riding, limb decapitating apocalypse. This release is a current generation update of 2013's State of Decay, which was originally released on both Xbox 360 and PC. As expected, the main plot of State of Decay focuses on the sudden outbreak of a zombies. Taking the role of born leader Marcus Campbell, you must rally together other survivors and defend yourself against the ever growing brain eating hordes. Beyond the main game, State of Decay also includes the two previous main DLC packs that were released in 2013, Breakdown and Lifeline. Breakdown contains no story and merely focuses on survival, but Lifeline puts you in the role of the military, and aims to give you a whole new take on the outbreak and the need to contain it at all cost. However if you haven't played the previous version of State of Decay, you'd be advised to play the main game first, then Lifeline and then Breakdown, if you're looking for the best overview of the story.

State of Decay is a third-person open-world game, and one that, at its heart, places a massive focus on survival and interacting with other survivors. That said, on its surface it ticks all the boxes you'd want covered in a zombie game. There's a huge world open to you explore, a diverse array of vehicles to race around in, plenty of weapons for you to cut, slice or blast your way through enemies and, of course, legions of ghoulish zombies to kill. After all, that's the hook of any zombie game, and something the recent Dying Light got right as does State of Decay. The same goes for the array of missions available throughout the game. From the main game to its accompanying expansions, it all falls nicely in line with what you want from this type of game- wiping out zombies, rescuing survivors, scavenging for items, rinse and repeat. It's nothing new, but it ultimately delivers on giving the player a fun jaunt through the world of the undead.

But as I said before, State of Decay does manage to carve out some innovation for itself. The first of these innovations come in the fact that building and maintaining relationships with survivors is key, as without them it can often spell certain death. With each survivor found you'll need to build up their Trust meter, which in doing so will  obviously come in handy if they're the one covering you during an excursion for more supplies. Also, some survivors just don't get on with others, mainly due to their different personality traits. You'll need to end randomly generated conflicts, ultimately gaining Trust with one survivor, while the others Trust meter will go down. It's a great little aspect of the game that truly pulls State of Decay out of the typical zombie game formula, and into something new, interesting and fun to dick around with. Another nice addition to the game is its aspect of survival. This isn't a game where you'll go into a situation guns blazing, as in this world supplies are pretty low. So as you play State of Decay you'll need to keep an eye on bullet usage, medical supplies, injuries to both yourself and other survivors, and the overall morale of survivors. It all successfully makes State of Decay feel like a hardcore survival game, and with an absolutely fantastic and simple to use menu system in place, it's pretty easy to keep track of your progress without feeling overwhelmed by info.

Overall State of Decay: Year One Survival Edition despite having a few bugs, and not really looking very current-gen in terms of graphics, is a great, fun and exciting open-world zombie adventure. It blends innovation with the familiar quite nicely, and ultimately comes together to make a pretty great game.

State of Decay: Year One Survival Edition is full on brains and gets a 4/5.

★★★★☆

Denis Murphy

State of Decay: Year One Survival Edition at CeX

Australia India Ireland UK USA

Get your daily CeX at

Google+ Instagram Twitter YouTube Facebook

Dumb and Dumber To [used]

I'm a massive fan of the original Dumb and Dumber. I rank it up there with great comedies like Withnail and I and Blazing Saddles. From selling a blind kid their dead parakeet with its head taped onto its body, killing a dude with hot chilli's, getting confronting by a trucker in a toilet for “manly love” to falling for the same woman that obviously ends with one of them being shot, Jeff Daniels and Jim Carrey really helped create a comedy classic with Dumb and Dumber in 1994. Then it was followed up with a completely unwanted prequel, Dumb and Dumberer. Without the involvement of the Farrelly brothers it was of course an abomination. Now, just over 20 years since the release of the original, the team has gotten back together for a direct sequel. Being technically as unwanted as the prequel was, is this direct sequel a dumb idea?

Directed by the Farrelly brothers and out now on Blu-Ray and DVD comes Dumb and Dumber To, a film that has every reason to be utter crap, but ends up being genuinely hilarious. The story takes place 20 years after the original. We see Harry (Jeff Daniels) going to a psychiatric hospital to visit his friend, Lloyd (Jim Carrey). Apparently after the events of the first film, and his utterly doom/dead/failed romance with Mary Swanson, Lloyd lost his mind. Wheelchair bound and sporting a gigantic beard, all he can do is drool and go, “AAAUUUGHHHH!”, naturally. But being Lloyd he's only bullshitting Harry, and reveals that the last 20 years of being partially comatose, wheelchair bound with regularly Harry wiping his arse, has all being a prank. A 20 year prank, now that's dedication! Anyway, once Lloyd gets out Harry drops the bombshell that he needs a kidney transplant. After he suddenly finds out he's adopted from his parents (they're Chinese, by the way), Harry then discovers that he could be a father as Fraida Felcher, Harry's ex-girlfriend we only heard about in the first film, fell pregnant shortly after they were together. Like the first one Dumb and Dumber To is a road-trip film, but whereas the original focused on Lloyd's quest for love, this one is all about Harry's search for his potential daughter and her kidney.

First off, I wasn't exactly looking forward to this film. I really wasn't. There's no way it could be better than, or at least be as good as, Dumb and Dumber- and it isn't, but that's OK. The best part about Dumb and Dumber To is the fact that, even 20 years since playing these roles, both Daniels and Carrey easily become Harry and Lloyd again. From their mannerisms, attitude to how they perceive themselves and their complete inability to have a normal conversation with a regular person, it's a real joy to see them back on screen together. They insanely crude, make jokes about popping and farting and absolutely have no filter in place between their brain and their mouths. The rest of the cast pales in comparison to the fantastic chemistry these guys have together, but nonetheless do a fine job at being the dressing around the Harry and Lloyd delicious shit sandwich. 

The gags in Dumb and Dumber To come hard and fast, and I'd honestly say I laughed out loud at a good ¾ of them. However, my viewing experience was an odd one initially. Before re-watching it on Blu-Ray, I originally saw it in the cinema. I went with my girlfriend, and we were absolutely shocked to discover that the cinema was jam packed with kids. Like, tiny kids. They giggled at the farting and whatnot, but then came the scene in which Harry is imagining what's it like to be a father. In the scene he's there smoking a pipe and reading his paper, when his daughter walks up to him. She's crying and, well, lets just say that it's obvious that she's just had her first period. Without missing a beat Harry takes out a cork and gives it to her, pleased in the knowledge that he's a good dad. My girlfriend and I laughed amid pure silence, the kind of silence when a parent is clearly thinking, “Oh shit! What have I brought my child to see?! Little Timmy, NO!”. The lack of laughter only spurred me on. This went on through the film, and it made for one of the best/most awkward cinema experiences to date. Another one of those funny silences came about when, after Harry asks someone for a kidney, Lloyd says to the person something to the effect of, “unless you have full blown AIDS!”. I laughed and I heard parents groan. It was hilarious.

I don't want to ruin too much, but yeah, Dumb and Dumber To's humour is pretty much on par with the first one. It's juvenile and adolescent and has been attacked by critics, but what exactly were they expecting? It's a sequel to a film that contains a scene of a dude having explosive diarrhoea into a broken toilet and then dumping its contents out of a window. It's not high art, and though I went into Dumber and Dumber To expecting a bit of a shit film, I really enjoyed it. Yeah, it's not as good as the first one, and yeah, some jokes miss the mark, but like the first one it's a great blend of both humour and heart. I want a third film. Yeah, that's right, come at me.

Dumb and Dumber To is actually not shit (seriously) and gets a 4/5.

★★★★☆

Denis Murphy

Dumb and Dumber To at CeX

Australia India Ireland UK USA

Get your daily CeX at

Google+ Instagram Twitter YouTube Facebook

Spongebob Heropants [used]

When I was younger I loved the cartoon Rock's Modern Life which followed the life of well, Rocko, of course. Rocko was a wallaby, and the series was something I essentially grew up on. Featuring lovely animation and a fair share of adult humour (anyone remember the episode where Rocko worked at a sex line?), it still holds a place in my heart. Sadly though, Rocko's Modern Life only lasted 4 seasons, and ultimately met its demise in 1996. However, 3 years later Rocko's Modern Life creator struck gold once again with Spongebob Squarepants, the series that became a worldwide phenomenon. It has (so far) lasted 9 seasons, has spun off into 2 movies, a whole slew of comic books and, naturally, a good few videogames from the days of the Gameboy Color all the way up until now. Most of those games were crap, but with a few showing promise, I gave the latest Spongebob Squarepants game a try. How did go? Read on.

Developed by Behaviour Entertainment and out now from the Xbox 360, Playstation Vita and Nintendo 3DS comes Spongebob Heropants, a game that is literally the epitome of shovelware. It's by the development team who brought us classics like Victorious: Hollywood Arts Debut, High School Musical: Sing It! and Doritos Crash Course 2. So yeah, basically they're the shovelware masters, and seem to be focused on creating trash for a quick buck. Heropants fits perfectly alongside their previous efforts, but the real kicker here is the fact that even kids won't lap this shit up. It's terrible on all fronts!

The plot takes directly place after the second film, The SpongeBob Movie: Sponge Out of Water. Now I haven't seen an episode of Spongebob in awhile and neither have I seen the latest film, but I don't think I was missing out on anything plot-wise. The story here is pretty simple, and basically revolves around trouble brewing in Bikini Bottom after Spongebob dreams begin to become a reality. Utlising uperhero-like powers (apparently granted to them in the recent film), Spongebob, Patrick, Sandy, Squidward, Plankton and Mr. Krabs must work together in order to stop the demise of Bikini Bottom. It's a simple set-up, but one that could have kicked off some pretty interesting gameplay opportunities. Heropants doesn't just drop the ball there however- it drops it everywhere.

Heropants is a platform game, and one that not only looks like an original Playstation game, but also one that plays like one, and a very shitty one at that. We've seen this formula time and time again, and playing Heropants is like playing a relic from 1996. It's all here- soulless levels devoid of design and charm, extremely simplified objectives that even a small child will grow tired of, enemies that simply aim to walk directly into your attacks, puzzles that are one step away from “put the round bit in the round hole”, the age old and tired act of collecting coins, and boss battles that are just sloppily made. Needless to say, this is not a good game, but the forgiveable thing here is the fact that it's not even, you know- FUN! I wasn't looking for a masterpiece here, I was looking for a bit of fun with a yellow sponge that doesn't involve me sitting in a bath. Heropants isn't fun. It's just not. It's literally one of the most generic games I have ever played, and after playing 5 levels I was ready to give up.

The games big wild-card is the fact that you can not only play as 6 different characters, but you can also assume command of their superhero alter egos. You'd think that alone would open up room for the developers to really toy with the game mechanics, but no, you'll still double-jump to get to that platform, you'll still collect that key, you'll still kill that enemy with one hit and you'll still be hitting the jump button 400 times every level, only now you could be doing it while wearing a cape. Brilliant. If I wanted gameplay this simple I'd play Heavy Rain! Visually the game is dreadful too, with all versions of the game (PS Vita, 3DS, Xbox 360) looking incredibly bland, boring and sparse in terms of design and graphical flair. Granted there are always games out there made for the money, but holy f*ck, Heropants takes the cake- it's an abomination.

Spongebob Heropants is terrible. I'm one of those older gamers who can easily jump into a game intended for a young audience, but that wasn't the case with Heropants as it's honestly that bad. But don't get me wrong, even younger gamers won't put up with it either. They're smarter than we give them credit for, and with a whole slew of fun kids games on the market for a whole host of handhelds and consoles, Heropants should take a back-seat to all of them. Terrible.

Spongebob Heropants is just pants and get a 1/5.

★☆☆☆☆

Denis Murphy

Spongebob Heropants at CeX

Australia India Ireland UK USA

Get your daily CeX at

Google+ Instagram Twitter YouTube Facebook

Resident Evil: Revelations 2 [used]

After a seemingly endless amount of lackluster releases in the Resident Evil franchise, Capcom have turned a corner in this highly enjoyable episodic horror-fest. Whilst not quite reaching the heights set by the most popular games in the series, a large amount of effort has been made to give fans of the series what they want from a Resident Evil game, whilst also crafting an almost self contained story that will not alienate any newcomers to the franchise.

Out now on Playstation 4, Playstation 3, Xbox One, Xbox 360 and PC comes Resident Evil: Revelations 2. In a series first, Capcom have turned to delivering an ongoing plot, continuing over 4 episodes, with each one building in tension until the very end. The story follows two separate timelines each with its own pair of characters, starting with the familiar Claire Redfield and newcomer Moira Burton.  It doesn’t take long for the pair to discover things aren’t quite right. After being captured, they are pitted against an evil ‘overseer’, whose motives become clearer as the game unfolds. Resident Evil has never set the world alight with its plot nor its character dialogue; in fact for the most part it has always been pretty dreadful. It came as quite a pleasant surprise to find that the story told in Revelations was not at all convoluted, as it was in Resident Evil 6, nor the dialogue quite as cringworthy as in every other Resident Evil game. Characters seems a lot more self realized in this installment and even poke fun of some of the terrible one lines we once heard in previous installments. This is elevated by the gameplay, which is no longer like the Resident Evil of old. The scares are less, if existent at all, but to its credit, this is clearly not what Capcom were going for in this game. Alien isolation and The Evil Within will test your courage in different ways while Revelations 2 seems content in offering a faster paced more action orientated game while throwing in the occasional jump scare to tease the player. 

In the second timeline we see the return of Barry Burton who is joined by mysterious newcomer Natalia, a little girl who is already on the Island when Barry first arrives. It is possible to swap between each character of the pairings whenever you choose and while Natalia and Moira cannot fire any weapons, both carry their own useful abilities that serve more than just moving the story forward. For example, Natalia is able to sense enemies at a distance and through walls, making it easier to plan your approach accordingly. She is also able to spot hidden objects that Barry is unable to see. Likewise, loud mouth Moira carries a torch with her that can be used to blind enemies, giving Claire more opportunity to pick off foe without becoming overwhelmed. It is these mechanics that Capcom have clearly thought about, and while they don’t work to the degree I was hoping, for the large part it all comes together pretty well and certainly excels in some of the large set pieces that were clearly created to show these advancements in gameplay.  Likewise a lot of thought has been given to the leveling up system in the game and heightens the need to explore every corner and dark corridors. This further emphasizes the use of the secondary characters in the game that are able to see these items, while Claire and Barry take care of the monsters that plague the island.

This brings us on to the actual locations of the game itself. This is an area where I, personally would expect Capcom to have excelled, given the unique island premise.  Aside from a few locations mainly towards the end of the game, too much of your time is spent wondering around areas we’ve all seen before. Sewers and derelict building are plentiful and would almost be plausible had more effort actually been put into distinguishing these areas from one another, but unfortunately we’re treated to one grey and brown area after another.  The game lacks a gleam and crispness that you would expect with the newest generation of consoles, and while the game is also available on both the PS3 and Xbox 360, I cant help feel like the game would have been better suited to perhaps the PS Vita the 3DS.  Regrettably not much can be said about the enemies that you face, who are as unimaginative as the areas they are placed in.  This is slightly rectified by end of level bosses, but none of them are particularly memorable or stand out from other iconic bosses faced in other Resident Evil games.

Resident Evil: Revelations 2 is an enjoyable game and flourishes in its co-op mechanics and its arcade gameplay. It keeps the player motivated to see through to the end of its plain but satisfying story. It’s a shame then that the levels and enemies simply do not match these areas, as too much time is spent in boring and bland locations that you often have to repeat when the timeline switches between the two groups. Had Capcom spent a bit more time in developing the locations visited, we may have had a truly memorable Resident Evil game, something fans have been waiting a long time for.

Resident Evil: Revelations 2 gets a passable 3/5.

★★★☆☆

Gareth Thompson

Resident Evil: Revelations 2 at CeX

Australia India Ireland UK USA

Get your daily CeX at

Google+ Instagram Twitter YouTube Facebook

Best of 21th Century British Alt. Cinema [used]

Over recent years, Britain’s cinema output has been rather…predictable. The majority of said output has been generic Oscar-fodder biopics (12 Years A Slave, The Theory Of Everything, etc.) and feel-good films (anything with Richard Curtis attached). But every so often, amongst all of this, we put out some really fresh and original material that reminds us of the true power of film. Here’s my rundown of the best in alternative British cinema. 

LOCKE (2013)

Directed by Steven Knight

Tom Hardy…as a Welsh builder…driving. At its core, that’s what Locke is. Wrongly marketed as a fast, edge-of-your-seat thriller; Locke is slow, quiet drama. But my goodness, what an incredible film. Hardy delivers the performance of a lifetime here, single-handedly demanding our attention for the duration of the film. We don’t see ANYONE else onscreen, as the only other voices in the film come from Locke’s colleagues and family on the phone. I don’t want to ruin the plot of the film – like many stories, the twists and turns of Locke’s journey fall better unto a blind audience with no knowledge of what to expect. As such, I’d even suggest you avoid the misleading trailers. But, believe me when I say that Locke is extremely intelligent thought-provoking entertainment and a breath of fresh air for cinema. 

SIGHTSEERS (2012)

Directed by Ben Wheatley 

Britain’s always been good for dark comedy – I guess we have a twisted sense of humour sometimes. And what better example than Ben Wheatley’s wonderfully violent and bloody hilarious Sightseers, telling the story of Birmingham couple Chris & Tina’s caravan holiday across England. Sounds exciting, right? But as events conspire against them and the holiday goes downhill, one thing leads to another and the couple leave a trail of bodies behind them as they continue their trip. Alice Lowe (Garth Marenghi’s Darkplace) is great here as the not-so-bright Tina but the real star is relatively unknown Steve Oram as short-tempered Chris. With the spirit of classics Withnail & I and Mike Leigh’s Nuts in May throughout, Sightseers is a true gem. Pitch black humour, over-the-top violence and some great caravans; this is a sight worth seeing.

UNDER THE SKIN (2013)

Directed by Jonathan Glazer

Next up, Jonathan Glazer’s surreal and scary Under The Skin. Scarlett Johansson plays an unnamed ‘woman’ prowling the streets of Scotland, and that’s all I’m prepared to say. Once again, the plot is full of surprises that shouldn’t be spoiled so I’m keeping quiet! Scarlett Johansson is phenomenal in the role, showing a complete lack of emotion with great skill. Interestingly, a lot of the other ‘characters’ are played by non-actors – hidden cameras captured Johansson’s interactions with the people of the streets, while she remained in character. Now, the film demands a LOT of attention and an analytical mind for the strong surrealism and metaphorical shots. Those who give this attention to the film will be rewarded. And those who don’t? Well, Scarlett Johansson gets undressed in it if that floats your boat and lifts your luggage.

28 DAYS LATER (2002)

Directed by Danny Boyle

In 2002, Danny Boyle breathed new life into the ‘zombie’ genre with this modern classic. Although many, including myself, have been known to argue that ‘the infected’ in this film AREN’T zombies; I suppose the film is a ‘zombie film’ at its core. Shot on handheld digital cameras, the film delivers extremely gritty and eerie cinematography – there is a sequence in a deserted London that is still breath-taking today. For those who don’t know the plot – 28 Days Later tells the story of a young man who awakens from a coma to a post-apocalyptic world (*cough*The Walking Dead*cough*) and joins a group of survivors as they head toward a safe zone. Although it may sound predictable, rest assured the plot takes some surprising turns and, despite being made 13 years ago, still holds up well as a fresh and unique horror film.

SEXY BEAST (2000)

Directed by Jonathan Glazer

And finally; the delightfully profane Sexy Beast – also directed by Jonathan Glazer. Ex-gangster Gal (Ray Winstone) is trying to enjoy retirement in his sunny villa, but his old criminal friend Don (Ben Kingsley) has other ideas. When taken as a whole, the film is a run-of-the-mill British crime thriller that is not too dissimilar from Guy Ritchie’s classics Snatch and Lock, Stock & 2 Smoking Barrels. But there’s some very interesting surreal imagery scattered throughout when you least expect it, making it stand out as something of a gem of the genre. Making it stand out even more is a phenomenal Oscar-nominated performance from Kingsley, who yells some of the finest and vilest insults in cinema history like he was born to say them. A swear-filled modern crime classic and a nice alternative to Ritchie’s greats, Sexy Beast is worth a look. Maybe it isn’t one to watch with your dear old gran, though.

To conclude, this small offering of alternative cinema should open up a great pool of unusual, unique, dark, twisted, sometimes even surreal works to you. Britain isn’t all Paddington and Harry Potter, you know!

Sam Love

Get your daily CeX at

Google+ Instagram Twitter YouTube Facebook

St. Vincent [used]

One thing went through my mind during the first ten minutes of St. Vincent. This is something of a ‘passing of the torch’ film for Ghostbusters. Hear me out. With the upcoming remake/reboot/spawn-of-cinematic-satan being cast recently and my mortal enemy Melissa McCarthy announced as the ‘lead’, it felt unusual seeing her on-screen with a bitter old Bill Murray. After years of refusing to be involved with any continuation of Ghostbusters (not including his fantastic Zombieland cameo), Murray is reportedly not involved with this new one in any capacity. Watching St. Vincent, I felt like he was playing an old drunk retired Peter Venkman and his initial resentment of McCarthy’s character was because she was part of the new ghost busting team. Hey, if it’s the closest we’ll get to seeing him as Venkman again - I’ll take it. But before I could take this fun any further, I actually got absorbed by this cheesy and predictable little film. Much to my surprise, there is a lot to like in St. Vincent. I’ll try and keep how against the new Ghostbusters I am out of the review…no promises. 

Out now on Blu-Ray and DVD, St. Vincent tells the story of a young boy named Oliver whose parents have just divorced. Bullied at school and neglected by his busy parents, he finds an unlikely mentor and friend in the hard-drinking, chain-smoking, cantankerous Vincent MacKenna. As their friendship develops, Oliver learns more about Vincent and the true heart of gold he has hidden beneath his gruff exterior. I know, it’s a story we’ve seen before many times. The film doesn’t tread any new ground and there’s no major surprises in store. But you know what? I had a good time with it.

Who doesn’t love Bill Murray? Nominated for a Golden Globe for the performance, he’s on superb form and the best he’s been since Lost in Translation. While the film was originally written with Jack Nicholson in mind (who rejected it), Bill Murray feels like a perfect fit for the role. His sarcastic charm, arguably his trademark, is given a slightly meaner and bitterer undertone than he gave us with his characters of the 1980s. Whilst he primarily spends the first hour of the film being Bill Murray, he really shines in the moving second half. But without Murray, the film would fall flat on its face. The rest of the cast is rather mediocre. As stated at the beginning of this review, I’m no fan of the ridiculously typecast Melissa McCarthy. She seems to play a loud, obnoxious, vulgar woman in everything. Bridesmaids, The Heat and Tammy are but a few of her recent contributions to cinema that made me want to cry. But credit where credit is due, she is on decent form here, delivering a toned-down performance as a busy single mother. But knowing she actually can act when she tries just makes me even MORE angry at her, for wasting her talents on shite comedies. Chris O’Dowd seemed crow-barred in for the sake of it with nothing to give to the film except a couple of Chris O’Dowd-y scenes. And Naomi Watts plays a pregnant Russian prostitute…Um…I’ve nothing to say on that matter.

St. Vincent isn’t perfect. Theodore Melfi, who also directs his debut here, provides a script almost overflowing with clichés and predictability, and the film occasionally doesn’t know who its audience is. Some scenes are very mature and feel adult-aimed; others seem plucked right out of a Disney TV movie. Cheesy indie music fills several scenes of our mismatched friends becoming closer – so cheesy infact that viewers with a lactose intolerance should beware. But as the film went on, I let it go. And I’ll admit, I was genuinely moved by the second half. I could see each twist and turn coming a mile away but they were well executed for the most part – for an indie; when this film worked, it really worked.

So, to conclude, St. Vincent is ridiculously predictable and it’s nothing you haven’t seen before. But with films like this, who cares? It’s not trying to be anything other than what it is – a nice, light-hearted bit of easy watching for an evening in. Despite being nominated for a couple of Golden Globes, this isn’t a film that’s out to win awards or satisfy intellectual critics. If you want something like that, you’re in the wrong place. But sometimes we need a nice relaxing two hours in front of the TV without having to pay too much attention. St. Vincent is pretty good for that. Oh…Did I remember to mention I’m NOT on board with the new Ghostbusters?

St. Vincent says his prayers and earns a holy 3/5.

★★★☆☆

Sam Love

 

St. Vincent at CeX

Australia India Ireland UK USA

Get your daily CeX at

Google+ Instagram Twitter YouTube Facebook