Erik the Viking (1989)

 "Stay calm. This is not happening."

Oh dear. What went wrong here? We begin with a moderately well-scripted Pythonesque little scene about, er, rape (yes, quite), and then we seem to descend into quite the mess.

And yet... it's written and directed by Terry Jones, he of Monty Python fame, certainly someone with comic talent, many glimpses of which are seen here- it's a bad film, yes, and don't get me started on the dragon, but there are funny concepts and funny lines. Jones, of course, knows his mediaeval history, and there are references and in-jokes aplenty, many of which go over my head. There's a theme of belief that runs throughout- Harald the Missionary refuses to believe in the aspects of Norse myth that surround him, and cannot see them. The King of High Brazil and his subjects refuse to believe that their land is sinking beneath the waves. And Erik falsely believed that he is wearing an invisible cloak.

There are other little bits of cleverness. The Norse gods are played by children. And yet... overall, it falls flat. There's a clear plot, pretty much, but it all falls flat. This tries to be a Monty Python and the Holy Grail or a Time Bandits but... it isn't.

Then there's the performances. Jones himself is excellent, as is John Cleese as the delightfully evil Halfdan the Black. But so many of the cast fail to shine. And I suspect this offers us a clue: Terry Jones is a damn good writer and performer, and I don't think the script is at all the problem here... but he's just not a good enough director to helm a big blockbuster, at least on his own.

An interesting failure, then, and with nuggets to be found. But a failure nonetheless.

Green Lantern (2011)

"You haven't just been replaced by an alien or something?"

It's so frustrating. This film has stuff going for it. It could easily have not been rubbish with a few tweaks. But sadly that was not to be, and rubbish it is.

There’s so much potential here. Ryan Reynolds is genuinely great as Hal Jordan. The Guardians and hordes of alien Green Lanterns look awesome, particularly Mark Strong as Sinestro and a great cameo from Michael Clarke Duncan as Kilowog. All of that side of things is great; the whole thing looks fantastic, the fans get what they want. But no amount of polishing can disguise the fact that the script is a turd.

It tries to be epic, it really does. But it starts with a load of CGI aliens we don’t care about, for ages, and then moves to an extended F-35 dogfight. All visual spectacle, no heart, no real humour, no character, until the film is quite a long way in. And, while Ryan Reynolds is great at giving us a well-rounded Hal whom we can like, the film never really recovers from that. We aren’t given time to know and care about any of the characters until the plot starts in earnest. And there’s an awkward moment where Hal “wins” his dogfight by going to high altitude and the same stunt saves him at the end, which looks awkwardly derivative of Iron Man. And then there’s the onviousness of the plot- you know, man-child with aimless life and problems with responsibility is given great power and responsibility that he supposedly deserves; seems undeserving and gives up; is persuaded by a beautiful woman to try again and saves the world. This sort of formula isn’t unusual in Hollywood, but it’s seldom so blatant.

And it’s a real shame; the film is well shot and well made. But, well, it’s the script, stupid.

The War of the Worlds (2005)

"Trees are funny!"

I have a rule. Never do I blog a sequel before it's predecessor and never do I blog a remake- if I blog remakes at all; I have a big prejudice against them- before the original. Never mind the obvious stylistic nods to the 1953 George Pal film; this is at heart another version of the original novel. Indeed, we open and with Morgan Freeman speaking H.G. Wells' words, and the ending, from a time when Natural Selection was a relatively new thing, is retained in this updated film, set in modern America.

Steven Spielberg and War of the Worlds was always going to be a neat fit, and the film certainly looks great. Sadly, it stars Tom Cruise, but it's nice to see a suitably weird performance from a young Dakota  Fanning, one of my wife's favourite performers. 

The opening section, introducing Sal, his kids Robbie (studying French colonialism in Algeria, appropriately as the original novel was based on the idea of the British Empire feeling what it was like to be colonised) and young Rachel, goes on too long with the stuff about custody of the kids, something which could have been established much more economically; we want Martians!

The spectacle never ceases to amazed but, sadly, there's a reason why Tom Cruise was a has-been by 2005. Everything looks fantastic and there are some nice touches- the Martians ride the lightning to their machines- and the family themes sentiment is even, by Spielberg standards, not overdone. This is a good film, but could have been great with a different star.

Howard the Duck (1986)

"That's it. No more Mr. Nice Duck!"

It's rather odd that I haven't reviewed any superhero films so far, especially as I'm rather partial to them and there are so many of them around these days. V for Vendetta doesn't really count. It's about time that I reviewed a film starring one of the truly iconic Marvel or DC heroes. What could be a more obvious choice than Howard the Duck? (Thanks to Nick for lending it!)

Admittedly, there are reasons to go in with low expectations. The quotes on the DVD cover, which are naturally going to be the most complimentary ones they could possibly use, are all about the special effects and nothing else. The film is "presented by" George Lucas, and any film which is "presented by" someone more famous is invariably directed by someone quite obscure. Also, back in those distant days before the Star Wars prequels when George Lucas actually had a good reputation, this was generally considered one of the worst things he's put his name to.

Actually, though, I was very pleasantly surprised. It's not a particularly great film, fair enough, but it's a pleasantly nostalgic experience to watch it today. Yes, the plot is a bit plodding, the tone overly sentimental and the jokes forced, but without these things it just wouldn't be a 1980s Hollywood adaptation. And the film lays on the 1980s-ness so heavily that it's hard to accept that it's from the real 1980s and not a modern pastiche of the 1980s that thinks it was all Rubik's cubes, shoulder pads, Mr. T and Boy George. Let's do a list, shall we?

• Lea Thompson is in it, and she's one of the most 1980s people ever. Plus, her hair is looking particularly 1980s. Oh, and she's lead singer in a band that's just like the Bangles.

• We have one of those sorts of nightclubs that are only ever seen in movies from the 1980s, complete with an extraordinary array of hairstyles and probably half the world's supply of hairspray.

• Howard gets shoved all the way along a bar until he falls off the end, and then walks purposefully across it to get his revenge. This only ever happens in 1980s film and TV.

• There's some outrageous product placement for, of all things, Heinz mustard and tomato ketchup.

• There's an end of level baddie at the end as the Dark Overlord attains his true form, thus indicating that we've just entered the age of the video game, and yet this monster is a rather splendid, Ray Harryhausen style stop-motion thingy that moves just a little too quickly and awkwardly but is nevertheless the greatest thing ever. This combination could have happened in no other decade.

So, yay for all that. Of course, the duck costume looks rubbish. Of course, you have to raise an eyebrow at how easy it seems to be for a literal illegal alien to get a job. And yes, the film translates very little of Steve Gerber's absurd humour and sharpness to the screen, although Beverley does utter the phrase "trapped in a world you never made". But this is fun, nostalgic to the point where even the rubbish bits are nostalgically rubbish, and features Lea Thompson with not many clothes on. What more do you want? Although it has to be said that the film only has a 12 certificate and yet there are rather broad hints of what is technically bestiality…!