Reviews

This is a film that does some things very well. For example, as others have said, the portrayal of working class life in the North in the 1980s is very well done, and some of the acting is extremely good. Unfortunately, it is a far from flawless piece.

The whole relationship between the three main characters is puzzling. It starts out as a sex comedy, then degenerates into something more tragic, covering domestic abuse, jealousy, divorce and miscarriage. The characters' actions change them forever... or so you think. At the end, suddenly, the three get back together and everything's good.

Then there's the infuriating stereotyping. The Asian characters make for particularly uncomfortable viewing. And then there's Sue's dad. An unemployed Northern man, and therefore in common with all unemployed Northern men in 1980s drama, an abusive drunk. Not even a well done abusive drunk- he reels and sways like, well, a guy pretending to be drunk.

Overall, it just feels like yet another "it's grim up North" film in which character development is sacrificed in favour of just making things as unpleasant as possible. A distinctly average British film.

This is definitely a film where you have to think. This is a drawback if you're expecting a brainless zombie flick, as many of the reviewers on here clearly were. In response to some of the questions people have posed in previous reviews: - London is empty because it has been evacuated, save for those who have come under siege from the Infected. There are no cars about because frankly, if nobody was coming into work, seeing the sights or going clubbing, there would be nobody in Central London (hardly anyone actually lives around Westminster these days). - Why do the zombies only come out at night? Well, they don't (see Mailer). They prefer the night because they can catch people more easily. - Why the jet fighter? It might not have come from Britain. There are British soldiers elsewhere in the world. Anyway, the movie itself. This is one of the finest examples of the post-apocalyptic genre I have ever seen. The writer, Alex Garland, is not a sci-fi man, and this works in the film's favour. Like 'Night of the Living Dead', there's relatively little gore and the focus is on the actual people. Garland and Boyle give us a world of real people, with their good and bad qualities (SPOILER: An outstanding example of this is Jim's sadistic rampage towards the end). You really care for the characters and, thanks to the death of one sympathetic character early on, you really fear for them. The film plays with your expectations throughout (SPOILERS COMING). The animal rights protestors break into a research complex with good intentions and cause the outbreak. Our heroes make it to the safety of the military complex only to discover that the soldiers are basically planning to rape Selina and Hannah and execute anyone who stands in their way. The Infected help our heroes to escape. The world has apparently ended, but then Jim sees a jet fighter that suggests Britain is alone. To those who believe the ending of the film to be overly sweet, let's not forget that so far nothing has been as it seems- the airforce might be planning to come round and gun them down as a disease hazard. And then there's the images that will have particular resonance to anyone living in Britain- London deserted, the M1 motorway traffic-free and blockaded, Manchester burning. The images are both recognisable and unrecognisable. The camerawork and lighting gives the film a feel that is closer to 'Trainspotting' (another Boyle film) than 'Dawn of the Dead', which is more effective than any big-budget sci-fi blockbuster in conveying the chilling nature of the crisis. If you want lots of gore, put a camera in a bucket of blood for two hours. This film is more than a dumb slasher flick. There are three problems with the film (aside from nitpicks). Firstly, I find it difficult to believe that any disease could be so effective in 10-20 seconds. Secondly, some of the dialogue feels a bit clunky, relying too much on speeches to explain events. Thirdly, the image of Manchester burning is only there for a couple of seconds at the top of the screen, which feels like a cop-out after the bombshell of deserted London. Overall, I'd agree that this is a thinking person's horror movie. 9/10, with a point only deducted for the above points.

Blackadder has always been regarded as one of the best British sitcoms of all time. But in this final series it took on a satirical edge which led to a truly shocking finale.

The premise is that Captain Edmund Blackadder is a soldier on the Somme during the First World War. He is accompanied by the dimwitted Private S Baldrick and the posh twit Lieutenant George and hindered by the insane General Melchett and the snidey office boy Captain Darling. Blackadder is the only one who realises that he and his companions will almost certainly be killed if they remain and so hatches a number of escape plans which range from joining the Royal Flying Corps to feigning insanity.

It is arguable that tragedy makes for the best situation comedy, and it certainly does not come any more tragic than the First World War. With the incompetence of the generals, the ridiculous ideas of warfare and the woefully distorted propaganda, it is a wonder that such a sitcom had never been done before. A lot of the jokes (spoiler alerts to end of paragraph) seem to reflect our attitude to the war with hindsight, such as General Melchett's claim that the last thing the Germans will be expecting is for the British to use the same tactics they did seventeen times before. And there's Blackadder's assertion that escape will mean, "No more bombs, guns, shrapnel, whizzbangs or those bloody awful songs that have the word "whoops" in the title". There is also a fair share of slapstick, much of it befalling Baldrick. Never enough to lower the tone, but enough to be funny. Even the war stereotypes are dealt with, such as Rik Mayall's performance as the gloriously sexist pilot, Lord Flashheart ("Always treat your kite like you treat your woman. Get inside her five times a day and take her to heaven and back!").

What really shocks, though, is the ending. I won't give it away, but suffice it to say that it always comes near the top of British polls for the greatest moment in television history.

In a word? Sublime.

***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** First off, let me say that I'm not a huge fan of Star Trek: The Next Generation. I'll watch it, but I find the characters are just too straight-up and unrealistic- you know that they're always right and they always win. Which was partly why this made such an excellent film. The character of Captain Picard was properly explored (is he fighting for what is right, or merely what he perceives as right?), as was that of the android Data (far removed from the comic relief role he had in the early years of the television series).

The storyline is this: the Borg, cybernetic hive organisms who specialise in assimilating entire species and turning them into single-minded drones, have travelled back in time to prevent humanity from making first contact with alien life and plan to take over the Earth. Picard, who has "previous experience" of the Borg, goes against his orders and follows them back to the twenty-first century. There, humanity is recovering from the Third World War and Zephram Cochran is about to make the first ever flight in a faster-than-light vessel. The crew of the Enterprise have to fight the Borg off and still ensure that the flight goes ahead in accordance with history.

The Borg are excellent villains in this film. Virtually immune to almost every weapon, silent and ruthless, they are a genuinely menacing threat. In contrast to the smooth and clean Enterprise crew, they are dark and dirty. Alice Krige as the Borg Queen exudes a seductive cruelty.

Zephram Cochran is a particularly interesting component- someone who deflates the pretensions of the twenty-fourth century and also raises the question of what our heroes were really like- were they really as great as we think they were?

All in all, this is a movie which manages to combine action, intelligent concepts and good characterisation. This is rare enough in cinema; to see it in the eighth entry of a movie franchise based upon a TV series is a revelation. You won't like it if you hate science fiction, but you'll like it even if you aren't a Trek fan.

Best line? "Assimilate this!" A few complaints: (spoiler alert)

1. If the Borg are so fearsome, how come they're such bad shots?

2. Lieutenant Hawk. Here is the regular crew, and here is Lieutenant Hawk, whom we have never seen before. Which one do you think gets assimilated?

3. All the Borg drones die when the Queen is killed- now, that can't make much evolutionary sense.

This film is an example of a genre that is all too rare these days: science fiction that is based upon intellectual questioning rather than flashy special effects. The film begins with our hero, John Murdoch, waking up in his apartment with a dead body and no memories of who he is or how he got there. A broken syringe adds a further strange element to this scene. I have heard three major complaints about this film: the special effects are unrealistic, the voiceover at the beginning gives too much away and the ending is pretty lame. I would disagree with all these comments.

The special effects are, it has to be said, unrealistic. But then, so were the ones in 'Moulin Rouge'. The whole film is shot in a stylised and atmospheric manner which is wholly in keeping with the story. To criticise the film for this, you would also have to criticise 'Batman', 'The Crow' and 'Moulin Rouge' for the same crime. As for the voiceover at the beginning, this is perhaps a little redundant. But it is not a spoiler, as some people have suggested. Watching the film will show that, in fact, there is a catch to it. As for the ending, it may appear to be something of an anticlimax, but after the revelations of the events of the film it makes perfect sense. The characters are superb- we have the doctor who claims to have betrayed his race (who is a good guy, though acting in the manner of the mad scientist), the hard-bitten police inspector (who seems to veer between hero and villain) and the hero's wife who finds herself washed away on the tide of events beyond her understanding. The story is excellent with some genuinely unexpected plot twists and, for once, it actually asks serious questions about the nature of humanity- to what extent is a human made up if his or her memories? Only one complaint from me (spoiler alert). I thought the old sci-fi cliche of the Maniac-Who-Turns-Out-To-Be-Right was used unnecessarily- he supplies little information that we did not already know and, since it's science fiction, it's a fair bet that he is speaking the truth whether you know the story or not. Maybe someone should make a sci-fi movie where the maniac is just a maniac.