Reviews

At one point James Franco's character says loudly "it's really offensive". It's not. It's dumb and devoid of purpose.

To be offensive you need to have something more than two stoners trying and failing to do 'a funny' on film. Everything is done with a cringe worthy wink and nod, and you can almost hear the deluded giggling that must have happened in the writers room as they marvelled over their own limp creation.

Seth Rogen plays the same character he has played in every film he's ever been in. Wide eyed sleepy ganja bear.Franco just resembles a rabid child with ADHD looking for a ritalin fix.

Tonally it seems to be aiming towards Team America but misses by miles. There is a small film called 'Interview' with Steve Buscemi and Sienna Miller which is so much better. The Human Centipede is better. The only redeeming feature was for about 30seconds they played a bit of a White Stripes song ... that was quite good.

No one should take offence at this film, it should be pitied and ignored and hopefully it'll go away. I laughed more when my doctor pushed a flexible telescope up my cock than I did while watching 'The Interview'.

After using the 'Timehop' app my Facebook status after seeing Human Centipede a while ago came up, and I thought it might be useful to capture the feelings one might be likely to have after seeing it.

"I just saw Human Centipede for the first time and I … I just … yeahh … I don't know … don't know what to - It was hateful, but I don't think I hated it. I haven't seen anything quite like it before, and yet at times it reminded me of other things, particularly the tone of Spring Breakers, but where that was tongue in cheek this was tongue in arse. It wasn't good, but it wasn't the worst thing I've ever seen (Mel Gibson's The Beaver) and yeah it just happened for an hour and a half and then it stopped … Need to watch something nice now, maybe some kittens frolicking, and stand out in the rain for a bit, and never go to the bathroom ever again. #enigma"

I have been assured that 'The Hunger Games' books are better than the films. After seeing an endorsement from Stephanie Meyer saying 'The Hunger Games is AMAZING!' and watching both of the films I can't say I'm convinced that it was ever a story worth telling, let alone filming.

Catching Fire is long, narcissistic, dumb, nonsensical, slow, and many other things.

American born actress Elizabeth Banks ends up sounding like an English person trying and failing to do an American accent rather than someone who naturally has one?

Lenny Kravitz as Katniss' fashion designer was the strangest piece of casting since Rihanna in Battleship. He gets beaten up just as Katniss is ascending into the game room, and like almost every other event in the movie you don't really find out why it happened. It is just an excuse to cue in Jennifer Lawrence for some more jaw out, mouth open, gurning at the camera. She looks like a bland office intern, rather than a seventeen year old firecracker.

There are many other unanswered questions. Why is the magical wire allowed into the game? Why is the game trying to kill the participants when the original point was for the Capitol to enjoy watching them kill each other? Why bother being sentimental by putting an elderly lady into the game to only then have her wander off into some poisonous mist and not be spoken about again? Why must Katniss stay alive to save her boring family? Are the answers in the book? Probably. Will finding the answers make the film any better? Probably not.

It's the kind of heavy handed allegory that eventually makes you feel like anyone portrayed as a victim in it probably deserves the fate they are dealt. The only saving graces are Philip Seymour Hoffman who rises miles above anyone around him, one scene that resembles Hitchcock's 'The Birds' and another that resembles 'Black Swan' which serve as reminders of bigger and better films that never felt the need to resort to the hero and heroine telling each other what their favourite colours are.

Green and orange apparently.