More exciting than The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian continues the movie franchise based on C.S. Lewis' classic fantasy books. The movie picks up where the first left off... sort of. It's been a year since the Pevensie children--Peter (William Moseley), Susan (Anna Popplewell), Edmund (Skandar Keynes), and Lucy (Georgie Henley)--returned to England from Narnia, and they've just about resigned themselves to living their ordinary lives. But just like that, they're once again transported to a fantastical land, but one with a long-abandoned castle. It turns out that they are in Narnia again--and they themselves lived in that castle, but hundreds of years ago in Narnia time. They've been summoned back to help Prince Caspian (Stardust's Ben Barnes, resembling a young, cultured Keanu Reeves), the rightful heir to the throne who's become the target of his power-hungry uncle, King Miraz (Sergio Castellitto). And he's not the only one threatened: Miraz's people, the Telmarines, have pushed all the Narnians--the talking animals, the centaurs and other beasts, the walking trees--to the brink of extinction. Despite some alpha-male bickering, Peter and Caspian agree to fight Miraz alongside the remaining Narnians, including the dwarf Trumpkin (Peter Dinklage) and the swashbuckling mouse Reepicheep (voiced by Eddie Izzard). (Also appearing is Warwick Davis, who was in Willow and the 1989 BBC version of Prince Caspian.) But of course they most of all miss the noble lion, Aslan, who would have never let this happen to Narnia if he hadn't disappeared.

Prince Caspian is epic, evoking memories of Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings films. (Some of the battle elements may seem too familiar, but they were in Lewis's book.) And it's appropriate for kids (Reepicheep could have come out of a Shrek movie), though the tone is dark and there is a lot of death, albeit bloodless. After two successful films, Disney and Walden Media's franchise has proved successful enough that many of the characters are scheduled to return in The Voyage of the Dawn Treader. --David Horiuchi, Amazon.com

Saved by the mice and Lucy, 19 Nov 2008
The first thing that I have to say is that this isn't a great movie,not by a long way.It's too long,boring in parts and I had the same problem that I had with the first film in the series.Namely,three of the four children are a charmless bunch bereft of any personality.Apart from Georgie Henley that is who plays Lucy.She gave the best performance in the first film and is also the best thing about 'Prince Caspian'.As the Prince,Ben Barnes certainly looks the part but his accent varies between Spanish,French and Scottish.I also felt that this film was aimed directly at the children's market.

So why have I given it a reasonable three stars?I was toying with giving it two but in fairness it does look great and some of the CGI is very well done.I especially liked the water giant near the end.If I could give this two and a half stars I would but because of Miss Henley,the water giant and the mice(cute) I will give it a maybe too generous three.This is not a movie that I would watch again but children will probably love it.

Good sequel, 19 Nov 2008
I was looking forward to this movie, this was one of the iconic books from my childhood. I have to say that I very much enjoyed it, however maybe not as much as the first film. The filming was excellent, with beautiful backdrops and surroundings, very good CGI and good acting. It's been so long since I read the books however, that I can't remember if this was faithful to the original though... will have to re-read them I think! The things that let it down for me were the comedy elements, the mouse-knights and alike fitted very much with a Disney film, however I thought that they were not necessary, and detracted from the story. Word of warning though, not sure if I would let very small children see it though as there is quite a lot of violent deaths albeit no blood.

Prince Caspian, 18 Nov 2008
This has to be one of the most disappointing films I've ever seen. The books enthralled me as a child and, as an adult I have read them to children in my family who were equally delighted by them, so the liberties taken with the story were a total disaster for us.

It starts off well enough, but then the film-makers apparently think they have to add plot twists with a very silly a subtext where Caspian & Peter are so jealous of eachother that they almost bring about the downfall of Narnia by it.

Yet again Hollywood has tinkered with the original and wonderful story, and lost the magic on the way, and because the special effects are fantastic it's a real let down. This is not a film I'll be buying or would want to own under any circumstances. Don't waste your money.

what happened to..., 16 Nov 2008
I did enjoy the film - and thought it stood up well against The Lion et al, but what happened to 'a Horse and his boy'? (The 3 chronicle) also will we go back to the Magician's Nephew at a later stage?


Excellent family entertainment, 13 Nov 2008
I'll keep it short and sweet - great performances, great effects, true to th ebook while still fleshing out the story and characters a little more. Fantastically fun action adventure that's suitable for all the family without patronising kids or sanitising the darker elements of the story. Parents should not object to being forced to sit through it with the kids!

You know you're going to get a different kind of superhero when you cast Robert Downey Jr. in the lead role. And Iron Man is different, in welcome ways. Cleverly updated from Marvel Comics' longstanding series, Iron Man puts billionaire industrialist Tony Stark (that's Downey) in the path of some Middle Eastern terrorists; in a brilliantly paced section, Stark invents an indestructible suit that allows him to escape. If the rest of the movie never quite hits that precise rhythm again, it nevertheless offers plenty of pleasure, as the renewed Stark swears off his past as a weapons manufacturer, develops his new Iron Man suit, and puzzles both his business partner (Jeff Bridges in great form) and executive assistant (Gwyneth Paltrow). Director Jon Favreau geeks out in fun ways with the hardware, but never lets it overpower the movie, and there's always a goofy one-liner or a slapstick pratfall around to break the tension. As for Downey, he doesn't get to jitterbug around too much in his improv way, but he brings enough of his unpredictable personality to keep the thing fresh. And listen up, hardcore Marvel mavens: even if you know the Stan Lee cameo is coming, you won't be able to guess it until it's on the screen. It all builds to a splendid final scene, with a concluding line delivery by Downey that just feels absolutely right. --Robert Horton

Saved by the mice and Lucy, 19 Nov 2008
The first thing that I have to say is that this isn't a great movie,not by a long way.It's too long,boring in parts and I had the same problem that I had with the first film in the series.Namely,three of the four children are a charmless bunch bereft of any personality.Apart from Georgie Henley that is who plays Lucy.She gave the best performance in the first film and is also the best thing about 'Prince Caspian'.As the Prince,Ben Barnes certainly looks the part but his accent varies between Spanish,French and Scottish.I also felt that this film was aimed directly at the children's market.

So why have I given it a reasonable three stars?I was toying with giving it two but in fairness it does look great and some of the CGI is very well done.I especially liked the water giant near the end.If I could give this two and a half stars I would but because of Miss Henley,the water giant and the mice(cute) I will give it a maybe too generous three.This is not a movie that I would watch again but children will probably love it.

Good sequel, 19 Nov 2008
I was looking forward to this movie, this was one of the iconic books from my childhood. I have to say that I very much enjoyed it, however maybe not as much as the first film. The filming was excellent, with beautiful backdrops and surroundings, very good CGI and good acting. It's been so long since I read the books however, that I can't remember if this was faithful to the original though... will have to re-read them I think! The things that let it down for me were the comedy elements, the mouse-knights and alike fitted very much with a Disney film, however I thought that they were not necessary, and detracted from the story. Word of warning though, not sure if I would let very small children see it though as there is quite a lot of violent deaths albeit no blood.

Prince Caspian, 18 Nov 2008
This has to be one of the most disappointing films I've ever seen. The books enthralled me as a child and, as an adult I have read them to children in my family who were equally delighted by them, so the liberties taken with the story were a total disaster for us.

It starts off well enough, but then the film-makers apparently think they have to add plot twists with a very silly a subtext where Caspian & Peter are so jealous of eachother that they almost bring about the downfall of Narnia by it.

Yet again Hollywood has tinkered with the original and wonderful story, and lost the magic on the way, and because the special effects are fantastic it's a real let down. This is not a film I'll be buying or would want to own under any circumstances. Don't waste your money.

what happened to..., 16 Nov 2008
I did enjoy the film - and thought it stood up well against The Lion et al, but what happened to 'a Horse and his boy'? (The 3 chronicle) also will we go back to the Magician's Nephew at a later stage?


Excellent family entertainment, 13 Nov 2008
I'll keep it short and sweet - great performances, great effects, true to th ebook while still fleshing out the story and characters a little more. Fantastically fun action adventure that's suitable for all the family without patronising kids or sanitising the darker elements of the story. Parents should not object to being forced to sit through it with the kids!

Briliant, 08 Nov 2008
Enjoyable, mindless, and very funny. Downey Jr. was surprisingly brilliant. Little plot or real substance but who cares, just fun hokum and the best film I've seen for a while. Recommended.

Even if you're not a Comic Book fan this is great, 07 Nov 2008
A really good film from start to finish. Even if you are not a comic book fan this is a great film.

Don't take it too seriously, just watch it for what it is.

Very enjoyable blockbuster, good stuff, 04 Nov 2008
This is great entertainment and I really enjoyed watching it. This is real fun and I'd recommend it.

Not a fan, but my 9 year old is! , 29 Oct 2008
My then 8 year old dragged me along to see this. I'm a cynical, long-in-the-tooth 42 year old who doesn't have time to watch adverts much less a super hero movie. So yes, I found the story implausible and far-fetched, and would have fallen asleep if the music wasn't so loud......but my son LOVED it - and is now hassling me for the DVD which will be in his Xmas stocking.

So, if you're buying for a pre-teen they'll love it, but stick in the mud accountants like me won't!

A good film or a god mix of special effects and computer graphics ?, 13 Oct 2008
Iron Man is a b-level superhero and this film is in line with the character. Very amazing scenes of GC and special effects, but the plot is poor (if non ridicolous) the cast is good, with Downey perfect for the role, but Paltrow and Bridges almost wasted. If you like superhero movies is better than Hulk (2003 ed) and F4 (one or two). But the film lacks of the complexity of Spiderman trilogy or the last Batmans. A good film for teen ??

Hancock turns the standard superhero movie inside-out. The titular character, played by Will Smith, can fly, has super strength and is invulnerable. But he's also a sloppy, arrogant alcoholic who causes millions of dollars in property damage whenever he bothers to fight crime. When he saves the life of a PR agent named Ray (Jason Bateman, Arrested Development), Ray decides to improve Hancock's image--starting by having Hancock surrender himself to the authorities and go to prison for his lawless behaviour. The idea is that once he's in prison, the crime rate will go up and people will start realising Hancock might be of value after all. This is only the first act of Hancock though--from there, the film takes several surprising turns that shouldn't be revealed. Hancock isn't a great movie, but it is an extremely entertaining one. The script, which holds together far better than most superhero movies, has a propulsive plot, good dialogue, some compassion for its characters, and even an actual idea or two. The spectacular action at least gestures towards obeying the laws of physics, which actually makes the special effects more vivid. The three leads (Smith, Bateman, and Charlize Theron as Ray's wife, Mary) deftly balance the movie's mixture of comedy, action, and drama. All in all, a smart subversive twist on a genre that all too often takes itself all too seriously. --Bret Fetzer

Saved by the mice and Lucy, 19 Nov 2008
The first thing that I have to say is that this isn't a great movie,not by a long way.It's too long,boring in parts and I had the same problem that I had with the first film in the series.Namely,three of the four children are a charmless bunch bereft of any personality.Apart from Georgie Henley that is who plays Lucy.She gave the best performance in the first film and is also the best thing about 'Prince Caspian'.As the Prince,Ben Barnes certainly looks the part but his accent varies between Spanish,French and Scottish.I also felt that this film was aimed directly at the children's market.

So why have I given it a reasonable three stars?I was toying with giving it two but in fairness it does look great and some of the CGI is very well done.I especially liked the water giant near the end.If I could give this two and a half stars I would but because of Miss Henley,the water giant and the mice(cute) I will give it a maybe too generous three.This is not a movie that I would watch again but children will probably love it.

Good sequel, 19 Nov 2008
I was looking forward to this movie, this was one of the iconic books from my childhood. I have to say that I very much enjoyed it, however maybe not as much as the first film. The filming was excellent, with beautiful backdrops and surroundings, very good CGI and good acting. It's been so long since I read the books however, that I can't remember if this was faithful to the original though... will have to re-read them I think! The things that let it down for me were the comedy elements, the mouse-knights and alike fitted very much with a Disney film, however I thought that they were not necessary, and detracted from the story. Word of warning though, not sure if I would let very small children see it though as there is quite a lot of violent deaths albeit no blood.

Prince Caspian, 18 Nov 2008
This has to be one of the most disappointing films I've ever seen. The books enthralled me as a child and, as an adult I have read them to children in my family who were equally delighted by them, so the liberties taken with the story were a total disaster for us.

It starts off well enough, but then the film-makers apparently think they have to add plot twists with a very silly a subtext where Caspian & Peter are so jealous of eachother that they almost bring about the downfall of Narnia by it.

Yet again Hollywood has tinkered with the original and wonderful story, and lost the magic on the way, and because the special effects are fantastic it's a real let down. This is not a film I'll be buying or would want to own under any circumstances. Don't waste your money.

what happened to..., 16 Nov 2008
I did enjoy the film - and thought it stood up well against The Lion et al, but what happened to 'a Horse and his boy'? (The 3 chronicle) also will we go back to the Magician's Nephew at a later stage?


Excellent family entertainment, 13 Nov 2008
I'll keep it short and sweet - great performances, great effects, true to th ebook while still fleshing out the story and characters a little more. Fantastically fun action adventure that's suitable for all the family without patronising kids or sanitising the darker elements of the story. Parents should not object to being forced to sit through it with the kids!

Briliant, 08 Nov 2008
Enjoyable, mindless, and very funny. Downey Jr. was surprisingly brilliant. Little plot or real substance but who cares, just fun hokum and the best film I've seen for a while. Recommended.

Even if you're not a Comic Book fan this is great, 07 Nov 2008
A really good film from start to finish. Even if you are not a comic book fan this is a great film.

Don't take it too seriously, just watch it for what it is.

Very enjoyable blockbuster, good stuff, 04 Nov 2008
This is great entertainment and I really enjoyed watching it. This is real fun and I'd recommend it.

Not a fan, but my 9 year old is! , 29 Oct 2008
My then 8 year old dragged me along to see this. I'm a cynical, long-in-the-tooth 42 year old who doesn't have time to watch adverts much less a super hero movie. So yes, I found the story implausible and far-fetched, and would have fallen asleep if the music wasn't so loud......but my son LOVED it - and is now hassling me for the DVD which will be in his Xmas stocking.

So, if you're buying for a pre-teen they'll love it, but stick in the mud accountants like me won't!

A good film or a god mix of special effects and computer graphics ?, 13 Oct 2008
Iron Man is a b-level superhero and this film is in line with the character. Very amazing scenes of GC and special effects, but the plot is poor (if non ridicolous) the cast is good, with Downey perfect for the role, but Paltrow and Bridges almost wasted. If you like superhero movies is better than Hulk (2003 ed) and F4 (one or two). But the film lacks of the complexity of Spiderman trilogy or the last Batmans. A good film for teen ??

RIP OFF !!!, 19 Nov 2008
ok bascily hollywoods makeing all these ironman,the hulk,hellboy etc etc comic book hero films


so they go i no lets get a famous actor to make up a complete random pointless hero and make are own super hero


so they created Hancock its just so dumb

they just wanted some limelight in the time of the super hero films

hancock sucks

ether that or they wanted a black super hero

if they did want a black super hero they should of made another spawn film

Not your standard superhero movie, 18 Nov 2008
I had no idea what to expect from this movie, but the trailers looked interesting. This movie is an interesting angle, making a superhero with all too human floors. What you should not expect is a Marvel or DC comics movie, probably much more of an all American feelgood movie. Will Smith gives a good performance as our misguided superhero with a good supporting cast and good effects, makes for a nice easy watching movie.

Starts well, goes downhill fast , 04 Nov 2008
This has some funny bits & good scenes near the start but it starts tripping over itself and messing everything up. Not recommended.

It's average, nothing more or less, 05 Oct 2008
One star and five star reviews for this film should be laughed at, as you will many great moments in the first half of this film.

At some point the laughs had to run out, there is only so much script in an alcoholic super hero.

When that happens and the plot twist occurs, which many will see coming, you've just got to enjoy looking at the tunning Charlize Theron and patiently await the end of the film.

Good rather than excellent, 21 Sep 2008
Film in which Will Smith plays John Hancock, a Los Angeles based superhero who despite his using his super powers to fight crime is despised by the public because he is a drunkard and clumsy in the use of his powers, often causing millions of pounds of damage to public and private property in his efforts to bring criminals to justice. One day Hancock saves the life of PR executive with a heart Ray Embrey (played by Jason Bateman), and to show his gratitude Ray decides to take Hancock under his wing to help him to rectify his public image problem. With Ray's help Hancock starts learning how a superhero should behave - and look - and how to endear himself to the public. Through his relationship with Ray Hancock gets to meet Ray's family - wife Mary (played by Charlize Theron) and his young son - and when Ray and his family query Hancock as to his origins Hancock reveals something that no one until that point knew: he has no memory of his past. But everything will change for Hancock when it transpires that Mary has a secret of her own and Hancock gets involved in a love triangle with her and Ray. And when some dangerous criminals that Hancock helped put behind bars come after him looking for revenge when Hancock is at his most uninvincible will Hancock survive?

Comments: I enjoyed this film. Will Smith plays the role of superhero Hancock well, both as the interesting uncouth and unpleasant drunk he is at first and the more polished - and familiar - type of superhero he becomes after his makeover by Jason Bateman's PR exec. The special effects are first-rate, Bateman makes for excellent support and Charlize Theron is suitably mysterious as the wife with a secret. There are also a number of moments of wry humour (although the film is not a comedy). Personally I never get tired of seeing superheroes fighting against crime or the forces of evil - as long as it's done well, which it is in this film. However although the enjoyment factor in this film is high Hancock's back story is not developed enough or given enough detail in the film, weakening the end product somewhat. Smith and Theron's charisma and star power carry the film but the lack of sufficient information about the character Hancock's origins means that this film is good rather than excellent.

As the impresario behind gravity-defying Russian blockbuster Night Watch, it's inevitable that Hollywood would come calling for Timur Bekmambetov. With a studio budget and an international cast, including two Oscar winners, Timur cooks up a Hong Kong-styled actioner bursting with fast cars and big guns. Our unlikely hero is mild-mannered Chicago accountant Wesley Gibson (Atonement's James McAvoy), whose father died when he was a tot. Wesley never learned to stand up for himself, and his girlfriend, boss, and best buddy all take advantage until the seductive Fox (Angelina Jolie) rescues him from a sharpshooter named Cross (The Pianist's Thomas Kretschmann). After which, she whisks him away to a mansion on the edge of town to meet the other members of the Fraternity, where leader Sloan (Morgan Freeman) informs Wesley that Cross, a rogue agent, executed his father. Sloan believes Wesley has the goods to take him out, so he undergoes the Fraternity's brutal training regimen (Marc Warren and Common dish up some of the abuse). When he's ready, Sloan sends him out to fulfill his duty, but matters become complicated when Wesley finds out someone isn't telling the truth, leading our former milquetoast to exact an elaborate revenge. For those who've been following McAvoy's career to date, Wanted will surely come as a surprise. In adapting Mark Millar's comic series, Timur offers buckets of blood and a smidgen of depth, but fans of The Matrix and Mr. and Mrs. Smith will want to give this one a look. --Kathleen C. Fennessy

Saved by the mice and Lucy, 19 Nov 2008
The first thing that I have to say is that this isn't a great movie,not by a long way.It's too long,boring in parts and I had the same problem that I had with the first film in the series.Namely,three of the four children are a charmless bunch bereft of any personality.Apart from Georgie Henley that is who plays Lucy.She gave the best performance in the first film and is also the best thing about 'Prince Caspian'.As the Prince,Ben Barnes certainly looks the part but his accent varies between Spanish,French and Scottish.I also felt that this film was aimed directly at the children's market.

So why have I given it a reasonable three stars?I was toying with giving it two but in fairness it does look great and some of the CGI is very well done.I especially liked the water giant near the end.If I could give this two and a half stars I would but because of Miss Henley,the water giant and the mice(cute) I will give it a maybe too generous three.This is not a movie that I would watch again but children will probably love it.

Good sequel, 19 Nov 2008
I was looking forward to this movie, this was one of the iconic books from my childhood. I have to say that I very much enjoyed it, however maybe not as much as the first film. The filming was excellent, with beautiful backdrops and surroundings, very good CGI and good acting. It's been so long since I read the books however, that I can't remember if this was faithful to the original though... will have to re-read them I think! The things that let it down for me were the comedy elements, the mouse-knights and alike fitted very much with a Disney film, however I thought that they were not necessary, and detracted from the story. Word of warning though, not sure if I would let very small children see it though as there is quite a lot of violent deaths albeit no blood.

Prince Caspian, 18 Nov 2008
This has to be one of the most disappointing films I've ever seen. The books enthralled me as a child and, as an adult I have read them to children in my family who were equally delighted by them, so the liberties taken with the story were a total disaster for us.

It starts off well enough, but then the film-makers apparently think they have to add plot twists with a very silly a subtext where Caspian & Peter are so jealous of eachother that they almost bring about the downfall of Narnia by it.

Yet again Hollywood has tinkered with the original and wonderful story, and lost the magic on the way, and because the special effects are fantastic it's a real let down. This is not a film I'll be buying or would want to own under any circumstances. Don't waste your money.

what happened to..., 16 Nov 2008
I did enjoy the film - and thought it stood up well against The Lion et al, but what happened to 'a Horse and his boy'? (The 3 chronicle) also will we go back to the Magician's Nephew at a later stage?


Excellent family entertainment, 13 Nov 2008
I'll keep it short and sweet - great performances, great effects, true to th ebook while still fleshing out the story and characters a little more. Fantastically fun action adventure that's suitable for all the family without patronising kids or sanitising the darker elements of the story. Parents should not object to being forced to sit through it with the kids!

Briliant, 08 Nov 2008
Enjoyable, mindless, and very funny. Downey Jr. was surprisingly brilliant. Little plot or real substance but who cares, just fun hokum and the best film I've seen for a while. Recommended.

Even if you're not a Comic Book fan this is great, 07 Nov 2008
A really good film from start to finish. Even if you are not a comic book fan this is a great film.

Don't take it too seriously, just watch it for what it is.

Very enjoyable blockbuster, good stuff, 04 Nov 2008
This is great entertainment and I really enjoyed watching it. This is real fun and I'd recommend it.

Not a fan, but my 9 year old is! , 29 Oct 2008
My then 8 year old dragged me along to see this. I'm a cynical, long-in-the-tooth 42 year old who doesn't have time to watch adverts much less a super hero movie. So yes, I found the story implausible and far-fetched, and would have fallen asleep if the music wasn't so loud......but my son LOVED it - and is now hassling me for the DVD which will be in his Xmas stocking.

So, if you're buying for a pre-teen they'll love it, but stick in the mud accountants like me won't!

A good film or a god mix of special effects and computer graphics ?, 13 Oct 2008
Iron Man is a b-level superhero and this film is in line with the character. Very amazing scenes of GC and special effects, but the plot is poor (if non ridicolous) the cast is good, with Downey perfect for the role, but Paltrow and Bridges almost wasted. If you like superhero movies is better than Hulk (2003 ed) and F4 (one or two). But the film lacks of the complexity of Spiderman trilogy or the last Batmans. A good film for teen ??

RIP OFF !!!, 19 Nov 2008
ok bascily hollywoods makeing all these ironman,the hulk,hellboy etc etc comic book hero films


so they go i no lets get a famous actor to make up a complete random pointless hero and make are own super hero


so they created Hancock its just so dumb

they just wanted some limelight in the time of the super hero films

hancock sucks

ether that or they wanted a black super hero

if they did want a black super hero they should of made another spawn film

Not your standard superhero movie, 18 Nov 2008
I had no idea what to expect from this movie, but the trailers looked interesting. This movie is an interesting angle, making a superhero with all too human floors. What you should not expect is a Marvel or DC comics movie, probably much more of an all American feelgood movie. Will Smith gives a good performance as our misguided superhero with a good supporting cast and good effects, makes for a nice easy watching movie.

Starts well, goes downhill fast , 04 Nov 2008
This has some funny bits & good scenes near the start but it starts tripping over itself and messing everything up. Not recommended.

It's average, nothing more or less, 05 Oct 2008
One star and five star reviews for this film should be laughed at, as you will many great moments in the first half of this film.

At some point the laughs had to run out, there is only so much script in an alcoholic super hero.

When that happens and the plot twist occurs, which many will see coming, you've just got to enjoy looking at the tunning Charlize Theron and patiently await the end of the film.

Good rather than excellent, 21 Sep 2008
Film in which Will Smith plays John Hancock, a Los Angeles based superhero who despite his using his super powers to fight crime is despised by the public because he is a drunkard and clumsy in the use of his powers, often causing millions of pounds of damage to public and private property in his efforts to bring criminals to justice. One day Hancock saves the life of PR executive with a heart Ray Embrey (played by Jason Bateman), and to show his gratitude Ray decides to take Hancock under his wing to help him to rectify his public image problem. With Ray's help Hancock starts learning how a superhero should behave - and look - and how to endear himself to the public. Through his relationship with Ray Hancock gets to meet Ray's family - wife Mary (played by Charlize Theron) and his young son - and when Ray and his family query Hancock as to his origins Hancock reveals something that no one until that point knew: he has no memory of his past. But everything will change for Hancock when it transpires that Mary has a secret of her own and Hancock gets involved in a love triangle with her and Ray. And when some dangerous criminals that Hancock helped put behind bars come after him looking for revenge when Hancock is at his most uninvincible will Hancock survive?

Comments: I enjoyed this film. Will Smith plays the role of superhero Hancock well, both as the interesting uncouth and unpleasant drunk he is at first and the more polished - and familiar - type of superhero he becomes after his makeover by Jason Bateman's PR exec. The special effects are first-rate, Bateman makes for excellent support and Charlize Theron is suitably mysterious as the wife with a secret. There are also a number of moments of wry humour (although the film is not a comedy). Personally I never get tired of seeing superheroes fighting against crime or the forces of evil - as long as it's done well, which it is in this film. However although the enjoyment factor in this film is high Hancock's back story is not developed enough or given enough detail in the film, weakening the end product somewhat. Smith and Theron's charisma and star power carry the film but the lack of sufficient information about the character Hancock's origins means that this film is good rather than excellent.



Brainless Fun, 16 Nov 2008
Okay, so you can claim this rips off the style of many other films but the director DOES bring his own style to this movie (watch NIghtwatch and Daywatch) and it's all the better for it. When you come right down to it every movie is influenced by every other right back to the first one. Get over it, sit down and have fun.

As for complaining about the acting, it's not going to win awards but McAvoy is an engaging enough actor to pull this type of thing off. Jolie is given little enough 'acting' to do that whatever you think of her, you can't actually criticise her here.

It's a dumb, fun popcorn movie with no pretensions. Everyone's having fun and you know what, it's not a sequel to a movie that's ripping off it's own series. For what it's type I had more fun watching this than say Indiana Jones' latest or anything else that came out recently. 4 stars for it's type, 3 stars in general.

Looks Great, 12 Nov 2008
It looks really good, very easy to watch and fun as well. Avoid if you like your films serious and believable but give it a watch if you want a good night in. James McAvoy is great as well.

Holy ****, 11 Nov 2008
I was looking to watch a mindless Hollywood action film tonight. I am halfway through this and my word... wooden, devoid of imagination, unrealistic to the point of parody. Please... what offensive stupidity. What brain numbing crapulence. I'd like to say I'm lost for words but... I'm not. Please can someone return the 60 mins of my life it's taken to finally turn this rubbish off. Ugh.

Update: this film was so awful out of curiosity I finished it. And my my my... How entertaining it finally gets! Especially the sub-Matrix style finale. I can imagine the positive reviewers probably loved this exercise in low budget, B-movie slaughter. I will give the main character some credit for the creative way he uses a bad guys brain whilst shooting the place up. Its so ridiculous its actually an art form in Hollywood vacuousness. If you check your brain at the door and fill the hole with lukewarm custard then maybe, just maybe you'll be titillated.

I thought about upgrading my review to 2 stars just so more people can be educated in how far Hollywood action films have fallen. But I lost the will to interact at this point.

Catatonic.


Plot - Implausible/Special Effects - Brill/Fun Factor - Hillarious, 09 Nov 2008
Have just watched it for the second time with my mates and enjoyed it just as much the second time around. The Plot and the plausability of some of the things that happen are beyond belief. But for sheer entertainment value this is a film well worth watching. For those who do, have your pause button ready for when he smacks his mate's jaw with a keyboard as he storms out the office and pause the DVD as you see the keys come flying towards the camera.

Sharply directed thriller , 07 Nov 2008
Unsatisfied with his life, Wesley Gibson (McAvoy) joins a group of assassins to hunt down the man who killed his father.

From trailers, Wanted may seem like an ordinary action thriller with a stereotypical list of characters but Bekmambetov's picture is very diverse from your run of your mill conventional genres with a truly intense twisting plot and a bizarre choice of direction.

As good an actor as McAvoy (Last King of Scotland) is, he can't do anything about the stereotypical hero character he plays. Bored with life, feeling he has more potential, hasn't found love etc. These conventions of a central character won't surprise the most optimistic viewer. Sadly Angelina Jolie (Tomb Raider) and Morgan Freeman (Million Dollar baby) are also stereotyped and thankfully the plot makes them slightly different.

Wanted is sharp, fast and importantly interesting and diverse. This film fulfils the action genre with guns, chases and fighting. The thriller genre is also justified through the intensity of the central ideology.

Gibson has joined the assassins to hunt down the man who killed his father and though this may scream that idea of unsung hero defying odds to get retribution, there is a charm about the approach in this picture. Despite logic saying that the clichés and conventions of scenes and ideologies are repetitive, the action and likability about the picture will keep you hooked right till the very twisty end, with one of the best final lines to a film in recent years.

The approach is made intriguing through the direction. Very sharp and sophisticated, Bekmambetov is able to create an artistic action thriller with a slow down motion. As bullets fly, as the pounding in Gibson's head gets louder we are given this stylistic vision of slowness and is so different and bizarre that it simply has to be admired. There isn't one bad shot in the entire film and credit to Bekmambetov who has changed the ordinary view of an action thriller into a piece of art.

His advancement and directness help create that cutting edge to the film and we are thrust into Gibson's life head first.

The plot is exciting and always interesting, if some scenes are predictable and unrealistic. There are many twists and turns along the way which makes Wanted an intriguing thriller with excellent direction, if not the best characters.

7.5/10

Star Wars: The Clone Wars is the 2008 CGI-animated theatrical film that serves as the kick-off to the weekly animated Clone Wars TV series. The concept came about way back in 1977's original Star Wars film, when Leia says in her message to Obi-Wan Kenobi "Years ago, you served my father in the Clone Wars." Initially a simple offhand reference that would reveal Luke's past, the phrase captured fans' attentions for years, until Episode II: Attack of the Clones revealed just how the Clone Wars figured into the battle between Republic and Empire.
The 2008 movie is full of familiar characters--Anakin Skywalker, Obi-Wan Kenobi, Yoda, Count Dooku--and a new one: Ahsoka Tano, a young girl who has been made Anakin's Padawan. Together, the two headstrong youths embark on a mission to rescue Jabba the Hutt's kidnapped child, battling each other as much as they battle the Separatist forces. There are some good sequences, including duels with Dooku and his assassin, Asajj Ventress, and it's interesting to see some new corners of the Star Wars universe, such as the seamy underbelly of Coruscant. But Ahsoka and her penchant for nicknames that are too cute to stomach seem aimed only at tween-age audiences, and for all that goes on in the movie, nothing really happens in the end. The 2003 animated Clone Wars micro-series, which had the advantage of being directly tied into the live-action film series, had much more emotional bite.
At least some familiar voices return: Samuel L. Jackson (Mace Windu), Anthony Daniels (C-3PO, and still the only actor in every movie), Christopher Lee (Dooku). Other voices include Matt Lanter (Anakin), Ashley Eckstein (Ahsoka), and James Arnold Taylor (Obi-Wan). But even the traditional opening crawl has been replaced by a narration more suited for Starship Troopers. Veteran Star Wars fans will probably want to see The Clone Wars--once--but it won't take them long to discover that this Star Wars isn't theirs any more. --David Horiuchi

Saved by the mice and Lucy, 19 Nov 2008
The first thing that I have to say is that this isn't a great movie,not by a long way.It's too long,boring in parts and I had the same problem that I had with the first film in the series.Namely,three of the four children are a charmless bunch bereft of any personality.Apart from Georgie Henley that is who plays Lucy.She gave the best performance in the first film and is also the best thing about 'Prince Caspian'.As the Prince,Ben Barnes certainly looks the part but his accent varies between Spanish,French and Scottish.I also felt that this film was aimed directly at the children's market.

So why have I given it a reasonable three stars?I was toying with giving it two but in fairness it does look great and some of the CGI is very well done.I especially liked the water giant near the end.If I could give this two and a half stars I would but because of Miss Henley,the water giant and the mice(cute) I will give it a maybe too generous three.This is not a movie that I would watch again but children will probably love it.

Good sequel, 19 Nov 2008
I was looking forward to this movie, this was one of the iconic books from my childhood. I have to say that I very much enjoyed it, however maybe not as much as the first film. The filming was excellent, with beautiful backdrops and surroundings, very good CGI and good acting. It's been so long since I read the books however, that I can't remember if this was faithful to the original though... will have to re-read them I think! The things that let it down for me were the comedy elements, the mouse-knights and alike fitted very much with a Disney film, however I thought that they were not necessary, and detracted from the story. Word of warning though, not sure if I would let very small children see it though as there is quite a lot of violent deaths albeit no blood.

Prince Caspian, 18 Nov 2008
This has to be one of the most disappointing films I've ever seen. The books enthralled me as a child and, as an adult I have read them to children in my family who were equally delighted by them, so the liberties taken with the story were a total disaster for us.

It starts off well enough, but then the film-makers apparently think they have to add plot twists with a very silly a subtext where Caspian & Peter are so jealous of eachother that they almost bring about the downfall of Narnia by it.

Yet again Hollywood has tinkered with the original and wonderful story, and lost the magic on the way, and because the special effects are fantastic it's a real let down. This is not a film I'll be buying or would want to own under any circumstances. Don't waste your money.

what happened to..., 16 Nov 2008
I did enjoy the film - and thought it stood up well against The Lion et al, but what happened to 'a Horse and his boy'? (The 3 chronicle) also will we go back to the Magician's Nephew at a later stage?


Excellent family entertainment, 13 Nov 2008
I'll keep it short and sweet - great performances, great effects, true to th ebook while still fleshing out the story and characters a little more. Fantastically fun action adventure that's suitable for all the family without patronising kids or sanitising the darker elements of the story. Parents should not object to being forced to sit through it with the kids!

Briliant, 08 Nov 2008
Enjoyable, mindless, and very funny. Downey Jr. was surprisingly brilliant. Little plot or real substance but who cares, just fun hokum and the best film I've seen for a while. Recommended.

Even if you're not a Comic Book fan this is great, 07 Nov 2008
A really good film from start to finish. Even if you are not a comic book fan this is a great film.

Don't take it too seriously, just watch it for what it is.

Very enjoyable blockbuster, good stuff, 04 Nov 2008
This is great entertainment and I really enjoyed watching it. This is real fun and I'd recommend it.

Not a fan, but my 9 year old is! , 29 Oct 2008
My then 8 year old dragged me along to see this. I'm a cynical, long-in-the-tooth 42 year old who doesn't have time to watch adverts much less a super hero movie. So yes, I found the story implausible and far-fetched, and would have fallen asleep if the music wasn't so loud......but my son LOVED it - and is now hassling me for the DVD which will be in his Xmas stocking.

So, if you're buying for a pre-teen they'll love it, but stick in the mud accountants like me won't!

A good film or a god mix of special effects and computer graphics ?, 13 Oct 2008
Iron Man is a b-level superhero and this film is in line with the character. Very amazing scenes of GC and special effects, but the plot is poor (if non ridicolous) the cast is good, with Downey perfect for the role, but Paltrow and Bridges almost wasted. If you like superhero movies is better than Hulk (2003 ed) and F4 (one or two). But the film lacks of the complexity of Spiderman trilogy or the last Batmans. A good film for teen ??

RIP OFF !!!, 19 Nov 2008
ok bascily hollywoods makeing all these ironman,the hulk,hellboy etc etc comic book hero films


so they go i no lets get a famous actor to make up a complete random pointless hero and make are own super hero


so they created Hancock its just so dumb

they just wanted some limelight in the time of the super hero films

hancock sucks

ether that or they wanted a black super hero

if they did want a black super hero they should of made another spawn film

Not your standard superhero movie, 18 Nov 2008
I had no idea what to expect from this movie, but the trailers looked interesting. This movie is an interesting angle, making a superhero with all too human floors. What you should not expect is a Marvel or DC comics movie, probably much more of an all American feelgood movie. Will Smith gives a good performance as our misguided superhero with a good supporting cast and good effects, makes for a nice easy watching movie.

Starts well, goes downhill fast , 04 Nov 2008
This has some funny bits & good scenes near the start but it starts tripping over itself and messing everything up. Not recommended.

It's average, nothing more or less, 05 Oct 2008
One star and five star reviews for this film should be laughed at, as you will many great moments in the first half of this film.

At some point the laughs had to run out, there is only so much script in an alcoholic super hero.

When that happens and the plot twist occurs, which many will see coming, you've just got to enjoy looking at the tunning Charlize Theron and patiently await the end of the film.

Good rather than excellent, 21 Sep 2008
Film in which Will Smith plays John Hancock, a Los Angeles based superhero who despite his using his super powers to fight crime is despised by the public because he is a drunkard and clumsy in the use of his powers, often causing millions of pounds of damage to public and private property in his efforts to bring criminals to justice. One day Hancock saves the life of PR executive with a heart Ray Embrey (played by Jason Bateman), and to show his gratitude Ray decides to take Hancock under his wing to help him to rectify his public image problem. With Ray's help Hancock starts learning how a superhero should behave - and look - and how to endear himself to the public. Through his relationship with Ray Hancock gets to meet Ray's family - wife Mary (played by Charlize Theron) and his young son - and when Ray and his family query Hancock as to his origins Hancock reveals something that no one until that point knew: he has no memory of his past. But everything will change for Hancock when it transpires that Mary has a secret of her own and Hancock gets involved in a love triangle with her and Ray. And when some dangerous criminals that Hancock helped put behind bars come after him looking for revenge when Hancock is at his most uninvincible will Hancock survive?

Comments: I enjoyed this film. Will Smith plays the role of superhero Hancock well, both as the interesting uncouth and unpleasant drunk he is at first and the more polished - and familiar - type of superhero he becomes after his makeover by Jason Bateman's PR exec. The special effects are first-rate, Bateman makes for excellent support and Charlize Theron is suitably mysterious as the wife with a secret. There are also a number of moments of wry humour (although the film is not a comedy). Personally I never get tired of seeing superheroes fighting against crime or the forces of evil - as long as it's done well, which it is in this film. However although the enjoyment factor in this film is high Hancock's back story is not developed enough or given enough detail in the film, weakening the end product somewhat. Smith and Theron's charisma and star power carry the film but the lack of sufficient information about the character Hancock's origins means that this film is good rather than excellent.



Brainless Fun, 16 Nov 2008
Okay, so you can claim this rips off the style of many other films but the director DOES bring his own style to this movie (watch NIghtwatch and Daywatch) and it's all the better for it. When you come right down to it every movie is influenced by every other right back to the first one. Get over it, sit down and have fun.

As for complaining about the acting, it's not going to win awards but McAvoy is an engaging enough actor to pull this type of thing off. Jolie is given little enough 'acting' to do that whatever you think of her, you can't actually criticise her here.

It's a dumb, fun popcorn movie with no pretensions. Everyone's having fun and you know what, it's not a sequel to a movie that's ripping off it's own series. For what it's type I had more fun watching this than say Indiana Jones' latest or anything else that came out recently. 4 stars for it's type, 3 stars in general.

Looks Great, 12 Nov 2008
It looks really good, very easy to watch and fun as well. Avoid if you like your films serious and believable but give it a watch if you want a good night in. James McAvoy is great as well.

Holy ****, 11 Nov 2008
I was looking to watch a mindless Hollywood action film tonight. I am halfway through this and my word... wooden, devoid of imagination, unrealistic to the point of parody. Please... what offensive stupidity. What brain numbing crapulence. I'd like to say I'm lost for words but... I'm not. Please can someone return the 60 mins of my life it's taken to finally turn this rubbish off. Ugh.

Update: this film was so awful out of curiosity I finished it. And my my my... How entertaining it finally gets! Especially the sub-Matrix style finale. I can imagine the positive reviewers probably loved this exercise in low budget, B-movie slaughter. I will give the main character some credit for the creative way he uses a bad guys brain whilst shooting the place up. Its so ridiculous its actually an art form in Hollywood vacuousness. If you check your brain at the door and fill the hole with lukewarm custard then maybe, just maybe you'll be titillated.

I thought about upgrading my review to 2 stars just so more people can be educated in how far Hollywood action films have fallen. But I lost the will to interact at this point.

Catatonic.


Plot - Implausible/Special Effects - Brill/Fun Factor - Hillarious, 09 Nov 2008
Have just watched it for the second time with my mates and enjoyed it just as much the second time around. The Plot and the plausability of some of the things that happen are beyond belief. But for sheer entertainment value this is a film well worth watching. For those who do, have your pause button ready for when he smacks his mate's jaw with a keyboard as he storms out the office and pause the DVD as you see the keys come flying towards the camera.

Sharply directed thriller , 07 Nov 2008
Unsatisfied with his life, Wesley Gibson (McAvoy) joins a group of assassins to hunt down the man who killed his father.

From trailers, Wanted may seem like an ordinary action thriller with a stereotypical list of characters but Bekmambetov's picture is very diverse from your run of your mill conventional genres with a truly intense twisting plot and a bizarre choice of direction.

As good an actor as McAvoy (Last King of Scotland) is, he can't do anything about the stereotypical hero character he plays. Bored with life, feeling he has more potential, hasn't found love etc. These conventions of a central character won't surprise the most optimistic viewer. Sadly Angelina Jolie (Tomb Raider) and Morgan Freeman (Million Dollar baby) are also stereotyped and thankfully the plot makes them slightly different.

Wanted is sharp, fast and importantly interesting and diverse. This film fulfils the action genre with guns, chases and fighting. The thriller genre is also justified through the intensity of the central ideology.

Gibson has joined the assassins to hunt down the man who killed his father and though this may scream that idea of unsung hero defying odds to get retribution, there is a charm about the approach in this picture. Despite logic saying that the clichés and conventions of scenes and ideologies are repetitive, the action and likability about the picture will keep you hooked right till the very twisty end, with one of the best final lines to a film in recent years.

The approach is made intriguing through the direction. Very sharp and sophisticated, Bekmambetov is able to create an artistic action thriller with a slow down motion. As bullets fly, as the pounding in Gibson's head gets louder we are given this stylistic vision of slowness and is so different and bizarre that it simply has to be admired. There isn't one bad shot in the entire film and credit to Bekmambetov who has changed the ordinary view of an action thriller into a piece of art.

His advancement and directness help create that cutting edge to the film and we are thrust into Gibson's life head first.

The plot is exciting and always interesting, if some scenes are predictable and unrealistic. There are many twists and turns along the way which makes Wanted an intriguing thriller with excellent direction, if not the best characters.

7.5/10

Not for Science Fiction, or Star Wars fans., 26 Oct 2008
I tried to open minded about this film when I first went to the cinema, determining that "I'm a star wars fan, and no matter how bad it is, it's still Star Wars."

That feeling lasted about um... a second and a half from the start of the film. It started off fine with the, "A long time ago in a galaxy far far away." I smiled, prepared myself for the classic theme and it... never came. I had been told it was 'remixed' beforehand, but I was expecting something not too different, the new composer didn't even keep the first 4 notes.

Then we move onto the 'Opening Crawl' - which didn't exist. Another staple of Star Wars, even found in the games, gone, poofed completely. It was replaced with a narrator speaking over a kind of WW2 'news reel'. A few minutes into it and already the film has lost all its feel of being Star Wars, by no doubt intentional design decisions. In my book, if the writers/directors/producers etctera intentionally changed something, and it turned out badly, it's still bad.

It got worse, the opening battle could have potentially been something good and enjoyable to watch, instead it was as if it had been played in fast forward, I could almost imagine the 'Benny Hill' theme being played in the background.

Admittedly, I was a bit biased towards the 'art style' before hand so I thought, if I'm going to write a review on it, I'll avoid mentioning it as it would be rather unfair and not truly neutral. So I will avoid commenting on it except to say, that it gets worse. When Supreme Chancellor Palpatine walked into a scene, his style was seemed to be entirely based on a... bobblehead toy. There is 'stylised' drawing (which I would define by the early 1990's Batman cartoons) and then there's 'caricature' - Star Wars: The Clone Wars, I felt was the latter. Additionally, the animation was jerky, possibly as a reference to the 'Thunderbirds' puppets. In my opinion, it didn't work, it just made it look even worse.

The film is a childrens oriented film, and I'm perfectly happy to accept that. In honesty, this was the strongest part of the film. The new Padawan was someone that children could enjoy watching and identify with. There was even some humour involving her and "Stinky the Hutt" that could be enjoyed by the little 'uns. However, I think in trying to appeal to children, they actually managed to make the dialogue even worse than Attack of The Clones and going on to insult the intelligence of the kids in the audience to boot. A typical conversation, which was repeated several times in the films follows.

Character A: "Jabba the Hutts son has been kidnapped."
Character B: "The Jedi Order must go and rescue Jabba the Hutts son."
Character A: "If the Seperatists rescue Jabba the Hutts son first we'll lose the war."
Character A: "Then it's agreed, we must rescue Jabba the Hutts son from being kidnapped."

While this conversation was on-going (and going, and going), the characters tones would randomly change from low to high to low again. I believe, when Obi-wan was speaking, this was an attempt to copy his voice from episode III, it didn't work. The only character that avoided this was the Padawan, Ashkoja, which, truth be told, made her scenes are more watchable than any others.

Finally, a good word about it, scenes that didn't have any characters in them, for example space and 'landscape' scenes did look particularly good and demonstrate the potential for how enjoyable the film COULD have been. However, due to several strange, strange design decisions that seemed only to have been changed for the sake of being changed, I would recommend against even renting this film. If you must see it, wait for it to come on television.

Thoroughly enjoyable, 19 Oct 2008
I watched this in the cinema with my young lad. Surprisingly to me, I thoroughly enjoyed it and will be buying the DVD without a doubt. I would definitely recommend this film.

Worth naming Star Wars Episode 7, or just disappointing?, 07 Oct 2008
Star Wars: The Clone Wars is an 1hr 1/2 long movie which is set to mark the beginning of a brand new series airing on Cartoon Network. I can't watch the series for some reason but it isn't airing here where I live but I have been to the cinema to see the film and I was impressed. The beginning of the film where they are fighting in a large city is incredible as is the raid on the monastery but when Anakin and Ahsoka arrive on Tatooine, I fought it was a bit over-the-top but never mind.
The film itself is good and snappy, action-filled without the romantic bits of Episode II and the long boring conversations of the first half of Episode III, this film is excellent!

promising!, 07 Oct 2008
have to admit, wasn't too sure about this at first, but star wars: the clone wars is actually good fun and rather enjoyable! it's no classic, but it's a fun action adventure cartoon, and a promising start to the upcoming star wars: the clone wars animated cartoon series, which judging from what i've seen here, i will be watching.
it feels weird at first. this is the first star wars movie not made by 20th century fox, so the idea of a star wars film without the traditional fanfare feels off. the music composer's no john williams,and that feels a little weird as well. the voice cast do a competant job. the guy doing the voice off anakin does a much better job than hayden christien, though mind you, that's not really saying too much, is it? nice if somewhat surprising to see christopher lee and samuel l jackson back as count dooku and mace windu, and i'm glad anthony daniels is still c three pio, as let's face it, recasting him would be simply wrong. oh, and if you thought 3pio was the campest character in the star wars universe, guess again! wait till you see zero the hutt!! a cousin of jabba the hutt!! good fun, though i suspect strictly for star wars fans only.

Surprisingly good, 05 Oct 2008
I was nervous when I heard about this animated film, I heard it was aimed more for kids than the hardcore older fan (30+ !).

But i was pleasantly surprised, theres a ton of action in there, not too much annoying 'Jar Jar Binks' type scenes (Eg an annoying character and stupid dialogue) and was pretty good. Yes theres some silly bits in the film but with the Star Wars effects and also some brilliant 3d imagery it works very well.

Seen the first two episodes of the actual series and again theyre worth watching.

The feverish Hellboy 2: The Golden Army is a very busy sequel that might have looked unhinged in the hands of a less visionary director than Guillermo del Toro. Ron Perlman returns as Hellboy, aka "Red," the Dark Horse Comics demon-hero with roots in the mythical world but personal ties in the human realm. Still working, as he was in Hellboy, for a secret department of the federal government that deals (as in "Men In Black") with forces of the fantastic, Red and his colleagues take on a royal elf (Luke Goss) determined to smash a longtime truce between mankind and the forces of magic. Meanwhile, Red's relationship with girlfriend Liz (Selma Blair), who can burst into flames at will, is going through a rocky stage observed by Red's fishy friend Abe (Doug Jones), himself struck by love in this film. Del Toro brilliantly integrates the ordinary and extraordinary, diving into an extended scene set in a troll market barely hidden behind the façade of typical city streets. He also unleashes a forest monster that devastates an urban neighborhood, but then--interestingly--brings a luminous beauty to the same area as the creature (an "elemental") succumbs to a terrible death. Del Toro's art direction proves masterful, too, in a climactic battle set in a clockworks-like stronghold tucked away in rugged Irish landscape. But it's really the juxtaposition of visual marvels with not-so-unusual relationship issues that gives Hellboy 2 a certain jaunty appeal hard to find in other superhero movies. --Tom Keogh

Saved by the mice and Lucy, 19 Nov 2008
The first thing that I have to say is that this isn't a great movie,not by a long way.It's too long,boring in parts and I had the same problem that I had with the first film in the series.Namely,three of the four children are a charmless bunch bereft of any personality.Apart from Georgie Henley that is who plays Lucy.She gave the best performance in the first film and is also the best thing about 'Prince Caspian'.As the Prince,Ben Barnes certainly looks the part but his accent varies between Spanish,French and Scottish.I also felt that this film was aimed directly at the children's market.

So why have I given it a reasonable three stars?I was toying with giving it two but in fairness it does look great and some of the CGI is very well done.I especially liked the water giant near the end.If I could give this two and a half stars I would but because of Miss Henley,the water giant and the mice(cute) I will give it a maybe too generous three.This is not a movie that I would watch again but children will probably love it.

Good sequel, 19 Nov 2008
I was looking forward to this movie, this was one of the iconic books from my childhood. I have to say that I very much enjoyed it, however maybe not as much as the first film. The filming was excellent, with beautiful backdrops and surroundings, very good CGI and good acting. It's been so long since I read the books however, that I can't remember if this was faithful to the original though... will have to re-read them I think! The things that let it down for me were the comedy elements, the mouse-knights and alike fitted very much with a Disney film, however I thought that they were not necessary, and detracted from the story. Word of warning though, not sure if I would let very small children see it though as there is quite a lot of violent deaths albeit no blood.

Prince Caspian, 18 Nov 2008
This has to be one of the most disappointing films I've ever seen. The books enthralled me as a child and, as an adult I have read them to children in my family who were equally delighted by them, so the liberties taken with the story were a total disaster for us.

It starts off well enough, but then the film-makers apparently think they have to add plot twists with a very silly a subtext where Caspian & Peter are so jealous of eachother that they almost bring about the downfall of Narnia by it.

Yet again Hollywood has tinkered with the original and wonderful story, and lost the magic on the way, and because the special effects are fantastic it's a real let down. This is not a film I'll be buying or would want to own under any circumstances. Don't waste your money.

what happened to..., 16 Nov 2008
I did enjoy the film - and thought it stood up well against The Lion et al, but what happened to 'a Horse and his boy'? (The 3 chronicle) also will we go back to the Magician's Nephew at a later stage?


Excellent family entertainment, 13 Nov 2008
I'll keep it short and sweet - great performances, great effects, true to th ebook while still fleshing out the story and characters a little more. Fantastically fun action adventure that's suitable for all the family without patronising kids or sanitising the darker elements of the story. Parents should not object to being forced to sit through it with the kids!

Briliant, 08 Nov 2008
Enjoyable, mindless, and very funny. Downey Jr. was surprisingly brilliant. Little plot or real substance but who cares, just fun hokum and the best film I've seen for a while. Recommended.

Even if you're not a Comic Book fan this is great, 07 Nov 2008
A really good film from start to finish. Even if you are not a comic book fan this is a great film.

Don't take it too seriously, just watch it for what it is.

Very enjoyable blockbuster, good stuff, 04 Nov 2008
This is great entertainment and I really enjoyed watching it. This is real fun and I'd recommend it.

Not a fan, but my 9 year old is! , 29 Oct 2008
My then 8 year old dragged me along to see this. I'm a cynical, long-in-the-tooth 42 year old who doesn't have time to watch adverts much less a super hero movie. So yes, I found the story implausible and far-fetched, and would have fallen asleep if the music wasn't so loud......but my son LOVED it - and is now hassling me for the DVD which will be in his Xmas stocking.

So, if you're buying for a pre-teen they'll love it, but stick in the mud accountants like me won't!

A good film or a god mix of special effects and computer graphics ?, 13 Oct 2008
Iron Man is a b-level superhero and this film is in line with the character. Very amazing scenes of GC and special effects, but the plot is poor (if non ridicolous) the cast is good, with Downey perfect for the role, but Paltrow and Bridges almost wasted. If you like superhero movies is better than Hulk (2003 ed) and F4 (one or two). But the film lacks of the complexity of Spiderman trilogy or the last Batmans. A good film for teen ??

RIP OFF !!!, 19 Nov 2008
ok bascily hollywoods makeing all these ironman,the hulk,hellboy etc etc comic book hero films


so they go i no lets get a famous actor to make up a complete random pointless hero and make are own super hero


so they created Hancock its just so dumb

they just wanted some limelight in the time of the super hero films

hancock sucks

ether that or they wanted a black super hero

if they did want a black super hero they should of made another spawn film

Not your standard superhero movie, 18 Nov 2008
I had no idea what to expect from this movie, but the trailers looked interesting. This movie is an interesting angle, making a superhero with all too human floors. What you should not expect is a Marvel or DC comics movie, probably much more of an all American feelgood movie. Will Smith gives a good performance as our misguided superhero with a good supporting cast and good effects, makes for a nice easy watching movie.

Starts well, goes downhill fast , 04 Nov 2008
This has some funny bits & good scenes near the start but it starts tripping over itself and messing everything up. Not recommended.

It's average, nothing more or less, 05 Oct 2008
One star and five star reviews for this film should be laughed at, as you will many great moments in the first half of this film.

At some point the laughs had to run out, there is only so much script in an alcoholic super hero.

When that happens and the plot twist occurs, which many will see coming, you've just got to enjoy looking at the tunning Charlize Theron and patiently await the end of the film.

Good rather than excellent, 21 Sep 2008
Film in which Will Smith plays John Hancock, a Los Angeles based superhero who despite his using his super powers to fight crime is despised by the public because he is a drunkard and clumsy in the use of his powers, often causing millions of pounds of damage to public and private property in his efforts to bring criminals to justice. One day Hancock saves the life of PR executive with a heart Ray Embrey (played by Jason Bateman), and to show his gratitude Ray decides to take Hancock under his wing to help him to rectify his public image problem. With Ray's help Hancock starts learning how a superhero should behave - and look - and how to endear himself to the public. Through his relationship with Ray Hancock gets to meet Ray's family - wife Mary (played by Charlize Theron) and his young son - and when Ray and his family query Hancock as to his origins Hancock reveals something that no one until that point knew: he has no memory of his past. But everything will change for Hancock when it transpires that Mary has a secret of her own and Hancock gets involved in a love triangle with her and Ray. And when some dangerous criminals that Hancock helped put behind bars come after him looking for revenge when Hancock is at his most uninvincible will Hancock survive?

Comments: I enjoyed this film. Will Smith plays the role of superhero Hancock well, both as the interesting uncouth and unpleasant drunk he is at first and the more polished - and familiar - type of superhero he becomes after his makeover by Jason Bateman's PR exec. The special effects are first-rate, Bateman makes for excellent support and Charlize Theron is suitably mysterious as the wife with a secret. There are also a number of moments of wry humour (although the film is not a comedy). Personally I never get tired of seeing superheroes fighting against crime or the forces of evil - as long as it's done well, which it is in this film. However although the enjoyment factor in this film is high Hancock's back story is not developed enough or given enough detail in the film, weakening the end product somewhat. Smith and Theron's charisma and star power carry the film but the lack of sufficient information about the character Hancock's origins means that this film is good rather than excellent.



Brainless Fun, 16 Nov 2008
Okay, so you can claim this rips off the style of many other films but the director DOES bring his own style to this movie (watch NIghtwatch and Daywatch) and it's all the better for it. When you come right down to it every movie is influenced by every other right back to the first one. Get over it, sit down and have fun.

As for complaining about the acting, it's not going to win awards but McAvoy is an engaging enough actor to pull this type of thing off. Jolie is given little enough 'acting' to do that whatever you think of her, you can't actually criticise her here.

It's a dumb, fun popcorn movie with no pretensions. Everyone's having fun and you know what, it's not a sequel to a movie that's ripping off it's own series. For what it's type I had more fun watching this than say Indiana Jones' latest or anything else that came out recently. 4 stars for it's type, 3 stars in general.

Looks Great, 12 Nov 2008
It looks really good, very easy to watch and fun as well. Avoid if you like your films serious and believable but give it a watch if you want a good night in. James McAvoy is great as well.

Holy ****, 11 Nov 2008
I was looking to watch a mindless Hollywood action film tonight. I am halfway through this and my word... wooden, devoid of imagination, unrealistic to the point of parody. Please... what offensive stupidity. What brain numbing crapulence. I'd like to say I'm lost for words but... I'm not. Please can someone return the 60 mins of my life it's taken to finally turn this rubbish off. Ugh.

Update: this film was so awful out of curiosity I finished it. And my my my... How entertaining it finally gets! Especially the sub-Matrix style finale. I can imagine the positive reviewers probably loved this exercise in low budget, B-movie slaughter. I will give the main character some credit for the creative way he uses a bad guys brain whilst shooting the place up. Its so ridiculous its actually an art form in Hollywood vacuousness. If you check your brain at the door and fill the hole with lukewarm custard then maybe, just maybe you'll be titillated.

I thought about upgrading my review to 2 stars just so more people can be educated in how far Hollywood action films have fallen. But I lost the will to interact at this point.

Catatonic.


Plot - Implausible/Special Effects - Brill/Fun Factor - Hillarious, 09 Nov 2008
Have just watched it for the second time with my mates and enjoyed it just as much the second time around. The Plot and the plausability of some of the things that happen are beyond belief. But for sheer entertainment value this is a film well worth watching. For those who do, have your pause button ready for when he smacks his mate's jaw with a keyboard as he storms out the office and pause the DVD as you see the keys come flying towards the camera.

Sharply directed thriller , 07 Nov 2008
Unsatisfied with his life, Wesley Gibson (McAvoy) joins a group of assassins to hunt down the man who killed his father.

From trailers, Wanted may seem like an ordinary action thriller with a stereotypical list of characters but Bekmambetov's picture is very diverse from your run of your mill conventional genres with a truly intense twisting plot and a bizarre choice of direction.

As good an actor as McAvoy (Last King of Scotland) is, he can't do anything about the stereotypical hero character he plays. Bored with life, feeling he has more potential, hasn't found love etc. These conventions of a central character won't surprise the most optimistic viewer. Sadly Angelina Jolie (Tomb Raider) and Morgan Freeman (Million Dollar baby) are also stereotyped and thankfully the plot makes them slightly different.

Wanted is sharp, fast and importantly interesting and diverse. This film fulfils the action genre with guns, chases and fighting. The thriller genre is also justified through the intensity of the central ideology.

Gibson has joined the assassins to hunt down the man who killed his father and though this may scream that idea of unsung hero defying odds to get retribution, there is a charm about the approach in this picture. Despite logic saying that the clichés and conventions of scenes and ideologies are repetitive, the action and likability about the picture will keep you hooked right till the very twisty end, with one of the best final lines to a film in recent years.

The approach is made intriguing through the direction. Very sharp and sophisticated, Bekmambetov is able to create an artistic action thriller with a slow down motion. As bullets fly, as the pounding in Gibson's head gets louder we are given this stylistic vision of slowness and is so different and bizarre that it simply has to be admired. There isn't one bad shot in the entire film and credit to Bekmambetov who has changed the ordinary view of an action thriller into a piece of art.

His advancement and directness help create that cutting edge to the film and we are thrust into Gibson's life head first.

The plot is exciting and always interesting, if some scenes are predictable and unrealistic. There are many twists and turns along the way which makes Wanted an intriguing thriller with excellent direction, if not the best characters.

7.5/10

Not for Science Fiction, or Star Wars fans., 26 Oct 2008
I tried to open minded about this film when I first went to the cinema, determining that "I'm a star wars fan, and no matter how bad it is, it's still Star Wars."

That feeling lasted about um... a second and a half from the start of the film. It started off fine with the, "A long time ago in a galaxy far far away." I smiled, prepared myself for the classic theme and it... never came. I had been told it was 'remixed' beforehand, but I was expecting something not too different, the new composer didn't even keep the first 4 notes.

Then we move onto the 'Opening Crawl' - which didn't exist. Another staple of Star Wars, even found in the games, gone, poofed completely. It was replaced with a narrator speaking over a kind of WW2 'news reel'. A few minutes into it and already the film has lost all its feel of being Star Wars, by no doubt intentional design decisions. In my book, if the writers/directors/producers etctera intentionally changed something, and it turned out badly, it's still bad.

It got worse, the opening battle could have potentially been something good and enjoyable to watch, instead it was as if it had been played in fast forward, I could almost imagine the 'Benny Hill' theme being played in the background.

Admittedly, I was a bit biased towards the 'art style' before hand so I thought, if I'm going to write a review on it, I'll avoid mentioning it as it would be rather unfair and not truly neutral. So I will avoid commenting on it except to say, that it gets worse. When Supreme Chancellor Palpatine walked into a scene, his style was seemed to be entirely based on a... bobblehead toy. There is 'stylised' drawing (which I would define by the early 1990's Batman cartoons) and then there's 'caricature' - Star Wars: The Clone Wars, I felt was the latter. Additionally, the animation was jerky, possibly as a reference to the 'Thunderbirds' puppets. In my opinion, it didn't work, it just made it look even worse.

The film is a childrens oriented film, and I'm perfectly happy to accept that. In honesty, this was the strongest part of the film. The new Padawan was someone that children could enjoy watching and identify with. There was even some humour involving her and "Stinky the Hutt" that could be enjoyed by the little 'uns. However, I think in trying to appeal to children, they actually managed to make the dialogue even worse than Attack of The Clones and going on to insult the intelligence of the kids in the audience to boot. A typical conversation, which was repeated several times in the films follows.

Character A: "Jabba the Hutts son has been kidnapped."
Character B: "The Jedi Order must go and rescue Jabba the Hutts son."
Character A: "If the Seperatists rescue Jabba the Hutts son first we'll lose the war."
Character A: "Then it's agreed, we must rescue Jabba the Hutts son from being kidnapped."

While this conversation was on-going (and going, and going), the characters tones would randomly change from low to high to low again. I believe, when Obi-wan was speaking, this was an attempt to copy his voice from episode III, it didn't work. The only character that avoided this was the Padawan, Ashkoja, which, truth be told, made her scenes are more watchable than any others.

Finally, a good word about it, scenes that didn't have any characters in them, for example space and 'landscape' scenes did look particularly good and demonstrate the potential for how enjoyable the film COULD have been. However, due to several strange, strange design decisions that seemed only to have been changed for the sake of being changed, I would recommend against even renting this film. If you must see it, wait for it to come on television.

Thoroughly enjoyable, 19 Oct 2008
I watched this in the cinema with my young lad. Surprisingly to me, I thoroughly enjoyed it and will be buying the DVD without a doubt. I would definitely recommend this film.

Worth naming Star Wars Episode 7, or just disappointing?, 07 Oct 2008
Star Wars: The Clone Wars is an 1hr 1/2 long movie which is set to mark the beginning of a brand new series airing on Cartoon Network. I can't watch the series for some reason but it isn't airing here where I live but I have been to the cinema to see the film and I was impressed. The beginning of the film where they are fighting in a large city is incredible as is the raid on the monastery but when Anakin and Ahsoka arrive on Tatooine, I fought it was a bit over-the-top but never mind.
The film itself is good and snappy, action-filled without the romantic bits of Episode II and the long boring conversations of the first half of Episode III, this film is excellent!

promising!, 07 Oct 2008
have to admit, wasn't too sure about this at first, but star wars: the clone wars is actually good fun and rather enjoyable! it's no classic, but it's a fun action adventure cartoon, and a promising start to the upcoming star wars: the clone wars animated cartoon series, which judging from what i've seen here, i will be watching.
it feels weird at first. this is the first star wars movie not made by 20th century fox, so the idea of a star wars film without the traditional fanfare feels off. the music composer's no john williams,and that feels a little weird as well. the voice cast do a competant job. the guy doing the voice off anakin does a much better job than hayden christien, though mind you, that's not really saying too much, is it? nice if somewhat surprising to see christopher lee and samuel l jackson back as count dooku and mace windu, and i'm glad anthony daniels is still c three pio, as let's face it, recasting him would be simply wrong. oh, and if you thought 3pio was the campest character in the star wars universe, guess again! wait till you see zero the hutt!! a cousin of jabba the hutt!! good fun, though i suspect strictly for star wars fans only.

Surprisingly good, 05 Oct 2008
I was nervous when I heard about this animated film, I heard it was aimed more for kids than the hardcore older fan (30+ !).

But i was pleasantly surprised, theres a ton of action in there, not too much annoying 'Jar Jar Binks' type scenes (Eg an annoying character and stupid dialogue) and was pretty good. Yes theres some silly bits in the film but with the Star Wars effects and also some brilliant 3d imagery it works very well.

Seen the first two episodes of the actual series and again theyre worth watching.

Sympathy for the devil, 17 Nov 2008
I, like many people, am becoming a huge fan of Del Toro's work both in English and Spanish and having really enjoyed the first Hellboy was excited about seeing this sequel.

I saw it twice in the cinema, once in London in a special preview screening and again back at home on it's last night - and was completely bowled over both times. For someone like me who watched Ray Harryhausen creatures slugging it out on TV as a kid with his jaw open - this movie is a dream come true, Del Toro has just unlatched the top of his head and spilled his imagination onto celluloid and the result is amazing. I really liked the first one, but I love this one!

The reason I gave this review the title I did was because I can see that for some people there maybe a flaw in this movie, and that is that there are no real human characters of any consequence in it. If you exclude Liz whose pyro-abilities leave her one foot in the creature camp anyway, we are left with only Manning who is a caricature bureaucrat, black suited agents that are tooth fairy fodder and obnoxious ungrateful members of the public.

In the first movie we had Myer's, Professor Broom and even one of the Black suits was given a personality and a name - Agent Clay, if I recall; with his hair plugs.

I'm not saying that this is a bad thing - what I am saying is that the movie is pretty damning of people and their behavior - it's sympathies are much more with the magical folk - but this can make it pretty hard to hate the 'villain'. Though I think the elf prince is an great character and his first scene in what seems like an ancient chamber, until a subway train screams past, is genius - there is moral complexity here. The story is in essence a timely environmental allegory - reminding us that there are many things that the world will be a sadder place without, and that the planet has many reasons to be very pissed off with us!

I won't say anything about the incredible design work and vision - as there isn't anything to add that others haven't already said - except maybe that it really stands up to repeat viewings; I spotted so many details on my second viewing that I missed first time (like all the crabs on the legless Goblin!)

There is an obvious hint in the scene with the Angel of Death at a third movie, but whether or not that story will ever get told seems doubtful (with Del Toro signed up for about 4 or 5 other projects - Including the 2 Hobbit movies and working as producer on a stop motion version of Pinocchio, which could be amazing given the bedtime story that opens Hellboy 2). I for one would love to see a Hellboy 3.


Hellboy II....a parent's point of view, 15 Nov 2008
My son adored Hellboy I (and heck, so did I!), so I slipped off to the cinema to do a quick reccy on Hellboy II to decide whether he could watch it or not (he's 8 - and I'm fairly strict).

I'm not going to go into detail as to the content of the film, because that's covered very well in the other reviews.

As a parent, would I recommend that you let an 8 year old watch this? I have to say, purely on the basis of the Tooth-fairies (teeth-fairies?!) at the beginning and the absolutely amazing Death figure,no. Fabulous creations as you would expect from Del Toro, but the stuff of nightmares if you're a kid! These are escapees from Pan's Labyrinth

Other than this, Hellboy II isn't a scary movie, indeed it spills over into silliness (that Barry Manilow song was a bit bizarre!) The trademark humour is still there, but the pathos of Hellboy I is, imo, missing.

I had a lot of sympathy for the Elfin Prince and his co-horts, intent on taking out the whole human race. I think he had a point - mankind is making a bit of a mess of things! The Tree God is a wonderful creation - terrifying in its grandeur and magnificent in its death.

While I really enjoyed this film and would buy it for myself, for the moment, it will remain on the top shelf next to Del Toro's Spanish language classics and out of reach of my son for another 12 months anyway.






Del Toro,s astonishing imagination illuminates standard fantasy fare., 15 Nov 2008
Having loved the original Hellboy [2004] I was fervently looking forward to this sequel and while Hellboy II The Golden Army isn't a disappointment neither is it up to the standard of the first film. Having said that anything that lets director Guillermo Del Toro propagate his extraordinary imagination is well worth seeing for that reason alone and this film displays that to superlatively sumptuous effect.
Ron Perlman reprises the role of the wisecracking Hellboy who we see as a boy in the opening sequence being told the story of the golden Army by his human father ( John Hurt) who once fought against human kind( the golden army that is , not his father ) but have been mothballed by dividing the crown that controls them into three separate pieces kept in secret locations. Elf prince Nuada ( Luke Goss) may look a little on the pasty side but he is a great warrior and is determined to awaken the golden army so he can wage war on human kind. His twin sister Nuala (Ann Walton) is rather more moderate realising the chaos this would unleash .She also holds one of those missing pieces.
This is pretty standard fantasy fare and there is an argument that Del Toro and Hellboy creator Mike Mingola , the writers should have come up with something stronger in terms of the story , though the script does have a certain sardonic frisson and there is some tremendous character interplay.
Hellboy is still working for the secretive Bureau For Paranormal Research And Defence and still annoying his overbearing boss Manning (Jeffrey Tambor ) who laments his lack of discipline and the fact he keeps getting photographed and put on "You Tube" ."I hate You Tube" he tells Abe Sapian ( Doug Jones) the polite blue skinned amphibian . Hellboy,s partner the fiery (literally ) Liz (Selma Blair) is finding "Reds" lack of domesticity a problem and there is another potential dilemma lurking . Agent John Myers from the first film has been dispatched to Antarctica we are told ( this is because Rupert Evans who played him in Hellboy was unavoidable due to stage commitments)"He likes the cold" Hellboy sneers, and is replaced by ectoplasmic agent Johann Krauss ( voiced byFamily Guy - Series 1 To 5 - Complete " Seth McFarlane with an amusing mangled German accent which he based on Jeremy Irons character in Die Hard 3) whose officiousness rubs up Hellboy the wrong way.
The film makes points about selfless sacrifice , the power of love, the magnetic need for normality (Which it shares with Batman ) and hints broadly at a potential conflict of interest for Hellboy to resolve if there is another Hellboy film . The performances are great again and it,s nice that Liz is given a more developed role other than looking mopey. Really though it's the visuals and set pieces that astound with this film .Del Toro has an incredible eye and will make a scene fantastical even when something ordinary would do. The "Troll Market" scene is astonishing and the high-speed acrobatic denouement between Hellboy and Nuada in a cavernous city surrounded by enormous golden mechanical beings and massive rotating cogs is just breathtaking . There is no cheap CGI for Del Toro , everything looks authentic and he even invokes the demise of a giant "elemental" creature with a sense of magic and loss.
Del Toro clearly feels close to the Hellboy character .He turned down the chance to direct "Halo " , Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince" and "I Am Legend [2007]" to bring this sequel to the screen . It wouldn't be the same without his marvellous vision yet if there is to be another Hellboy ( I very much hope there is) film he needs to work more on the story . Can you imagine a Hellboy film with the same allegorical and dramatic punch as his masterpiece Pan's Labyrinth [2006] ? Till then this will do nicely though.



do we need this?, 11 Nov 2008
I had long been awaiting for the next installment, having watched hellboy many a time, and interested in Del Toro films in general.
The problem was this was all really about breeding, from the winy little brat young hellboy at the start then the choices of demoted Liz Sherman to being stroppy and pregnant, this effecting all decisions of the film. I was expecting an evolution in character this just devolutions her character, who is a Heroine, stuffing a woman back down as our society says "you aren't a real woman unless you are a mother" hence there are very little women who haven't bred and have careers, those who do have a career then pop off and breed as if what ever they do isn't of value as having children. In Liz's demotion to the normal and makes everything normal.
The entering into the fairy lands meeting the angel of death seem like a way from and back to the same things, babies pregnancy and relationships or normal magnitude which isn't why we watch this genre, these films give us another view, deeper view, a mythology of self discovery. Even Abe finds someone and is almost threatening to breed himself. You end up wanting hellboy to go off and the Prince of the Elves to come the slaughter, rather than have to worry at the films finish of the waving characters surrounded by brats looking down at them with tight smiles.
Then the unstoppable golden army is stopped, and the end fizzles away, its not even inspired me to watch again, to buy it on DVD.
But the vision remains Del toro which is the one star, hoping he isn't descending like Ridley Scot into only purely visual and meaningless films.

Great fun, terrific story, good action , 04 Nov 2008
This is a very, very good movie. It's very entertaining from the get-go and has some stunning visuals. There's also a good few laughs as well as some top notch action. Very enjoyable stuff.

An adaptation of the Neil Gaiman novel of the same name, Stardust brings a strong cast together for an enjoyable family feast, with plenty to enjoy.

Stardust