NEWS: Video - Oscar Predictions

Edd Wright interviews The Wild Bore (Sam - that's me) about who could win what at this years Oscars - and some gossip about Natalie Portman.

True Grit

The Coen brothers return with their most successful movie ever - a remake of the John Wayne classic True Grit. Tipped for the Oscars, is this modern Western going to sweep up in 2011?


I'm going to be honest, I've never seen the original True Grit - all I know about it is that it was John Wayne's sole Oscar winning performance and his last. Jeff Bridges takes on the one eyed Rooster who is employed by a young girl to find her father's killer - it's a simple chase movie that we know the Coens can do well, but is it their best yet? To be honest, I don't think so.

There's nothing I like more than a good Western but I just couldn't get into this story that much, it's great don't get me wrong but I don't love it as much as I loved No Country For Old Men for instance. That's not to say the performances here aren't incredible, because they are, and I'm sure that there might be an Oscar nomination nod here. Bridges is perfect for the dissatisfied, nihilistic Marshall and his gravel-tinged voice is full of the spite that he has for criminals - he truly doesn't care about killing another man. This is in contrast to the rather conservative Texas Ranger Matt Damon who has been chasing this notorious criminal for a while and his journey crosses theirs more regularly than they might like. Brolin as Chaney is again a small but perfect performance but it is Steinfeld as young Mattie that really stands out. For such a young actress her bold, brave and startlingly convincing performance sometimes completely outshines the others and I would not be surprised if she is nominated, or perhaps might even win an Oscar this year.

Not only is it just the acting, but the writing is also remarkable and every character in this movie will make you love and yet hate them. The girl is clever, sweet-natured but yet bloodthirsty and often annoying, Brolin is clearly evil but naive and subservient, Damon is brave yet stubborn and Bridges is the classic anti-hero. The dialogue and pacing is perfect, keeping you on your toes one minute but then lets you embrace the exchanges around the campfire the next, all without losing interest. A big issue here was that there's a lot of grumbling, murmuring and often I couldn't understand what was being said, an issue I'm finding cropping up more and more often - either that or I'm getting older.

I guess there are some deeper themes here, some more apparent than others such as feminism, sexism, existentialism and generally the idea of killing a man. However, there is also the idea of following your dream, coming-of-age, family and it's all generally very macho. It was an enjoyable film and I highly recommend it, but I can't justify giving it top marks because I immediately forgot about it as soon as it was over. It might get the same score as Tron: Legacy, which people might see as blasphemous, but I really did enjoy it the same amount. Coen brothers are generally considered 'cool' and 'indie', but have they ever been truly indie? They are usually the first names people go to when they try to suggest they know something about film, the amount of times I hear 'I think the Coen brothers are amazing', I agree that they are amazing but people often gush over them way too much then they should - A Simple Man? Burn After Reading? They got rave reviews but I didn't think they were much cop. Shock!

Overall, this is a good film that I would enjoy watching again, but not unless I had to. Great performances and I'm sure the Oscars will love it but if you've seen the trailer, you've seen the film. I don't really care if it's got Coen's all over it, it's a great film but it's not amazing and I'm sure they will release something similar in a couple of years. Quantity doesn't mean quality.

Rating: 8/10

Tron Evolution

Just before the world goes Tron crazy, we get a glimpse at Disney's game to coincide with the release. Taking place before the events of Tron Legacy, we delve into The Grid to see what all the fuss is about ...

I was apprehensive of this game for good reasons, the production company behind it had only really done Turok before this, which wasn't exactly inspiring confidence and Disney aren't known for their cutting edge computer games (Kingdom Hearts can suck my balls), so what to make of Tron Evolution?

Well let's set the scene, Flynn introduces us to the game by saying how the system he created has evolved, it's not just computer games now. Instead, it's expanded and there's not just basic programs bouncing around in there either - there's Iso's. These Iso's are entities that have formed on their own and serve no direct purpose and there's unrest in The Grid because of this. After an Iso has gone rogue and become a virus, Clu (who is Flynn's server manager and looks just like him) goes a bit mad and declares war on all Iso's - civil unrest ensues and the virus doesn't help either. So that's basically it.

What follows on from there I still don't know. You run into some people in the way and you have to get places but I'm never sure why and I'm afraid I lost interest not long after the start. This isn't just because of the story, it's for a number of reasons.

The first thing you'll notice is the graphics, it's very slick and the neon lights look great and you'll be immediately impressed. However, on closer inspection you realise it all looks rather the same and begins to hurt your eyes after a while. The close up's and anything that needs real texturing look terrible and the Tron universe is simple and quite barren which doesn't make for much of a sight.

The gameplay is also ridiculously behind-the-times. It plays like Prince of Persia where you hold a button to run up walls and basically do anything fancy, which means you're pressing that button for pretty much the whole game. You run up walls, jump about and do other parkour stuff that seems completely out of place and you'll spend about 80% of your time playing it, just moving from one platform to another. However, it's not as advanced as Uncharted or say, Enslaved, so you can fall off at any point, often don't know where you're supposed to be going or what you're supposed to be doing and will time and time again jump off wrong and end up dead. I must have died well over 200 - 300 times and some of the checkpoints are so stupidly placed that you'll find yourself having to kill a bunch of enemies just to make sure you get that one jump right again, and if you don't get the next one right? Back to kill those enemies again. I cannot tell you how frustrating it all is. The platform aspect of the game is tedious, backward, repetitive and a chore - it's no fun whatsoever.

So when you're not jumping about like a retard, what are you doing? Mostly fighting. Once again, this has been poorly conceived as you often don't know how hard an enemy is hitting and with their sodding flying discs you never know when you should be blocking or hitting. You don't feel any real metaphysical contact when you do hit (that should make sense to the gamers) so you just feel like you're swooshing about and hoping for the best. You have four different types of disc but there's no real grace to it, I often kept with the heavy disc and did an 'area attack' which saw me off pretty much everyone. You have to keep your energy levels up by running, much like a bag of crisps along a checkout counter, against an energy wall thing which gives you health. This often means that in crucial times, you'll often miss it or spend 20 seconds trying to get the run right meaning by then you're already dead and have to start it again. Also by using your 'special' discs, you use up power, so to up your power you hop over desks or little stumps in the ground - no joke. The whole thing is just bloody stupid.

So what about the cool stuff like the bikes? Well, like any good gamer knows, sometimes games have to sacrifice skill for spectacle. Take Call Of Duty's little bike or four wheel excursions, they are fast, furious, and take minimal skill to continue and would rather you enjoy it than have to do it again and again and again. Tron isn't like that. Instead, if you hit anything, or even touch the sides you lose a lot of health, which means instead of flooring it, you have to patiently and slowly make your way round bends and then suddenly know when to speed up at points to get over jumps. When other bikers engage you (there's only 3 I think in the entire game and they don't last longer than ten seconds each) then instead of trying to get them to crash into your light, you just have to outrace them. No 90 degree turns either. Disgraceful.

The tank sequences are also laughable and feel like a PS One game gone awry, it's simple shoot and move mechanics that are so lame it hurts. When you have to battle enemy ones without being in the comfort of your own tank, it takes a while to figure out how to kill them and if their turret so much as brushes you, you're dead. The 'game' sequence where you go up against other programs in gladiator type events is so short that if you blink you'll miss it and is stupidly easy. It feels like an afterthought. Apart from that, that's really it.

What annoys me the most is that because of the lights and the fact your character doesn't say anything it reminds me of Dead Space, which makes me even angrier for some reason, probably because the way it looks is it's only saving grace and it doesn't even stand up to a game released years ago. Overall, there have been worse games out there but this is shockingly bad. Apparently multiplayer mode is an important part, but I can't see it being much fun as the story campaign was infuriating. Don't touch this game, just leave it well alone and hope that one day someone can do Tron justice and, if you're planning to get this on PS Move then good luck because I wouldn't dare.

It's definitely taken a Tron for the worst, but looks pretty at times and, I guess it does have light cycles. It's either clearly been rushed for release or the producers are idiots.

Shame.

Rating: 3/10

Crazy Heart

The Oscar winning film that ticks all the boxes. Is it the masterpiece some make it out to be? Or is it just a melting pot of what the Academy enjoy?

Jeff Bridges is a fantastic actor. No-one can deny that and his Oscar for this is well deserved but I can't help but say that it's just a bit boring.

The story follows "Bad" as he is at the bottom of his career, trying to get back on track but instead he is falling into an abyss of alcohol and self loathing. His health is starting to fail and he's watching the young bucks take over. All the while, he's falling for younger single mother Maggie Gyllenhaal and starts to change his life around. Sound familiar? There are resonances of The Wrestler here, but also Walk The Line and the rest of these biopics. Except this one isn't real, and that's a major flaw.

The reason why biopics work so well is because fact is stranger than fiction, and more interesting. I couldn't tell you what really happens in this whole film (except that I did it in the last paragraph) but I guess the narrative plays like his character, stumbling from one scene to the next. The only thing driving this forward is the acting. Geeky Gyllenhaal, whom I can't stand, does her bit and Colin Farrell makes a great little cameo but really, there's just no real jeopardy.

Bridges' moment of clarity comes when he has an incident in a shopping mall. Oh my God! Time to get sober. This isn't exactly that rock'n'roll. The country songs are okayish, but much like the genre, it's too same-y and the lyrics almost verge on cringeworthy - "Falling feels like flying for a little while" - wow.

This character has everything that fills a country singer stereotype. He drinks, womanises, has a son somewhere, married lots of times, a 'troubled genius', smokes and sings sad songs. There's nothing here that will blow your mind. The redemption is rather quick and ill prepared, and his jealousy of Tommy Sweet seems petty. Did he learn anything? Sure. But he didn't seem that far gone in the first place really. Just needed a kick up the arse it seems.

Overall, it's worth seeing as a nice, sweet film about a sad, old singer. But really, you'll forget about it in a couple of days and think of it purely as 'that film Jeff Bridges won that Oscar for'. Enjoy it, but it's Oscar fodder a plenty and there's much better stuff you could be spending your money on.

Rating: 7/10