:00:00. > :00:23.It's time for our weekly film review with Mark Kermode.
:00:24. > :00:29.Welcome to the Film Review. Taking us through the latest releases is
:00:30. > :00:41.Mark Kermode. We have a new X`Men film. We have
:00:42. > :00:49.Heli, are extremely challenging film from Mexico.
:00:50. > :00:57.And we have Feeding Gigolo in which Woody Allen acts and John Turturro
:00:58. > :01:02.writes and directs. The X`Men, it's absolutely
:01:03. > :01:06.everywhere. This is a way of putting together all the disparate elements
:01:07. > :01:10.of the franchise. In this, we start in the near future. Terrible things
:01:11. > :01:15.are happening, and in order to stop those things happening, Wolverine
:01:16. > :01:20.has to be sent back into the retro past in order to do something that
:01:21. > :01:24.will rearrange the present. There is a lovely bit of exposition at the
:01:25. > :01:31.beginning in which they explain to Wolverine, " you don't age, so you
:01:32. > :01:44.will look the same. " which is very useful. Were sent back to the 1970s
:01:45. > :01:51.to meet the past and change it. I help you?
:01:52. > :01:59.What happened to the school? Are you a parent?
:02:00. > :02:07.I hope not. I guess you only glimmer.
:02:08. > :02:10.There is no professor here. You're pretty strong for a scrawny
:02:11. > :02:22.kid. Are you sure there is not a little beast in new? I said the
:02:23. > :02:31.school is close. There is no professor here, I told you that.
:02:32. > :02:35.Basically, they send his spirits from the future back into his body
:02:36. > :02:40.in the past but obviously as body looks the same. Much of the fun of
:02:41. > :02:44.characters are going to play out. It characters are going to play out. It
:02:45. > :02:52.is an interesting film would too many characters to deal with
:02:53. > :02:55.completely. Bryan Singer, the director, is a driving force behind
:02:56. > :02:59.these movies. It dazzles you with enough gobbledygook that you do not
:03:00. > :03:08.think, hang on, this does not quite make sense. It is utterly ``
:03:09. > :03:10.terrific performance by the man who has invented these extraordinary
:03:11. > :03:16.robots which will destroy the future of the past cannot be changed. There
:03:17. > :03:21.are some good action sequences. It is colourful and bright. The cast
:03:22. > :03:26.managed to do a good job of delivering dialogue whilst wearing
:03:27. > :03:32.increasingly ridiculous costumes. It is a bold attempt to make the thing
:03:33. > :03:36.tying together in a way that is rigorous and coherent. It does not
:03:37. > :03:41.quite hang together. There was a cameo performance by Richard Nixon,
:03:42. > :03:53.there is this blend of history, fact and fiction. It is not by any means
:03:54. > :03:58.the best of the X:Men films, but you can't forgive it for the things that
:03:59. > :04:01.are wrong with that. There is an underlying sense of it being a bit
:04:02. > :04:04.of a road show, trying to get all of these disparate elements on screen
:04:05. > :04:11.and allowing everybody to do the thing they do before moving onto the
:04:12. > :04:16.next set piece. And moving back and forward in time terms, does that
:04:17. > :04:24.work? You have to go with it. These things are happening in parallel,
:04:25. > :04:29.both things are interconnected, the future in the past, but most of the
:04:30. > :04:35.action takes place in the 70s. It is good fun and it is ambitious. It is
:04:36. > :04:38.not a masterpiece by any means. Although some fans of the series
:04:39. > :04:52.think that that is exactly what it is. To Mexico now, and Heli. This is
:04:53. > :04:56.an incredibly grim portrait of life in modern Mexico. The central
:04:57. > :05:00.character is a young man living in a House with his wife, his child, his
:05:01. > :05:04.father and his young sister who's having a relationship with a
:05:05. > :05:07.17`year`old cadet which will somehow 17`year`old cadet which will somehow
:05:08. > :05:18.lead to terrible catastrophe in the family. The film earned notoriety at
:05:19. > :05:23.Cannes because it has won notorious extended torture scene. Although
:05:24. > :05:27.much of it is very difficult to watch, occasionally intolerable to
:05:28. > :05:32.watch, it does have in its central character is a strange kind of
:05:33. > :05:36.resilience. You can see the director has sympathy for the plight of the
:05:37. > :05:40.characters. He is trying to take situations from modern headlines and
:05:41. > :05:43.put them on the screen in a way that has sympathy for the people at the
:05:44. > :05:49.sharp end of it. Some people will find it too tough and stop at some
:05:50. > :05:54.points, watching it, I thought, this is almost intolerable. But
:05:55. > :05:57.afterwards, thinking about it, it is a film with a heart, albeit a very
:05:58. > :06:05.dark heart, and it is a very tough watch. And the view of modern`day
:06:06. > :06:15.Mexico that is uncomfortable. Deeply uncomfortable. Certainly, there have
:06:16. > :06:32.been some worries in Mexico that the film paints an unfettered portrait
:06:33. > :06:46.of the country. Fading Gigolo is about a man who is an old gigolo.
:06:47. > :06:52.This is exactly my point. I am not a beautiful man. You have a certain
:06:53. > :06:58.kind of sex appeal. Is Mick Jagger and beautiful man? The man opens to
:06:59. > :07:08.`` opens as mouth to sing, and it is a horror. Some guys just like better
:07:09. > :07:13.when they are naked. I am figuring that you one of them. What does that
:07:14. > :07:23.have to do with Mick Jagger? He's rich and famous. You are sick man. I
:07:24. > :07:33.go for help twice a week. You need a guy like Tom Ford or George Clooney.
:07:34. > :07:36.You are not that. You are man's man. You can see that Woody Allen is
:07:37. > :07:41.doing what Woody Allen is famous for. You have to get over the ego
:07:42. > :07:54.centres are to the central conceit, that Sharon Stone will pay Woody
:07:55. > :08:02.Allen $1000 to provide her with macro to to take part in a menage a
:08:03. > :08:10.trois. If you can get you can get yonder conceit, there are some
:08:11. > :08:13.gentle last be had, especially in the conversations between Woody
:08:14. > :08:19.Allen and Jon Turturro. There is a deeper plot in which he uses his
:08:20. > :08:25.healing hands on a Hasidic window played by Vanessa Paradis, no,
:08:26. > :08:28.really, and that aims more towards the metaphysical. There is something
:08:29. > :08:31.poignant about it but you have to get over the most ridiculous of
:08:32. > :08:39.obstacles in order to enjoy it. It is not to be taken seriously. It is
:08:40. > :08:42.fun but very flawed. I liked description of Woody Allen's
:08:43. > :08:48.performance as saying that he seems somehow liberated. It is not the
:08:49. > :08:51.first time he has shown up on someone else's from, but he is
:08:52. > :09:00.clearly enjoying himself and having fun. Woody Allen had a lot of input
:09:01. > :09:06.into the script. He played his part. Yes. Let us talk about your
:09:07. > :09:13.favourite of the films that is out at the moment. You're going to tell
:09:14. > :09:16.us about this. It is a better film than the critics have given it
:09:17. > :09:22.credit for. Gareth Edwards takes the Godzilla franchise somewhere new.
:09:23. > :09:29.Also, being very respectful and intelligent with the original film,
:09:30. > :09:31.which was very much to do with the Japanese response to nuclear testing
:09:32. > :09:37.and to the legacy of the atomic bombs. That was a very smart thing.
:09:38. > :09:46.This takes that idea and something interesting with it. His previous
:09:47. > :09:48.film, Monsters, made no money, this cost 60 million, but it has the
:09:49. > :09:53.fingerprints of Gareth Edwards on it and when you finally get to the
:09:54. > :10:01.third Act of the film, it is very eager and impressive. I have seen it
:10:02. > :10:07.twice, and the sound is everything. It is a smart monster movie. Good to
:10:08. > :10:14.him for managing to put it together. And the best DVD pretty much I have
:10:15. > :10:26.chosen this, I was not crazy about it when it came out in the cinema.
:10:27. > :10:29.If you're interested in the Greenwich Village folk scene in the
:10:30. > :10:34.60s, it is a slightly fictionalised version of that. It refers to real
:10:35. > :10:40.events and real characters. It is made with a lot of love, care and
:10:41. > :10:46.attention. I found it rather called on the first couple of viewings, but
:10:47. > :10:53.on the third viewing, it warmed up. `` rather cold. Thank you very
:10:54. > :11:02.much. A quick reminder that you can find more film, news and reviews on
:11:03. > :11:08.market a mode's blog. `` Mark Kermode. That's over this week.
:11:09. > :11:17.Thank you for watching and goodbye. `` that's all for this week.
:11:18. > :11:21.It is almost time for the BBC News at ten with you Edwards.