“Baby Driver” is a terrific film about a getaway driver. It’s filled with thrilling car chases, some genuinely amusing comedy and a very unique style. I enjoyed this movie a lot more than I was expecting to.

Baby (Ansel Elgort “The Fault In Our Stars”, “Divergent”) is a legendary getaway driver that does not speak much and spends most of his time listening to his iPod. In order to repay a debt, he works for a crime boss (Kevin Spacey “The Negotiator”). When he meets a delightful young girl (Lily James “Darkest Hour”), he tries to escape the criminal world but that will be no easy task.

Baby drives like Jason Statham’s character in the “Transporter” movies but he is not exactly a tough guy. He has a real love for music and he is practically dependent on it. While at times, he seems to have almost no personality, he is actually a very complicated character and Ansel Elgort does a good job. Kevin Spacey is wonderful as Doc. Jamie Foxx (“Collateral”) is pretty entertaining as Bats. Lily James is really good as Debora. Most of the characters in this movie are very funny and nearly everybody gets to deliver a few funny lines.

“Baby Driver” features some exhilarating driving sequences and supposedly no computer effects were used making them even more impressive. While I do not necessarily like all of the film’s musical choices, the way that it embeds music into the film is truly innovative. One of the best gags in the film sees the criminals accidentally purchase Mike Myers masks instead of Michael Myers masks for their heist. While not perfect, this is a really great movie and I highly recommend “Baby Driver”. I definitely think it is much more captivating than those brainless “Fast and the Furious” movies.

I recently re-watched “Babe: Pig In The City” and I was a little disappointed that I’d reminded myself that it’s not as charming as the original. Sure, the first one wasn’t a masterpiece or even a top mark movie but it wasn’t far behind and although “Pig in the City” is a fun movie it lacks the wit and realistic suspense and setting of the original.

In “Babe: Pig In The City” Babe (Elizabeth Daily “Happy Feet”) accidentally injures his human Farmer Hoggett (James Cromwell “Babe”). Babe’s home is then threatened by bankers so Mrs. Hoggett (Magda Szubanski “The Golden Compass”) takes her husband’s beloved pig and embarks on a trip to get enough money to save the farm from being reposed. Unfortunately, it doesn’t go to plan and both Babe and Mrs. Hoggett are thrown into a world of uncertainty. Babe finds himself kidnapped by a children’s entertainer, chased by two ferocious dogs and having to save all of his new friends from an unpleasant future when they are taken to the pound.

All the animals are voiced reasonably well and they’re all given personalities. Onscreen they look wonderful too. Mrs. Hoggett’s misadventures are mildly amusing.

From beginning to end “Pig In The City” is full of ridiculous antics that defy all logic and lack the realistic charm of the original’s suspenseful moments. In the film’s defence though it does contain some lovely moments that are smarter and more mature than the majority of kids’ movies. This redeems the movie and along with some nice cutesy moments “Babe: Pig In The City” is much certainly a more child friendly movie than the last movie. If you haven’t seen “Pig In The City” and you have a small child I recommend waiting till you think they’re ready and get both because I think you need to see the first as well (and it would help if you saw it first).

There are a few things that I believe the people who made this move have not done: 1. Watch any of the other “Alien” or “Predator” films (including the first “AVP” film) 2. Find out the meaning of the word ‘quality’ 3. Not realize that this is a big movie that’ll have a wider release than just the SYFY channel. I think they have not done these things and somehow this sequel is even worse than the first one.

“AVPR” takes place right after the first movie as the Predalien makes the Predators’ ship crash-land near a small, American town. A vengeful Predator goes in search of the Aliens but doesn’t prove any help to the innocent people of the town that are trying to survive the onslaught of monsters.

The people in this are so poor. Most of them are just a bunch of annoying teenagers, which makes it feel more like a slasher flick instead of a sci-fi/action film, which it should be. Many of these teens are brutally murdered by both the Aliens and the lone Predator, making it another reason why it feels like more slasher and less sci-fi/action. The Aliens look better than they did in the last film. The Predator looks a little rubbish though. The Predalien is a waste of space the amounts to virtually nothing.

This film features a lot of action and a lot of gore (two things that the first one didn’t have at all) but sadly although they’re two ingredients that I feel are essential to a crossover between the “Alien” and “Predator” franchises, the film has so many issues that it’s even worse than the original. Bad acting, a bad script, bad characters, average action scenes and no scares makes this a tedious film to watch and it feels like it was more intended for television than a theatrical release. The ending even implies a third outing. Let’s hope nobody has the ‘bright idea’ to make that picture.

A long time ago the “Alien” franchise had a great name and even the first “Predator” was widely regarded as a great sci-fi action flick but this film that pairs two of cinema’s most notorious extra-terrestrial killers has no suspense and has below average action scenes.

The film has nothing to do with the plot of the arcade game. In Antarctica, something strange on a satellite sparks an archaeological expedition. The group accidentally unearth the ‘Aliens’… and some of the group find they are about to be the hosts of these creatures. Also, there are the Predators, who like hunting and they see the Aliens as the ultimate prey and like to use the humans as the hosts. The remaining humans realise they have to pick sides if they are to survive.

The humans are boring. We came here to see Aliens fight Predators and not to watch boring humans do boring stuff for well over half of the runtime. Why didn’t they have some ultra-macho tough guy like Arnold Schwarzenegger in the first “Predator”? Or even better why didn’t they have Arnold Schwarzenegger himself? The Aliens look alright except for the fact lots of the shots they’re featured in have them made by computer effects. Did they do that in “Aliens”? No. Did they look great in the older films? Yes. The Predators don’t look all that impressive. Also, the Predators actually team-up with the humans to fight the Aliens, which I think is an awful idea.

This should have been so over the top and fun but it just offers so little. This is just a bland experience, even by ‘versus’ movie standards. The action is bad, the special effects are mediocre, the horror is non-existent, the acting is bad, the dialog is weak, the plot is thin and the film doesn’t give us anywhere near enough of what we expected to see. However, it does give us some hilarious looking blood, which is some of the fakest I’ve ever seen in a movie.

The Marvel Cinematic Universe just seems to be getting bigger and bolder. “Avengers: Infinity War” seeks to bring in the dozens of heroes from the previous Marvel movies and it really is a great spectacle.

The Avengers, the Guardians of the Galaxy and other Marvel heroes must join forces if they are to stop the evil intergalactic warlord Thanos (Josh Brolin “The Goonies”, “Jonah Hex”) from getting his hands on all the Infinity Stones. If Thanos collects them all and places them on his gauntlet, he will be able to fulfil his wish and wipe out half of the population of the universe.

It is really great to see Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr. “U.S. Marshals”), Doctor Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch “War Horse”), Spider-Man (Tom Holland “The Impossible”), the Incredible Hulk (Mark Ruffalo “13 Going On 30”), Star Lord (Chris Pratt “Passengers”) and many more all share the screen. However, the Guardians of the Galaxy characters are just so darn likeable that I wish they were the focus of the movie. Thanos is a really good villain and I think his evil plan is actually quite interesting. He also gets the most screen time out of all the characters and that makes sense considering he is the reason why they all need to work together.

“Avengers: Infinity War” features some terrific action sequences and it adds in an appropriate level of humour (the Kevin Bacon joke is brilliant). I thought that the Marvel movies might be starting to get a little stale by now but this shows you that they know how to keeps things fresh and can raise the stakes when necessary. While I do not think it’s a masterpiece (or even the best Marvel film), there is no denying that “Avengers: Infinity War” is a great addition to the superhero genre and I look forward to seeing the resolution in “Avengers: Endgame”.

This movie works well enough to get a recommendation as a movie but it works superbly well as a novelty item. This is a film where we get to see some of Marvel’s greatest superheroes onscreen together. Most of these crossover films never work particularly well but I was impressed with this.

In this film, Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr. “Iron Man”, “Sherlock Holmes”), Thor (Chris Hemsworth “Thor”, “Star Trek”), Captain America (Chris Evans “Fantastic Four”) and the Incredible Hulk (Mark Ruffalo (“Shutter Island”) must join forces to defeat the evil Loki (Tom Hiddleston “War Horse”) and his alien army.

Robert Downey Jr. is good as Iron Man. Thor is okay as Chris Hemsworth gives a mediocre performance. Chris Evans is a little weak as Captain America. Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson “Snakes On A Plane”) is good. Mark Ruffalo is tolerabl as the Incredible Hulk’s human form, Bruce Banner, but the Incredible Hulk himself is decent. Loki is pretty good this time around and a substantial improvement over how he was in “Thor”. Jeremy Renner (“Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol”) and Scarlett Johansson (“The Prestige”) play some less powerful and more obscure heroes named Hawkeye and Black Widow, who aren’t too impressive sadly and I’d happily trade them for Spider-Man.

The action in this film is what holds it together. The dialog is fairly weak, the acting is mediocre and there are punch lines that are only mildly amusing. As a novelty this film works brilliantly as we get to see some great superheroes onscreen together for a decent length of time with lots of interaction and enough action that even puts the newer “Transformers” movies to shame (although only the first is worth bothering with anyway). I think anyone who isn’t a major geek will still enjoy this film for the action as it is truly splendid.

The first “Avengers” movie was no masterpiece but it delivered an entertaining crossover film where Earth’s mightiest heroes joined forces to battle evil. “Avengers: Age Of Ultron” is not bad but feels somewhat underwhelming as it comes in the wake of “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” and “Guardians of the Galaxy”.

In “Age Of Ultron”, Tony Stark/Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr. “Iron Man”) hopes to revive a peacekeeping computer system but things take a turn for the worst as the system turns hostile and the Avengers must do battle against Ultron (voiced by James Spader “Stargate”) from enacting a terrifying planet that will doom the planet.

Robert Downey Jr. does a good job as Iron Man. Chris Evans (“Captain America: The First Avenger”) is reasonable as Captain America. Chris Hemsworth (“Thor”) is also reasonable as Thor. I was again a little disappointed by the performance from Mark Ruffalo (“Shutter Island”) as the Incredible Hulk’s human form, Bruce Banner. The other heroes are not very good, with the exception of Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner “The Bourne Legacy”). Some of the comedic interactions between the heroes feel really unnecessary and they result in making the film needlessly long. The Ultron villain is really boring.

There are some great moments in this film. The scene where Iron Man fights the Incredible Hulk is genuine blast yet there are too many parts that come across as routine. The movie is not helped by a convoluted story with a few too many subplots. If you are a big fan of the Marvel movies then you should see this movie (you sort-of need to considering all the films are part of one cinematic universe) but I think casual fans of the superhero genre are going to be a little disappointed at how average this one feels in comparison to some of the other ones.

The “Austin Powers” series has never really worked for me, this first is easily the best as at least it is original (kind of). The franchise parodies the “James Bond” films and the 60s in general but it does in such a one-dimensional way with its toilet humour and sex gags that it never really clicks; this one occasionally beats you down and gets a chuckle out of you but that’s it.

In “Austin Powers: International Man Of Mystery”, Mike Myers (“Wayne’s World”, “Shrek 2”) stars as the titular British spy character and his evil nemesis Dr. Evil. Both are frozen in the 60s and resurface in 1997 to continue their battle against each other as Dr. Evil plans to cause all volcanoes in the world to simultaneously erupt. It’s up to Austin Powers and his female spy accomplice Vanessa (Elizabeth Hurley “Bedazzled”).

I’ll give Myers some credit for making me giggle at his Dr. Evil character but Austin Powers is such a lousy creation; he’s just so basic and boring that I couldn’t find myself enjoying anything about him. Elizabeth Hurley is pretty decent as Austin’s girl in this one as she has some personality. The other characters just aren’t very funny either and that’s a real shame.

The “Austin Powers” films are really obvious and simplistic mockeries of “James Bond” and never really show any level of intellect unlike something such as “South Park”, “Austin Powers” shares the same league with other brainless gross comedies like “Ted” and the appropriately named “Dumb and Dumberer”. I don’t understand what’s so appealing about this film and the others as all they do is represent 60s Britain at its most simplistic level without every delving deeper and finding something smart to say or do. Like I say this one is the best as this one came up with the jokes and while I don’t like them they are original.

I haven’t enjoyed any of the “Austin Powers” movies as I haven’t found them as the main character would say ‘shagadelic’. However, this one is just insulting in every way possible as Austin would say ‘it’s lost its mojo’ (not that I think that the series ever had that anyway).

“Goldmember” follows our, as the movie would say, ‘shagadelic’ spy Austin Powers (Mike Myers “Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me”) as he captures the evil Dr. Evil (also played by Myers) but then he needs his enemy’s help when he discovers his father Nigel Powers (Michael Caine “Batman Begins”) is missing. Austin then travels back in time to 1975 where he meets the villainous Goldmember (again played Myers). Through dumb antics and battles with other villains including Fat Bastard (once again played by Myers) as well as getting busy with Foxxy Cleopatra (Beyoncé Knowles “Dreamgirls”) Austin manages to save the day once again.

Austin Powers is a character I just can’t laugh at; I just never find his overly dumb and usually dirty antics amusing. Sadly this time around I didn’t find myself giggling at Dr. Evil, which was a shame because I usually find him funny. Beyoncé Knowles is unmemorable as Foxxy. Goldmember is a severely unfunny enemy for Powers.

“Goldmember” plays like an early draft of an “Austin Powers” movie… and a poor one at that as it feels like they never quite get it right. The whole film plays like a rehash of the last movie that was a rehash of the first movie. I’m shocked that so many people like this movie and I’m even shocked that so many “Austin Powers” fans like it. I didn’t laugh during this movie but I did come close to throwing up. If you’re a diehard “Austin Powers” fan then maybe you’ll like this one but for anyone else stay well clear of this one.

The Jewish Holocaust is one of the most despicable parts of human history. I would argue that the best person to depict the horrors of such an event is not Uwe Boll (“House of the Dead”, “Rampage”). He’s usually exploitative, offensive and amateurish. He’s even played Hitler in his comedy film “Blubberella”. Yet parts of “Auschwitz” are surprisingly done well. They seem to show the harrowing nature of events but like pretty much anything with Boll’s name attached to it, it has problems.

“Auschwitz” is a strange hybrid film with parts of it being like a movie showing Nazis soldiers gassing Jewish prisoners but we also get documentary parts where Boll interviews German students about Hitler and the Holocaust. There’s also an extensive use of archive footage during the latter third of the film.

At times, the film effectively shows the depraved acts that the Nazis committed towards the Jews, there are a few scenes with terrible acting and dialog. One scene that shows two German soldiers talking while looking at jewellery that they have taken from the Jews, contains the sort of awful dialog that you only hear in a movie by Uwe Boll. Boll himself plays one of the Nazis. The scenes with the German students are quite shocking too as many of them are ignorant about German history.

In some ways, I was dreading seeing a Holocaust film by Uwe Boll. However, it’s certainly not as bad as I thought it would be. It’s still not exactly good though because you have got the awkward dialog and the strange mix of styles. Why not give us a feature-length experience visualising the Holocaust? Why not give us a feature-length documentary showing how some modern Germans have a worrying lack of knowledge about the Holocaust and the Nazi era? Trying to mix the two creates this odd little movie. It’s certainly not as bad as many of his other films but I would not recommend that you waste your time with “Auschwitz”.