“Dragon Ball Z: Battle Of Gods” kickstarted a revival of “Dragon Ball” by ditching the continuity of the divisive “Dragon Ball GT” series. With great animation and a terrific new villain, this is easily one of the better “Dragon Ball” films out there.

This movie is set after the end of the “Dragon Ball Z” show. We discover that Lord Beerus, the ‘God of Destruction’, has awoken and has set his sights on doing battle with a ‘Super Saiyan God’. When he learns that no Saiyan is powerful enough to be in the same league as him, he contemplates destroying the Earth. Goku and his friends must find a way to transform one of them into the Super Saiyan God and save the planet from Lord Beerus.

For fans of the shows, get ready to see lots of familiar faces such as Goku, Vegeta and Gohan. They all look great with the new updated animation. There are some really funny moments in here such as Vegeta singing about bingo. Lord Beerus is a fantastic villain. He is genuinely a lot more complex and interesting than I was expecting. The interactions between him and Goku and surprisingly poetic at times. This is something I was not ready for in a film about a man with crazy hair punching a giant purple cat man.

I’ll admit that it starts off a little slow but the second half of this movie is just intense as Goku and Lord Beerus have a spectacular showdown. Fans that like to squabble about the canon also seem to prefer this to “Dragon Ball GT”. It’s not exactly going to change your life but if you want to see a really good anime film with a lot of action then look no further than “Dragon Ball Z: Battle Of Gods”.

“Dragon Ball Super: Broly” is the longest and most successful “Dragon Ball” movie to date. It seems to do a lot right as it creates a surprisingly accessible experience for non-fans and manages to give the hardcore fans the first canonical appearance of Broly.

The plot of this film is perhaps a little too ambitious. It tries to tie together the backstories of Broly, Vegeta and Frieza. We learn that shortly before Frieza destroyed the planet Vegeta, King Vegeta (Vegeta’s father) exiled Broly to a remote and inhospitable planet. Now Frieza intends to get the Earth’s Dragon Balls and he has brought Broly with him. Goku and Vegeta will be pushed to their limits in their battle against Broly.

Broly has already appeared in three other “Dragon Ball” movies but as I previously stated, this is his first canonical appearance because some “Dragon Ball” fans like to obsess about the canon like it’s holy scripture. Broly arguably gets a little too much screen time and as a result, Goku and Vegeta lose out on the spotlight. I think the inclusion of Frieza is interesting yet I do have my worries that his presence merely overcomplicates things. Some of the other characters were not particularly entertaining.

Although I do think that the plot is unnecessary complicated, the filmmakers do a really good job in terms of explaining a lot of things about the “Dragon Ball” universe. The big battle at the end involving Goku, Vegeta, Broly and Frieza is spectacular. The animation throughout is very impressive. I do sometimes miss the simplicity of the older “Dragon Ball” stuff yet I cannot deny the fact that this movie looks fantastic. Non-fans may still be confused by some of “Dragon Ball Super: Broly” but this is as good a place as any to start.

I’ve never seen the original television series “Dragnet” and I don’t know if this does it justice but this film version is both an effectuate spoof and homage to police programmes of the past that can also work on the same level as a lot of buddy cop movies of the 1980s such as “Beverly Hills Cop”.

In “Dragnet”, Sergeant Joe Friday (Dan Aykroyd “Ghostbusters”, “The Great Outdoors”) is a L.A. police officer who does everything by the book. Friday gets a new partner in the form of Detective Pep Streebek (Tom Hanks “Toy Story”, “Big”) who is reckless but gets the job done. The two must try to stop a group of criminals.

Dan Aykroyd is fantastic as Sergeant Friday; he really captures the essence of old police show policemen. Tom Hanks is equally great as Detective Streebek. The two in the movie are really great as Friday acts like he’s from the 50s and 60s while Streebek seems to be in the 80s along with everyone else, this is great idea for a movie like this and it makes it highly enjoyable to watch. The other characters aren’t too compelling to watch but you’ve got enough with the two leads.

“Dragnet” is a movie that is very similar to “Beverly Hills Cop” as both are comedies of the police/buddy cop genre but both also work as legitimate police/buddy cop films unlike films such as “National Lampoon’s Loaded Weapon 1”. Some scenes in “Dragnet” are very enjoyable and very amusing but there a few moments that don’t work such as the scene where Hanks’ character makes a bad guy talk in the interrogation room by repeatedly slamming a draw into his private area. Aside from a few mishaps this is a fun picture that I recommend because it is so effectuate and I feel it is as good as “The Naked Gun”.

Back in the 40s, Universal gave the world “Frankenstein Meets The Wolf Man”, which saw two great movie monsters do battle. In 1971, we got the cheap and lousy flick called “Dracula vs. Frankenstein”. This looks and feels a world away from some of the classic monster movies Universal gifted the world. This movie is literally one of the darkest movies I have ever seen as you genuinely cannot see what is going on a lot of the time.

In this movie, Dracula (Zandor Vorkov) joins forces with a descendant of Dr. Frankenstein. That’s pretty much all the plot there is as this was not originally intended to be a film with Dracula and the Frankenstein Monster, they just got thrown in later on. Lots of the scenes do not really connect so it feels like watching several different movies.

Dracula only appears in a few scenes and he is pretty pathetic. He does not even turn into a bat in this film. This film features arguably the worst version of the Frankenstein Monster that I have ever seen. Lon Chaney Jr. (“The Wolf Man”) somehow gets dragged into this mess, which is pretty sad considering that this was his last movie.

The acting is terrible, the special effects are really bad and the film makes little to no sense. However, I do have to admit that I was amused by a lot of it because it is so laughably bad. The final fight against the two monsters is so dark that it becomes almost impossible to figure out what is going on. You almost wish you were watching “Alien vs. Predator” or “Freddy vs. Jason” instead. Fans of the two iconic monsters will have to look elsewhere unless they are really in the mood for a ridiculously bad monster mash.

A historical picture with a supernatural twist, “Dracula Untold” merges reality and fantasy to create an interesting and entertaining movie. Many have criticised it for deviating greatly from the source material but I would get bored seeing the same story again and again. The movie is almost a feature length version based on the opening scene from 1992’s “Bram Stoker’s Dracula”.

In this movie, Vlad the Impaler (Luke Evans “The Girl On The Train”) faces a difficult challenge as the Ottoman Turks demand his kingdom give up a thousand boys in exchange for security and any form of refusal would result in war with the Turks. When Vlad refuses to meet their demands, he seeks to become a vampire so that his people may have a chance of survival.

Luke Evans does a good job as Vlad. In this version, Dracula does not merely become a bat to fly, he transforms into a swarm of bats. Dominic Cooper (“Warcraft: The Beginning”) plays Sultan Mehmed and he is okay. I enjoyed the performance from Charles Dance (“Last Action Hero”) as the vampire that transforms Vlad into Dracula. Sarah Gadon (“Cosmopolis”) is good as Vlad’s wife, Mirena. The other characters are fine.

While I probably would have preferred a regular Vlad the Impaler movie, “Dracula Untold” is still an entertaining film. The large battle sequences are a treat and I very much like the look and feel of the movie. I did not really care for the ending, which was clearly designed to set up a Universal Monsters universe (something that did not happen). If you want a more traditional “Dracula” movie then watch the 1931 “Dracula” or “Bram Stoker’s Dracula” but if you have seen those and want something different then “Dracula Untold” is worth checking out. Still, I do not get why we cannot have a regular movie about Vlad the Impaler, you think the success of films such as “Gladiator” would have opened the floodgates.

“Double Team” is a big, snazzy spy flick; the problem is that it doesn’t have the sophistication to work (“James Bond” this is not). The fight scenes are fun and creative but the star power and script aren’t there at all.

In “Double Team”, super spy Jack Quinn (Jean-Claude Van Damme “Double Impact”, “Hard Target”) teams up with weapons dealer Yaz (Dennis Rodman “Simon Sez”) to take on bad guy Stavros (Mickey Rourke “The Wrestler”). There’s a scene where Quinn skilfully escapes a secret, high-security island and then there’s one where we see cyber monks and that’s a lot less impressive (mad scientists would’ve been more appropriate).

Van Damme is never great but here he’s alright but he isn’t suave in the slightest and would be better as a henchman in a “James Bond” film with his incredible muscles and high kicks. Mickey Rourke is forgettable as the bad guy. By far the worst thing about this film is Dennis Rodman; he dresses like a female prostitute and keeps changing his hair colour/style so maybe we’re meant to think tough guys need to spend their time being vein instead of killing bad guys, getting the girls and saving the world. The chemistry between Van Damme and Rodman is non-existent, who wanted to see these two opposite each other?

The action sequences are clever, energetic and thoroughly enjoyable, particularly when a tiger gets introduced into an explosive mine field inside the Coliseum. The issue here is the dumb script and the weak characters that in no way support the shootouts and fistfights. I think this film could have just edged it had Rodman not been here but he’s so distractingly bad that he completely ruins the film’s chance of working; it really says something about Rodman when he, a basketball player with facial piercings and bizarre fashion, can spoil a film with explosions and tigers in the same shot.

“Double Jeopardy” is very reminiscent of “The Fugitive” and it even stars Tommy Lee Jones (“Men In Black”, “The Client”) in a similar role but somehow I found myself having a lot of fun with this movie because although it is conventional it has some unique qualities.

Ashley Judd (“Heat”, “Kiss The Girls”) plays rich girl Libby Parsons, who enjoys her life with her son Matty and her husband Nick (Bruce Greenwood “Star Trek”). However, she is framed for her spouse’s murder and is sentenced to six years in prison. During her time ‘inside’ she learns about ‘Double Jeopardy’, which legally means she can kill her husband and the law can’t touch her, and when she is released she escapes her parole officer (Jones) and embarks on a mission of vengeance.

Ashley Judd is very good as Libby as she comes across naturally as kind as well as smart. Bruce Greenwood is good as her sly husband that fakes his own death. Tommy Lee Jones is fantastic here but he or at least his character lacks the determination seen in “The Fugitive” and even in that film’s mediocre sequel “U.S. Marshals”. All together we get three great stars that really help make the film more enjoyable.

“Double Jeopardy” certainly disappoints as it follows a routine but it has some interesting parts to it and the cast is overall very good so despite the flaws I feel this is worth watching, especially if you’re like me and loved “The Fugitive” but I recommend you make that film more of a priority. I’ve talked a lot about the cast being talented but the director Bruce Beresford did “Driving Miss Daisy”, which I remember was a very good film so on both sides of the camera you do have some skilled individuals. Hopefully though this is the last time I see Mr. Jones in the same role because it is beginning to wear a little thin.

“Double Impact” is another movie where the star plays dual roles; Elvis, Charlie Chaplin and Lindsay Lohan are now joined by Jean-Claude Van Damme (“Universal Soldier”). The issue with the film is that it’s all by the numbers but if you’re into Van Damme, you’re probably accustomed to his films’ average feel and you will enjoy this one too.

In “Double Impact”, Van Damme plays Chad and Alex, twins separated at birth, who must come together as grown-ups to get the bad guys that killed their parents. This movie made me think, it made me think ‘didn’t Jackie Chan do this in “Twin Dragons” and wasn’t that funnier with more interesting fight sequences?’ so if you want my advice, see “Twin Dragons” instead.

As many of you may be aware, I’m not exactly a fan of Van Damme as an actor; I appreciate his fighting skills but when it comes to lines he’s no Gene Wilder (“Young Frankenstein”) or Tom Hanks (“Forrest Gump”). He’s a greater kicker with big muscles and a non-American accent, he’d make a perfect villain in a more ambitious film but here he plays two dud heroes, one has slicked back hair and a cigar wedged in-between his lips while the other is capable of smiling a little more, that’s the difference. The villains are forgettable (I guess Bolo Yeung looks good as the henchman) and the character played by Geoffrey Lewis (“Maverick”) goes nowhere.

The shootouts and fistfights are reasonably enjoyable but they’re not creative enough to warrant any real praise. The whole film looks alright and the whole script is alright, nothing stands out here. I remember enjoying Van Damme’s film “Universal Soldier” because it had an interesting concept, some really fun action scenes, good humour and most importantly: good use of Van Damme; where has all that gone?

Based upon the heavily popular first-person shooter “Doom” perhaps captures the game a little too well for its own good. I keep seeing movies based on games that may well be great but have no depth (e.g. “Street Fighter”) so I’m still waiting for a “Zelda” or “Half-Life” picture.

In “Doom”, a bunch of space marines, who are the kind you could only ever find in a movie (or videogame) led by Sarge (Dwayne Johnson “Fast Five”, “The Other Guys”) journey to Mars after a distress signal. The film captures the feel of the game as the characters goes through dark hallways and shoot monsters but it isn’t all that fun to look at. Near the end there is even a first-person scene, which is like watching somebody else play the game; I like the fact they’re trying but it is a horrible segment.

Karl Urban (“Red”) plays the main character but unfortunately he lacks any form of personality whatsoever and this can be said for many of Mr. Urban’s characters in his various films. Dwayne Johnson is kind of fun but as the film went on the character goes through a change in attitude and for me no longer works; he should have been the main character. The other marines’ vocabulary is very small and therefore provides nothing of interest when all you see is black on the screen due to darkness of the corridors. The monsters look okay.

I have yet to see a film that can convert a videogame and make it work because they just seem for a variety of reasons such as not following the games, following the games too closely or usually just making a bad film anyway. “Doom” has some interesting moments but due to the fact it aims to be just like the game it finds itself being a below-average space marine movie, why not try “Aliens” instead?

“Dogma” attracted a lot of controversy when it was released with people claiming it was anti-Catholic and blasphemous even though its director, Kevin Smith (“Clerks”, “Chasing Amy”), is himself a Catholic. While I’m not Catholic, I am a Christian and I have a lot of respect for the Catholic Church so I certainly don’t feel as though a comedy movie is any threat to my beliefs and to an institution as great as the Catholic Church.

An abortion clinic worker (Linda Fiorentino “Men In Black”) is called upon to save existence itself when two fallen angels (Ben Affleck “Argo”, Matt Damon “The Departed”) plan to exploit a loophole in order to return to Heaven.

Linda Fiorentino does a good job as Bethany. Matt Damon and Ben Affleck are surprisingly really funny as the two angels that are intent on re-entering Heaven. As with the majority of Smith’s movies, Jason Mewes and Smith play the Jay and Silent Bob characters and they’re reasonably amusing here. Other cast members include Alan Rickman (“Die Hard”), Salma Hayek (“Desperado”), Chris Rock (“Osmosis Jones”) and George Carlin (“Cars”) and most of them provide fun performances. Some may dislike the fact that God is depicted a woman in this movie but I didn’t really take much of an issue with it because it’s in the context of a zany comedy.

“Dogma” never claimed to be an accurate representation of Christian scripture nor does it ever hint that its theological assertions are anything more than punchlines so I don’t think this movie is particularly offensive. This is a silly and very amusing movie with Smith’s uncompromising dialog that’s full of vulgarity but also littered with some real wit. I thought a lot of “Dogma” was very enjoyable and the big budget craziness made it much more of an interesting watch than Smith’s “Clerks”.