Interstellar - "Honey, I shrunk the astronauts"

Essentially, from what I can remember of this film, I loved the build towards the flight, I even enjoyed the space travel itself (the beautiful sequence going into the black hole) and the futility and wasted years on the first two planets (I guess I liked how after all that effort and technological development, their readings couldn't tell them the planet was essentially a large wave machine - speaks volumes about the fragility of human endeavor and our over reliance on technology)

I loved Matt Damon's dark character and what his characters action's reflected about human nature and the will to survive. I liked how we saw Murph age decades in what were hours for Mcconaughey and the desperation to get back to his daughter.

The film lost me as soon as Mcconaughey got chucked into the black hole and we got treated to a version of "Honey, I shrunk the astronaut":p Seriously, Mcconaughey floating behind an enormous book case inside an alien-made tesseract and then literally using a book cover to Morse code Murph? Look out citizens it's Nolan's "2001 meets Playschool"! Why is it when any Science Fiction film has humanity meet a superior alien race, we have to communicate though a patronizingly simplistic medium? (See "Contact" - the single most disappointing climax to a film ever) I've always felt it was just plain laziness on the film maker's part; not being able to come up with a mind bending communication tool that would link human and alien races together. At least give us something with a bit more panache than the equivalent of a duplo set:p

Nolan, this mawkish device ruined an otherwise enjoyable film.

Bird Man - Best Picture, my arse...

An overly pretentious, hipster/comic nerd pandering, supposed satire/self-adulation for the acting world piece of shit that is all sound, fury, cool and no substance.

The device of one continuous take is completely unnecessary. It may add to the stage performance quality of the acting and story by providing us with a sense of real time but otherwise there's no reason to frame the film like this. The sometimes live jazz music accompaniment is fitting for the tone and pacing of the film, but again otherwise unnecessary. It's experimentation for the sake of experimentation.

The performances are strong across the board, and the technical craft on display is impressive, but the essential message and world we're investing in is hollow, desperate and flaky...essentially the world of acting. I've lived it so I can say that.

"This place is horrible. It smells like balls" pretty much sums up the tone of the film and the way I felt about it. Does a film about a hack Action star; a self-absorbed ass with delusions of super powers, desperate to prove he's important to the exclusion of his ex-wife, daughter's and every one else's happiness, REALLY deserve "Best Picture"? In my opinion, no. This is Hollywood self-aggrandizing itself, a community terrified of it's own obsolescence in light of independent crowd-sourced film making, viewers increasingly watching films on portable devices (The opening song at the 2015 Oscars with Jack Black ranting about "screens from our jeans" confirms as much for me) and the diminishing returns for Hollywood due to piracy. It strikes me even the Hollywood acting community are worried they may not have an industry for much longer - how else to explain the ascension of this witless film about an actor fixated on his fading cultural relevance? These people seem desperate for ANYTHING that proves they're still important. Just like "Sunset Boulevard" (Another one about fading fame) Hollywood loves rewarding films ABOUT Hollywood.

For the record "Sunset Boulevard" is an arguably better film.

Motivational Growth - Inspiring First Feature

This should make for an interesting review; I met the director Don Thacker at Crypticon Seattle 2015 and talked to him at length, so while I overall loved this film, I have to tread carefully caus this guy knows me and could track me down:)

First off, for a debut feature film "Motivational Growth" is outstanding. I agree with other critics that there is nothing to make apologies for here, i.e. "in spite of technical shortcomings" - there are no technical shortcomings, the level of craft and skill on display here is formidable. This isn't a good film for a debut feature, it's good film full stop.

There are multiple things here to like: from the brilliant, grimy art direction on the amazing set, the level of execution in terms of jib moves, time lapse and composition, the invention and poetry of the script (From Ian's brilliant conversations to camera, The Mold's beautiful language and Ox's constant "shut up". In person, Thacker has the energy of Tarantino, but his dialogue here feels more like the Coen Brothers or Tom Stoppard), the amazing performances across the board (Adrian Giovanni gives an assured, wired and intense performance, Jeffrey Comb's voice as The Mold is outstanding, and I loved Box and the freaky Plasmoday guy), the great design and puppetry of The Mold itself - a welcome break from our overly CGI'ed times - to beautifully surreal sequences like Ian sucking from a fungal tit on the wall and suspended horizontally. Thacker wants to entertain, surprise and make an impact and he does so brilliantly.

Although wildly diverse and well executed, for me the programs on the television were perhaps the weakest element of the film. I simply didn't feel they were as funny as they could have been, nor the satire as lacerating as these kind of zombifying, soul crushing programs warrant. I just feel this has been done better before in other films.

Ian also emerges in these programs as fantasy/hallucinations, with the television (Or "Kent") accusing Ian of betrayal and that the TV "looked after him" long before (The Mold?) In the overall context of the film it's unclear whether "Kent" is a separate character, perhaps a rival to The Mold for Ian's allegiance? Or is "Kent", who often uses the same language as The Mold, merely an extension of The Mold? This ambiguity is merely distracting rather than being an engaging mystery within the film.

The 8-bit music, while fitting the period (The film is set in the early 90's) and the aesthetic of the Imagos production company, is occasionally jarring with the action on screen.

My only other complaint is the ending of the film, in terms of leaving the viewer with a feeling of satisfaction, and with the level of artistic innovation (camera move and craft wise) dropping off near this point.

While it is hinted at at various stages during the film that Ian is dead (Or at the very least "someone" has died), I was disinterested in the possibility that the entire film was one long hallucination/after life experience as Ian's dead body is consumed/transformed by mold, so I had dismissed that prospect early on. For most of the film my mind had been blown by the originality (Such as Ian talking to camera; which I haven't seen before in a Horror film) on display, so an ending with Ian dead and engaging with his dream girl only as a hallucination, left me feeling a bit cheated.

It has to be said, however, that the ending is very confusing and open ended. After being cocooned in a very Mold-like form (Juxtaposed with a great monologue from The Mold about how Man has always been the victim of death and decay), the film appears to restart from the point of Ian waking up after his fall in the bathroom, with Ian resuming his unkempt, filthy state on the couch at the start of the film. So is Ian dead or isn't he, and did he ever undergo his "motivational growth" from The Mold?

It's also possible that I simply didn't get the film in it's entirety. Thankfully the film, mixing elements of "Brazil", "Little Shop of Horrors" and "Fight Club", is such an enjoyable ride that it will warrant repeat viewings in the future. And maybe at last I will "get" it:)

Human Centipede 3 - What a grotesque delight...

I know I'm a sick man but this is a stunning return to form for Tom Six after the patently nasty Human Centipede 2. From start to finish this is overblown, hilarious, transgressive fun (The same sense of fun and ridiculousness that made the 1st Film such a treat) You know you're in for one hell of a ride when in the first five minutes Dieter Laser has already fingered and hurled abuse at poor Bree Olsen, who he blithely refers to as "Tits" or "Office Slut" alternatively.

This film is one long animal scream of racism, misogyny, testosterone, stereotypes, sadism and violence and I for one found it very cathartic and refreshing (In the same way I found the "Jackass" films refreshing; these films come along to clear the nastiness and repressed anger from your pipes) With Laser's UTTERLY over the top performance and Lawrence R Harvey's natural British accent occasionally coming through - and that fact that ANYONE would let a lunatic like Bill Boss get away with what he does - makes the ability to take this film seriously a challenge. Having been liberated from taking the film seriously, we are free to enjoy every hysterical transgression on display, from the "hot water boarding" to the castration scene (To Laser eating said testicles later) to the dream (?) sequence of Laser being raped in a puncture wound on his kidneys. It's repugnant joy from start to finish.

Some of the dialogue is just distastefully beautiful: "I need my ballsack drained before lunch!" Laser spits at Olsen, "Even the corpse of a spastic would turn you down!" he howls at Harvey before having sex with the brutalized, comatose body of Olsen in the Prison Hospital. My only complaint is Laser is so over the top that it's often hard to understand the dialogue through his ranting.

With the film's closing shot of a naked Laser literally screaming into a megaphone atop a Prison watch tower, while the American National Anthem plays over the soundtrack, the film ultimately won it's way into my heart.