OK, so watching loads of movies means that I also watch rubbish movies even when I know they’re going to be bad. Bratz was one of these movies. Bratz is a line of kids dolls based on bling and ‘real’ girls. Translating this onto the big screen must have been a challenge as they would have to keep up the appeal to young kids and mums so that they continue buying these morally wrong toys. There were so many things wrong with this movie so I have listed some here for your perusal:

• The Chinese girl can get changed and have a hair makeover in about 30 seconds in public into an outfit that stays with her for the rest of the film.
• The black cheerleader turns into a 30 something white overweight woman when she does cartwheels.
• The poor soccer girl turns into a 30 something overweight woman when she plays football.
• Oscar winning Jon Voight couldn’t give a **** about being in this film and puts in a stunningly poor performance as a crap headmaster/principle.
• The deaf kid can hear himself talk and therefore speak perfectly.
• The deaf kid can lip read without looking at lips.
• The kids age by 2 years by driving motored vehicles but dress up exactly the same way.
• The bad girl in this film is exactly the same type of bad girl seen in about every tween movie including high school musical.
• A scholarship is awarded to the winner of the talent contest. Since when does a scholarship go to someone good at singing over someone who is good at maths?
• The poor girl is looked down upon and pitied by even her own friends in the film making any viewer with less than £400k in their bank account feel like wringing all their necks.
• The girls seem to make the party food with play dough toys.
• The girls appear to make play dough food.
• The songs are really bad.
• The plot is really bad.
• The poor girl mimes over a singer who sounds a lot older.
• All the girls have walk in wardrobes yet none have an ensuite bathroom.
• The kid who gets a football in his belly squeals at the most pathetic kick.
• The bad girl wanted to win the scholarship. She would not need a scholarship.
• The bad girl had an MTV sweet 16 party yet her dad is only a headmaster.
• All the kids in the school want to go to this pretentious party even though no one likes the girl.

The flaws go on and on and on! With all things reflected the director (Sean McNamara) should stop making kiddie movies and concentrate instead on fermenting cheese. At that note I should say that this film deserves nobodies time. I feel really sorry for those parents whose kids will be receiving this film as a DVD as they are going to probably play this aweful thing over and over again studying the fashion if that’s what you want to call it. Even High school musical is better than this absolute trash. With that in mind I award this film a whopping flat zero out of 20 million.

Jim Carrey takes another outing in a silly comedy film. Up alongside him is kooky Zooey Deschanel. To cut a long story short Jim Carrey plays a guy who runs away from everything in life and as a result gets nowhere in life. One day an old friend persuades him to go to a Yes seminar and it changes his life forever – as long as he keeps saying yes to everything. A run of luck is rewarded to him as a result and he meets equally crazy Zooey. They fall in love but then a run of poor luck follows Jim for bit until we get to the predictable end where everyone leaves the cinema feeling happy and smiling.

Some of the jokes in the film are funny. Other times it’s a little cringe worthy. In the right mood this film can be just what the doctor ordered. With a mixed bag of goodies I give this film a 3 out of 5.

Following on from the success of the first film, writer/director Eli Roth was at it again with a sequel. Based back in the same place as the first film – the story was very familiar. Not diverting the story much from the first film, I was left feeling a little cheated of originality. What’s wrong with making up a new story for a sequel? So many sequels these days are just rehashed revisions of the original and Part II was no exception.

If you saw the first one, then you know what will happen in the second one. Instead of seeing men getting slaughtered, you get to see women getting slaughtered. One of them even gets fully nude hanging upside down from her feet. Apart from the twist at the end there was little else on offer with this film. Not at all interesting and not worth a watch if you saw the first one. If you haven’t then it may be worth watching so I’ll give this a generous 2 out of 5

This is the film with Russell Crowe and Leonardo DiCaprio in it. It was directed by Ridley Scott, the guy who made Gladiator, Blade Runner, American Gangster and loads of other movies. The film is set mainly in the Middle East where there is all sorts of terrorist activity going on. Back in Europe places are being bombed left right and centre.

To cut a long story short, Russell Crowe is the top dog trying to call the shots in the comfort of his home in the USA while his eyes and ears Leonardo, gets his hands dirty in the Middle East. Leonardo tries to get to the bottom of the terror cell by befriending the Jordan main intelligence but Russell keeps getting in his way by being the clumsy and arrogant American. I won’t say anymore because I’d give away the story.

It is a film that is interesting in parts but easily confusing. It is a thought provoking film but only if you managed to stay awake through the endless boring dialogue and confusing plot twists. The film could have been better in so many ways including Russell Crowe’s performance where I felt he couldn’t be bothered. The saving grace was Leonardo’s captivating acting but that is not enough for me to award any higher than 2 out of 5.

A different and original twist sees a bunch of unknown actors stranded in the middle of the ocean with no help available to get back to shore safely. A sailing trip goes wrong and the disaster victims end up in the water with no way back onto their boat. It’s an interesting and compelling watch but at the end of it you are left feeling a bit cheated as there wasn’t much content to the film. The back story could have been developed better but I think the film was going in the right direction. I would say more in this review but I don’t want to give away the rest of the story if you haven’t yet seen this movie. For the originality I give this film 2.5 out of 10.

This slowly tense but captivating thriller starring Kevin Costner and Demi Moore utilises strong character development as expected from Kevin. Kevin plays Mr Brooks who is a Schizophrenic killing addict trying to quit. Mr Smith (Dane Cook) appears at his workplace to blackmail Mr Brooks with photos of a crime scene with Mr Brooks in. Mr Smith has a taste for blood and wants to learn from a master serial killer and they hang out together to find someone to kill. Tracy (Demi Moore) plays the multi millionaire detective on their tail and soon finds herself the target for some blood letting. I’ll leave the rest for you to watch but I have to warn you of the slow Kevin Costner pace induced in this film. It’s nice to see him in a different role as he does shine in this film. Demi Moore and Dane Cook could have done better but this film is all about Mr Brooks and therefore I give this a slightly higher rating than I would usually of a film of this caliber at 3.5 out of 5.

One of Anthony Minghella’s most recent works before his death sees familiar faces in Jude Law, Juliette Binoche, Martin Freeman and Robin Wright Penn on screen together. Miro played by Rafi Gavron plays a bad kid who’s not that bad who is also a parkour thieving nut. Jumping from roof to roof he steals a load of high tech loot (a bunch of macs) from Will (Jude Law) and Sandy’s (Martin Freeman) work place. Will finds out by stalking his own workplace and stalks Miro whilst his home life goes all depressed on him. Being depressed and trying to escape he befriends Amira (Juliette Binoche) who is Miro’s mum. Amira figures out what will is doing and they go through a clever and well thought out relationship which makes it interesting for the viewer as we discover more about these characters through all the peripheral charachters. 

Breaking and Entering took me by surprise as I am so used to watching Jude Law acting like a wooden spatula. I actually felt depth in his role this time around and I was truly captivated by the strong character development in the film. I would have liked to have seen more of a resolution at the end of the film but that’s a personal preference. I would rate this understated film amongst Mingella’s finest works and I give this a 4 out of 5 rating.