Monday 19 January 2015 The Theory Of Everything (Eddie Redmayne, Felicity Jones & David Thewlis) Posted by joeldfisher at 10:28

These days in the cinema, it seems many movies have some element of science, amongst all the spectacle and action scenes. The recent reboot of the Planet of The Apes franchise has tried to put a certain sense of reality into its movies, explaining how a planet could be easily populated by advanced apes that enslave the human race. The Terminator franchise (for better or worse) plays on our fears of our own technology turning against us and overthrowing Earth. Star Trek, arguably the oldest science fiction franchise in popular culture has recently been rebooted also and has raised some issues such as genetic engineering and the effect that one person's actions can have on the course of life (which resulted in Captain Kirk being played by Chris Pine rather than William Shatner). However all these movies have one thing in common, they all bring their own points up about issues that affect us but the problem is that they all do so amongst all the explosions, special effects and gunfire that bring in big audiences, so where has the science gone?

Professor Stephen Hawking himself may be the living embodiment of the ideas that those movies I mentioned before. He has a foot firmly in popular culture and a great sense of humour and love of science fiction and is still considered a leader in his intellectual field. Professor Hawking has appeared in Star Trek: The Next Generation, The Big Bang Theory and most recently as part of Monty Python's Mostly Live farewell shows, he's a face everyone knows and yet for the masses, his theories may go over most of our heads as to how they work and even less is known about the man's life and stratospheric rise to international acclaim as the greatest living mind on Earth. The Theory Of Everything is a welcome beginner's guide to Professor Hawking's life, his diagnosis of Motor Neuron Disease and to his greatest achievements.

By the age of 21 he was one of Oxford University's brightest and most promising students, but his theory on black holes and the beginning of time itself would push Hawking into a league of his own. During his time at Oxford however, Hawking was struck down with Motor Neurone Disease, otherwise known as Lou Gehrig's Disease or as last year's ice bucket challenge highlighted, ALS (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis).

Taken from Jane Hawking's book "Travelling To Infinity: My Life With Stephen", The Theory Of Everything tells the life of Stephen Hawking very much through his first wife's eyes. Those who want to learn more and understand Hawking's theories and scientific achievements may be left disappointed but the heart, wit and wisdom of Professor Hawking is evident in every scene and Eddie Redmayne's portrayal is one of great detail and care as another actor may overemphasise Professor Hawking's condition but Redmayne uses it to his advantage as part of a character. Motor Neurone Disease never defines the role of Stephen Hawking as I'm sure it never defines him as a person and the character shines through as warm, inspiring and sometimes even comedic.

The Theory Of Everything even manages to maintain Hawking's personality after he loses his ability to speak and shows the audience what kind of a man Hawking really is and how he touched the lives of so many people (as he still does today) not only through his work but through his interactions with the ones he loves.

On the other side of the story is his then wife, Jane (Felicity Jones) who has her own story, that of a woman torn and eventually defeated when the care of her husband becomes too much and Felicity Jones should be equally as awarded and celebrated as Eddie Redmayne has already been and will no doubt continue to do so. The story of their marriage is a complicated one, not so much due to Professor Hawking's condition but more for the strain Jane Hawking has on losing the man she loves, through disability and through his success.

The film discusses many aspects of life throughout its running time; marriage, birth, death and love are all explored. Even the meaning of life itself comes into question and dealt equally on both sides of the argument (Jane Hawking being a devout Christian and Professor Hawking being a liberal atheist). However, the film never takes a side and never belittles one another's opinions, leaving that for the audience to decide.

Then there comes the conflict in the story, as with many stories of hope and triumph there is one of loss. When Jane becomes bored and frustrated with her life she decides that she needs a break from being her husband's full time carer and she joins the church choir. The choirmaster, Jonathon (Charlie Cox) finds an instant connection to Jane and vice versa and soon he almost becomes part of the family. The introduction of Jonathon never feels like a betrayal to Jane's marriage as I'm sure it wasn't in real life either. Even at a point where they announce their third child, Jane vehemently objects to the idea posed by one of her friends, that her husband may not be the father so the loyalty to Stephen is absolute and unquestionable, even if the love may not be as strong as it once was.

As life continues then things happen that may be out of your control, Jane and Stephen never lose their love for each other but it changes, as does life and their paths move in different ways. This is a love story, whether it's about Stephen and Jane's love or even the love that Jane and Jonathon find is up to the audience. The relationship between Jane and Jonathon is never torrid or illicit but played just as a time in Jane's life where she needs to move on, as these things happen in life.

The cast are all excellent (nice to see David Thewlis back in robes again). Although the story may not focus on the aspects of Professor Hawking's life that fans of his work may expect, it is an uplifting and inspiring story. Not a story about battling against the odds and coming out on top, but about life and hope. Whereas all the blockbuster movie franchises may believe they're telling an intelligent and thought provoking story amongst all the explosions and gunfire The Theory Of Everything shows its audience that there's no need for such spectacle where the truth can be more involving, thought provoking and inspiring than the fiction.

Sunday 11 January 2015 Exodus: Gods & Kings (Christian Bale, Joel Edgerton, Ben Kingsley) Posted by joeldfisher at 09:40

Over the past year, biblical epics seem to have been a rich source for Hollywood blockbusters, each with their director's own take on the well known and loved religious tales. Last year there was Darren Aronofsky's elaborate, fantastical and sometimes disturbing epic take on Noah starring Russell Crowe, Jennifer Connelly and Emma Watson. Also last year due to the popularity of the American miniseries The Bible, it was edited down for an Easter release and entitled Son Of God, of course focussing on the story of Jesus. Finally the day after Christmas Day, 20th Century Fox releases Ridley Scott's epic and all star cast movie of the story of Exodus, Exodus: Gods & Kings.

The problem of releasing a biblical movie in the 21st Century seems quite divisive. A director has to be very careful to balance the tone of their movie in order to appeal to the masses without alienating those who don't believe and those who do believe but may be offended by the content if not presented correctly.

Many have tried before, such as The Ten Commandments in which Charlton Heston gives a barnstorming performance as Moses and the epic tale of Jesus as told in the modestly titled The Greatest Story Ever Told. However, in recent years biblical stories have become as much of a money spinning event as any other blockbuster in your local cinema.

While Noah was advertised as an epic and original retelling of the story of Noah's Ark, nobody can deny that the rock monsters dreamt up by Darren Aronofsky would have potentially bewildered those who believed and those who do not.

Also there has been controversy in biblical movies, such as Martin Scorsese's provocatively titled The Last Temptation Of Christ and Mel Gibson's epic and widely applauded The Passion Of The Christ which ultimately led to a severe decline in his career after his depiction of Jewish people came to light amongst the Hollywood elite.

Now we come to Exodus: Gods & Kings. Moses (Christian Bale) and Ramses (Joel Edgerton) have grown up together as brothers. Their father, Seti (John Turturro) is concerned for their futures and a prophecy has foretold that one will save the other and whoever that is will become king. Promptly afterwards, a battle breaks out and amongst all the violent commotion (which we haven't seen this well played from Ridley Scott since Gladiator) Moses saves Ramses' life, setting their destinies in stone.

Ramses becomes jealous of Moses, particularly due to his knowledge that his brother was adopted and has him exiled. Moses, being an adaptive sort goes to find his people and settles down (remarkably quickly) with a wife (Maria Valverde) and soon a son. However, as well all know that is not the end of the story, it just feels a bit dull being the first hour of a movie.

20th Century Fox and Ridley Scott must have pulled in a lot of favours and thrown a lot of money at certain stars in order to pull in the box office takings they had been hoping, not to mention bringing in bright eyed and hopeful rising stars (Aaron Paul hidden under a huge bushy beard and wig comes to mind). There's the likes of John Turturro (as mentioned earlier) Ben Kingsley and Sigourney Weaver which you will see in this epic movie...for all of five minutes. Collectively. So those expecting some of the greatest stars of modern cinema to come toe to toe in various scenes alongside Moses' epic struggle will no doubt be left disappointed.

I also deliberately didn't mention the 3D aspect of this movie, firstly because I didn't see it in 3D and secondly because it is barely worth a mention. Going into a 3D screening of Exodus: Gods & Kings, an audience may expect a spectacular visual treat (and in 3D no less) and particularly considering Ridley Scott's reputation as a master of artistry in the visual aspects of his movies (Blade Runner and for all its faults Prometheus' 3D aspects were quite beautiful). However, the gritty style of Scott's biblical Egypt don't match up with the CGI world of 3D enhanced cinema and from what I could imagine from my 2D screening  (aside from the brief plague scenes) the 'money' shots were in the last 20 minutes of the movie. Considering this being a two and a half hour movie, it's too much to pay for so little.

The ancient Egyptian lifestyle is also rather misjudged and wouldn't look out of place in a Carry On movie. I won't suggest what Viceroy Hegep is saying to Moses when he asks him if there's anything he can do to 'please him' but the pure campiness and old fashioned humour distracts from the story and doesn't suit any purpose other than to expand the characters past the point where anyone should care about them.

The only parts I can recollect with any kind of enjoyment are the scenes with Isaac Andrews as God (or Malak as he is listed in the credits). Taking his role far more seriously than the rest of the cast and probably not quite so smugly as Christian Bale seems to be taking Moses, Andrews gives an almighty and powerful performance. Particularly impressive considering he's only a 11-year old boy.

Epic is certainly the word they were going for when making Exodus: Gods & Kings, however the meaning of the word in cinematic terms seems to have been lost here. Epic doesn't mean that it HAS to be two and a half hours long, but if it is then there has to be some way to grab the audience and hold their attention to the wonders on the screen. Today there is plenty of competition for these kind of movies; the spectacle, the stars and the storytelling should all balance each other out so there's something for everyone if that is the aim of the director. This time however, as the audience lifts up off their seats and separates like The Red Sea in the epic finale, the expectations and potential of such an epic tale will have dried up like the desert.

Saturday 10 January 2015 Birdman (Michael Keaton, Emma Stone, Ed Norton) Posted by joeldfisher at 09:07

In 1989 Batman starring Michael Keaton was released, becoming a worldwide blockbuster hit and arguably changing the face of cinema and creating a new franchise - the superhero movie.

Since the first Batman movie there have been 6 others to follow. including Batman & Robin, which was so bad it took nearly 10 years and a complete reboot of the series in order to restart the franchise.

Spider-man had an equally successful run of movies in the early 2000's until Spider-man 3 which was panned by fans and critics alike, which again took a reboot to rejuvenate the franchise, albeit less successfully.

The X-Men franchise has also been largely successful, despite a couple of blips in the running (Brett Ratner I'm looking at you) but since X-Men: First Class, the franchise seems to be back on track. With a spin-off focussing on the popular character Gambit, a third stand-alone Wolverine movie and coming next year, what seems to be a final movie in the franchise this series of movies is looking quite healthy... for now at least.

Finally of course there's the powerhouse which is Marvel. Marvel Comics created their own studio and began releasing their own movies featuring their own titles (created by Stan Lee) to mostly massive and unprecedented success. Iron Man, Thor, The Incredible Hulk and even Captain America have become worldwide names in the hearts and minds of children throughout the world. With many more titles announced by Marvel to be coming out over the next few years and the surprise success of Guardians of The Galaxy last year, there seems to be no stopping superhero movies ever being made.

Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) is the actor who twenty or so years ago played Birdman in the popular Birdman series of movies. Now becoming disillusioned with his fame (or lack thereof) he decides to reboot his career by putting on a play from a novel by Raymond Chandler. Riggan feels washed up, his career is over and he has the constant reminder of that character he played so long ago from fans, friends, family and his co-workers. He's willing to make big changes to prove the critics wrong that he's just a one-note actor - but is he doing it for himself or just to put on a show?

Riggan has a lot to deal with as well; his daughter and PA, Sam (Emma Stone) who blames him for everything wrong in her life. His girlfriend Laura (Andrea Riseborough) who may or may not be pregnant and particularly the renegade method actor, Mike (Ed Norton) hired to take on a pivotal part in the play at a moment's notice but whose methods are - unusual.

Shot in what, at first glance, seems to be in a single take Birdman is a movie that takes it's audience in many different directions (sometimes all at once) and manages to give the audience a different and refreshing take on cinema, art, blockbuster franchises and the meaning of life.

Personally speaking, I am a big fan of the superhero genre so when the movie started and Riggan sees Robert Downey Jr. on a TV screen, only to turn it off after being reminded by his alter ego that Downey makes considerably more money than he ever had - I was cautious and curious to see whether the movie would look down its nose at the movies I love, and I'm pleased to say that I never felt patronised or belittled for my viewing choices.

Yes, Birdman is partly about Riggan's dislike for his past career choices and his constant campaign to be accepted by the critics that would not see his talent any clearer than the Birdman fans who'd eagerly want his autograph (or a selfie). However, whenever Riggan is reminded about that time in a derogatory way, the Birdman side of his psyche would awaken suggesting a longing for the kind of acceptance and adoration that had so easily come before, and maybe never will.

The first 20 minutes Birdman starts like a play. Flawlessly set up scenarios taking Riggan from one place in the theatre to another, it feels like one as well but as the film progresses the audience soon settles in. It's evident that Birdman has brought the audience to the theatre, and although the style of shooting may seem like a gimmick, the theatre is exactly where the director has brought the audience, whether they wanted to go there or not.

The cast for Birdman is exceptional and knowingly so considering the inclusion of Michael Keaton, Emma Stone and Ed Norton - all of which have appeared, albeit briefly, in various superhero movie franchises. Keaton is outstanding in a role the likes of which many actors would no doubt be dying to play (I wonder if Robert Downey Jr is jealous) and like Riggan Thomson, his career is no doubt going to change dramatically in the next few years. Emma Stone is as usual an extremely likeable screen presence and arguably has the best speech in the entire film, knowing her dad's career and his personal life as well as she does, she seems to be the most self aware character in the film.

Andrea Riseborough and Naomi Watts, although playing minor and somewhat stereotyped roles manage to hold their own. Their characters may not be all that fleshed out but they add a lot to their respective characters that make the audience want to know more about them, even if they're not given that chance.

However the stand out performance has to go to Ed Norton who steals every scene he's in and undoubtedly gets the biggest laughs of the entire film. He's able to flow through scenes with an almost improvisational flair and get laughs and have the audience warm to his character, despite his eccentric and somewhat single-minded views of the world.

Before you go to see Birdman, you should be under no allusion that this is the start of another blockbuster movie franchise. There are no big special effects (well maybe a little) and there are no damsels in distress waiting to be rescued by the muscled hero. Birdman is a thoughtful and inspiring movie which reminds movie-goers why they go at all and if you do go with somebody who does enjoy the special effect movie blockbusters that envelope our multiplexes then expect a lively debate of the current state of cinema and how films like this can make your mind feel as free as a bird.

Friday 30 December 2011 In Time (Justin Timberlake, Amanda Seyfried, Cillian Murphy) Posted by joeldfisher at 10:37

A stitch in time saves nine. Time waits for no man. Time after time. As time goes by. No time like the present. I don't have the time. Just some of the references to time in In Time (I may have made some of them up).

In a not too distant future, or maybe an alternative reality everybody is born with a clock. Once they biologically reach the age of 25 their clock starts ticking, they can earn time, buy time, spend time or even in some cases, waste time. Will Salas (Justin Timberlake; Friends With Benefits, The Social Network) is a working class boy, struggling to make ends meet and provide for him and his mother (Olivia Wilde; Cowboys and Aliens, Tron: Legacy). In an act or heroism he meets a rich man with all the time he wants, and he wants none of it. So after a quick transfer to Salas, he finds himself with more time on his hands (or on his arm I should say) than he could ever have imagined. After a heartbreaking meeting with his mother, (where she literally runs out of time) Salas realises that the system is wrong and that he must do something about it.

After going into the rich side of town (spending a lot of time doing it too) he meets a beautiful heiress by the name of Sylvia Weis (Amanda Seyfreid; Red Riding Hood, Letters To Juliet) and together they go on the run in hopes of changing society forever.

Judging by the trailer, In Time looked to be an alternative spin on Logan's Run and the adventure it promised looked intriguing. Despite it being an obvious rip-off of aforementioned movie, In Time looked good, after all mimicry is the sincerest form of flattery. However after watching In Time, the trailer is somewhat misleading, but in a good way because you don't just get a sci-fi rehash of Logan's Run but a timely (no pun intended) and apt social comment on today's society which includes the evils of greed and capitalism. What starts out as Logan's Run soon becomes Bonnie And Clyde but with a futuristic spin.

After hearing of Salas' felonies, a Timekeeper (yes the puns just keep on coming) called Raymond Leon (Cillian Murphy; Inception, Perrier's Bounty) vows to hunt down Salas and his 'hostage' and bring him to justice, alive or dead.

At one point it is commented that Salas looked like a poor person because he runs everywhere and that's what gives him away. However being poor must mean that you're an expert in hand-to-hand combat, driving skills and marksmanship because just as the action kicks off, Salas turns into a Jason Bourne-like professional, capable of quickly assessing a situation and getting out of it just as fast. This is a minor quibble for the movie but it does give it a certain level of unbelievability as the audience's suspense in whether the main characters will survive or not. Given his training, Salas must have been in a situation like this before.

A mention should go to Alex Pettyfer, who plays small time crook and hustler Fortis. Being the youngest of the cast at a mere 21, he plays the role menacingly and really controls the scenes he's in and is fun to watch.

In recent times, there has been a leaning towards more intelligent science fiction, such as Inception, The Adjustment Bureau and Source Code and I for one welcome it with open arms. A good story, well acted and with a decent concept is better than any special effects driven, highly sexed gore fest. Although not up there with the likes of Inception and Source Code, In Time will keep on ticking.

Contagion (Matt Damon, Laurence Fishburne, Kate Winslet) Posted by joeldfisher at 09:31

Coughs and sneezes spread diseases, catch them in your handkerchief. An old and trusted public service announcement that has probably helped a lot of snotty little boys and girls for years. These days, however, it's much more than just putting your hand over your mouth or nose to stop the spread of disease and I can't remember the last time I saw anybody under 50 with a handkerchief and even then it's a rarity. In 2005 bird flu swept throughout the world and a media panic caused all kinds of people to think that all flying creatures would spread a disease that would cause them to die. There were a few cases of this but nothing as widespread as was expected. In 2009 another virus spread across the globe, this time on a much larger scale, people did die and it almost got to the point where you didn't know someone who knew someone who had it.

Contagion is a new kind of disaster movie. Whereas before we've had alien invasions, natural disasters and Mayan predictions of doomsday for planet Earth, now with Contagion we have a new threat that's much more close to home that can hit anyone, anytime, anywhere. In fact it could be happening right now.

Mitch Emoff (Matt Damon; The Adjustment Bureau, True Grit) greets his wife, Beth (Gwyneth Paltrow; (Country Strong, Iron Man 2) after her business trip to Hong Kong. She comes home with the sniffles and a few days later, she dies. Distraught at his wife's sudden death, Mitch and his daughter set off to find answers, or as the epidemic escalates, a way to survive. At the W.H.O. (World Health Organisation) Dr. Ellis Cheever (Laurence Fishburne; Predators, Armoured) is confronted with the epidemic and the best way to handle it, both medically and politically so he send one of his newest recruits. Dr. Erin Mears (Kate Winslet; Revolutionary Road, The Reader) to handle the investigation.

Meanwhile an anarchistic blogger called Alan Krumweide (Jude Law; Repo Men, Sherlock Holmes) is causing more and more widespread panic due to his misguided and often inflammatory reporting on the global epidemic. All the while, a cure is being developed, but how many will it be given to? And how soon?

Steven Soderbergh has had a wide-ranging career, from such blockbusters as Men In Black and Ocean's Eleven to more critically acclaimed fare such as Erin Brockovich and Traffic. So with a subject such as the one in Contagion and with the biggest all-star cast seen in a movie for a very long time then a blockbuster is certainly what springs to mind. However the tone of Contagion is somewhat different than expected. There is no heightened drama, there are no risk taking, heroic feats by the main cast and really there is no sense of underlying threat at all. The people who live are living, and the people who die, well they just die and are pretty much forgotten about for the rest of the movie. Life goes on.

Arguably it could be said that Soderbergh has gotten the tone all wrong and that the movie is filled with facts and figures and none of the drama and action that audiences come to expect. However, on the other hand it could be argued that Contagion's almost documentary-like approach to its subject matter makes the movie all that more scary. We've lived through things like this happening in recent years. The ones that have been affected have been either very ill for a short period of time and either got better or, sadly, died and the ones that weren't affected just lived their lives as nothing was going on in the world.

The movie does go in depth about the statistics and the realities (albeit somewhat heightened) of what happens during an epidemic. It could also be argued that the recent numbers calculated that the world's population reached 7 billion could have been reached by adding up the population numbers mentioned in the movie. However those who really look at it deeply could be very scared (I remember myself during the screening suppressing a sneeze like my life depended on it) and hypochondriacs should probably steer well clear of this movie but for those who like to see an account of how the world would, to an extent, realistically deal with such a situation (and see a lot of movie stars) then Contagion is not to be sneezed at.

Thursday 22 December 2011 Immortals 3D (Henry Cavill, Mickey Rourke, Freida Pinto) Posted by joeldfisher at 11:40

Greek mythology has inspired cinema for years. From the original Clash of The Titans, Jason and The Argonauts and more recently Troy, even Disney got involved telling the story of Hercules (albeit loosely). So after the recent success (not critically) of Clash of The Titans and 300 Hollywood realised there would be a way to combine the two via visionary director Tarsem Singh (The Fall, forthcoming Snow White epic Mirror Mirror) and so we get Immortals... in 3D.

Those familiar to The Clash of The Titans story will be familiar with the premise of Immortals even though it has been slightly altered. Theseus (Henry Cavill; TV's The Tudors, the forthcoming Superman movie as the man himself) is forced into a battle against the oppressive force of King Hyperion's (Mickey Rourke; Iron Man 2, The Expendables) rule. After his mother is killed by the king himself he is taken prisoner and forced to engage in an uprising and to get back the one weapon that could cause chaos amongst his people with the release of the titans.

Along the way Theseus meets Phaedra, (Freida Pinto; Rise of The Planet of The Apes, You Will Meet A Tall Dark Stranger) a psychic who can see a rather confusing but victorious future for Theseus and enables him to escape captivity in order to help him achieve his destiny. So Theseus must raise an army from the ground upwards to overcome the evil king's rule.

As mentioned before there are a few differences to the Clash of The Titans storyline but the main elements are there, if anything it seems like a sequel with a very different cast and appealing to a very different audience. Theseus is of course related to the gods, being Zeus's (played on Earth by John Hurt, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, Melancholia and in the heavens by Luke Evans; The Three Musketeers 3D, Tamara Drewe) son and living amongst mortals but he is unaware of his lineage so the surprise when the gods intervene (and they really do intervene) is still there.

Tarsem Singh, who has been credited as Tarsem or in this case Tarsem Singh Dhandwar is truly a visionary director. He is able to create vivid imagery which sticks in the mind for a long time, and usually with a very small budget. His previous work on The Fall won critical acclaim, with some suggesting a bit of digital trickery to which he has strongly denied. Also his directorial debut, The Cell, an exploration of the darkest side of the human psyche, has striking cinematic presence if the film itself may have fallen by the wayside as time has gone on. So this almost feels like an ambitious step out on his own for Tarsem and considering his next, perhaps more mainstream project, he may have a lot to prove.

Unfortunately there seems to be a lot of misdirection (no pun intended) here. Whilst telling the story of Theseus' struggle there is a lot of attention to the violence of the movie which makes the audience wonder who exactly it is aimed towards. At a UK 15 certificate a lot of the action seems to stop short of where it wants to go and so the older audience, looking for a bit of mind-numbing violence may be left feeling a bit short changed. As with 300 that had the same certification, there is also a lot of style over substance so those looking for an interesting and engaging historical action movie may be left a bit short too.

Also the casting is a little peculiar considering one of the world's greatest actors, John Hurt is left to a supporting role and Luke Evans (40 years Hurt's junior) is given the role of Zeus, the king of the gods but with very little gravitas that a more seasoned actor could bring to the role. In fact all of the actors playing the gods, although being attractive, with a few of the elder actors barely reaching 40, most are under 30 so a lot of the audience are left wondering if somebody who is actually in charge will come along.

The poster and trailer for Immortals boasts 'from the producers of 300' and their influence is definitely there. However, just having another 300 rip off from a different director who, given the right material could pass off something better visually and substantially is not a sure fire hit and after such a long hiatus after 300's success, audiences have surely moved on by now.

The Debt (Helen Mirren, Jessica Chastain, Sam Worthington) Posted by joeldfisher at 11:39

As the months of the year go by, we've seen a lot of summer blockbusters come and go. Some successful and others not so. So now as the year gets older we're drawn into attracting a different kind of audience, mainly adults so after brushing off my curiosity and somewhat childlike wonder over big explosions, fighting robots and rebellious apes it's time to watch a more grown up film; The Debt.

The Debt tells the story of three Mossad agents sent to retrieve a Nazi war criminal to stand trial. Set in the late 90's and 60's, the story goes back in time and forward again to tell of the complicated relationship between the three agents and their manipulative captor.

Rachel Singer (Helen Mirren; Brighton Rock, RED) is haunted by her past, the dark secret she holds amongst her fellow agents has been eating away at her for a very long time, and after hearing of the death of one of the trio, David (Ciran Hinds; Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, The Rite) she feels the time is right to put an end to the pain and guilt that she holds so close to her. Stephan (Tom Wilkinson; The Ghost, 44 Inch Chest) her estranged husband tells her of David's death and despite Stephan's objections, Rachel has to right the wrong that she has lived with for so long.

After hearing the fated account of Rachel's bravery in the face of danger we flashback to the 60's where Rachel (Jessica Chastain; The Tree of Life and the upcoming Oscar grabber The Help) is on her first covert mission. She is met there by David (Sam Worthington; Clash of The Titans, Avatar) who is posing as her husband and Stephan (Marton Csokas; Alice in Wonderland, forthcoming movie Dreamhouse). Together they hatch a plot to kidnap gynaecologist Doktor Berndhart alias Dieter Vogel (Jesper Christensen; The Young Victoria, Quantum of Solace), a notorious butcher who conducted hideous experiments on Jews during World War Two.

After a couple of unknown reasons, The Debt finally gets a release. Apparently, Sam Worthington was picked up for The Debt even before the breakthrough that made him a star, Avatar, and that he was living in his car at the time. So to finally see this film given the light of day must be very rewarding for all. Not to mention Jessica Chastain who has three major films this year, including this, The Help and of course The Tree of Life and is really proving to be a breakthrough star so this seemingly all star vehicle (if you include Tom Wilkinson and Helen Mirren) just seems to have been waiting for the right time and the right place.

Going back to the 60's the young cast of agents work well together, Worthington really is given a role with far more emotional depth than before and rises to the challenge he'd been lacking since this movie was made with such roles in Avatar and Clash of The Titans. Marton Csokas is a formidable presence as Stephan which in juxtaposition is shown be his debilitating wheelchair bound state in later life played by Tom Wilkinson. However the standout performance goes to Jessica Chastain who conveys a lot of emotion in such a confused and naive character. Her scenes with Doktor Berndhart make for uncomfortable viewing, whether you're a man or a woman and the way she can turn from distressed and overwhelmed to cool, calm and professional is an emotional level I'm sure a lot of actors and actresses can only dream of achieving.

As the action moves back to the 90's for the third act, we see how the agent's lives have changed and how their willingness to do the right thing takes them to levels they never would even consider. Mirren revels in the espionage scenes which are a lot of fun but without being completely unbelievable and the payoff may shock the audience but there is a certain poignancy to it and it ultimately feels like the only proper conclusion.

In a departure writer/director Matthew Vaughn and co-writer Jane Goldman provide the script for The Debt, after best known for superhero adventures Kick-Ass and X-Men: First Class, The Debt is a far more grown up affair that deals with complicated relationships, guilt and redemption and is handled well. Audiences will feel like a lot of care has gone into appealing to audiences that Hollywood would usually ignore i.e. intelligent and thoughtful ones and beside the occasionally implausible action scene, The Debt will definitely be up there alongside Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy as something different for those who are not a fan of explosions, fighting robots and dare I say it, rebellious monkeys.