Review : Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (Part 1)

All growed up: Daniel Radcliffe as the titular boy-man-wizard

Six years have passed since Harry Potter was sitting alone under the stairs without a care in the world. Now the world has changed, darkness has fallen and Harry and co must leave home and go on a quest to find a way to defeat the mighty dark lord.

Voldemort now controls the magical world and the only way for our dynamic trio to defeat him is to destroy the remaining shards of his soul, known as Horcruxes.

At one point our teenage heroes wear one of the Horcruxes as a locket around their neck, which makes them slowly become overcome with anger and rage, not entirely unlike a certain ring, and you can't help but wonder why they didn't just put it in their pocket instead.

If you're thinking it all sounds a bit familiar, then cast your mind back to 2001; a group of heroes travelling in search of a way to destroy an item of jewellery to defeat an evil overseer? Hmmm...

Throughout the Deathly Hallows there's a distinct Fellowship of the Rings feel. This isn't automatically a bad thing of course, as director David Yates embracing the picturesque landscapes and dynamic camera work which gave the films such an epic sense of scale, but the sense of foreboding and ever-increasing darkness soon takes its toll.

The film itself begins the climax to the boy-wizard's story solemnly, with Harry, Ron and Hermione all leaving home for what they know will be the final time. Particularly heart-breaking is the moment where Hermione wipes her parents memories of her, to protect them, and her face fades from the picture frames across her muggle – that's non-magic – home.

The universe which author J.K Rowling might not be exactly the same as the one which we've got to know on screen, but fans will notice plenty of familiar touches crammed in between the lines, and the absence of Alnwick Castle (or Hogwarts to those in the know) mixes up the hum-drum school year formula and turns the film into a non-stop chase movie.

As ever, those who've read the books will understand far more of what is going on (Snatchers?), but the usual tension between the main characters and ample amounts of Polyjuice potion hurry things along. With Obi Wan/Gandalf/Dumbledore gone and Sirius long since departed, Harry has noone to guide him. There's a real sense of the group really not knowing what to do for the first time, which adds to the sense of helplessness and world-ending which Yates is keen to push.

The supporting cast are the usual high standard, with new addition Bill Nighy sublimely asserting his authority as new Minister of Magic Rufus Scrimgeour, and the return of Dobby the house elf is sure to be a hit with younger fans.

It's Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson that we've all grown up with though and they all continue to be as effective as ever, though Radcliffe still lags behind the rest, but Bellatrix Lestrange (Helena Bonham Carter) really stands out from the 'evil minions' crowd, even over Ralph Fiennes' chilling tones.

With the story only being half over it's hard to build to a climax, though Yates succeeds in creating a impressive and lasting closing image, but the two parts demand watching together to give a real sense of finale. The film is an effective beginning to the end, but not exceptional, the closing chapter will either prove its worth or see the series fall short of the mark.

Rating: 3/5

James Michael Parry

Film Review: The Social Network (so yeah...they mean Facebook)

Just a fad? A waste of time? For people with no real lives? Facebook may fall victim to the generation gap but there’s no denying its popularity.

Over 500 million people actively use the site, spending 700 billion minutes of their time every month updating statuses, poking people and checking out pictures.

The company is currently valued at $25 billion, making CEO and co-founder Mark Zuckerberg the youngest billionaire of all time.

But The Social Network’s story begins well before all that in 2003, at a bar at Harvard University with poor socially awkward Mark (Jesse Eisenberg) being dumped by his Girlfriend Erica (Rooney Mara) for being elitist about his academic future.

Sure enough, Mark doesn’t react too well to this and goes on the computer-geek version of a alcohol binge, creating a site called facemash.com which compares girls on the university campus, blogging all the while.

It’s not all megabytes and C++ coding though, and as Mark, with his business partner/best friend Eduardo Saverin (Andrew Garfield), evolves their company from a lose connection of college students to the most popular social networking site in history the strain begins to show.

Mark and Eduardo soon don’t see eye to eye over the business, with Eduardo pushing to make money from their success while Mark insists: “We don’t even know what this is yet, all we know is that it’s cool.”

Whether the film is a true reflection of what really happened between the pair through those ground-breaking years, only seven years ago, is unlikely, but there is a keen sense of teenage-awareness with director David Fincher, helmsman of Seven, Fight Club and Zodiac, to keep the film entertaining as well as tense.

Zuckerberg wasn't involved with the film and in fact only Saverin is loosely connected with the book which originated the film, The Accidental Billionaires by Ben Mezrich.

Nonetheless the events did happen, and a few unexpected names pop up in the opening credits such as Kevin Spacey as Executive Producer and Trent Reznor, the founder of industrial rock group Nine Inch Nails, on music duty alongside Atticus Ross, who appeared in Reznor's post-Nails side project How to Destroy Angels.

The supporting cast has a few surprising additions, none more so than former pop sensation Justin Timberlake, who plays Sean Parker, a renegade entrepreneur who co-founded original music sharing site Napster back in 1999. Parker becomes a wedge between Mark and Eduardo and Timberlake manages to be convincing as the washed-up party boy – strange that.

Social media is undoubtedly a phenomenon, and Facebook is at the centre of it, like MySpace before it it changed everything about how people interact on the internet, and it continues to be important today, seven years on, after a lot of similar sites have long since declined, including MySpace itself.

As for the film the story is engaging because of the friendship between the characters, and anyone who has grown up with the rise of the internet will relate to it's integration with the cyberculture which has evolved in the 21^st century, as well as typical teenagery moments.

For those who don't know Facebook and don't want to know it won't offer much, but to see what goes into something that has become more than 'just a fad' it is much more rewarding.

Rating: 4/5

James Michael Parry

Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook film, film, review, movies, James Michael Parry, Eduardo Saverin, Jesse Eisenberg, social media, internet, cyberculture

Film: Review – Inception

'Inception' means 'beginning', 'start' or 'commencement', but that doesn't shed much light on what Christopher Nolan's latest blockbuster, starring Leonardo DiCaprio, is all about.

Even if you did read my previous post about Nolan and Inception, little can prepare you for combination of simplicity and complexity of the film itself.

In the film, 'inception' is not just the beginning of something, but the principle of planting an idea in someone's head. The way this is done is through dreams, using the subconscious to control the conscious, which involves connecting people together with a strange briefcase-shaped device which means several people can experience the same dream simultaneously.

The principle which you have to bear in mind watching the film is that dreams always seem real when you're having them, as DiCaprio's character Cobb says: “It's only when we wake up that we realise anything is strange.”

Nolan, who also wrote the film, has never been someone who has embraced CGI in films before, generally adopting a very personal approach to directing, never taking a second unit and often doing shots with a hand-held camera. In Inception though, it's impossible to avoid, since the story and concepts involved require so much which is not physically possible.

It would be a mistake to think that Nolan has 'sold out' with this picture though, since it's an idea he's been working on for many years, and it is certainly worth the wait.

The reputation of the director, who also directed The Dark Knight the trailers are keen to tell us, means Nolan is graced with a fantastic cast to sell his story.

DiCaprio, fresh from another deep emotional performance in Martin Scorcese's Shutter Island, shows us how far he has come from his boyish charms evident in the likes of Titanic and Romeo & Juliet, delivering a gripping portrayal of a character which the audience latch on to and follow through the film, something which is integral to its success.

Ellen Page, of Juno Fame, also delivers convincingly as Ariadne, despite being the token 'young person', as does Cillian Murphy as Robert Fischer Jr., who is the victim of the film's convoluted heist, despite not realising it.

Brit acting legend Michael Caine, in his fourth film with Christopher Nolan, is on wise old mentor duty once again, without his usual comic relief moments, and in fact its Tom Hardy of Layer Cake as Eames who shines in the comedy stakes.

To go in to the story too much would spoil or confuse things, but the film itself is a triumph of Nolan's skill as a director and passion for story-telling. Those looking for the excitement, action and explosions of The Dark Knight won't be disappointed, as the film's climax providing the most nail-biting finale of Nolan's work to date.

What is more important to the film though is that you're constantly asking yourself what is real and what's a dream, which is exactly the question Cobb is constantly dealing with, making you feel quite unnerved at times, but still exhilarated.

Inception is a film which binds genres together seamlessly, going from a heist movie one moment to a tense thriller the next, with some gravity-defying action thrown in for good measure. It must be seen to be believed.

Rating: 5/5

Film: Who on Earth is Christopher Nolan? - Background and a look at latest film 'Inception'

Whenever I mention his name eyebrows are raised, but the truth is Christopher Nolan is nothing short of a cinematic genius, in my mind at least.

The man responsible for re-energising the good-as-dead Batman franchise, as well as deliver the most gripping thriller of recent years, and possibly the best twist ending of all time.

The film I'm talking about is 2006's The Prestige, a story of two magicians who begin as friends but soon their art tears them apart in almost every way. Christian Bale and Hugh Jackman star as Alfred Borden and Robert Angier in a tale which plays with the audiences mind all the way through, just like any good magician.

It is Nolan's skill at guiding the audience through complex storylines, often wrought with flashbacks and surrealism, which makes him such an effective director.

Born in London in 1970, Nolan spent his early life there as well as Chicago, since his mother was american. Nolan caught the film-making bug aged seven and during his education at University College London began making short films.

1996 saw Nolan direct his first feature film, Following, in 1996, about a writer who stalks people. Here the first signs of his penchant for unusual storytelling surfaced, with his protagonist, and the audience, experiencing events in non-chronological order.

Momento in 2000, based on a short story written by his brother and oft collaborator Jonathan, saw Nolan get his first widely-known release, nominated for Best Screenplay at the Oscars.

After this Nolan directed Insomnia (2002), a remake of a Norwegian film, featuring all-round acting legend Al Pacino.

By the time Batman Begins er...began (sorry!) in 2005, Christopher Nolan was still a relatively unknown director and writer, but David S. Goyer, writer of the Blade trilogy and recently creator of the TV series FlashForward, got the green light to lift Warner Bros' hiatus on Batman and soon he and Nolan created the screenplay for one of the most successful 're-boots' in recent years.

With super-sequel The Dark Knight now safely nestled in Blu-ray collections worldwide, Nolan's pedigree as a director seems assured, but it could all depend on upcoming release Inception, a film shrouded in secrecy but which carries the surrealist tells of a Christopher Nolan film.

Starring Leonardo DiCaprio and an ensemble cast including: Ellen Page, Michael Caine and Cillian Murphy, the film – as far as I can make out - focuses around the nature of reality and dreams, and how dreams seem real while we are having them. DiCaprio's character works for a company which deals with “sub-concious security” and there seems to be a lot of surrealism and manipulating gravity and the elements.

Very little concrete information has come out to explain the phenomena seen in the latest trailer (YouTube it now), but the world-bending visuals are certainly a spectacle in themselves. Screen Rant have dissected some of an LA Times interview with Nolan, and suggest this is a very personal film for Nolan.

As writer and director for the film, Nolan has a big responsibility, particularly when you consider even the cast had trouble understanding the plot until the film was in production. DiCaprio said to the LA Times:

“Complex and ambiguous are the perfect way to describe the story. And it’s going to be a challenge to ultimately pull it off. But that is what Chris Nolan specializes in.”

So not really a film where you sit scoffing snacks for two hours, Inception will work the audiences mind, fitting really when you consider the film is pitched as “a contemporary sci-fi actioner set within the architecture of the mind” (Variety).

Ellen Page, who plays Ariadne, said: “There’s a tangible realism even when it gets crazy, and somehow that makes the jeopardy feel more real...There’s the big scale, but the sincerity isn’t left behind. The story is complicated but never confusing.” (SR)

On top of this latest release, Nolan had been talking to David S. Goyer about a new Superman film, sub-titled on IMDB as 'Man of Steel'. Though the thought of a down-to-earth incarnation of America's favourite superhero is enough to get some hearts racing, the likelihood of Nolan directing is unlikely due to the presence of another superhero: Christian Bale – OK Batman...

Currently just referred to as Batman 3 Nolan seems to want to finish his saga: “Without getting into specifics, the key thing that makes the third film a great possibility for us is that we want to finish our story. And in viewing it as the finishing of a story rather than infinitely blowing up the balloon and expanding the story . . . I’m very excited about the end of the film, the conclusion, and what we’ve done with the characters. My brother has come up with some pretty exciting stuff.” (LA Times)

With release set at July 20 2012, Nolan has plenty of time to lead the caped crusader (a possible title?) through a final ordeal of superhero turmoil, though it's difficult to imagine it out-doing the late Heath Ledger's swansong.

Inception will come out in cinemas July 16 and I for one will be there to get another dose of Nolan, because noone makes a film quite like him, and when someone dares to do things a little bit differently, it's nice to see it pay off.

James Michael Parry

Acknowledgements: Wiki, IMDB, Screen Rant

Film: Review - The Wolfman

As mythical creatures go, we seem to have been overwhelmed in the last few years: centaurs and unicorns from the Narnia and Potter-verses, goblins and beasts to give children nightmares in The Spiderwick Chronicles and The Dark Is Rising and angst-ridden teenage vampires in The Twilight Saga.

With all these children's' films around you might be fooled into thinking these creatures of the night aren't scary; The Wolfman changes all that.

From the opening giving a chilling recitation of the werewolf legend, the film embraces the clichés and preconceptions of Gothic horror to set its scene. Foggy moorland – check, continuously murky and rainy weather – check, an isolated village overlooked by a looming manor house surrounded by forest – check. What could go wrong?

Amongst the trees a lone man treks through the fogged woods, with only a lantern for protection you can guess how well he gets on. It turns out the man is Ben Talbot, brother of Lawrence Talbot, played by a timid Benico Del Toro, who soon arrives straight from the stages of London to clear up the fowl business.

With such a deadly creature for a title, you'd expect a certain amount of violence, but Director Joe Johnson pushes to gore levels approaching that of a slasher-horror. Thankfully, much of the mutilation is off-screen, the audience only given split-second glimpses of the wolfman until the second act.

The CGI, which grants Del Toro the more animal side of his on-screen persona, is both terrifyingly realistic and surprisingly well used, particularly when highlighting Lawrence's splintering mind and his struggle with the beast within reaches it's most severe. One chilling moment sees the statue which lies above Talbot's mother's coffin slowly turn her head , complete with fatal neck injury, saying “Look in to my eyes Lawrence, you'll see I'm quite dead”.

Anthony Hopkins, as Lawrence's father Sir John, is on fine form and provides the most disturbing performance of the film, while Emily Blunt fits seamlessly into the period as leading lady Gwen Conliffe. Despite the usual necessity for romance, the film only hints at the tortured love that develops between Lawrence and Gwen, the reality of the situation keeping them apart.

Hugo Weaving is the real star of the show though as the suspicious Scotland Yard man Francis Abberline, who, like the audience, quickly sees the fantastic truth of the whole situation. The growling voice of The Matrix's Agent Smith and the calm wisdom of The Lord of The Rings' Elrond combine with a hint of cynicism and comedy from V for Vendetta's V to create a formidable pursuer for Del Toro.

There are some well thought-out set pieces and the flash-back moments are used for more than just the sake of it, but the pace quickens unevenly, making it difficult to continue to suspend disbelief, it almost seems as if a werewolf has been thrown in to an otherwise quiet period drama.

Since it is a remake, and one determined to stick to the original story, there are always drawbacks, and the most telling one of all is that you probably already know what happens before the Orange Wednesdays Advert has finished.

As a result the story leads to an inevitable conclusion, dissolving the tension and suspense built up the whole way through and falling into the trap of over-the-top action and gore in an attempt to build a climax.

James Michael Parry

Film: AVATAR - 3D's shining light?

Director James Cameron gives lead guy Sam Rockwell a few pointers...literally

Seeing things in 3D is quite ordinary. Think about it, you see in 3D (and super-duper HD come to think of it) all the time. In cinema though there's always been a certain fascination with the third dimension, to give films depth you can't get on a run-of-the-mill screen.

Since I've already delved into the history and technicalities before (take a look at my previous post if ye dare), I'll move on to the case in point: James Cameron's much anticipated epic, Avatar.

After fourteen years waiting for technology to catch up with his imagination, or so he would have us believe, Cameron invites you to the far flung world of Pandora to learn about the dangers of damaging the environment – in a nutshell, it may fight back.

The film itself, ignoring any 3D aspect whatsoever, was good. The story and characters were on the cliché side, but the style of the picture saves it, plus a top-form performance from not-so-newcomer Sam Worthington as Jake Sully.

Comparisons to the story of kids' 80s TV show The Smurfs aren't totally unreasonable, in fact the South Park episode on the subject is well worth a watch, but it all comes down to a simple message about not destroying our beloved planet.

Never fear though, remember this is the James Cameron who brought us Aliens, so there's action and excitement a-plenty – there's even a giant tree!

But what about the gimmick/innovation that is 3D? As the screen instructs you to 'Put on your 3D glasses now' there's a well of anticipation and as the spectacle begins there's a satisfying feeling of 'oooo ahhh'. Soon though the initial shock of seeing things with a little more depth wears off and you let yourself get engrossed in the story, and apart from the occasional flurry of leaves towards your face or burning shrapnel flying perilously close towards you, all the hype of 3D sinks into the background, adding to the film surprisingly subtly.

So Cameron delivers his master-stroke with ease, and an awful lot of patience, but it's film-goers who benefit, since Avatar hammers home the fact that 3D films are no longer restricted to cheesy animated shorts or tedious specials about underwater life at the IMAX. Whether 3D will prove to be more than a fad this time around remains to be seen, particularly with home 3D technology just around the corner, but for now it's here to stay, complete with its fairly ridiculous prices – unfortunately.

And happy new year everyone! Thank you for reading This Is Entertainment this past year and I hope I will continue to amuse and inform you in the coming months as well.

3D or not 3D? The future of cinema is...the past?! This Is Entertainment looks at Ice Age 3 through 3D specs

I saw my very first 'Real 3D' film yesterday. I felt as though it should have been a massively significant moment, as if it would change the way I looked at films forever and warp my mind in ways never before experienced.

So, I got to the cinema, fashion-disaster 3D glasses in hand, went into the screen, sat down to enjoy the Odeon Digital 3D experience and...

...got a headache.

The film itself, Ice Age 3(D), was reasonable. Your classic kids' film mix of cliché, parody and talking animals sees Manni, Sid and Diago return in another slapstick adventure with added family, another inevitability in kids' film sequels.

While the endless toils of the acorn seeking Scrat raised a smile or two, if hand-in-hand with some eye-rolling moments, the deminishing return of the jokes from the first film was now began to show.

That said, Simon Pegg quickly turned a limited stereotypical role into a filled out comic relief machine. As the other characters collected and toyed with their collective baggage, Pegg's 'Buck' ("short for Buckington") riled off one-liners and delightfully mad mannerisms to keep adults, as well as kids, entertained.

The 3D effect though is an interesting beast. At times the effect was sublime, drawing you into the picture with perfection to make the events on screen grab your attention and 'come to life' all the more. One particular highlight was when the camera flew right through a torrent of molten lava, peppering the screen (your eyes) with intense colour and forcing you try to move your head to dodge it.

Often though, particularly when changing scenes, the action moved too fast for your eyes to keep up with, making the 3D animations blurry and difficult to concentrate on. Too often I found myself longing for characters to stop moving to save my retinas.

The glasses are reasonably comfortable, compared to the red/green specs of old, but if you didn't have to wear them things would have been far more comfortable, particularly since the 3D magic stopped at the edge of the film screen and not the glasses.

The only comparison to make is with IMAX, the only significant 3D experience I'd had before, and it was so much more immersive. Part of that is the far-bigger-than-a-standard-screen aspect, but in Odeon's favour their film was far more entertaining than watching underwater creatures.

Since 3D has been around for so long, Hitchcock famously imagining Psycho and Vertigo in 3D back in the mid 20th century, it's staggering it's taken so long to get from the early stages of the technology to where we are today, and the fact that it still underwhelms is disappointing.

For glasses wearers the toil and trouble is even worse, since you're forced to balance them precariously on the end of your nose to fit your own glasses on in between. Price is another factor, with even a student 3D ticket costing a meaty £8.50.

All in all there is definite glimmers of potential in the technology, but we're not quite to virtual reality film-watching, and with the escapism of film being one of its strongest points, do we really want to be?

Film Review - Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen

We were promised 'Bayhem': more location, more action and, bizarrely, less explosions and Revenge of the Fallen doesn't disappoint on these counts, delivering a marked improvement on robo-duelling as well as believable robot to human interaction.

If you go to see this film expecting more than giant computer generated robots kicking nuts and bolts out of each other you were always going to be disappointed and though Director Michael Bay has done little to convert nay-sayers, there's little more of a plot this time around to hold things in place.

Sam Witwicky (Shia LaBeouf) returns with his impossibly attractive girlfriend Mikaela Banes (Megan Fox) and he's now starting college and trying to get on with his life after disposing of evil nasty Megatron two years ago.

The Decepticons (the baddies) aren't content to shuffle off and leave Earth be though, and have been tackling with ultra-secret taskforce NEST (which may stand for Nuclear Emergency Search Team – we aren't told – but the important thing is it's an alliance between the Autobots and humanity against the remaining Decepticons).

The story this time revolves around the fact that the Transformers have come to Earth before, some 19,000 years ago, and to cut a short story shorter the Fallen is the equivilent of the devil, a Prime (yes, like that Optimus guy) cast out after he decided killing innocents to obtain Energon, the races power source, was a good idea.

What follows is a highly computer generated chase movie with some comedy moments thrown in for good measure, Sam's mum trying some 'special' college brownies is a particular high point, and eventually coming to a climax in the sandy lands of Egypt.

The film works. It isn't flawless, it isn't outstandingly excellent, but it does what it set out to do. With the summer release schedule peppered with heavy releases it lets you forget reality for a moment and embrace this strange world where toys come to life...wait a second that sounds familiar...

The returning cast all put on a good performance, save Megan Fox who rests on her laurels somewhat in her eye-candy role and resorts to a few damsel-in-distress turns. John Turturro fills out Agent Simmons, who's fallen on hard times after Sector 7 was disbanded following the events of film one, and treads the line between action and comedy perfectly to set the tone of the final act.

Megatron seems a little emasculated by title-stealer The Fallen, and bravely runs away at the end to leave the door open for a three-quel, which despite Bay's insistence this was written as if it was the last Transformers movie, seems inevitable, if not for a couple more years.

Already in the two years since its predecessor you can see how much the technical complexity of the robots themselves has left forwards, with fights between up to have a dozen at a time a common occurrence, one particular highlight is the Mortal-Kombat style de-spining of a cougar shaped Decepticon.

The real hero is, of course, Optimus Prime, who, keeping with the Biblical analogy here, is killed and then resurrected for the final face-off against the big nasty, while Sam and Mikaela carry on their (slightly) forced love story, takling the issue of the 'l' word itself, which really pales in comparison to the excitement going on all around.

Bay has surpassed himself to create a film which people are sure to enjoy if nothing else, but he wasn't trying to make people thing or deliver a moral message, he just wanted to blow stuff up.

And, despite his initial claims, he does like no one else could.

Misleading Trailers

Excitement, amusement and bewilderment are three things that can come from watching a trailer. They began as a mere marketing tool, designed to get the word out about new films and entice people in with flashy special effects and big actors' names with "Academy Award-Winner" pasted over the top (Public Enemies, Above), but now trailers have turned a bit nasty.

It's not that there's anything particularly bad about them, but increasingly you find they mislead the viewer into making false assumptions. Take latest Dan Brown adaptation Angels and Demons for instance (here there be spoilers), in the trailer a chilling voiceover says "If god has issues, it won't be with what we've done, it will be with what we're about to do"

Nothing wrong with that you might say, and you're right, it's a decent quote to stick in a trailer as a dead body is chillingly uncovered on screen and conjures up questions for the viewer like: What are they going to do? Why? and Who are 'they'?

Once you get to the film itself however, this subterfuge reveals itself. Rather than a mysterious heinous act, the quote in fact refers to the simple act of murder. Furthermore the quote has been manipulated so the 'we' that was heard in the trailer is actually 'I' in the final print, instantly taking away all the mystery and suspense since it's obvious that a killer who's already killed and has three prisoners is likely to do so again.

Another example is Minority Report, where another line change changes the meaning of what's going on. In the trailer Colin Farrell's character Danny Withwer is in Pre-Crime HQ with Tom Cruise's John Anderton when he says "I've got a warrant in my pocket that says murder".

On the surface this is a pretty good line and sounds pretty cool, but after watching the film you find it makes no sense and is just untrue.

It makes you wonder how far this will go, there's been plenty of trailers or teaser trailers which have used scenes which were eventually deleted from the final cut (see Xmen 3's "We're not kids anymore" discussion), but surely manipulating lines is a slippery slope and could become a dangerous game of deception.

Will we eventually find films changing as radically as this:



If you haven't seen or heard of The Shining, then you could easily be fooled by something as simple as this, admittedly very well done, spoof.

We can only hope that film companies decide that we can, in fact, handle the truth.

Xmen Origins: Wolverine Review

Wolverine is cool, Hugh Jackman is cool (or hot, depending on your gender), so a film featuring both focusing on both should be a no-brainer, right? This was clearly the thought of Marvel bosses when they decided to launch into the Xmen Origins film series, currently at least two films, the second being focused on Ian McKellan's sublime Magneto.

As it turns out, the film reaches expectations, but goes little further. Wolverine is joined by a cast of fan favourites to make it more than just a one man show, notably Deadpool/Weapon XI (who's already been given the green light for his own spinoff) and Gambit.

X2's evil-nasty-man William Striker returns, this time embodied by Danny Huston, as Wolverine and big brother Sabretooth's (an excellent Liev Schreiber) way out of an exceptionally long military career. You do stop for a moment to wonder why no one seems to notice these recruits enlist for every major conflict in US history and never move up the ranks...

Confusing continuity aside, the brothers are soon among an elite group of mutants, a word muttered under-breath throughout the film, which serves to outline how early in mutant history we are here, there aren't going to be evil plots to mutate world leaders for some decades.

The prequel nature of the story lets us see some of the later mutants in their earlier years, such as a young Scott Summers (a.k.a. Cyclops) and a brief cameo from an even-more-digitally-de-aged Patrick Stewart as Professor X. This is all well and good, but does slightly distract from the general story.

The other supporting players in the story perform well overall. Gambit seems tragically underused, tacked on as a means to an end for our protagonist, and despite being very cool and quick to get back at the big bad Wolf after he's knocked out with a casual elbow to the face, you still feel like the story wouldn't have missed him.

Ryan Reynolds (NOT Ben Affleck as I stupidly assumed at first) put on an impressive turn as Wade Wilson, combining some excellent comic lines with some devastating katana moves in the opening act , and eventually being transformed into the Sylar equivalent of the Xmen universe: Deadpool. There's confusion here since in the comic books Weapon XI and Deadpool were too very different characters, but in the film the two have been combined.

Jackman has maintained countless times in interviews the fact that this film should take the character to a place where he could walk off-screen at the end and walk into the bar where we meet him at the beginning of Xmen.

This is unlikely to remain however, since the teasing out-scenes, now an expectation of the Xmen movies, show Logan drinking in Japan trying to remember who he is. The tragedy of amnesia is that it almost makes the entire film pointless, as everything he's learned, suffered and sacrificed are lost along with his memories, but from a storytelling perspective it's very handy, since it neatly explains why he doesn't recognise Sabretooth as his brother in Xmen 1, for example.

The film overall is a healthy blend of action, emotion, mystery and some more action thrown in. It's a worthy beginning to Wolverine's tale, and sets itself up nicely for a sequel which could bring to life Sin City scribe Frank Miller's stories of Wolverine in Japan.

In terms of the 'Origins' aspect, it doesn't take away from the endearing mystery of Wolverine as a character to know what happened in his past that he can't remember, but the adamantium process, frequently flash-backed in the first two X films, seemed a lacklustre affair compared to the scenes of Jackman covered in blood, desperately trying to escape Alkali Lake amid primal screams.

If you compare this film to the trilogy it bobs around about the same standard as the franchise's debut, with X2 sailing in front and poorly subtitled The Last Stand trailing, aptly, in third. The effort put into the film, but that and its fairly predictable story are let down by a few jarring visual effects, which at times seem set to appeal the videogame generation.

Definitely worth checking out for fans of the series and the genre as a whole, but lacking in enough substance to draw in new viewers who aren't already trapped by the invincible Adamantium claws.

Feel Good Hits Of The Summer: May's Blockbusters

Summer has always been a big release time for film, with films released July 4 weekend smashing records on an almost yearly basis, but does this years crop of films look to stand up to the pedigree of past years.

Last year was dominated by the superhero, as Iron Man and The Dark Knight stole the world's attention, and putting in yet-another case for why comic book films are a serious business.

May is the big month this year, with almost all the big name releases being thrown at us relentlessly amid the (hopeful) sunshine.

Wolverine is the first big contender, or Xmen Origins: Wolverine, to give it its full, overblown title. Originally planned for release May 1, the date was rushed forward after a massively hyped piracy scandal, which saw the film leak prematurely on the internet, to which Hugh Jackman was reportedly very disappointed, since the version which got out wasn't 100% done, and obviously you don't get the full affect of all the nifty special effects.

Jackman is big in terms of star quality and he's a very talented actor, so the film stands to do well merely rested on his shoulders (though Baz Luhrmann may disagree with this logic...), but if you add to that the vast fanbase of the Xmen franchise, both film and comic book, then you've got a massive potential audience before a metal clawed punch has been thrown.

Another film which has a huge, perhaps even epic, potential fanbase, is the latest incarnation of Star Trek directed by JJ "Help I'm LOST" Abrams on May 8. Those who haven't heard of the starship Enterprise by now have surely been hiding under an astoriod, since the plight of the Galactic Federation of Planets has been played out in (at least) five series and nine previous films over the last 40 years.

With veteran Leonard Nimoy back for a cameo as the cooly logical poity-eared Vulcan Spock, hardcore Trekkies will already be unable to resist, while big budget sci-fi has been off the table long enough for it to make a comeback at the cinema.

This leads us inevitably on to Christian "husky voice" Bale in Terminator Salvation on May 21. Not technically a sequel, but a "re-boot" - to translate this industry jargon, it basically it means the last film didn't do quite so well, so they wanted to distance themselves from it and start afresh (see also Hulk, Casino Royale and Batman Begins).

Judgement day has finally come for John Connor and those of humanity who've decided to fight back against evil supercomputer software Skynet and its company: all-round robitics-controlling-nasty Cyberdyne Systems.

Last in May is Disney Pixar animated tale Up, about a...I'm not sure, is it a floating house with a small child an old man going for a walk? Anyway it's set up as being the most impressive Pixar spectacle yet, and since they keep raising the bar with every film (except perhaps Cars, but we'll ignore that - talking cars? That's madness!), we can expect some great things from the team.

In terms of vocal talent the film includes Christopher Plummer of A Beautiful Mind and as OAP with altitude Charles Muntz, along with newcomer SyrianaJordan Nagai as Russell. Family films often tend to do well, since they appeal to a wide audience by their very nature, and Pixar have proved their pedigree numerous times over the years, meaning young'uns will be clamouring for this latest story.

Crashing out of May and into June is Michael Bay's Transformers sequel Revenge of the Fallen, but perhaps we'll look into that a little more another time. Essentially all you need to know to appear up on the latest social trends is that is has Shia LeBouf, Megan Fox and giant transforming robots, simple!

Potential big hitters are Angels & Demons, an adaptation of another book from The Da Vinci Code's Dan Brown, and Drag Me To Hell, a horror flick directed by Sam Raimi, who helmed the Spiderman trilogy.

So, if you decide to see a film this May then you should have a bit more of an idea what to expect, chances are you've already decided what you like the look of and don't but if you choose not to take the big names at face value, who knows?, you might be presently surprised.

Censorship: Protecting the public or hiding the truth?

Film and television have always been subject to some sort of censorship, even at the most basic level, shows or films regarded as too violent, sexual or controversial have been banned. In video games too, censorship is a big issue, with Mortal Kombat being the victim of a media storm in the 90s for its violent finishing moves.

In the age of 24/7 entertainment and relentless information exchange, is it still right for companies to censor information? When you mention censorship, you might think of the limits on the Chinese version of Google or the propaganda of Nazi Germany, but in reality it goes on without the general public even realising.

The most recent example which I noticed was the broadcast of an episode of [Scrubs] on E4. The episode seemed innocent enough, 6 o'clock on a Tuesday evening, but as I watched, I noticed a few things that just weren't quite right. Dialogue was cut short, suggestive lingering camera shots removed and the shows signature fantasy moments bizarrely tame. The reason: censorship. The network, for whatever reason, had taken out the comedy's 'edgier' moments, leaving the show a shadow of it's former self.

There are watershed issues to consider of course, and the concept itself (which essentially forbids the broadcast of illicit material until after 9pm) is important to protect the 'innocence' of children etc. But the real worry is that many of the omissions were nothing more outrageous than you might see on your typical episode of Eastenders, leading us to conclude that either the network is being over-cautious, or deliberately toning-down to appeal to their viewers.

Surely with the show available on DVD, they must know that many fans of the show will have a series or two, so may have watched the show before, making these omissions obvious. Obviously to those who have never seen the show before will be none the wiser, but it is still a concern.

This is just one example of the negative effects of censorship. There are claims long-term exposure to violence on television causes an increased risk of violence in the real world, but there is little evidence to substantiate that this affects more then a sever minority.

Back in 2000, the BBC reported on a study called 'Making sense of Censorship', which concluded that four out of five people would rather watch un-edited versions of film and television, and judge for themselves what not to watch.

The poll also raised the concern of children's viewing, with 98% of adults saying they were responsible for deciding what their children should and should not watch. Interestingly, almost two thirds of people were more worried about censorship on the internet, an issue which has still not been significantly tackled by authorities. At the time the BBC spoke to Nick Jones, head of film programming for Channel 4 and FilmFour:

"This puts the emphasis on facts rather than pre-conceived myths, It shows middle England is more informed and wants to make its own choices about what they watch - based on information and not the intervention of a 'nanny state' It is now time to take a hard look at confused legislation that assumes there is such a thing as 'the moral majority'" (Jones 2000)

There was controversy last year in the wake of Heath Ledger's death, when there were calls to omit the scene in 'The Dark Knight' which showed Ledger as the Joker in a body bag.

In 1995 Simon Birch wrote a report which discusses why censorship should be stopped. He concluded that the system is not working and that there are discrepancies which mean the public is being mis-informed:

"Sooner or later they will have to amend a system which allows more explicit detail of real sexual peccadilloes through the written media than it allows the viewing public to see within a fictional context." (Birch 1995)

In the end, if the public objects to how something is being done, the government is forced to act to change it, but if people do not even know it is going on in the first place, then we may begin to see an ever-increasing problem in years to come.

What are subtitles actually for?

Some think subtitles are merely a device to allow the hard of hearing to understand and enjoy TV programmes and films more easily, and that is, of course, how they began their life, but what about everyone else? Are they just irrelevant choices on a DVD title screen?

If you've got this far then hopefully you have a feeling that there might be a little more to it than that.

A reliable (though basically designed) internet page tells us that subtitles have been considered since the inclusion of voices in film in 1929. In those days, a lot of films came from abroad in foreign languages, so the only way British audiences could understand them was to have the films 'dubbed' into English, a practice which still goes on to this day.

Dubbing is expensive though, and soon film-makers had the cunning plan just to show the words on screen as they did with the title and credits and the beginning and end of the films, but tucked away at the bottom of the screen so you could still see what was going on, hence subtitles.

Fast-forward to today and you see subtitles telling you the latest news in railway stations, when audio would need to be deafeningly loud to be heard over busy commuters, as well as in nightclubs to let you enjoy an episode of Family Guy or whatever it might be while you take a break from all that hard boogie-ing.

In foreign films still, subtitles are used, and in Japanese anime films and series there are not always English-dubbed versions of series available, making reading 'subs' the only way to understand the action.

Subtitles can also be used in education, since many children may be daunted at the prospect at watching Harry Potter's adventures in French, but once the subtitles are put on they can watch a good(ish) film and learn the language at the same time: the definition of enjoyable learning.

There are still practical reasons for the inclusion of subtitles, and it baffles the mind to think that in an age where we're (supposed to be) more accepting and accommodating to people than ever before, some DVD releases still don't have subtitles when others boast alternate audio soundtracks and dozens of world languages to read through.

Cast of Tintin film "Secret of the Unicorn" announced

After all these months (or years, if you're a slightly older chap/chapette) there are finally some concrete details on the trilogy of Tintin adventures coming to the big screen.

The Times tells us today in a piece on The Times Online that the all-star cast will include Mr Bond himself, Daniel Craig, Middle Earth's most weird-talking minion Gollum, Andy Serkis, and as the jolly ginger journalist himself...

The boy from Billy Elliot: Jamie Bell.

Also said to appear are Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, as bowler hat-wearing detectives Thompson and Thompson, which is interesting when you consider a comment on the story made by Mark from Woking:

"They gave Simon Pegg, the guy who is the spitting image of Tintin, the part of one of the Thomson detectives...?!?! "

Of course, since it's a CGI animation, you won't be too confused by Pegg's ginger-ness (even if it would be concealed below a hat) but he is clearly a man you think of when you think of ginger stereotypes.

Directing duties go to the on-again/off-again film-making wizard Steven Spielberg, who's teamed up with Lord of The Rings helmsman Peter Jackson to make "up to three films" starring the plucky young Belgian.

Aparently there are even a few new characters, such as Tintin's (seemingly nameless) Editor, who surely should be played by a ruffled Steven Fry (in a mash of the mild-mannered QI host and spagetti-brained General Melchett), since the poor man received only one story from Tintin throught the entire 24 story series.

The real question though, is: will it work?

We all have some knowledge of Tintin, even if it's just "Isn't that the ginger Belgian fellow?", but can this largely Brit cast directed by Americans do justice to a franchise which is as close to bizarre adventure as Indiana Jones? (which Spielberg also directed let's not forget)

Being animation, there's infinitely more possibilities to what can be done, but it's not that which will be the problem, it's what can be done 'convincingly'.

Either the film will take itself seriously and go for action, suspense with a slice of comic relief (what else are Pegg and Frost going to be for?) or they take things with a pinch of salt, be true to the character but stray from the well-established story and before you know it there's aliens and flying monkeys everywhere...sound familiar?

That said, it is early days, and despite being a bit of a fan myself (you really don't have to look far to find me with my branded tshirt and messenger bag...) we should definitely give it some time to take shape for we form too many pre-conceptions, but probably the most important thing for the team to remember is:

It just wouldn't be Tintin without Snowy.

A day at EMPIRE: The World's Biggest Movie Magazine

Well I've made it, the clock has struck 6pm and my first day of work placement at EMPIRE is over.

There's no question it's been overwealming, and perhaps I feel as though I could have accomplished more, but I'm happy with the day, and most importantly, I've enjoyed myself.

My first taste of the industry has been as entertaining as I expected, with stories and comments flying around the office and big Hollywood names being name-checked here and there throughout.

I didn't get off to the best start, having been told to go to the FIRTH floor instead of the FORTH, but there's still time to turn around those first impressions, and everyone I've met is very nice.

I won't (t)witter on about it too much, but there's no signs of the credit crunch dampening people's spirits in this festive Christmas season.

The office, littered with EMPIRE issues as you'd expect, is also complete with a pool table to unwind with, as well as a couple of shiny big screen TVs for those all-important DVD views.

Most impressively though, is the A1 cardboard representations of some of the magazine's most iconic covers, which brought a warm smile to my face as soon as I arrived.

As well as that there seems to be a large amount of Star Wars related things lying around, fingers crossed that my new T-shirt in the same vein will make a good impression later in the week.

Stay tuned for more.

Holidays are coming...but first

With a huge sigh of relief I finally completed and handed in all my work for this term earlier on today (I might share some of it on here so watch this space). There's nothing like feeling you're actually accomplishing something in your life, don't you think?

There's not much new about this holiday season for most people, but for me it's an important and exciting one. First of all I get to turn 21 (14th of December, be sure to look out for a birthday post then!), which has been long awaited and confirms my ascent from the last remnants of childhood into an age where people accept you aren't a child, but look at you with a disapproving gaze followed by a shrewd smile whenever you try do or say something naive.

I accept this is part of the 'right' of passage into the world of working to get paid as opposed to the world of paying to study, but I wonder what age most 'real' adults think us borderliners become part of their club?

More importantly, and excitingly, than that though, is the other big event that is happening is my work placement, which begins on Monday at none other than EMPIRE magazine, a magazine which I have almost infinite respect for and a great appreciation of.

I'll be there all week, so hopefully I'll find a moment to report back about the interesting goings on, but rest assured my eyes will be peeled for tantalising glimpses of the next years hottest films.

This placement is the best 21st birthday present I could have hoped for in truth, because EMPIRE is the place I'd like to end up once I've flexed my creative muscles throughout the industry in a few years time.

Let us hope this opportunity will be everything I'm convinced it will be, because there's always a chance this time in the industry will make me realise I don't want to be a journalist anymore.

I do, I undo, I redo

You may have noticed a change around here. On the other hand I suppose you may have never been here before, in which case welcome along, but the big change to the blog today is the name.

Yes, that's right, I've finally realised that no one except me and old people in Vatican City with big beards understands Latin anymore, so it was out with "Ex virborum auditorum" and in with "This is Entertainment". I thought I'd opt for a name which reflected a little more the content of the page, something which I hope to build up on in future.

Also there's a snazzy banner at the top (comments?), which I knocked up on trusty Photoshop Elements (6.0, none of this archaic 4.0 University nonsense) so hopefully it gives things a little more cohesion, I suppose only time will tell.

The name of the post, for those who are interested, is from an artistic work I saw (above) in the Tate Modern in London a few years ago by Louise Bourgeois, which consisted of three large metal towers called "I Do", "I Undo" and "I Redo".

I just the symbolism reflected here quite nicely, I hope you'll read on...

The great film ticket price problem

Do you ever find yourself visiting your local cinema and thinking: “Blimey, those nachos are a bit expensive!” The truth is, the price gap between the real world and movie-land is vast, a bag of Minstrels in a high street shop or local convenience store might set you back £1.50-£2.00, whereas in cinemas this price jumps up to £2.75 or even £3.00.

Of course, this is nothing new, there are endless ways to cheekily nab money off us these days, but what’s the real reason? Shameless money grabbing, or something more?

Cinemas generally don’t get all the money from the tickets they sell, as you might assume, in fact the figure is closer to 20%, with most of the money going to film distribution companies, not even to the actors and actresses themselves.

When you hear news of Quantum of Solace raking in the most money at the box office in history on opening day then you have to take that into account, since it’s likely Daniel Craig won’t be seeing any of that money, he’s on a fixed contract from Sony for £5million, which goes up to £8million for Bond 23.

Spiralling film budgets from the last few years have only fuelled the fire, with the cost of a typical Hollywood film breaking the $100million mark in 1997, which jumped to over $200million by 2004, but suffered in 2006, when the average Hollywood budget dropped by $2.5million.

The biggest budget film in recent years was Bryan Singer's shaky hit Superman Returns which set Warner Brothers back a whopping $268million (£170million), not including the marketing and promotion, meaning the film had to collect over $600million worldwide just to break even.

Interestingly, low budget films continue to be the only area of film making which is consistently profitable, with Saw II taking $4million and turning it into $144million.

The ever-increasing cost of film-making is causing audiences pockets to be left bare, tickets are far more expensive these days compared to the 1970s, when an average adult film ticket was around 61p (£2.20 in 2008 money).

Of course, things are a lot different here up North compared to if you venture into the nation’s bustling capital, where West End cinemas can see tickets rise as high as £12.50 for adults, making it all the more un-appealing to fork out for a tub of popcorn rather than sneaking in some Jaffa Cakes.

In Stockport earlier this year, Adam Glennon was physically thrown out of the Cineworld cinema for taking in his own sweets.

He said he’d bought about £5 worth of sweets, crisps and bottled drink to take in, which would have cost well over £10 if bought inside the cinema, but Cineworld operates a strict ‘no food’ policy.

He told the Stockport Express:

"It costs a small fortune to buy sweets from the cinema and they don’t take this into account when people with little money just want to watch a film."

Vue specifies in its legal terms and conditions that

“Hot food brought from outside of the cinema may not be consumed on the premises”

but doesn’t saying anything about cold food, such as chocolate, or drinks.

Odeon have no problem with customers taking in their own food, providing it’s not a take-away and there’s no alcohol involved. The cinema giants are more worried about film piracy and people bringing in recording equipment, the results of which are difficult to appreciate when faced with the ever-increasing amount of films available on the internet.

Another pillar of cinema money-making is advertising, which is estimated to create £214million this year, and cinemas will take a fair chunk of that, but its not an astronomical figure when you consider generally 3.5million people visit the cinema each week.

Pearl and Dean, which represents a third of the cinema advertising market, reports that £26.4million so far this year has been spent on car advertising, meaning it isn’t just our collective imagination that car adverts are never-ending, but it comes as no surprise that the oft comical Orange mobile phone adverts are the biggest single earners, handing over £10.9million.

With all this money flying around the industry, it’s easy to feel put out by the ‘evil’ corporations, but in reality a student cinema ticket (fellow students, don’t forget that NUS extra card!) will only set you back around £5, which is about the same as you pay for a couple of pints of beer and a bag of crisps on a typical night, so compared to those West End film lovers; we’ve got it good.

A life in film: Heath Ledger

The death of Heath Ledger on January 22 came as one of the biggest shocks to the film industry in recent years. The news travelled quickly, with candlelit shrines being erected, tears being shed and mournful tributes held.

To most he will be remembered for his Oscar Nominated performance as quiet Ennis Del Mar from Brookeback Mountain or perhaps the sadistic psychopath the Joker in the upcoming sequel to Batman Begins: The Dark Knight, but for every admirer there is another person who has never heard of him.

This mixed reaction has been echoed amongst students: “I barely knew who he was until he died.” Said second year Cheryl Pennant-Jones, “As someone who's only ever seen him in 10 Things I Hate About You, I didn't know too much about him before.

“It's a tragic incident though, and I especially feel sorry for his daughter Matilda [2].”

Keen fan Elizabeth Norman, a first year Philosophy and Media student added: “He was someone with great talent, who loved his daughter and will never get to see her grow up which is tragic. He wasn't afraid to show his emotions and express how much he loved her...in fact it was his unfailing power of emotion that made his name.

“Whatever the film it is clear Heath could both feel and express what he feels deeply on screen.”

Born in Perth, Australia, on April 4 1979, Ledger was only 28 when he was found dead in his Manhattan apartment by his housekeeper. Police Commissioner of the New York Police Paul Browne said “there were pills within the vicinity of the bed” and there was a possibility of drugs being related, but they had no suspicion of ‘foul play’ in his death.

The latest reports suggest Ledger may have suffered a heart attack, since the level of drugs in his system was apparently too low to cause an overdose.

Ledger’s family described the traumatic event as “accidental”, his father Kim said: “We, Heath's family, can confirm the very tragic, untimely and accidental passing of our dearly loved son.

“Heath has touched so many people on so many different levels during his short life that few had the pleasure of truly knowing him”

Ledger’s impressively vibrant career began on Australian television in 1992 as an extra, but his first breakthrough was on 1996 TV series Sweat, which saw a group of athletically gifted youngsters training in an academy tackled their personal problems.

The first well-known show for Ledger to come into contact with was down under take on Baywatch: Home and Away, when he joined as Scott Irwin. This performance gave him the credibility he needed to play a part in the US-financed series Roar, a medieval drama inspired by Braveheart which earned him a cult following in the US, despite quickly being axed by its US distributor.

Ledger also met the first of his older female partners Lisa Zane, 14 years his senior, who he shared a relationship with in 1997 and followed across the Pacific Ocean to Los Angeles in an attempt to find work.

Unfortunately the now 18 year old actor was less successful in Hollywood than in his native country and was saved when he made his name in the film industry through the Australian film Two Hands in 1999.

Shortly after came one of Ledger’s most well known roles, as Patrick Verona in 10 Things I Hate About You, a modern take on Shakespeare’s Taming of the Shrew alongside teenage heartthrob of the day Julia Stiles.

With this first wave of international success came a downside, Heath felt he was at risk of being typecast into shallow teen-movie roles, and turned down numerous scripts over the next year, his increasingly low finances forcing him to live on noodles and water.

His resolve paid off though when he was cast alongside Mel Gibson in millennium success The Patriot. Ledger played Gabriel Martin, the son of Gibson’s Benjamin Martin, which went a long way in shaking his ‘toy boy’ image and established him in Hollywood as a well-rounded actor.

Along with his latest step up the showbiz ladder came relationships. The first came during the filming of A Knight’s Tale in Prague when Heath met actress Heather Graham (Austin Powers 2) but it went on for only a few months.

In 2001 Ledger began a two year relationship with the star of The Ring Niomi Watts after they met on the set of Ned Kelly. The American, 10 years older than Mr Ledger, was unphased by the age gap: “I think it's about life experience and not about age. I fell in love with a soul and a person, and his life experience was rich enough that it stimulated me.”

By 2004 Ledger had faded a little from the spotlight as The Sin Eater (a.k.a. The Order) floundered at the box office and he focused more on his private life. The filming of Brookeback Mountain the same year threw Ledger together with Michelle Williams, with whom he had a serious two year relationship and his daughter Matilda.

The film itself had been often dubbed ‘that gay cow boy movie’ in the industry since the story had been floating around for years before it was taken on by the director of Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Ang Lee.

Ledger teamed up with Jake Gyllenhaal, who’d previously auditioned for his part in The Patriot, in a story which earned him the Best Actor Oscar Nomination and Best Supporting Actor nominations for his co-stars Gyllenhaal and Williams. Unfortunately for the cast, the films only win was Best Director.

Soon after the media frenzy surrounding Brookeback Mountain died down, Ledger was approached and asked to portray one of the most iconic villains of all time: The Joker.

Seemingly epitomised by Jack Nicholson in Tim Burton’s original Batman film in 1989, Ledger made it clear he wasn’t going to try to ‘do a Jack’ and would play a far darker and more psychotic character, in line with director Christopher Nolan’s gritty re-vision of Gotham City in Batman Begins.

Internet servers went into meltdown when the first picture of how Ledger would look in the film found its way onto the internet in May 2007, and every trailer, poster and interview since has had fans and critics alike ripe with curiosity as to how it will turn out.

However history remembers him there is no doubt that the death of such a young actor is significant, particularly in such delicate times with the recent strikes and the annual Screen Actors Guild Awards.

To his fans in particular, Heath Ledger will remain a symbol of the achievements of the film industry in recent years and proof that the talent seen in glory days of Marlon Brando and Cary Grant’s Golden Age live on through the performances of young actors and actresses.