Now, this is a promising, if not altogether surprising piece of news. Given that the reboot of Spider-Man is being directed by Marc Webb, and given that Webb previously helmed (500) Days Of Summer, Zooey Deschanel is an actress who was likely to have always been in his mind for his new film. And so it turns out, as she's currently being strongly linked with the role of Betty Brant in the new Spider-Man movie.

Elizabeth Banks took on the role in Sam Raimi's take on Spider-Man, but the role was relegated to the background in his films. Marc Webb, apparently, has bigger plans for Brant, although what they are remains to be seen.

The usual caveat applies here: this one's strictly a rumour thus far. It originated over at Showbiz Spy, and you can find the original story right here.

Spider-Man returns in the summer of 2012, and the shoot is set to begin in just a month or two from now. Blimey.

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

As Torchwood's fourth series, The New World, prepares for production, the casting jigsaw continues to fall into place. We already know that John Barrowman and Eve Myles are reprising their roles as Captain Jack and Gwen. But we also now know, courtesy of Deadline, that Arlene Tur has joined the cast, too.

Tur's highest profile role to date was in the TV series of Crash, where she played Bebe Arcel. In Torchwood? She's got a recurring role, even if it's not entirely clear thus far which one.

Currently, Amber Stevens is still rumoured to be joining Torchwood too, but Dollhouse's Enver Gjokaj won't be featuring now, as had been previously rumoured. Chad Michael Murray, who had also been linked, is not in there, either.

We'll keep you posted on casting news, and Torchwood: The New World will be screening next summer...

Deadline

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

I'm blinking, open-mouthed and slightly agog. I'm surprised and a bit discombobulated. I suppose that's appropriate considering I've just been hit by Sucker Punch.

The striking trailer for Zack Snyder's upcoming feature definitely delivers a blow. I'm looking forward to seeing it on the big screen before a feature-length blockbuster in order to appreciate the full effect. In fact, I'd like to go along to the cinema with someone who isn't as desensitised to stylised cinematic hyperviolence as I am, to see how it affects them.

On first impressions drawn from the teaser and the pre-release blurb, Sucker Punch looks like the kind of film that kicks the Daily Mail Outrage-o-meter into overdrive. Sexuality! Violence! Young girls in a mental institution! All kinds of gratuitous sick thrills presented as a slick entertainment package to be swallowed by unstable, amoral teenagers! Intolerable! (That's assuming that these moral guardians have got over the shock of Kick-Ass and can concentrate on something other than their own knees jerking.)

In the beginning, it all looks like Watchmen, with a funeral sequence and what's possibly attempted rape, underscored by Led Zeppelin's When The Levee Breaks. Things then start to get odd as we're pulled into an asylum for girls. The aesthetics and atmosphere of Snyder's earlier movie are still there, but with a sense that we've ditched costumed superhero fetishism to ogle young incarcerated females in what could be a sexploitation flick set-up.

Thankfully, it gets less uncomfortable and filthy when the trailer flies off into really peculiar territory and presents the viewer with shots of samurai, biplanes, androids, dragons and bombed out, war torn cities. The rest of the promo reel leaps out of the asylum and into a dazzling and diverse array of fantasy action sequences in which the females are talking tough and fighting in a range of wider worlds. We'll have to see the whole movie before we can give a proper feminist critique. Nevertheless, it grabs your attention and successfully says, "Hey! I've got style. You know it and you want to know more!"

Altogether, with its 'chicks with attitude' vibe echoing Tarantino's Death Proof and the look of 300 and Watchmen mashed up into a mix-genre cocktail, I'm onboard and eager to see what Snyder has in store.

What is most exciting about Sucker Punch, though, beyond the fact that it looks cool and appears to have the appealing edge of other flicks, is the fact it's the first time Snyder will be handling a concept that is completely his own.

His directorial debut was a remake of Romero's Dawn Of The Dawn with running zombies being the major innovation. After that came super-stylish, very faithful graphic novel adaptations in the shape of 300 and Watchmen. The fidelity to source material is perfect for the focused scope of Frank Miller's Battle of Thermopylae comic, but not so much for Watchmen (proclaimed deservedly as 'the greatest graphic novel of all time'). Snyder managed to film the 'unfilmable', but the Alan Moore/ Dave Gibbons masterpiece is such a multifaceted, all-encompassing and cerebral artefact that it could only suffer as a condensed single flick for multiplex consumption.

You can't say that Snyder doesn't have balls as he throws himself in front of these stampeding sacred cows. That's even truer now that he's been tasked with rebooting the Superman franchise, a comic property more popular than Watchmen, wrapped up in even more expectation and fanboy adoration.

Facing Superman, I'm concerned about Snyder and fear that once more he'll become a slave to the source material, hamstrung by all the mythology and mass adulation attached to the Man of Steel.

The director gets a fair amount of flak for being a 'hack' (all-style-and-no-substance), but I don't believe that's a fair appraisal. Cinema is a visual medium and Snyder's output is amongst the most eye-popping and invigorating out there. Punishing Mr Slo-Mo Mojo Risin' for pushing the full sensory potential of the format (and films are meant to be sensual experiences), seems snide and pernickety.

Sucker Punch will be refreshing because it looks like a release for the 300 director where he can take his aesthetic approach to something wholly new that doesn't have a precedent in the pages of a much-loved graphic novel. Creatively free and able to apply the style without limits, he's giving us samurai warriors, fighting androids and much, much more. It looks spectacular and outlandish and I, personally, can't wait to appreciate the full force and depth of his imagination when the movie comes out in March.

Evidence that Zachary can adapt to great effect is on display in Legend Of The Guardians: The Owls Of Ga'Hoole, which is the director's first foray outside of R-rated territory. Though it may be an adaptation based on a series of fantasy novels, it provides Snyder the chance to spread his wings (ah ha ha), play with different material and prove he's not just an 'ultraviolent comic hack'.

The flourishes are there from the beginning: a shot of an owl swooping and losing a single feather echoing the falling smiley badge and fatal skyscraper plummet of the Comedian that opens Watchmen. Legend Of The Guardians also offers some of the best CGI fight sequences yet realised, which is pretty astounding considering that the combatants are round and fuzzy winged animals.

Altogether, it's like a family-friendly 300 with owls and has the same sense of battle spirit, but it also carries a charming sweetness and innocence that's surprising in light of Snyder's other movies. The effects are amazing. Frames of beautifully-rendered feathers bristling against torrential rain, for instance, are amongst the most incredible things achieved so far in cinematic CGI animation.

Snyder's technique and computer animated family adventure are perfect companions and credit is due to him and his team for taking what is a pretty baffling 'reality' (it's a world dominated by owls and a snake nursemaid) and using their tools to draw us in and make it believable. The style resonates more than the standard good versus evil story, but overall, I'd rate the movie as a success that hints at the moviemaker's ability and versatility.

I'm excited to see more of what Snyder can do when he's not enslaved by established iconography. Superman won't give him that chance, but before then we've got Sucker Punch and the signs are favourable.

Liberated and unshackled to do what he will with his visual, visceral technique, I predict an inspired, invigorating hoot.

James' previous column can be found here.

James sketched a series of movie-spoof comics and they can be found here.

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

This episode's guest star had a strong connection to the show prior to appearing, as he had a comedy partnership with Muppet Show head writer, Jack Burns, for many years and appeared on a variety show with Rowlf in the late 60s. Schreiber made many appearances in a number of TV and movie projects including the likes of My Mother The Car, Get Smart, Saved By The Bell, Duck Tails and Animaniacs, as well as being another guest who would feature in the movies of Mel Brooks, with appearances in Robin Hood: Men In Tights and Dracula: Dead And Loving It. If that wasn't enough; he also sported a rather magnificent moustache.

Given his past partnership with Burns, it's hardly a surprise that Schreiber is given some excellent material to show off his comedic talents. Overall, the episode leans far more towards outright sketch comedy than has been seen at any other point this series, and it benefits from it greatly. Schreiber gets roped in to a plot to make Kermit jealous by posing as a competitor for Miss Piggy's affections only to get chopped for it when he refuses to kiss her, as his lips can't touch pork because of his religion.

Another sketch that sees his combative side is the gladiatorial sketch in which he adopts the role of Sir Avery of Macho (obviously, the moustache is the key to his macho powers) in order to combat Sweetums. When he realises he's unable to defeat the mammoth Muppet with weapons, the moustachioed Avery dishes out a series of insults to flay Sweetums, until he himself is slain by the beast , who tells him that Burns and Schreiber were his second favourite comedy act.

Master of comedy that Schreiber is, he came to the aid of Fozzie when he was being heckled by Statler and Waldorf, saying that he knows how to handle heckling as he's used to it from Burns, which was another nice nod to the partnership.

Other sketches see Schreiber play the role of a security guard clashing with a painting of Fozzie that comes to life and one of the more bizarre musical numbers seen so far this series in Make A Song, which is an original piece written by Schreiber that involves him playing guitar and singing in a scat style.

There are regular sketches such as Muppet Labs, At the Dance, Muppet News Flash, Veterinarians Hospital, all of which are good, but the show's highlights very much belong to Schreiber, whose material is on a whole other level to the rest of the sketches that make up the show, and much of the series to date.

The episode doesn't have many of the subversive elements that I have favoured in past episodes, but there's a manic energy running throughout the show which made it go by in a breeze. The material was paced to perfection, with well judged and crafted material that really did the guest and the creative team credit.

Schreiber demonstrated the characteristics that have made the best guest stars so successful: a lack of inhibition and an ability to commit to the material fully, which made this episode one of the better seen so far this series.

So, given that this episode is another one of high quality, which makes it two in a row, it looks as though we're finding some consistency. Here's hoping that I haven't spoken too soon and that next week's episode is another hit.

Quotes by Statler and Waldorf at the end of the show sum the series up so far, quite nicely:

Waldorf: Hey, you've gotta give ‘em credit.

Statler: Why's that?

Waldorf: Well, they're gonna keep doing it ‘til they get it right.

Read our remembrance of episode 15 here.

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

US correspondent Ron Hogan bravely volunteered to conduct an interview with the most fearsome, famous monster on the Internet. No, not Lady Gaga, we're talking about SyFy's own Sharktopus.

You've watched the trailer, you've grooved to the song, and you've embraced the meme, now meet the real Sharktopus as it puts to rest rumors of trouble on the set, discusses bikini girls, and explains just how it manages to terrorize and delight via the power of social networking.

Good morning, Sharktopus. May I call you Sharktopus, or do you prefer to go by your codename, S-11?

I am Sharktopus, and I chomp anyone who calls me S-11, so it's up to you. Syfy thought they'd redefine me as a monster. They gave me the nickname S-11 because it's mechanical and strips away all the personality of Sharktopus.

Your film debut was the most-watched September Saturday original movie in SyFy history, and scored the second-highest ratings of the year just behind Lake Placid 3. How does it feel being the newest of SyFy's mon-stars?

It's bittersweet for me. This was my big break, but after I chomped my agent my contract got screwed up and now I'm not getting a dime for my work. I'm looking for a new agent now, and this time I won't require that they wear a bikini when we negotiate future movie contracts.

During the filming of Sharktopus, rumor has it you were a bit of a diva, at least according to executive producer Roger Corman. Would you like to address those rumors once and for all, or will you let your team of lawyers do the talking? What was life really like on the set of Sharktopus?

Technically, a diva is a female opera singer, a performer. So yeah, I was performing and I might have waved my tentacles around, but it was all a part of my method acting. The rest of Roger's allegations are hardly worthy of my response. He will rue the day he called me ‘Sharktopussy'.

Life on the set of Sharktopus was pretty sweet. They fed me as many bikini girls as I wanted (a detail Syfy and the Cormans hoped to bury). I got along great with the cast until I began to realize they weren't really filming my documentary. Everyone was in on it. I felt like Carrie at the homecoming dance, and I made their movie just a little more realistic when I began chomping their cast and crew. That's real method acting.

If you could chomp any person, real or imaginary, current or historic, who would you chomp? Same question, except replace person with movie monster. Who are you just aching to pick a fight with?

I have always wanted to chomp Artemis, I think we have a lot in common. As for a movie monster, there aren't any that would be capable of resisting my omnipotence, but I am tired of that slinky ridiculous Dinoshark calling me a Sharktowus. I'd pick a fight with him just to make a point.

Is there any truth to the rumor that you're the secret love child of MegaShark and Giant Octopus, and that their long-running feud was really a custody battle over the adorable baby Sharktopus?

(Laughing) I was not born. I was not created. I chomp, therefore I am.

The trailer for Sharktopus was a big viral video hit, the theme song was quite successful on iTunes, you're incredibly popular on Twitter, and your movie had really good ratings despite being on a Saturday night. Whatever your market, you seem to be a big hit. Are there any plans to take Sharktopus worldwide? What's the next move for a brand-minded Sharktopus like yourself? Books? A cartoon series? Making an adult video for the Japanese market?

I'd tell you, but then I'd have to chomp you. Do you really want my answer?

Err, that's okay. I like my limbs and organs.

Speaking of Twitter, how do you manage it? When I first mentioned Sharktopus, it wasn't five minutes before you showed up and chomped me, despite your thousands of followers. Did Eric Roberts make you super-intelligent as well as super-deadly, or are you just using eight computers with your various tentacles?

My trick is that I'm telepathic. I don't type or have an assistant tweeting for me. When you get chomped by Sharktopus on Twitter or Facebook, you're talking with the real deal. Sometimes I respond right away, sometimes I'm a little slower, but I'm not like those other celebrities that don't respond to their fans. We are Team Sharktopus, and together we can save the world from deceivers and tricksters like Syfy and the Cormans.

How do you respond to claims that you're a bad example for kids, Sharktopus? I mean, you ate lots of people, but no vegetables. And PETA was very upset when you ate that great white shark when there were many freighters of vegetables you could've cracked open with your mighty tentacles and devoured.

Just a hunch, but I don't think kids are going to go start chomping bikini babes after watching my movie. I mean, did kids start spinning spiderwebs with secret messages after they watched Charlotte's Web?

That's PETA for you. Let the great white shark eat the humans, and don't raise a finger, but the minute you hurt a great white shark alarms begin shrieking around the globe. You humans baffle me.

Do vegetables wear bikinis? I would have cracked one of those open.

I know you're a very busy cross-bred genetic killing machine, and you've got lots of places to go and many other people to kill, so I'll make this my last question. Are you really a bad guy, or are you just misunderstood? I can't tell if you're smiling at me or licking your chops in anticipation of my inevitable chomping. I'll let you respond while I'm fleeing for my life.

I'm a good guy. I only chomp people who deserve it. Do you deserve it? I think you do...

Who, me? No way! I'm Team Sharktopus for life! I even bought the Sharktopus tee shirt...!

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

As a teenager I had two distinct talents. The first we won't go into now, but the second was a talent for what I call 'illicit viewing'. This involved an almost ninja-like ability to creep downstairs after dark without waking my parents and watch all manner of video tapes that I had managed to procure through a variety of nefarious means.

These were sometimes the latest instalment in the Electric Blue series of (ahem) art films, but often the film I was watching would be what would shortly come to be known as a video nasty. My parents would have been appalled but, light of foot and lithe of limb that I was, I got away with it.

I'd sit there in the dark for 90 minutes, enduring dodgy video tracking and poor colour saturation and, in a very strange and skewed sort of way, fall in love with what I was watching. It's an experience anyone of a certain age who is familiar with the early 80s home video explosion may recognise. It is certainly one that is echoed in the recollections of many of the participants in Jake West's superb documentary Video Nasties: Moral Panic, Censorship And Videotape.

West's documentary forms the centre piece of the three disc DVD set Video Nasties: The Definitive Guide, and tells the story of the sudden explosion of horror films in the early 1980s and the ensuing media and political frenzy that led to bans, prosecutions and heartfelt pleas from Members of Parliament to consider the effects that all this depravity was having on the nation's dogs (of which, more later).

And one thing captured superbly on all three discs that is often missing from more sober accounts of this episode is the sheer thrill of it all, the giddy excitement and illicit pleasures of watching films with titles like Don't Go Into The Woods, Twitch Of The Death Nerve and Zombie Creeping Flesh. It was never the quality or even the content of these films that engendered, for many, a love of horror, but the experience of what it was like to watch them, a sense of expectation that this was edge of the seat stuff and that we could all soon find ourselves in very big trouble.

All of this is conveyed wonderfully in the first half hour of the documentary through recollections of various talking heads (Christopher Smith, Neil Marshall and Kim Newman, among them), some welcome footage from The Young Ones, and a dizzying segment that includes footage from all 72 'official nasties' to a backing track of The Damned's (what else?) Nasty.

None of which is to say that this is a film that will appeal only to those wishing to wallow in nostalgia. The subsequent account of political and media uproar is a fascinating and timely reminder of what can happen when headlines and hysteria fail to concern themselves with the facts.

A moral crusade led by a horrified Mary Whitehouse (President of the National Viewers and Listeners Association) and much of the tabloid press, all led to a chain reaction of events that saw MP Graham Bright's Private Members Bill pass into law as the Video Recordings Act (1984). This basically meant that all videos needed to be submitted for classification before distribution, and if they weren't, those responsible could potentially be prosecuted under the Obscene Publications Act.

The documentary relates all of this with as much objectivity as it can muster, considering the sheer injustice of much of what was taking place, including some outrageous distortions of academic research in the pursuit of scaremongering headlines. It also throws in some amusing asides such as the fact that the porn magazine, Whitehouse, was named after the great lady herself. And yes, that really is an elected member of parliament seriously contending that research on the effects of these films will prove that such material has an adverse effect on dogs.

Some people may ask 'What was the big deal? So a few horror films got banned. Was the world really any poorer for their loss?' Well, firstly, this was essentially law being made by lynch mob, arbitrary moral judgements being imposed on the majority by the few.

Also, individuals were imprisoned and businesses were ruined, despite there being very little guidance on what was or wasn't legally acceptable, with a bewildered Manchester Police seizing copies of Dolly Parton musical The Best Little Whorehouse In Texas (not necessarily a bad idea, I grant you). And bear in mind that these were films that were legally defined as being 'designed to deprave or corrupt'. As a friend to all mankind and a sensitive flower in general, I took particular exception to that.

But the reason why the story told in the documentary is still so important and relevant today is because it illustrates what can happen when those with power and influence feel threatened by 'the other', something that they feel will contaminate, threaten or change a world that they choose to see in very narrow terms.

But if Video Nasties: Moral Panic, Censorship And Videotape is the heart of this DVD, then the rest of the three disc collection provides ample quantities of lung, liver, intestines and spleen. Disc 1 also includes a wonderful collection of sleazy film trailers (be sure to catch Teaserama) and a 50-minute parade of film distributor idents. Only the most hardened fan would want to sit through the latter, but it does illustrate the explosion in the number of video distribution companies that were founded in an effort to grab a piece of the home video pie.

Discs 2 and 3 feature film trailers for each of the 72 films that were originally included on the Director of Public Prosecution's list of what constituted a video nasty. What makes each of these such a treat is the fact that they are all preceded by interviews and analysis of the film in question, including why the film was selected for inclusion on the DPP's list in the first place.

Many of the participants from the documentary offer their personal take on the merits (or otherwise) of each film, with standout contributors being film journalists Kim Newman and Alan Jones. Jones, in particular, offers some highly entertaining asides, including one about the time a hungover Lucio Fulci vomited over him prior to an interview about Zombie Flesh Eaters.

Combined with the trailers themselves, these two discs comprise over nine hours of additional material and what they offer is a celebration of films that are by turns absurd, bizarre, disturbing, and in some cases, really rather wonderful.

In many cases the intro and the trailer combine to whet the appetite for some of these films and there's a good chance you'll find yourself seeking out titles like The Beyond and The Living Dead At Manchester Morgue afterwards.

Finally, spread across all three discs are galleries of Video Nasty VHS cover art, all of which gives some idea of the sort of gratuitous depravity unsuspecting shoppers at the local corner shop might have stumbled upon when they nipped out for a packet of fags and a paper. All of this combined with the documentary and extras from Disc 1 amounts to a package that is about as comprehensive as any horror film fan could wish for.

I remember my dad's bemusement at the height of the video nasties craze. "They must be sick in the head, anyone who'd want to watch that stuff. What sort of nutcase wants to watch that?" A curious mixture of shame and resentment built up in me as I thought, "Well, me Dad, me'.

After watching Video Nasties: The Definitive Guide, there's a fair chance that you'll feel the same.

Feature:
Discs:

Video Nasties: The Definitive Guide is out now and available from the Den Of Geek Store.

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

Just what was it that made the original GoldenEye so great, anyway? Anyone under the age of about 25 will probably look at YouTube footage of the N64 original, with its soldiers made of boxes and equally simplistic enemy AI, and wonder why anyone would have spent so many hours playing it.

But like a spectacularly funny, off-the-cuff joke, you had to be around at the time to truly appreciate Rare's GoldenEye 007 in its full pomp. The slickly designed levels, open enough to encourage individual approaches, but linear enough to ensure progression.

The range of weapons and devices, many of which had never been seen on a console before - the proximity mines, the sniper rifle, which evoked the same thrill when used to take down an enemy with a head shot as any game 13 years later.

Then there was the blackly British sense of humour. Characters yelped in pain if you shot them in the backside or hand. There were joyously strange secret modes, like Donkey Kong, which gave everybody giant heads, or the paintball mode that replaced bullet holes with splodges of pigment.

Most of all, it was the sense of balance that made GoldenEye such a delight. Every element worked so well, with scaling missions that increased the number of objectives to fulfil depending on which difficulty level you chose, and every stage offering something new that you hadn’t seen in the last. One minute you were taking down enemies in snowy wastes, the next you were trundling around city streets in a stolen tank.

So given that the original GoldenEye was such a product of its era, is it really possible to update the game for a new generation, while at the same time retaining enough of the first’s atmosphere to make it worthy of the name?

First-person shooters have evolved enormously in the past decade, and it’s therefore unsurprising that Eurocom’s updating of GoldenEye should appear to be as influenced by the Call Of Duty series as its own forebear.

The classic maps of old - given a 21st century makeover here - are now more crowded with enemies and scripted sequences. Playing through the first level, for example (the Dam), is like coming back to the comfort of your home after a lengthy holiday, and discovering that someone’s booby-trapped the place. There’s a cosseting sense of familiarity, but an added frisson of danger that is entirely new.

Enemies behave more intelligently and with greater aggression, and just as you’ve settled into a familiar pattern – taking down a few guards with your silenced handgun, nipping up into the watchtower, and relieving the sentry of his sniper rifle – the game throws in a crazy scripted sequence in a truck.

It’s here you become aware of just how much Eurocom has wrung out of the Wii’s humble architecture. It really does look good by the console’s last-gen standards, and is arguably the most technically impressive third-party release yet seen on Nintendo’s little white brick.

Daniel Craig replaces the boxy Pierce Brosnan of old, and he’s brought a greater sense of athleticism and a shiny smart phone along with him. The former means you can now run, vault over low cover as well as duck behind it, and perform silent, close-quarter kills, while the phone allows you to remotely hack into computers and sentry guns with its hi-tech apps.

As Wii shooters go, it’s as kinetic and exciting as you could reasonably expect, and inarguably offers some of the best FPS action you’ll find on the Wii. Weapons have the same weighty, varied feel as they did in the late-90s, and the sniper rifle is still as much of a joy to use as ever.

The level designs, too, tread similar ground to the original – there’s a level in the snow, one on a boat, one in a nightclub, and so on – but add enough new elements and layouts to make them seem fresh.

But having got so much right in terms of balance, Eurocom then mystifyingly let the game down with some bizarre control choices. Given that no sane gamer would play a first-person shooter with the Wii remote (its point-and-shoot mechanic merely leads to arm ache), using a classic or GameCube controller has problems of its own. Whose idea was it to have to press down two buttons simultaneously to open a door, operate a lift or melee an enemy?

Those unfortunate enough to be playing with the GameCube controller may also find switching between weapons tricky in the heat of battle, since the controls for this are mapped to the left and right buttons on the tiny D-Pad. Accidentally pulling the mobile phone out on an enemy soldier instead of a gun isn't uncommon, and the use of the Wii Classic Controller is strongly recommended.

They’re niggles that you can learn to live with, but detract somewhat from what is otherwise an excellent, exciting shooter.

Multiplayer

The split-screen multiplayer mode was one of the most fondly remembered elements of the N64 original, and it’s back in style on the Wii. It offers a similar range of games to choose from, including Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch and Golden Gun, and a number of Bond characters to play as, including Scaramanga, Odd Job and Jaws.

Play is fast, slick and exciting, and there's a greater wealth of maps to choose from than was on offer back in 1997.

The online multiplayer mode offers the same range of games as the offline split-screen and adds an XP/levelling system and achievements familiar from numerous other shooters.

The fact that only eight players can compete at any one time may seem a little behind the times, but the upside is that the Wii can at least cope with all the action taking place without too much noticeable lag.

Conclusion

13 years is a lifetime in videogame terms, and that the original GoldenEye is still talked about with hushed reverence is a sign of its enduring appeal. It’s to Eurocom’s credit that it hasn’t simply cobbled together a perfunctory FPS and traded on the old classic’s good name (which EA did with the risible GoldenEye: Rogue Agent), but has instead crafted a game that stands as a worthy successor.

Eurocom’s GoldenEye doesn’t get everything right – the humour from the original is sorely missing, and the controls can become irksome at times – but it at least understands what was great about the first game, and augments those positive aspects with some of the features we’d expect from a 21st century shooter.

It isn’t in the league of Modern Warfare 2 or Halo: Reach, inevitably, but Eurocom has nevertheless brought GoldenEye up to date with a thrilling bang.

GoldenEye 007 is out now and available from the Den Of Geek Store.

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

Producing more than 500 movies over almost 60 years, Dino De Laurentiis became famous for his grand, sweeping epics such as The Bible: In The Beginning, Battle Of The Bulge and the 1976 remake of King Kong.

Nevertheless, De Laurentiis’ most interesting and fondly remembered films were smaller in scale. 1973’s Serpico, directed by Sidney Lumet, boasted a remarkable performance from Al Pacino, while 1983’s The Dead Zone paired director David Cronenberg with Christopher Walken in unforgettable style.

Inevitably for such a prolific producer, not everything De Laurentiis’ fingers touched turned to gold – Flash Gordon, Dune and Maximum Overdrive (writer Stephen King’s first and only directorial credit) all underperformed at the box office – films such as Death Wish, King Kong and, most recently, Hannibal, were huge commercial successes.

De Laurentiis also produced such cult classics as Barbarella, Sam Raimi’s classic sequels Evil Dead 2 and Army Of Darkness, and the Wachowski brothers’ noirish debut, Bound.

Dino De Laurentiis died today, aged 91.

There are two things that model-turned-hardman actor Jason Statham excels at: scowling, and beating people to within an inch of their lives.

While more low-key than The Expendables or Crank: High Voltage, Statham gets to do plenty of scowling and fighting in the forthcoming British thriller, Blitz. Working like a cross between David Fincher’s Seven and an episode of EastEnders, Blitz casts Statham as a tough Londoner on the trail of a sociopathic cop killer (who has a strange habit of wearing lime green novelty shades).

David Morrissey, Paddy Considine, Aidan Gillan and Luke Evans also star, and the script was adapted, from a Ken Bruen novel of the same name, by Nathan Parker, the writer behind Duncan Jones’ brilliant Moon.

Blitz is the second film from former music promo director Elliott Lester (his first was the 2006 drama Love Is The Drug), and judging by the trailer below, he’s created a gritty, kinetic action thriller with plenty of pithy dialogue – “I want a lawyer, I want a sandwich, and I want to update my Facebook status” is one of the better one-liners we’ve heard in a trailer this year.

Blitz is tentatively scheduled for release in the Summer of 2011.

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

Well, it was a good couple of weeks prior, with a bountiful amount of new shows and finales. Now we've hit a cold spell, but worry not as two new shows are braving the frost to keep us toasty with auto-generated warmth via laughter.

First, Jimmy Carr performs for us in our very own front rooms in a taped tour from London earlier this year. He's never let us down before and there's always more to come, as we learned in our interview here. This private living room gig takes place on Tuesday, November 16th on Channel 4 at 10:00pm. Heckle all you like. He won't mind a bit. And you may be chuckling enough to lose the Snuggie.

The straggler of the week is a US import going by the name of Raising Hope. The sitcom pilot episode airs Thursday, November 18th at 10:00pm on Sky 1, introducing us to Jimmy Chance, a young adult single father and his blue collar family. They're all short on education, but full of affection for each other and the cast boasts some exceptional talent in Martha Plimpton, Cloris Leachman and a breaking out of the typecast mould, Garret Dillahunt, in what, to our recollection, must be his first comedic role. Series creator, Gregory Thomas Garcia, will also be familiar to fans of My Name Is Earl and from the few clips we've seen, this show may fit nicely into that empty trailer park spot each week. Here's hoping, and there are ample chances to hop on through the week on Sky 1 and 2.

Now, on to the films showing through the weekend and a bit beyond. As always, if we missed anything interesting, have a shout in the comments, with our thanks.

Please also note: the ordinal numbers for dates will help you scan through this simple list with your browser's search function. Enter '13th' in your browser's Find box or window to highlight and/or tab through all movies shown on Saturday. Enjoy!

28 Weeks Later
On: Film4
Date: Monday 15th November
Time: 11:05pm (and 00:05am 16th Nov Film4+1)

2001: A Space Odyssey
On: TCM
Date: Tuesday 16th November
Time: 9:00pm (and 1:40am 17th Nov)

A Clockwork Orange
On: ITV4
Date: Saturday 13th November
Time: 10:30pm (and 11:30pm ITV4+1, 11:45pm/00:45am 16th/17th Nov)

Anaconda
On: Five
Date: Sunday 14th November
Time: 11:05pm

Back To The Future
On: ITV2
Date: Sunday 14th November
Time: 3:45pm (and 4:45pm ITV2+1)

Barbarella
On: ITV4
Date: Thursday 18th November
Time: 11:20pm (and 00:20am ITV4+1)

Conquest Of The Planet of the Apes
On: Film4
Date: Saturday 13th November
Time: 02:10am (and 3:10am Film4+1)

Darkman
On: Sky Movies Modern Greats
Date: Monday 15th November
Time: 01:55am (and 00:10am 18th Nov)

Diamonds Are Forever
On: ITV1
Date: Saturday 13th November
Time: 3:30pm

Enter The Dragon
On: Five USA
Date: Monday 15th November
Time: 10:00pm (and 11:00pm Five USA+1)

Eraser
On: TCM
Date: Friday 12th November
Time: 9:00pm (and 1:20am 13th Nov)

Eraserhead
On: horror channel
Date: Saturday 13th November
Time: 10:55pm

Fist Of Fury
On: SyFy
Date: Friday 12th November
Time: 10:00pm (ans 11:00pm Syfy+1)

Harold And Kumar Get The Munchies
On: Comedy Central
Date: Friday 12th November
Time: 11:30pm (ans 00:30am 13th Nov CC+1 & 11:00pm/midnight)

In The Line Of Fire
On: Channel 5
Date: Thursday 18th November
Time: 9:00pm

Innocent Blood
On: horror channel
Date: Sunday 14th November
Time: 10:55pm

Inside Man
On: ITV2
Date: Monday 15th November
Time: midnight (and 1:00am 16th Nov ITV2+1)

Interview With The Vampire
On: BBC 1
Date: Friday 12th November
Time: 11:35pm

Little Nikita
On: FIVER
Date: Saturday 13th November
Time: 4:10pm (and 5:10pm Fiver+1, 2/3:00pm 14th Nov)

Lost In Space
On: FIVER
Date: Wednesday 17th November
Time: 9:00pm (and 8:30pm Fiver+1, 9/10:00pm 17th Nov)

Men In Black
On: FIVER
Date: Friday 12th November
Time: 9:00pm (and 10:00pm Fiver+1, 6:10/7:10pm 13th Nov)

My Neighbour Totoro
On: Film4
Date: Tuesday 16th November
Time: 2:50pm (and 3:50pm Film4+1)

Night At The Museum
On: E4
Date: Sunday 14th November
Time: 2:45pm (and 3:45pm E4+1)

Paranormal Activity
On: Sky Movies Premiere
Date: Friday 12th November
Time: 10:15pm (and 11:15pm Premiere+1, then daily at similar times through 18th Nov)

Sinbad And The Eye Of The Tiger
On: Five USA
Date: Saturday 13th November
Time: 7:40pm (and 8:40pm Five USA+1, 2:40/3:40pm 14th Nov)

Spaceballs
On: SyFy
Date: Saturday 13th November
Time: 1:50pm (and 2:50pm Syfy+1, 2:40/3:40pm 14th Nov)

Stakeout
On: E4
Date: Saturday 13th November
Time: 10:00pm (and 11:00pm E4+1)

The Cable Guy
On: Bravo
Date: Friday 12th November
Time: 9:00pm (and 10:00pm Bravo+1)

The Castle Of Cagliostro
On: Film4
Date: Sunday 14th November
Time: 2:50pm (and 3:50pm Film4+1)

The Day After Tomorrow
On: Film4
Date: Sunday 14th November
Time: 6:40pm (and 7:40pm Film4+1)

The Day Of The Jackal
On: ITV4
Date: Sunday 14th November
Time: 11:15pm

The Day The Earth Stood Still
On: more4
Date: Friday 12th November
Time: 11:45am

The Departed
On: Film4
Date: Saturday 13th November
Time: 9:00pm (and 10:00pm Film4+1)

The Dirty Dozen
On: Five
Date: Saturday 13th November
Time: 5:45pm

The Goonies
On: TCM
Date: Saturday 13th November
Time: 3:00pm (and 7:10am 14th Nov)

The Howling
On: ITV4
Date: Friday 12th November
Time: 11:50pm (and 00:50am 13th Nov)

The Pearl Of Death
On: TCM
Date: Wednesday 17th November
Time: 3:00pm (and 6:40am 18th Nov)

This Is England
On: Film4
Date: Sunday 14th November
Time: 9:00pm (and 10:00pm Film4+1)

Thunderbolt And Lightfoot
On: TCM
Date: Monday 15th November
Time: 11:10pm

Waterworld
On: SyFy
Date: Saturday 13th November
Time: 10:00pm (and 11:00pm Syfy+1, 4:30/5:30pm 14th Nov)

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

Director Wes Anderson is a filmmaker whose work frequently polarises opinion. Some appear to love every minute of his self-consciously quirky, stylised pictures, while others insist he’s yet to make a film to top Rushmore.

For me, The Darjeeling Limited lacked the spark of Anderson’s earlier movies, but Fantastic Mr. Fox was a lovingly, expertly crafted film that was a real departure for the director.

Anderson’s next film is said to be the 60s-set drama, Moon Rise Kingdom and, in what is becoming another of the director’s trademarks, it has already attracted interest from a list of stellar actors.

That Bill Murray is set to appear won’t surprise anybody (he’s appeared in every Anderson feature since Rushmore, after all), but the interest of Edward Norton and Bruce Willis possibly will.

Co-written with Roman Coppola, Moon Rise Kingdom tells the tale of a young couple who run away from a quiet area in New England. Edward Norton is said to be in the running for the role of the town’s leader who organises the search, while Bruce Willis will play a local sheriff. Frances McDormand and Tilda Swinton are also said to have expressed an interest, though what roles they'll fill isn't yet clear.

Shooting is scheduled to commence on Moon Rise Kingdom next Spring.

Chud

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

It was rumoured a week or two back that the upcoming The Dark Knight Rises production was on the hunt for two lead female roles, even if nobody was quite sure what the parts involved were. Catwoman is the obvious rumour doing the rounds, but the thinking had been that Christopher Nolan was actually looking for a love interest for Bruce Wayne, too.

It turns out that these rumours may have been quite close to the mark. For Deadline is now reporting that Nolan has a shortlist of actresses he’s looking to see for the two roles. And yes, one of them will be a villain, and the other a love interest character.

So who’s on the shortlist?

Well, the candidates Nolan is due to meet are reportedly Naomi Watts, Rachel Weisz (who may or may not be attached to the new Bond film, shooting next year), Blake Lively, Natalie Portman, Anne Hathaway and Keira Knightley.

As things stand, that’s as much as the story as we know, as casting will no doubt continue for a while yet. But you can read more about it at Deadline, right here.

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

If you like your Nicolas Cage movies just a little bit bonkers, then 2011 is going to be something of a great year for you. We’ve already got the joy of Drive Angry 3D heading our way at the start of the year. And now we’ve also got the resurrection of Season Of The Witch, a delayed project that’s been undergoing reshoots. At one point, we even thought it had outright disappeared.

But it’s a film that’s now back on the radar, and set for release early next year. Nicolas Cage plays Nicolas Cage in the film, obviously (although it’s harder to say that these days, post his brilliant Bad Lieutenant turn). And while it’s hard to sit here and predict Season Of The Witch will be a great film, it does look quite good fun.

Here’s the trailer, then. And don’t forget, The Cage has got Ghost Rider 2 lined up next…

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

Appreciating that the box office performance of the next Harry Potter film clearly, er, depends on our review of it, the early opinions have nonetheless started rolling in. And there's a real mix of reactions to it. The general feeling appears to be that at nearly two-and-a-half hours long, it's a little flabby. But there appear to be more pros than cons. Here's what the early reviews have been saying...

The Hollywood Reporter

"More than even the most faithful of the earlier episodes, this film feels devoted above all to reproducing the novel onscreen as closely as possible, an impulse that drags it toward ponderousness at times and rather sorely tests the abilities of the young actors to hold the screen entirely on their own, without being propped up by the ever-fabulous array of character actors the series offers."

The Express

"The tension never fades amid desperate chases, frantic escapes, titanic battles, noble deaths, electrifying encounters and enough humour to break the tension every now and again. The only real flaw is that we have to wait until July for the conclusion. Summer has never seemed so far away."

The Guardian

"It's not so much that Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows feels at times largely indistinguishable from the six outings preceding it, nor even that part one offers so little in the way of resolution(part two will surely take care of that). It's simply that it's hard to mourn the demise of a franchise that was never more than half-alive to begin with."

The Telegraph

"Even at a running time of just under two-and-a-half hours, it feels as if [David] Yates is cramming in as much as he possibly can. Can Part II be better than this? You'll have to wait until July to find out. But it'll be no mean feat. "

Herald Sun/Daily Mail

"The movie runs for 146 minutes - not the longest in the series, but I'm sure there must be a spell that could have made at least 20 minutes of it disappear. Perhaps the filmmakers are preparing us for Part Two, which I hear could end up being the longest in the series because there's so much that needs to be crammed into the final mix."

As for our own review? You can expect that late tonight, if all goes to plan. And the film itself is on general release from 19th November...

It’s a weird coincidence that, just as I’m about to depart to see the Strause brothers’ Skyline, the first trailer for Jonathan Liebesman’s similarly themed Battle: Los Angeles hovers into view on the Internet.

Set to the ominous strains of Jóhann Jóhannsson’s Sun’s Gone Dim, the trailer hints at a grittier take on the familiar alien invasion premise, with a visual style not dissimilar to Black Hawk Down or District 9.

We get glimpses of Aaron Eckhart and Michelle Rodriguez in their army fatigues, looking alternately determined and terrified as an extra-terrestrial armada lays waste to Tinsel Town, and the visual effects (which were overseen, in another spooky coincidence, by the brothers Strause) are quite spectacular.

While there’ll be no shortage of alien invasion films heading our way over the coming months, the twist of setting the action at street-level is an interesting one, and the trailer’s a genuinely well constructed one.

It’s curious, however, that the film’s title isn’t mentioned – more curious still, IMDB now lists the film under the name World Invasion: Battle LA. Have the movie’s producers decided to go for a last-minute title change?

Battle: Los Angeles (or World Invasion: Battle LA) is due to arrive in cinemas on 25 March 2011.

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

In the best and worst sense, few recent blockbuster films have managed to convey the sense of the passage of many months of time better than Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I.

It does this via two main strategies. Firstly, it crams in as much narrative as it can, keen to leave as much of J K Rowling’s source material in place, before it skids to its half-time break. And secondly, it goes on for a good 20 minutes after your buttocks have waved the white flag.

That said, there’s little arguing that it’s a film that shoots out the traps quite brilliantly. In fact, with one notable exception which we’ll come to shortly, all of the really good stuff is to be found in the first third of the movie. That’s where you get the cavalcade of British thesps (Alan Rickman, as always, takes the honours for us, but you get, inevitably, a lot more Ralph Fiennes too, and the return of Imelda Staunton is a brief delight), along with the sinister build up of the Dark Lord Voldemort's plan, the magnificent sequences inside the Ministry Of Magic, and a real sense of darkness and gloom.

Let’s make no bones about this, then: the first segment of the film is utterly gripping. Director David Yates has not only learned how to get the most out of his hardly-miniscule special effects budget (most of which is very much used for effect rather than distraction), but he’s utterly on top of some quite brilliant blockbuster sequences. The same kind of sequences that big budget production after big budget production over the past year or two have failed to deliver.

The opening transportation of Harry Potter to attempted safety, for instance, is genuinely thrilling, the kind of sequence that will leave many in the audience simply gasping for breath. There’s surely, too, a future horror film in Yates, given just how well he manages to jolt you out of your seat, and put across such a sinister tone. He borrows a little from Alfonso Cuaron’s Prisoner Of Azkaban movie, yet he’s wise to do so, melding one or two of the ideas from there with plenty of his own. They promised this one would be dark and dangerous, and they really weren’t kidding. Make no mistake: that 12A rating is very well deserved.

Once he’s built up such a believable sense of foreboding, though, Yates then has to turn the movie over to the most familiar trio of teen movie characters on the planet. So we have wizarding chums Ron, Hermione and Harry put into place on the search for Horcruxes, with it also firmly established that Voldemort and the forces of darkness will stop at little to track them down.

As an opening act, it’s hard to think how it could have delivered more.

Yet it’s then that Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part I starts to lose its momentum, and it never really gets it back. Because once Ron, Hermione and Harry head off on their Horcrux hunt, the film takes the franchise away from the very elements that have always grounded it through the slower moments before. There’s no Hogwarts here, for instance, and many of the familiar side characters are shuffled away for a very large proportion of the film.

Instead, the story puts Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint in the unenviable position of having to carry the vast bulk of the film, with very little narrative meat to feast on by this stage. And, to be frank, they cope with it to varying degrees.

It’s a little predictable now to come to the conclusion that it’s Watson who’s matured as the best acting talent of the three, but there’s proof of it all over Deathly Hallows Part I. Radcliffe’s improved a lot here, too, and he’s given some really quite difficult work to do. We can’t lose the feeling that he seems to be developing as an actor around a year behind where the Potter films generally need him to be, though, yet he’s closed the gap a lot here, and it’s to the benefit of the film.

Grint, however, is likeable enough, but Ron Weasley lurches between comedy sidekick and being in a bit of a bad mood. Grint copes with this perfectly well (and generates many of the film's laughs), but there’s never any threat that the character is going to go be taken much deeper. 

To be fair, it doesn’t help that the three simply aren’t given enough story to put across here. The narrative feels like an old-style computer adventure game, which hinges on discovering objects, solving puzzles, taking things to the right place to use them, and unlocking the next level. That in itself isn’t a massive problem, but the pacing is terrible at times, and the three main characters really don’t evolve very much at all throughout it all.

As such, the film drags substantially as it heads into its final third, and it’s there that it hits you. Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows Part I is effectively a film about a journey for Ron, Harry and Hermione. But not in any sense a metaphorical one. Instead, it’s a simple, and long, traipse from A to B via C to get things done, and there’s little more to it than that for most of the film.

David Yates, to be fair, does occasionally attempt to inject more life into the second half of his film, and he does so with varying levels of success. Yet suddenly, out of the blue, he pulls a stunning animated sequence out of his bag of tricks, that left our jaw dangling near the floor. It’s unexpected, exquisitely executed, and by far the darkest thing in a film that already frequently snarls with menace. We’ll tell you no more about it for fear of spoiling it, but if you find yourself tempted to watch-gaze as the ending gradually draws near, it’s worth indulging the film just a little further.

Still, the ending itself proves little reward, with the much-talked-about decision to split the Deathly Hallows book into two films giving the script no particularly obvious end point. What’s more, nobody really bothers to try and generate one, with the brakes very suddenly applied and the credits rolling on a pretty non-descript moment.

But then that’s an indicator of the battle that Deathly Hallows Part I faces, and never really fully deals with. That it’s only telling half of a story, and robbed of the ability to have a beginning, middle and end to itself, it unnaturally elongates the mid-section. Thus it sorely misses, as a self-contained movie in its own right, any kind of convincing final act.

It does, to be fair, set the scene for a smashing finale. But if you’re looking for proof that the breaking of Deathly Hallows into two films was a narrative decision rather than a commercial one, it simply isn’t here.

Which leaves you with an occasionally strong blockbuster movie, that spends far too much time treading water, and relegates many of the main reasons for sticking with the franchise thus far into the background.

There are, to be fair, moments here that match anything the franchise has delivered to date. And there’s further evidence too that David Yates has got an extremely promising movie career ahead of him, post-Potter.

But while Deathly Hallows Part I just about holds together as 146 minutes of entertainment, and is going to please its target audience with its sheer reverence to J K Rowling's book, it remains a frustrating beast. It's certainly tinged with moments of excellence. Yet it ultimately so over-indulges itself, that when it finally ends, it leaves you exhaling with relief, rather than demanding more.

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

8. Cooperative Calligraphy

Having kicked off its first season with a Breakfast Club homage of epic proportions, Community went back to its roots this week with some more locked library shenanigans. Cooperative Calligraphy, while a nod to its origins, is also a fabulous excuse for Kids in the Hall-inspired comedy, a little more Winger nudity and torturing Pierce while he’s still unable to get away.

The little bundle of neuroses that is Annie throws a hissy fit when yet another of her pens goes missing, and somehow the entire group, rather than telling her to take the stick out of her ass, actually humours her tantrum and spends the episode tearing each other apart.

From invading the privacy of everyone’s bags, to the privacy of everyone’s underwear, the group turns a simple pen mishap into Greendale’s version of Guantanamo Bay. Yup, it’s time for Community to pay tribute to the bottle episode – that dramatic staple of episodic TV – or as Abed puts it, an episode full of ‘wall to wall facial expression and emotional nuance.’

Not good at reading people at the best of times, a bottle episode is Abed’s worst nightmare, and it’s easy to see why. With emotions running ridiculously high, and each group member desperate to prove they’re as trustworthy as they can possibly be, the group puts itself through a number of humiliating and degrading experiences, allowing each member to revert spectacularly to their stereotypes.

Britta’s teenage protests at the gross invasion of her civil liberties, Jeff’s well-hidden petulance and clear need to be naked as often as possible, and Shirley’s not so silent judgement of pretty much everybody come to the fore almost immediately. But it’s the rest of the group’s foibles that are most interesting. Abed’s secret charting of the girl’s menstrual cycles is finally revealed, as a way of staying on their good side. Pierce’s depriving three hospitals of his high tech wheelchair is proof, if any were needed of his vileness, and Troy’s empty, save for a cushion, backpack is... left unexplained. Apparently, he has a desperate need to be comforted at all times.

The bottle episode is also a great way of dealing with loose story strands, and Cooperative Calligraphy brings together two of the most disparate of the show so far. Those of you who remember the horror-fest that was Halloween will know that the devout Shirley is not as devout as she likes to think. Not only did she hook up with ex-Senor Chang during the Zombie-fest, it seems she’s also taking a stroll down infidelity avenue with her married ex-husband.

Through the magic of Abed, we discover that the pregnancy scare she’s currently dealing with can only have come from one man – and it’s not her ex. Yup, there could well be the pitter patter of tiny(er) Chang feet by the start of next season.

But those tiny feet won’t be alone – if you’ve been wondering what happened to Annie’s Boob’s (the monkey, not her actual rack) after Abed let him loose, wonder no more. He’s alive and well, and working on his evil plan to destroy the group by stealing as much of their stuff as possible. Question is, how did they not notice the monkey? Admittedly, the group is about as self-absorbed as it’s possible to be, but surely even they would notice a rogue primate helping itself to their property. On the other hand...

As with all great bottle episodes, order is restored by the time the credits roll, and despite the fact that Annie’s pen is never found, the group is as strong as ever.

Perhaps unusually for Community though, we do have something of a cliffhanger – Troy knows that Shirley and Chang hooked up, so the question is, how long will he be able to keep it a secret? Probably not very.

Still, it’s a lovely, if slightly unnerving way to have the hook up rear its head, and goes some way to keeping Chang in our collective consciousness, even if he’s not physically in the episode. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, please Community, give us more Ken Jeong! Naked Jeff is great, but it’s starting to get a little predictable... 

So, that’s the bottle episode and Kids in the Hall taken care of; what will they think of next?

Read our review of episode 7, Aerodynamics of Gender, here

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

If nothing else, the brothers Strause should be commended for their sheer audacity. Despite a comparatively tiny budget, they’ve attempted to make an alien invasion movie on the scale of Independence Day.

After the debacle that was Aliens Vs Predator: Requiem, it’s fair to say that expectations were fairly low for Skyline. That is, until the first trailers appeared, which displayed a few neat visual ideas that suggested that their independently made sci-fi movie might be worth watching after all.

In a film that cost less than $500,000 to produce (the rest of the movie’s $10-20 million budget was blown on computer effects), it’s unsurprising that Skyline finds novel ways to keep costs down. Its handful of characters spend much of the film hiding in a flat, viewing the unfolding invasion through blinds, on the television, or through a telescope.

And while the extensive use of CG helps to give the film a greater sense of scale, the actual plot and number of physical locations couldn’t be much smaller. Hung over after a wild party in a penthouse apartment, Jarrod (played by 24’s Eric Balfour), his pregnant girlfriend Elaine (Scottie Thompson) and his best friend Terry (Scrubs’ Donald Faison) are woken up by mysterious blue lights emanating from the sky.

In what may be an oblique reference to John Wyndham’s The Day Of The Triffids, the aliens’ blue lights have a strange, mesmerising effect on anyone who sets eyes on them, causing their flesh to erupt with varicose veins, and their eyes to glaze over. An unfortunate partygoer (Neil Hopkins) is the first to succumb, and after a few moments’ exposure to the light, he’s whisked away by the evil invaders.

From their vantage point at the top of the building, Jarrod and his friends watch as vast alien machines begin hoovering up the hypnotised masses of LA like autumn leaves. And, as the invaders close in around them, they have to decide whether to stay hidden among the luxury fittings of the apartment, or take their chances and run for the hills.

As they’ve already demonstrated, the brothers Strause have a genuinely good eye for visual effects, and while there are moments in Skyline where the lack of funds is blatantly obvious (to keep down costs, their building appears to be impervious to any kind of expensive-to-repair damage), the film’s CG is occasionally on a par with far bigger-budget productions.

It’s sad, then, that Skyline’s human element hasn’t been given the same attention as its special effects. Characters are poorly drawn and often unsympathetic, and the script is forgettable at best.

There are some rather neat creature designs, courtesy of Alec Gillis and Tom Woodruff Jr., but these are also let down by the film’s muddled writing. Among all the devastation, explosions and goo, we eventually learn exactly why the aliens have flown light-years to Earth, and it’s a motivation lifted straight from the very ripest of 50s B-movie cheese.

Viewed in this regard, Skyline is actually quite good fun in places, and there are some laughs to be had as the film’s dumb characters attempt to keep one step ahead of the aliens’ marauding tentacles.

But then, just as the movie reaches what you might think is the next, absurdly over-the-top act, it ends. To go into too much detail would spoil the surprise, but it’s the kind of denouement that audiences will find either faintly amusing or utterly infuriating.

As risible as the ending is, Skyline’s biggest problem is its flat characters and tedious dialogue. Most are mere alien fodder, and the film’s leads, Balfour and Thompson, display little charisma or chemistry.

It’s as though the brothers Strause are hoping their visual effects will have the same impact on audiences as the blue lights do on the citizens of LA – that we’ll be so mesmerised by the pretty patterns, that we’ll overlook the fact that Skyline’s characters have all the presence of kitchen units.

For lovers of B-movie sci-fi, there are perhaps enough slithering aliens, cool baroque space ships and ripe pieces of dialogue (one character even shrieks, “He’s Alive!!” in a manner James Whale would have enjoyed) to justify the price of admission.

Had the brothers Strause been as adept at storytelling as they are at creating luminous effects, Skyline could have been genuinely thrilling. Instead, it’s a mildly diverting, mediocre sci-fi mash-up with one of the most bizarrely abrupt endings in recent memory. Disappointing.

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

When I wrote a retrospective on the Die Hard series for this site, a reader pointed out that it was Lethal Weapon that first paved the way for its success. Indeed, coming out the year before Bruce's finest hour, Mel's finest hour introduced the world to a new kind of cop film.

Gone was the serious tone of the Dirty Harry flicks. Gone was the gritty underbelly of the Death Wish series. Here was a film that brilliantly blended the high-budget, high-action ethos of the boys own Indiana Jones-type movie with the broad, chirpy comedy of the likes of Back To The Future and yet could still hold a strong dramatic presence when the time required it.

Director Richard Donner has to take much of the credit for creating a near-perfect film. Donner's career had hit its golden period by the time Lethal Weapon came about. Superman and The Omen had made him a huge name at the back end of the 1970s, but it's a film that came out two years previous to Lethal Weapon, The Goonies, whose influence can really be seen.

The Goonies was a fun, outrageous family film that blended comedy and action seamlessly and, perhaps by virtue of coming out so soon after, Lethal Weapon benefits from following a similar approach. Donner clearly understands action set pieces as well as he knows his way around a good one-liner, and this is apparent throughout the film.

Of course, it's Shane Black's debut screenplay which brings the characters alive on screen, throwing in acerbic wit and some of the funniest, most memorable lines ever heard in blockbuster movies. Making what in other hands could have been stock cop characters likeable, flawed and funny, Black does this stuff better than anybody, with The Last Boy Scout further proof of his genius. We'll come to that another time, though.

Back to Lethal Weapon, then. The combination of a superb script and the directing calibre of Donner would bring a big-budget 80s masterpiece that would prove a tough act to follow. And while Donner would try to bring back the magic no less than three more times, he was never going to be able to reprise the same level of excitement that came with this first outing.

You could argue that this is down to Black leaving the field of play for the final two instalments or perhaps it's just down to lightning never striking twice. Personally, alongside Black's lack of involvement as the series went on, I like to think it's simply a case of all the right elements coming together at the right time. For just as Donner was riding the crest of a directorial wave, so its leading star was on unbeatable, career-defining form.

As much as the film depends on the chemistry between the buddy cops, Lethal Weapon will always be most associated with Mel Gibson's crazed, tortured and frequently outlandish turn as Martin Riggs (a character dripping with sharp edges, that would prove to have been fully blunted by the time the fourth film came around). Here's your typical homicidal cop who somehow gets the job done better than anyone else, and its so often his wild-eyed, over-the-top bravado that makes Lethal Weapon the joy to watch that is still is today.

Gibson, of course, is perfect for the role. While he had shown that he could do understated and serious in the likes of Gallipoli and Mad Max, he would go on to prove that he was more comfortable playing it up for the camera and playing on his good looks and charm, and Lethal Weapon was his first opportunity to lay it on nice and thick for global cinema audiences. It works a treat, and you must remember that while his perm looks stupid today, that was a good look back then.

Danny Glover has done better work since Lethal Weapon, something I couldn't say about Gibson, in all good faith. However, none of his films have had the same impact at the box office as the Lethal Weapon series – not even the underrated Predator 2. Something of a respected elder statesman of cinema, it's a little strange to imagine him playing the sort of role he does here, but it's a wise decision to place him alongside Gibson, his straight man Murtaugh acting as a foil to the hyper Riggs.

Lethal Weapon would go on to gross over $120 million at the worldwide box office and make a global superstar of Mel Gibson. It  would also spawn three sequels, which I'll be looking at soon. But for now, I take my hat off to what remains one of Hollywood's very best action-buddy movies.

Tomorrow, we'll take a look at Lethal Weapon 2.

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.

Finally, after weeks of ambiguity, apologies and speculation, Sony has formally announced the release date of Kazunori Yamauchi's eagerly awaited racer, Gran Turismo 5.

Understandably desperate to get the game into customers' hands in time for Christmas, GT5 will be rushed onto shelves for a 24 November release. In a press release written with an almost palpable air of relief, Yamauchi spoke briefly about the behind-the-scenes difficulties in the game's production.

“Gran Turismo 5 is an ambitious project, with challenges and complexities that have made it our version of the Apollo Space Programme," Yamauchi said. "Satisfying the loyal Gran Turismo followers is at the heart of all of our efforts, which is why it was such a difficult decision to delay the release of the game, and one which we did not take lightly. I can only apologise to everyone for making you wait so long, and I hope that when you try out the wealth of driving experiences available in Gran Turismo 5, you will not be disappointed.”

So there we have it - five years after it was initially announced, the PS3's most popular driving game is finally about to arrive. Unless, of course, Yamauchi delays it again. He wouldn't do that, would he...?

Telegraph

Follow Den Of Geek on Twitter right here.