Max Payne
Short Review by Kiva microfinance : Seven years since Max Payne brought bullet time into videogames on the back of its jaw-dropping effect on cinema audiences, the action goes back to the big screen in this belated adaptation. Mark Wahlberg has stepped up to star as the titular maverick cop on the hunt for those responsible for the brutal murder of his family, and a journey into the underworld.
The original third person shooter videogame had close allusions to film with cinematic story sequences and noir-style night and rain devouring every moment. However, the main appeal of Max Payne was the ability to shoot the bad guys in the same "bullet time" style seen in The Matrix while leaping between crates or through doorways – a simple gimmick which was stretched over two games. Controlling Max around mainly enclosed spaces, killing everything that moved with the ease of slow motion became famous for its novelty factor when bullet time was still creating a buzz and The Matrix sequels were being anticipated rather than lambasted. In bringing the game to screen, the filmmakers will need to work on giving us more than just this borrowed element to make an engrossing film - especially as it’s not clear if this novelty value is being exploited.
The last time Wahlberg was cast as a no-nonsense killer was in The Shooter, a run-of-the-mill revenge thriller. His chiselled features were wasted on a bland character and even blander story, but Max Payne has the advantage of its noir style to help develop the tortured soul’s bid to bring his family’s murderers to justice. Of course, being Max Payne there has to be copious amounts of violence but, done right, the dark undertones could be amplified by the gunfire rather than provide the padding.
Whether it achieves this aim could be reliant not on Wahlberg’s performance, but on those around him. The presence of Ludacris and Nelly Furtado, more famed for their music than acting ability, and Chris O’Donnell, normally associated with average studio fare than hits, gives the impression we could be in for a rough ride. Director John Moore’s CV is sketchy: his previous high profile movies such as The Omen, Flight of the Phoenix and Behind Enemy Lines were workmanlike and there’s no getting away from the fact Max Payne is hardly a gaming household name anymore. The film is billed to include enemies from beyond the natural world too, a fantasy element not normally used in classic noir or even more modern day fare such as Sin City.
Max Payne will not be aiming to shoot the bullseye of taste with the average movie fan: it’s most likely to fall into that limbo of gamers wanting to see how their hero has been presented on the big screen and those looking for a simple actioner. If it achieves any more, then it will be considered a huge success for all involved.
Director: John Moore
Runtime: 1 hr 40 mins
Genre: Action/Adventure
Starring: Mark Wahlberg, Mila Kunis, Beau Bridges, Chris "Ludacris" Bridges
Theatrical Release:Oct 17, 2008 Wide
In short order, Cooper meets, saves, and is in turned saved by plucky doctor Sara (Brooke Nevin), the daughter of Cooper’s boss, who has just been snatched off the streets by one of the flying giant bugs. Together, they free other survivors: the hot but fragile Cindy (Kinsey Packard), a father and son, and Leechee (Linda Park), who seems to know an awful lot about insects, poisons, and other strange scientific facts. Together, the survivors devise a plan to brave the city streets and swarm of giant bugs in order to reach Cooper’s father (Ray Wise), a kooky survivalist who happens to have a bomb shelter underneath his home.
“Infestation” is fronted by Chris Marquette, playing one of those likeable losers who is a good guy, but somehow manages to get everyone else in trouble along with him because he just doesn’t take anything seriously enough. Marquette makes for an atypical hero, but in a movie with giant flying bugs, is actually preferable over the buff, square-jawed man-of-action archetype. Brooke Nevin, as the spunky love interest, makes a good foil for Cooper. There is actually chemistry between the two leads, which is not an easy feat given that their characters literally meet one moment and fall for each other the next. It’s silly writing, to be sure, but Marquette and Nevin make it cute anyway.
The central mystery of “Private Eye” is an engaging one, essential for this type of film, and though it progresses via a series of well-timed revelations rather than thanks to any real detective work on Jin Ho’s part, it manages to keep the viewer interested. There are a number of twists and turns, some of which are predictable and a few of which are pleasingly left-field, and Park does a good job of switching the focus from the question of ‘who’ to the more important ‘why’ as the film progresses from simple murder mystery to sinister conspiracy. 
Although the film has a familiar premise – a cocky though brilliant sleuth, his young sidekick, his somewhat detached relationship with a mysterious woman, and his problems with authority figures – the period setting does give it rather a different feel. Director Park’s style a mix of polish and grit, which works well to ground the film whilst allowing for some handsome production values and impressive visuals. He shows a keen eye for detail, bringing the historical setting to life without being overly ornate, making good use of both urban and rural settings. 
As such, “Private Eye” is the kind of film which offers viewers the best of both worlds, working well both as a fairly straightforward and entertaining popcorn hit, and as a well crafted and tough thriller. Slickly directed, its period setting helps it to stand out from the recent rush of other noir-themed films, as does Hwang Jung Min’s charismatic lead performance, making it a highly enjoyable and occasionally quite suspenseful thriller.
But “Kingdom of Heaven” barely functions on that kind of level. Violence comes suddenly and without expectation. Murder is perpetrated quickly and often. Battles are edited for their narrative and not for their action, occasionally ending without resolution (there is one part in the film where soldiers are fighting along a breached wall, and the scene shifts gradually to the end of the battle a few hours later, the motion of life coming to a dreary halt like cooling magma, the soldiers becoming about as lively as stones). Thus, the pacing so endemic to the large war scenes in “Lord of the Rings” and “Troy” is missing here. There is no buildup or catharsis, no catch and release. Though the choreography is dazzling, there is little thrill in their motions; only blood and violence and the kinetic energy rush that guards them every moment from death. Running throughout the film is a viable cynicism about war. This is in direct contradiction to Ridley Scott’s 2000 film “Gladiator”, in which violence sets Maximus free. Perhaps we are seeing here two sides of the same man.
Edward Norton, who in the past has worked the passive/aggressive thing well, defies all range here and plays one of the most unexpected parts in so eerie and enduring of a character, King Baldwin of Jerusalem, that all of his past roles seem hidden away beneath his mask. Like Tom Cruise in “Tropic Thunder”, except even more unrecognizable, his tricks are concealed right in front of us.
