Top Five Romantic Comedies

For those days when you feel like you're going to die alone and need some absolutely incontrovertible, not at all fictional and deeply realistic proof that this will not happen.

1. Pretty Woman
2. Bridget Jones's Diary
3. 10 Things I Hate About You
4. He's Just Not That Into You
5. When Harry Met Sally

At least, these are the five that I remembered I loved first. Most rom-coms are overly-loaded with cliches, ridiculously predictable, too cheesy to take seriously and generally just cheap, meaningless entertainment to indulge in when your brain can cope with nothing else. These five, on the other hand, I'm not at all ashamed to say I love because they're genuinely romantic, clever and just a bit different. Also, they're actually funny.

Pirates of the Caribbean

This isn't really a review, more of a...whatever the good version of 'rant' is. So...a passionate discussion of something I feel very strongly about, only this time (for a change) it's about something I love, rather than something I hate. Kind of. Oh, just read it...

So, the new Pirates of the Caribbean film, On Stranger Tides, comes out this week, and to commemorate this, my family and I spent the night watching The Curse of the Black Pearl, just to get us in the mood. It's yonks since I've actually watched this film, which is odd really, since I went through a phase when I literally watched it about once a week. Whenever someone asks me what my favourite film is, I often say something ambiguous like "Oh, I can't possibly answer that; I love too many..." or "It depends which genre; I have several favourites because you can't really compare A Knight's Tale with The Shawshank Redemption or Bridget Jones's Diary." But in my head, I'm always thinking 'Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl'. Because it's just brilliant.

My favourite genre of films are basically swashbuckling, bit-of-everything adventure films; for me, the best movies are ones that have an action-packed story with a few (nice) surprises, plenty of witty one-liners, couple of entertaining rather than confusing action sequences and ending with a kiss. I mean, deep and meaningful dramas with poignant writing and tragic irony is all very well when you're in the mood, but cinema was invented to entertain, and entertainment is, to me, the essence of what makes films wonderful. It's about telling a good story. And, as far as I'm concerned, that's exactly what Pirates of the Caribbean is. It's an all-rounder, and it's just brilliant. Johnny Depp created quite possibly the best movie character of all time, the gags are consistently hilarious, the sword-fights (particularly the one between Depp and Orlando Bloom in the blacksmith's) don't get boring, there's eye-candy for every taste, an old-fashioned romance and a happy ending. You can't watch 'Pirates' and not leave with a smile on your face.

I was actually thinking of watching the first one tonight, the second tomorrow, the third on Tuesday and then I'd be all prepared to see the fourth on Wednesday, but I've decided against it. Like many fans of the first film, I was disappointed with the sequels. They were still good, they just weren't a patch on the first one. The plots got too confusing, the gags were more forced, there was a good hour of the third film I couldn't make head nor tail of and the special effects department were given a little (read: lot) too much free reign. I still enjoyed the films, but I couldn't help feeling that the sequels kind of, sort of, pretty much ruined it. It's like eating cheap American chocolate after you've tried proper Dairy Milk; it's fine, it'll do, but all it really does is make you appreciate just how tasty Dairy Milk is.

But I'm still looking forward to On Stranger Tides. It hasn't been as rushed, the new characters will hopefully lend it a freshness that the second and third installments lacked, and it's still got the most important ingredient: Captain Jack Sparrow. And I am one hundred per cent certain that it will not be as good as the first film, but it stands a good chance of being better than the second and third. But however downhill Pirates of the Caribbean went, watching the first film again just helped me remember why I loved it so much in the first place. It really is my favourite film, but there was no point trying to match it. You can't beat perfection.

Review: Something Borrowed

So Sunday night arrives, and there's a decision to be made. Go to the cinema, or revise for forthcoming A-Levels. Not much of a decision, really, is it? Since Water For Elephants was already booked in for Wednesday, my friend Roz and I had no choice but to go and see the exceptionally rubbishy-looking 'Something Borrowed', based on a book I read last year and was massively irritated by.

The trailer led me to hope that they may have changed the plot slightly, which is, in essence, that two women who have been best friends forever fall in love with the same man. Rachel (sensible, generous, kind, lawyer) was in love with him first, but hesitated at the wrong moment and kind of shoved this man into dating her best friend, Darcy (attention-seeking, flirty, inconsiderate). Skip six years. Now Darcy and the man (Dex) are getting married, Rachel is turning thirty and single, and gets very drunk. Result: Dex and Rachel sleep together. Cue lots of angst, silliness, worry and very little common sense.

I won't say I didn't laugh; there were some very funny moments, the majority of which provided by John Krasinski, playing Rachel's other best friend, Ethan. This was one of my many issues with the film; why is she lusting after her best friend's bloke when she has a beautiful, lovely, funny, SINGLE guy right there?

Anyway, I think the fact that I was watching this with MY best friend made me view it in a completely different light, because at one point I turned to look at my best friend and just thought...NO! THIS IS NOT OKAY! Everybody in the film acts as though it's perfectly fine to be sleeping with your best friend's fiance, because you loved him first, you're much better suited to him and your best friend's kind of an irritating show-off. But, as a viewer, I was just sat there thinking: NOT OKAY! And I couldn't help but come to the conclusion that the woman who wrote this either a) had never had a proper best friend, or b) did something horrible to her best friend and tried to justify it through fiction. Either way, she was not qualified to write this film.

So really, the moral of the story was 'Sleeping with your best friend's fiance is allowed, as long as your best friend's a bitch.' *sigh*

Basic summary: an insensible but mildly amusing rom-com with all the best lines from John Krasinski and a lot of irritation for those of you with a best friend and a conscience.

Rating: * (poor)

Review: Arthur

I really tried not to be biased by my dislike of Russell Brand. I really, really tried. And to be honest, I did better than I thought I would. I didn't really want to see this film, but the only other option was Water For Elephants, and considering all the factors (opening night, 2 for 1 Wednesday, Twilight fangirls), that seemed like it would be more trouble than it was worth. So, we went to see Arthur.

A remake of an 80s classic, in which a daft and endearing alcoholic heir to a fortune is given an ultimatum by his exasperated mother; marry this 'suitable' woman and stop behaving like such a schmuck, or be cut off from the millions and earn your way like the rest of us. Unfortunately, this ultimatum comes at a time when Arthur has begun to fall in love for the first time, but not with the woman he now has to marry in order to keep his frivolous, extravagant lifestyle, all under the watchful eye of his sarcastic, stern but caring nanny/butler Hobson.

I've never seen the original all the way through, so I had no point of comparison, which was probably a good thing. I was expecting a childish comedy with poor acting, glorified fart gags and a predictable story. But it was much better than that. It was genuinely very funny; the one-liners were witty, Russell Brand (dare I say it) made me laugh a couple of times and Helen Mirren was hilarious; it really impressed and surprised me with it's semi-sophisticated and clever humour.

And the acting wasn't so bad, either. Admittedly, Russell Brand was (again) merely playing an extension of himself (read: manchild with addictive personality and more money than sense), but he did it reasonably well. Jennifer Garner - for me - couldn't quite act past her face, which looks so friendly, sweet and charming that I just couldn't take her seriously as a gold-digging dominatrix. Helen Mirren was brilliant, but then she usually is, though the writing made her character's personality flick from one extreme to another in terms of strictness and mothering. However, Greta Gerwig's portrayal of the kooky children's writer who steals Arthur's heart was very touching and sweet; Brand's scenes were largely made better because she was in them.

So all of that was fine. The issues I had were with the plot, and the moral. I can't really go into my annoyances here without giving anything away, but the whole point of the film was essentially negated for me by the rushed, blink-and-you'll-miss-it ending (which, in fact, a friend of mine did blink and miss). Aside from that, a very important sequence towards the end of the film was unexplained, too brief, out of the blue and let down by Brand's inability to act emotively. As a comedy actor I admit - though I can't really stand the man - that he's good, but in a more emotional scene his shortcomings as an actor were painfully obvious.

For me, the story was too flawed to really like it, though I did enjoy the wittiness and thought it was made considerably better by Helen Mirren and Greta Gerwig.

Basic summary: lighthearted and endearing comedy with some serious structural flaws, but a good one to watch when you don't want to engage your brain and fancy a good laugh.

Rating: * * (average)