Looking Back: Identity

Released in 2003, James Mangold, the director of the critically-acclaimed Walk the Line and up-and-coming action-romantic-comedy Knight and Day, brought us the psychological horror/thriller, Identity.

When eleven seemingly innocent strangers find themselves, all under different circumstances, stranded at an isolated motel during a storm, not all is right. Elsewhere, a murderer's execution is halted due to a last minute hearing, led by his psychologist Alfred Molina.

As the night progresses, each of the eleven strangers are mysteriously, and brutally, murdered. What they originally thought were a string of unintentionally-planned murders turns rather sinister as they realise their fellow-strandees are systematically dying.

Lead by ex-cop John Cusack, the cast of characters range from the bewilderingly inept to the resourceful. Whilst the lesser-known actors aimlessly flail themselves into a fortuitous death, the stronger, more capable, characters - Cusack, Amanda Peet, Ray Liotta - remain standing, solving the riddle as it progresses, all-the-while dealing with the curious happenings at the motel.

Clearly inspired by Hitchcock's Psycho, the motel retains a similar negative vibe. Aided entirely by the storm ravaging it's surroundings, the motel stands - like Psycho - as a partial character, as well as the main attraction in the plot involving the strangers.

Shrouded in mystery, the film never particularly strays far enough for your attention to be withdrawn from the characters and the undeniably odd situation they find themselves in. Providing enough suspense and thrills to hold the attention span of a three year old, the film grips as it twists and turns, throwing you in the deep end with the arguably shocking ending.

The ending, like many films of its kind, will split the audience right down the middle. The vast majority, i like to think, are like myself; overly ecstatic that the obvious 'hero' didn't disgracefully 'discover' him/her/itself as the psychotic, mystery murderer we've attempted to desperately uncover since the opening few minutes. Luckily, what we're given is something incredibly original - back in 2003, anyway - and genuinely well-made. Upon first viewing, i have no doubts that slight hesitation will be apparent. Psychological-favourite Michael Cooney, the writer of Identity, should be praised on his efforts of the 'shock and awe' tactic that is sadly so obscured and poorly executed in most films that it may as well be without.

While the film doesn't exactly contain the same effect as it does upon first viewing, it remains a perfectly entertaining psychological thriller, with the thrills and chills still as satisfying as it was the day i sat down as an unsuspecting, and slightly bewildered, 10 year old.

3.5/5

Looking Back: Godzilla (1998)

If you were a gigantic, dino-like creature, where would you go? I, personally, would head to Disneyland. My purpose? Animating the rides the way i wanted, all-the-while terrorizing the tourists. It seems that i'm the only one. According to 98% of monster flicks, the guaranteed hot spot is New York; The City That Never Sleeps.

A rule which is undoubtedly correct for disaster-extraordinaire Roland Emmerich, re-inventing the Japanese creation - from tail to snout - and spicing it up, giving us the big-budget version of Godzilla. Something which, upon release, was highly criticised.

Vastly enhanced (physically) by nuclear bombs, the well-known lizard travels to The Big Apple where scientist Nick Tatopoulos (Ferris Bueller's Matthew Broderick) is helping the military rid the creature due to it's continuous urge to cause destruction wherever it goes.

Whilst there, Nick meets college sweetheart Audrey, a kind-hearted, wannabe-news reporter who wastes no time in using his inside knowledge to further her own career.

Released in 1998, the film wasn't particularly praised by critics. A grudge held entirely against Emmerich's re-invention of the animal, but - without wishing for negativity over the original films - actually making the 'monster' look like a monster, and not a man flailing around in a less-than-average suit. But like most of Emmerich's films, criticisms were made, but some - myself included - weren't disillusioned over the fact that the film was/remains to be two hours of pure popcorn entertainment.

Like most of it's kind, the script wasn't developed to full capabilities. Still, a story was made, and whilst not perfect, was suitable. Lead by geeky, anti-hero Nick, no connections to any characters are particularly noticeable. Excluding charming, adventure-craving Hank Azaria, most of the characters aren't particularly well-rounded enough to care about, but, together, are enjoyable. Dramatic and, at times, over-the-top, but clearly enthusiastic for their roles, making the film appear even more like a 70's creature-feature.

The romance between the two leads is a desperate, but cheaply effective, attempt at creating some sort of emotional attachment which, as the film progresses, becomes more and more blatant.

Still, when were monster movies made to mentally-charge it's audiences? They're not. What we want are the monsters energetically rampaging throughout big cities; and this is Roland Emmerich, of course that's what we're going to get!

Clearly maintaining his flare for staging an epic, special effects-laden action sequence, Godzilla couldn't be more full to the brim of them if it even tried. Containing copious amounts of CGI, explosions and the 'dinosaur' himself, Emmerich's vigorous directing is fitted entirely for a film of this particular standard.

3/5

Looking Back: The Swan Princess

Nostalgic viewing never hurt anybody, did it? The Swan Princess, one of my most memorable animated romances from my childhood, was dug up on VHS a few days ago.

Hardly straying from the ever-popular story of everlasting love, Prince Derek and Princess Odette have been visiting each other every Summer ever since they were babies, unaware of their parents' hopeful plans that the pair fall in love and marry once of age. Sadly, evil sorcerer Lord Rothbart wishes for King William's (Odette's father) kingdom. Therefore, one stormy night, Rothbart transforms himself into an unspeakable evil, terrorizing and murdering King William and his men and kidnapping Odette. Keeping her hostage, he places a spell under the Princess, changing her into a graceful swan until the moon rises when she is transformed back, but kept under the watchful eye of Rothbart. Will Derek save his damsel in distress?

Amidst the countless Disney fairytales, The Swan Princess didn't particularly stand a chance. Having re-watched it, the similarities to The Little Mermaid are undeniable. Still, what makes the film entirely worthwhile is it's predictably romantic plot. Everybody loves

a sappy, musical-infused romance.

From the wonderfully colourful opening credits, The Swan Princess charms and 'woos' with the meeting of the adorable two-some, Derek and Odette, and the series of me

etings followed, leading to Odette and Dereks' first, fully-fledged feelings towards each other. The 'look' which is shot between both characters is knee-quivering, which is rare for two characters stuck inside a 2D animation. Once kidnapped, Derek's realisation of Odette's 'death' is heartbreaking. Screaming her name into the rain, he drops to his knees in a fit of sheer emotion. Melodramatic, yes, but visually and emotionally effective.

Adding traditional humor to the animation are the friends Odette meets in captivity, soft-spoken turtle Speed, courageous puffin..Puffin, and French frog Jean-Bob (played by John Cleese) who thinks he's a Prince in disguise. Watching now, the humor is undoubtedly less effective, but as a kid, i ate it up.

Villain-wise, it fails. Disregarding the monstrous creature Lord Rothbart transforms into -- which i still actually found rather frightening --, the character himself is anything but frightening. In fact, the most disturbing thing about him is his hair. I personally wished for Odette to throw a comeback his way about the unmanageable mess located on his head.

Re-discovering the film was a worthwhile experience. Clearly not as impressive as i remembered it being, but not exactly tainting the film to the point where it's entirely ruined. Made completely by the chemistry of the two leads - and the song, "Far Longer Than Forever", they sing for one another, it's a film which i would happily find on DVD to add to my collection, and, if possible, the two sequels which followed after.

3/5