We here at CeX are excited to announce that we've arrived in Italy! This latest store makes Italy the 11th country that we're bringing the joy of CeX to. Salute!
We have a beautiful store spread across 2 floors packed to the rafters with gaming or gadget goodies and techy treats for the people of Bologna to Buy, Sell & Exchange.
Come find us at Via Giovanni Amendola, 10 in Bologna and keep your eyes peeled for more from CeX Italia!
I loved the Halo games growing up. I’m very far behind now – the last one I played was Halo 3 – but I have fond memories of whiling away the hours on the original trilogy with my cousin and my friends. It was a simpler time. 2001’s Halo: Combat Evolved took the shooter genre and breathed new life into it with unprecedented graphics, a strong narrative and a rich world full of exciting locations and interesting characters. At least, that’s what game historians say. While it is true, when I played it I didn’t care about any of that. I just liked shooting things. What can I say, I was a normal young boy.
As the years went on, the Halo franchise became enormous – with 5 games in the Master Chief saga, several spin-offs and a whole lotta merchandise, it’s like the Star Wars of the gaming world. Out now on DVD & Blu-Ray comes Halo: The Fall of Reach, an unusual animated film looking at how a young boy named John became the hero we all know and love – the Master Chief. This isn’t the first time the Halo universe has reached our screens in a non-gaming capacity, after Halo Legends, Forward Unto Dawn and Nightfall in the last 5 years. But The Fall of Reach stands out for several reasons.
Firstly, it gives us the origin story of the game series’ hero. Based on the novel of the same name by Eric Nylund released back in 2001 alongside the first game, The Fall of Reach shows us the events which led up to the first game and explains the origins of the SPARTAN II super soldiers. We see the young John, among other children, kidnapped and put through brutal military training and augmentation to ultimately become the Master Chief we love. We see him change from self-centred little kid to responsible, strong leader. We see his first mission. We see the first interaction between man and the Covenant. All exciting, right? Not really.
The film’s main downfall lies in the technical side. The animation is quite appalling at times, and extremely flat. It’s trying to be stylish but just comes off as amateur, with the film having the appearance of a painting – one that moves, but barely. Characters and backdrops often remain stiff and stilted while the mouthing is often way off the dialogue, making for an extremely uncomfortable viewing experience. It just feels like a cut-scene, and not a very good one. The voice acting itself is passable but lacks any punch or depth. Some visuals – the Master Chief’s suit, for example – look decent enough but the majority just look cheap and…well, shit. Maybe if this film had strong visuals, it would be a more exciting and engrossing watch. But the aesthetic of The Fall of Reach stopped me from being sucked into its world.
I haven’t read the book on which it’s based, nor have I touched a Halo game in years. But from what I’ve read online, the film actually messes with the source material a lot and changes things from the novel and things within the Halo universe itself. Die-hard fans of the saga should be warned of this. But for me, a casual viewer, The Fall of Reach was just a downright predictable origins story of a character whose charm was, and maybe still is, his mystery. Remember the ending of Combat Evolved when the Chief took his helmet off, but the ‘camera’ pulled away at the last second and we didn’t see?! We loved that shit back in ’01. So now, learning all about his childhood and seeing his little face for 65 minutes (yes, it’s that short) feels a little strange. Mysterious characters are the best characters. Look at Clint Eastwood’s iconic character ‘The Man with No Name’. A film about his childhood would be terrible because his mystery is his character. I get that sort of feeling here. I guess when the novel came out, the world didn’t know how big the Halo franchise would become and how important the character’s mystery would be. But to adapt it for screen now? Seems a little daft.
But hey, what do I know? I haven’t played a Halo game properly since ’07 and am coming to this as strictly a film critic. Maybe as fan service, The Fall of Reach will go down well – I’d love to hear from anyone who has good things to say about the film, from an avid gamer’s perspective perhaps. But for me, The Fall of Reach left a lot to be desired and felt largely unnecessary. But I did feel a little bit of joyful nostalgia seeing some of the Halo iconography again after all these years.
Halo: The Fall of Reach strives for quality but doesn’t reach it. 2/5.
Out now on DVD & Blu-Ray, Tom Vaughan’s Lessons in Love tells the story of a charming British poetry professor/womaniser named Richard (Pierce Brosnan) who, after impregnating one of his students, must become a father figure to the child aswell as a partner figure to the mother Kate (Jessica Alba). But when Kate starts seeing another man (Ben McKenzie), Richard’s life falls apart. But what’s this? Kate has a sister? Played by Salma Hayek? Could Richard maybe fall in love with her and have a happy ending?! Of course he bloody could. Lessons in Love is almost painful in its predictability. Every plot development is seen coming from a mile away, right down to Richard’s estranged and hateful father (Malcolm McDowell) whom Richard makes amends with at the end of the film! Yay! Who saw that coming?! But you know what? It doesn’t matter.
Sure, Lessons in Love is predictable. But it isn’t exactly trying to be a suspenseful mystery or thriller. It isn’t trying to keep you on the edge of your seat, wondering whether Pierce will get to have it off with Salma. We all know from the trailer alone that they’ll end up together. It knows its audience is, on the whole, middle aged women – and sons, boyfriends and husbands in the wrong place at the wrong time – and it knows this audience doesn’t care about predictability. They just want pithy romance, funny jokes and a cheesy soundtrack. They get all of this here! And the laughable dialogue – “how can you teach the romantics, when you don’t even have any real feeling?” – is hardly noticeable with such beautiful locations on offer. Lessons in Love mostly takes place in a gorgeous, sun-soaked Californian home which could easily be in Spain. And of course, there’s some beauty to behold walking around onscreen too – Salma Hayek and Jessica Alba still look as good as ever, and with a pale Malcolm McDowell wondering about they look even better by comparison! That said, he’s probably the best thing about the film. Everybody loves a bit of Malcolm McDowell.
Show me one person who says they don’t, and I’ll show you a liar. It’s just a shame that in recent years he has gone the way of all legendary 70s actors and taken almost any job he’s been offered. He’s not quite as bad as De Niro yet, though. Brosnan, Alba and Hayek are all on decent form too – they know why they’re here and they know what they’ve got to do. They get on with it and I haven’t any issues with their work here. I just get the impression that after Love Is All You Need, The Love Punch and A Long Way Down; Pierce is on autopilot within this cheesy genre now. Oh well, he seems happy enough.
At the end of the day, to say Lessons in Love is bad would be to say all romantic comedies are bad. They’re all exactly the same and there’s nothing in this one that makes it any better, or any worse, than the countless efforts before it and the almost infinite supply that Hollywood inevitably have lined up to follow it. It’s predictable, yes. It’s unoriginal, sure. But it’s an easy watch. You can switch off your brain and escape with films like this, which in today’s increasingly violent and dark world, is something we all need. The target audience will love it, and guys, if you watch this with your mum or your partner, you will get major points. That’s always a result, isn’t it?
Lessons in Love ultimately brings nothing remotely new to the genre, but it’s a romantic comedy. It is what it is. 3/5.
Out now on Blu-Ray and DVD, The Man From U.N.C.L.E. is Guy Ritchie’s latest project, based on the ‘60s spy TV show of the same name. Generally when I watch a Ritchie film I’m excited, but left feeling like something was lacking – fortunately for TMFU, it was a whole lot different this time round. I decided to approach the reboot without seeing the original series, and so can’t compare the two, but felt rather satisfied looking at it as an independent film.
Napoleon Solo (Henry Cavill), CIA agent of the ’60s, finds himself working alongside Illya Kuryakin, opposing Russian KGB agent, and Gaby Teller, daughter of the alleged Nazi scientist Udo Teller, to prevent a criminal organisation from harnessing the information needed to create their own nuclear bomb. With Solo’s smoothness, Kuryakin’s anger issues, and Teller’s unexpected bouts of feistiness, we see the three of them try to cooperate throughout the mission, despite each having their own separate agenda.
I’m going to be frank here – the plot isn’t all that great. It works, and it’s enough to make you want to watch it, but it’s the not the key feature of the film. The tone is playful throughout, and so realism doesn’t necessarily make much of an impact – although it still makes great viewing. What really draws you in is the dynamics between the main characters as they struggle to work together. The script is incredibly witty, and there’s a great chemistry there that just makes each scene fun in its own way. Unfortunately, it’s so impactful that scenes where only one main character appear seem to be lacking, but this isn’t too much of an issue. Elizabeth Debicki played an excellent villain as Victoria Vinciguerra, and Hugh Grant also performs well as Waverley (for once he’s not playing an arrogant love rat, which is rather refreshing).
Solo is an undeniably smooth character that fits well with the style and, although I was worried about how Cavill might do in this role (I just can’t help seeing Superman when I look at him), he actually pulled it off exceptionally well. In particular, his constant feud with Kurykin from start to finish adds to the hilarity of the overall film – there wasn’t one scene where one wasn’t trying to one-up the other, and so there also wasn’t one scene where it wasn’t amusing to watch. I don’t think there was one main star either – all three of the main characters brought their own elements to the film, and so were as enjoyable to watch as each other.
The filming is well thought out and the editing particular really stands out – it’s got a real ‘60s vibe to it. Perhaps they went overboard with the idealism of the era, but it fits in well with the light-hearted tone. It’s stylised and fast-paced, with a vintage score that adds to the overall feel. One thing I really enjoyed was how thought out the action scenes were – the viewer gets to witness several different vehicle chases and a variety of different character fights. Each one is original and clever, and so I found myself enjoying these much more than the regurgitated action scenes from the more anticipated Spectre. As with many ‘60s style features, some scenes can be a little cheesy, which in turn adds a bit of predictability, but generally they all flow together quite seamlessly.
The film ended just as I wanted it to and hinted at a sequel, but this has yet to be confirmed. Although the not so fulfilling plot might mean this movie isn’t for everyone, one thing is for sure – if Ritchie does make another, I’ll be straight there to watch it.
In fact, I would like to actively discourage anybody considering buying this as a present for young fans of the cartoon. I certainly wouldn't want my kids playing it. There aren't people exploding in clouds of gore or machine guns that shoot breasts to the sound of expletives or anything, but there are some iffy elements. Your boss is a lady who wears her jacket partly open and, it would seem, with no bra therein (not to mention a skirt so short, it's not even possible to be sure that's not a pair of shorts just about peeking out from beneath the jacket). More disturbingly, the female member of your party is more than once subjected to some quite frankly predatory dialogue.
With that out of the way, it's worth mentioning in fairness that the concept and execution of the plot is actually quite interesting. There's a global VR community called Eden where – of course – things quickly take a sinister and dangerous turn. It's not long before your character tries to escape a virtual fight but ends up in the real world in digital form, because science. This results in our hero gaining the “Connect Jump” ability whereby you can instantly transport yourself between the physical and digital realms, via TVs and computers and mobile phones and things. You discover that (unsurprisingly) these 'Digimon' creatures present in VR spaces are sentient creatures from another dimension, and will prove to be both friends and enemies.
Unfortunately, a crucial part of game design is f*cked.
Bosses are tougher than standard enemies. If you don't know that, you don't know videogames. But here? Bosses are – especially after the first half of the game – massively, gigantically, preposterously overpowered compared to the Digimon you find in random battles. The most extreme example (and this can happen) is that you take out some or all enemies in just one or two hits on the way to the boss of a dungeon and then, when you reach him/her/it, he/she/it takes out one or more of your Digimon in just one or two hits. Come on guys, seriously?!?
The moral of the story is, of course, to grind like a stripper. But you don't expect that from a licence like Digimon, do you? And the game itself does nothing to warn you until it's too late. Oh, and did I mention the fact that there are no autosaves? Yeah, you better be careful around that. It's a well-made game for those who grind by habit. It's not fantastic though, and there's not exactly a shortage of JRPGs on the market. As a result, this is brilliant for older Digimon fans, but very much missable for anybody else.
Only hardcore fans need get Digivolved in this. 3/5.
So as the name suggests, Zombi is about killing
zombies. Wait, where are you going? You're sick of zombie games? I
don't know how that's even possible, but what if I told you that it's
structure is much more in the vein of Dark Souls than pretty much
every other zombie game, but remains a First Person Shooter? Ah,
interested now are we? Well, you should be.
Developed by Ubisoft Montpellierand
out now for Xbox One and PlayStation 4, Zombi has a weird history.
The game was originally a launch title for Nintendo's Wii U in 2012
and had it's design very much inspired by the unique controller of
the Wii U. With the lack of a second screen though, it'd be pretty
tough to bring the game to Xbox One and PlayStation 4 right? No, not
at all. However, lost is that tense feeling when you must look down
at the second screen while gameplay continues. You had to be quick
and aware of your surroundings. For the Xbox One and PlayStation 4
version though, your view of the environment is blocked by the
inventory management and it loses its tension.
The rest of the game though stays largely intact. The
game takes place in London (London baby!) and a zombie outbreak has
all but wiped out the population. With the help of a mysterious voice
over a radio, you are tasked with carrying out a number of quests in
order to stop "The Black Prophecy" which was created 400
years ago.
So, I know some of you are reading this thinking: "He
mentioned Dark Souls a few paragraphs ago and this game just sounds
like another generic zombie First Person shooter". Patience my
dear child, I will get to that now. So should your character be
killed, that character will be dead, permanently, and you will lose
all items that were in your inventory at the time of death. Zombi
doesn't have a main protagonist that you control; Instead, you play
as a random civilian and each time you die, you will wake up in the
bunker as a new resident of London.
If you loved what you looted and want it back, then
you must go back to the location of your character's demise and
re-loot that bag. It may not always be so easy as your previous
character might have also returned as a stumbling, rotten mess of
flesh and you must take down yourself, kinda. Visually, the game is surprisingly decent given the
history of the game and that it released on the under-powered Wii U
in 2012. Textures are slightly better and there is a less blurry look
to it all. You won't be amazed on a technical level but it does an
brilliant job of turning London into an actual creepy city with an
uneasy atmosphere.
Zombi isn't a perfect game. Gameplay can be quite
tedious and there are moments of frustration but there are glimpses
of absolute excellence that stays with you more than swinging a
cricket bat 50 million times to kill a zombie (that number may be
slightly exaggerated but only slightly). It's a game that I hope
Ubisoft go back to because it honestly deserves another shot in the
sun, or the dark moody lighting of a city overrun with zombies and a
sense of hopelessness.
It's in your head, in your head, Zombi, Zombi, gets a
4/5.
The Good Dinosaur, out now on BluRay and DVD, Pixar’s newest family film, shows us what life might have been like had the asteroid that killed out the dinosaurs 65 million years ago never actually made contact with the Earth. In this alternate universe, humans and dinosaurs live side by side, although dinosaurs seem to be the more advanced species. When Arlo the nervous Apatosaurus ends up miles away from home he meets Spot, a young human, and together they go on an exciting, if slightly surreal, journey home, facing many of their fears along the way.
Immediately you can tell that this is a Pixar film, and that’s a good thing. The scenery is beautiful and some of the animation is incredibly realistic. As all Pixar films do, The Good Dinosaur follows a formula – usually I would be one to complain of formulaic films, but their formula is so spot on every time that it really makes a good film. Sure, us adults might be able to predict what will happen, but that doesn’t make it any less enjoyable, and for children it makes an easy watch. I’m not going to say it’s the best they’ve ever done, because they’ve made an incredible collection of films over the years (and how could any film beat Toy Story?!), but it’s pretty darn good all the same.
I found this film to be more emotional than most – there’s a lot of ‘show, don’t tell’ which is great, and the main characters are really well developed. Visual cues are used a lot more than usual to show concepts such as family death, and physical pain, but in a way that children can understand. There’s also a real Land Before Time feel for those of you that remember watching that as a kid – something that makes it all the more enticing for adults to watch as well as children.
I must admit that the content was much more surreal than I thought it would be, but actually really funny. Along the journey we meet a whole host of bizarre characters (such as a group of Western-style T-Rexes and an animal-hoarding Triceratops who looks weirdly like comedian Milton Jones), but every single little thing that happens feels meaningful, and gives insight into the story. So much so that by the end of the film you wish it could have gone on longer. I loved the repetition used of Arlo running away screaming at the end of every scene, and it just made it more accessible for kids who sometimes might struggle to relate to something that goes on for so long. I also thought the music was great, which had a real percussive feel to it and complemented the storyline perfectly.
For a Pixar film, it’s more hard-hitting than the others – it starts off with a death, and looks at many aspects of the natural world that aren’t so wrapped in cotton wool (fighting and eating other animals for survival being a couple). I didn’t see this as a bad thing though – although this may not be what you’d quite expect from a kids’ film, it was educational, and each scene had a reason behind it. Maybe some parents want to shield their children from such things, but I thought it had a great way of encouraging different ways of thinking, and speaking to the viewers in real terms.
And that’s the thing I loved most about The Good Dinosaur - the way it challenges children’s concepts of fear. It’s not about becoming fearless, because that’s pretty hard; instead, it’s about just getting through your fears. Because, as Butch the T-Rex so wisely says, “if you ain’t scared, you ain’t alive.”
You all know how Rotten Tomatoes works, don’t you? For those who don’t, it’s a website that takes all critical reviews for a film and makes a percentage of how many are actually positive. So for something good, like The Shawshank Redemption, the score is 91%. And for something bad, like Fantastic Four, the score is 9%. Alejandro Amenábar’s latest, Regression, currently stands at a pathetic and laughable 7%. Shocking work for the man who brought us The Others. So, is it deserving of this ridiculously low score? Or is it just misunderstood?
The thing that makes Regression so difficult to review is that there’s neither nothing hugely in-your-face bad about it, nor anything at all good. Nobody in the cast seems to be making much effort and they all act like they want to be somewhere else, but for a B-movie thriller like this, that is to be expected. The dark, gritty visuals of the film are sufficient for a film of this genre and occasionally lend the film its only saving grace - but it isn’t enough to truly save the film from being so painfully mundane and run-of-the-mill that anyone in the world could’ve directed it. And anyone else could’ve probably done a better job, as Amenábar doesn’t seem to have a clue what film he’s directing here.
Some films hybridise genres effectively but Regression isn’t one of them. Trying to be a thriller, horror and drama isn’t a particularly hard task – especially for a man who won an Academy Award in 2004 – but here, Amenábar doesn’t seem able to be any of those genres. There are no thrills because we’ve seen it all before, no scares because the film mainly focuses on jumps which we see coming a mile off, and certainly no drama because we don’t give a shit about the thinly written characters. As an audience we have absolutely no interest or care for the weak narrative and when the hilariously anti-climactic so-called ‘twist’ is dropped on us at the end, it isn’t a shock. If the film was good, the ‘twist’ would’ve been disappointing. But because of this total lack of audience connection with the characters or plot, we don’t care enough to be disappointed.
This is a slightly shorter review than you’re used to getting from me, but I just have nothing else to say about Regression. It is such an empty, forgettable and unoriginal film that there is nothing to comment on. I’m not angry, and I’m not even disappointed because I went in with no expectation. I’ve just come out of it with nothing to say, and certainly no recommendation. Maybe, just maybe, if you’re an Emma Watson fan you might like seeing her do something different here. And if Ethan Hawke has any fans left, then they might enjoy seeing him play a completely unoriginal detective character. Otherwise…just don’t waste your time.
Regression is a film worth repressing, and never thinking of again. 0/5.
Let’s just cut to the chase. You know exactly what you’re in for when you watch an Adam Sandler movie. In recent years, he’s given us a veritable feast of shit with films like Jack & Jill, Grown Ups, That’s My Boy and You Don’t Mess With The Zohan – and now with Netflix Original The Ridiculous 6 released, there’s clearly no end in sight. Pixels looked like it might be different. A stronger premise than his usual films and a bigger budget than normal looked like it might be enough to save it. It wasn’t. Pixels is every bit as bad as you probably expected.
Out now on DVD, Blu-Ray and Blu-Ray 3D, Pixels is a fun idea. The simple story is that after the human race sent videos of arcade game footage in a time capsule to space in 1982, aliens took this as a declaration of war. As they unleash hell on planet Earth in the form of these game’s characters – ie. Pac-Man, Donkey Kong, etc. – it’s up to the ‘nerds’ of yesteryear to save the day with their immense knowledge of the games. This could make a great film with the right cast and script. Sadly, Pixels has neither.
We’ll start with the very brief positives of Pixels. The CGI is very strong. Each of the attack sequences are a delight for the eyes, particularly in 3D, with all of the alien game characters being made of many blocks to resemble the low-resolution pixels. While Disney’s Wreck-it Ralph opted to lose the 8-bit pixel aesthetic in favour of a smooth look, Pixels keeps the 80s ‘bad graphics’ and this gives it a certain nostalgic charm. The bright colours of these characters make for a colourgasmic final showdown on the streets of Washington DC – and to be fair, the action is pretty solid as well. I enjoyed these sequences on a nostalgic level too, and it felt fun and fresh seeing Pac-Man, Donkey Kong and Centipede fuck shit up in the real world. But Pixels is supposedly a ‘comedy’. Funnily enough, the Blu-Ray of Pixels carries one critic quote on the cover, and that quote reads ‘Thrilling actions & stunning visuals!’. Just like in this review, that is the only nice thing you can say. You notice how there are no quotes on the cover to compliment the film’s ‘comedy’? That’s because the comedy is non-existent.
Outside of the CGI, Pixels is just terrible. Before we discuss how bad the ‘comedy’ is, there’s the issue of the cast. Adam Sandler is his usual self; the whiny, passive-aggressive twat who is refusing to accept he’s getting too old for these juvenile comedy films. Kevin James shows up to play the President of the United States – a premise that is probably even more unrealistic than the alien attack. Peter Dinklage is probably the highlight here, although you can’t help but be a little bit sad for him. He’s a multiple-award-winning actor, and everyone know you only accept a role in an Adam Sandler Movie if you need the money. Why else would you do this to your career? Poor guy. Josh Gad, the voice of Frozen’s Olaf, is even worse than Sandler – no surprise there, he’s one of the most annoying actors working today. Brian Cox and Sean Bean appear as straight-faced military men, who hold each other in fear during one of the alien attacks. They’re more likely giving each other an understanding “we’re both in this shit together” hug. On the plus side, Sean Bean doesn’t die in it! This calls for a celebration!
But as I said, the main problem with Pixels is the fact that it just isn’t funny. At all. I didn’t laugh, I didn’t smile, I didn’t even smirk. Tim Herlihy and Timothy Dowling’s screenplay is dripping with shit, the kind of shit that Sandler seems to think is hilarious. The comedy is mostly made up of sarcasm and insults from Sandler, screaming from Gad and the visual gag of Dinklage having a mullet. The jokes are extremely stale, childish and repetitive. The dialogue is abysmal, the characterisation poor and the narrative wholly predictable. Pixels brings nothing new to the Sandler table. It troubles me to think there’s still an audience for this.
Pixels looked like it might be more than just another Adam Sandler movie. I hoped it would be. But it’s not. Take away the premise and the visuals, and all you have left is Sandler with that daft look on his face, thinking he’s funny. This is just a thinly disguised Sandler flick that is trying to be something it’s not, thanks to a bigger budget than usual. Maybe if you’re still at the Adam Sandler Enjoyment Age (around 13), you’ll enjoy Pixels the same way you enjoyed Jack & Jill. But if you have self-respect, you won’t. Pixels stinks of one big missed opportunity, but ultimately I’m not surprised one bit that it’s awful. This is just a terrible attempt to re-do what Wreck-it Ralph did much better – create a big bowl of nostalgia in film form. Nobody wants Adam Sandler tainting their childhood, but Disney? Disney get a pass.
Developed by Sandlot and out now for PlayStation Vita, Earth Defence Force 2 has released alongside the PS4's Earth Defence Force 4.1 – which may make you say “wait, what?”. Both are something between a remake and a remaster, with the Vita's entry originally released on PS2. The beating heart of the EDF series that you need to understand above all else is this: The budget for each game is small, but the devs make no attempt no hide this. In fact, they wear it as a badge of grubby pride.
Originally known as Global Defence Force, the new moniker's subtitle – Invaders From Planet Space – should serve as a none-too-subtle hint that this is a game with its proverbial tongue wedged deep into its proverbial cheek. Just as well really, because as soon as I say “You'll be killing giant ants, giant spiders, and giant robots”, I've adequately explained three quarters of the game. No branching dialogue trees; no moving block puzzles; no moral choices; no QTEs. Just swarms of huge enemies trying to kill you. You see something, blow the crap out of it as quickly as possible. Simple as that.
Despite the ultra-simplistic gameplay, there is a degree of planning and tactical thinking involved. Before each stage (of which there are almost 80), you get to choose your class and equipment. Classes, there be three: Infantry, Pale Wing, and Air Raider. Infantry are fairly tough and handle the kind of weapons players will be used to (rifles, rocket launchers, grenades, etc) so are great for beginners. They, and the Air Raider, can jump into any vehicle that may have been kindly left for you on the map. Vehicles are fairly rare, but who doesn't love driving a tank? There's also helicopters, and a speedbike with a crappy machine gun. The Air Raider is so called because they can use smoke grenades to call in bombing runs. They also get some cool equipment like sentry guns – but their personal weaponry tends to be slow and awkward. The Pale Wing starts off the weakest of the three, and they're a bit rubbish at long-range combat. But! They have a jetpack. A fucking jetpack, people!
Sometimes, an enemy will drop an item. This will be health, armour, or a random weapon. Each armour pickup increases that class's maximum health by one (after the mission ends), and the weapon will be added to your arsenal once you return to the menu. This means that you can slowly build your characters up to be powerhouses but, until you do, you'll tend to find that each stage is best tackled by a particular class. Or you could just keep grinding the first few levels for hours upon end like a psychopath.
I fell in love with this game within seconds of the first level, when a dodgy cockney voice asked “What's goin' on?” as I watched ants the size of whales run around what was supposed to be London. I chuckled as the giant insects were matter-of-factly referred to as “Buggernauts”. Glee roared through my veins as I made a mess of hundreds of giant insects, robots, and other monstrosities for hours. But, sadly, the Blue Peter budget began to show itself in much less amusing ways. It wasn't until the times I somehow ended up with a few stragglers at opposite ends of the map that I realised how damn slow all these athletic soldiers move. And while the fact that EDF 2 has a lot more cramped areas than EDF 4.1 shouldn't matter, it does. It's all very well having dozens of bug corpses at a time, lying around until they magically disappear; but when they block your bullets and set off your explosives, they can now and again give the enemy an unfair advantage. As for the time I was being shot at through a wall and I couldn't shoot back...
There's both ad-hoc and online multiplayer and, if you can get a game in this way, it's arguably the way EDF is meant to be played. It's also great fun solo but, either way, this eleven-year-old game still needs a bit more tidying up.
Good dumb fun, but occasionally buggered. 3/5.
★★★☆☆
Luke Kemp
Earth Defence Force 2: Invaders From Planet Space at CeX
In 2012, Seth MacFarlane – the man behind Family Guy and American Dad – introduced us to Ted in his directorial debut, and first time working with live-action. The tale of a hard-drinking, drug-abusing and foul-mouthed teddy bear was a huge success, grossing over $500 million against a $50 budget. Audiences loved it, and surprisingly, so did critics. A sequel was promised, but before that, MacFarlane gave us A Million Ways to Die in the West. The comedy Western didn’t go down quite as well as Ted, but the promised sequel continued production. Finally, Ted 2 arrived. Did it meet expectations?
Out now on DVD & Blu-Ray, Ted 2 begins with Ted’s marriage to Tami-Lynn – his girlfriend from the first film. As their relationship sours shortly after, they decide to have a baby – but in order to qualify to be a parent, Ted has to prove he’s a ‘person’ in a court of law. So, with the help of his dear friend John (Mark Wahlberg) and up-and-coming young lawyer Samantha (Amanda Seyfried), Ted will do whatever it takes to earn the respect and rights he feels he deserves. Funnily enough there are some powerful messages in the film, hidden under the dick jokes and drug use. There are references to slavery and human rights issues in the past that, funnily enough, are sometimes presented straight and without humour. You can tell Seth MacFarlane has something to say with this film, in his own way. The film is packed with famous faces, from a completely straight-faced performance from Morgan Freeman who seems to think he’s in a far more serious and intelligent film, to a great cameo from Liam Neeson, and the funniest thing Jay Leno has ever done. Patrick Stewart also returns to briefly narrate the tale, while Mila Kunis is noticeably absent due to being pregnant at the time of filming – this absence is written into the plot, though.
Ted 2 does everything a comedy sequel should – it’s bigger, it progresses the story and, if you liked the first film, it’ll make you laugh. I’ve seen so many people reviewing Ted 2 and saying how much they “hated the first one” and how “disgusting” the humour is. Well then, you’re quite clearly not the target audience for this sequel! I feel like it’s too obvious to say but judging by these other reviews I’ve read, I’ll have to - it’s the same inappropriate and offensive humour that the first film delivered in spades, so if you didn’t like that then you won’t like this. It’s quite simple. At the end of the day, it’s a film about a talking teddy bear who smokes pot, drinks beer and is convinced the ‘F’ in ‘F. Scott Fitzgerald’ stands for ‘Fuck’. It’s not high-brow entertainment, nor is it trying to be. It’s just a daft 2 hours of escapism. And there are some really funny things in Ted 2. I wasn’t expecting to laugh out loud, and I’m not ashamed to say I did.
There are some issues. Like most comedies of today, it is – if you’ll pardon the pun – overstuffed. It’s far too long for a comedy about a talking teddy bear, clocking in just shy of 2 hours. It feels like several films in one – the courtroom stuff make it feel like a courtroom movie, but there’s also some road movie thrown in and a general buddy movie feel. Most of the jokes land and the pacing means this hybridising of genres isn’t too much of an issue, but some things felt unnecessary. For example, returning villain Donny (Giovanni Ribisi) brings back the main flaw of the first film – the out-of-place tension in the final act. It just feels like it’s come out of a different film. But who cares? Even at its worst, Ted 2 isn’t unwatchable.
Ted 2 isn’t better nor worse than Ted, it’s just more of the same – but not in a bad way. It’s just a continuation of the story. I won’t deny it, it made me laugh and I had a fun, easy evening with it. After a stressful day, I lay on the sofa in my pyjamas and switched my brain off for a couple of hours. Sometimes that’s what you need. Not much plot and certainly no depth. But when all is said and done, it boils down to this. Did you like Ted? If the answer is yes, you’ll like Ted 2. If the answer is no, you won’t.
Ted 2 is an entertaining sequel and despite some shortcomings, earns a solid 3/5.
A new James Bond movie, in my opinion, is generally always a good thing. There’ll be an exciting mission, a mysterious enemy, and new ways of pushing Bond to his limits. So what the hell happened to this one, then?
After the massive success of Skyfall Bond is back with a new adventure in Spectre, out now on Blu-Ray and DVD, where things get an awful lot like Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation(watch the two together and you’ll know what I mean). After a disagreement with the new M over an unofficial visit to Mexico, Bond is suspended as M comes to terms with the privately-backed Joint Intelligence Service trying to take over, with their new technology which they believe will sort out the ‘outdated’ 007 programme. Despite being suspended, Bond follows the orders from the previous M to finish off a mission whilst remaining undetected by the head of the Joint Intelligence Service, C.
I’ll start with what was good, as admittedly there were some very good parts. The first scene, for instance, is probably the most intense start I’ve seen to a Bond film, and it was done brilliantly. From the very beginning we’re thrown into Dia de Muertos (Mexican Day of the Dead), and get to witness a nail-bitingly tense fight staged within an open helicopter. The camera work is beautiful, as always, and many of the scenes from then on are set up to look like classical paintings, which makes it very easy on the eye.
We also get to see some interesting development of the main characters – we’ve got Bond, who’s now effectively rogue, and then Q and Moneypenny, who are both torn between helping Bond and staying loyal to their jobs. Unfortunately, there’s nowhere near as much development for the other characters – C’s personality seems to keep changing throughout, and the women seem little more than something to calm Bond down after a stressful day (although, admittedly, this is pretty much the case in all of the Bond movies). Even our main antagonist seems under-developed, despite a good performance from Christopher Waltz. When I think back the story, it was almost as if he was written in as an afterthought.
And it just goes downhill from there, as I noticed very quickly what the overriding problem was – there was nothing new about it. As always, we see Bond find a new car, a new gadget, and a new girl, before taking on an enemy who’s presented a new set of problems. There’s no originality like Skyfall though, which I find hard to believe considering the diverse plot. Everything felt like I’d already watched it – even the first car chase was distinctly average and, instead of showcasing the new Aston Martin like previous films, only managed to get across just how reckless a driver Bond now is. He might as well have been driving a modded Ford Fiesta and it would have gained the same result.
This one has been hard for me to rate – honestly, if I’d watched this as a standalone film, then it would have been very entertaining, and I would have rated it much higher. In reality, it’s probably the most formulaic Bond film I’ve seen and so it only just gets an average rating from me.
If you want to watch another Bond film, maybe it’s best you just watch Skyfall again. 3/5.
Do you know what was great about the original Assassin's Creed game that launched in 2007? In some missions and even it's design it felt like you were an assassin in the shadows, stalking your prey and waiting for your right moment to strike. In a lot of ways, the Assassin's Creed Chronicles Trilogy very much feels like that great condensed stealth gameplay compressed into a 2.5D plane.
Developed by Climax Studios and out now on Xbox One and PlayStation 4, Assassin's Creed Chronicles Trilogy is a collection of three games (hence trilogy) that go from China, to India, and then finally to Russia. Before going a little deeper into those three games I will give one word summaries for each one – China: Basic, India: Refined, and Russia: Varied. While none of them reshape the genre, there is a lot to enjoy within its compact design.
ACC: China is set in 1526 and you take control of Shao Jun. The exciting thing about this female protagonist is that she was trained by none other than Ezio Auditore de Firenze. After she was trained by the iconic Assassin's Creed character, she returns to China to enact revenge on the Templar group known as Eight Tigers. The game, just like the other two is played out on a 2.5D plane as you move from one side of the screen to the other sneaking past enemies and using your equipment. Unfortunately, China is by far the weakest in the trilogy despite having possibly the most interesting setting. The gameplay itself takes the best part of the original Assassin's Creed titles and distils them into a side-scrolling affair. The result is pretty good, even if the flow of the gameplay and combat doesn't hold up. Everything feels quite basic and surprisingly dull. The moment to moment gameplay is peaks and valleys with nothing in between and can feel quite jarring.
The next one up is ACC: India which is colourful and refines a lot of the problems with the first game. The biggest improvement with India is the pacing and flow of the gameplay. ACC: China went from slow stealth moments to fast action-packed sequences that required a precision that was almost frustrating. While moments do switch up here once again, the flow of how it all comes together is much more enjoyable. There are more gadgets at your disposal for more fun encounters.
If ACC: China is OK and India is good, then ACC: Russia is great. It is the best and most pure entry in the trilogy. It feels like everything had been learned about in the other two titles and the last one was their "real" release. Everything feels varied, especially in your stealthy approaches. In the other two you really only had bushes, pillars, and dark areas to hide from guards. In ACC: Russia, you have so many options to approach ant given situation. You can call a telephone in a different room to distract a guard or shoot out a breaker box in order to restrict their vision. The fact that this takes place during the 20th century means there are new mechanics to take advantage of. The more modern world means there are different environments to enjoy as well as better designed buildings. ACC: Russia feels varied in almost every way.
However, there are some problems that persist throughout the entire trilogy, and that are the actual combat mechanics. It's forcibly bad in order to persuade you to try a stealthy approach, but it's just not fun whatsoever. The other problem ties into the combat and that's the upgrades. You unlock upgrades by surpassing point thresholds. The biggest point rewards though are tied to a stealthy approach by either not being seen or taking out guards without anyone noticing. This restricts the "freedom" it employs and leads you to multiple retries of completing sections stealthily in order to actually improve your character.
A trilogy where the last one is actually the best. 3/5.
Out now on Blu-Ray and DVD, The Martian, Ridley Scott’s newest sci-fi film, presents one of the scariest notions of all time – being completely on your own. Matt Damon plays Mark Watney, one of the Ares III crew, who are on a 31 Sol NASA mission to Mars to explore the Acidalia Planitia. Unfortunately it doesn’t go quite to plan when a storm is much more violent than predicted, meaning that the crew have to make a quick exit. On the journey back to the vessel Watney is struck by a piece of flying debris. The crew have to leave, under the assumption that they’re now a man down.
After the storm we discover that this is not the case at all – Watney awakens due to the low oxygen warning of his suit, and makes his way back to the base. When he realises that he’s been left behind, he realises he now has only two choices: survive or die.
I’d been excited about watching this film for a while, and so naturally had built up a sort of expectation around what it was going to be like. It turned out my expectation was nothing like the reality – I’d envisaged a film about loneliness and despair, when actually the main theme was hope. From the very beginning we witness a man in the most terrible of situations turn it around to make a success out of what he has, despite the dwindling resources and the fact that he’s the only man on the planet. Luckily Watney is a botanist, and so he goes through a series of small achievements which results in the sustainable growing of potatoes, despite being stranded on a planet with no water or liveable atmosphere.
I felt perhaps the pace was a bit too quick at the start – the crew left the planet within the first ten minutes, and then Watney managed to go from stranded man to successful colonisation within about half an hour. It got me thinking though – to go into space one needs to be ridiculously clever to begin with, and so perhaps it wasn’t that unrealistic an achievement (it did make me feel rather inferior though!). I’d liked to have seen more in between bits though; the film was so captivating that it could easily have been half an hour longer and still been watchable.
Interestingly, the film felt a bit like a documentary at points – in particular when focusing on the progress from Mission Control. The filming was varied and so kept the tension there (it could easily have been portrayed as a slow and morbid journey, which I don’t think would have worked quite so well). The scenery was stunning, and both Jordan and Hungary made very realistic Mars landscapes. In fact, the whole film felt realistic – although I can’t comment on how realistic the actual science behind it was (some parts did seem quite far out), it honestly felt like everything was actually happening. Everything was believable, from the location to NASA to the characters, and I could almost feel the effort that Watney was putting into his survival.
On the subject of characters, Matt Damon gave a brilliant performance as Mark Watney, and the rest of the main cast (Jessica Chastain, Kristen Wigg, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Jeff Daniels and Sean Bean) all played convincing roles alongside him. Donald Glover gave a particularly enigmatic performance as astrophysicist Rich Purnell – although he wasn’t a main part, he certainly added something.
Overall, the film was pretty darn good. Casting was perfect, the plot seemed believable, and clearly a lot of effort had been put into making it. I’m not happy about sound effects being added in when the spaceship was in flight (rookie mistake, Scott – why would you do this?!), but apart from that, I’d thoroughly recommend The Martian to anyone, whether they’re a fan of space movies or not.
I’m going to be completely honest from the outset: I’ve never heard of Arslan nor have I indulged in much Anime or Manga. However I have learned that Arslan is a Manga and Anime that is quite popular in Japan, and even though you or I may have never heard of it the game based on it is pretty damn good even, if it follows the very familiar musou game design associated with its developer.
Developed by Omega Force and out now on Xbox One and PlayStation 4, Arslan: The Warriors of Legend is a very familiar game for fans of Omega Force games. Arslan sees you take on thousands of enemies in hack-and-slash encounters within massive battlefields, quite a lot like the Dynasty Warriors series except visually the game is strikingly different. There is a cel-shaded look that immediately stands out even if the fidelity isn’t brilliant. Despite the smooth look to things, the outline of a lot of characters and assets are quite jaggy. This can be forgiven though thanks to the gameplay. This type of game has never felt as smooth or free-flowing as Arslan: The Warriors of Legend. This is amplified by the excellent animations on show. The flashy gameplay married with tight controls make this game such a joy to play even if the actual game design doesn’t hold up.
The game’s Story mode is surprisingly steeped in, well, story. If you’ve become accustomed to these types of games then you’ll expect some exposition, some story progression, and a pinch of personality. Because this has proper source material, Arslan’s story mode is littered in cut-scenes, story progression, and characters. It’s so deep that the main menu has an encyclopaedia to help you break down the entire world, characters, and get some proper backstory. If you are a fan of the series or even just want something with plenty of lore then Arslan has it in the arse-load. It’s quite convoluted but they’ve done their best to break down a huge series in essentially a single installment.
Outside the story, you have Free Mode which allows you to play any of the levels, as well as a few bonus ones using any of the main characters you control throughout the story. This is when things get really fun. Possibly the biggest surprise about Arslan is just how diverse and fun every character is. You have your standard melee and range choices, but there are some unique ones that add spice to the mix. There’s a character here that uses a magical paint brush to attack enemies and create traps on the ground, as well as one that uses the music coming from his lute to take out enemies. Everyone feels different but controls are kept tight, responsive, and fun.
Gameplay is quite simplistic and you complete standard missions against hundreds, and sometimes thousands of enemies. To add some depth to the core gameplay is a card system. When completing missions or even when taking out some higher ranked enemies, they may drop cards. These cards can be equipped to your character to boost your stats. Those same cards can also be synthesised to create a more power card whose stats depend on the ones you’ve synthesised together. It doesn’t add a lot but there’s something so satisfying about collecting cards and seeing numbers go up.
It’s very easy to get bored in these types of games and if you’re not a fan in the first place then chances are you won’t suddenly find love in Arslan: The Warriors of Legend. However, if you’re open to these games what you’ll find here is a solid and fun game with plenty of world-building and flashiness.
