I love my technology. Especially if it means leaving less of a carbon footprint. Which is why I’ll be waiting ever so impatiently for the day when (crisp) colour e-ink technology is built into laptops, giving them a MASSIVE battery-life boost. I’m not talking a full day. I’m talking four, five days. A week without needing to charge your laptop? Technology that doesn’t produce glare? I’d pay good money for that. This is my dream technology: fusing the old and the new. We started with the printed paper. Then the e-book reader. We’re getting the paper-ebook reader soon (imagine reading on a bendable plastic that isn’t paper, but has words that looks printed on paper, in colour). See how it goes? To hell with your 3D glasses, this is what technology should be about. Saving the trees.

I’m not even making this up:

Those aren’t newspapers.

Movie Review: Kick Ass

***** This pseudo-review comes without a synopsis. If you want that, go on IMDB. I’m expecting you to know what I’m talking about so you’ve got to watch the film first and then agree with me here.*****

I finally got around to watching Kick Ass. I actually didn’t plan to watch it this late (last week in cinemas, boohoo!) because this preview was the only one that caught my eye the last time I went to the cinema. I’ve been so out of touch with current films and the last time I saw one was so long ago I don’t even remember what film it was (!). So, naturally, I was all pumped up to have a blast, since Hit Girl pretty much stole the preview I saw.

I still stand by my first impression of the film: the movie should’ve been called “Hit Girl” instead. It’s not everyday I agree with Nicolas Cage – and his character in this film was just plain creepy – but Kick Ass did get his ass kicked eighty percent of the time, so: Hit Girl, the movie.

Also, I went to this with high expectations because my friend was hyping it up so much. I think that did a lot of damage to the movie, which is me saying how Kick Ass isn’t much of a ‘rewatchable’ film. You might see it again for the stunts and the violence, but it won’t be as awesome as … say, Finding Nemo (har har I’m being so damn unfair comparing these two), which is fun no matter how many times you re-watch it. Kick Ass just isn’t that charming.

Unfortunately, it wasn’t that funny too. You’ll smirk once in a while at a witty comeback, but you’ll probably not get stitches from those. Crude fratboy humour was a novelty when it was restyled in Superbad, and it stayed a novelty then. My friend calls this a superhero film, and I can obviously see why she thinks that, but I disagree. It doesn’t have the same ring, the same vibe as a superhero movie, and I think it’s more of a spoof or a parody of some sort, though halfway through the movie sorta became a caricature of itself, which was also roughly when it stopped being fun. It tried too hard, and if it didn’t, I would have liked it more. I don’t know how to put this in words, but it left me unsatisfied. I mean, Red Mist got a fair amount of screen time, but even then he felt underused. Sure, that cute little ending screams KICK ASS 2, with him doing a Harry Osbourne, but they didn’t milk his character’s worth. I don’t even care that he’s going to shoulder the second one; I hate leaving feeling like I paid for a commercial.

Last and least, I hope Kick Ass’s love interest gets killed.

I’m totally willing to forgive the entire movie if Hit Girl got a movie or a TV-series, though.

Not a review: Percy Jackson & the Olympians: The Lightning Thief

Percy Jackson was not so good. Other than how awesome the Underworld looked when they were being ferried by the boat guy, and the line “WHY ARE YOU TAKING OFF YOUR PANTS?!” it was quite the disappointment. I know, I know, it’s Chris Columbus, what can you expect, artistic and inspirational direction? But you know what, I was telling myself, the worst that could happen is that he’d be dead loyal to the book with no artistic input whatsoever, except… except he wasn’t (loyal, I mean)!

***** The next few paragraphs will be a geek rant about how the movie wasn’t a direct adaptation of the book. *****

Look. The main lure of Book 1 is the freaking fact that PERCY HAS NO IDEA HE’S A DEMIGOD. HE DOESN’T KNOW WHO HIS FATHER IS. HE FINDS OUT LIKE IN THE MIDDLE, WHEN THE TRIDENT APPEARS OVER HIS HEAD. For the first half of said book, he’s a geek, and then when he’s in Camp Half Blood, he’s thrown in the Hermes (I think) camp, because that’s where all the demigods go before their parent god claims them. He then makes an enemy out of Clarissa, the daughter of Ares, the God of War. In fact it is she who sorta gave everyone clues that Percy was the son of Poseidon, because when she tried to dunk his head in toilet bowl water it missed him and hit her instead.

But no, Poseidon has a hissy fit with Zeus at the start, right after he emerges from the bloody sea as a giant for the world to see. And Chrion tells him right away he’s the son of Poseidon. Shame on you Chris. Exposition is LAZY. NOBODY in Camp Half-blood knows he’s Poseidon’s offspring, that’s the point of half the book!

Dammit, why does every fantasy have to come down to bloody dragon fights? Why does Camp Half-blood look so primitive? If they can add wings to Converse sneakers, use iPods as mirrors, and video chat through a fucking Macintosh, why the hell are they living in log houses? Book 1 isn’t that steeped in action you know, it’s about Percy and Daddy issues, which even the movie managed to get wrong because Daddy IGNORES his son (the only acknowledgement is the trident claim for like 5 seconds), and certainly does not whisper advice into his son’s head.

Oh, yeah: HOW COME THEY CUT CLARISSA OUT? CLARISSA, PERCY’S FUCKING ARCH ENEMY?! CLARISSA, WHO GOES ON QUESTS WITH PERCY IN THE FUTURE AND BOTH RUINS AND SAVES THE DAY (more or less)? It’s like watching Titanic without freaking Rose in it.

And… and… why are they suddenly all COOL? The three leads in the book were as cool as the three leads in Harry Potter, which is NOT COOL, but here Percy is antsy and rebellious, and Grover is a black guy who slangs half the time. Look, there are times when you simply can’t just change the race of a character. Grover is not black, end of story. It’s not fucking racist. It’s how the bloody character was written. I also have a problem with the actor who played him, he was insincere with his lines and basically trying too hard to be a smart ass. Book Grover was an even bigger nerd than Percy, okay. He’s got a heart of gold and chews tin cans when he’s nervous. Mostly he stutters and doesn’t freaking slang. To me Mr. Tumnus is a far better likeness to Grover than Movie Grover. *Book Spoiler* I can’t imagine Movie Grover going off alone with any form of reed pipe to search for Pan. Did you see that part in Las Vegas where Movie Grover was staring in awe at all the buildings and lights? Book Grover would have been sad, because he’s all about nature. Hello, the guy went off alone to search for Pan against the wishes of his Elder Satyres! He became an outcast for the sake of finding the Nature God!

And I don’t know if this considers as a spoiler, but:

How come everyone was so chill when they found out Percy was Poseidon’s kid? The Big Three (Zeus, Poseidon, Hades) swore on the river Styx that they wouldn’t sire children because they were too powerful, and this plays an EXTREMELY huge part later in the books. It’s practically the freaking backbone of the series. If there’s going to be another movie that reveals this, then sorry for this outburst, but from the way things are going, like how they turned Book 1 into an action adventure and how Clarissa was cut out totally, I don’t think that’s going to happen. Also Annabeth has a huge admiration for Luke that goes back a looong way, but in the movie she has no trouble looking Luke in the eye and cutting him up with her knife. A knife that according to the later books, was a gift from Luke himself.

Which, speaking of knives, Percy’s blade is just a retractable pen thing now, huh? How about the fact that it’s got a cool name, like Riptide? And that it’s made of celestial bronze (which can hurt magical creatures but doesn’t hurt humans). And oh, oh, that it reappears in Percy’s pockets so he can never, ever lose it? Talking about blades … (and I know I’m getting carried away here) Luke also has one, except it’s much more badass since it’s made of both steel and celestial bronze, which means it can hurt mortals and magical creatures. And THIS one is called Backbiter. Of course, both swords, like the twin wands in Harry Potter, have elaborate histories.

Finally, I don’t recall seeing a resolution for Hades. He gets knocked out and put into a lightning-induced coma by his wife, and …?

Edit: Just read Wikipedia again to refresh my memory. It rings a bell but barely, but apparently the bolt wasn’t the only stolen item; Hade’s Helm of Darkness was stolen too, and that was why they accused one another. AND the thief of the bolt was Ares, another god, NOT Luke. Luke stole the Helm.

Movie Review: The Flyboys

You kind of have to tip your hat off to a movie that’s capable of bringing you out of a reviewing hiatus. The Flyboys is amazing. I could go on about it all day, but this isn’t  a movie I feel that deserves to be *ruined* by high expectations, so I’ll try and refrain from hyping it up. Not because I’m not convinced it wouldn’t meet those high expectations, but because I’d like you to keep an open and fair mind when I say it was epic if you think about the 2 million dollars they had to make this. Two million, dude. And yet it still soars higher than a considerable number of Hollywood blockbusters.

Also, I thought the acting was extremely good, considering this is a kids’ movie. Sort of. It’s about two friends who get themselves stranded on a private plane, and when I say kids, I mean, like, kids around the age of twelve. So they have to land that plane themselves, and… honestly, I’m reluctant to tell you the plot at all, because it’s one of those rare genres that heavily relies on suspense. I would personally call this a crime-adventure, though it has a very good blend of suspense (as I mentioned earlier), humor, adventure, and … er, family values. If you remember Holes, the other family-friendly movie I won’t shudder to recommend (also the one starring Shia Labeouf), The Flyboys kind of gives off that same vibe. Anyhow, it’s an enjoyable film, and I doubt you’ll regret spending time on it. It really, really ought to get itself a theatrical release!

The Hunger Games – A Proposed Cast List

It’s been too long. But now I’m back! Not with a review (though I’ve recently seen UP and New Moon), but with a proposed cast list for Suzanne Collins’ awesome trilogy, The Hunger Games. Who cares if it’s some kind of YA-fiction the likes of Battle Royale, or Death Race, or The Condemned, or even Survivor? It was AWESOME, plus I like murderous outplay, outlast, outlive mind games. I’m bloodthirsty that way. If you’ve read it, and are looking forward to the movie they’re making based on it, then you probably don’t want the movie screwed with horrid actors (because the book was awesome). I was inspired to do this because I saw a YouTube video of the same topic, except that person decided to cast Megan Fox as Katniss. Thankfully I’m not that idiotic.

I take into account looks, (history of) acting ability, popularity (the lack thereof is often good), and the shadow of a personality I can sniff just from looking at a photo of the actor. I mean, at least I try.

And oh yes, of course I ripped some of them off from other lists I found on the internet. It just means they’ve got my stamp of approval and I can’t think of anyone else better.

Katniss Everdeen (Danielle Panabaker, Christian Serratos)

Katniss was a tough one, and I had to steal these people from lists I’ve seen. I haven’t even heard of these people before in my life, but they look the part of Katniss in a very simplistic way. Best yet, I can imagine Danielle Panabaker to have chemistry with BOTH my cast choice for Peeta and Gale. Christian would be my second choice, because she just has that very simple Katniss-bowgirl look. So: Danielle for her chemistry and ability to carry off the romance angle with Peeta, and Christian for her huntress look.

Peeta Mellark (Sterling Knight)

Baker-boy face. ‘Nuff said.

Gale Hawthorne (Gaspard Ulliel)

Charming, mysterious, defined features, dark hair. Gaspard Ulliel completely fits the description from the book, looks the part of a hunter who kills with brains than brawn (remember those traps!), isn’t maddeningly muscular or cumbersome, and basically is someone I can imagine stalking prey in the forest.

Primrose “Prim” Everdeen (Jodelle Ferland)

Who wouldn’t want to sacrifice herself for this face, really?

Haymitch Abernathy (Robert Downey Jr., Gary Oldman)

Well, you know the look I’m going for. Intelligent, cunning drunk. Downey Jr. looks a drunk, and Gary Oldman has an ability to disappear into his characters. I’m imagining Sirius Black here. If he could pull that insane prisoner off, Haymitch shouldn’t be a problem.

Cinna (Hugh Dancy)

He looks like a stylist! An extra nice one! Who’s clever and isn’t with the Capitol!

Effie Trinket (Kristin Chenoweth)

Avox girl (Laura Pepon)

Rue (Yara Shahaidi)

Frankly I didn’t imagine Rue to be black. But Yara Shahaidi certainly has the charm and lightness of Rue.

Foxface (Sophie Anna Everhard)

She strikes me to have an extremely sly face. It’s the eyes and the smile.

Cato (Sebastion Stan)

I think he has the face of an “alpha male”, and that of a killer. More brawn than brains, but not exactly stupid either. Looks trained, too.

Clove (TBC)

Thresh (TBC)

Glimmer (TBC)

Movie Review: Harry Potter And The Half-Blood Prince

(This review contains spoilers not only for this film but for the remaining of the series, and anyway I’d prefer it to be read after you’ve seen the movie.)

I paid eight bucks for this for the first time in more than a year of free screenings, and I’ll stand by my previous Order Of The Phoenix-based opinion that David Yates is as useful to the franchise as a wet matchstick. It was not a waste of money per se, since the Harry Potter movies are something I would throw money at just to see it in crazy cinema scale and dim lighting, but other than that I think I’d take a minute to mourn for the last two movies led also by this uninspired, boring turd of a director. It seems that Yates hasn’t realised that in a cinema, cameras have the ability to capture more than the 4 by 3 of a TV screen. Given a Confundus Charm I would have led Alfonso Cuarón (director of Prisoner of Azkaban, my favourite of the movies) into directing the rest of the series, and even then he would’ve done a better job in his confused state.

A lot of people are commenting on how Yate’s movie was a faithful adaptation, about how you can’t ask for more, really – and I understand that it would be a foolish thing to ask to have the entire book made into a movie verbatim. But consider this: were the romances SO important to the plot? The way I see it, Harry Potter is three-quarters action and adventure, and only one-quarter romance comedy. Heck, most of the story’s comic relief came in the form of Ron’s insensitive remarks and the Weasley twins. What Yates did was to eliminate the natural, seasoned humour of the twins, and turn Ron into some romantic cheeseball – a role I felt Rupert Grint wasn’t as comfortable with. Also a few-second glimpse of the twin’s joke shop does not compensate the fact that they didn’t crack a single joke throughout the 2.5 hour movie. The twins are so well-loved that removing their humour just doesn’t feel right. And while I’m at it, what the hell happened to Neville? I’m sure readers would know by now that he plays a significant role in the ending, yet here he is in this movie, reduced to being a waiter at Slughorn’s party.

But my greatest gripe with the film is its lack of focus on all things important, and its unnecessary, drawn out scenes with everything else secondary in the books. Yates just HAD to focus on the romantic sub-plot, didn’t he? This wouldn’t be particularly bad had the actors been good at sexual tension and all that, but one gets the feeling that Ginny was cast without much thought in the first movie, and it’s only now that Bonnie Wright has massive shoes to fill because J. K. Rowling decided she would be the Chosen One’s girlfriend. So because recasting is awkward and disruptive, they stuck with Wright and gave her a kissing scene with Harry. Now, this one kiss is important and crucial, almost like the Everest of Romantic Sub Plots, so its existence is inevitable, but what’s with the excessive touching between Harry and Ginny? What’s the point of drawing attention to the film series’ weakness – the young casts’ inability to act properly? Sure the actors have come far and improved, but it is still silly to tango with scenes calling for a certain standard of acting, particularly scenes that aren’t that important. It’s like refusing a short cut… and then looking silly for it.

Next up – the severe lack of focus on Dumbledore’s death. HELLO KNOCK KNOCK IT’S HIS FUCKING DEATH. What, you can give Lavender Brown 20 seconds to draw a heart in her condensed breath, but can’t let Dumbledore have a longer death scene, with some emotional build up and crowd-reaction scenes? The last time I felt this unsatisfied by a character’s death was Sirius’s one, which was really Rowling’s fault. Oh, I know, it must be because wrinkled old men aren’t entitled to extra seconds. I’m no cinematographer or director, but one shot of Dumbledore falling off the tower, and the next a close-up of his dead face? I’m seeing a movie I made in my imagination when I first read the book, and am certain that a wide shot would have had a greater impact. Dumbledore’s frail body, such a tiny speck in the surrounding area. Also I was not completely happy with Gambon’s utterance of his final words (“Don’t. Don’t.” Something like that.). I know I’m digressing but I imagined much more fear when he was saying this to Snape. Because, you know, it was all an act to make Snape seem like a heartless traitor. And for the first time, I did not agree with Rickman’s delivery of Snape’s “Aveda Kedavra”. It was without the ferocity that Snape usually unleashes on Harry, and despite the fact that killing Dumbledore was all part of the plan, you’d think that Snape-Rickman would try to be more convincing at wanting to murder Dumbledore. The only good thing that came out with the whole tower scene was surprisingly Tom Felton, because I was actually quite touched by his delivery of Draco’s, “I have no choice. I have to kill you… because if I don’t… he’ll kill me.” line. Not word for word of course, but it was a moment of great acting and I could never take Draco seriously with his OTT sneering.

Ok, I got carried away, sorry. This is an abrupt end to my rant because I feel like I’ve more or less mentioned everything I wanted to say, and said it in a long, long breath. I’d still recommend for people to watch it, but I wouldn’t blame them should they walk out unimpressed. That said I’m looking forward to and will pay to see the last two films of the last book in cinemas, despite them being directed by a dud.

P.S. Did anyone notice the Chinese New Year lanterns in one of the posters and in a scene? What’s up with those, anyone know?

4 YA fiction books better than Twilight

I know that if you’re a fan of the series, the last thing I should do is to belittle your shitty taste in literature. (If you’re not a fan, fucking good for you!) But since you’re a fan, I don’t exactly respect your tastes anyway, so belittling would be a natural reaction.

There’s a reason why Twilight and its red-and-black-themed brethren aren’t recommended reading by schools. Well, look up. Do you see an angel descending from the heavens, scowling in distaste yet aiming right for you? That’s me, bitch. I’ve come to save your sorry little soul from the evil clutches of Bad Authors. Here’s a list of books you should be reading for your own redemption.

Unwind by Neal Shusterman

From the jacket: In a society where unwanted teens are salvaged for their body parts, three runaways fight the system that would “unwind” them.

Connor’s parents want to be rid of him because he’s a troublemaker. Risa has no parents and is being unwound to cut orphanage costs. Lev’s unwinding has been planned since his birth, as part of his family’s strict religion. Brought together by chance, and kept together by desperation, these three unlikely companions make a harrowing cross-country journey, knowing their lives hang in the balance. If they can survive until their eighteenth birthday, they can’t be harmed — but when every piece of them, from their hands to their hearts, are wanted by a world gone mad, eighteen seems far, far away.

Why it’s better than Twilight: Whereas Twilight was all “Kissmekissmekissmemememe Edwaaard!”, Neal Shusterman knows what it means to balance sexual tension with action and circumstance. I personally don’t qualify Twilight as being particularly good at the subject of sexual tension, because Bella and Edward are described making out every tenth page or so. If you’re into cheesy romance, fine. If you like a book that demands you to read between the lines, a book that doesn’t spoon feed you the details, read Unwind… and feel the love/lust amid all the danger. Because of the danger. I’m serious.

The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins (Hunger Games Trilogy, Book 1)

From the jacket: Katniss is a 16-year-old girl living with her mother and younger sister in the poorest district of Panem, the remains of what used be the United States. Long ago the districts waged war on the Capitol and were defeated. As part of the surrender terms, each district agreed to send one boy and one girl to appear in an annual televised event called, “The Hunger Games.” The terrain, rules, and level of audience participation may change but one thing is constant: kill or be killed. When Kat’s sister is chosen by lottery, Kat steps up to go in her place.

Why it’s better than Twilight: I shudder to even compare these two books. Between Twilight and The Hunger Games is a vast plain so huge, the distance would make the circumference of the Sun look tiny. The Hunger Games is fear, death, pain, brutality, survival and teaser romance, basically The Condemned and Battle Royale put together and injected with steroids. Oh, and they’re also accomplishing the same results with kids below the age of 18. Twilight is death, and… sucking. See the difference?

Writer’s note: They’re making this into a movie.

Everlost by Neal Shusterman (yeah, again!) (Skinjacker Trilogy, Book 1)

From the jacket: Nick and Allie don’t survive the car accident…but their souls don’t exactly get where they’re supposed to get either. Instead, they’re caught halfway between life and death, in a sort of limbo known as Everlost: a shadow of the living world, filled with all the things and places that no longer exist. It’s a magical yet dangerous place where bands of lost children run wild and anyone who stands in the same place too long sinks to the center of the Earth.

When they find Mary, the self-proclaimed queen of lost kids, Nick feels like he he’s found a home. But Allie isn’t satisfied spending eternity between worlds. Against all warnings, Allie begins learning the “Criminal Art” of haunting and ventures into dangerous territory, where a monster called the McGill threatens all the souls of Everlost.

Why it’s better than Twilight: It’s a book with much more imagination and creativity put into it than what Meyer bothered to do for Twilight. Shusterman’s take on the afterlife is wild and original, where souls of the dead can’t die yet are still exposed to many different kinds of dangers… things worse than death. Things that don’t end because souls can’t die again, so they end up getting trapped for eternity. Now tell me what’s so great about a vampire that sparkles in the sun, can’t get fried, and can only be killed by a beheading? Oh wait, not just a beheading, right? The stump needs to be burnt or something? Point is, there is not much danger involved. And characters are flat if you don’t care enough for them except to use them in sexual fantasies. Meyer seriously underestimated the power and importance of fragility and sacrifice here. Being invincible is cool… up to a certain point only. I’d like to think of it as the nail in the coffin of her writing career.

Writer’s note: They’re also making this into a movie.

The Amulet of Samarkand by Jonathan Stroud (The Bartimaeus Trilogy, Book 1)

From the jacket: Nathaniel is eleven years old and a magician’s apprentice, learning the traditional arts of magic. All is well until he has a life-changing encounter with Simon Lovelace, a magician of unrivaled ruthlessness and ambition. When Lovelace brutally humiliates Nathaniel in public, Nathaniel decides to speed up his education, teaching himself spells way beyond his years. With revenge on his mind, he masters one of the toughest spells of all and summons Bartimaeus, a five-thousand-year-old djinni, to assist him. But summoning Bartimaeus and controlling him are two different things entirely, and when Nathaniel sends the djinni out to steal Lovelace’s greatest treasure, he finds himself caught up in a whirlwind of magical espionage, murder, and rebellion.

Why it’s better than Twilight: I’m sure this won’t be the first time you’ll hear someone complain about how mechanical Stephenie Meyer’s narration is. It’s grammatically correct, but lifeless and without voice (also another reason why the Harry Potter books are better). Stroud breathes sarcastic, mischievous personality into Bartimaeus the djinni, and the three books of the trilogy have been written with footnotes – the djinni’s own commentary on every page it narrates. Notice I say “it narrates”, because the book isn’t entirely all from the djinni’s POV. This is my only gripe with the book, because he is a much more colourful character than Nathaniel, although Nathaniel has his own darker traits. Still, this book has my recommendation, and Stroud’s view of magic is a different world from the Potter universe, and I can appreciate its originality.

Writer’s note: Also being made into a movie. It’s like Hollywood decided to let someone else better do the storytelling.

Hiatus.

I’m going on a break. No more reviews until I can watch movies again without being reminded of my job. Or ex-job. Which, did I mention, I left with utmost glee? I won’t start bitching about it, and I never thought I’d live to see the day that has me saying “OMFG Halp!” from an overload of movies, but yeah, there can be too much of a good thing.

I may occasionally return to upload super short rants about movies, but without the free screenings anymore you can expect reviews to slow to a trickle. I will also be busy with school, so that’s that.

Go read the archives or something. But just so you know, I appreciate you reading the stuff I write.

Movie Review: Forrest Gump

You know, this might be the first movie I’ve seen that has no trouble saying “run away” when things get out of hand. This is what Forrest Gump does for a large portion of the movie, yet in what may be the most ironic turn of events, he accomplishes great things running away. What I love about Gump is that the film doesn’t ever equate saving your own hide as being cowardly.

As for it being one of IMDB.com’s Top #250 films, I’m convinced it deserves the spot. The hype? Not so much. That’s to say Forrest Gump is a movie that could do without critics ranting about how great it is. It’s not a movie that needs to be punished because everyone else had high expectations after hearing the hype. Forrest Gump isn’t as wonderful as everyone makes it out to be – it isn’t great enough to wow those with raised expectations.

Why Tom Hanks wasn’t the first choice for Gump remains a mystery to me, because it is his simplistic yet intricate delivery that brings the movie to an impossible emotional level. Not that he does it directly to your face, pleading with you to sympathise with him, but rather ever so lightly, tickling but never forcibly tugging on your heartstrings. Having given Hanks a personal award for “only actor to carry off a role opposite a volleyball”, I therefore had certain expectations of the acting, and this one passed with flying colours. It’s Hank’s who’s the gem, the movie his tool.

8 Movies for Father’s Day

Father’s Day is around the corner, and… well, there are many different kinds of dads out there. To assume that every one of them enjoy sitting down to stuff like The Pursuit Of Happyness is downright bias, because “dad” doesn’t define age groups. Any guy between puberty and death has potential to be a father, and that’s a huge spectrum to take into account.

Below is a list of eight movies to choose from that we hope would cover this large demographic, and they’ve been chosen based on three things: 1. they’re actually decent, 2. they all have the highest censorship rating of M18, meaning you won’t have that big a problem watching it with the dad, and 3. they cover a good range of genres.

The Pursuit Of Happyness (PG)
Biography, Drama
An obligatory entry, this. A bit too honeyed up for this writer, and never quite meets its potential. Sorry folks, Will Smith and Jaden Smith may make a sweet father-son pair, but they don’t make nearly as interesting a movie. Recommended only if you’ve seen everything else on this list.

Finding Nemo (G)
Animation, Adventure, Comedy, Family
Because like anything that has to do with Disney, this one features a lead character with a dead/missing/non-existing mom. Sorry man, it’s Father’s Day we’re celebrating. Other than that: what rock have you been living under not to have heard the hype about this six years ago?

Outlander (M18 for Violence and Some Gore, but they’re just exaggerating)
Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi
Fathering a kid may change a guy’s perspective and all that, but heeeeey, it’s a monster movie! That isn’t Godzilla! Outlander has a good story going on, and despite its low budget, isn’t a complete basket case visually. The CGI is decent, and the monster looks terrifying enough. It even glows in the dark! Oh, and it kills a bunch of people. Highly recommended for those with a taste for action and good old monster hunting, especially so when free-to-air TV has more or less broadcasted every other monster flick there is to broadcast. PG monster movies are silly, so why not rent an M18 one for the kick?

War Of The Worlds (PG)
Action, Adventure, Sci-fi, Thriller
Now, if you have a dad who’s fond of classics, we don’t actually recommend this. If you have a dad who loves Sci-Fi and alien invasion-type films, then hell yes! This one’s pretty badass and haunting, and frankly it’s surprising to see it under the PG tag. It can leave you a little psychologically scarred if you’re below the age of fourteen, so don’t say we didn’t warn you.

Fido (NC16 for Some Gory Scenes)
Comedy, Drama, Horror, Romance
Got a dad who likes the unconventional? Fido’s about taming zombies, and there are not a lot of movies that feature tamed zombies doing household chores. It’s a breath of fresh air, and it’s funny too. Lots of fake blood and effects, but seeing how half of it doesn’t look painfully real, there’s nothing to fear.

Ip Man (PG for Fighting Scenes. Thanks for stating the obvious.)
Action, Biography, Drama, History
It’s a kung-fu movie. Actually it’s Wing Chun, but that isn’t the point. The point is, there’s fighting! Dudes love fighting, right? Useful if you’ve run out of Jackie Chan movies.

King Kong (PG for Some Intense Sequences)
Adventure, Romance
It’s Peter Jackson’s version we’re talking here. Which means you can treat your dad to an updated version of Kong where he isn’t a toy climbing up a five inch skyscraper model.

[Rec] (NC16 for Some Gore and Coarse Language)
Drama, Horror, Thriller
Our wild card: he may love you or hate you for this. It’s scary, and then it’s good. Word of warning: it’s in Spanish. Sure, get the U.S English remake Quarrantine if you must, but it just isn’t as crazy as the original. You may want to empty your bladder and grab a few pillows first, though.