Ashes to Ashes: Series 1 (2008)

With Life on Mars – and the journey of time-travelling cop Sam Tyler – neatly wrapped up after two stellar seasons, the existence of sequel series Ashes to Ashes clearly owes to one thing and one thing only: Detective Chief Inspector Gene Hunt.

Philip Glenister's brutish, scene-stealing cop is back front and centre in Ashes to Ashes alongside Life on Mars sidekicks Ray Carling (Dean Andrews) and Chris Skelton (Marshall Lancaster), who have left Manchester to tackle the criminal scum of London. The trio are brought back to life when police psychologist Alex Drake (Spooks' Keeley Hawes) awakes in 1981 after being shot during the pursuit of a criminal in 2008. Like Tyler before her, Drake finds herself trapped in the past and working with Hunt and his team.

By the time Ashes to Ashes' first season wrapped up on ABC1 last week, it had more or less escaped the vast shadow of Life on Mars. The season's central arc, which saw Drake fighting to prevent the death of her parents in a car bombing, was engaging stuff, and her urge to return to her daughter in the present day meant Drake's even more determined to return to the present day than Tyler was.

Unfortunately, the show stumbles in overcoming the expectations attached to a sequel series. The transition from Life on Mars' gritty depiction of seventies Britain to the glitz and glamour of the 1980s in Ashes to Ashes is accompanied by a jarring tonal shift; at times, Ashes to Ashes borders on a parody of its predecessor. The ingredients are all there (the Ford Cortina is replaced by an Audi Quattro, the pub by an Italian restaurant and the Test Card girl by a very creepy clown) but there's an obvious sense of self-awareness to Ashes to Ashes that was lacking in the original series. While it may be befitting to Hawes' character, who, having read Sam Tyler's files, is convinced that her awakening in 1981 is all in her head, the jokier tone plays contrary Life on Mars' engaging conviction to its conceit.

(Curiously, the lighter Ashes to Ashes would probably have leant itself better to a US adaptation than Life on Mars did, particularly given the in-vogue setting of the 1980s. It also wouldn't have given US producers the ammunition they needed to make a God-awful literal twist in the final episode.)

Glenister still lends great gusto to Gene Hunt who is now aware that his old school policing methods are soon to be a thing of the past (it's ripe material only hinted at in series one – here's hoping it'll be further explored in future episodes). However, Hunt, like Skelton and Carling (sporting an ace perm), seem to be painted in far broader strokes than they were in Life on Mars – witness the bombastic introduction of Gene Hunt in episode one.

Hawes, meanwhile, eventually comes into her own as Ashes to Ashes ultimately does. Her constant (and occasionally annoying) narration in early episodes makes her a less endearing protagonist than John Simm's instantly likeable Tyler, but Drake's tetchy sparring with Hunt becomes a joy to behold. She also develops an intriguing relationship with Montserrat Lombard's Sharon Granger toward the season's end.

It's difficult to assess the first season of Ashes to Ashes as an independent entity (the show even takes its title from another David Bowie song, just one of dozens of funky '80s tunes to feature), and it was always going to struggle to recapture the brilliance and originality of Life on Mars. However, there's still life left in the show's fish-out-of-water premise and with that awkward transitional phase over, Ashes to Ashes should be well placed to develop an identity of its own as the second season begins tonight.

Life on Mars (2006-2007)

For those of you wondering whether the experience of enduring Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen had turned me off popular culture, fret not. To detox, I've decided to splurge on all the critically-acclaimed telly I missed over the last few years while I was travelling the world, having life-shaping experiences and all that.

The first DVD box sets to land in my shopping basket? BBC's Life on Mars, the time travel/cop show with a premise so balmy it shouldn't work, let alone work so brilliantly.

The excellent John Simm is Sam Tyler, a Manchester police officer who is hit by a car in 2006 and wakes up in 1973. With no idea as to how or why he is living in the past, Sam struggles to fit in with the archaic, corrupt and thuggish 1970s Manchester police force led by Philip Glenister's eminently quotable Gene Hunt.

Tyler's time warp dilemma is mostly a subplot on the show, simmering in the background of each week's fresh, '70s-set police procedural. It's a time when forensic science is a developing field, when suspects and witnesses are treated with equal contempt and when it's perfectly acceptable to halt a murder investigation on account of it being "beer o'clock".

It's testament to the sheer quality of Life on Mars' that at no point does the concept ever feel naff. Jokes about the past and present are sly and subversive without ever seeming too cute; "There will never been a woman Prime Minister as long as I have a hole in my arse," bellows the sexist, racist, alcoholic, homophobe Hunt, who still remains likeable thanks to Glenister's commanding performance.

Dean Andrews as the boorish Ray Carling, Marshall Lancaster as the likeable Chris Skelton and Liz White as love interest Annie Cartwright are all perfect for their parts, but the real focus is wisely kept on Tyler and Hunt; their relationship represents a fascinating contrast between the morals and values of the 1970s and the present day.

Life on Mars is rich on nostalgia, truly capturing the essence of the seventies – the soundtrack is amazing (led by David Bowie's dizzying title track) and the cinematography drenched in all those browns and yellows commonly associated with the decade. This vivid detail of the 1970s constantly plays on Sam's mind, as he fights off voices and visions that suggest he's actually gone insane rather than back in time.

Both seasons deliver a pitch-perfect cocktail of intrigue, humour, action and drama through their highly successful meshing of the science fiction and crime genres. Thanks largely to the strengths of the show's two main actors, Life on Mars also succeeds in being strangely affecting; I challenge any other viewer not to share Sam's mixture of emotions each time he hears a voice beckon to him from the present day.

The programme's creators chose to follow the great British tradition of ending a show at the top of its game, and while Sam's predicament remains almost as intriguingly ambiguous at the end of the show as it was at the start, the finale is perfectly satisfying.

(As an aside, don't get Life on Mars confused with the gratuitous US remake, the finale of which sounds as awful as it is different from that of the UK version.)

If I sound like I'm gushing, it's because I am. Life on Mars is one of the finest shows of the decade. Thoughts on the show's sequel – the 1980s-set Ashes to Ashes, which recently premiered on ABC1 – will be here in the coming weeks.

Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009)

Up until last week, I thought I understood popular culture. I knew reality television would never produce anyone but absolute cretins. I believed celebrity gossip to be a driving force behind the spread of mankind's stupidity. And I accepted no film would ever bludgeon my senses like 2005's Stealth, the Jamie Foxx actioner about a talking plane that turns evil.

And then I saw Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen and suddenly the whole world unravelled before my very bleeding eyes.

Where to start? Perhaps by pointing out that the film's robots (and I'm including the so-called humans in this category for reasons that become clearer with each chunk of moronic dialogue mumbled between explosions) are as soulless, boorish, lumbering, clunky, hulking and unnecessary as the film itself.

Granted, this is a franchise based on a toy line (and an inane one at that) and the first film could only be considered passable in a guilty, check-your-brains-at-the-door kind of way, but my God, Revenge of the Fallen is dumb, even by Transformers standards.

It's pointless dissecting the acting, casting, music, cinematography or direction, as all are as subtle as a cannonball to the face. Quite simply, it's a film where the only thing that's special are the effects, and even those are little more than a forgettable mishmash of pixels.

There's a scene towards the end of the film where, for reasons too moronic to explain, a Decepticon is seen climbing one of Egypt's Great Pyramids. As the camera pans up to reveal the robot, the audience is treated to a bird's-eye view of a pair of giant wrecking balls clanging together. Transformer testicles. Proof positive Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen is utter bollocks.

At least I still have the undeniable, unquestionable, irrefutable assumption that no film this vapid will ever become a box office hit. Oh.

In wonder at Alice...

I try to keep this blog for review-ish posts and my Twitter feed for pointing out odd nuggets of pop culture that catch my attention. However, I couldn't resist highlighting these stunning pieces of concept art for Tim Burton's upcoming film, Alice in Wonderland.

If ever there was a story seemingly tailor-made for Burton's eccentric style, Lewis Carroll's Alice's Adventures in Wonderland must be it. The kooky director looks to be on top form here, coming off the back of the fantastic Sweeney Todd.

In a word, the art is breathtaking. These character images perfectly capture the bizarre dystopia dreamt up by Carroll for the Alice books.

Be sure to check out USATODAY.com for an interactive look at some of the artwork for the film.

Burton's Alice in Wonderland is a live action/stop motion/motion capture adaptation set 10 years after the original stories and sees the title character return to Wonderland with no recollection of her first adventure there. The usual Burton stalwarts are all set to appear, including Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham Carter, Alan Rickman and Christopher Lee. They are joined by Mia Wasikowska as Alice. The film will be released in glorious IMAX 3-D.

Star Trek (2009)

In the wake of the bland and forgettable X-Men Origins: Wolverine, J.J. Abrams' Star Trek is refreshing proof that there's still life in the old prequel/origin concept.

The punchy title of this, the eleventh entry in the Star Trek series, reflects the confident, stripped-back nature of the film. Gone are the unattractive roman numerals, indicating an impenetrable byzantine storyline, along with the confusing subtitles referring to incidents and characters that further alienated casual viewers.

Star Trek (re)introduces us to Captain James T. Kirk (Chris Pine), Spock (Zachary Quinto), Dr Leonard "Bones" McCoy (Karl Urban), Nyota Uhura (Zoe Saldaña) and the rest of the crew of the U.S.S. Enterprise as they meet for the first time at the Starfleet Academy.

However, the gang's first mission puts them to the ultimate test when they come up against a band of time-travelling Romulans (lead by Eric Bana's Captain Nero) hellbent on destroying Earth by using a drill containing an element called red matter that will open up a black hole when placed in the planet's core. Or something. To be honest, it's too convoluted to even bother taking the storyline seriously.

Despite this, the reimagined Trek (re)creates an entire universe that isn't worlds apart from our own. Wisely setting much of its action on Earth, Star Trek is populated by flawed heroes. Kirk, for instance, is strong-willed but cocky, while Spock is constantly conflicted by his mixed heritage.

The cast do a superb job of resurrecting classic characters, embodied for decades by the same actors. Pine and Quinto are particular highlights; neither opt to ape their predecessors, but both manage to retain the key elements that made the characters so iconic in the first place. Leonard Nimoy gives a heartfelt but contrived cameo as an older Spock, providing a neat link to the franchise's roots. Simon Pegg's hyperactive Scotty and Bana's forgettable Nero may be the only casting bum notes.

Rich in the themes that often dominate J.J. Abrams' TV work – chiefly, destiny – Star Trek's script ingeniously uses its central plot device of time travel to create a parallel timeline that effectively wipes clean anything made canon in the old Trek, and creates great potential for future instalments. Sure, the action and special effects dominate, but Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman's script ensures things move along so swiftly – and with enough humour – that the whole affair is never anything other than fun.

Yes, the geeks-only Star Trek franchise has been given a terrific Casino Royale-esque reboot. But whereas Casino Royale injected new life into a series that was still bringing in the big bucks, J.J. Abrams' Star Trek successfully reinvigorates a franchise that had previously appealed only to an increasingly narrow audience.

And once Leonard Nimoy delivers that immortal voiceover from the original Star Trek series during the film's final reel – like Daniel Craig's triumphant delivery of 007's famous introduction at the end of Casino Royale – it's evident that the series has truly become reborn.

X-Men Origins: Wolverine (2009)

I was anticipating a leisurely Saturday afternoon at the cinema. Having left home in good time, I drove to Westfield Bondi Junction to discover utter chaos in the carpark. After twenty minutes of dizzying circling in a desperate attempt to find a parking space, I looked at my watch and questioned whether I would ever make it to see X-Men Origins: Wolverine.

I finally found a spot somewhere in the earth's outer core and did that awkward-looking half-walk-half-run to the movie theatre. Only then did I realise I'd still made it to the cinema in time to catch the last twenty minutes of advertisements before the film began. Enduring countless commercials, each more irritating than the last, I found myself once again wondering whether I would ever see Wolverine.

Sadly, my journey to the cinema contained more uncertainty and more suspense than the entirity of the latest instalment of the X-Men cashcow.

The greatest hurdle of the origin film is to surprise the audience with a story of which they already know the outcome. In the case of X-Men Origins: Wolverine – a prequel – it's a particularly lofty barrier, given we've already seen Hugh Jackman's sideburned mutant slash and scream his way through three earlier (or later, I guess) films of varying quality.

Director Gavin Hood, from a script by David Benioff and Skip Woods, sadly seems to skip over possibly the most compelling period of James Logan's life in a gritty credits sequence that sees the ill-tempered mutant fighting his way through the 20th century's numerous wars alongside his fiery half-brother Victor Creed (Liev Schreiber). Instead, the bulk of the film is concerned with Logan's involvement with a group of forgettable mutants led by Danny Huston's equally forgettable William Stryker (so coldly played by Bryan Cox in the excellent X-Men 2) and his relationship with his half-brother.

In hiring Hood, who helmed the terrific Tsotsi, I'd hoped for a more cerebral superhero film, akin to Christopher Nolan's potential-filled Batman Begins. Unfortunately, Wolverine is lumbered with the kind of overwhelming CGI, over-choreographed fight scenes and underdeveloped characters that are the hallmarks of lesser comic book adaptations (see: Fantastic Four, Daredevil, Spider-man 3). Even Brett Ratner's much-maligned X-Men: The Last Stand contains more panache than that which is on display here.

The film's key moment, naturally, comes when Logan agrees to participate in the surgery that causes his skeleton to be bonded with an indestructible metal called adamantium. Or something. But having already seeing Jackman (and Troye Sivan as a young Logan) brandish his claws and scream skywards several times before this point, the only real transformation the character appears to undergo is aesthetic.

Suitably, this is Jackman's film, and he does a fairly admirable job of carrying it. Unlike the previous films' reliance on an ensemble cast, only Schreiber and Huston could be considered to have supporting roles here, with the remainder of the picture's characters reduced to mere cameos. Lost stars Dominic Monaghan and Kevin Durand make brief appearances as Bradley (a mutant who can manipulate electricity) and the Blob (clue's in the title) respectively, while Lynn Collins plays Wolverine's romantic interest. Ryan Reynolds, who appears in roughly five minutes of film as Deadpool, is reportedly being considered for his own spin-off, though there's little indication here as to why it would be a worthwhile investment of anyone's time. Only Taylor Kitsch leaves any kind of impression with his sassy interpretation of Gambit.

A post-credits scene points towards an already-announced sequel that will take the character to the Far East where he will hopefully meet characters more interesting and have adventures more gripping than those presented here. Whichever film comes first – be it this prequel-spin-off-sequel, the Deadpool flick, or the infinitely more appealing Magneto spin-off – it's apparent that the X-Men franchise needs to undergo a more exhaustive transformation than that which Wolverine endures here.

Lost: Season 5 (2009)

To celebrate Lost's 100th episode – last week's terrific Faraday-centric "The Variable" – I briefly entertained the idea of writing a post entitled "100 reasons why you and everyone you know and everyone they know should watch Lost".

It's tragic that I probably could come up with 100 different reasons, but I figured I would avoid doing so in order to preserve the thinly-veiled façade that I'm not actually a big Lost geek. In any case, after about the forty-eighth reason, I probably would have descended into some really obscure arguments...

49. I actually consider those funky DHARMA jumpsuits highly fashionable.

50. Ben's beady, unblinking eyes. Say no more.

51. The way the show's title flashes across the screen at the end of each episode (usually following some jaw-dropping cliffhanger) never fails to send a chill down my spine.

52. Frank Lapidus: the most engaging minor character in a show packed with engaging minor characters.

53. Scrap that. Richard Alpert is the most engaging minor character in a show packed with engaging minor characters.

54. No, wait. Lapidus.

55. Alpert.

56. It's a tie.

And so on. But don't worry, aside from the above, this isn't going to be yet another post banging on about how brilliant Lost is (I needn't tell you the answer is "freaking"). I'll let the show's makers do that.

"It's a challenging show. It's not just a cookie-cutter procedural with a new case each week. There's a real depth to it. But I also know people who watch only occasionally and really enjoy it when they do." – Stephen McPherson, ABC President of Entertainment

"There are a lot of things happening with [Locke], and the writers give me a lot of room to do things. I like that they allow a wide range of ways of playing this character. There's a lot of potential for interpretation in how to play this character. I don't feel I'll be typecast when the show ends, because you see this character in so many ways." – Terry O'Quinn (John Locke)

"People often ask us if there are any characters on the show that we wouldn't kill. The answer is no, everyone's fair game. With one exception. The most integral character on the show, the one we could not live without, is the music. And that is all a product of Michael [Giacchino]'s singular genius." – Damon Lindelof, executive producer

"We needed to express to the audience where the bookmark was in the novel. By announcing the end date, we signaled yes, we have a game plan, so you can rest assured that your investment in the show is going to pay off." – Carlton Cuse, executive producer

"There's a huge twist in the season finale. It's the best one to me, and I can't talk about it. When I read it, I couldn't stop thinking about it. It's part of that secret scene. I think it tops everything that's happened before this point. I would love to talk about it, but I can't." – Yunjin Kim (Sun-Hwa Kwon)

There's loads more in 100th episode retrospectives in both Variety and The Hollywood Reporter. There are a few spoilers for anyone not up to date with the previous episode, "Some Like It Hoth". You can also check out Jimmy Kimmel's amusing "guest spot" in "The Variable" below.

With 100 episodes down, Lost is now on the home stretch; a mere 20 episodes remain until the island vanishes for good. I aim to live a long and fulfilling life, but to be honest, I'll be content simply by not popping my clogs until after Lost's final episode.

Lost: Season 5 (2009)

Spoilers for Lost: Season 5 ("He's Our You")

In previous posts about Lost, I praised the show to the skies and encouraged newcomers to get onboard and see what all the fuss is about.

I take it all back. Why? Because despite the fact that Lost continues to surpass its own lofty standards, it's clearly a show for the hardcore fans. Instead, I urge you – more strongly than ever before – to start buying those DVD box sets and catch up. Lost is brilliant.

Once upon a time, casual viewers could easily tune in to Lost and still have a vague idea about what was going on. A self-contained flashback was more than enough to hold one's attention amid the polar bears and hatches and dead people walking around the island.

Those days are long gone. Unlike Alias (J.J. Abrams' pre-Lost series), which hit the reset button several times during its five-year run, Lost is now in the process of delicately assembling five seasons of stories into an impressively cohesive whole. The side effect of this is that it has separated the true fans from the casual viewers.

If you skipped out on Lost a season or two back and tuned back in now, you may be forgiven for thinking you're watching another show entirely, what with Jack, Kate, Hurley, Sawyer and co. currently ingratiating themselves with the DHARMA Initiative in a 1977-version of the island. The acceptance that time travel is possible in the Lost universe has proven itself not only a great way to finally reveal the island's twisted history, but also to allow our favourite castaways to become inextricably linked with it.

With just 24 episodes to go until Lost calls it a day, the resolutions to the show's main mysteries are slowly shifting into focus: the smoke monster, the four-toed statue, Richard Alpert's agelessness... but there are a few other questions I hope we'll get answered. I hereby present my top five lesser Lost mysteries I hope we see resolved before the island disappears for good...

1. Does Walt have special powers? One of Lost's few disappointments for me was the poor handling of Michael's storyline. Though he promisingly returned last year, the troubled dad was offed shortly after. While Walt, his son, had to be written out of the show (the actor was growing up too fast for the show's compressed timeframe), the death of his onscreen father seems to have sidelined any resolution to the notion that Walt is "special". A recent cameo by the character has given me renewed hope that this will be addressed in the future.

2. Who was Libby? The short-lived tail survivor who captured Hurley's heart before being gunned down by Michael was never treated to a flashback of her own. We've caught intriguing glimpses of her in other characters' flashbacks (why was she in the mental asylum with Hurley? was it just a coincidence that she gave Desmond the boat that took him to the island?), but she's got an almost clean slate for the producers to address her history however they like.

3. What happened when The Swan station blew up? Aside from the fact that Locke lost his voice and Desmond lost his clothes. With The Swan under construction in the show's current '70s setting, the answer to this may be closer than we think.

4. What happened between Benjamin Linus and the real Henry Gale? This was something the producers intended to address during the show's strike-shortened fourth season. It's not essential information, but there's a good story to be told about the hot-air balloonist Ben impersonated after being caught in Danielle Rousseau's trap. Heck, I just wanna see more of the creepy former leader of the Others.

5. What is "The Magic Box"? Remember Locke's father mysteriously appearing on the island back in season three? Ben claimed his sudden appearance owed to a "magic box" that would give you anything you desired. How about some answers to these questions?

The X-Files: Fight the Future (1998)

Revisiting 1998's The X-Files: Fight the Future after the release of the disappointing The X-Files: I Want to Believe only amplifies the strengths of the former and the flaws of the latter.

Unlike the "Is that it?" reaction elicited by last year's long-awaited sequel, Fight the Future proves itself to be one of the best TV-to-film transitions ever, deftly turning an already-cinematic show into a bona fide theatrical film.

Mostly filmed between The X-Files' fourth and fifth seasons, but released and set between its fifth and sixth, Fight the Future represents The X-Files at its creative peak. While fans of the series are no doubt better positioned to understand its tangled conspiracy yarn within the context of the show's ongoing story, the movie also offers a terrific starting point for franchise newcomers.

David Duchovny and Gillian Anderson reprise their roles as FBI agents Fox Mulder and Dana Scully, believer and sceptic, who discover evidence suggesting a Dallas building was bombed in order to destroy several human corpses infected with an extraterrestrial virus.

X-Files regulars Frank Spotnitz and Chris Carter (who together wrote the script) and director Rob Bowman make the most of cinema's broader canvas, both narratively and technically. Fight the Future expands on The X-Files' ambitious plot, presenting an epic conspiracy tale spanning four continents and 35,000 years in history. Bowman makes certain that every extra cent of the film's sizeable budget winds up on screen. All of the show's staples are present and accounted for – paranormal occurrences, shadowy conspirators meeting to ambiguously discuss their plans, unresolved sexual tension between Mulder and Scully – but on a much grander scale. A Hitchcockian chase through a corn crop is just one of a number of memorable action scenes.

The impact of agents' investigation – which sees them hung out to dry by their own agency – allows the film to examine the issue of trust, a key theme that runs throughout the series, characterised by its popular catchphrase: "Trust no-one". Infiltrating military facilities and chasing rogue tanker trucks, Mulder and Scully find they have only each other to depend on, and the will-they-or-won't-they? romantic subplot is only one aspect of their engaging relationship.

Most of the series' recurring characters appear, including Mitch Pileggi as assistant director Walter Skinner, Tom Braidwood, Dean Haglund, Bruce Harwood as conspiracy theorists The Lone Gunmen and William B. Davis as the show's iconic villain known only as the Cigarette-Smoking Man. In addition, Martin Landau is superb as Alvin Kurtzweil, a paranoid doctor whose suspicions may or may not be founded.

The film falters during an action-dominant third act that fails to give any meaningful payoff to the fireworks, but Fight the Future, in true X-Files style, delivers an open ending that leaves the viewer with an insatiable urge to continue untangling the labyrinthine plot via the popular TV series.

Watchmen (2009)

So, yesterday I praised the heck out of Watchmen, Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons' esteemed graphic novel set in an alternate 1985 in which the world is teetering on the brink of nuclear war. Does the much-hyped film version live up to the expectations that accompany any adaptation of such acclaimed source material?

For the most part, yes. Director Zack Snyder captures much of the spirit of the graphic novel, which offered a refreshingly cerebral take on the "superhero genre". Fans of Watchmen will relish seeing the book's unique imagery represented in live action form. Even as someone who only discovered Watchmen less than a week ago, hearing masked vigilante Rorschach's gravelly narration taken word-for-word from the book, or seeing the action scenes painfully reconstructed shot-for-shot from the graphic novel's frames, enlightened my inner geek.

Watchmen opens with the brutal assassination of a vigilante named The Comedian, whose death sparks theories of a plot against masked heroes. This opening scene, coupled with one of the best title sequences in years (a three-minute montage of moments in the lives of the earliest superheroes, accompanied by Bob Dylan's "The Times They Are A-Changin'"), is arguably the highlight of the film. In just a brief, few minutes, the audience is thrown headlong into the history of this bizarre, alternate reality. It's moving, intriguing and beautifully shot and edited.

Snyder's film remains incredibly faithful to its source material, despite lopping a number of my favourite subplots and sequences in order to get the movie's runtime down to a still-pretty-meaty 161 minutes. Snyder plans to release a director's cut on DVD, containing an extra half hour of footage, which I suspect will benefit the film greatly. (Additionally, an animated film based on the brilliantly dark "Tales of the Black Freighter" story-within-a-story from the original comic is due to be released on DVD in the near future.)

Where Snyder does deviate from the graphic novel (as opposed to excising content due to time restrictions), it's often an improvement. In particular, the villain's ultimate plot, or rather the means by which he aims to achieve it (which I criticised yesterday), is altered here, becoming a tighter, tidier scheme with the same end result. It's difficult to elaborate without spoiling the film, but it's a marked improvement on what was, for me, one of the graphic novel's few flaws. Unfortunately, the absence of the sequences missing from this cut of Watchmen mean we don't fully grasp the scope of the final act's devastation; here's hoping this will be rectified with the director's cut of the film.

Watchmen's faithful transfer to the screen is also due in large part to its cast, which doesn't contain a single A-lister (a major plus). Rather, the film is populated by a very capable group of actors who could only individually be described as "that guy/girl from...". For the most part, all embody their roles with a perfect understanding of the original book's appeal: that Watchmen's characters were not "super" heroes, but rather a random patchwork of real people with real flaws. Standouts include Patrick Wilson (that guy from The Phantom of the Opera) as Daniel Dreiberg/Nite Owl, Jackie Earle Haley (that guy from Little Children) as Walter Kovaks/Rorschach and Jeffrey Dean Morgan (that guy from Grey's Anatomy) as Edward Blake/The Comedian. All of Watchmen's characters are mired in a kind of murkiness and ambiguity that more popular superheroes don't even come close to representing.

My only minor niggles with the cast were Matthew Goode (who's almost too young for the part of Adrien Veidt) and Billy Crudup (though that may have more to do with the difficulty of depicting a character who was vaporised in a radiation accident only to regenerate in the form of a bright blue super human who possesses a range of powers, few clothes and an oft-featured bright blue knob, because he is superb in his pre-accident flashbacks). The fact that Watchmen is one of the best-cast comic book adaptations ever is a major boon in light of the story's ensemble nature.

The cinematography, special effects and costumes are all terrific. Special praise goes to Watchmen's superb soundtrack, which features a fantastic assembly of songs, each beautifully fitting and unfitting for the scenes they accompany.

Yet as much as I found to enjoy in Snyder's adaptation, I can't help but appreciate Alan Moore's snobbery that Watchmen could only ever be pulled off within the confines of the comic book medium. The writer told Entertainment Weekly in 2008, "There are things that we did with Watchmen that could only work in a comic, and were indeed designed to show off things that other media can't." I'm inclined to agree.

Even though Snyder's take on Watchmen is probably as faithful as any adaptation could ever get, everything about the story, including its very context, functions so much better in the comic book medium that any transition to film was bound to live in the shadow of its source material. Many of the book's talky sequences, often dealing with heady existential subjects, are much more engaging on the printed page than on the screen. Moreover, the absence of any equivalent to Moore's engaging and articulate written extracts that close each chapter and contextualise much of the story are sorely missed. Meanwhile, the movie's excessive violence, though accurately translated from the book, at times seems like a bone tossed at fans of the so-called "torture porn" genre. In short, the film version failed to leave me with the same sense of awe at the saga unfolding before me as the graphic novel did.

Like its original format, Watchmen probably isn't destined to be crowd-pleasing fare. I suspect it may even divide fans of the graphic novel as much as it will moviegoers (I'm hoping the director's cut will amend most of my bugbears about this adaptation). It also lacks the psychological resonance that made the graphic novel such a landmark in its medium. Nevertheless, it remains a superior addition to the superhero genre, and one that will hopefully point filmgoers towards its phenomenal source material.

Lost: Season 5 (2009)

Spoilers for Lost: Season 5 ("Jughead")

It's best to consider Lost as the most demanding – yet rewarding – jigsaw puzzle you have ever tackled. Its story is a rich, growing tapestry of flashbacks, flashforwards and flashes in time that are slowly piecing together to form a beautiful, detailed image. It's a slow, often frustrating process, but when that piece you've been agonising over for so long finally slots into place, the reward is a giddy, euphoric feeling.

Three episodes into its penultimate season and Lost has made finally made the leap into fully-blown science fiction territory, adding another dimension to its already complex narrative. So imagine that lovely flat jigsaw you've been working on is actually one of those funky 3D puzzles.

Casual fans may turn their noses up at this season's principal theme of time travel, but from the moment that thunderous monster began tearing up large patches of jungle in the pilot episode, Lost was showing its sci-fi hand. Its current state is the result of a very natural progression.

While last season's phenomenal Desmond-centric episode, "The Constant" proved that time travel exists in the Lost universe, the fifth season has taken that idea and ran with it. It's a bold move, but the show has danced around the notion for so long that it was an inevitable development.

"Because You Left", this year's season-opener, plunged viewers headfirst into a four-year-long mystery and made no apologies for doing so. If you'd never seen Lost before, lost is precisely what you'd have been. But if you have watched Lost, and watched it devotedly, it was a brilliant continuation of all the themes and characters that have made the show such compulsive viewing.

The second episode, Hurley-centric "The Lie", slowed things down a touch; the cursed lottery winner has always been one of the most relatable characters on the show. It also featured a great expanded role for Hurley's father, played by Cheech Marin. Meanwhile, "Jughead", episode number three, continued the show's run of virtually flawless Desmond episodes. Oh, and I'd like to note that eccentric scientist Daniel Faraday, who I initially felt was overplayed by Jeremy Davies, is developing into one of the most intriguing characters on the show.

Lost has always been an ensemble programme, and that's never been truer than in the fifth season. After just three episodes, there's already been a list of returning guest stars long enough to bewilder anyone but the most ardent of fans. However, as that's precisely what I am, it's thrilling telly. If you struggle to keep up with who's who among the regular cast, good luck remembering returning characters like Ms Hawking, the enigmatic antique saleswoman who convinced Desmond that travelling to the island and pushing the button was his destiny (gibberish to non-fans) in an episode two years back.

If that wasn't enough, this season's new storytelling format that sees the remaining castaways visiting the island at various points in its past really requires viewers to brush up on Lost history (Lostory?). However, that's all part of the fun of unravelling the show's labyrinthine plot. With the island constantly shifting in time, the producers have given themselves the broadest canvas imaginable for exploring the island's past – and future.

Lost has long since become impenetrable for new viewers hoping to make heads or tails of its intricate plot, but that's precisely what makes it such a rewarding viewing experience. Pick up the DVD box sets and get stuck into it. And if you're really struggling with the Lost jigsaw, consider Lostpedia – a wiki entirely devoted to the television series – as the puzzle box from which you can cheat.

Lost: Season 5 (2009)

Spoilers for Lost: Season 4

Can you believe it? Lost is back tonight!

Following its groundbreaking first year, Lost settled in for a bumpy but thoroughly entertaining season and a half. It was then that the show's producers announced that Lost will end in 2010. With just three curtailed seasons remaining, a noticeable shift into focus occurred, and our favourite castaways were no longer wandering aimlessly through the jungle encountering endless random island weirdness.

Lost is in the unique position of being a blockbuster television programme with an incredibly intricate storyline. I think many people were turned off the show during its second and third years, fearing that Lost would become a victim of the kind of protracted, meandering storytelling that ultimately caused The X-Files' flame to flicker out. But ever since the end date announcement, Lost has confidently propelled forward, providing answers to existing mysteries, and tantalising new ones. This viewer has faith that there will be a worthwhile resolution at the end of it all.

For those who gave up on Lost, there's no excuse not to come back. While it makes no apologies if you miss an episode, and the show's producers have openly admitted that those who have never watched the show will be, erm, lost, during the fifth season opener, viewers who do their homework and fervently follow the show will be greatly rewarded. Lost is at the top of its game as one of the most exciting and intelligent shows on the box.

As we prepare to enter Lost's penultimate season, I present you with a brief cheat sheet to brush up on television's most perplexed castaways.

[insert flashback whoosh sound here]

Jack (rescued)
Everyone's favourite doc with daddy issues escaped the island and declared that the other escapees mustn't tell anyone about what happened there in order to protect the other survivors. Since rescue, Jack has been visited by Jeremy Bentham (the man in the coffin) who told him some terrible things had happened on the island since he left. Jack became racked with guilt over abandoning the other survivors, including Claire, who he learned is his half-sister.

Claire (unknown)
Since being all blowed up in an explosion while the survivors battled the freighter folk, Claire's been acting incredibly strange. Her current pasttime seems to be hanging out in that creepy moving shack with her and Jack's dead father, Christian Shepherd.

Kate (rescued)
Upon rescue, Kate went to court for her crimes and was given 10 years probation on the condition she remain in California. Kate and Jack were briefly engaged. Claire's child, Aaron, is living with Kate. Presumably without contributing any rent, the slacker. Kate is living under the pretence that Aaron is her child.

Sawyer (on the island)
Sawyer sacrificed his own rescue so that the other survivors could escape. Before doing so, he whispered something in Kate's ear. He probably asked her to feed his fish.

Juliet (on the island)
Juliet was last seen drinking rum with Sawyer on the beach. Yo, ho, ho, etc.

Daniel (missing)
Eccentric physicist Daniel was last seen ferrying people to the freighter off the island. He has developed a bond with Desmond, who is his "constant", something too complicated to do anything but link to here. Brush up on that, as time travel is set to be a major part of the fifth season.

Miles (on the island)
Ghost-whisperer Miles remains stranded by choice, opting not to ride with Daniel to the freighter. Bit weird.

Charlotte (on the island)
The mysterious Charlotte also opts to stay on the island. Although it transpires she's been there before...

Hurley (rescued)
Hurley's curse hasn't escaped him since being rescued. After seeing visions of the deceased Charlie and Mr Eko off the island, he is readmitted to the same mental institution he was in before the plane crash. He has also been visited by Jeremy Bentham. Oh, and those numbers still haunt him.

Michael (dead)
By delaying the detonation of a large amount of explosives aboard the freighter, Michael sacrificed himself in order to give the survivors the time they needed to escape. Christian Shepherd appeared to Michael moments before he died.

Jin (presumed dead)
Jin's fate is uncertain, but he was seemingly caught in the inevitable explosion of the freighter.

Sun (rescued)
Sun escaped the island but, hopeful that Jin survived, she makes a pact with big baddie Charles Widmore to help him find the island.

Ben (magically appeared off the island after turning a giant, frozen wheel)
Upon instruction from Jacob (overseer of the island), beady-eyed Other Ben assisted Locke to "move the island". To where (or when) remains a mystery. In doing so, he was teleported to the Sahara desert 10 months into the future. After the death of his own daughter at the hands of Widmore's men on island, he swears to kill Widmore's daughter in order to settle the score.

Sayid (rescued)
After escaping, Sayid married his beloved Nadia who was later murdered. Ben finds Sayid and tells him the culprit was one of Widmore's men, leading Sayid to become a mercenary for Ben.

Desmond (rescued)
Desmond's rescue remains unknown to the rest of the world (unlike the highly-publicised rescue of the Oceanic 6). He was swiftly reunited with his beloved Penny... Widmore's daughter.

Locke (dead?)
We recently learnt Locke has been watched from birth by ageless Other Richard Alpert. On the island, he made contact with Jacob, who told Locke to move the island. After the island moves, Locke will become leader of the Others. On the mainland in the future, Ben visits Jack, who tells him that in order to save the stranded survivors, everyone who left the island must return, including the deceased Jeremy Bentham, who, it turns out, is John Locke.

Ooooooo...

Anyway, Lost. Brilliant. Watch it.

Ten films to bet on in 2009

The cinema gods are vengeful gods, for 2008 was the year we were blessed with The Dark Knight and punished with Mamma Mia!. What does 2009 have in store? Read on for my picks...

Watchmen (6 March, 2009?)
Potentially The Dark Knight of 2009, the film adaptation of Watchmen is currently the subject of a bitter legal battle that may see its release postponed into 2010. I haven't read Watchmen yet, but it's considered to be the most critically-acclaimed graphic novel ever (it even made Time's 100 best novels of all-time). The amazing trailers show that the film appears to do it justice.

This Side of the Truth (20 March, 2009)
Ricky Gervais' feature film directorial debut is a high-concept comedy set in a world where lying was never invented. Gervais has assembled an impressive cast, including Jennifer Garner, Rob Lowe, Tina Fey, Jonah Hill, Christopher Guest, Patrick Stewart and cameos from Gervais regulars Stephen Merchant and Karl Pilkington.

Star Trek (8 May, 2009)
Star Trek! What a geeky recommendation, I hear you cry. Fair point, too. But before you start hurling insults my way, like, er, Trekkie, let me tell you that this instalment is helmed by none other than J.J. Abrams, the genius who gave us TV's Lost and Alias, as well as the enjoyable Mission: Impossible III. Abrams is a master of high-quality popcorn entertainment and if anyone could get me into a cinema to watch a bunch of fellows with pointy ears and bowl haircuts, it's him.

Angels and Demons (15 May, 2009)
The critics predictably bashed it, but I actually loved Ron Howard's adaptation of The Da Vinci Code. Angels and Demons, though, is the superior book. It loses the huge amounts of exposition that were necessary in The Da Vinci Code and opts for a simpler race-against-time plot that sees Robert Langdon (played again by Tom Hanks) trying to stop a plot to destroy Vatican City on the eve of the papal election. Ewan McGregor, Ayelet Zurer and Stellan Skarsgård co-star.

Terminator Salvation (22 May, 2009)
Never thought I'd see a McG film on my most-anticipated list (he's to blame for those God-awful Charlie's Angels flicks), but here we are. Christian Bale is onboard to once again resurrect a dormant franchise and the trailers are looking rather spiffy. Don't expect it to reach the heights of Terminator 2, but with a script by reboot masters Jonathan Nolan (The Dark Knight) and Paul Haggis (Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace), it doesn't look like the write-off it could have been.

Up (29 May, 2009)
WALL•E set a phenomenally high bar for Pixar, but they're notorious for topping themselves. A 3D re-release of Toy Story is also set for later in the year.

Public Enemies (1 July, 2009)
Johnny Depp and Christian Bale team up with Michael Mann (the director who gave us Heat and Collateral) for this crime drama set during the Great Depression. Two actors at the height of their careers and one of the best crime directors around – what's not to like?

Inglourious Basterds (21 August, 2009)
Love him or hate him, Quentin Tarantino is one of the most influential filmmakers around. He's back after the commercial stumble that was his Robert Rodriguez collaboration, Grindhouse, with this clumsily-spelled wartime epic. Brad Pitt, Diane Kruger and Mike Myers head up a huge cast list.

Sherlock Holmes (20 November, 2009)
The more serious of two Holmes films currently in production, Guy Ritchie's take on Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's famous detective sees Robert Downey Jr. as the title character and Jude Law as Watson. Scenes for the film were being shot at London's St Paul's Cathedral when I visited there in October. (For those curious, the second Holmes pic is a comedy starring Sacha Baron Cohen and Will Ferrell...)

Avatar (18 December, 2009)
James Cameron returns to the director's chair for the first time since blockbuster mush-fest Titanic. Sci-fi pic Avatar uses groundbreaking 3D technology that's predicted to finally put 3D cinema on the map.

Runners-up
Coraline (6 February, 2009): surreal stop-motion adaptation from the director of The Nightmare Before Christmas, starring Dakota Fanning, Ian McShane and Teri Hatcher.
X-Men Origins: Wolverine (1 May, 2009): spin-off exploring Wolverine's formative years; can the X-Men franchise bounce back after the lacklustre Last Stand?
Brüno (15 May, 2009): Sacha Baron Cohen's Borat follow-up will also likely offend and entertain in equal measure.
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (26 June, 2008): more big, dumb action with extra-special effects from Michael Bay.
Green Zone (TBC): Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass reteam for this film about the American reconstruction project in Iraq.

Anyway, those are my bets for 2009. If any of them turn out to be rubbish, I apologise. If all of them turn out to be rubbish, blame the cinema gods.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (2008)

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button, F. Scott Fitzgerald's 1921 short story about a man who ages backwards, has been adapted into a sprawling three-hour epic... by David Fincher. Yes, David Fincher of Fight Club and Alien³ fame.

There's no doubt that it's a "curious" choice for Fincher (see what I did there?), but this is an engaging film that resonates with genuine emotion.

Told in flashback, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button charts the title character's life from his birth at the end of the first World War and subsequent abandonment by his horrified father, to his difficulties in finding his place in the world, and ultimately his coming to terms with growing younger as everyone he knows is getting older and dying. It's a lengthy film where, for once, the runtime is justified. Eric Roth's screenplay ensures that Button's life is ripe for exploration; the character's fairy tale-like condition never feels like a gimmick.

Brad Pitt roles tend to fall into one of two categories. There are the parts he was born to play (such as his previous Fincher collaboration, Fight Club) and the parts that ooze "Hey, hey! It's Brad Pitt!" stunt casting (like the celebrity love-in Ocean's series or the disappointing Burn After Reading). Benjamin Button lands firmly in the former category. It is, quite simply, an Oscar-worthy turn in what is probably an Oscar-worthy film. It's a tremendously tricky role to pull off but Pitt gives the character a hefty dose of humanity. Button's condition could easily be played for laughs (and there are more than a few in the film, including an amusing running joke involving a man reminiscing about being hit by lightning seven times), but Pitt wonderfully balances the tragedy of Button's condition with a beautiful depiction of his unrelenting joie de vivre. You really believe in his affliction.

Cate Blanchett plays Daisy Fuller, Button's main romantic interest, whom he meets early (i.e. late) in his life and with whom he becomes romantically involved when they approach the same age. Blanchett may be the film's only significant blight. There are times when she suits the part, but the chemistry between the pair isn't quite stellar. I never got a genuine sense of why Daisy was "the one" for Benjamin.

What's interesting is that we are never shown an attempt to diagnose or cure Button's disease. Only twice in the film is he seen in the presence of a doctor – once as a child with the symptoms of an old man and once as an old man with the symptoms of a child. The decision to not focus on the condition itself but rather on living with it pays off. Attempting to explain the disease would have only weakened the film.

The picture also contains some truly standout scenes, including Button's first brush with unnatural death during the second World War and a fascinating sequence in which he details the unfortunate chain of unconnected events that leads Daisy to be hit by a taxi (even if there's no way Button could have known about these).

Technically, The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is just as impressive. There's a terrific soundtrack and some gorgeous cinematography, both of which befit the eras that the film spans. The effects used to achieve Button's aged look early in the film are particularly convincing.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is a melancholic allegory on life and death, equal parts poignant and uplifting, and a worthy addition to the Oscar race.