Ever noticed how the box office always seems to release films in two? Confusing cinema goers making them rack their brains trying to decide on a film!

Here are a few examples to prove my point:
 -       Killers vs. Knight & Day (2010)
 -       Dante’s Peak vs. Volcano (1997)
 -       The Prestige vs. the Illusionist (2006)
 -       A Bugs Life vs. Antz (1998)
 -       Deep Impact vs. Armageddon (1998)

Check out more here if you want to get into each duo's plot details:

Coincidence? I think not! But from looking at those titles, there’s always one that’s better quality than the other. And if you’re trying to decide which one is worth your time. Let me help you make that decision.

Both films are typical and predictable, definitely something for the ladies. Both portray a modern female character who are empowering and career focused & don’t want a serious relationship. But we can all guess what happens at the end, women hormones and emotions take over.

But if we’re going to compare the pair, ‘No Strings attached’ takes the cake hands down. The film's script takes on a much wittier approach and gave me a few chuckles and giggles. At the same time there were scenes that got me a little choked up. It was a good mix of comedy and romance like the genre suggests.

Not to mention Kutcher and Portman who were portraying these typical characters, seem to have more chemistry and didn’t make my skin crawl. Even the older wiser character in both films, played by Kline (Adam’s Father) had more of a distict characteristic and was flawed and funny as oppose to the ‘Friends with Benefits’ counterpart played by Clarkson (Jamie’s mother) who’s character failed to even resonate in my memory.

‘Friends with Benefits’ is a Justin Timberlake fans only film. Mila and Justin made a good effort, but if you’re looking for a film with a typical plot that would make you laugh and cry. You’d be better off checking out Reitman’s ‘No Strings Attached’ attempt.

Even though the 'No Strings attached' tagline appears to be directly ripping off 'Friends with Benefits'. How I see it is, if you’re going to do something that’s been overdone and clichéd. Then do it well. And ‘No Strings Attached’ did just that.

**Spoiler Alert**
My favourite scenes:
‘No Strings Attached’: Portman’s drunken jealous rage
‘Friends with Benefits’: Timberlake’s old school rapping (about the only part in the film that brought a smile to my face, only because I am a fan of his music)
New Zealand. 2010. Directed by Taika Waititi. Screenplay by Taika Waititi. Story by Taika Waititi. Starring: Taika Waititi, James Rolleston, Te Aho Aho Eketone-Whitu

Rating: ★★★★

Boy is a simple but emotionally powerful story about growing up, relationships, following your head over your heart and drawing the line between right and wrong. It's easily one of the best New Zealand films ever made. It's Rich characters and humorous dialogue, entailed by the occasional light-hearted hand drawn animations delivered a hugely entertaining blend of culture, comedy and drama.
The story started on a perfect note with Boy played by James Rolleston giving his show and tell speech in the classroom. It introduced the character, his background and set the atmosphere, mood and setting all in one go without being a dull lead up. Taika Waititi (who also plays the dead beat father) did an amazing job in setting out each detailed scene with the occasional Michael Jackson tributes giving the film an even disperse of light laughter at the same time appropriately moving the plot along.

The film gave a heart aching recount on every boy's natural instinct to worship their father, whether they deserve it or not. The growth and resilience of each character portrayed superbly by every single actor from the child stars to the minor adult characters was a pleasure to watch. It still brings a smile to my face today. Pure brilliance...

USA. 2010. Directed by Michael Patrick King. Screenplay by Michael Patrick King, Candace Bushnell, Darren Star Story by Michael Patrick King. Starring: Sarah Jessica Parker, Kim Cattrall, Kristen Davis, Cynthia Nixon


The charm of the original 'Sex and the City' series is that women can relate to each of the awkward, ditsy, clumsy, sex crazed working gal. SATC2 bombed! It took all the charm away and presented a bunch of over-the-hill photoshopped New Yorkers on a glamorous all expense paid holiday. I didn't sign up for this shit! It was detached from reality and completely over the top. The girls are all well groomed in their perfect little lives, with their perfect apartments, loving husbands and massive wardrobes. Yet, still find pointless shit to complain about! Now they're just being spoilt difficult rich bitches. It makes me cringe.

**Spoiler Alert**
The first scene already started on the wrong foot, with cheap gimmicks used in an exaggerated gay wedding with an ice palace, swans, choir singers and Liza Minnelli. Who looked like she was about to drop dead after her 'single ladies' performance *cringe again*. Followed by eye-rolling, gag worthy and head shaking scenes one after the other. No interesting controversial topics were brought up. No clever cute humour. All in all, a lame over the top exaggeration about nothing.

Usually I end it with my favourite stupid scene but the whole movie was so ridiculous, I say the worst part was going to the movies to see it in the first place. Short and sweet.