The World's End

The last chapter in the Three Flavours Cornetto Trilogy is a delightful, fun, subversive romp through the genre of the "Buddy Road Trip" and Alien Invasion/Independence Day, and even a dash of Western and Apocalypse. However, unlike the prior two entries, "Shaun of the Dead" (a modern zombie/horror-comedy classic) and "Hot Fuzz" (hilarious crime thriller/whodunit), the laughs were not consistent throughout its 100-minutes run, and neither were there many genuinely laugh-out-loud, choke on your snot kind of moments this time round. It could be that expectations were too high for this last hurrah, but nonetheless, this was still a great comedy! Miles ahead of the usual Hollywood tropes and pure money-grabbing schticks (looking at you: "Hangover"!). The cast has a great chemistry, even the usual dead fish-esque Rosamund Pike (still cannot imagine her in "Gone Girl", she and Ben Affleck?!!..what was David Fincher thinking?). Martin Freeman, Paddy Considine and Eddy Marsan were great additions to the dynamic duo of Simon Pegg and Nick Frost. Each role had a distinctive character and the actors were so brilliant in drawing the comedy out of them. There were some great one-liners and scenes, but as fore-mentioned, it was less often. Some of the running gags did get quite stale and, sadly repetitive, after a bit (but, the jumping over the fence bit? Never old...not even after three movies!). Edgar Wright's directing seemed to be verging on the Marvel-esque direction that his "Ant Man" will be bringing him towards, and he definitely needs to brush up on his close-up action choreography and quick cuts. Great music throughout too, a mash of 80/90s alt/indie rock, that really strike a chord with the audience who are the same age as the protagonists. When the main antagonist was revealed, it was a total "Oh gosh! Not again?" moment, but writers Pegg and Wright hilariously subverted our expectations, and with Bill Nighy's sardonic voice work, the climax was actually riveting. Until the final two scenes, which could be a different movie all by themselves.

Lolla

They call themselves a small-plates dining experience, but in other words, tapas-like. Thankfully, the pretentiousness ends there, as the food at this small Ang Siang Hill establishment was really good. Fresh, interesting pairings which taste as good as they are presented. Price is slightly more expensive for the size of the portion but quality is undeniable. At least it's more worth it than the many other tapas/restaurants that keep springing up these days. The toasted baguette with an olive oil and tomato purée dip came with a half a roasted garlic (that itself is seldom done locally...) and was a tasty opener. The specials of the day was outstanding in particular the candied foie gras with cranberries and spanish onions and squash which was a generous portion with the sweetness complementing the savoury, generous liver although would have been better if the onions were caramelised longer; the iberico pork collar was served on a bed of crushed almonds with figs and that was perfect with the taste and textures of the ingredients all blending exquisitely; the kabouca pumpkin with beef relish was sadly rather uninspiring with the pumpkin grilled until it was rather too dry with the sweetness all gone and the beef relish rather pedestrian. The doughnuts with lemon curd took a long time to arrive, as compared to the others, but it was worth it. The doughnut balls were crispy on the outside but so airy and fluffy inside, dusted with icing sugar and dipped into a tangy sweet lemon curd (which I can imagine as a fantastic lemon meringue pie filling). Yum! However, two things bad about the place (other than the price) is one, the small space which made the acoustics rather unbearable when it's full or when a loud, sharp pitched diners are in the house; also the cling and clang of the open kitchen gets amplified. In addition, the smell control is lacking and the smells from the kitchen just permeates the whole area. The service was prompt and polite, and, importantly, unobtrusive.

Verdict: Will come back but price is an obstacle to regularity. 

Prisoners

A riveting, engaging 153 minutes crime drama with career best performances by both Hugh Jackman and Jake Gyllenhaal. Director Denis Villeneuve and writer Aaron Guzikowski have given us a very well and tightly written crime drama (not thriller, per se, as this is very much a drama) that weaves red herrings, drops seemingly unimportant plot points and stretch the unwavering tension throughout in a well-paced (slow to some, no doubt, who prefers the usual Hollywood fare) and intelligent manner. Of course, all this is for nought, if there was not the very strong cast that Villeneuve has assembled. Jackman, in a role that is more deserving of an Academy Award nomination than Jean Valjean, has the more showy role and he was brilliant. He is the character that you hate yourself for sympathising with, an anti-hero due to circumstances; his choices conflict with his morality and Jackman aptly displayed the emotions and pain that such decisions has caused him. For a while, you can finally lose the Wolverine in him. However, he still had moments where he was just shouting the lines. Gyllenhaal, on the other hand, got the more introspective role. But that does not mean that he was not outstanding. He got into the character so fully, that you don't see Gyllenhaal (although there are times where it was reminiscence of "Zodiac", although that could be blamed on a similar subject matter confusing the roles). He is the hero that you want to succeed, but the obstacles in his pass just bring out his frustrations and his innate fear of failing. Failing himself, and the failing the victims. Gyllenhaal brought all that out. The supporting cast was top-notch too in particular the ever brilliant Viola Davis, the chameleon-like Melissa Leo and Paul Dano who has gotten himself a niche role in indie productions but was sympathetically wonderful here. Terence Howard and Maria Bello round out the rest of the cast, but their roles were not written as strongly. Kudos goes out to Rogers A. Deakins again for framing such beautiful cinematography, and to Johann Johannsson for an effective score especially the cellos and the strings to notch up the tension. However, most praises must be lavished on director Villeneuve for creating a riveting drama, and Guzikowski for writing a thoroughly engaging and intelligent crime fiction. Except for the last scene, which seemed a bit too neat after all that had happened before that.

Brooklyn Nine-Nine

Pilot: FOX's newest comedy is a curious thing. The concept of a 30 minutes crime procedural is intriguing, but to make it a comedy? The cast and the writers have to be exceptionally strong! By the end of the pilot, I am reminded of "Scrubs": a 30 minutes comedy set in a hospital but was not "ER" or "Chicago Hope" (and now "Gray's Anatomy"). However, unlike "Scrubs", "Brooklyn Nine-Nine"' has Andy Samberg who lacked Zach Braff's naive self-depreciating humour, and Melissa Fumero who lacked Sarah Chalke's gift for physical comedy and comedic timing. But, instead, we got Andre Braugher in a decidedly uncharacteristic role. Outwardly, he may be similar to his many previous characters especially in "Last Resort" where he was also in uniform, but as the episode progress, his deadpanned line reading belies some hilarious comedic moments. The rest of the cast had their moments but perhaps over time, "Brooklyn Nine-Nine" can be as funny and imaginative as "Scrubs" was in its prime.

Episode 2, "The Tagger": I don't get this comedy. Yes, it is funny, but it ain't laugh out loud funny. More like, snigger, snigger...heh. Man-child characters annoy me a lot, and a lot of the comedy here is derived from Samberg behaving as such. Although Braugher is still the secret weapon of this show. His straight-faced deadpan deliveries are spot on. Joe Lo Truglio and Stephanie Beatriz are the other two standouts.

Episode #3, "The Slump": A much better entry with equal time for each cast member to shine. Less of Samberg is a good thing. There is no laugh track here which emphasises the importance of comedy, and this show really does have its lines. Sure, no laugh out loud moments, but there are many snarks, sniggers, and hehe-s.

Masters of Sex

Pilot: And now it's Showtime's turn to dip its toes into the Period Drama. With "Broadwalk Empire" losing steam and "Mad Men" nearing its end, perhaps it is indeed a good time to launch this new project, and based on the pilot, this show has a very good chance of succeeding. Even with a titillating premise, the pilot was surprisingly sterile (reminds me a lot of "Magic Mike" where the sex was rather clinical rather than erotic). A stellar cast led by the brilliant and sensational Michael Sheen and the amazingly revelation that is Lizzy Caplan, and created by Michelle Ashford, brings this engaging 50s era drama to life. Undoubtedly, the directing by John Madden, the sumptuous score by Michael Penn, and the gorgeous, beautiful set/production design, all played an essential part in transporting the audience to this time, place and moment in American history. Michael Sheen is amazing to watch, as he brings about a complexity to the character through subtle body language and tonal shifts; Lizzy Caplan, on the other hand, brings about a tender frailty despite the strong ferocity that she displays outwardly. Teddy Sears' (from "Dollhouse", "Torchwood: Miracle Day" and the ill-fated "666 Park Avenue") and Caitlin Fitzgerald's were briefly introduced, the former's role in the future seems rather uncertain, but the latter, will definitely be playing a big part in the familial context of the show. The weakest link in the cast would be Nicholas D'Agosto's Ethan Haas who seemed to be poised to be the main antagonist, but so far, in the pilot appears nothing but like a petulant child. Hopefully, as the story progresses, a new villain will emerge. We need for Margo Martindale! Her one scene with Sheen was priceless!

Episode #2, "Race to Space": A brilliant follow-up episode that advances the storyline without too much catching up and exposition. The hurdles and obstacles between the main leads are beginning to be established and this should bring us to the end of the season. Caplan continues to dazzle and sparkle in her role as the complicated, yet resourceful and sympathetic Ginny. Michael Sheen is a wonder of restrained emotions that flitter pass his face ever so subtly. Pacing may be a bit slow, but at least the score and the acting and directing was first class.

Episode #3, "Standard Deviation": This show is a winner. Really good acting from the two leads Sheen and Caplan, and an interesting plot that slowly, and deliciously, moves forward every week. The supporting cast has their moments, but I really hope the payoff for D'Agosto will be worth it. No Teddy Sears this time round. The periodicity of the times really does reflect on our current society, and by doing so, causes us to too reflect on our currency.

Sleepy Hollow

Pilot: Fall 2013 has finally started for television, and one of the first out is this new FOX supernatural, drama series based on the "Headless Horseman" legend. Admittedly, to a non-American audience, the most I know about the legend of Sleepy Hollow comes from the Johnny Depp-Christina Ricci movie back in 1999. Anyways, this pilot has got a few things going for it, but it is relying quite strongly on the supernatural hook which may turn off some audience members who are not that into the occult; however, if, like me, supernatural stories are up your alley, then this show may be quite promising. In particular, the two leads: Tom Mison and Nichole Beharie have a good, comfortable chemistry on screen which makes their exchanges pleasant to watch. It was something similar between Lucy Liu and Johnny Lee Miller that made "Elementary" enjoyable despite it being a procedural. Perhaps it is that combination of British and American accent? The one big issue I have with "Sleepy Hollow" is how are they going to continue this beyond one season. From the looks of it and the hints throughout, the headless horseman may just be the hook, and the eventuality of it will be a typical battle between Good and Evil, although if both Ichabod Crane and Abbie Mills are mere "mortals", what are their roles then? I see this ending up some sort like "Supernatural" meets "The X-Files" and "Elementary". Sadly, with EPs Kurtzman, Orci and Wiseman, I approach with cautious trepidation.

Episode #2, "Blood Moon": I like this opening credits. Looks like we are heading towards a supernatural case-of-the-week kind of format, with a larger overarching mythological arc. The chemistry between Mison and Beharie is still one of the best things of the show. At least the sister gets introduced early in the season, instead of holding her back. However, too much cheap tricks makes the plot too contrived: didactic memory, psycho sister who may not be psycho, secret tunnels, etc. Ken Olin directed this outing, I wonder if he will turn in the future? I miss his wife. John Cho is still sticking around, but what a waste of his talent, although that bit about his neck was a good bit of continuity. Still interesting enough to see where this goes.

Episode #3, "For The Triumph of Evil": So it looks like this will be how the filler episodes might look like. A demon-of-the-week case that needs to be solved by Crane & Mills with little to tie in with the overarching mythology of witches and horsemen. It's a bit like "Supernatural" but that was not stuck with "Sleepy Hollow" as a location. At least the chemistry between the two leads are worth it, and the Sandman does have its creepy moments.

Episode #4 and #5, "The Lesser Key of Solomon" and "John Doe": The main mystery is still progressing slowly, and this is always a big problem on network TV, even though this is only a limited order of 13 episodes. At least there were some scares but the key ingredient here is definitely the Mulder/Scully like chemistry that is going on between Mison and Beharie. I do hope more progressions with less fillers.

Jamie's Italian (Singapore)

I had tried the one in London about a year ago, and left without a very good impression of the food. Therefore, I came in with rather low expectations. Service was alright, but I could barely understood what the wait staff was rambling on about the specials. Also, if the mobile credit card machine does not work, wouldn't it be better to just take the customer's card and proceed to the cashier to make payment rather than look for another machine? Anyways, I ordered the same thing that I had in London: the squid ink pasta with scallop, chilli and scallops. The food came quite fast, however, the sure were not kidding when they say "small". I could have eaten up that bowl in 2 bites! It was a lot smaller than the one in London. Taste wise, it was equally pedestrian. The pathetic scallops were not the freshest and the pasta, although al dente, did not blend in with the sauce/broth that it was sitting in. For the price that it is charged, this, like its London's branch, was not worth the time or calories.

Verdict: No value for money, so will not be coming back.