rodduncan-1

A story about a faded, jaded journalist (Clint) who starts to suspect the man on death row he is supposed to be interviewing is in fact innocent. Is he right? Will he get the evidence in time? I watched this from the point of view of someone trying to write screenplays that can be shot on a low budget. With that in mind, I was very impressed. The movie makes good use of a small number of sets and a small cast. The story is gripping enough. The characters are well developed. There was never any doubt in my mind what would happen at the end, but it was engaging non-the-less.

My one quibble would be the resolution - those last 3 or 4 minutes right at the end. The rhythm of this seemed slightly out. I can't go into details without giving the plot away. But let's face it, I could guess what had actually happened at the climax of the movie. There was no point in trying withholding the facts any longer. That just left us with a slightly cheesy moment in the ending sequence.

However, this is a very watchable, if somewhat unremarkable movie. Gently entertaining.

I don't think you can judge a budget thriller with the same measures as you use to judge a thriller that cost tens of millions to make.

Cut out the helicopter explosions and car smash-ups chases. Reduce the number of locations to the absolute minimum. Then see what is left of a big-budget thriller. Usually very little. But in white angel - constructed cleverly around the limited resources that were available - there is a compelling narrative that never feels slow.

Maybe I see it this way because I am a writer and can see the elegance of what the film-makers have done in this case. A compelling story and a fine central performance make this a British psychological thriller well worth watching.

This is one of those 'open-secret' plots. We, the audience, have seen the poster. We know the exhibits in the museum are going to come alive once the sun sets. Only the new night watchman, Ben Stiller, is in the dark.

So there I am, sitting in the movie theatre, surrounded by parents and children, and I'm anticipating Jurassic Park with some slapstick comedy thrown in. But when the museum's T Rex skeleton does come to life, it has a personality all of its own, as do each of the museum's other exhibits. It is from these individual characters and foibles that much of the trouble and the fun of the movie flow.

There is a fine cast, including Steve Coogan and Robin Williams as exhibits and Ricky Gervais as museum director. A trio of old time museum security guards are played by Dick Van Dyke, Mickey Rooney and Bill Cobbs. The plot starts somewhat slowly in comedy and action terms, but once the exhibits wake up the laughs and excitement keep going to the end.

I might have gone along with most of the reviewers of this film and concluded that Night at the Museum is pleasantly funny but should have been so much more. I might have said that but for the reaction of the children in the audience – particularly the 8 to 11 year olds. Their eyes widened through the twists and turns of the plot. They curled up in their seats like springs in anticipation of the things they could see coming and they exploded with laughter at all the right points.

In character and target audience, this film is more like Home Alone than Jurassic Park. It is built on anticipation and ingenuity and plans going right and plans going wrong. In spite of the CGI it is an old fashioned family movie. And in spite of the opinions of reviewers, I suspect it will remain a favourite of its target audience for many years to come.