Push (12A)

  

What is it about February and sub standard paranormal power films? Almost a year ago to the day that Jumper fell on its bum, so Push takes a similar tumble.

Although suffering from similar problems (unsympathetic characters, poor pacing, stupid plot developments and insufficient action), this year's X-Men/Heroes wannabe does differ in one key area: a story so needlessly complicated, that it makes the Ocean films look like Snakes on a Plane.

Information overload begins right from the credits, where file notes, clippings and a voice-over gives a potted history of these powers (Nazis trying to make a super-army, obviously) and the characteristics of a 'Pusher', 'Mover', 'Sniffer', 'Watcher'... hang about, why is this necessary now?

Arriving in Hong Kong, we catch up with Nick (Chris Evans), a telekinetic (Mover) in hiding from Division, a shady US experimental cliché. We've already seen Division, headed by scary looking and funny sounding Djimon Hounsou, kill his father in the opening moments, so we know they mean business.

Nick is soon visited by two of Division's psychic bloodhounds (Sniffers), quickly followed by smart arse 13-year-old Cassie (Dakota Fanning, the millennium's Jodie Foster), a Watcher who can draw the future. Yeah, a prepubescent Isaac Mendez, Heroes fans.

Apparently, everyone is looking for another psychically powered escapee who has stolen a briefcase that contains something really, really important. Also in the mix are a rival Chinese family with powers such as shouting at a zillion decibels, Nick's old friend who can make objects appear temporarily different and assorted other psychics who have all chosen to live in the same part of the world.

In its favour, Push does have the novelty value of using quirky, often garishly decorated Hong Kong locations, lending an off kilter backdrop to the psychic battleground; plus about 15-20 minutes of competent, chaotic action. Lots of props fly about and psychic punches create a cool lens flare, but The Matrix was doing far more exciting stuff ten years ago.

Problems arise during the 90 minutes of other stuff – you know, characters, dialogue and story. The three protagonists are charmless: dour Evans has no personality, Fanning's old-for-her-years sarcasm grows tiresome quickly and Camilla Belle, the subject of everyone's hunt, is just a pretty face with prettier eyebrows. She was much the same in 10,000 BC.

The film's biggest flaw, though, is the plot. I'm all for multiple twists and turns within the right genre (thrillers, heist films etc) and polite applause for not being as hollow as the trailer would suggest. However, writer David Bourla and Brit director Paul McGuigan should have been told that insanely complicated does not equate to clever and gripping.

Without giving too much away, or rather, I couldn't explain it to you if I tried, the heroes realise that the only way to outwit the more powerful Watchers (future readers, keep up!) is to not have a clue of their own next move. The way in which Nick et al circumvent this hurdle with a pen and some paper will alternately confuse and annoy you. I believe the modern parlance is 'WTF?!'

Coming full circle to my original Jumper comparison, the film's apparent self confidence also extends to leaving threads dangling for a sequel. I am a Watcher and that isn't going to happen. My notepad never lies.

Jason Caro