A United Kingdom is directed by Amma Asante and is the story of Seretse and Ruth Khama, a black prince of Bechuanaland and a white ambulance driver during World War 2, whose marriage caused great political problems during the mid-20th century.
I wasn't familiar with the story of Seretse and Ruth before I saw A United Kingdom, and I was really interested to see how it would turn out while watching the film. During my review of Allied I mentioned that for a film about the relationship between to people to work, you must believe in the relationship on screen. Luckily I believed in David Oyelowo and Rosamund Pike here as the central couple. If I were to have a complaint it would be that at the beginning the set up of their romance was rather quick and was done over a montage where it isn't very clear how long a time period it covers.
In short: A United Kingdom is very well made with believable central performances, but with a rushed set up.
Saturday, 17 December 2016
The Accountant review
To make everything chronological I saw The Accountant after Arrival but before Nocturnal Animals.
The Accountant is a dramatic action film about a highly intelligent autistic accountant who does business on the side with people who have questionable careers, and has a deadly arsenal to defend himself.
Honestly, I found it hard to describe the film as there are so many different story threads and characters that are followed, so I told you the basic premise instead. Having several story threads running alongside each other in a non-linear structure can make a film a mess. I found that wasn't the case here and, like Nocturnal Animals, each story compliments the overall story and the film probably works better having a non-linear structure.
Ben Affleck does well here, as do Jon Bernthal, Anna Kendrick, John Lithgow and JK Simmons. There were some elements to the story which were a bit predictable or felt rather rushed but for the most part it was good. Director Gavin O'Connor and cinematographer Seamus McGarvey do well at showing which time period you are currently watching. However, O'Connor fails to create a natural bridge between the autistic drama half of the film to the action heavy half of the film. I liked both parts, but there was no natural link between them.
In short: The Accountant is an entertaining, action drama that is two films in one without a good link between them, and a few story problems.
The Accountant is a dramatic action film about a highly intelligent autistic accountant who does business on the side with people who have questionable careers, and has a deadly arsenal to defend himself.
Honestly, I found it hard to describe the film as there are so many different story threads and characters that are followed, so I told you the basic premise instead. Having several story threads running alongside each other in a non-linear structure can make a film a mess. I found that wasn't the case here and, like Nocturnal Animals, each story compliments the overall story and the film probably works better having a non-linear structure.
Ben Affleck does well here, as do Jon Bernthal, Anna Kendrick, John Lithgow and JK Simmons. There were some elements to the story which were a bit predictable or felt rather rushed but for the most part it was good. Director Gavin O'Connor and cinematographer Seamus McGarvey do well at showing which time period you are currently watching. However, O'Connor fails to create a natural bridge between the autistic drama half of the film to the action heavy half of the film. I liked both parts, but there was no natural link between them.
In short: The Accountant is an entertaining, action drama that is two films in one without a good link between them, and a few story problems.
Thursday, 15 December 2016
Allied review
Ok, I lied, I am writing this on the 15th December.
Allied is directed by Robert Zemeckis and is about two spies in World War Two, who, after a mission in Casablanca, fall in love. Later the husband is informed his wife may be a German spy.
It would have been interesting to watch the film without knowing about the spy twist. But it was shown in the trailer and if it weren't for that I probably wouldn't have seen it. I wish they didn't show it in the trailer because the film did not work for me at all.
In a film centred around the relationship between two people it is essential that you believe that they are a couple for the film to work. I did not believe for a second in Brad Pitt and Marion Cotillard's characters as a couple. They share very little on screen chemistry and their relationship feels very rushed. They are in Morocco for a week, in which they keep it professional until the last day. Then suddenly Brad wants Marion to come back to London with him because they are so in love. Suddenly they're married, now there's a kid, now they're happy, and maybe she's a German spy. It also doesn't help that Brad Pitt shows about five variations of the same expression throughout the film: Happy Brad, Sad Brad, Confused Brad, Angsty Brad and Angry Brad (that could easily become a mobile game). Marion Cotillard was good though.
Robert Zemeckis is known for advancing cinema and for his use of both practical and digital effects, so it is rather odd of him to choose to take on this film when it is a lot more personal with a lot less standout scenes. And the scenes which he tries to make spectacles often come off as cheesy. Scenes inside a car during a sandstorm and a birth during an air raid stand out as completely out of place. I liked one of the previous films Steven Knight wrote, Locke, but I really disliked the characters and the story he created here. Maybe one of the true stories of which this film is based on are more interesting than the fictional one here.
In short: Allied doesn't work for several reasons but mainly the central relationship is not believable.
I forgot to review The Accountant. So that will be next instead of A United Kingdom.
Allied is directed by Robert Zemeckis and is about two spies in World War Two, who, after a mission in Casablanca, fall in love. Later the husband is informed his wife may be a German spy.
It would have been interesting to watch the film without knowing about the spy twist. But it was shown in the trailer and if it weren't for that I probably wouldn't have seen it. I wish they didn't show it in the trailer because the film did not work for me at all.
In a film centred around the relationship between two people it is essential that you believe that they are a couple for the film to work. I did not believe for a second in Brad Pitt and Marion Cotillard's characters as a couple. They share very little on screen chemistry and their relationship feels very rushed. They are in Morocco for a week, in which they keep it professional until the last day. Then suddenly Brad wants Marion to come back to London with him because they are so in love. Suddenly they're married, now there's a kid, now they're happy, and maybe she's a German spy. It also doesn't help that Brad Pitt shows about five variations of the same expression throughout the film: Happy Brad, Sad Brad, Confused Brad, Angsty Brad and Angry Brad (that could easily become a mobile game). Marion Cotillard was good though.
Robert Zemeckis is known for advancing cinema and for his use of both practical and digital effects, so it is rather odd of him to choose to take on this film when it is a lot more personal with a lot less standout scenes. And the scenes which he tries to make spectacles often come off as cheesy. Scenes inside a car during a sandstorm and a birth during an air raid stand out as completely out of place. I liked one of the previous films Steven Knight wrote, Locke, but I really disliked the characters and the story he created here. Maybe one of the true stories of which this film is based on are more interesting than the fictional one here.
In short: Allied doesn't work for several reasons but mainly the central relationship is not believable.
I forgot to review The Accountant. So that will be next instead of A United Kingdom.
Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them review
Fantastic Beasts is an expansion of JK Rowlings Wizarding World, and follows magizoologist Newt Scamander as he enters 1920s New York.
I could go on for ages about how I found this to be a great continuation of a franchise that should have ended five years ago. But I'm not because it could easily become derivative. If you are a dedicated reader (are there any of you?) you will know I am a big Harry Potter fan. During October I visited the studio tour in Watford and would highly recommend it for any fan. I really enjoyed the film.
The characters of Newt (Eddie Redmayne), Jacob (Dan Fogelman), Tina (Katherine Waterstone), and Queenie (Alison Sudol) are all well written and are portrayed well. Colin Farrell and Ezra Miller also do good in smaller roles, but still manage to bring depth to their characters. Rowling does a good job of writing her first screenplay and director David Yates does well in bringing it to the screen.
The CGI is well done and the beasts are truly wonderful... that doesn't sound quite right, erm... majestical! Yes, the beasts are majestical. The second time I saw the film was in IMAX 3D, and while I found the 3D conversion to be quite good with the breaking of the frame, there were several times where the conversion blurred the picture.
In short: Fantastic Beasts is a worthy expansion of the Harry Potter series and shows great potential for the future.
I could go on for ages about how I found this to be a great continuation of a franchise that should have ended five years ago. But I'm not because it could easily become derivative. If you are a dedicated reader (are there any of you?) you will know I am a big Harry Potter fan. During October I visited the studio tour in Watford and would highly recommend it for any fan. I really enjoyed the film.
The characters of Newt (Eddie Redmayne), Jacob (Dan Fogelman), Tina (Katherine Waterstone), and Queenie (Alison Sudol) are all well written and are portrayed well. Colin Farrell and Ezra Miller also do good in smaller roles, but still manage to bring depth to their characters. Rowling does a good job of writing her first screenplay and director David Yates does well in bringing it to the screen.
The CGI is well done and the beasts are truly wonderful... that doesn't sound quite right, erm... majestical! Yes, the beasts are majestical. The second time I saw the film was in IMAX 3D, and while I found the 3D conversion to be quite good with the breaking of the frame, there were several times where the conversion blurred the picture.
In short: Fantastic Beasts is a worthy expansion of the Harry Potter series and shows great potential for the future.
Nocturnal Animals review
Tom Ford's Nocturnal Animals has a three story structure in which a woman receives a manuscript from her ex-husband, the story in the manuscript and the story of their relationship.
Of the two Amy Adams films that came out in November, this is the lesser. That doesn't mean it's bad, just nowhere near as good as Arrival. It is clearly shown that Tom Ford is a fashion designer, as every shot seems a carefully put together and everything that is shown is there on purpose. This, however, becomes a case of style becoming substance at times. I love whenever a filmmaker is able to tell their story through visual means, but at times it is almost as if Ford decided to have some parts of the film have several meanings in order to remain ambiguous and confuse the audience. Of course, every shot looks beautiful and helps to easily transition between the three stories.
For a film like this to work you need to be invested in all three stories. The manuscript had me invested in through the whole story despite the shocking violent scenes, which probably helped me to stay interested in the story. The story of Susan (Amy Adams) and Edward's (Jake Gyllenhaal) relationship was intriguing as I wanted to know what went terribly wrong. The story of Susan reading the manuscript didn't have me invested until at least halfway through the film. A lot of the scenes were of Susan walking around her big house, reading as she becomes depressed about her life. It wasn't until we actually start to learn more about Susan that I found this part of the film interesting. The three stories effectively intertwine and add to each other, so it is possible that on another viewing I will appreciate the film more. But the opposite could also be true.
Amy Adams gives a better performance in Arrival than she does here, as she is given more to work with there. Jake Gyllenhaal, Michael Shannon and, especially, Aaron Taylor-Johnson give great performances and I would really like for them to get recognition during awards season.
Once again, it would probably be best not to know much about the stories before watching Nocturnal Animals for the first time.
In short: Nocturnal Animals is a film with great performances and is very well designed, even if it sometimes overtakes the plot.
Of the two Amy Adams films that came out in November, this is the lesser. That doesn't mean it's bad, just nowhere near as good as Arrival. It is clearly shown that Tom Ford is a fashion designer, as every shot seems a carefully put together and everything that is shown is there on purpose. This, however, becomes a case of style becoming substance at times. I love whenever a filmmaker is able to tell their story through visual means, but at times it is almost as if Ford decided to have some parts of the film have several meanings in order to remain ambiguous and confuse the audience. Of course, every shot looks beautiful and helps to easily transition between the three stories.
For a film like this to work you need to be invested in all three stories. The manuscript had me invested in through the whole story despite the shocking violent scenes, which probably helped me to stay interested in the story. The story of Susan (Amy Adams) and Edward's (Jake Gyllenhaal) relationship was intriguing as I wanted to know what went terribly wrong. The story of Susan reading the manuscript didn't have me invested until at least halfway through the film. A lot of the scenes were of Susan walking around her big house, reading as she becomes depressed about her life. It wasn't until we actually start to learn more about Susan that I found this part of the film interesting. The three stories effectively intertwine and add to each other, so it is possible that on another viewing I will appreciate the film more. But the opposite could also be true.
Amy Adams gives a better performance in Arrival than she does here, as she is given more to work with there. Jake Gyllenhaal, Michael Shannon and, especially, Aaron Taylor-Johnson give great performances and I would really like for them to get recognition during awards season.
Once again, it would probably be best not to know much about the stories before watching Nocturnal Animals for the first time.
In short: Nocturnal Animals is a film with great performances and is very well designed, even if it sometimes overtakes the plot.
Arrival review
I am really bad at releasing reviews on time.
Arrival is a science fiction drama about a linguistics professor(Amy Adams) asked to make contact with aliens in pods that have arrived on Earth.
I have told you all you need to know about Arrival before you see it. It is one of my favourite films I have seen this year, and I would highly recommend that you see it if you haven't already. This is the third film of Denis Villeneuve's that I have seen; it is his best in my opinion. Prisoners and Sicario are both very well made but both are very dark and neither have much hope. This is where Arrival is different. There is a sense of wonder felt at several times throughout the film and the outlook on humanity isn't as dark and depressing as several characters in Prisoners and Sicario. There are a few moments of humour that are placed well without standing out, but help keep the film from going into bleak territory.
Amy Adams gives a brilliant performance in the lead role and I think has a great chance of being a frontrunner when it comes to awards. Jeremy Renner and Forest Whitaker both do well in the smaller roles they are given as a theoretical physicist and a military colonel. Villeneuve once again partners with Jóhann Jóhannsson for the third time to produce a magnificent score that works well in the film. Not returning is cinematographer Roger Deakins, and is replaced by Bradford Young who excellently captures the great majesty of the arrival of the extra-terrestrials.
I've told you enough, just remember that aliens≠action.
In short: Arrival is fantastic, it is what every science fiction film should strive to be like.
Arrival is a science fiction drama about a linguistics professor(Amy Adams) asked to make contact with aliens in pods that have arrived on Earth.
I have told you all you need to know about Arrival before you see it. It is one of my favourite films I have seen this year, and I would highly recommend that you see it if you haven't already. This is the third film of Denis Villeneuve's that I have seen; it is his best in my opinion. Prisoners and Sicario are both very well made but both are very dark and neither have much hope. This is where Arrival is different. There is a sense of wonder felt at several times throughout the film and the outlook on humanity isn't as dark and depressing as several characters in Prisoners and Sicario. There are a few moments of humour that are placed well without standing out, but help keep the film from going into bleak territory.
Amy Adams gives a brilliant performance in the lead role and I think has a great chance of being a frontrunner when it comes to awards. Jeremy Renner and Forest Whitaker both do well in the smaller roles they are given as a theoretical physicist and a military colonel. Villeneuve once again partners with Jóhann Jóhannsson for the third time to produce a magnificent score that works well in the film. Not returning is cinematographer Roger Deakins, and is replaced by Bradford Young who excellently captures the great majesty of the arrival of the extra-terrestrials.
I've told you enough, just remember that aliens≠action.
In short: Arrival is fantastic, it is what every science fiction film should strive to be like.
Tuesday, 29 November 2016
Doctor Strange review
Scott Derickson's Doctor Strange is the origin story of the titular Marvel hero, a surgeon who loses control of his hands in an accident and goes to the mystical Kamar-Taj, where he learns to become a sorcerer.
Benedict Cumberbatch is a great actor, and does great here as Stephen Strange. He is perfectly cast and shows great growth and subtlety in his character. Tilda Swinton does very well as The Ancient One, despite the controversy around her casting. Benedict Wong and Chiwetel Ejiofor both do well in their roles as well. Mads Mikkelsen does the best with what he's given. Like a lot of Marvel movie villains he isn't given much to do and is mainly there to move the plot forward.
The visuals are amazing. Visually spectacular. See it on a good screen if you still can as it will be worth it. Scott Derrickson, a director who mainly worked in a genre I am not a fan of: horror, really shows off his talent here.
In Short: Doctor Strange is a hugely enjoyable, effects filled comic book film with many good performances.
Benedict Cumberbatch is a great actor, and does great here as Stephen Strange. He is perfectly cast and shows great growth and subtlety in his character. Tilda Swinton does very well as The Ancient One, despite the controversy around her casting. Benedict Wong and Chiwetel Ejiofor both do well in their roles as well. Mads Mikkelsen does the best with what he's given. Like a lot of Marvel movie villains he isn't given much to do and is mainly there to move the plot forward.
The visuals are amazing. Visually spectacular. See it on a good screen if you still can as it will be worth it. Scott Derrickson, a director who mainly worked in a genre I am not a fan of: horror, really shows off his talent here.
In Short: Doctor Strange is a hugely enjoyable, effects filled comic book film with many good performances.
Jack Reacher: Never Go Back review
Jack Reacher: Never Go Back is directed by Edward Zwick and features Tom Cruise returning to the Jack Reacher role, and teams up with Cobie Smulders to clear their names.
I like the first Jack Reacher, it's a fun action thriller with some good action scenes, a great car chase, a very powerful opening scene and a plot to hold it together. Never Go Back was fun while I was watching it but, just like The Magnificent Seven remake, it is very forgettable. I can't tell you the plot, the villain and what happens in the middle of the film.
Tom Cruise is good as always, but his characters unlikableness, something which I liked about the first one, is toned down here. Partially because of the writing, but also because of a side plot about a girl who may or may not be his daughter.
In Short: JR:NGB is enjoyable at the time but completely forgettable.
I like the first Jack Reacher, it's a fun action thriller with some good action scenes, a great car chase, a very powerful opening scene and a plot to hold it together. Never Go Back was fun while I was watching it but, just like The Magnificent Seven remake, it is very forgettable. I can't tell you the plot, the villain and what happens in the middle of the film.
Tom Cruise is good as always, but his characters unlikableness, something which I liked about the first one, is toned down here. Partially because of the writing, but also because of a side plot about a girl who may or may not be his daughter.
In Short: JR:NGB is enjoyable at the time but completely forgettable.
I, Daniel Blake review
I, Daniel Blake is the new film by Ken Loach about a man who recently had a heart attack trying to apply for jobseekers allowance and tries helps a single mum who recently moved.
This is a very well made, slow paced, look at a man's life as he is trying to earn enough money to live. Dave Johns gives an excellent performance of the struggling Daniel, and helps to make him believable in this situation. There is also a strong political theme running through the film that may be lost on viewers outside the UK. However, I think that the themes present in Daniel's struggle will help make audiences outside the UK enjoy watching the film.
In Short: I, Daniel Blake is a excellent depiction of a man struggling to make a living, while deconstructing the job finding process.
I have wrote my Allied review but I am keeping it for now so that my reviews are in chronological order. Also you may have noticed this review was slightly shorter, as will most of my reviews before the Allied review.
This is a very well made, slow paced, look at a man's life as he is trying to earn enough money to live. Dave Johns gives an excellent performance of the struggling Daniel, and helps to make him believable in this situation. There is also a strong political theme running through the film that may be lost on viewers outside the UK. However, I think that the themes present in Daniel's struggle will help make audiences outside the UK enjoy watching the film.
In Short: I, Daniel Blake is a excellent depiction of a man struggling to make a living, while deconstructing the job finding process.
I have wrote my Allied review but I am keeping it for now so that my reviews are in chronological order. Also you may have noticed this review was slightly shorter, as will most of my reviews before the Allied review.
Friday, 25 November 2016
The Girl on the Train review
The Girl on the Train is a thriller directed by Tate Taylor about a woman who goes missing(Haley Bennet), her neighbour(Rebecca Ferguson) and a woman who sees her everyday from the train(Emily Blunt).
The main cast all give good performances, with Emily Blunt standing out as an alcoholic divorcee. If the performances were not convincing in a film like this then it would all fall apart. The Girl on the Train didn't need bad performances to derail it, instead it had a laughably bad ending and an extremely obvious twist.
In my Miss Peregrine review earlier today I talked about how the ending made me think less of the film. The ending for this is so horribly bad and obvious that it takes it from a decent mystery thriller to a disappointing mess. I enjoyed the first half of the film and was going along with it. But that ending is just awful... I really want to go in depth with spoilers but you might want to see it so I won't. The writing is quite good in the first half as well, but as the film goes on it gets progressively worse. There were moments when people in the screening I was at were laughing at the (I presume) unintentionally bad dialogue.
In Short: The Girl on the Train starts off well and has good performances, but has a predictable plot and gets progressively worse as it continues.
I probably won't post any reviews at the weekend but I might have a review for Allied on Sunday.
The main cast all give good performances, with Emily Blunt standing out as an alcoholic divorcee. If the performances were not convincing in a film like this then it would all fall apart. The Girl on the Train didn't need bad performances to derail it, instead it had a laughably bad ending and an extremely obvious twist.
In my Miss Peregrine review earlier today I talked about how the ending made me think less of the film. The ending for this is so horribly bad and obvious that it takes it from a decent mystery thriller to a disappointing mess. I enjoyed the first half of the film and was going along with it. But that ending is just awful... I really want to go in depth with spoilers but you might want to see it so I won't. The writing is quite good in the first half as well, but as the film goes on it gets progressively worse. There were moments when people in the screening I was at were laughing at the (I presume) unintentionally bad dialogue.
In Short: The Girl on the Train starts off well and has good performances, but has a predictable plot and gets progressively worse as it continues.
I probably won't post any reviews at the weekend but I might have a review for Allied on Sunday.
Hunt for the Wilderpeople review
Taika Waititi's Hunt for the Wilderpeople is a comedy about a troubled teenager and his foster father who decide live in the New Zealand bush after an unfortunate event.
In my Swiss Army Man review I mentioned Wilderpeople as one of the funniest films I have seen this year. It is my favourite comedy of the year, due to it's characters, story and all round likeableness.
Julian Dennison and Sam Neill work brilliantly with each other. They have great comedic chemistry and have two of the best characters I have seen this year. I like Sam Neill in this films I have seen him in, but he is absolutely brilliant here as Hec. Julian Dennison is even better as Ricky, and gives some of the best one liners out of any film I have seen this year.
It's not just the main characters that are well written, but the secondary characters have some lines that are just as good as Ricky and Hec's. Standouts are Rachel House's social services worker and Taika Waititi and Rhys Darby's cameos.
Of all of Waititi's work I have only seen this and What We Do in the Shadows(which he co-wrote and directed with Jemaine Clement), and I really want to see more of his films. He is a very good comedic director who knows how and when to put in deeper and more emotional moments. I am a fan of comic books and superheroes, and with Waititi's involvement in Thor: Ragnarok, I am now more excited to see it next year(and the Team Thor short is great too).
In Short: Hunt for the Wilderpeople is one of the funniest films of the year with great characters, a hilarious script and very well done direction.
In my Swiss Army Man review I mentioned Wilderpeople as one of the funniest films I have seen this year. It is my favourite comedy of the year, due to it's characters, story and all round likeableness.
Julian Dennison and Sam Neill work brilliantly with each other. They have great comedic chemistry and have two of the best characters I have seen this year. I like Sam Neill in this films I have seen him in, but he is absolutely brilliant here as Hec. Julian Dennison is even better as Ricky, and gives some of the best one liners out of any film I have seen this year.
It's not just the main characters that are well written, but the secondary characters have some lines that are just as good as Ricky and Hec's. Standouts are Rachel House's social services worker and Taika Waititi and Rhys Darby's cameos.
Of all of Waititi's work I have only seen this and What We Do in the Shadows(which he co-wrote and directed with Jemaine Clement), and I really want to see more of his films. He is a very good comedic director who knows how and when to put in deeper and more emotional moments. I am a fan of comic books and superheroes, and with Waititi's involvement in Thor: Ragnarok, I am now more excited to see it next year(and the Team Thor short is great too).
In Short: Hunt for the Wilderpeople is one of the funniest films of the year with great characters, a hilarious script and very well done direction.
Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children review
Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children is a fantasy film directed by Tim Burton, based on the book of the same name about an American teenager who finds a children's home in Wales filled with peculiar children.
I like Tim Burton. I've seen most of his films and I always enjoy his distinctive style. It definitely works with this film. Miss Peregrine is not his finest film but he certainly worked hard to make it look great.
I have read the first two books and enjoyed reading them. I was fine with Burton and screenwriter Jane Goldman changing the ages and powers of some of the characters. However, they completely changed the ending and I really didn't like it. There are some adaptions where a change to the ending will be an improvement. But the end was completely changed and made it much worse. The antagonists, The Hollows, are shown to be terrifying and hard to kill throughout most of the film. They are then made a mockery of at the end and are shown as foolish in a bright and colourful sequence with techno fairground music playing. It feels completely out of place with the rest of the film and makes it too cheery.
The main actors all do well in their roles, even if Samuel L. Jackson didn't realise he was no longer working on Kingsman (nothing against him, but he plays them both the same). There is a twist involving a character that is handled poorly, and I would have preferred if they had it in a similar way as to how it plays out in the book (I realise the book and the film are separate but it's hard not to compare them).
The beginning and middle of the film I enjoyed. There many good moments between the characters and there are some interesting ideas. It's a shame the ending overpowers that tough.
In Short: I like the director, I like the cast, I like the book, but I don't like the film.
I like Tim Burton. I've seen most of his films and I always enjoy his distinctive style. It definitely works with this film. Miss Peregrine is not his finest film but he certainly worked hard to make it look great.
I have read the first two books and enjoyed reading them. I was fine with Burton and screenwriter Jane Goldman changing the ages and powers of some of the characters. However, they completely changed the ending and I really didn't like it. There are some adaptions where a change to the ending will be an improvement. But the end was completely changed and made it much worse. The antagonists, The Hollows, are shown to be terrifying and hard to kill throughout most of the film. They are then made a mockery of at the end and are shown as foolish in a bright and colourful sequence with techno fairground music playing. It feels completely out of place with the rest of the film and makes it too cheery.
The main actors all do well in their roles, even if Samuel L. Jackson didn't realise he was no longer working on Kingsman (nothing against him, but he plays them both the same). There is a twist involving a character that is handled poorly, and I would have preferred if they had it in a similar way as to how it plays out in the book (I realise the book and the film are separate but it's hard not to compare them).
The beginning and middle of the film I enjoyed. There many good moments between the characters and there are some interesting ideas. It's a shame the ending overpowers that tough.
In Short: I like the director, I like the cast, I like the book, but I don't like the film.
Thursday, 24 November 2016
Swiss Army Man review
The Daniels' Swiss Army Man is a tale of life, love, and friendship featuring a shipwrecked man (Paul Dano) and a magical farting corpse (Daniel Radcliffe).
I was intrigued about seeing this film ever since hearing about the walkouts at Sundance, where I thought "This sounds hilarious". I didn't like the film at first. The first ten minutes or so were unfunny and slightly boring. But then a moment happens and I was invested until the end. It is one of the funniest films I have seen this year, alongside Deadpool,The Nice Guys and Hunt for the Wilderpeople(more on that later). There are some extremely laugh out loud moments, be it the bodily functions of Manny the corpse or what occurs during the more existential and thought provoking scenes.
There is a major problem I had with the film. There are two or three musical montages during the film. During these moments a thought popped into my head: "These are quite music video like moments". Later I had another thought: The film felt like an idea for a music video stretched out to future length. Given The Daniels past directing music videos it makes sense. Once I realized this I couldn't get the idea out of my head.
In short: Unlike a lot of reviewers, I neither loved it, nor hated it. It's just a hilarious film with a problematic story and structure.
I was intrigued about seeing this film ever since hearing about the walkouts at Sundance, where I thought "This sounds hilarious". I didn't like the film at first. The first ten minutes or so were unfunny and slightly boring. But then a moment happens and I was invested until the end. It is one of the funniest films I have seen this year, alongside Deadpool,The Nice Guys and Hunt for the Wilderpeople(more on that later). There are some extremely laugh out loud moments, be it the bodily functions of Manny the corpse or what occurs during the more existential and thought provoking scenes.
There is a major problem I had with the film. There are two or three musical montages during the film. During these moments a thought popped into my head: "These are quite music video like moments". Later I had another thought: The film felt like an idea for a music video stretched out to future length. Given The Daniels past directing music videos it makes sense. Once I realized this I couldn't get the idea out of my head.
In short: Unlike a lot of reviewers, I neither loved it, nor hated it. It's just a hilarious film with a problematic story and structure.
Deepwater Horizon review
Sorry for not posting any short reviews but homework and procrastination happened.
Deepwater Horizon is directed by Peter Berg and is the story of the disaster on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in April 2010.
My delay actually helped me here. Since it's based on a true story of a terrible disaster, I wanted to think of a way to write this review honestly while being respectful. Being respectful to those involved and those who lost their live on the oil rig is something Peter Berg and writers Matthew Michael Carnahan and Michael Sand did very well. They could have made it a big effects extravaganza, but instead focused on the characters trying to survive the disaster. If they had gone for the former then it would be a case of literally profiting off of death, injury and disaster. Berg instead goes for a more human tale of surviving against the odds.
The film wouldn't work without people that you care about that you want to see survive. Mark Wahlberg, Kurt Russell, Gina Rodriguez and Dylan O'Brien all do a good job of making you care about these people and give good performances all round of people just doing their job trying to survive after BP wants the process rushed. Speaking of BP, John Malkovich gives a very good performance of the BP employee who you can tell doesn't really want to be there and doesn't care about the delicate process that must happen for the oil to be obtained.
Mark Wahlberg's Mike Williams is the main character. The film opens with him and mainly follows him. We see the most of his family out of the employees, and the scenes where he is with his wife and daughter at the beginning help to establish him as a good person. As I said, this is a human story of survival, and there is a very well done scene at the end of the survivors off the rig that ends the film in the only way I can think of that would work.
Peter Berg has found his niche in making based on true story films that show the triumph of the human spirit in the face of extreme conditions. Both this and Lone Survivor are well made tributes to the men and women who had to endure these adverse situations. He and Mark Wahlberg obviously work well together and I'm interested in seeing Patriot's Day when it's released.
And the sound during the scenes of the oil rig undergoing the oil spill is very well designed and used.
In short: Deepwater Horizon is a very well made tribute to those that had to endure these events with good performances, good direction and great sound design.
Deepwater Horizon is directed by Peter Berg and is the story of the disaster on the Deepwater Horizon oil rig in April 2010.
My delay actually helped me here. Since it's based on a true story of a terrible disaster, I wanted to think of a way to write this review honestly while being respectful. Being respectful to those involved and those who lost their live on the oil rig is something Peter Berg and writers Matthew Michael Carnahan and Michael Sand did very well. They could have made it a big effects extravaganza, but instead focused on the characters trying to survive the disaster. If they had gone for the former then it would be a case of literally profiting off of death, injury and disaster. Berg instead goes for a more human tale of surviving against the odds.
The film wouldn't work without people that you care about that you want to see survive. Mark Wahlberg, Kurt Russell, Gina Rodriguez and Dylan O'Brien all do a good job of making you care about these people and give good performances all round of people just doing their job trying to survive after BP wants the process rushed. Speaking of BP, John Malkovich gives a very good performance of the BP employee who you can tell doesn't really want to be there and doesn't care about the delicate process that must happen for the oil to be obtained.
Mark Wahlberg's Mike Williams is the main character. The film opens with him and mainly follows him. We see the most of his family out of the employees, and the scenes where he is with his wife and daughter at the beginning help to establish him as a good person. As I said, this is a human story of survival, and there is a very well done scene at the end of the survivors off the rig that ends the film in the only way I can think of that would work.
Peter Berg has found his niche in making based on true story films that show the triumph of the human spirit in the face of extreme conditions. Both this and Lone Survivor are well made tributes to the men and women who had to endure these adverse situations. He and Mark Wahlberg obviously work well together and I'm interested in seeing Patriot's Day when it's released.
And the sound during the scenes of the oil rig undergoing the oil spill is very well designed and used.
In short: Deepwater Horizon is a very well made tribute to those that had to endure these events with good performances, good direction and great sound design.
Monday, 21 November 2016
The Magnificent Seven (2016) review
Antoine Fuqua's The Magnificent Seven is the story of seven outlaws who band together to protect a town from evil people(I honestly can't remember what they were).
The problem with this review is I can't remember the villain and his faceless army, along with other aspects of this film. I remember enjoying it at the time but now I realize it is forgettable. It suffers from the same problem as Man of Steel, and that is the last 30-40 minutes is pure action and destruction. In MoS I find the city destroying action to be out of place with the rest of the film(the first two thirds is the best film Zack Snyder has made), while The Magnificent 7 I feel earns its long climactic action scene as the majority of the film is building up to it. Having said that it all blurs into one and there are only a few memorable sequences from it.
I remember the seven being likeable and working well together, even if Manuel Garcia-Rulfio and Martin Sensmeier were there to fill out the seven and were given no character development outside of the wanted Mexican and the banished Native American. I was quite glad that they didn't take the easy way out and had characters die and make reasonable decisions instead of everyone miraculously surviving and making unrealistic plans.
I realise I've not talked about much but as I said, I've forgotten a lot of it.
In short: The Magnificent Seven is forgettable but has a cast that work well together and is fun at the time.
The problem with this review is I can't remember the villain and his faceless army, along with other aspects of this film. I remember enjoying it at the time but now I realize it is forgettable. It suffers from the same problem as Man of Steel, and that is the last 30-40 minutes is pure action and destruction. In MoS I find the city destroying action to be out of place with the rest of the film(the first two thirds is the best film Zack Snyder has made), while The Magnificent 7 I feel earns its long climactic action scene as the majority of the film is building up to it. Having said that it all blurs into one and there are only a few memorable sequences from it.
I remember the seven being likeable and working well together, even if Manuel Garcia-Rulfio and Martin Sensmeier were there to fill out the seven and were given no character development outside of the wanted Mexican and the banished Native American. I was quite glad that they didn't take the easy way out and had characters die and make reasonable decisions instead of everyone miraculously surviving and making unrealistic plans.
I realise I've not talked about much but as I said, I've forgotten a lot of it.
In short: The Magnificent Seven is forgettable but has a cast that work well together and is fun at the time.
War on Everyone review
War on Everyone is a comedy by John Michael McDonagh about two corrupt cops(Michael Peña and Alexander Skarsgård) who get involved with a dangerous crime lord.
This film is not for everyone. If you're offended easily you will hate it before the first five minutes are over. It goes out to offend everyone in it's sights, and has a lot of fun doing so. Your enjoyment of the film is based on whether you are able to laugh along with the film at the cast of racist, sexist, homophobic, all round terrible people. If it had been made with proper hatred by McDonagh then it would come across as so and the film wouldn't be anywhere near as funny as it is. But there is the sense that he is doing it all tongue in cheek and just wanted to make the most politically incorrect movie he could.
Which brings me onto the story. It is rather weak and is used as a way for the characters to get from one joke to another. In this case it doesn't seem as though McDonagh ever wanted to create a complex case for these two to be involved in and wanted to focus on the characters instead. On the surface Terry and Bob are shallow and hateful, but are much more complex than that. I've seen Michael Peña in several comedic roles in the past, but I don't remember Alexander Skarsgård ever making me laugh as much as he did. His comic timing was perfect and I would quite like to see him do more comedic roles instead of the usual dark and dramatic roles.
In short: War on Everyone is good fun as long as you are able to go along with it's dark and offensive tone.
This film is not for everyone. If you're offended easily you will hate it before the first five minutes are over. It goes out to offend everyone in it's sights, and has a lot of fun doing so. Your enjoyment of the film is based on whether you are able to laugh along with the film at the cast of racist, sexist, homophobic, all round terrible people. If it had been made with proper hatred by McDonagh then it would come across as so and the film wouldn't be anywhere near as funny as it is. But there is the sense that he is doing it all tongue in cheek and just wanted to make the most politically incorrect movie he could.
Which brings me onto the story. It is rather weak and is used as a way for the characters to get from one joke to another. In this case it doesn't seem as though McDonagh ever wanted to create a complex case for these two to be involved in and wanted to focus on the characters instead. On the surface Terry and Bob are shallow and hateful, but are much more complex than that. I've seen Michael Peña in several comedic roles in the past, but I don't remember Alexander Skarsgård ever making me laugh as much as he did. His comic timing was perfect and I would quite like to see him do more comedic roles instead of the usual dark and dramatic roles.
In short: War on Everyone is good fun as long as you are able to go along with it's dark and offensive tone.
Kubo and the Two Strings review
Tis is unreasonably late, I realize that. I can try to think of an excuse but I can't, and I'm sorry for that. But it's better to do short reviews for everything I've seen in the last two months than to give up completely on something I said I would start. I'm sorry if anyone has been waiting patiently for more reviews, though unless a following has been formed in my absence I doubt it.
Travis Knight's Kubo and the Two Strings is the story of a boy named Kubo who, along with a monkey and a beetle, tries to fight back against evil forces.
Laika are masters at stop motion animation. Along with Aardman they are helping keep this classic animation style alive while more and more animated films opt for the computer animated approach. Obviously there's nothing wrong with cgi animation, but there is a sense of reality lost when it is not hand drawn or sculpted. Some of the set pieces in Kubo made me wonder how they were able to achieve it, particularly the giant and climactic scenes. Kubo, like Coraline, has a strong story at the centre, which compliments the fantastic visuals and makes the film as a whole more complete. I'm not saying Paranorman and The Boxtrolls have weak stories, I'm simply saying that the stories of Kubo and Coraline are more integral to the films working, while Paranorman and The Boxtrolls will occasionally rely on jokes. It is especially obvious how important the story is as the first lines are the Michael-Caine-esque "If you must blink, do it now".
A problem I face with Kubo(which has nothing to do with the predominantly white cast) is that it's too short. I wanted to spend more time with these characters and learning about the mythology of this world. But stop motion is a lengthy process(as seen in the end credits) so it would have taken a lot longer to make the film if it were two hours long. And there was a moment which I saw coming for reasons completely unrelated to the film which I shouldn't have put together.
In short: I really enjoyed Kubo and the Two Strings and would highly recommend it to anyone, whether it be for the fantastic visuals or the complex and emotional story.
Travis Knight's Kubo and the Two Strings is the story of a boy named Kubo who, along with a monkey and a beetle, tries to fight back against evil forces.
Laika are masters at stop motion animation. Along with Aardman they are helping keep this classic animation style alive while more and more animated films opt for the computer animated approach. Obviously there's nothing wrong with cgi animation, but there is a sense of reality lost when it is not hand drawn or sculpted. Some of the set pieces in Kubo made me wonder how they were able to achieve it, particularly the giant and climactic scenes. Kubo, like Coraline, has a strong story at the centre, which compliments the fantastic visuals and makes the film as a whole more complete. I'm not saying Paranorman and The Boxtrolls have weak stories, I'm simply saying that the stories of Kubo and Coraline are more integral to the films working, while Paranorman and The Boxtrolls will occasionally rely on jokes. It is especially obvious how important the story is as the first lines are the Michael-Caine-esque "If you must blink, do it now".
A problem I face with Kubo(which has nothing to do with the predominantly white cast) is that it's too short. I wanted to spend more time with these characters and learning about the mythology of this world. But stop motion is a lengthy process(as seen in the end credits) so it would have taken a lot longer to make the film if it were two hours long. And there was a moment which I saw coming for reasons completely unrelated to the film which I shouldn't have put together.
In short: I really enjoyed Kubo and the Two Strings and would highly recommend it to anyone, whether it be for the fantastic visuals or the complex and emotional story.
Saturday, 10 September 2016
Hell or High Water review
My first review is for David Mackenzie's 'Hell or High Water'.
'Hell or High Water' is a modern western about two brothers (Ben Foster and Chris Pine) who rob banks, and the two Texas Rangers (Jeff Bridges and Gil Birmingham) trying to solve the case.
In recent years Jeff Bridges has been talking in an unclear garbled voice in almost every film he's been in. Occasionally it can be a bit difficult to understand him but over the past few years I've become used to it. Ben Foster, meanwhile, sounds like he's trying to impersonate Tom Hardy in 'The Revenant'. At the beginning of the film it took me a few minutes to get used to the heavy Texan accents that the majority of the characters have, the same way it took me a few minutes to get used to the Shakespearian language used in last year's 'Macbeth'. Though that just adds to the authenticity of the real world setting that the film inhabits.
Now that I have my (very) minor gripe out the way, 'Hell or High Water' is a brilliant film. From the opening shot, alternating between a teller and the brothers as they enter a bank, the film had me hooked and never lost my interest for a single second. Part of the brilliance of the film is that writer Taylor Sheridan and director David Mackenzie manage to make you care for all four main characters and you become conflicted as to which duo you would like to see succeed.
Ben Foster's Tanner is the more unstable of the two brothers, having committed a multitude of crimes in the past and having spent time in jail. He expertly conveys this and believably portrays a character who isn't quite mentally stable. Chris Pine's Toby is more adjusted than his brother, actually caring about people other than his brother. I have mainly seen Chris Pine in high budget films, like the Star Trek reboot, and does fine in them. Here he gives a great performance as a man trying to help his family and keep his land. Foster and Pine are believable as brothers, partly because of their chemistry together on-screen, and also thanks to the dialogue that Taylor Sheridan has given them.
The premise of the film is simple on paper, but as the story progresses that doesn't matter as you believe in these characters and situations. During several scenes I started to think what it would be like if it were set a century or two earlier, and the majority of scenes would still work well. However, seeing the western tropes in a contemporary setting is refreshing, as during a time where there are very few actual westerns are made, taking the story to modern day Texas sets it apart from the classic westerns from several decades ago. One moment sees a ranch worker moving a herd of cattle across the road, as he remarks "It's no wonder our kids don't want to do this", referring to how film makers produce westerns a lot less frequently than their predecessors.
The western genre does bring with it several clichés, and unlike 'No Country For Old Men' and the revenge genre, it doesn't quite set them up and turn them on their head. For example: Jeff Bridges' Marcus Hamilton is days from retirement. Marcus is not the one who constantly brings it up, and actually dreads it, but his partner Alberto is the one counting down the days until he will no longer be subject to Marcus' mildly racist remarks about his mixed race heritage.
The cinematography provides beautiful wide landscape shots of the west Texas scenery. It is coupled with great precision with Nick Cave and Warren Ellis' score. This is thanks to David Mackenzie's expert direction. All of this would make a good film to watch, while listening only to the music used, but it is Taylor Sheridan's script which moves this film into the territory of greatness. The sharp dialogue and western structure make the film an enjoyable watch, and the characters develop throughout and you understand everyone's motives behind their acting. After this and last year's 'Sicario', Sheridan truly is a screenwriter to look out for during awards season in the next few years.
In short: 'Hell or High Water' is one of my favourite films I have seen so far this year, containing brilliant dialogue, great acting all around, a story that keeps you interested, and a score that works extremely well with the cinematography and the direction of the film.
'Hell or High Water' is a modern western about two brothers (Ben Foster and Chris Pine) who rob banks, and the two Texas Rangers (Jeff Bridges and Gil Birmingham) trying to solve the case.
In recent years Jeff Bridges has been talking in an unclear garbled voice in almost every film he's been in. Occasionally it can be a bit difficult to understand him but over the past few years I've become used to it. Ben Foster, meanwhile, sounds like he's trying to impersonate Tom Hardy in 'The Revenant'. At the beginning of the film it took me a few minutes to get used to the heavy Texan accents that the majority of the characters have, the same way it took me a few minutes to get used to the Shakespearian language used in last year's 'Macbeth'. Though that just adds to the authenticity of the real world setting that the film inhabits.
Now that I have my (very) minor gripe out the way, 'Hell or High Water' is a brilliant film. From the opening shot, alternating between a teller and the brothers as they enter a bank, the film had me hooked and never lost my interest for a single second. Part of the brilliance of the film is that writer Taylor Sheridan and director David Mackenzie manage to make you care for all four main characters and you become conflicted as to which duo you would like to see succeed.
Ben Foster's Tanner is the more unstable of the two brothers, having committed a multitude of crimes in the past and having spent time in jail. He expertly conveys this and believably portrays a character who isn't quite mentally stable. Chris Pine's Toby is more adjusted than his brother, actually caring about people other than his brother. I have mainly seen Chris Pine in high budget films, like the Star Trek reboot, and does fine in them. Here he gives a great performance as a man trying to help his family and keep his land. Foster and Pine are believable as brothers, partly because of their chemistry together on-screen, and also thanks to the dialogue that Taylor Sheridan has given them.
The premise of the film is simple on paper, but as the story progresses that doesn't matter as you believe in these characters and situations. During several scenes I started to think what it would be like if it were set a century or two earlier, and the majority of scenes would still work well. However, seeing the western tropes in a contemporary setting is refreshing, as during a time where there are very few actual westerns are made, taking the story to modern day Texas sets it apart from the classic westerns from several decades ago. One moment sees a ranch worker moving a herd of cattle across the road, as he remarks "It's no wonder our kids don't want to do this", referring to how film makers produce westerns a lot less frequently than their predecessors.
The western genre does bring with it several clichés, and unlike 'No Country For Old Men' and the revenge genre, it doesn't quite set them up and turn them on their head. For example: Jeff Bridges' Marcus Hamilton is days from retirement. Marcus is not the one who constantly brings it up, and actually dreads it, but his partner Alberto is the one counting down the days until he will no longer be subject to Marcus' mildly racist remarks about his mixed race heritage.
The cinematography provides beautiful wide landscape shots of the west Texas scenery. It is coupled with great precision with Nick Cave and Warren Ellis' score. This is thanks to David Mackenzie's expert direction. All of this would make a good film to watch, while listening only to the music used, but it is Taylor Sheridan's script which moves this film into the territory of greatness. The sharp dialogue and western structure make the film an enjoyable watch, and the characters develop throughout and you understand everyone's motives behind their acting. After this and last year's 'Sicario', Sheridan truly is a screenwriter to look out for during awards season in the next few years.
In short: 'Hell or High Water' is one of my favourite films I have seen so far this year, containing brilliant dialogue, great acting all around, a story that keeps you interested, and a score that works extremely well with the cinematography and the direction of the film.
Thursday, 8 September 2016
Update: Re-branding
Hello,
Recently I have decided that I'm going to resurrect this blog and make some changes.
Firstly, I'm no longer dedicating this to posters. I created this to talk about posters that I own in order to complete the Duke of Edinburgh award. I have completed that and have since abandoned reviewing posters.
So now I have decided to start up again, for fun this time. Now I'm going to review films, talk about movie news that interests me, or just talk about any film related subject that I want. Occasionally I will also write about TV shows and videogames as well, but those posts will be less frequent.
This weekend I will definitely be reviewing 'Kubo and the Two Strings', and will possibly be reviewing; 'Bad Moms', 'Café Society' or 'Hell or High Water'.
After that I will be frequently uploading posts, but reviews will usually be at a weekend.
Until then,
Recently I have decided that I'm going to resurrect this blog and make some changes.
Firstly, I'm no longer dedicating this to posters. I created this to talk about posters that I own in order to complete the Duke of Edinburgh award. I have completed that and have since abandoned reviewing posters.
So now I have decided to start up again, for fun this time. Now I'm going to review films, talk about movie news that interests me, or just talk about any film related subject that I want. Occasionally I will also write about TV shows and videogames as well, but those posts will be less frequent.
This weekend I will definitely be reviewing 'Kubo and the Two Strings', and will possibly be reviewing; 'Bad Moms', 'Café Society' or 'Hell or High Water'.
After that I will be frequently uploading posts, but reviews will usually be at a weekend.
Until then,
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)