The Lost City of Z review

The Lost City of Z is the true story of an explorer who becomes obsessed with finding an ancient civilization.

This is an interesting film. One the one hand, it is a very well made interpretation of a fascinating story and man. On the other hand, it gets quite boring at times. The most interesting and entertaining parts are when Percival Fawcett is charting the jungles and searching for the lost civilization in the "green desert" of the Amazon. Several of the scenes when he is back home in Britain occasionally become drawn out and a bit boring. There is one part in particular, set during World War 1, that needs to be in the film but brings the film to a stop.

The change in quality between the two sides of the film is almost supported by Darius Khondji's cinematography, which shows the beauty of the Amazon, then applies an ugly colour palette to the Britain-set sequences. It's possible that director James Gray intentionally did this so that, as a viewer, you two would long to get back to the search.

In short: The Lost City of Z is interesting while the search for the titular lost city is underway, but Fawcett's home life is lacking.

Life SPOILER review

I'm not going to make this long.

You have all probably heard by now that Life is not a Venom movie. But going by Sony's recent comments about how their upcoming Venom movie will be a sci-fi/horror, it sounds like they realised they missed a trick.

Things I neglected to mention in my secrels post on Life; Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick wrote a draft for a Venom movie a while back, some people thought Life was a prequel to Alien (I mean, come on).

Seeing as I'm doing this I might as well mention some stuff.

I like how well known actor Ryan Reynolds was the first to die. I thought he would at least make it to the final 4,but was pleasantly surprised to see him killed off first.

In my regular review I mentioned how I laughed out loud at the ending. This was because I was fully expecting them to go with the Hollywood "we defeated the alien, there's a single survivor" ending. And I was taken aback when the life pod door open and you saw Jake Gyllenhaal and Calvin in the pod on Earth. This has great sequel potential, and I really want to see it. Given that it has made $50 million worldwide so far, I am not sure what the likelihood of a sequel is, but I really hope it happens. They could even finally show us what the original idea for Alien 3 was, with a deadly alien wreaking havoc on Earth. I have so many potential ideas for a sequel, but I am not a film maker and it may not happen at all.

Power Rangers review

Power Rangers is a reboot of the 1990s franchise about five misfit teenagers who gain superpowers who come together to save their town of Angel Grove.

Power Rangers is an oddity. I hadn't seen any of the trailers and had only seen the posters with the suits and the zords. So when I went to see Power Rangers I was expecting this to be an enjoyable, cheesy mess. So the opening scene, involving an udder-less cow was not surprising. But as the film actually started and repercussions for actions and serious scenes happened I was really surprised.

The film brings together in a way that combines The Breakfast Club and Chronicle, and then for the next hour and a half it plays as a diet version of both. Then at the end it turns into Transformers combined with the second half of Man of Steel. Having gone for cheesy action I was expecting the latter, but I found that I preferred the former.

Throughout most of the film the only cheesy parts are Alpha 5, who is used as comic relief, and Rita Repulsa, who feels completely out of place. The rest of the film is inhabited by interactions with the teenagers as they get to know each other and train for the upcoming battle. There is one scene set around a campfire that is especially welcome.

There are several scenes involving the teenagers dealing with their problems that makes the film feel more like a teen movie than a superhero movie. Due to this there are many parts that younger people will not get. For example, there are conversations about bullying, picture sharing, sex and drug use. Despite these maturer themes, it would be a good film to watch as the cast is very diverse and inclusive.

In the original series there was some slight racism in the casting. The Black Ranger would be black, and the Yellow Ranger would be Asian. This film tries to distance itself from these casting mistakes, as the Black Ranger is now the Asian character, the Blue Ranger is now the black character, and the Yellow Ranger is now latino. I think it would have been further interesting if they reversed the gender roles of the original series by making the Red Ranger female. If they had switched the casting for Kimberly and Jason, making her the Red Ranger and him the Pink Ranger, it would have further diversified the team dynamic. They would even be able to keep the name of Kim for the Pink Ranger. They probably would have had to change Jason's name though.

The cast shows how inclusive people should be and would be good role models for children. The characters include a guy with autism, a young carer, an outsider who questions her sexuality, and all the characters are able to admit their flaws.

This is why I was not a big fan of the cheesy ending. I would have preferred it if the ending were more serious and personal, and not a town destroying set piece that features one of the most obvious pieces of product placement I have ever seen. Krispy Kreme is a literal plot point and it is really stupid, but hey, money is great.

In short: Power Rangers was surprisingly good but is let down by its ending.

Life review

Life is a sci-fi thriller about a group of astronauts on the ISS who make first contact with life from Mars. They later realise the danger this species could posses.

During my Get Out review, I mentioned how I have viewed horror movies as the cinematic equivalent of fairground rides. That is exactly what half of Life is.

Life is essentially split into two parts: a smart film exploring the biology of the life form, and a dumb slasher film. While I found the smart half interesting, the dumb half was equally as entertaining, just in a different way. The smart and dumb halves somehow are able to meld and work together. This is despite the smart half setting up the martian, called Calvin, with biology that is as far as I'm aware plausible, and then completely forgetting scientific accuracies in the dumb half. For example: it manages to forget that sound can't travel in a vacuum.

This is the sort of film that, when you walk out, it's difficult to remember more than two characters names, despite the small cast. However, when you walk out you are able to appreciate the fun that the film provided. Jake Gyllenhaal has said that he took his role because he wanted to have fun, and I don't blame him when his last film was Nocturnal Animals. In this case I'm glad that the fun that was experienced on set was able to be shared with the audience.

The design of Calvin is nothing special, but there is one thing that they do with it that works out really well. The kills that it makes are, for the most part, nothing special but it is really enjoyable.

I also appreciated the brevity of Life (I never thought I would write that sentence). The filmmakers could have easily made it much longer, but instead managed to keep it at the right length without feeling slow at any point.

Then towards the end there is something that happened that made me laugh out loud, not because it was absurd but because I absolutely loved what they did. I will tell you what it is in the spoiler review.

In short: Life is a fun time at the cinema that will not be remembered as a classic sci-fi thriller.

Get Out review

Get Out is the debut film of comedian Jordan Peele, and is a social horror-thriller about a black man who meets his white girlfriend's parents.

I am not a fan of horror movies. I have in the past dismissed them as the cinematic equivalent of a fairground ride, with things jumping out at you every other minute. This makes my love of action movies questionable. I enjoy good action movies with a mixture of well shot scenes, clear motivation and (semi-)strong characters. Maybe it's because horror trailers don't usually show this stuff, or maybe it's because I used to get scared really easily, but I have usually stayed away from horror.

At this point you may be wondering why I decided to see Get Out. It's because I am a big fan of Jordan Peele. I loved the Key and Peele Show and I think Keanu was hilarious. So I was interested to see what he would do working outside the genre he has established himself in. And I will admit it: I loved Get Out.

Peele has masterfully crafted this film. I have now seen it twice and I don't believe there is a single coincidence at all. The dramatic principle 'Chekhov's Gun' states that there should be nothing in a film that is of no significance. I truly believe that Peele has done his best to apply it here. I can't think of a single moment in the film which could be taken out and not affect the film overall.

While making a horror film with wide appeal, Peele has also managed to create a film which deals with modern racism in a clever way. He portrays it as people trying to bend over backwards to prove to Chris (Daniel Kaluuya) that they are not racist. He is able to put us in Chris's shoes and make every awkward or sinister encounter feel the same for us.

If you haven't already seen the trailer: don't. I saw it twice before seeing the film (though I wasn't really paying attention either time) and looking back on it, it potentially gave too much away. Get Out is a film best enjoyed when not much is known about it, which is why I am trying to keep this review as vague as possible. Due to this I will probably be posting a spoiler review at some point.

In short: Get Out is a tense, terrifying, terrific look at modern society.

Beauty and the Beast (2017) review

I'm sure everybody knows the story but if you don't: Beauty and the Beast is the story of a woman held captive by a prince who has been turned into a beast by a witch.

Recently Disney has been remaking their classic animated films in varying degrees of live action, and also varying degrees of success. My ranking would go: The Jungle Book, Alice in Wonderland, Maleficent and Alice Through the Looking Glass. I have still not seen Cinderella, though it is one of the many films on Netflix I need to make time to watch, or Pete's Dragon. My problem with The Jungle Book and Beauty and the Beast is that I don't understand their existence. The Jungle Book has some ground-breaking CGI, but the story is very similar to the original. And that is the same case here wit the story. There are a few extra songs and it is about half an hour longer, but none of the additions make it better.

The best part of the film is not Emma Watson, Dan Stevens, the CGI, the production design or the director, but Luke Evans as Gaston. He is perfect casting. He looks the part, he sounds the part and he completely inhabits the role. His interactions with Josh Gad's LeFou were funny, but Evans is the clear standout. The rest of the cast are all fine in their roles and perform their musical numbers well, but none are as good as Evans. No one can act like Gaston, no one can sing like Gaston.

A few small little gripes here. There were a few times when it seemed really obvious that the town of Villeneuve was a set. During the ballroom dance scene between Belle and The Beast there were a few frames where the CGI of The Beast really showed. Also the gay moment with LeFou is a great thing to have in a Disney film, but it has definitely been over-reported for how small a part of the film it is.

In short: This new adaptation is enjoyable. Watch it for Luke Evans' performance, then watch the animated film again.

Kong: Skull Island review

Kong: Skull Island is the latest re-imagining of King Kong, and follows a group of people, including scientists, military pilots, an ex-SAS member and an anti-war photographer, as they discover Skull Island.

 

If you go into Skull Island expecting strong characters and a revolutionary plot, you are going to be really disappointed. Skull Island rarely ever tries to be anything more than a fun monster movie. There is the occasional time when a bit of commentary on the Vietnam War is brought up but it never goes anywhere. Skull Island is an unashamedly fun monster movie. When I say that I am not saying it is a terrible movie that is enjoyable (like The Great Wall), but it is a fun movie with flaws that are not too important.

 

Most people will go to see King Kong be King Kong. That aspect of the film is highly satisfying as any of the scenes where Kong is in action are extremely entertaining. The CGI and motion capture to bring the towering ape to life was also well used and convincing enough.

 

As with 2014's Godzilla, Warner Bros. and Legendary hired a director who made a very low budget indie film to helm a giant monster movie. With Godzilla it made more sense, as Monsters was a very low budget ($500,000!) monster movie, but, as far as I'm aware, The Kings of Summer is completely dramatic. Unless they discover a monster at some point during the film, which I doubt is true, his hiring doesn't make sense. However, I like how he pushed for it to be set in the '70s and what he did with the colour scheme and the action scenes.

 

In short: Kong: Skull Island is an entertaining monster movie.

Secrels Revisited or: A Revelation in Life

THIS CONTAINS NO SPOILERS FOR ANY FILM MENTIONED THAT HAS NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY BROUGHT UP ON THIS BLOG IN A SPOILER POST.

As you may remember, back in January I wrote a spoiler piece on Split where I talked about secret sequels, or as I like to call them: secrels.

Tonight Sony Pictures is premiering their new sci-fi thriller Life at SXSW in Austin. There has been a lot of speculation recently that the alien life form in the film is actually Venom from the Marvel comics. If this were to happen it would be the largest scale of the recent secrels, or would it be a 'precret' (secret prequel)?

Of course, I am currently going off of nothing but pure internet speculation, which, at times, can be about as reliable as a crazy man shouting about conspiracy theories on the streets. And I personally don't believe this crazy man.

I would research this further but I can't be bothered, so I am going to go off of, mostly, prior knowledge.

In one of the trailers for Life, it is mentioned that the lifeform the astronauts have picked up might have killed all other life on Mars. This is similar to the origin of Venom: a symbiote is used by an evil inhabitant of an ice world for genocide. There is one obvious difference here: Mars is not icy. However, going off of trailer 2, we are not explicitly told that it is native to Mars, and even if we were, how would the astronauts know.

Another dissimilarity is the colour of the alien. It sort of has a fleshy colour, unlike the colour of Venom in the comics, black. This could of course be a creative liberty, but if they really are setting up the villain for its official film next year they would want to establish it as black. The fleshy colour could be a red herring, but is unlikely.

The next topic makes a precret(this isn't even a prequel, it's more like a spinet, or a secursor) less likely to be a possibility, but not impossible. Last year Ryan Reynolds starred as Deadpool in (no points for guessing) Deadpool. In Life he reunites with Deadpool writers Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick. Reynolds has so far played, arguably, four characters in comic book movies: Hannibal King, Wade Wilson, Hal Jordan and Deadpool. This shows that he can participate in more than one comic book franchise (he even took on Green Lantern while trying to get Deadpool made). It just seems unlikely the star and writers of a comic book property would help make another one while the sequel to the first is in active development.

There is another theory going around that this is another prequel to the thing due to something that is shown in the latest trailer. I haven't seen this trailer so I won't comment on it. However, this theory can be very easily debunked. Universal holds the rights to The Thing, but Sony is distributing Life.

At this point it seems unlikely that Life is any sort of secrel that involves Venom. As I said before, this would be the riskiest secrel, as, according to Wikipedia, it has a $58 million budget, nearly 4 times bigger than 10 Cloverfield Lanes' $15 million (the current highest. The other secrels were guaranteed to make their money back, but there is a chance this won't. To break even Life will have to make at least $120 million. While this is realistic, it is possible it won't reach it. Split was able to do that solely in America and 10 Cloverfield Lane nearly made that worldwide. Meanwhile, Blair Witch only made a third of that worldwide.

All this speculation could be completely wrong. As I write this the film is currently screening at SXSW, and in just over an hour the first members of the public will know if there is any connection to Venom. Hopefully they will keep it a secret, as with Split at Fantastic Fest and the AFI film festival. I will not be reading anything more of Life after tonight just incase I am wrong and it is a secursor. Once I see Life, no matter the outcome, I will post a spoiler review. In that spoiler review I will either admit that I was wrong, like with Richard E. Grant's role in Logan, or I will confirm that I was right.

Unrelated: I am aware my Logan and Fist Fight reviews were fairly late. I put off writing my Logan review because I didn't want it to be over. I put off writing the Fist Fight review because I didn't want to think about it any more. I then wanted to get this out so I did. I still have a Kong: Skull Island review to write, and over the next few days I will be able to write reviews for Beauty and the Beast, and Get Out.

Fist Fight review

Fist Fight is a "comedy" starring Charlie Day as a teacher who gets another teacher, played by Ice Cube, fired on the last day of school. Then Mr Cube challenges Day to a fight.

 

In my review for Office Christmas Party I mentioned that I might not be "harsh enough on comedies". I can assure you that that is only the case if it makes me laugh, because Fist Fight was a laughless, vile, hateful bore of a film.

 

I saw the trailer in front of The Great Wall last month and did not find it funny. I decided to see it anyway because of the comedic talent involved. Charlie Day is hilarious in It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, and I liked him in the Horrible Bosses films and Pacific Rim. Ice Cube is surprisingly funny in the Jump Street films. I found Jillian Bell to be a standout in 22 Jump Street. Kumail Nanjiani is great on Silicon Valley, had a good cameo in Mike and Dave Need Wedding Dates, and was one of the few funny parts of last year's Central Intelligence. And I have heard that Tracy Morgan is a funny guy. Yet none of these people were able to make me smile, let alone laugh.

 

The film is set in a fantasy world where nobody's actions have any consequences, despite Ice Cube trying to convince the audience that that is the reason why he wants to fight. This is a world where students are able to do a great deal of personal, social or physical damage and able to get away with it because "It was just a prank, bro". Most of these pranks are just people getting hurt, but that does not mean it is funny. Where Jackass is able to succeed in the physical harm comedy is that you know it's real and that everyone is having fun, but here it's staged and used as filler.

 

There is also some forced reference humour. One example is Ice Cube's history teacher saying they thought "the civil war was between Tupac and Biggie", alright fine. He then goes for the same joke two minutes later and says "Batman and Superman", no. Get your references right! BvS:DoJ was not a proper conflict that had consequences. While Captain America vs Iron Man was. And the movie had the subtitle of Civil War! Then later they attempt some meta humour by referencing one of NWA's most famous songs, but if feels very out of place.

 

Along with the boring physical comedy and failed reference humour is some really bad taste jokes. Some include making jokes out of drug use and dealing, paedophilia and tries to make some sort of social commentary on the American public school system, but fails horribly. The director tries to make an important commentary of the lack of funding and the lack of discipline present, but it is extremely obvious when he tries, which isn't very often.

 

The worst part of the movie is the way it tries to show Day as weak and cowardly, simply because he has enough sense to realise the ridiculousness of two teachers fighting. Throughout the whole film there is not one attempt to stop the fight from happening, and when Day tries to stop it he is just made fun of for being "weak". They then try to introduce character development but all it is is removing any sense that he had earlier.

 

Throughout the film the virality of the "teacher fight" is mentioned. Several tweets are shown and random people talk about it, yet at not one point do the police get involved. There is a scene, in the trailer, where Day attempts calling 911 only to get childishly laughed at and "take that ass whooping". I understand that suspension of disbelief is required for films but by this point I had had enough. There is a scene involving Day planting drugs on Ice Cube in an attempt to get the police involved, when they would have taken him just as seriously if he had told them about the threats of assault he has received. Then during the fight there is a crowd that is easily in the thousands, including some law enforcers, and yet at no point do the police decide to get involved with the fight.

 

I almost forgot to mention that it attempts to repurpose jokes from 21 Jump Street. These jokes work in Jump Street because of the overall tone and the context. Here it feels unoriginal and creepy.

There were two good parts at my screening. The first was the audible sounds of a guy sleeping. The second is a line where a character says something along the lines of "I was bored, I blanked out" and at that was the only point I agreed with the film.

 

In short: Fist Fight is an awful waste of 90 minutes. I would say "It would be more fun to be punched in the face", but that would be about as original as anything in the film.

Logan review

Logan is Hugh Jackman's final film as Wolverine and follows him and an ageing Charles Xavier(Patrick Stewart) as they travel across America with a powerful young girl, as they are pursued by malevolent forces.

Jackman and Stewart have been in these roles for nearly seventeen years, as long as I have lived. I have grown up watching the X-Men films so this does feel like the end of a specific part of my life. And I am really glad it ended this way.

This is the first Wolverine film which is aimed at a mature audience and, unlike Deadpool, has a serious tone and subject matter that would be lost on younger viewers. The un-family friendliness is evident from the first line and is emphasised in a bloody opening scene. But at no point does any of it seem gratuitous and unnecessary(apart from a brief shot of nudity, which, while it worked in the scene, felt like an attempt to further enforce the 15 rating).

Despite being unsuitable for a family audience, Logan deals heavily with themes of family. Logan, Charles and Laura(the young girl) form a surrogate family as they travel across the country. The X-Men films have always dealt with Logan helping a younger female character, like Rogue and Mariko, but this is the first time it seems as though there is an actual connection between them.

Having been in the roles for seventeen years, Jackman and Stewart have definitely got to know their respective character's well, and here they portray them the best they have. As a classically trained actor Stewart has always been brilliant and as Charles he gives, what I hope will be recognised as, one of his best screen roles. He expertly sells the degenerative brain disease of which he is suffering. This causes him to have powerful seizures, which are the most inventive and interesting additions made to the X-Men films.

Mangold's The Wolverine had a mixed reception, although I quite liked it, and the seeds were sown for the serious, personal tone in Logan. He subverts city destroying sequences in favour of conversations about family and mortality.  While there are action scenes, they are not the standout, but instead compliment the dramatic scenes. Logan is set at the furthest point in the  X-Men timeline, in 2029, and Mangold does really well at building the world and establishing what has happened in the years in between. Subtle dialogue builds the world and dramatic backstory is hinted at, but never explicitly stated.

In short: Logan is a masterpiece superhero film, with a standout performance from Patrick Stewart.

Fences

Fences is based on the stage play of the same name and is about a black family in 1950s America.

Denzel Washington directs and stars as the father, Troy, and Viola Davis plays his wife Rose. They are both brilliant in their roles. Davis is especially brilliant and brings a complexity to her character. The supporting actors are all very well cast in their roles. This is, at it's core an actor's film. The direction is never very showy, there's not much of a musical score, and there are no scenes of dramatic importance that are not played out through dialogue.

I am not familiar with the original play, but I doubt the film varies much from it apart from a montage. That is the problem: while Washington was able to get terrific performances from his cast, he isn't able to make Fences a cinematic experience. Most of the film takes place in or around the Maxon's house. There are three small scenes and a montage that take place outside the house, but the rest doesn't leave it. The montage is only there as an act breaker that shows the passage of time. The act changes are really obvious and make it feel even more like watching and NT Live broadcast at the cinema. The second and third acts introduce some cinematic moments but the first act is pure stage play, including an interrupted monologue by Troy that must have been at least fifteen minutes long.

There is definitely some symbolism that I didn't pick up on. While the fences and the religious stuff is fairly noticeable, there is a recurring shot of a broken window that was definitely lost on me. This isn't a flaw to the film, it's a compliment that it has layers that I didn't pick up on during the 20:50 screening I attended. But, I assume, that will be something people already study within the play.

In short: Fences is essentially a recorded stage show with fantastic performances.

Patriots Day review

Patriots Day tells the story of the victims, police, first responders and terrorists involved in the 2013 Boston marathon bombing.

Peter Berg and Mark Wahlberg have definitely found their niche making films based on true events that show humanity working together to help one another in times of crisis. There is a question as to whether a film telling the story of a terrorist attack should be made. Despite portraying the terrorists it is doesn't give them publicity, but instead is a moving tribute to everyone else involved in the attack.

At the beginning we follow several people who were involved either at the bombing or in the search. With it being an ensemble cast we don't get to know everyone very well, but that's understandable. The person we get to know the most about is Wahlberg's composite Boston police officer. The scene of the bombing is extremely intense. Before it happens there is a sense of dread as you know it will happen, but as you start to know the characters you don't want to see it happen. The aftermath never lingers on any injury to disgust the audience or feel exploitative, but shows brief images of the graphic injury detail long enough for you to feel uneasy.Adding to the emotional intensity of the scene is the human reactions of the actors. Many of the actors and extras react how you would imagine people would if they had just witnessed a terrorist attack.

Once we follow the survivors to the hospitals there are very few scenes with them until the end. Berg's direction suited the film very well and at times felt almost documentary-like. This introduces my problem with the film: this story could have been two great documentaries. There would be the one that tells the stories of the victims of the bombing, the first responders and the doctors on call over that week, and then how they have adjusted back to normal life. The second would tell the story of the police, federal agents and anyone else that helped in the search for the terrorists.

That doesn't mean I didn't greatly appreciate the film. As I said, Berg does great as the director and the actors all do well. It's a given that John Goodman, JK Simmons and Kevin Bacon will all be excellent in their roles, and Wahlberg brings an emotional arc to his character. I was really surprised by Silicon Valley's Jimmy O. Yang expanding his acting range from bit-part comic acting to a serious supporting role. Many of the supporting actors give solid performances. There is a police officer who is tasked with standing by the body of an 8 year old boy. The film will cut back to him occasionally and, without saying a word, he is able to convey the pain he feels.

In short: Patriots Day is a moving tribute to the victims of the Boston marathon bombings and the emergency service workers, that could have worked better in the form of a documentary.

The first advert I saw in front of Patriots Day was the EE advert with Kevin Bacon in Britney Spears' clothing. It's a shame that he is very good in films such as this but still has to appear in adverts where the gimmick got old and disappeared several years ago.