Thursday 23 May 2019

"Game of Thrones: Season 8" Review - The Good, The Mad, and The Ugly



Well, this is different. I don't usually talk about TV on here, but then again I haven't talked about much on here for a while now. What better to end that hibernation than Game of Thrones, the epic, sprawling fantasy show produced by HBO and shown on Sky Atlantic here in the UK. You know what it is, everyone knows what it is. From the offset spoilers within, for all 8 seasons (and, weirdly enough, for The Walking Dead season 7 if you care about that). If you haven't seen the show, don't read this; go watch it and then come back because I will preface everything I'm about to say you should absolutely watch it from beginning to end. It is a marvel of television, and, quite frankly, should stand as an example to all other TV series in the realms of character and storytelling, or at least the early seasons do. With all that said, this particular season as you've probably seen has been divisive to say the least and there's certainly plenty to talk about. It's probably a good idea, given I've never talked about this before, to talk about the last 7 seasons of the show and what makes Game of Thrones stand out from the crowd. I'm not going to waste time explaining the story of the show up to this point or who the characters are (not only because I've spoiler warned already, but because this would end up the length of a university dissertation), but there's some key points to pick up on. The entire series is based on author George R. R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire book series, which seasons 1-4 follow incredibly faithfully. These 4 seasons are absolutely phenomenal, and embody the best days of the show. The world building, characters, visuals, everything is on point. But what set the show apart from other fantasy serials or movies was the dark tone. This was fantasy grounded, to an extent, in reality, with violence and sex not only running rampant in the world, but the storylines placing a greater focus on the political rivalries and dealings of the Great Houses of Westeros to maintain power. The dealings in dark rooms, interesting and fun character dynamics, with smart political power plays from all sides, paired with a sprinkling of action, that right there is Game of Thrones. Season 5 follows the books less faithfully and adds in some new elements, and this is where we start to see some shaking in the foundations, largely in the writing which sees some atrocious dialogue and character introductions (the best example being the infamous Sand Snakes of Dorne and the "you want a good girl" line spoken to Bronn). Season 6 picks up again even though it is entirely made up and, while the writing still isn't what it once was, makes up for it with incredible scale and spectacle, for which you need look no further than the Battle of the Bastards and the finale "The Winds of Winter" (my personal favourite episode of the show). Season 7 falters a bit more, with a reduced 7 episodes which, although there are still some wonderful moments and episodes (the meeting of Jon Snow and Daenerys Targaryen, as well as the loot train battle spring to mind), does suffer from some horrendous pacing, plot armour, or characters travelling long distances in extremely short amounts of time. That said, it's still not a disaster and continues to be enjoyable as the show. Now, we come to season 8, the grand finale to this epic tale and, while the same great elements of Game of Thrones remain (assume that the technical aspects and effects of the show are on point, and I'll only mention them if they are really phenomenal or actually poor), issues do remain with the final chapter. So let's explore this, episode by episode, to consider what those problems are but also relive the great moments of this conclusion.

Episode 1 - Winterfell



Episode 1 of the season gets us off to an entertaining, if unremarkable start. This is very much the table-setting episode of the series as the writers scrambled to place all of the characters in their necessary positions from where they were left at the end of season 7. As you might guess from the title, the majority of the action takes place at Winterfell, where we get a number of satisfying interactions and reunions. Some characters do unfortunately get the short shrift until the later days of the season, the most notable examples being Varys, Davos, and Tyrion (although the latter does get an admittedly excellent scene with Sansa), but this could be shrugged off as these characters not being especially helpful assets in the war against the dead where trickery and political tactics are less effective. Speaking of Sansa, Sophie Turner was excellent this entire season. I really enjoy this performance and character given the development she has undergone, with her conflicts this season feeling genuine and realistic, redeeming her from the strange out of place fake drama with Arya last season. Maisie William's Arya gets probably the most emotionally satisfying reunions of the episode, not only in the highly entertaining scene with the Hound and Gendry (although this is of course where future issues would transpire), but more notably with Kit Harington's Jon. The two shine in the sequence and, with a few small lines, manage to recreate the same chemistry and sibling bond they haven't been able to demonstrate since season 1. Emilia Clarke's Dany is granted little to do this episode outside of ride a dragon with Jon (an example of appropriate fan service and spectacle given the revelation of Jon's heritage, also revealed to him this episode in a tense and dramatic sequence) and spout possibly the worst line of the entire season ("Now, keep your queen warm", queue vomit). Elsewhere, in King's Landing, there's also shenanigans afoot, as sassy and endlessly vicious pirate Euron Greyjoy sets about...um..."courting" Queen Cersei Lannister, starting their relationship and looking to impregnate her. These are two interesting characters and to see them interact with each other in an intimate setting was great, even if the relationship itself, throughout the season, is somewhat underserved in terms of screen time. The other two King's Landing plots are considerably worse. The first of these involves Bronn being given Joffrey's crossbow (the same one that Tyrion used to kill Tywin in season 4) and commanded by Cersei (by way of Qyburn due to some behind the scenes tensions between Lena Headey and Jerome Flynn) to kill Jaime and Tyrion should they survive the war against the dead. It's blatantly obvious that the writers had no clue what to do with Bronn this season hence why these scenes feel so strange and out of character. Bronn's always been out for himself I suppose though, so the course of action the writers took seems somewhat reasonable. I mean, if you really had nothing to do with him he could have just followed Jaime north. Then we come to Theon. He essentially breaches the entire Iron Fleet with a handful of men and rescues Yara from under Euron's nose with little to no consequences for his actions. The problem with this plot is that it is paced far too quickly and ultimately was only included as a means to quickly end Theon's mission from the end of season 7 before being able to send him to Winterfell for the Great War. This easily could have been broken down across a few episodes, like much of this season. This is the first major example of a victim of the shortened episode count that plagues much of this season, foreshadowing the more notable damages at the tail end of the season. With that said, it's still enjoyable as an episode on its own. It's very much table-setting, and the arrival of Jaime at Winterfell at the episodes conclusion sets up a tense and dramatic second part.

Episode 2 - A Knight of the Seven Kingdoms



Episode 2 of the season is a great improvement, although there are still some issues. Prior to release, the episode was described as "play-like" and this definitely rings true. Entirely set in the single location of Winterfell, this is an episode centred around character relationships and dynamics, as tension is slowly built through the episode up until the climactic arrival of the dead. There are so many great interactions, such as Sam presenting Jorah with his family sword in their first proper conversation of the season (even though you can cringe for days once you realise Jorah Mormont, eternally stuck in the friend zone, is then using a sword called "Heartsbane"). Jaime's trial is a wonderful scene, with Dany's quiet resentment as to her father's death at Jaime's hands feeling earned, while Brienne defending him also felt true to the characters. The best scene of course was the knighting of Brienne by Jaime as all of the other characters watch on. Her achieving her dream, and this demonstration of how far Jaime has come as a character, is the most emotionally effective moment of the entire season, and is the most genuine the show has felt in quite a while frankly. Arya and Gendry also have a moment...oh God, this scene. Right, so, Arya and Gendry get together and have sex in possibly the most awkward moment of the entire season, without any development or build in their relationship having not seen each other in literally years. I suppose she is now a badass, and is able to throw dragonglass spear tips into a wall without the appropriate force or trajectory to do so, and that makes him attracted to her. And she is...I don't know. Okay, so my basic point boils down to one simple question: without any sort of build-up or chemistry between the actors, baring in mind also if you wish the lack of relevance this relationship has in the rest of the season, what is the point of this? Let me tell you: fan service. This is fan service through and through, and there is no other purpose to this plot. It feels as though the writers looked at fan theories and "wish lists" online and adopted this particular point but, once again, hindered by a brutal reduction in episodes, this falls completely and utterly flat. In an episode with so many great interactions and dynamics, this feels like a black spot unfortunately. Where the episode also struggles is where it is not focused on character and instead aims to push the plot forward, which, thankfully, it does not do a lot. The plan to defeat the Night King, we've got to talk about that first. The plan which is proposed, by all of these smart characters, is merely to leave Bran in the Godswood to lure out the Night King while the rest of the forces of the living merely hold off the undead hordes and, then, when he reveals himself, they'll kill him. This is an utterly horrendous plan, first and foremost. Remember the days of seasons 2-3 of Game of Thrones, where characters such as Robb Stark spent the majority of their scenes gathered round a map table with figures to work out clever strategies to outwit their opponents. This, comparatively, has far too many variables. What about Viserion, the undead dragon thanks to Tormund they now know exists? How do you know the Night King will bother to come out if he has legions of undead minions who can kill people as well? Did Jon just forget the Night King can RAISE THE DEAD before he put the innocents in a CRYPT? How do you even kill the Night King? Even Bran, the Three-Eyed Raven himself, admits he has no idea if even dragon fire will work on him so presumably the only way would be to get really close, which carries complications in itself. There are simply far too many variables for this plan to be regarded as sensible. Jon also steps up at the end to reveal his heritage to Dany...just before the battle begins which is wonderful timing. Look, I'm not being cruel or anything but they are about to fight in a battle where she or you could potentially die, Jon. Maybe save this bombshell for only if you absolutely have to? Again, these are examples of logic haps present throughout the entire season, and indicative only of how the standards of writing have slipped.

Episode 3 - The Long Night



Here we are, ladies and gentlemen, the war of the living and the dead. The Great War. The Long Night. The climax of 8 seasons worth of build-up. Characters will die. Answers may finally be given. Or at least that was what was promised on paper. That's what I wanted. What we got, on the other hand, was a decidedly more mixed bag. As has been the case with this entire season, the absolute death here is the script which makes some shocking choices to say the least. The entire episode is just a battle but, compared to other episodes which are the same (season 4 episode 9, "The Watchers on the Wall", which was the Battle of Castle Black between the Night's Watch and Mance Rayder's Wildling army, springs to mind), each of the character moments and decisions made feel decidedly less smart and engaging. Carice Van Houten's Melisandre makes a grand return in this episode (as well as a swift exit) only to infuse the Dothraki with enough confidence to be sent to their bewildering obliteration (before, of course, their subsequent resurrection in the final episodes of the season). Much of the action here is entertaining when you can see it (I'm getting to that, don't worry), but the length of the entire episode means this can become rather much at times. Arya has a strange stealth moment which feels as though it is lifted from another show, particularly considering you can see nothing, even smoke, at the windows even though it looks like the gates of hell have opened outside. It's a strange diversion that ultimately probably could have been removed. Lady Lyanna Mormont once again cements herself as the greatest non-character the show has ever produced, deceiving the audience into believing she is actually a fully fleshed out character with her tough demeanour, before she gets the quite frankly underserved honour of killing the wight giant (after a hilarious swatting to the side as the gate is breached). There's a few deaths of note this episode which are quite effective: Dolorous Edd perishes defending his Night's Watch brother Sam (who should not have been in this battle under any circumstances); Beric Dondarrion, who has been on borrowed time for a while, went out like a champ; Theon redeems himself wholly before dying; and Jorah Mormont got a fitting send off defending his love and his Queen. Other characters are wrapped in plot armour, especially Jaime and Brienne who are literally against a wall and screaming their lungs off for more than half the episode yet somehow survive. The same can be said for Sam towards the end. Let's face it though, we want to talk about the big bad himself, the Night King who, even though it was absolutely unnecessary, did enter the fray. After surviving dragon fire and avoiding a brawl with Jon, the King makes his way to the Godswood and, now deciding the time is to be dramatic and slow, is swiftly murdered by Arya after she does a comically bad leap through the air. And thus the army of the dead is obliterated in a single episode. This could be described as anti-climactic to say the least after such build-up and I agree to an extent, with a longer series length and a few smaller conflicts before the main fight. Honestly, though, I do not have a massive issue with the Night King falling this episode. He always felt like the less interesting villain and more of a force of nature than anything else. Arya being the one to end him, however, is slightly more problematic. She has absolutely no connection to this character and therefore there is no satisfaction when he is taken down, no fist pump moment as it were. Benioff and Weiss, the writers, have claimed they knew Arya would be the one to do it three seasons ago, and yet have not built up to this appropriately at all. Training to be an assassin on its own does not justify this. It simply, again, feels there was more that could have been done to prepare audiences for this moment.


Surprisingly, the biggest issue I have with the episode as a whole is an aspect on the technical side. The cinematography in the episode is shockingly poor in comparison to the standard we come to expect from the show, with it being incredibly difficult to even see what is happening most of the time. The episode is virtually shrouded in darkness entirely, and I understand the intent was to build dread, but there are better ways to do this rather than making the episode extremely difficult to see. This certainly improves towards the end of the episode when there is a lot of fire in the fortress, but parts of the episode are straight up horrifically bad in this regard. The part which stands out is during the dragon battle between the Night King, and Jon and Dany, where there is so much dust, smoke, snow, and everything else assaulting the camera and your eye sockets that it is physically difficult to tell what is happening. That said, there are still some notable points which I should highlight again. The make up in this episode is unquestionably remarkable, with the Night King himself standing as one of the greatest practical creations in recent years. The music for the entire season is also incredible, but this is the episode where many of the best tracks come from. Ramin Djawadi's work on this show will stand as one of the greatest collective soundtracks for a series ever devised, and the true impact of his work cannot be understated. Without the slow piano building of the music as the Night King slowly lurks towards Bran towards the episode's conclusion is crucial in building tension and fear in the audience before the credits roll. Perhaps besides the finale, this episode is probably the greatest missed opportunity of the entire season. This should have been epic, unforgettable, and up there with the Red Wedding as one of the most emotionally taxing episodes of the entire show. Unfortunately, an overabundance of darkness and the script left me with a somewhat sour taste after thinking about the episode. There is so much merit to give me, but this is undeniably, somewhat, anti-climactic.

Episode 4 - The Last of the Starks



With episode 4, of the infamous Starbucks cup fiasco, we're definitely back on track despite that. This is probably my favourite episode this season, with lots of great little moments of character interactions. Following an appropriately dreary and atmospheric funeral sequence for all of the dead from the previous episode, the first half hour of this episode is essentially one long feast sequence where we get to see fun dynamics and interesting conversations take place. Tyrion and Davos are always great together to bounce their cynicism off one another, and Peter Dinklage and Liam Cunningham are just a delight as always. It was great to see Sansa and the Hound back together for the first time in a long while, even though I wish their conversation was better written; some of the dialogue felt quite clunky at times but both Sophie Turner and Rory McCann were on point as always. Really, it was Emilia Clarke who shone as an actress this episode, as we begin to see the toll that Westeros has take on her as a person with the losses she's suffered. Effectively, she had it all at one point in Meereen, and now she's lost one of her children, her most trusted adviser in Jorah is dead, and she herself is the subject of great distrust (largely by the Starks) or she can see others simply feel Jon is a better leader even when ignorant of his true heritage. You can really empathise with her character in that sense and understand her point of view building up to...ahem...certain actions. The interactions of the Stark children, including Jon, this episode were absolutely among some of the best of the season. The scene at the Godswood is wonderfully atmospheric and the internal struggle of Jon is palpable. This is the episode where the knowledge of Jon's heritage really spreads, with Sansa playing the game as she learnt in King's Landing and this in turn going to Tyrion and Varys (by the way, the MVP of the episode; it was great to see Conleth Hill back in the action and the Spider is an endlessly entertaining character even knowing what it was building up to). Bronn also returns for about 5 minutes and he's as great as he's always been even this did feel a tad distracting once again. This was also quite a hot and heavy episode in terms of romance, if you'll pardon the expression, with Arya rejecting Gendry's proposal (a fitting character choice, as was leaving Winterfell) but more notably Jaime and Brienne finally getting together. Unlike Arya and Gendry in episode 2 which felt quite forced given the lack of development, after several seasons of build in the dynamic of the character, this felt like appropriate fan service to me. The romance was believable, and the scene where Jaime leaves to return to King's Landing for Cersei was tragic and heart breaking. Speaking of which, this episode also marked the return of the Queen herself, and reminded me why she is one of, if not my favourite character on the show. Lena Headey has always been great on this show, but she revels in the conniving nature of Cersei who, at the end of the day, is still doing everything for her child. Every move she makes has two effects (a notable shared trait with Dany making Gendry a legitimate Baratheon): letting the citizens into the Keep ensures they support her, and makes Dany slaughter thousands to get to her; telling Euron the child is his keeps him on side, and hurts Jaime for abandoning her. The cleverness and subtleties of each political movies - that, right there, is Game of Thrones of old, and I wish we'd seen more of it this season.


This is probably the best episode to talk about why the deaths in Game of Thrones, or at least the Game of Thrones of old, were so effective. To do that, before considering this episode, let's compare, say, Robb Stark's death in season 3's monstrous Red Wedding, to the season 7 premiere of The Walking Dead (told you this was coming). In the season 6 finale of The Walking Dead, the cast of characters meet a lovely chap called Negan who delightedly tells them that he is going to kill one to keep the rest in line. He proceeds to do eeny meeny miny mo to decide and as he swings the bat, the episode cuts to black and the season ends. Outrage, as you can imagine. Flash forward to season 7 and Negan kills a bloke called Abraham who at a very push you could describe as one of the main characters. After he gets a punch, Negan then kills another character called Glenn who, to make matters worse, had already had a fake out death in the previous season. These deaths were done for shock value and nothing more. Let's compare that to the Red Wedding. This is a horrific event where, at a Frey Wedding, Roose Bolton betrays the Starks and lots of people die, including main characters like Robb Stark. This is built up to for the entirety of season 3 and even slightly before and you can perfectly trace every single mistake Robb make which led up to this, betraying Walder Frey and sidelining Roose. It wasn't all his fault, sure (Catelyn letting Jaime go even with Brienne surely led to some lost confidence), but regardless this is the foreseeable punishment for every error which occurred. It's still shocking and horrifying to watch, but the key difference is this is earned, not only through build up of characters and not placing them in cheap situations where the writers pretend they're dead, but through the story and their actions. With that borne in mind, it's easy to see why fans were outraged about the death of the Night King in episode 3 after years of build up (particularly given showrunners Benioff and Weiss's admission one of their primary aims was to subvert expectations), but episode 4 is notable for two examples. The first is Dany's second dragon Rhaegal, who is unceremoniously murdered by Euron Greyjoy with three Scorpion arrows (one of which is through the HEAD bare in mind) as the dragons are mid-flight God knows how many hundreds of feet in the air. Leaving aside the fact that Qyburn has apparently invented cloaking technology (cause sorry, Benioff and Weiss, I will not buy Dany just didn't see them behind that small rock), the fact Euron managed to get three direct hits is more than enough to raise some eyebrows. This was something obviously done, not only to shock fans, but perhaps more worryingly to even the odds before the final battle with Cersei. Again, this could have benefitted from an extension of episodes whereby this death could have come about in a way that further character and made sense (even leaving aside more episodes, I saw one fan suggest that Rhaegal should have died in episode 5 when the Bells are ringing while Dany is sitting on the wall to provoke her actions which we're coming to don't worry). The second death, and probably the more emotionally effective, is that of Nathalie Emmanuel's Missandei, a staple of the show for several seasons now and one of the only genuinely good people on the show. Her death scene certainly worked well enough. I felt the emotional connection, every actor was on point (especially Jacob Anderson's Grey Worm who looked physically sick, as he should), and it was tense to watch. The problem is how we get there. Unlike Rhaegal who is a shock device, Missandei simply didn't feel earned in the circumstances of how Euron captured her and in that sense the build-up felt weaker. Just have had her travelling by road instead of by sea, and then the party she's in is ambushed by the Golden Company. It would have let them have some moment of dignity and made more sense as to how she was found. The problem (which flows through other writing issues this season) is that as soon as you think about it it comes to pieces. Even despite all that, I will emphasise again though that episode 4 is still rock solid despite those two deaths and some logic issues. Intriguing, fun, good character dynamics, great build up, it seemed as though we were back on track. Until...

Episode 5 - The Bells



Oh boy. Alright, let's be fair and start with the strong points of this episode. This is a show that is always, as I said, technically impressive, but this episode, whatever its faults, is sure to stand as one of the greatest technical achievements in the history of the entire series. Miguel Sapochnik returns once again to the helm to direct this instalment and his trade mark style is evident throughout the episode. Long takes, intense and brutal action, and strong cinematography all help to immerse you in the battle sequences but, now that the civilians are at the mercy of a dragon, there is greater opportunity to instil fear in us as an audience of the sheer power Daenerys controls. Take the shots of Arya running through the city as Drogon wreaks havoc from above her very head towards the conclusion of the episode (even though this lacked any tension whatsoever as this obviously wasn't where Arya died if she was going to at all). The camera is ingeniously kept extremely low down, paired with the hand held (and thus naturally shaky) nature of the takes to give the impression we ourselves are a character in the action, to keep us looking up at the dragon and in awe and terror of the scale of the destruction. It's intense, terrifying, and from a purely visual standpoint, masterful. The acting from all parties is also wonderful here, but there's a few particular actors to note. Conleth Hill's Varys gets a well-deserved and fitting send off for his character, and it's in line with his nature that he would have had his "told you so" moment. Rory McCann as the Hound I've barely touched upon despite how excellent he's (always) been thus far, but in this episode he really shines, with the occurrence of "Cleganebowl" as he brawls to the, eventual, death with his monster of a brother feeling earned and appropriate. His speech to Arya about letting go of anger and living for herself was also very emotionally satisfying and matches that, despite his demeanour, the Hound has always sought to protect the Stark children. All in all, a great send off for a great character. Nikolaj Coster-Waldau and Lena Headey were excellent together as always, each perfectly selling their desperation, love, and emotional connection. However, despite everything I'll come to shortly, the star of the episode in terms of acting was Emilia Clarke as Dany. Clarke has always been a somewhat inconsistent actress on this show, particularly in the early days, but before coming on to the main criticisms a lot of people have with this show and I share to an extent, her performance absolutely must be singled out and praised for this episode, but also for this entire season. Her volatile emotion and rage is palpable throughout and this at least feels justified. Every tear, quiet moment, outburst, Clarke makes the entire performance feel genuine and relatable. No matter how much criticism may be levelled at the show, her great work here absolutely should not be underestimated.


Alright, now let's talk about the writing, and more specifically, character development. Yet again, turning very briefly to positives, there are some good character moments in here, including as I said, the Hound, or Jon Snow, who, once all hell breaks loose, never actually murders anyone in cold blood a la Grey Worm; he only kills people in self-defence, even the random rapist solider. It is undeniable, however, even to the most staunch defenders of this entire season, that this episode makes some severe missteps as to characters, of which there are two key examples to be considered in turn: Jaime Lannister and Daenerys Targaryen. Turning to the former firstly, I have no serious issues with Jaime going back to Cersei, because he has always loved her deep down. You could argue it undermines his relationship with Brienne and the moment where he leaves Cersei at the end of season 8 but, at the end of the day, the war against the dead was won and that was the reason he left in the first place. Love wins out and, in that sense, I can imagine he would go back. What I cannot accept is the conversation between Tyrion and Jaime where the latter states that he has never cared about any of the residents of King's Landing or any of their lives, and has only ever cared about Cersei. Okay, no. When asked in the past about lives he has saved, he's responded regarding the slaying of the Mad King to save the people of the city. Over the past 8 seasons, Jaime has undergone a dark, personal journey of redemption learning to look past his own interests, respect and help others, care about people in general. To now say, 8 seasons in, that none of this matters, is incredibly disrespectful to the characters and throws all development out of the window, akin to how Jaime treated Bran way back when in episode 1. His death also felt poor, as did Cersei's. Let's face it though, you're not here to talk about Jaime, so let's talk about Dany. The Mad Queen and now city scorcher. This is not an entirely left field choice, straight off the bat that must be said. The show has been building to this from day one, as Dany has had her eyes set on the Throne and doing whatever it takes to get there. She has always followed her heart and been rather emotionally volatile, particularly in the absence of Jorah, her constant and reliable adviser. With the loss of now two of her children, Jorah, Missandei, and surrounded by skepticism, I will buy that Dany would decide enough was enough and burn the Red Keep to prevent Cersei from getting off lightly with her actions. What I will not buy is that Daenerys Targaryen, the Breaker of Chains, will burn innocent citizens, including children, taking into account all of her development to date. This is not to say I could never see the character reaching this point, because that was certainly in the stars, but it's too far far too fast. This is the greatest victim of the unnecessarily truncated series length. The pacing is the true demon behind this season (and indeed last season) and it is the failure to properly develop the potential of such a dark turn that has been the root of some deserved criticism. I agree that this has been somewhat overblown and disproportionate but, certainly, more time should have been taken to develop this. Oh well, what's next?

Episode 6 - The Iron Throne



With all of that, we come to the finale, the last ever episode of Game of Thrones. Storylines had to be resolved, character journeys concluded, and a satisfying conclusion. So did it deliver? Yes and no, so let's explore. This episode is similar to a few episodes this season in that it strangely feels almost like two episodes in one, much like "The Last of the Starks" where there is a clear divide in the episode. Unlike that episode, however, which was generally consistently strong, not only is there an obvious story switch in this episode, but there is also a noticeable quality dip. The first half of the episode deals with the immediate aftermath of episode 5, with Dany, now the official Mad Queen of the Seven Kingdoms, proclaiming her desire to liberate the entire world as Tyrion is taken into custody, and Jon faces his most troubling dilemma to date (although I'm sure Kit Harington was thankful more than anything to have lines that weren't "I don't want it" or "She is my queen" this season). I have virtually no issues with this half of the episode. Besides Dany's projector voice and some quick Arya teleporting, the episode is on point, and even the writing isn't dreadful. Tyrion's notes about Dany and how she's been treated in the past does lend some legitimacy to her plan which was greatly appreciated, while Jon and Dany's final conversation was also excellent. Jon's evident desire to persuade her away from her plan before finishing it in the only way possible was emotionally wrenching and well deserved. Drogon's subsequent reaction, burning the Throne (a good symbol for breaking the wheel as Dany intended to do, the absence of this at the end a symbol of a desire to rule without war) and taking his mother's body away was also satisfying. This was a fitting end to Daenerys, even if the road we took to get here was not always smooth. The effects work and set design here was on point, as was the cinematography once again. Whoever devised the shot of Dany walking forward before Drogon's wings spread behind her as if they are her own, whatever they're getting paid, it's not enough. So far so good. Then we hit the meeting scene and the problems arise. After a jarring time jump, a meeting is held where control over the Kingdoms is wrestled from an understandably furious Grey Worm and the Unsullied and a new ruler is appointed. Featuring some returning faces, eventually Bran Stark is appointed King of Westeros, while Sansa, defending the independence of the North from another ruler (even though that ruler would also be a Stark but whatever) becomes Queen in the North. While the latter feels a well earned ending for that character, it's safe to say Bran has been a bit more divisive to say the least. This is such an utterly bizarre turn of events that this feels as if George R. R. Martin must have told the writers about this in advance but not quite how to get there, so this was tacked on. It is somewhat satisfying, the ruler can only be the person who does not want to rule, but considering once again the build of the show to this point, it does feel somewhat anti-climactic. Other character endings are mixed as well. Arya decides to head west of Westeros to where the maps end to find what lies beyond, which is fitting considering the progression of the character. Jon is exiled North of the Wall to take the black once again, and is reunited with Tormund and, thankfully, Ghost, who gets a pat like the good boy he truly is. Tyrion is appointed Hand of the King once again, and it's when we get to the Small Council things just get a little silly. Davos on the Council feels sensible, although Bronn is a somewhat questionable choice. I have no problem with Brienne leading the Kingsguard, while Ser Pod is also knighted. Her adding to Jaime's section of the White Book is also fitting. Grand Maester Sam is also there and this is when we reach the worst moment of the episode. Apparently a maester somewhere in the Citadel has been composing a catalogue of the events of the season which is, of course, titled "A Song of Ice and Fire". This nod to the camera and massive wink to the audience just felt a step too far quite frankly, and as soon as this happened, I rolled my eyes and felt like groaning out loud. The entire finale felt rather bittersweet if I had to pick one word to describe it. Honestly, personally, I do not have any serious problems with any of these character endings but, the issue is that not all of these felt as though they had the proper development to reach where they are. How fitting that the final issue is, once again, the pacing and shorter series length. With more time, this could have been incredibly satisfying. As it is, however, it's fine but you can't help but wonder what more could have been done.

Conclusion



That's this season of Game of Thrones. It's not a disaster, absolutely not, and some of the criticism levelled at this season as a whole has been a little much at times, I feel no one will deny that in the future at least in some respects. Although some characters are treated poorly as to their development over 8 seasons (*cough* Jaime *cough*), these are still largely entertaining people to watch on screen, and, for the most part, you continue to maintain that emotional connection to them and the journey's we are finally seeing reach their end. The acting remains strong across the board, the best performance coming from Emilia Clarke as Daenerys. The technical aspects of course remain strong. Say what you like about the writing (cause there's certainly plenty to say), but as a piece of cinema the merits of Thrones is simply undeniable. From the cinematography to the sound to the set and costume design to the effects work, from a visual standpoint, the series remains an absolute joy. The issues which are present, of which there are many, all stem from the writing of the series. It's a shame more than anything that the ending to this story has quite simply had its legs cut out from under it by virtue of an overly short series of length, leading to a lack of development as to certain plot points and characters motivations. The focus on wide scale battles and destructions and a lack of smart decisions and political interest. Some decisions on the part of the writers are admittedly anti-climactic, unexpected moves made for the sake of being unexpected, and that is possibly a sad symbol of what Thrones became over the last few years. At the end of the day, however, the fact of the matter was always that the show was never going to move back to the way it once was. Once the adaption came to its close, a change was always inevitable, and, yes, those changes might not always have been for the best. For the story we have witnessed, loved, experienced, however, this ending, certain to have been controversial regardless, feels concluded. The Game is over and the Throne is won. We'll always be able to re-watch this show as a complete story now, always remember Game of Thrones. There are so many great memories of moments from this show that everyone may have a different favourite, and the discussion this show has opened is a marvel rarely achieved by a modern film or series, and I can't see that discussion going anywhere soon. For that, at least, I'm thankful.

Pros

  • Strong acting
  • Entertaining characters
  • A technical marvel
  • On the balance, a somewhat satisfying ending

Cons

  • Generally inconsistent writing
  • Poor pacing and underdeveloped plot points
  • A lack of political intrique 
  • Some anti-climactic choices

Rating: 5/10
Full Season Release Date: 21st May, 2018
Starring Peter Dinklage, Nikolaj Coster-Waldau, Lena Headey, Emilia Clarke, Kit Harington, Sophie Turner, Maisie Williams, Liam Cunningham, Nathalie Emmanuel, Jacob Anderson, Alfie Allen, Isaac Hempstead-Wright, John Bradley, Hannah Murray, Rory McCann, Gwendoline Christie, Conleth Hill, Jerome Flynn, Kristofer Hivju, Joe Dempsie, Carice Van Houten, and Iain Glen

Friday 21 September 2018

The "Slender Man" Rant


Does anyone still care about or remember Slender Man? Initially starting life as a creepypasta story which has since elevated to meme status, the character is likely most well known for the free online PC game "Slender: The Eight Pages". The premise of the game is that you play a camera man or woman exploring the woods at night, you are tasked with finding eight elusive pages all while being stalked by a tall, thin (slender, if you will) faceless creature in a black suit, who begins more aggressive the closer you get to your goal. The game is nothing more than a jump scare nightmare but it doesn't attempt to be, and watching videos of players becoming overly scared by the game's loud noises was entertaining. The game was released in 2012, and interest in the character has been in severe decline since then. So it was quite a surprise when this movie was announced, arriving 5 years too late to pique interest and raise more than a cautious eyebrow. Even with a wise budget of $10-28 million (an exact figure has proven difficult to find), the entire concept of the movie has an air of skepticism about it, with trailers doing little to bring any reassurance that the movie would be more than passable at best. As it turns out, even rock bottom expectations could not be met, as Slender Man is an embarrassing and lazy attempt at film-making, but an insulting and tasteless mess that has cemented itself not only as the worst movie of the year by quite some margin (and so soon after The Festival, sorry) but also quite possibly one of the worst of the decade. But, why? Why is the movie such a travesty in every possible aspect? This is the question I intend to answer, but I cannot do so in a review format. To do so would be to let this movie get off lightly. This movie requires a different structure, to allow us to examine each individual aspect of film-making and point of failure. So with that in mind, I've picked out 7 subheadings to allow a complete autopsy of Slender Man. It's a long and difficult journey ahead, so let's jump in with one of the key features of most movies.


Plot



Quite frankly, I have no idea where to start with this movie, but generally most films have a plot so perhaps that seems to be a reasonable jump pad for this breakdown. As a general point, this one is fairly simple: the plot is extremely dull. In terms of the usual issues of horror movies or in a broader sense those involving spirits, ghosts, or spooky going-ons, a standard point is that nothing is ever explained, which is the case here. That said, a movie does not always need to explain everything. Look at another horror movie from earlier this year, Hereditary. The scares and effectiveness of that movie stems from the fact that we do not always understand what is happening, and to do so requires keen eyes and real thinking about what has happened on screen. Even then, if you do not want to think about it, the movie is just as effective. The atmosphere is built thick and fast, and a lack of understanding builds a real sense of tension - how can you predict what will happen if you do not understand it? This movie also accomplishes this, albeit in the completely wrong way. As soon as the movie starts, within 10 seconds you are instilled with a sense of dread. Being subjected to dull fonts and lazy plot exposition immediately, this is not a sense of dread like that of Hereditary or The Shining; immediately you know that the movie you are watching is going to be bad. As openings go, it sets the tone. The plot of the movie follows a group of teenage girls as they summon Slender Man for no reason at all other than for giggles and then subsequently find themselves haunted by the malevolent spirit. If you think that that sounds like an enjoyable watch, then I think you should perhaps see a psychiatrist. For those of you still here and not on the way to have a brain scan, of course the plot is excruciatingly dull and played out. Quite simply, the movie offers very little outside of the movie troops which we have come to expect from horror movies such of these: exposition, jump scare, exposition, jump scare, rinse and repeat. And that is the entire movie. If that sounds like a total nightmare, then I would say that is a fairly accurate feeling you experience for the entirety of the runtime. The movie attempts to establish a sense of logic through one of (many) scenes explaining the plot, but these rules do not survive 15 minutes into the movie before the writers themselves start to break and bend them as they see fit. The movie is little more than clichés and stereotypes thrown together with little regard for any semblance of sense and reasoning and it only serves to make the experience of sitting through this shambles considerably more tedious than necessary. The only thing that can be said for it is that a 90-minute runtime is mercifully short, although the length of certain scenes and the pacing of the entire movie drag this out to feel considerably longer than it actually is. Believe it or not, however, this is only the beginning, and perhaps even the least offensive of this movie's crimes.

Characters and Acting



Okay, well the story isn't the best but perhaps the movie can still make up for it with its characters and its acting. After all, plenty of movies can make up for a ridiculous story by making the movie an interesting character piece that focuses on the deteriorating relations between the characters, and in this movie in particular the madness they start to suffer. Naturally, however, expecting anything other than cardboard cut outs from this movie was too much and thus we are left with a merry band of morons to lead us through the proceedings. At the helm we have a troupe of four teenage girls who do not speak like girls and so I can only imagine have been written by a middle-aged to elderly old man who has no idea how teenage girls today talk and interact with each other, leading to some suitably hilarious dialogue. Unintentionally hilarious of course, much like the rest of the movie. None of these four girls are particularly interesting, and have very little character. Indeed you will struggle to keep track of exactly who is who. Even their names seem inconsistent. I could swear at one point a girl is called "Ally" but then later another member of the same group calls her "Hal", which only served to left me confused until the credits finally (and mercifully) rolled to solve the mystery of this poor girl's name. None of the girls have any particularly memorable character traits, and so in the absence of being able to remember their names you typically find yourself referring to them by whatever small detail you can recall, which does not tend to be particularly flattering. One is missing, one screams a lot, one is really boring, one is a psychopath, and they all share the common trait of being idiots. Oh the sheer, complete, and frankly insane idiocy on display from these girls is enough to leave anyone with a number of brain cells significantly lesser to when you went in, enough even to justify a visit to the hospital. You may have to be driven there though. Perhaps the most ridiculous issue of character is the identification of a main protagonist. Even in movies with groups of characters at the helm, especially in horror movies there tends to be a main character who uncovers everything that is happening and who acts as the audience surrogate. This movie seems unable to decide who it wants to be said character. The perspective of the movie frequently changes to different character, at some points leaping back and forth between them all while each uncovers different pieces of information much of which does not come together. This scatter-brained approach served only to leave me confused as to who the main character is meant to be, and it is impossible to rule someone out until they leave the movie (whether decidedly or you just realise they are never coming back, which I'll come back to later). Naturally the order in which this happens is from the most talented actress to the least talented, leaving us with an extremely dull and uninspired performance to round out the flick. That said, to say the "most talented" in this movie is more akin to the "least awful", and even then all of the performances are fairly terrible even outside of the main group. Nobody seems to have been told about this little thing called "subtlety", which is fairly key to a good emotional performance, rather than just screaming at the top of your lungs at everything or to quickly cut to a shot where they have an apparent monsoon streaming down their face. Even when they are meant to be happy they come across as barely teetering above tears. Ultimately, this is a band of misfits who you will have no fun spending time with, and truth be told cannot wait to see get picked off. I feel like there is one more character I'm forgetting though...

The Slender Man and Visuals



The final key character in the movie is of course the Slender Man himself. After the nonchalant set-up for the story and build-up to that reveal of the character himself, you would be forgiven for hoping that the crew behind the film might at least put some effort into the look of the titular monster. That they might create a design to strike fear into the audience, and rise to the difficult task of making the concept of the Slender Man into an intimidating reality. I'll give you three guesses what happens. That's right, the reveal is laughably out of the blue, with little to no subtlety or dramatic tension; all of a sudden you are greeted with a hilarious close up of a wrinkled up creature that looks like a lemon or a lime has gone off after being left out too long. That off-fruit has been placed on top of an effigy in a bad second-hand suit and hey presto we have our monster. As you might imagine, the reveal is not especially intimidating. The only thing funnier than how Slender Man looks is his antics and strategies to scare these girls silly. These involve the usual possession (although this tends to involve making someone shake their head and roar a lot in the funniest scene of the movie), and knocking things over, but also more innovative tactics. You see, Slender Man is a spook of the 21st century, and so employs devices such as FaceTime and Messenger to contact and scare the girls, but the writers failed to realise one thing: this is so stupid that it is impossible to take seriously.The only positive I might be able to give at a stretch is that the creature is at least practical, and that an actual bodysuit and mask is being used as opposed to making the creature completely CGI. Of course, this is all irrelevant when we consider just how terrible the costume here is, to the point where it looks as lifelike and believable as it would have done had it been a complete visual effects job in the first place. That being said, there is a reveal in the third act of the movie which I suppose is meant to be the true form of Slender Man. The whole look of this attempts to meld the practical suit with some ropey to say the least CGI, and, as you can imagine, it looks absolutely ridiculous. There are a few other scenes scattered throughout the movie where the Slender Man is shown to have silly tentacles that sprout from his back, again making an attempt to blend the dreadful visual effects with the equally dreadful practical costume. Of course, this makes the movie even more hilarious. At no point can you take this creature seriously when it looks as ridiculous as it does, naturally detracting from the tension and fear you are meant to be feeling through out. The same can be said for the occasional scenes scattered throughout where visuals are used to alter appearances or have a character to do something unnatural. The visuals throughout the entire film are frankly laughable and embarrassing considering especially how far movies have come in recent years in this department. There are a number of key things that can kill the serious atmosphere of a horror movie stone dead. A silly monster and dreadful effects are two, and this movie couples both together in a nice little package.

Lighting, Sound, and Cinematography



These are another few aspects of the film that go hand-in-hand with each other, and generally this encompasses the technical aspects of the movie. The entire movie quite simply looks...ugly. It sounds incredibly simplistic, but quite frankly it is also the best way to summarise all of these points. The daytime sequences all look incredibly grainy and on the verge of being out of focus. These are not the main issue, however, given that all of the conversations these girls have seem to be outside in the dead of night, and so it is the night aspects of the movie which deserve the most attention. Not only because they take up the most screen time but also because they are the most incompetent. Let us start with lighting, and from there lead into cinematography. For the most part, the movie is incredibly underexposed. For those of you who does not know what that term means, a good movie or TV episode should be neither over nor under exposed as you might have guessed. Overexposed movies tend to have too much light, with the team behind the movie utilising so much light in an attempt to get that perfect shot that the film looks blown up and in no way realistic. Underexposed - which is this movie's problem - refers to when not enough light is used, and the issue which stems from this is quite simple then. The audience cannot see what is happening. This is the key problem in the indoor sequences, particularly when tension is attempting to be built by having characters wander through empty corridors or houses while the next lazy jump scare lurks around the corner. If the audience cannot see what is happening, then when characters turn and run, we do not see it and do not feel the same fear. The movie becomes considerably more meta at this point as characters are literally, at least from the audience point of view, being scared and running away from loud noises. This is the key reason that the poor lighting and hilariously generic sound design go hand-in-hand as failures of the film, with the clichéd and overplayed violin building up to a fright that we cannot see while a loud crash plays that causes a character to run away. This is the structure that every "scary sequence" in the movie takes. And trust me, once you've seen it a few times, it gets old and you stop laughing, really really quick. The cinematography is for the most part bland and unimpressive, so I don't want to linger too much on it, but there is one key element that must be mentioned. Around 75%  of the movie takes place at night (because that's where these girls have ever conversation apparently but I've discussed the stupidity of the movie to death so let's move on). One might think then, that at the very least, the filmmakers would have the decency to shoot the movie at night. That being said, there are some scenes that look to this not being the case. At least not always the case. A strange green filter is often put over scenes. The sky often looks blown out and overexposed. The colour correction and aesthetic of scenes often looks like the blues and the blacks have been crushed in post production. I am not saying this is the case, and this is for you to make your own mind up about, but all of this looks incredibly suspicious and almost makes the night sequences look as if, horrifically...they were filmed during the day. In 2018. In a Hollywood blockbuster horror movie, with alleged talent working on this movie. What are we coming to as a species when the film industry has got to the point where professional filmmakers cannot be bothered to film at night? With all of this, how could the technical elements of this movie get any more embarrassing?

Editing



Oh, of course, the editing, how could I forget. You don't often see technical elements such as lighting, sound, etc. brought up in a lot of reviews, solely because at the very least movies do these competently. It should then be a testament to this movie, or more accurately a point to its detriment, that I have not only raised all of these, but have felt the need to devote an entire point to the somewhat niche point of editing. You know, that if I have chosen to bring this up as its own separate point that it must be truly terrifying. You do not know the half of it, take my word on that. The movie is honestly completely incomprehensible. This is an issue which extends far beyond a ridiculous story. There are plenty of movies out there with insane stories or films which have complex reveals, twists and turns. Think of a movie that you would describe as either of those things. At the very least, you should be able to follow what is happening, or, in a situation where information is being withheld, be able to consider it and establish what has happened in the movie you just watched. Most movies succeed. This one does not. Characters flit in and out of the movie at a moments notice, and you will almost certainly lose track of what each of them are doing at different points. Random time jumps are inserted throughout the movie for no real reason, and it only serves to confuse the placement of the characters further. The two biggest issues of editing in the movie relates to two of the main characters in the movie who fall victim to Slender Man attacks. You never see either of these characters die, although the film attempts to put across the madness that they are being infected with thanks to his presence in their lives. What we never see is either of these characters die. And yet they disappear from the movie at different points. No other line in the movie mentions them ever again, no hint is ever given to their fate, and for all we know they could be dead, in a mental institution, or absolutely fine. In a horror movie, where the events of the movie are meant to impact characters lives massively and even threaten them, we do not know what has happened to numerous of them by the time the credits roll. The worst part is, I cannot tell whose fault this comes down on. Is the editor competent? Were certain scenes not even in the script in the first place to be cut out? Was the 90-minute runtime studio mandated, thereby forcing the editor to trim scenes in the first place and those were the best options available to him? These are questions we will never know the answer to unless a making-of documentary on this travesty is put together and released (which to be quite frank, I would be incredibly interested to see). Whatever the reasons for this, the editing in the movie ensures that this product is a horribly incoherent mess. At the very least, I should be able to follow a film and understand what happens to its characters, even if the story is ridiculous and the script embarrassing. When a horror movie cannot even be bothered to include the deaths of the main characters and instead just has them disappear from the movie, this should be more than enough to set off the warning lights.

Insulting - A Conclusion



I think it is clear that from all of these points that one for the best words that can be used to describe this movie is "lazy". A script, editing room, cast, visual effects crew, and general filmmaking team who seemed completely content to offer the bare minimum, almost as if they were aware that nobody cares about Slender Man anymore (not that that gives them an excuse). However, I've watched terrible movies before. I've ripped other movies to shreds. What sets this movie apart? What justifies this becoming a rant over a review, and a new format? What is the source of such a deep disdain for this movie in particular? Disregard all of my previous points. Imagine this movie had a smarter plot; better performances; the most impressive effects work of the year; it was competently edited and it actually bothered to fill nighttime sequences at night. Imagine all of that. This movie remains the worst movie of the year and up there with the worst of the decade solely because of its final 30 seconds. I won't spoil the exact nature of the scene here (as if you should care), but it involves one barely developed character reflecting on the events which have happened throughout the movie. They regard the Slender Man as a virus who corrupts people, and the more people speak about him and spread word about him, the more likely they are to become obsessed with him and commit violent acts in his name. The movie is intending to leave a lingering sense of fear, hoping to suggest to the audience that just by watching the movie he might corrupt us. What in actual fact is is extremely distasteful and quite frankly insulting. Back in 2014, in Wisconsin, you might have heard that there was an act of violence carried out by two young girls against a third girl, with near fatal consequences. The reason provided by the girls for the stabbing: an attempt to prove their loyalty to Slender Man, who they believed to be real, and via this become his "proxies" and prevent him from harming their families. The details of the case are not pleasant, and of course this happening relatively recently all things considered has made this a point of controversy for the movie. Certain cinema chains in Wisconsin have refused to screen the movie out of respect while the communities and families associated with the incident have called the movie "distasteful". And I can't say I disagree with that statement, particularly having seen it. The fact that this movie even dares to include not one, but multiple scenes, of characters explaining the madness Slender Man inflicts on people and trying to explain that that is why people commit violent acts, without any meaningful self-awareness, screams of an extreme disconnect - or perhaps blatant nonchalance - for the real life tragedies associated with this character. The fact that the movie even further opts to bookend the movie with this message is the final slap in the face. Ultimately, this movie is not only incompetent and outright embarrassing as a film, but as a concept is tasteless and insulting, cementing it as the worst film of 2018 so far. There is no reason for you to watch this movie, and I cannot recommend enough that you avoid it like the plague.

Pros

  • For the second time this year, absolutely nothing

Cons

  • A story which is an absolute bore to watch unfold
  • Horrendous characters
  • Awful acting
  • Frequently more funny than scary
  • Terrible CGI
  • Editing
  • The lighting and cinematography
  • The laziest movie of the year?
  • An outright insulting and tasteless movie

Rating: 0/10
Original Release Date: 24th August, 2018
Starring Joey King, Julia Goldani Telles, Jaz Sinclair, Annalise Basso, Taylor Richardson, Alex Fitzalan, KEvin Chapman and Javier Botet

Thursday 16 August 2018

"The Festival" Movie Review - 2018's Worst Movie?


Hands up if you had no idea that The Festival was coming out until a few weeks or a month ago at the latest? I certainly fall into that camp, and it was quite a surprise to suddenly see a movie on the IMDb coming soon page from the creator of The Inbetweeners, which I'm sure most of you will have heard of. Aside from the IMDb page and a single bus banner, however, I struggled to find any information about this movie. There is no Wikipedia page available for it, there's little to no budgetary information available for this thing, and the trailers themselves seemed to have been released a month ago, around the same time this movie seemed to pop into existence. Why, you might ask? Why would a movie choose not to advertise itself until a month before release? And why oh why, would a studio want to realise a movie like this where it is sure to be eaten alive by the like of Christopher Robin releasing this weekend, as well as continuing giants The Meg and Mamma Mia: Here We Go Again? The answer is quite simple: the movie is not even remotely good and the people who made it know it. I watched no trailers for this movie as I had no plans to see it, but the warning signs were all there. The problem I face now, having watched the film, is that I genuinely have no idea where to start with this movie. I've managed to narrow the movie down to three main elements which I need to focus on: the story; the characters and acting; and the humour. This is not the type of movie where I should necessarily be talking about cinematography (which is bland and unimaginative, featuring an overabundance of shots of the whole festival from the sky), or about the editing, or any of the technical aspect (however poorly executed they may be) as this is not the type of movie where these are the focus. Therefore, you can take it for granted that these elements are passable at best, but given that this is not the kind of movie to focus on these, they are not going to add to the movie experience. One small element which is worth mentioning is the music. Given that most of the action takes place at a music festival, director Iain Morris obviously wanted to take the opportunity to include some popular festival songs. It's clear that he loves Mr. Brightside by the Killers, given that I heard that song being used a minimum of three times. The problem is that the movie was filmed largely at the Leeds Music Festival in 2017 and that in itself offers a chance for some live music performances in the midst of films. That might be considered too much to ask, but I don't think it is asking too much for more than three or four popular songs to be used throughout the movie. With this set up, I think expecting a more creative approach is fair.


With those small qualms having been dealt with, let's start examining the three main problems of the movie with the story. Ultimately this one's pretty simple: the movie is nothing you have not seen before and is extremely predictable. The story involves the uptight and not-very-fun Nick (played by The Inbetweeners' Joe Thomas) making a fool of himself at his university graduation when he breaks up with his girlfriend Caitlin (Hannah Tointon). In an attempt to make him feel better, he is dragged to a music festival by best friend Shane (Hammed Animashaun), where he is forced to try and embrace the fun, music, and mud. Thrown in are some subplots relating to strange religious ceremonies, Smurfs, and one-legged Amercian bouncers, but these amount to little more than unfunny bit jokes that I'll come to later. If the main plot sounds clichéd, you'd be right. This is a paper thin story that moves along predictably, with no surprising or funny twists and turns. The entire movie is a series of half-scenes, by which I mean scenes just happen, they do not start and they do not end. There are a number of scenes which start in the middle of conversations, while the main focus of the scene more than often has no set up. Scenes end without any resolution or proper conclusion, and then we swiftly move to another situation. If it sounds like I do not have much to say about the plot, then I'm sorry but there is simply not much to say. All this is is a story about a young guy trying to get back with his ex, while simultaneously making a fool of himself and learning to loosen up. The fact that the movie is set at a music festival is completely coincidental and does not in any way add to the generic plot and pacing. The only thing the movie does which is even remotely different is completely wrap up the ex-girlfriend story halfway through the movie...before restarting the movie and having Nick try to find a girl he spent the night with. If this sounds like a complete nightmare to follow, then you're completely right. All this sudden restart seems to offer is a way to pad out the runtime from a 45-50 minute movie to a 100-minute slog that will have you hating every single moment of the movie. The movie is bloated, predictable, and simply dull. The script is the killer of the movie, and is the source of all of its problems. Believe it or not, however, the plot is the least of the scripts issues.

The face of Nick (Joe Thomas) on the right sums up watching the movie fairly well
The characters, and in turn the acting, is the next step up in where the movie fails. It is still possible for a movie to have very little plot, but to still be extremely well done as a character piece, with the dynamics and development of characters being enough to carry a movie. However, when the movie has characters as weak as these, the experience becomes considerably more irritating. The movie is populated by cardboard cut outs and irritating personalities who surround our three main characters (who we'll dive into in a little bit). From Chris Geere's Brother David to Nick Frost's tattooist to Jemaine Clement's overenthusiastic father-in-law Robin, characters flit in and out of the movie at a moments notice, offering little progression and typically existing for the sole purpose of making one of the movie's sex-based jokes, which make up roughly 95% of the humour in the movie. I'm getting ahead of myself on the humour, though, so we'll come to that soon. The performances from all of the supporting cast are not especially memorable, and I find myself thankful that this movie has an IMDb page at the very least so I can check the names of the characters. The main three offenders, however, are the three leads, who we can go through in turn. Let's start with Claudia O'Doherty's Amy, a festival maniac who our two best friends meet on the train to the festival and who Nick views as forcing herself on them, desperate to be their friends. The entire schtick of this character is that they are annoying, talking for obscene amounts of time without allowing anyone else to get a word in and generally just having quite a grating personality. To O'Doherty's credit, she pulls off this aspect of the character quite perfectly, and she is sure to get on your nerves quickly once she enters the movie. The problem is, however, that being annoying and nothing else is not an excuse. There is some attempt later to explain how she never has any friends and thereby hoping to give the character some emotional depth, but O'Doherty never plays this seriously, instead laughing it off and stopping us as an audience from feeling any emotional connection because of this. If she doesn't care then why should we? This is a problem both for the script - which underdeveloped this - and for the actress - who never plays it seriously enough at the brief intervals where this is attempt. Secondly we have Hammed Animashaun's best friend character Shane. I'll correct myself, sorry, because to use the word "character" in relation to Shane is an insult to better films. Shane has no personality traits outside of being a best friend, and he exists solely to have the extremely predictable moment in the later half of the film where he gets annoyed at the main character only to drop this immediately after. The only other thing he has going for him is that he creates his own music, and is obsessed with a DJ called Hammerhead who wears a mask and just so happens to be playing at the festival. Bet you can't guess where that goes. There's precious little to say about Shane, and honestly you feel bad for Animashaun, who has no material to work with outside of the relationship with Nick, which never feels genuine or remotely believable. With that, we finally come to Joe Thomas' Nick, whose entire character revolves around the fact that he is unlikeable. The character arc he goes on focuses on his transition from being a selfish, uptight, and unlikeable person to a loosened up person...who is still unlikeable. The transition is one that happens with the flick of a switch with no real reason for the change. Indeed, the reason for the change makes no sense, and in actuality should have made Nick worse. The basic problem is that Nick, and indeed everyone else in the movie, is extremely loathsome. They don't change, their personalities are not entertaining or engaging, and they don't act like humans. You spend an hour and 40 minutes of your time watching people who you hate and have unbelievable dynamics. Ultimately, no matter how bad the events of the movie, thanks to the writing and the acting, you can't help but feel, at the end of day, for these people, it could've been worse.

You deserve a medal if you can buy for a second that these two are best friends
With the plot, characters, and acting dealt with, we come to the greatest crime the movie commits: the humour. All of the jokes in the movie think they are much funnier than they actually are, and quite frankly you are more likely to cringe or become completely confused watching the movie. The humour becomes all the more irritating when you realise that most jokes in the movie is based around one of two topics: toilet humour, or sexual antics. When every scene involves a joke relating to one of these two, and you begin to predict what the joke of the scene, adding to the boredom you feel watching the movie anyway. Take for example a scene in a forest (it of course starts halfway through a conversation, there is no set up to the religious group involved in the scene, and of course there is no real resolution or point to the scene). Two characters stumble upon a religious group about to partake in a marriage, with the laughs seemingly meant to be coming from the reaction to discovering the group. Of course, it soon becomes apparent that the "funny part" of the scene relates to who the man in the marriage is getting married to, and this of course leads to yet another sex joke. The whole movie is incredibly unimaginative and seems content to repeat the same jokes over and over and over again. You still might laugh at the scene, and indeed at the movie, but you will only do so out of either how bad the movie is or the absurdity of the scenes. You might get 3 or 4 laughs total. There are perhaps two exceptions to the focus of the joke through the entire movie. One of these relates to one random recurring drunk character mistaking the main character for Harry Potter. This is one of the moments which might make you laugh out of pure absurdity. The other joke relates to an American bounce character called Pirate (because he has one leg...seriously) mishearing Nick's name and calling him "Lick" for the rest of the movie, which of course every other character finds hilarious and proceeds to join in on. Set aside how mean-spirited the entire joke is, the frequency with which the joke comes up make sit easily the most irritating joke in the entire film. In fact, most of the jokes in the movie, while relating to those topics, are incredibly hurtful. The best comedies relate to the situations characters find themselves in, but the worst focus wholly on jokes which make you laugh at others. There's no cleverness, no visual humour, nothing outside of jokes which are mean tot make you laugh at the misfortunes or jokes made towards others. It's a truly horrible and outright lazy script that is content with doing the bare minimum with the expectation that we as an audience will be willing to accept that.

Smurfs turning up is one of the less absurd jokes in the movie if you can believe it
There is not much left to say about The Festival quite honestly. It is a mess from start to finish, and frankly I wanted to leave around 5 minutes into the movie. It's not even entertainingly bad for the entire duration, the few laughs to be had stemming from the sheer absurdity of what is happening on screen at a few scattered points. For the most part, the movie is simply...bad. Bad is underselling it, of course, when the movie does literally nothing right. Everything that could possibly go wrong with a film like this goes wrong. This is without even considering technical elements such as the (dull) cinematography, (bad) editing, or the (forced) music tracks. The absolute killer of the movie is its dreadful script, which commits ever possible sin that a movie can commit. The story is generic and clichéd, being poorly paced out to make the 100-minute runtime feel significantly longer than it actually is. All of the characters are unlikeable, going through no development or changes over the course of the movie. Written terribly and being paired with terrible performances, it's fair to say they do not make watching the movie any easier. The script has no clever jokes and seems content to repeat the same jokes about toilets, sex, Harry Potter, and mean-spirited jokes about people's names. This movie did not exist a month ago, and it is easy now to see why. No matter how awful you expect this movie to be, it cannot match the experience of watching the final product.

Pros

  • Literally nothing

Cons

  • Unlikeable and underdeveloped characters
  • A generic and predictable plot
  • An absolutely horrendous script, with humour more likely to make you cringe or become confused
  • All laughs (all 4) are at the absurdity of the film
  • A bloated running time
  • Poor acting across the board
  • Uninspired music choices which are forced into the movie

Rating: 1/10
Original Release Date: 14th August, 2018
Starring Joe Thomas, Hammed Animashaun, Claudia O'Doherty, Jemaine Clement, Hannah Tointon, Kurt Yaeger, Theo Barklem-Biggs, Nick Frost, and Noel Fielding

Friday 10 August 2018

Summer Movies In Review - Fallout, Skyscraper, Ant-Man and More!

Image result for summer 2018 movies

It's been a while since I last talked about movies. The last thing I reviewed was in May with the release of Solo: A Star Wars Story (I wasn't letting that one slide), and the last review I put out was for a TV show! As it's turned out, I've sadly just struggled to find the time to review what I've seen this summer...but I've still seen a few things since then! So rather than waiting until the end of the year to include all of these solely in my end of year review, I decided the best way to catch up would be to give my thoughts on all of the movies I've seen this summer at once. Summer is the time of blockbusters, action and superheroes so there's certainly plenty to talk about. I've kept my thoughts on Solo in here for the sake of completeness, with a link to the full review in there as well. Otherwise though these are all movies which I've not talked about on here yet. With all that said, let's jump right in to the 9 movies which I've seen over the last couple of months. Some are great. Some are awful. And for better or for worse, some are absolutely hilarious. Let's get stuck right in (oh, and I didn't see Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again...sorry).

Deadpool 2



Although the movies drags considerably near the start, there are various shots scattered through the movie where the effects strangely come to pieces, and perhaps most frustratingly the movie seems more content to lean into clichés, it still provides ridiculous and fun popcorn entertainment. Deadpool remains as engaging a main character as always, and it is largely thanks to his humour and interactions with the other characters in the movie that the movie is as hilarious as it is. That said, this movie benefits much more than the original thanks to a developed and emotionally driven story, and David Leitch's background in action boosts the movie considerably in that department. That all being said, there is a strange contradiction to be drawn here in that this emotion doesn't always feel totally earned. Given the nature of the humour adopted in the first film and indeed in the final half of this film, the build in emotional heft feels more like the build-up to a joke that never comes. You don't allow yourself to become attached to the connection as the writers intended because it doesn't seem like the type of situation the Deadpool we've come to know on the big screen would allow himself to be in; he might love his girlfriend, but he's never come across as the type of person who needed anyone else. The character dynamics in this movie work, don't get me wrong, but the adoption of the strangely generic plot in turn weakens the movie - in trying to add heart to elevate the movie above the original, they have in turn weakened the first half of the movie. When we get back to the action in the second half, I found that my enjoyment of the movie picked up considerably, with the filmmakers considerably less anchored by the story they had to set up. In this half, just like the MCU albeit in a totally different way, the people who are making these movies completely understand and know what they are doing. They know what makes Deadpool work to ensure that he never becomes tiring (i.e. teaming him with other characters unwilling to suffer through his non-stop quips and jokes and general schtick) and they know what people want to see. They know that what we want from these movies is just Deadpool being Deadpool with some action in between, and that would be more than enough to ensure that this film made truckloads of money regardless of what any review said. With that being said, the biggest commendation I can give then is the moxy of the writers to try to go beyond this, and inject the film with some sense of stakes and emotional heft. That is works for the most part is even more of a surprise. In the end, Deadpool 2's fun blend of heart, action, and self-awareness makes sure that this is an extremely enjoyable ride that will leave you with a smile on your face...at least for half of it.

Rating: 6/10
Original Release Date: May 18th, 2018
Starring: Ryan Reynolds, Josh Brolin, Zazie Beetz, Julian Dennison, Morena Baccarin, T. J. Miller, Brianna Hildebrand, Eddie Marsan, Terry Crews, Bill Skarsgard, and Rob Delaney

Solo: A Star Wars Story



Full Review Link: "Solo: A Star Wars Story" Movie Review - Remarkably Unremarkable

What is there left to say about this misguided and ultimately pointless movie? It's true that there are some good performances and action, while the effects are on point as always - that I cannot deny. However, that does not excuse the rest of the movie. While the issues of production design are somewhat bland, thee are forgivable and if they were the only issues I had and someone said I was reading too far into the movie then perhaps I could get past that. What I cannot forgive is this script. As I said at the beginning of this review (or maybe rant might be more appropriate for the first half), this movie began as a poor and ill-conceived idea, and was not developed from that. There was no desire to deviate from the formula of a standard adventure plot. There was no desire to find a way to develop and build on existing characters or create new ones. What the writers seemed to think was sufficient was a great deal of fan service and irritating moments where characters almost literally smirk at the camera as lines are delivered or pointless tidbits of information given out. It's just...dull. There is absolutely nothing to it and therefore as a movie fundamentally fails at a basic level. There might be cool effects or relatively fun action, but there is no rewatchability to this. What this is is a series of clips which you might want to watch on YouTube as opposed to having to sit through the other drab 2 hours. Ultimately, this is not only pointless, but it is utterly dull. Is it the worst Star Wars movie? No. Is it a particularly enjoyable movie or well-written? No. Does it have a point? No. It just exists, and it seems that is something I and the rest of the fanbase will simply have to live with. It's just a shame at the end of the day that there was potential for this story, and yet we ended up with something which is quite remarkably unremarkable.

Rating: 3/10
Original Release Date: May 25th, 2018
Starring Alden Ehrenreich, Woody Harrelson, Emilia Clarke, Donald Glover, Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Thandie Newton, Jon Favreau, Joonas Suotamo, and Paul Bettany

Ocean's 8



The Ocean's franchise was the latest series to this year be subjected to the "all female reboot/sequel" trend which is currently doing the rounds, although this movie thankfully had considerably more successful results than last years disastrous Ghostbusters. This is more successful for a few reasons. The most notable of these is the talented cast. Although the initial announcement of this movie may have been met with some trepidation, a few minds at least were calmed by the signing of big name talents such as Sandra Bullock, Cate Blanchett, and Anne Hathaway, as well as up-and-comers such as Sarah Paulson. The cast of this movie is great and thankfully live up to the expectations. Each of them knows exactly how to play their characters without them becoming grating or annoying (although Awkwafina comes dangerously close, she is thankfully restricted by less dialogue than some of the cast), and the chemistry between them is electric. Even Rihanna didn't annoy me...that much. The second point this movie got right is possibly the most important part of any movie and that is the director, Gary Ross. Responsible for the first Hunger Games movie, and also for writing Big back in 1988, Ross emulates the style of original Ocean's director Steven Soderbergh to a tee. There's a clear understanding throughout the movie that the character dynamics are the real bread and butter of the movie and the focus on these is wise. The editing is stylish, utilising the same comic panel transitions the series has become famous for, while the cinematography and shot composition is slick and well done. Where the movie doesn't work is the script. It's generic, clichéd, and often a boring slog. The heist of the movie, which involves a plot to rob the MET Gala in New York, is exceedingly simple and lacks the tension of the earlier movies in the series. While the group does encounter some problems with the plan throughout, ultimately these are overcome with very little difficulty, while also generally not requiring any specific skills a member of the group has. Effectively, you know the story of the movie going in and the beats you expect the plot to hit it routinely does. There's no real surprises in store (cameos aside), and there's no villain to add any real tension into the mix (no, Richard Armitage's ex-boyfriend does not count as a bad guy because he never encounters the group and he effectively amounts to a bit character). The humour in the movie can be very hit and miss as well, particularly when James Corden makes a late third act entry into the fray playing himself pretending to be an insurance investigator. Clearly, Ocean's 8 is a mixed bag. From a production stand point, the movie is well done, and the cast has excellent chemistry. It's the script that ultimately brings the movie down, with inconsistent humour, and the most standard by-the-numbers plot you can expect to see in this kind of movie. If you're not expecting high art, you could get some entertainment value out of this but otherwise, it may be decidedly more rough.

Rating: 5/10
Original Release Date: June 8th, 2018
Starring: Sandra Bullock, Cate Blanchett, Anne Hathaway, Mindy Kaling, Sarah Paulson, Awkwafina, Rihanna, Helena Bonham Carter, Richard Armitage, and James Corden

Hereditary



Hereditary is, above all, a victim of its own marketing. While I was lucky enough to avoid all trailers and footage for the movie side one 30-second clip that was nearly included in a video I watched (this is absolutely the experience you should aim for if at all possible, I put the trailer in for an option and for consistency), after seeing them after the film itself, as well as marketing quotes like "This generation's The Exorcist", I felt that audiences could have been strangely misled into seeing this film. Advertised as one of the scariest movies of all time and seeming to boast a slew of horror sequences, this is not really a fair representation of the movie at all. In fact, for the first half of the movie, there seems to be little to no supernatural activity. The movie initially seems to more be a comment on grief and regret, and the effect which this has on a person, especially following a death in the family. Any paranormal events in the movie at first are only seen by certain people, carrying an implication that this could be all in their heads, making the movie a much more psychological horror far away from genre tropes. The movie even opens with a shot of a doll house to suggest that everything we're about to watch is somewhat artificial, and that maybe we should not take everything we're seeing at face value. And then Toni Collette's Annie is involved in a seance sequence and the movie seems to from then on out be more content to lead into clichés and stereotypes. Indeed, the final half of the movie is much more standard mainstream horror, and almost feels studio mandated to ensure that the movie could still be watched and somewhat enjoyed by general audiences. I am certainly not going to deny that the final 20 minutes of the movie is perhaps the scariest sequence I have ever watched in a cinema, and at the very least one of the scariest sequences of all time. As with the rest of the movie, the cinematography, lighting, sound design, and music in this sequence is impeccable, and the slow escalation brings a horror that jump scare movies could only dream of achieving. The music of the movie is of particular note, given that there isn't any music for large portions of the movie, which does wonders for the slow-building nature and atmosphere director Ari Aster has sought out to achieve. This is also a movie where the explanation is one you will certainly have to think about. Again, it feels like director Aster wanted to leave the ending considerably more ambiguous but was asked to include more hints. However, this is still an extremely confusing set of reveals the audience is subjected to and it will certainly not be to all tastes. The movie is at times so brutal, so relentless, and so disturbing that I would completely understand someone telling me they didn't enjoy. I certainly didn't enjoy watching the whole thing. This wasn't helped by a bloated 2 hour runtime that feels as though it could easily be trimmed down. The acting is also worthy of a mention. All of the performances of the movie are excellent, but Toni Collette in particular gives a career-best, potentially Oscar-worthy performance which is alone worth seeing the movie for. Ultimately, there is plenty to like about Hereditary but it is certainly not to all tastes. Well-acted and produced certainly but held back by a script that at times feels pretentious and generic, this is movie that should not have been marketed as a straight horror but instead an insight into the effects of grief with psychological horror elements and a lean into those elements at the end. If you go in knowing what you're getting, and prepared for it, this is certainly an easier pill to swallow, and at the least an interesting and engaging watch.

Rating: 7/10
Original Release Date: June 8th, 2018
Starring: Toni Collette, Alex Wolff, Milly Shapiro, Ann Dowd, and Gabriel Byrne

Incredibles 2



If I had to some up this movie quite simply, Incredibles 2 is more of what you loved about the original. Hampered only by an admittedly predictable story (there's a villain reveal at the end of the second act which sticks out like a sore thumb and that you can see coming from miles away), the movie more than makes up for it by focusing on the dynamics of the various characters both old and new, and providing them with interesting motivations and conflicts. It's difficult to imagine not becoming wholly engrossed in the family drama and invested in these characters even despite this being an animated movie. All of this is helped by some stunning animation and the drama being surrounded by an onslaught of sequences which can make you laugh or provide a surprising adrenaline rush through the intense action set pieces. The action in this movie stands with this years own Infinity War as potentially some of the most heart-racing action seen in a superhero movie in recent years, using the powers of the Incredibles themselves as well as those of their allies, old and new, in tandem with a slew of interesting new gadgets and additions. Michael Giacchino's score is also excellent and provides the perfect blend of emotion and intensity in the background of the film. That's not to mention the theme songs written for Mr. Incredible, Elastigirl, and Frozone, harkening back to the gloriously campy superhero days of the 60s and sure to put a smile on even the most stone-hearted viewers face. As I say, it's more of the same, and that's okay ultimately. Fans have been waiting 14 years to see a continuation to these characters and this movie not only provides an immensely satisfying follow-up, but also works well as a device to introduce new audiences to these characters, as is necessary with a gap as long as we were forced to suffer. It's admirable of Pixar to have waited until they had a proper story to tell before making this movie, while also maintaining the heart of the original. In story, this is of course a different movie (and I will never understand comments arguing that this is the same movie repeated) but in essence, it's everything you know and love. Superpowers and action act as a backdrop to a story about family, and it is the dynamic of the central cast and those same themes that give the movie the heart of other Pixar movies. It's been a long wait, yes, but it's safe to say that the Incredibles are back and, with that same soul, it's like they never left.

Rating: 9/10
Original Release Date: 15th June, 2018
Starring: Holly Hunter, Craig T. Nelson, Sarah Vowell, Huck Milner, Samuel L. Jackson, Bob Odenkirk, Catherine Keener, Jonathan Banks, Michael Bird, Sophia Bush, and Brad Bird

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom



Jurassic World was released back in 2015 with the intent to revitalise the Jurassic Park franchise with the addition of exciting new leads Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Howard as well as some interesting new hybrid dinos to face off against the iconic T-Rex and Velociraptors. In actuality, Colin Trevorrow's effort was met with a decidedly mixed reception although it still managed to gross over a billion dollars worldwide. A sequel was thus guaranteed, but the reins were handed this time round to horror director J. A. Bayona. A $170 million budget to a director relatively unexperienced in the action genre this new set of movies seem to be aiming for? What could go wrong? As it turns out, quite a bit, but not as much as it could have done. The visual effects are once again on point, with the dinosaurs being seamlessly melded into the real world, while the new hybrids also boast some interesting and eye-popping designs. The acting from the two leads is also good, with their characters being better written this time around, while the chemistry between the two feels considerably stronger. The action in the movie is also fun, especially in the second half, while the cinematography also feels on point. There are some particularly beautiful shots in the first half on the island, although the second half certainly is not lacking in its memorable shots (see the shot of the Indoraptor on the roof of the mansion roaring while lightning flashes in the background). With those positives out of the way, however, where the movie is let down the most is (as with most summer blockbusters this year) in its script. You may have noticed that I referred there repeatedly to a first half and a second half and the reason for that is because, unlike other movies which follow a conventional structure and try to flow naturally throughout, Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom seems content to treat itself as two movies: one set on an island with an exploding volcano; and one more horror-themed segment set in a mansion (three guesses which of these is better directed going by the directors expertise). These plots are poorly bridged and tonally dissonant, and you will struggle to escape the sense that the movie switches to another halfway through, only with the same characters. Speaking of characters, aside from the two leads (although there are still lost issues there), the characters and other performances in this movie are absolutely dreadful for the most part. A number of actors are given virtually nothing to do throughout, including Toby Jones, B.D. Wong, and Jeff Goldblum. However, while they have nothing to do, they are not as annoying as a number of whose additions. Rafe Spall plays the "villain" of the movie but is an irritating presence, although the worst of the lot is Justice Smith's Franklin, who you will want to strangle from the moment he arrives on screen. That feeling does not go away. Oh, and the ending of the movie. I of course do not want to give anything away, but all excitement I might have had for the next movie in the series has died instantly. There are some good things in this movie, don't get me wrong. However, unfortunately the negatives far outweigh the positives, and generally Jurassic World is proving itself in my eyes to be a franchise of very little quality, but is never going to stop making money. That said, if they get a completely new cast, writers, director, and composer, then maybe we can have some hope for the show. Don't count on it.

Rating: 4/10
Original Release Date: 22nd June, 2018
Starring: Chris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard, Rafe Spall, Justice Smith, Daniella Pineda, James Cromwell, Toby Jones, B.D. Wong, Ted Levine, Isabella Sermon and Jeff Goldblum 

Skyscraper



So from the horrors of Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom we come to the hilariously awful Skyscraper. Described throughout the course of its production as an "Original Concept Movie", the plot of the movie involves the ever-entertaining Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson playing Will Sawyer, an amputee security expert, who must break into the tallest building in the world  in order to save the building - and his family - from some cartoon terrorists with hammy accents seeking a secret that the owner of the building is trying to hide. If you take out the tallest building in the world aspect, and think that that sounds like Die Hard, and about as far from an original concept as you can imagine, then you would be right. This is one of the most by-the-numbers plots in a summer blockbuster in years, although it is admittedly a (somewhat mercilessly) well-paced and snappy movie. It may be clichéd and by the books, but it does not waste any more of your time than is absolutely necessary. The action in the movie kick starts fairly quickly, which you'll also be thankful for given that this is the most delightfully bonkers aspect of the movie. Have you ever wanted to see the Rock climb up a crane tower without showing any indication of being affected by the helicopters blowing wind all around him or the killer cold of the height? No problem. Have you ever wanted to see Dwayne Johnson climb one of the tallest buildings in the world on the outside using duct tape on his hands and feet? What about that same actor using a prosthetic leg as part of the action beats? In case you couldn't tell, the movie is frankly about as insane as it gets, and it doesn't let up. Credit should also be given to the Rock's committed performance. It's clear how passionate he is about this project and his performance is the only one in the movie worth watching, solely due to this. Where the movie falls to pieces is everything else. The script is dreadful, offering no character development, leaving you with, for the most part, a cast of cardboard cut-outs. Not only that, but there are so many plot holes that it is effectively a black hole, while the sheer numbers of conveniences present never ceased to amaze me. The acting for the most part offers much to be desired but then again, as I said, it's not as if the actors had much to work with. And while the action might be fun and goofy, it is mind-numbingly stupid. Oh, and who could forget the dreadful CGI. To be quite honest, I would not recommend this movie if you are not prepared to finish it with approximately half of the brain cells that you start with. The movie is ridiculous in concept and any shred of fun to be found stems from this and the action, and of course the Rock's performance. If you're looking for anything deeper, stay clear. If you don't take the movie too seriously, however, then there are plenty of laughs to be had albeit at the expense of the movie itself.

Rating: 3/10
Original Release Date: 13th July, 2018
Starring: Dwayne Johnson, Neve Campbell, Chin Han, Roland Moller, Pablo Schreiber, Byron Mann, Hannah Quinlivan, and Noah Taylor

Ant-Man and the Wasp



It was never going to be an easy feat to be the Marvel movie to have to come off the back of the epic scale of Avengers: Infinity War. For that task, however, the studio opted to go down a (literally) smaller, and more humorous route, likely to be considered a palette cleanser after the intensity of Infinity War. Thus we have Ant-Man and the Wasp, which promises the debut of Evangeline Lilly as the titular flying insect (in costume at least), who is teaming up with Paul Rudd's Scott Lang AKA Ant-Man, who is still trying to balance his family life and his desire to help Hank Pym (Michael Douglas) and Hope through being Ant-Man. Not to mention the consequences of his actions in Civil War. It's the central dynamic between the two leads that is the big success of the movie. Rudd and Lilly have electric chemistry and it is endlessly entertaining to watch them bounce off of and bicker with each other. When the two are together on screen, the movie is at its best. The rest of the cast is, for the most part, equally excellent, although their characters are decidedly not as strong, nor is there a dynamic even close to watching that of the superhero partners. Michael Douglas is thankfully given much more to do in this outing as Hank Pym, his sarcastic comments well placed throughout the movie and always managing a laugh. Michael Peña is also great once again as Luis but he thankfully is not overused and never outstays his welcome to become tiresome. Legends Laurence Fishburne and Michelle Pfeiffer also do the best with what they are given, but strangely the script gives neither actor a character particularly worth their talents (in this movie at least, who knows what the future holds). Where the movie is noticeably different from other Marvel movies is in its villain situation, in that...there isn't really a villain. The closest we get is Walton Goggins' Sonny Burch, who has very little screen presence and fails to make much of an impression, amounting to little more than a two bit secondary villain. Hannah John-Kamen initially seems to be fulfilling villain duties as Ghost, but thankfully John-Kamen gets much more of a character to work with, with fleshed out motivation and a strong emotional backstory, leaving you not remembering her as much of a villain in the first place. The action in the movie is also extremely entertaining. Much like the first movie and indeed Ant-Man's appearance in Civil War, the shrinking and growing technology of both the Ant-Man and Wasp suits allows director Peyton Reed to get inventive with these sequences, and the use of vehicles, blasters, and other technology makes for an interesting extra dimension that the first film lacked. The cinematography, music, and visual effects are also once again excellent. Where the movie has some more problems is in its story and script. I found the humour itself to be much more hit and miss than the first film. When the movie is funny, it is riotously funny, with one sequence in a school in particular standing out. However, there are some tiring running jokes and characters that tend to make you roll your eyes more than even smile (see Randall Park's character of FBI agent Jimmy Woo for the prime example). The story is also the routine and formulaic Marvel story we've come to expect, even if the villain is not a standard addition to the Marvel rogues gallery, with the plot generally hitting all of the beats you are expecting to exactly when you expect them to. It's clear to see that the movie is saved largely by its central dynamic, performances, and action, while it is let down by a generic story and a number of underdeveloped characters. That said, there is much more to like here than there is not. Being elevated above the first film by virtue of a stronger connection between Rudd and Lilly, and of course the addition of the Wasp, Ant-Man and the Wasp is a standard Marvel movie that doesn't match the heights of this year's recent efforts, but is still a fun an consistently entertaining outing.

Rating: 7/10
Original Release Date: 6th July, 2018
Starring: Paul Rudd, Evangeline Lilly, Michael Peña, Michael Douglas, Hannah John-Kamen, Walton Goggins, Randall Park, Laurence Fishburne, and Michelle Pfeiffer

Mission: Impossible - Fallout



The latest movie I've seen this summer is also the best, and quite possibly the best movie I've seen this year. The Mission: Impossible franchise has now been going for 20 years and it seems difficult to imagine that the schtick of the series has not yet become stale. That said, this is a series which is helped largely by the input of different directors for each entry, giving each movie a unique tone and style, thereby keeping it fresh and interesting for the most part. So what makes this movie so special as the best movie in the franchise? This is actually the first time a director has returned to the series, with Christopher McQuarrie back on directing duties fresh off of Rogue Nation, and continuing the story he began in that movie. However, not only is this the first continuing story the franchise has seen, but it is easily the most personal. Rather than beginning the movie with the usual bombastic action sequence or show of Tom Cruise's insanity, the movie instead takes its time, spending 15 minutes to build to the opening credits, allowing us to understand the motivation of Ethan Hunt and his determination to not let any of his team die. It's easily the deepest insight we've ever had into the mind of Ethan, and it certainly gives the action and the stakes a more personal edge. By spending a small amount of time to let the audience get into the mindset of the character and understand him a little more, particularly coming off of the events of the last movie, the intensity of the action increases  tenfold, as action tends to when we have a deeper understanding of a characters motivations and what is driving them through what should effectively be a suicide mission for the entire film. Speaking of action, the set pieces in this movie are phenomenal as I'm sure you've heard by now, with this film destined to be remembered as one of the great action movies of, at the very least, the decade. The visual effects are excellent and any CGI implemented into the stunt work is flawless, being completely unnoticeable if it is even there at all. The stunt work is incredible (props of course to the (impossibly) 56-year old Tom Cruise for amazing us all as always), and these sequences are guaranteed to get your heart racing as you are thrust from Paris to London to the Middle East. The cinematography is incredible throughout, capturing the beauty of these locations.The characters and acting on display are also great. Tom Cruise's Ethan Hunt remains as fun a character as always while being helped by some extra development in this outing, while the dynamic within his IMF team is great once again. Particularly props to Rebecca Ferguson's Ilsa Faust, cementing herself as the best female lead of this series, Sean Harris as the villainous scenery chewing Solomon Lane, and Henry Cavill's career best performance as imposing CIA agent August Walker. The music by Lorne Balfe is also great, using a truly unique blend of tracks and instruments, but is cleverly only used where appropriate. Some action sequences, such as the bathroom fight, have no music for the most part, elevating the intensity of the scene further, and you feel every hit. All in all, this is an absolutely excellent movie that pushes itself beyond the boundaries of a typical action movie, offering not only great action but fun dynamics and characters, excellent acting, and a clear desire to tell a much more personal story than the series has ever seen.

Rating: 10/10
Original Release Date: 27th July, 2018
Starring: Tom Cruise, Henry Cavill, Rebecca Ferguson, Ving Rhames, Simon Pegg, Sean Harris, Vanessa Kirby, Michelle Monaghan, Angela Bassett, and Alec Baldwin