Well, 2017 is just about at it's close and it's been one hell of a year for films hasn't it? I've done my best to review as many of these as possible, but as some of you will well know that is not always the easiest to find time to balance doing so with work, exams, and the like. Despite that, I've still managed to watch just over 40 films this year, and I thought it would be best, before the year is rounded out, to look over every single one of these, both as an apology for having been out of the game for so long and as a precursor to talking about the best and the absolute worst of these before the new year! I'm going to give my brief thoughts on every single one of these, and, if I've already reviewed it then I've included a link to the full review if you want all of my thoughts. I will say that I've written more for some than others, generally I've tried if I've not talked about them before. So, without further ado, let's get stuck in. From superheroes galore to the world of musicals to the clown-ridden streets of Derry to dystopian futures of apes or replicants to regions of space infested with Xenomorphs or galaxies far far away, there's more than enough to talk about!
Silence
Silence was the first film I watched this year, having watched it on the 3rd of January if memory serves, and before I begin it should then be taken as an undoubted positive point that the movie has remained with me in such vivid detail. I am not going to pretend I remember every line, character, or plot point, but director Martin Scorsese, naturally in a film about Catholic persecution in Japan, has aimed to develop some scenes in such a way that they will horrify us as an audience and remain in our minds. In that sense then, the film succeeds, and handles an incredibly sombre subject matter in a (predictably) mature way. Secondly, at the heart of this are two incredibly good lead performances. Liam Neeson is held back in the film but is good when he appears, as are the rest of the supporting case. That said, this is naturally Andrew Garfield and Adam Driver's film. Both men give excellent lead performances and perfectly sell the peril of the situation they find themselves in, and the pain in brings. The film also looks fantastic, helped in large part by some brilliant cinematography and set design. It all sounds like a recipe for success so far. Unfortunately, the film is let down by a horrendously bloated run time. Clocking in at 2 hours and 41 minutes, Silence is at some points a terribly dull watch, and I wasn't surprised at the ease with which I found myself bored. To compare the movie's pacing to that of a snail would be generous, and I counted a minimum of 5 endings to the film (at one point I found myself saying out loud "just end already" to the enjoyment of all of the other 4 people watching the film). It's always a sign of an uncertain editor in my mind when some scenes are left in the movie for quite literally no reason. This tends to fall either to an editor, or possibly a self-indulgent director. The movie quite reasonably could have been trimmed down in my mind, and it is the dullness of a large part of the movie which brings it down. Don't get me wrong, this is a well-acted, horrifying, and generally well-directed movie. What I will say is, if you're going to watch it, be prepared for a long - and generally rather self-indulgent - sit.
Rating: 7/10
Starring Andrew Garfield, Adam Driver, Tadanobu Asano, Ciarán Hinds, and Liam Neeson
Assassin's Creed
Oh dear oh dear oh dear. This was not a good second film to carry on 2017 with. Based on the video game series of the same name which I actually quite enjoy, Assassin's Creed is largely a mess from top to bottom, save only for a few choice factors. The big draw is of course the stunt work and the action which is extremely fun and wildly impressive, and the Spanish scenes are, at the very least, in Spanish. Michael Fassbender also tries his best, but can't form a fully fleshed-out character with the paper thin model presented to him, and anyone who could deliver these lines and make them sound convincing deserves to receive an Oscar straight away. The movie also looks nice in terms of its cinematography and capture of environments. The rest of this, however, is an utter shambles. The plot is ludicrous to the point of hilarity, which is normally fine in a video game movie especially, but not when the script dictates that the pacing will grind to a halt every few minutes to allow someone to explain what is happening. Clearly, not even the screenwriters knew what was going on in the game's story. The action in the past during the Spanish Inquisition is curiously regulated to the occasional sideshow, with the script instead determined to anchor itself in the present day, in a noticeably more bland setting with an infuriatingly dull protagonist and setting. The characters in the movie are cardboard cutouts of what characters should be, with no one being fleshed out in any meaningful manner. All of the performances besides Fassbender to a point are utterly terrible. This is an issue which goes hand-in-hand with the script, but it is unfortunately obvious how no one wanted to be involved in this picture, and it has carried through to the performance standard. Michael K. Williams delivers an exceptional grating performance as one of Fassbender's "friends" in the corporation, and Marion Cotillard also seems somewhat unusually for her content to settle for as little effort as possible. Any length would have been too long for a movie using this script but it is an utter joke to have seen this movie released at a shocking run time of 2 hours and 20 minutes. It's a difficult watch, and not in the same way as Silence often was, suffering from a script delivered fresh from the brain of a primary school child who plays the games. Do not watch this movie; I can't think of any sane or logical reason why you would want to do so. Fans of the games will be infuriated as much as general audiences.
Rating: 3/10
Starring Michael Fassbender, Marion Cotillard, Jeremy Irons, Brendan Gleeson, Charlotte Rampling, Ariane Labed, Michael K. Williams and Javier Gutiérrez
La La Land
Oh thank God, finally, a good movie I watched this year. Although La La Land won't be in contention for the awards this year of course, I've included in on here along with the two before this since I did watch it this year and haven't talked about it before. In short, I love this movie. Honestly, there isn't much left to be said that hasn't already been said. Damien Chazelle's direction is consistently excellent, and the music of the movie is fantastic, both the songs themselves and the score of Justin Hurwitz. Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone have incredible chemistry and are both at their best throughout the film, along with the rest of the supporting cast. The story structure is intuitive and unique, with a script which is deep, emotional, and funny all at the same time. The aesthetic and choreography of the movie is excellent, with the cinematography along with this giving the movie an artistic edge to it at various points - just watch the Planetarium sequence or the epilogue to see what I mean. In short, there is not much left that I can add to the compliments of La La Land that haven't already been said at length. Excellent acting, a very funny but emotional script, fantastic music, and a unique style, I highly recommend La La Land, there's something for everyone in here.
Rating: 10/10
Starring Ryan Gosling, Emma Stone, John Legend, Rosemarie DeWitt, Finn Wittrock, Jessica Rothe, and J.K. Simmons
The Bye Bye Man
And with La La Land out of the way, we're straight back into the garbage. Great. I would not blame you if you have not heard of The Bye Bye Man, nor would I blame you if you laughed out loud when you read the title. It is an inherently stupid name, one which the movie appropriately reflects in its quality. In fact, that's practically the only reason I don't hate this movie entirely. This movie is so inherently stupid, so without logic, so unintentionally hilarious, that it becomes very quickly one of the best comedies of the year. Things frequently happen which I and the group I was watching this disaster with could only react to by saying "wait, what?!?!". The only other slight improvement is Carrie Anne Moss, who appears randomly towards the end of the second third of the movie as a police detective. Carrie Anne Moss is always good and makes the most of even the worst scripts, so it's a credit to her that she didn't even just cash this one in. In fact, she actually makes me slightly sad about this movie. Somewhere in here is a movie about her detective investigating these mysterious deaths and coming across the supernatural elements of the story. That would have been interesting, and actually a slight inversion of the usual genre tropes. Instead, the movie settles for a crew of clichéd characters, none of whom are interesting in any way whatsoever, and all of whom are weighed down further by terrible performances. The female lead in particularly is clearly English and hides her accent terribly. Their chemistry is awful and the character "drama" forced and cringeworthy. There are no scares to be found in the film, with any tension absent from the proceedings in favour of jump scare after jump scare after jump scare, all of which fall flat and all of which will more likely make you laugh. The movie attempts to have some semblance of plot structure, but moves at a far too rushed pace to properly flesh out it's story elements and the rules it constantly claims to have (which it unsurprisingly opts to break at every opportunity anyway). The Bye Bye Man himself looks awful and never comes across as a threatening presence, which is more of a shame considering he's played by Doug Jones who can normally craft some interesting movements or mannerisms even through make-up. However, that requires some assistance to do so, and he is prevented by a severe issue in the make-up department. The CGI used for the dog creature accompanying him is horrendous also. The cinematography in the movie constantly makes it an eye sore to put it kindly, and the lighting has a terrible tendency to constantly either overexpose or underexpose shots (which relates to how over or under lit some shots are). This is such a niche point I normally wouldn't bring it up but the problem is that it is so noticeable that it still contributes to making the movie a more painful experience. Essentially, this movie might be hilarious, but I do not recommend it by any stretch of the imagination, unless you want to be left considerably less intelligent than when you went in. As the movie says: don't think it, don't say it. I agree, because all you'll be left with is half of your brain cells.
Rating: 2/10
Starring Douglas Smith, Lucien Laviscount, Cressida Bonas, Faye Dunaway, Michael Trucco, Carrie Anne-Moss, and Doug Jones
T2: Trainspotting
Danny Boyle's 1996 movie Trainspotting is a movie which has become a staple of 1990s pop culture since its release, given the shockingly realistic and often disturbing insight into drug use, but wisely focusing much more on the difficulties of rehabilitation and the effects using has on their lives and people around them. A sequel 20 years on then was an exciting prospect for some but, after viewing, the movie does come across as a strangely...well, pointless affair. Following Renton (Ewan McGregor) as he returns to Edinburgh after stealing £16,000 at the end of the first movie, this film chronicles his reunions with his old friends, the addict Spud (Euan Bremner), the manipulative "businessman" Sick Boy (Jonny Lee Miller), and the psychopathic and violent Begbie (Robert Carlyle). The fact is that somewhere in here is a solid 45-minute short film about Renton returning home, and the incredible tension that comes from his relationships with his friends and in particular Begbie. The first 15 minutes and final 30 minutes of the movie are of an entirely different calibre to the rest of the movie. Whereas the rest of the movie has nothing new to say and does not expand outside of the themes of the first movie in any meaningful way, these moments are tense, engaging, interesting, and the chemistry of the four leads are on point. It's a shame that such a large portion of the movie comes across as frankly dull in comparison, and it makes the film seem fairly pretentious at some points. That said, it's not a bad film at all (I know I've just taken shots at the plot for a fairly large part of this review but let's just go with it). The acting of the movie is truly excellent, particularly the four main leads, and you really believe that these are four childhood friends who have went through some...difficult times to put it mildly. These characters are still as fun and interesting as they were 20 years ago (although Kelly Macdonald is shockingly wasted), and the new additions also fit in seamlessly. The direction and editing of the movie is consistently stylish and the movie is beautiful to look at. The cinematography is great and the landscape shots are gorgeous. In short, T2: Trainspotting is pointless and frankly dull at some points, but it is nonetheless a well-constructed film with some excellent leads and some great moments throughout.
Rating: 7/10
Starring Ewan McGregor, Euan Bremner, Jonny Lee Miller, Robert Carlyle, Kelly Macdonald, Anjela Nedyalkova, Shirley Henderson, and James Cosmo
Yu-Gi-Oh!: The Dark Side of Dimensions
Yes, I watched this movie. I'll give you a few minutes to let the judgement out before we continue and you can judge me even more for actually enjoying this. As in really enjoying it. If I have one complaint it would be that it is perhaps a tad lengthy, clocking in at an exhausting 2 hours and 10 minutes for an animated film. The particular duelling aspects of the movie with the monsters themselves takes quite a while to get to, and sadly the movie does move along quite slowly at some points. I also remember having watched the cartoon as a kid (likely one of the reasons I enjoy this movie so much), and some characters have retained their irritating personas in this modern transition to the big screen. That's not so much an issue when dealing with individual 20 minutes episodes. When it's 2 straight hours, however, it's undoubted that they will start to get a bit grating. That said, these a minor quibbles in what is a hugely enjoyable movie, especially for fans of the game and the series. It's a joy to see these characters back on screen after so many years, and the voice acting work is great too. Dan Green and Eric Stuart are in their element as Yugi Moto and Seto Kaiba respectively, bringing the emotional and raw intensity of their rivalry to the movie as well as they did in the original show. The animation is gorgeous, bringing a blend of traditional animation with CGI-rendered monsters for the duels themselves. It's a mix that takes some time to get used to but which is ultimately to the benefit of the movie itself. It highlights the progression of the series over time and makes sense in the context of the concept of the show itself. The duels themselves are excellent and carry a surprising amount of tension with them. I never thought I'd say that a virtual card game between Yugi and Kaiba would carry more tension and emotional weight to it than a lot of the action sequences I watched in big budget movies this year. In short, the characters are great, the writing impeccable and funny, the action tense and exciting, and the animation sharp and stylish. It's not perfect, but it's a fun nostalgic experience for fans, and a regardless great introduction for newcomers.
Rating: 8/10
Starring Dan Green, Eric Stuart, Wayne Grayson, Amy Birnbaum, Greg Abbey, Ted Lewis, Tara Sands, and Daniel J. Edwards
The Lego Batman Movie
I think I'm still recovering from how good The Lego Movie was when it released in 2014. Smart, emotional, and hilarious, it was the best animated movie of the year, no matter what the Oscars say. It's somewhat surprising then that the franchise building (sorry) out of that took so long to kick off, but we finally got The Lego Batman Movie in 2017, hoping to replicate the same success as the original film by way of using one of that film's most popular characters as the main focus. The result was a film that was...ok. Hold fire, I know this was hailed as the best Batman film in years (not saying much in all honesty; The Dark Knight Rises came out over 5 years ago so that doesn't count, leaving the only competition as Batman v Superman at time of release), but the film has some major issues. These somewhat go hand in hand with the positives of the movie so I'll go through them first. Firstly, the voice acting in the movie is absolutely excellent. Will Arnett is great as this version of Batman and he is supported in particular by Michael Cera's young Robin and Zach Galifianakis' hilarious Joker, but the cast all do great work. Second, the animation is gorgeous. The style adopted from The Lego Movie still looks excellent 3 years later, and of course has the added sheen and gloss that comes with the evolution of animation techniques. Third, the story in the movie is smart and works to the strength of one of the lesser focused elements of the Batman/Joker dynamic, namely that both need the other, whether they admit it or not. It plays up this element in a fun and often surprisingly emotional way, but the focus is of course on Batman's need to build on family and work with others. This also works, but I'll mention it a bit more later on. Finally, the jokes in the movie mostly work. They come thick and fast, with practically every scene having a joke in it, and the blend of verbal and visual gags afforded by the animation style makes for interesting viewing. However (and this is the first of the negatives), sometimes they come a bit too fast. The sheer volume of jokes in the movie means that it can often get tiring, and unfortunately the determination to keep them coming at every moment really effects the landing of some of them. It also has a negative impact on some of the emotional moments of the movie, with it being natural the emotion is removed somewhat when it is immediately undercut by a not particularly funny joke. The other issue is one of repetition. I mentioned the story focal point of Batman needing to work with others and build a family up again. The problem is that this plot is entirely resolved by the end of the second act of the movie. There is a moment where this is resolved in the character, and did not have to be continued. However, the script then decides to undo this for no reason, and redo the entire story for the final part of the movie. It's worthless repetition of a plot which we have literally seen played out for an hour of the movie to extremely similar beats, and therefore any engagement in this the second time round is taken away from. It's not a bad movie, and Batman fans in particular are sure to have fun with it. However, the sheer volume of jokes proves and issue, and the emotional weight of the original Lego Movie is lessened dramatically in this outing. It's fun, but ultimately flawed.
Rating: 6/10
Starring Will Arnett, Michael Cera, Rosario Dawson, Ralph Fiennes, Zach Galifianakis, Jenny Slate, and Susan Bennett
John Wick: Chapter Two
John Wick: Chapter Two is a masterclass in pure insanity and action. What sets this apart from other movies, some of which I'll talk about later, in terms of why the action works is that it does not over-utilise CGI, and instead works with great choreography and cinematography to make the action interesting and realistic. We feel the weight of every blow and stab, the ferocity of Keanu Reeves' Wick and determination to leave behind the world that consumed his life. Even gunfights carry the same weight, all helped by some excellent make-up, stunt work, and acting to make every injury and pain feel more real. It gives the scenes a considerably more realistic tone, and sets it apart from other action films in that it removes the risk of the sequences becoming repetitive or dull. These are all linked by a story which carries some surprising emotional depth in the purpose of Wick's journey, and that also helps elevate this movie above simply a series of action clips which would be fun to watch on YouTube. The world-building in terms of the institutions and characters that inhabit it is a great addition to this movie as opposed to the first film, and elevates the potential for this as a leading action franchise. The acting in the movie is excellent, with Keanu Reeves continuing to cement this role as one of his best, while Laurence Fishburne and Ian McShane deliver memorable supporting turns, although the former is somewhat underserved. It's not the best in terms of character development, admittedly, and that is sometimes an issue, leaving some characters as nothing more than clichés or cardboard cutouts as opposed to three-dimensional characters. However, for what this movie is trying to do, it is hugely successful. Elevated by a largely successful script, with some good emotional weight and humour, but standing out naturally because of it's brutal and intense action set pieces, John Wick: Chapter Two is a wildly entertaining ride which retains its brilliance on second and third viewings, and likely beyond.
Rating: 9/10
Starring Keanu Reeves, Common, Riccardo Scamarcio, Laurence Fishburne, Ruby Rose, Bridget Moynahan, Lance Reddick, Franco Nero, with John Leguizamo, and Ian McShane
The Great Wall
I've seen some truly awful films this year, and don't get me wrong, The Great Wall most certainly ranks among them, but while it may not be the worst film of the year, what it certainly is is the most boring. The movie aims to be a somewhat light-hearted historical romp with supernatural elements, placing a big focus on what promise to be visual spectacles of set pieces and interesting creature designs. The first question going through my mind and after the film then should not have been questioning why I was quite so bored by the proceedings. This is an inherently dull movie in every single area. The effects of the movie are truly terrible, in terms of monsters and environments, failing to capture any sense of the period or realism, which, when you're making a period piece especially with supernatural undertones, is immediately going to compromise any possible immersion the audience has. Further, the creature design here is so generic, so bland, that the action sequences themselves become an absolute bore to watch. Excitement in action comes form tension, a sense of threat, a sense that anything could happen to the main characters at any moment, usually due to the opposition they're up against. When it is just Matt Damon and a cast of characters whose names you will not remember fighting a slew of green, for want of a better word, blobs, over and over again, no matter how much exposition is thrown at the audience telling us that they are scary, there will never be any real tension. As you might have guessed from that that the script is also awful. The plot drags along at an often painful pace and, as I've said, the whole affair is just not very interesting. There is no real hook, or emotional connection to force the audience to be even remotely engaged in the story. Trust me, these cardboard cutout characters are not even remotely interesting enough to warrant caring about. The acting is also dreadful, and no one actor delivers an even remotely fun performance. The script might prevent interesting performances, but that's still no excuse for not trying. There might have been some controversy surrounding Matt Damon's casting in a movie set in China, adding to this current climate of whitewashing, but regardless it's a shame that he was only in the film for the pay cheque. The editing is terrible, the soundtrack stock YouTube music, and the cinematography unforgivably unimaginative. In short, do not see this movie. It is a terrible movie but, worst of all, it is a bland, dull, and inherently boring experience.
Rating: 2/10
Starring Matt Damon, Jing Tian, Pedro Pascal, Willem Dafoe and Andy Lau
Logan
Full review link: "Logan" Movie Review
I can't emphasise enough how much I adore this movie. I honestly struggle to think of anything which I do not like about this movie. Perhaps a couple of underdeveloped characters, and nothing else comes to mind even after reflecting on the story, characters, action and every other aspect of the movie. The story is hard-hitting, emotional and gritty. The acting is phenomenal and believable from all of the cast. The action is brutal and unforgiving. The music is brilliantly heart-wrenching. The cinematography is both gorgeous and intense where appropriate. These are all undeniable facts about the movie. Yet none of these are the reason I love this movie so much. I love the characters of the comics, and I have thoroughly enjoyed seeing them portrayed on screen for the last 17 years. It's rare that you find casting in a movie that transpires to be so perfect and inspired, especially in a comic book movie where fans will avidly compare the character and portrayal to the source material, often obsessively looking for some slight change to complain about. I can say without a doubt, that Hugh Jackman as Logan has been some of the most perfect casting put to screen, not just in a comic book movie, but across the board. We have fallen in love with this character. We have cheered when he was victorious, been saddened when he fell, and felt the pain from the beginning of his life as the Wolverine to the end of this movie. This movie is fantastic, not only for all of the above reasons, but because of the respect it has for the character of Logan. It understands the ending this character needed, the sorrow and the joy both being shown throughout the movie. If this truly is the end of the road for Hugh Jackman as Logan, it has been an incredible journey, and all credit goes to director James Mangold, and all of the actors and crew involved, for crafting an incredible swan song for this character. This movie is a modern day classic, and should be regarded as such for years to come.
Rating: 10/10
Starring Hugh Jackman, Patrick Stewart, Boyd Holbrook, Dafne Keen, Stephen Merchant, Elizabeth Rodriguez, Eriq La Salle and Richard E. Grant
Starring Hugh Jackman, Patrick Stewart, Boyd Holbrook, Dafne Keen, Stephen Merchant, Elizabeth Rodriguez, Eriq La Salle and Richard E. Grant
Kong: Skull Island
Full review link: "Kong: Skull Island" Movie Review - A Crumbling Throne?
I'm conflicted with this movie, I truly am. On the one hand, I don't want to take this movie overly seriously. After all, it is a KING KONG movie! It is a movie about a giant ape fighting other giant monsters on an island in the Pacific. I'm not expecting Oscar-worthy writing and characters. The action in the movie is great, and is only enhanced by the impressive visuals of the piece, a must for the number of different monsters on display throughout. The acting is also very good, as I've said, although the characters they are portraying on screen are incredibly weak. Make no mistake, this is an extremely enjoyable popcorn flick. If you go to this movie not expecting anything more than what the trailers are showing it to be and nothing more, then I imagine you will enjoy it far more than I maybe did on first viewing. That being said, there is simply no looking past the flaws of this movie. The writing in particular is cause for concern. No character in this movie is particularly interesting, and I can hardly remember any of their names (no, Kong doesn't count). The plot is also nothing original. Perhaps the worst problem of the lot, however, is the clear studio meddling in the movie, and nowhere is this more obvious than it examining the tone of the movie. The gritty and often horrifying violence of some sections of the movie were evidently the sort of movie the director was trying to create, thus making the flat humour of the movie stand out even more than it already would. In fact, it was the jaw-dropping and stomach curdling violence of these segments that impressed me the most, and the small character moments in between, particular between Tom Hiddleston and Brie Larson, were the most effective scenes. This franchise (which is all building up to Godzilla vs Kong in 2020 believe it or not) needs to build on this. Without taking advantage of the human elements of these monster movies, it is going to be difficult for Legendary Pictures to continue to make these movies particularly interesting to audience, and maintain Kong's throne as the King, not only of Skull Island, but of movie monsters in general.
Rating: 6/10
Starring Tom Hiddleston, Brie Larson, Samuel L. Jackson, John Goodman, Jing Tian, John Ortiz, Toby Kebbell, and John C. Reilly
Starring Tom Hiddleston, Brie Larson, Samuel L. Jackson, John Goodman, Jing Tian, John Ortiz, Toby Kebbell, and John C. Reilly
Beauty and the Beast
Beauty and the Beast came out in March at is the latest effort by Disney to recreate some of their older classics in live-action. Here's the problem with adapting Beauty and the Beast though: it is one of the best animated films ever made, and the only animated film ever to be nominated for the prestigious Best Picture Oscar (back before the Oscars hadn't gone insane with their nominations). The original animated film is still a magical experience, and one which is held dearly in the hearts of so many Disney fans. It's no small feat to adapt something that beloved years later, but, for the most part, the results were largely successful. I've watched this film a few times now and don't have too many issues. If I was to pick one out, it would be some often questionable CGI, which is particularly an issue given that a large portion of the cast are entirely CGI creations. The Beast himself looks excellent in one scene and then changes as the movie goes on. This curiously correlates as *spoiler alert* we realise he is not really a Beast. I don't know if this was then intentional, but it regardless begins to looks more cartoon-like and less convincing. The other point which has been brought up by a number of critics is the frankly obvious auto-tuning on display here, especially in Emma Watson's case. I completely understand that auto-tuning is a necessary evil of all movie musicals - not everyone is going to be excellent at singing but still be a good fit for the past. Acting and singing are two entirely different arts, so I am not opposed to one being improved in post-production, and that's obviously not going to be the acting. The problem arises then with how brutally obvious it is at some points, but equally it is not always. Dan Stevens is excellent at both singing and acting in the film, as is most of the cast. There is still some auto-tune, but it is Emma Watson who is particularly clear. However, these are thinly complaints I have. The film retains the magic of the original for the most part in faithfully adapting the story of the animation, but also adding several new elements to further develop characters in a way the original had not. It contributes to making the relationship between Belle and the Beast feel more realistic and believable, and therefore the emotional depth is far deeper. The acting in the movie is excellent also. Emma Watson and Dan Stevens are great in their respective roles and have good chemistry, which Luke Evans also gives a memorably performance as a leaner but equally mean Gaston. The music in the movie is phenomenal, helped in large part by original composer Alan Menken returning to score, adding some new music as well. The cinematography and set design is fantastic and contributes to the magic of the entire story. The script is great, adding appropriate humour, and moving at a swift but fair pace to allow for development but not so slow that we find ourselves bored as an audience. All in all, this was a solid remake which wholly justifies Disney's ventures into the live-action arena with their old classics.
Rating: 8/10
Starring Emma Watson, Dan Stevens, Luke Evans, Kevin Kline, Josh Gad, Ewan McGregor, Ian McKellan, Stanley Tucci, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Audra McDonald, and Emma Thompson
Power Rangers
Full review link: "Power Rangers" Movie Review - It's Rebootin' Time
A movie with it's ups and it's downs to be sure. On the one hand, the writing is not great in the story department on this film, not that time has been particularly kind to the now slightly clichéd story of the Rangers anyway. There isn't nearly enough Ranger action to maybe keep kids entertained for the entirety, and the product placement is simply too hilarious and off-putting to not mention. With that said, the characters and the cast are handled with much better care, particularly the Rangers themselves and villain Rita. The effects are great, the action is unashamedly over-the-top, and the nostalgia I got from the movie was unlike any I have experienced in one of these reboots film studios have become so fond of to date. Like I said, this movie has a legacy to pay respect to, given that the show has been running in it's different iterations for a jaw-dropping 24 years now. The Power Rangers have always had a silliness to them. Make no mistake, with it's returning dinosaur robot vehicles and ridiculous martial arts action, this movie is silly too, and that is it's greatest strength. There are far too many reboots which try to go "darker" with the source material, and in doing so lose whatever it may be that people love about a certain franchise. This movie has a different edge to it, absolutely, but it retains the fun, the craziness, and the humour that we loved from the old series. If you hated those shows, you might be able to find some fun here (although I honestly doubt it). If you loved them or never watched them but you're willing to take a gamble on the Rangers, then chances are you'll find something to enjoy in this, and it'll be well worth you giving it a watch.
Rating: 7/10
Starring Dacre Montgomery, Naomi Scott, RJ Cyler, Becky G, Ludi Lin, Elizabeth Banks, Bill Hader, and Bryan Cranston
Starring Dacre Montgomery, Naomi Scott, RJ Cyler, Becky G, Ludi Lin, Elizabeth Banks, Bill Hader, and Bryan Cranston
Free Fire
Free Fire is possibly one of the most disappointingly average films I've watched this year. I waited a long time to see this movie, and was promised an equally exhilarating and funny thrill ride for 90 minutes. And what I got in the end was...boredom, frankly. The fact is that this is a movie which would have worked much better as a short film, a movie which would have lasted about 30 minutes to spare us of more time with these dull characters whose names you won't remember 5 seconds after hearing them and cut down a fire fight which, despite essentially being the title of the film itself, offers very little by way of intense action. It's strange that you never feel any particular tension throughout the movie, despite the central premise of the film, and that tis going to derive in large part from the fact that none of these characters are given any real development or backstory to make you care about them in any way. The simple fact is that if you don't care about the characters in a movie where the main focus is meant to be about these characters double crossing and killing each other, then your movie has essentially failed in one of its main goals straight out of the gate. It's too long, and the writing is neither particularly funny or strong to fully engage you in the story at hand. With that having been said, it's not a poorly made film. The acting in the movie is solid for the most part. I find Sharlto Copley a rather annoying actor to be honest, but he does his best with the material give in this movie. Brie Larson and Cillian Murphy are on point as always, but it's Armie Hammer who delivers the surprisingly stand-out performance of the movie. Although he has not a strong impression in my opinion in many of his other roles, he gets some of the movie's funniest lines and probably the most interesting character, and therefore stands out from the crowd of cardboard cut outs. The movie is extremely well-shot and looks the part. Director Ben Wheatley knew how to make a single location film work and make the most of the setting, destroying it and developing it as the movie carries on. Although not tense, it makes the action continually feel somewhat fresh and different, rather than repetitive brief exchanges which only serve to bore the audience. The costume design is great and works to the recreation of the period the movie is aiming for, and the music in the film is great. Although purposefully not used for a large part of the film to attempt to add to the atmosphere of the piece, the score is great when it is used. All in all then, this is a decidedly average film. As a character piece and example of how to design sets, the movie works well; but for how the movie was marketed, lower your expectations if you have any whatsoever.
Rating: 5/10
Starring Sharlto Copley, Armie Hammer, Brie Larson, Cillian Murphy, Jack Reynor, Babou Ceesay, Enzo Cilenti, Sam Riley, Michael Smiley, and Noah Taylor
Fast and the Furious 8
I, and everyone, should really know what we're getting into with the Fast and Furious movies at this point, and yet I watched this one anyway. A mistake I regret, and a mistake which I will likely repeat when these movies keep coming out. What can I say, for some reason I'm a sucker for the dumb action sequences these movies keep shoving onto the big screen. The fact is that this action is so ludicrous, so unrealistic, so (if you'll pardon the expression) utter balls to the wall insanity that it is impossible to not at the very least crack a smile. A highlight to this movie was the New York "zombie" car sequence when Charlize Theron's villain takes control of all the cars in the city somehow and uses them as her personal weapons. There is no logical explanation, no reason to appreciate it, not particularly great effects, but what is on show is no delightfully uncaring of such facts, that it is at the very least slight fun. The action in this movie is fun, and the performances of Jason Statham and Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson are predictably hilarious. However, with all of that said, this movie is still utter garbage. It might be fun to an extent, but when the filmmakers have not lost their minds with the action, and try to focus on plot, character, or regular action, get ready for a miserable experience. Statham and the Rock are on point in the movie, as said, as is Charlize Theron predictably although she is criminally underwritten along with Kurt Russell, the rest of the performances are horrendous. Vin Diesel is not a charismatic lead in any sense of the word, and is in no way interesting, while the rest of the cast do not seem to care in the slightest. The characters are generally unlikable and the plot impossible to keep track of, despite the constant onslaught of exposition you will find yourself faced with. The humour falls flat, and the emotional impact is solely lacking, relying on clichés and generic plot points to try to elicit some emotional connection from an audience. Yes, it might occasionally be fun but the problem is that, from a film-making perspective, this is an insufferable mess. Weak characters with no semblance of development, a sloppy plot and story-telling devices, and terrible effects and editing, you'll laugh, not for the right reasons, and when you're not laughing, you're sighing.
Rating: 3/10
Starring Vin Diesel, Michelle Rodriguez, Dwayne Johnson, Jason Statham, Tyrese Gibson, Ludacris, Nathalie Emmanuel, Kurt Russell, Helen Mirren, and Charlize Theron
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
In theory, the sequel to 2014 hit Guardians of the Galaxy should have been a home run. With director James Gunn back to helm this next instalment, along with all of the old cast and some promises new additions, it looked like this was going to be Marvel's big movie of 2017. Why, then, I ask, was it quite so average? Don't get me wrong, there are things to like in the movie. All of the cast are great, and the chemistry between them works as well as it did when we first met them 3 years ago now, which is an insane thought in itself. The visuals of the movie are incredible as they needed to be. The jokes come thick and fast, and work for the most part (I say "for the most part" for a reason), while the songs on the soundtrack are once again very catchy and a fun nostalgic connection to the 70s. Some characters are given a lot more development this time around as well, especially Michael Rooker's Yondu. However, this is a movie with quite a few flaws sadly. However, none of these are the main problem with Vol. 2. This is one of many movies this year which was an unfortunate victim of it's predecessors success. Not only was the first Guardians monumentally successful, but it was also a huge surprise when it first came out, rocking audiences and critics alike with just how great that movie is. The primary problem here is that James Gunn and co. set out to do it again, using elements from the first movie which were deemed to make it a highlight of the MCU from the humour to the characters to the music. That said, there is such a focus on these this time, and such a clear determination to try and one up what they have already made that it comes across as an inherently less fun experience. The music no longer fits to the scenes; scenes feel devised to fit to some sort of retro music, and therefore it comes across as a far more formulaic decision rather than the natural, fun feel it had in the first movie. Characters are still great, but there is such an overt focus on humour and trying too hard to make an audience laugh that the jokes are considerably more hit or miss, and are regardless a lot less funny on second viewing. There is such a thing as too much and, as I feared from the trailers, Baby Groot was too much. Hate me all you want, but these antics are a running joke which is not particularly funny, and just demotes one of the strongest Guardians to nothing more than comic relief as opposed to the hero he was in the first movie. The plot suffers as a direct result, and the attempts to inject some emotional weight to the proceedings comes across as much more clichéd than it did in the first one. Rather than focusing on 5 misfits finding each other to form a motley crew and eventually a family, this outing is a more standard son/lost father affair, and obviously since it's a superhero comic book movie there will be some stock enemies and villains not too close behind. The individual character moments are great, and some of the Guardians are split off into groups to allow for unconventional dynamics, but it almost feels like a clip show of various great moments I would watch on YouTube compiled together with some attempt to form a story between them. It's not a bad movie by any means - it is funny sometimes, the acting is great, the songs are great, and it looks amazing. It suffers from sequel syndrome, and that hurts it more than anything else. It's a real shame, and I hope that this is not a problem to resurface in the already confirmed Vol. 3.
Rating: 6/10
Starring Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Dave Bautista, Vin Diesel, Bradley Cooper, Michael Rooker, Karen Gillan, Pom Klementieff, Elizabeth Debicki, and Kurt Russell
King Arthur: Legend of the Sword
This movie is simply a dull affair, and therefore commits the worst crime a movie can commit: for the most part, it is incredibly boring. The plot is strangely in the model of a superhero origin story, which only serves to make the whole movie incredibly predictable, and for some reason tries to turn King Arthur into some sort of Oliver Twist on steroids. The characters also go through some standard stock arcs which can be thrown into any movie. This character is being encouraged to aim for a better life than the one he has; this character is stereotypically evil and has no redeeming qualities; and so forth. When no magic is thrown into the mix, the action is also surprisingly non-inventive, devoid of any interesting qualities, and is also weighed down by some awful CGI. Also, this is something I would not normally pick up on, but the editing in the movie is truly terrible, and is all but guaranteed to give you a headache. It's a shame that the script and effects are so bad, because many of the other parts of the movie are actually fairly solid. The acting is good for the most part, with Jude Law in particular delivering a hilariously over-the-top performance. As I suggested, where magic is included, the action also becomes more interesting and intense, and these are shot in a stylistic and intriguing way. The soundtrack is also great. The movie is a mixed bag then, with plenty of good and bad elements. However, solely because most of the movie is unfortunately bland, I have to recommend that you give this one a miss, unless you are very tolerant with your .
Rating: 4/10
Starring Charlie Hunnam, Astrid Begrès-Frisbey, Jude Law, Djimon Honsou, Aidan Gillen, Tom Wu and Eric Bana
Alien: Covenant
The Alien franchise has had a rough ride in it's latter years. The only two great movies in the series are the first two entries, with all other films, including Prometheus, having received mixed-to-negative reviews. Alien: Covenant is another mixed bag of a movie unfortunately, no matter how much fans wanted this to be a return to form for Ridley Scott and the crew. The big problem here is pacing. The movie is overly long, and wastes a lot of time on unnecessary set-up at the beginning of the plot. However, somewhat strangely, there is very little time devoted to character development, so little that you're unlikely to remember their names. Therefore, when the bodies start to drop, there's little to no emotional resonance with the audience. Why should we care about a character when they die if we don't know anything about them? The only two exceptions are lead character Daniels (Katherine Waterston), and pilot Tennessee (Danny McBride), who is only memorable because he wears a cowboy hat. The plot also spends little time answering the questions left by predecessor Prometheus, and in fact raises far more questions than it cares to address. Also thrown in is a strange amount of exposition, which I say is strange in particular due to Scott's status as one of the most visual directors working today. With this being the case, you might have thought that he would have tried to find a way to express his ideas in a more interesting way, without simply explaining them blatantly. However, it's not all bad. The acting in the movie is solid for the most part, with Michael Fassbender in particular delivering a stellar dual performance as androids Walter and the far more sinister David. When the fantastic Neomorphs and later the famous Xenomorphs actually join the action, the movie becomes immediately more enjoyable and tense. The music is also excellent, and the visuals are of course stunning. Yes, Alien: Covenant is a mixed bag, but, if you can get past the first act, the movie becomes immediately more arresting, and chances are that you'll be abel to have a good time with this one. If you're paying attention to plot, character, or anything standard in a film, you can afford to give this one a miss.
Rating: 5/10
Starring Michael Fassbender, Katherine Waterston, Danny McBride, Billy Crudup, Demián Bichir, and Carmen Ejogo
Baywatch
I cannot remember the last movie I saw where I left as angry as I did this one. I turned to the friends I was with and proclaimed that I wanted my money back, because this is hands down the worst movie I have seen in a long time. The fact is that the movie does absolutely nothing right. Of course Dwayne Johnson is as entertaining to watch as always, but he isn't playing a character. All he is playing is the stock character he plays in a dozen other movies. The rest of the cast is given nothing to do besides Zac Efron, who comes across as extremely irritating for the entire runtime, plain and simple. The movie is billed as a comedy, but I did not find myself laughing for a lot of the movie. The humour is very downmarket, which is unfortunately the kindest way of putting it, relying on sex, toilet humour, and slapstick to land laughs. It's a sorry sight when characters in the movie have to laugh to signal when the audience is meant to be laughing. Clearly the writers knew that none of the audience would be laughing. The only time I was properly laughing without a cue was during a fire rescue scene, but that was because the CGI was so awful that a first year university student studying film-making could almost undoubtedly do better. Also tacked on is a weak crime-busting plot with a very confusing villain, as well as 2 (possibly 3) forced romances. It's not the best narrative to say the least. However, as I've said, the absolute worst thing a movie can do is bore you, and this bored me. I was never laughing at any of the jokes, the main plot was never engaging, and I was never interested in any of the character side stories. To put it simply, do not see this movie, because it will leave you with nothing more than a headache and unsafely high blood pressure.
Rating: 1/10
Starring Dwayne Johnson, Zac Efron, Alexandra Daddario, Kelly Rohrbach, Jon Bass, Hannibal Buress, Priyanka Chopra, and David Hasslehoff
Pirates of the Caribbean: Salazar's Revenge
Here's another franchise I think the majority of audiences have recognised as being well past it's due by date. The problem with the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise at this point I think is that audiences have become wise to gimmick of Johnny Depp's drunken pirate schtick, and the ridiculous supernatural antics each instalment seems to become further reliant on. At the very least, what I can say for Salazar's Revenge (a significantly sloppier title than the original Dead Men Tell No Tales), the latest instalment in the series, is that it at least better than the previous two movies. The new additions to the cast largely work. While Brenton Thwaites' Henry is a somewhat dull Will Turner replacement, given his predictable arc and bland motivation, Kara Scodelario is introduced as the new Keira Knightley-esque character in Carina. She gives easily the best performance in the movie and is evidently the person most committed to giving a good performance, despite the often lacklustre script. Javier Bardem's Captain Salazar also makes for an effective villain. To be perfectly honest, that might derive from the fact that he is essentially a blend of Barbossa in character and Davy Jones in look, the series best two villains but regardless he makes for an intimidating presence, with Bardem giving the role a decidedly creepy edge. The returning characters do not always fare so well. A returning Will and Elizabeth amount to little more than courtesy cameos and add little to the plot, while it is painfully obvious that Geoffrey Rush can no longer be bothered with this franchise. The problem here is that Johnny Depp has now so overdone the drunken Jack Sparrow performance, that the actor gives his most confused and irritatingly over-the-top turn as the character to date. If you have enjoyed that role before, however, then you'll probably still enjoy this. The plot in this movie is just as ridiculous as the last few movies. Focusing on Jack Sparrow trying to track down the Trident of Poseidon while evading the insidious Salazar, the plot does little to bring real intrigue or tension to the proceedings, while the writing proves to be very hit and miss, both in terms of jokes which land and effective character development. The effects in the movie are actually very well done in this movie, particularly on the ghost crew of Salazar, and the action is well done as well. The cinematography and set design is well done in the movie as well, and actually recreates the period fairly well. The music in the series is as strong as it has always been, with Geoff Zanelli doing a good job working with the already iconic scores. The movie has problems but it is still a fun movie regardless. If this series is destined to end with the next movie set up in a post-credits scene (some of you may be breathing a sigh of relief a that), if the franchise continues in this direction, we may at the very least see a somewhat satisfying conclusion.
Rating: 6/10
Starring Johnny Depp, Javier Bardem, Geoffrey Rush, Kara Scodelario, Brenton Thwaites, Kevin McNally, Golshifteh Farahani, and David Wenham
Wonder Woman
I've been let down so badly by DC in the past, with all 3 of their previous movies set in their cinematic universe failing to live up to expectations, particularly with me being a fan of the source material. How refreshing then, to finally have a movie that has quite rightly been a critical success almost universally so far! Wonder Woman is easily the best film I have seen recently, and one of the best of the year. Gal Gadot proves all of the haters wrong and gives a strong, emotional performance as Diana, cementing her as one of the best parts of the DCEU. In fact, all of the cast does incredibly well. A special mention goes to Chris Pine for his great performance and chemistry with Gal Gadot. It's the smaller moments between these characters, such as an early scene on a boat and a dancing scene, that makes their romance so believable and better than every other superhero movie relationship in recent memory. The 3 villains are also handled remarkably well: Danny Huston's General Ludendorff is used appropriately; Elena Anaya's Doctor Poison is the most interesting and is enjoyable on screen (albeit she is slightly underused); and a third act twist introduces another villain who fits into the story perfectly and does not feel out of place thankfully. The script is impactful, often extremely funny, and presents the setting of World War I in a mature, often harrowing manner. The action is also excellent, although the overuse of slow motion may be slightly overused. The No Man's Land sequence is particularly impressive. If I had one complaint about the movie, I would only say that the third act is much more standard, predictable superhero fare than the rest of the movie, which is only a shame after the refreshing and intriguing first two thirds. This and the sequence is bogged down by some frequently questionable CGI. That said, it doesn't tear down the rest of the movie, and I highly recommend that you give Wonder Woman a watch. You won't regret it.
Rating: 9/10
Starring Gal Gadot, Chris Pine, Robin Wright, Connie Nielson, Danny Huston, Elena Anaya, Ewen Bremner, Saïd Taghmaoui, and David Thewlis
Captain Underpants: The First Epic Movie
Full review link: "Captain Underpants: The First Epic Movie" Movie Review - My Ultimate Guilty Pleasure?
I thought this film was going to be terrible, I truly did. I think a small part of me might have wanted it to be, just to see another bad movie to put a review up here. I know that's not right but I saw Valerian regardless so there you go. That said, at risk of all of my credibility and any right to call a film distasteful again, Captain Underpants: The First Epic Movie was a supremely fun time watching. Beautifully animated and boasting an original story, the movie is constantly engaging and funny, including your often standard jokes for kids (even though even here the writers are able to innovate) and some jokes for adults as well. However, the true strength of the movie is in how self-aware the movie is. With fourth-wall breaking to an extent to rival 2016's Deadpool, and jokes throughout indicating the writers own knowledge (and acknowledgment) of the inherent silliness of the concept, the movie embraces wholeheartedly it's nature, and is a heck of a lot more fun because of that. Fully prepared to admit what it is and adapt the books often more than faithfully, it is a movie which I urge you to try in spite of the title. It's funny, it's actually the most appropriate title they could have picked despite it's confidence. The movie was indeed great, and I hope that this is only the start.
Rating: 9/10
Original Release Date: 24th of July, 2017
Starring Kevin Hart, Thomas Middleditch, Ed Helms, Nick Kroll, Jordan Peele, and Kristen Schaal
Original Release Date: 24th of July, 2017
Starring Kevin Hart, Thomas Middleditch, Ed Helms, Nick Kroll, Jordan Peele, and Kristen Schaal
The Mummy
Full review link: "The Mummy" Movie Review - Dead on Arrival
I've simply got no where to go with this movie that no one hasn't already said. The production designs and visual effects are admittedly very good. However, these are all aesthetic factors, and don't matter if everything surrounding it is bad. Three fine performances, that's all else that I had to entertain me through this nearly 2-hour long mess. The rest of the movie is plagued by problems, not least the apparent primary purpose of this project to set up the future movies of this universe. The story is paper thin at best, and can be easily dismantled without overly detailed scrutiny, and the script as a whole is terrible. However, the biggest issue I have is that, if I had to pick one word to describe this movie, it would be this - dull. The whole thing feels much longer than it actually is, and that is because you will constantly find yourself wondering when this..."experience" will come to an end. With all that said, I don't recommend this movie particularly highly unless maybe you're devoted to and love Universal's monsters. In case you couldn't guess, this whole movie did not instil me with hope for the future. We'll see how this universe progresses, with Bride of Frankenstein coming next in 2019 (I have no idea why they chose THAT movie), but, unfortunately, I doubt that The Mummy is the foundation Universal were hoping to be building upon.
Rating: 3/10
Starring Tom Cruise, Annabelle Wallis, Sofia Boutella, Jake Johnson, Courtney B. Vance, Marwan Kenzari and Russell Crowe
Starring Tom Cruise, Annabelle Wallis, Sofia Boutella, Jake Johnson, Courtney B. Vance, Marwan Kenzari and Russell Crowe
Transformers: The Last Knight
I like to compare the Transformers franchise at this point to the Fast and the Furious series. Both have silly, over-the-top action; both are infamous for their writing and acting; and both are seemingly critic-proof (hopefully until now when the final figures are revealed). However, there is one key difference: the Fast and the Furious movies know exactly what they are, and Transformers still takes itself overly seriously throughout. The plot revolves around a staff left on Earth during the time of King Arthur to a drunken Merlin and the race in the present day to find it, all while Optimus Prime slowly returns to Earth under the new guise "Nemesis Prime". The writing in the movie presents this story in an extremely pretentious manner, so determined to fool the audience that they are watching something of a higher standard than they are, seemingly convincing themselves in the process. The story is full to the brim with problems and quickly falls to pieces under scrutiny. The characters and acting don't fare much better either, with practically every character being a cliché. Mark Wahlberg is a surprisingly uncharismatic lead while Michael Bay continues to infamously degrade women through Laura Haddock's Vivian (whose name I literally count' remember for most of the movie). The only good character in the film is Anthony Hopkins' Sir Edmund Burton. It's a testament to Hopkins that he didn't sell out to this series and actually gives his performance his all, easily becoming the most entertaining part of the movie and carrying every scene he is in. The movie is also a film-making shambles behind the scenes, with terrible cinematography and frequently changing camera ratios throughout proving a serious distraction. So what reasons are there to see this movie besides Hopkins' performance? Well, as you might have expected, the visual effects and CGI are always on point. Michael Bay has a real talent as a film-maker for being to envisage the final product as he films his movies and therefore knows how to make his actors move, and the CGI look more realistic in the end result. The action is also appropriately over-the-top and insane, and, while it makes no sense, it can be fun to watch. This movie is simply maximum "Bayhem" and nothing more. If that's your cup of tea or you go in expecting nothing more than that, then there's a chance you might have some fun with this one. For the rest of you, keep a safe distance.
Rating: 3/10
Starring Mark Wahlberg, Laura Haddock, Josh Duhamel, John Turturro, Gemma Chan, Stanley Tucci, and Anthony Hopkins
Baby Driver
Full review link: "Baby Driver" Movie Review - Volume Up, Pedal Down
There is not much to say about Baby Driver anymore - yes, it is that good, and if you want my full thoughts check out the full review. It is not only a great film but is, in my mind at least, one of the best films of the years; quite possibly THE best. Edgar Wright pumps the movie full of his trademark humour and stylish wit, making music the true lifeblood of this movie, ingeniously wrapping the cinematography and editing around the soundtrack. The acting in the movie is phenomenal, and is backed up by a brilliant script which excels in creating an engaging plot and interesting characters. That's without even mentioning the mind-blowing and often insane action sequences, with Wright having crafted car chases quite unlike any I've ever (seriously, EVER) seen in a movie. I managed to see this one at a preview screening on Saturday night before general release so please spread the word of how good this is as fast as possible! Stylish, funny, exhilarating, and head rocking, Baby Driver is the perfect marriage of summer blockbuster action and Oscar-worthy filmmaking skill. It is Edgar Wright's perfect symphony. See this movie. I promise you that you will not regret it.
Rating: 10/10
Starring Ansel Elgort, Kevin Spacey, Lily James, Eiza González, Jamie Foxx, Jon Bernthal, and Jon Hamm
Starring Ansel Elgort, Kevin Spacey, Lily James, Eiza González, Jamie Foxx, Jon Bernthal, and Jon Hamm
Despicable Me 3
If I was to sum up Despicable Me 3 in a single word, it would be this: competent. The animation is fine, and certainly has more effort put into it than a lot of Illumination Entertainment's other efforts, most notably Minions and last year's Sing, the latter of which reused character models to an absurd extent. That said, it still lacks a great amount of detail, particularly in facial animations, backgrounds and other textures. The voice acting is decent, there's nothing inherently wrong with it, as the actors do the best with what they have been given. However, there is still a surprising lack of emotion put into the performances, making it difficult to connect with the characters on a deeper level and understand them more. This is of course not entirely down to the actors, but also relates heavily to the flaws of the script. The screenplay, somewhat unsurprisingly written by an insane 4 people, is a general mess. Characters are poorly developed throughout, and no real lessons are learnt over the course of the movie. Generally with these kids films at the very least I expect some sort of message for the younger audience, no matter how generic, so it was shocking that even this was absent from the story. The plot on the whole is a collision of ideas which might have worked if they had been fleshed out more, but unfortunately these are extremely underdeveloped to the extent that they are as engaging as they would have been in the initial boardroom pitch. The primary problem which applies to all of these stories is that they are nothing we haven't seen before, whether in this series or elsewhere in cinema: Agnes loves unicorns; Lucy wants the girls to see her as a mum; lead characters get fired and need to capture a villain to redeem themselves; and there's even a generic and clichéd twin brother plot shoehorned in here. Need I go on? Several of these are actually raised and resolved within 3 scenes, which is particularly troublesome where the writers (or, one of them at least) is trying to inject some emotion and conflict into the script. By wrapping these up so quickly, there's little time to become attached or invested in the conflict at hand, and ultimately each of these feels like filler to pad out this 80-minute film. As I said though, the film is fine and does have some entertaining elements. The Minions have (mercifully in my opinion) been toned down a lot in this outing and are regulated to their own subplot, which actually has some entertaining visual gags. Trey Parker's villainous Balthazar Bratt is a wildly enjoyable presence, and is easily the most fun part of the film, using his insane weaponry, disguises (including one resembling certain trending politician right now), and nostalgia every time he is on screen. Ultimately, although there is a general lack of charm and heart in the script as a whole, the rest of the movie is competently made. Fine animation and acting elevate this above recent entries in the series, but not quite to the heights of the original. It's an average movie, but a watchable one, especially if you know what to expect at this point.
Rating: 5/10
Starring Steve Carrell, Kristen Wiig, Miranda Cosgrove, Pierre Coffin, Julie Andrews, Steve Coogan, and Trey Parker
Spider-Man: Homecoming
Full review link: "Spider-Man: Homecoming" Movie Review - #HomecomingKing
I came out of Spider-Man: Homecoming honestly received more than anything else in that we finally had a great Spider-Man movie again. Not only that, but easily the best Spider-Man movie to date and one of my personal MCU highlights in recent years. Almost all of the movie is executed perfectly. With never a dull moment to weigh it down, director Jon Watts has delivered an extremely fun movie, with excellent writing and a consistently hilarious script, filled to the brim with jokes which always land. The acting is also excellent on all fronts, and the action is extremely entertaining and often surprisingly original. The effects, cinematography and music are also all excellent. The only fault I might put to the movie is that some of the minor characters are slightly underdeveloped, but that is nowhere near a big enough problem that I should recommend against you seeing this movie. If there is one final thing I should mention, it's a reassurance to all of you who have watched the trailers for the movie, and in particular the second trailer which seemed to give away a lot of plot details and even outline the entire plot structure. I can promise each and every one of you that, even as a comic book fan, I was frequently pleasantly surprised when watching the movie. With plenty of twists and turns throughout, the movie is always engaging and exciting to watch. Thanks to the fantastic writing, cast, and action, Spider-Man: Homecoming stands in my mind as one of Marvel's best movies, and I truly can't wait to watch this one again. All I can say is thank goodness Marvel and Sony reached the deal they have. It's good to see our friendly neighbourhood web slinger back home where he belongs.
Rating: 9/10
Starring Tom Holland, Michael Keaton, Laura Harrier, Zendaya, Jacob Batalon, Jon Favreau, Marisa Tomei, Donald Glover, and Robert Downey Jr.
Starring Tom Holland, Michael Keaton, Laura Harrier, Zendaya, Jacob Batalon, Jon Favreau, Marisa Tomei, Donald Glover, and Robert Downey Jr.
War for the Planet of the Apes
Some of my favourite movies in recent years have been the rebooted Planet of the Apes movies, the first being Rise and the second being Dawn. Both are incredible films, and now director Matt Reeves has returned with War for the Planet of the Apes to forge an ending for this revitalised trilogy of films. So, does it meet the expectations and the high bar set by it's predecessors? Absolutely. This is a truly beautiful film, with the effects of the apes going above and beyond all expectations. I may go so far as to see that these are the best visual effects and CGI that I have seen in a live-action movie. Ever. If this film doesn't get some recognition for it come awards season, it will be truly criminal. The actors behind the apes manage to also give some great performances through the CGI and visual wonder, particularly lead ape Andy Serkis as Caesar. The raw emotion that Serkis and his co-stars are able to convey throughout the film is something brilliant to behold. The human actors also give great performances. Woody Harrelson excels as the formidable and intimidating Colonel, but the performance is a strangely accessible one, and you'll find yourself unexpectedly sympathising with him later despite the atrocities he commits. Production design and make-up of course both deserve shout-outs as well, with the Apes series having excelled in creating practical sets throughout all 3 movies now. The score is also outstanding, with Michael Giacchino's intense, heart-pounding music accompanying every action sequence but also including emotional tracks and a haunting piano in some places. The aforementioned action is also great to watch. You might be surprised by a slight lack of big set pieces throughout but the movie more than makes up for it with some brutal sequences when the time comes. However, where the movie truly excels is in the writing. Although there is some slightly tone-deaf comedy at a few (infrequent) points courtesy of Steve Zahn's Bad Ape character, this is a shocking, harrowing, and emotional film, truly conveying the horrors both sides of this conflict have had to endure for the past 15 years in this world. There is also a second conflict in the movie which is somewhat even more engaging however, and that is the internal conflict of Caesar himself. We see him struggle throughout the film with the decisions he has already been forced to make for the good of his people, even questioning if he himself is becoming that which he so strongly looks down on. The struggle between mercy and vengeance is a theme which has been recurring throughout all of these movies, especially in Caesar himself, and it is spectacular to see Matt Reeves continue to explore these ideas, and inspire some thought-provoking messages and imagery for the audience to consider long after the film has come to it's end. In short, War for the Planet of the Apes stands not only as a stunning movie in it's own right, but it serves as an incredible ending to this series, firmly cementing it, in my mind at least, as possibly the greatest trilogy of films I have ever watched.
Rating: 10/10
Starring Andy Serkis, Woody Harrelson, Steve Zahn, Karin Konoval, Terry Notary, Judy Greer, and Amiah Miller
Dunkirk
Rating: 9/10
Starring Fionn Whitehead, Tom Hardy, Mark Rylance, Harry Styles, Tom Glynn-Carney, Barry Keoghan, Jack Lowden, Cillian Murphy, and Kenneth Branagh
Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets
Full review link: "Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets" Movie Review - Valerian Ascending
It's a real, genuine shame about Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets. You can tell director Luc Besson was looking for a solid return to form after the disappointment of Lucy in 2013, largely through the visual spectacle the movie certainly delivers on to an extent. The effects are nice, remaining faithful to the style of the original graphic novel the movie was based on, and remains great to watch during the often fun action sequences, which thankfully deliver some reprieve from the movie's faults. Unfortunately, those faults are many and are on screen for far longer than any of the action beats care to entertain you for. The effects, for how good they are, are frequently dull and boring, somehow making what should be a visually dynamic and thriving environment into a drab and uninteresting husk. The same can be said for the aliens. The plot is also predictable and standard stock for this type of movie, weighed down further by some unlikable characters and often dreadful acting. Most unforgivably, however, the entire film is hopelessly boring to watch, and will make that 140 minute running time feel considerably longer than it actually is. This is a true example of style over substance, and is the latest example that effects do not make a movie. For all the great effects and cool action that's in the movie, I simply cannot give this movie a high score, and in fact I'm giving it a low score, because it seems like little to no effort has been put in in any other area of the film's production. We can only hope that filmmakers considering or in the process of making films like this one will actually inject some life and energy into the movie they are creating. Without the heart required to do so, the future of sci-fi film quality may be questionable to say the least.
Rating: 2/10
Starring Dane DeHann, Cara Delevingne, Clive Owen, Rihanna, Ethan Hawke, Herbie Hancock, Kris Wu, Elizabeth Debicki, and John Goodman
Starring Dane DeHann, Cara Delevingne, Clive Owen, Rihanna, Ethan Hawke, Herbie Hancock, Kris Wu, Elizabeth Debicki, and John Goodman
Death Note
Death Note is a hopelessly misjudged attempt by Netflix to adapt a beloved anime into a single feature length film but let's face it, any film which is just under 2 hours is always going to suffer from plot and character issues when coming off of 37 20-minute episodes. At the very least, the story is an interesting concept, even if you are not familiar with the anime. Essentially, it involves a high school student who is mysteriously granted a book called the Death Note. Urged by a demon called Ryuk (played with delicious menace by Willem Dafoe) to embrace the power of the book, which will kill whoever has their name written in it by the user, and soon finds himself being hunted by an unorthodox detective called L (Lakeith Stanfield). That's a somewhat interesting story, and one where you're intrigued as to where it will end up. There's also a couple of good performances. Willem Dafoe as mentioned brings his all to the voice role of Ryuk and is clearly enjoying every minute, while Lakeith Stanfield proves a formidable choice for the role of L, bringing a great intensity, fun, and later desperation to the character. He's especially great in the scenes where he and Light (Nat Wolff) play off of each other, the only scenes in the movie with any real tension. Unfortunately, that is where the good points about this movie end. Everything else is an utter disaster. Although interesting, to say the movie proceeds at a snail's pace would be a generous way to put it, and the movie feels like a considerably longer time than it actually turns out to be. The plot structure is a disaster also. What should be noted is that what may work as an anime, as a book, or as a TV show will not always work as a film. The basic issue is that the writers were so desperate to appease fans of the original anime that they tried to shoehorn in every element of it, and what we get as a result is a sloppy, generally confused mess of scenes, characters, and subplots that go absolutely nowhere. It constantly breaks its own ground rules, invents new ones, and then proceeds to break those. Although the aforementioned two performances are good, everyone else in the movie is dreadful. Nat Wolff is a horribly uncharismatic lead, terribly miscast and lacking the necessary gravitas for a person carrying out the deeds he is. Margaret Qualley is also particularly dreadful as Light's girlfriend, a character so forgettable she may as well have been removed from the entire film so as to increase focus on the conflict between the two main characters rather than serving up a ridiculous sideshow from time to time. The visuals of the movie also fail to be particularly imaginative or impressive. This is largely na issue when it seeks to use Ryuk as a primary plot device, when he is entirely CGI and doe snot look even remotely convincing, thereby removing any possibility of tension his presence should bring with him. In fact, the aesthetic of the movie in general fail to be anything even remotely unique. All in, this Netflix effort proves to be a pain-stakingly bland and dull film, weighed down further by an onslaught of boring characters and a lack of tension throughout. Netflix is worth having in my opinion; not for this.
Rating: 3/10
Starring Nat Wolff, Lakeith Stanfield, Margaret Qualley, Shea Whigham, Paul Nakauchi, Jack Ettlinger, and Willem Dafoe
Atomic Blonde
This Charlize Theron starring and produced action thriller clearly did not know exactly what it wanted to be. I'm unclear on whether the writers were aiming to create a straight-up action movie, or a smart and sophisticated spy thriller. On either front, it failed in my mind. The writers evidently thought that the story being presented here (resolving around Theron's MI6 agent hunting a double agent in 1980s Berlin prior to the fall of the Berlin Wall) was much smarter than it actually was, feeling the need to layer the story with an absurd number of betrayals, reveals and plot twists, practically all of which occur in the last 15 minutes. Until that point, the story was not simple, but was generic. The final 15 minutes overcomplicates the entire film to the extent that my friends and I struggled to comprehend what had actually happened and work out exactly what the final twist in the film was meant to be. Ultimately, we were left largely confused by the entire affair, and that comes down to the dreadful pacing and the insanely quick sequence of reveals rather than spreading these out. Even then I doubt it would make sense but it would have been slightly better at least. On the converse, the action thriller possibility, it also does not work because the entire film is surprisingly boring. There are too few action sequences spread out throughout the movie, only one of which truly stands out after seeing the movie. Again, the problem comes down to the rest of the action being incredibly generic, and the pacing of these throughout the film. Some of this starting to sound familiar? Other elements in the film are also dreadful. The word 'character' should not be used in relation to this film, because any development or interesting personality traits are nonexistent. The supporting cast are all terrible as well, wasting great names like John Goodman and the up and coming Sofia Boutella. To be fair, however, the script does not give them much to work with. The cinematography is awful and only helped to give me a headache, and the editors attempts to be stylish all fall flat, ultimately coming across as more over-the-top. There is also an overabundance of pop music from the era. Rather than adding to the period however, the amount of times this is used causes some of the more shocking or emotional moments of the film to be greatly lessened. This is a modern trend which needs to stop and only be used where it actually adds to the film! It's not all bad though, believe it or not. The two main leads in the film are consistently great, with Charlize Theron and James McAvoy both doing the best they can with what they had to work with. They can't create interesting and layered performances with that material, but they at least ensure that they are enjoyable to watch throughout. There is also one stand-out action sequence in a stairway. The entire scene is about 10 minutes or just over that in length, and is spectacularly choreographed. It is the only time where I really felt the weight of each hit and blow in the action, and it is also edited very well to give the illusion that it is actually filmed in one take. There are cuts, but they are cleverly hidden. It's a shame successes in these areas here could not be carried over to the entire product. Finally, the period setting, despite the overuse of music as previously mentioned, is fairly well recreated here, and 1980s Berlin could actually prove an interesting setting for a spy movie in the hands of a more capable writer and director. These points are not enough to save the movie, however, and Atomic Blonde ultimately proves itself to be little more than a dire and exasperating movie to have to sit through.
Rating: 3/10
Starring Charlize Theron, James McAvoy, John Goodman, Sofia Boutella, Eddie Marsan, Til Schweiger, Bill Skarsgård, and Toby Jones
American Made
Tom Cruise is one of my favourite actors. I used to say he was my favourite, but I don't think that's true anymore given the quality of work of so many other actors these days; regardless, he is consistently enjoyable to watch (except in The Mummy, but we don't talk about that one). His latest role as Barry Seal, however - who famously performed jobs and deliveries as a pilot for the CIA, mercenaries in South America, and famous Colombian drug barons such as Pablo Escobar simultaneously - is a massive return to form after his summer let down, and the movie is all in all excellent. The plot, which I've just briefly described and resolves around Seal's attempts to balance all of his employers and his home life, is an extremely engaging story, and one which is consistently interesting to watch. That largely for me comes down to having very little knowledge of the actual events surrounding Seal in real life, including how the film would end, but I would bet that anyone who did have this knowledge would also find the film's presentation of the events interesting. That's largely due to the suspense that has been masterfully injected into the script throughout, keeping the audience on edge as Cruise's Seal constantly finds himself in situations which are seemingly impossible to escape from. This suspense builds as the movie progresses and comes to a head in the third act in particular. The movie also perfectly achieves a balance between the suspense and a great sense of humour, however, which also ensures that the movie is also fairly light-hearted and you'll be laughing throughout the movie. With all that said, the entire movie, no matter how engaging, is still difficult to become immersed in. The words 'inspired by a true story' (or I may be paraphrasing there but you get the idea) appear at the beginning of the movie, and the clear word here is 'inspired'. The writers clearly (and naturally) have also taken liberties with the events for the sake of the film itself, but ultimately, whether events or scenes have been left out or not, the problem with the film (and it is a small one) is unfortunately that a great deal of the plot comes across as incredibly unbelievable. That said, it still is enjoyable and engaging. The acting in the film is also all excellent. Tom Cruise delivers a redemptive performance as I mentioned above, while Domhnall Gleeson continues to make a name for himself in Hollywood, giving an enjoyable turn as CIA agent and Seal's confidant Schafer. The setting is also brilliantly recreated for the period (thankfully in this instance without the over use of pop songs), and the cinematography is excellent. The movie is filmed almost in the style of a documentary, with an extremely strange camera ratio being used, but it actually works to set the film apart from other biopics and is actually an effectively stylish addition. Ultimately, the whole film, although perhaps questionable in its presentation of events, is an extremely stylish and enjoyable movie to watch. Of all the films that have bombed at the box office this year, the commercial failure of this one might be the one that upsets me the most.
Rating: 9/10
Starring Tom Cruise, Sarah Wright, Domhnall Gleeson, Jayma Mays, Caleb Landry Jones, Jesse Plemons, and Lola Kirke
The Hitman's Bodyguard
The buddy cop (or just buddy movie) genre is one which has been severely lacking from modern cinema in recent years. The film Chips from earlier this year makes me happy about that fact to an extent. Despite that, however, some of my favourite comedies growing up were from that genre, and I'm eager to see it make a return to form. Although it's just a step, The Hitman's Bodyguard is certainly a step in the right direction. Just without the cops. The film revolves around hitman Darius Kincaid (played by Samuel L. Jackson) being given a deal in his imprisonment to testify against an Eastern European former dictator (Gary Oldman) for his crimes. However, due to the various attempts on his life, Interpol agent Amelia Roussel (Dardevil's Élodie Yung) brings in Ryan Reynolds' bodyguard Michael Bryce to see him safely to the court in Europe to deliver his testimony. This type of movie lives and dies on the chemistry of its two leads, and thankfully this is an area in which the movie excels. Ryan Reynolds and Samuel L. Jackson make for a highly enjoyable on screen duo, and their interactions with each other are ultimately where the majority of the film's humour comes from. Both men give excellent performances and bounce off each other throughout the film, and it's an act that thankfully never gets boring. The rest of the humour in the movie is also excellent, and there are very few jokes in the movie that do not land, delivering a mix of traditional humour though character interactions as well as visual gags throughout the movie, achieving a nice balance and variety. Unfortunately, the story does not fare so well. Although it starts off well enough, the story as it progresses becomes increasingly more generic and recognisable, and it's undoubted that you will be able to piece together exact events and the outcomes of various sequences in the movie long before that climax is reached on screen. It's a shame because the premise is so unique and original, and perfectly lends itself to a plot very different from other movies, so I find myself questioning why the writers were content to fall into stereotypes and clichés. The supporting cast in the movie is also fairly weak. To give credit where credit is due, Élodie Yung gives a credible performance throughout the movie, and Salma Hayek in particular is outstanding in her various short scenes as Kincaid's wife. Jackson and Hayek have excellent chemistry and perfectly sell the relationship between the two characters. However, besides them, the cast is largely unremarkable. Gary Oldman is a massive disappointment as ex-dictator Dukhovich, and it ultimately comes across as if he took this role solely for the pay cheque that he was being offered. He seems content to deliver a very phoned-in performance and put on a stereotypical Eastern European accent, as if that is enough to craft an interesting character. A colossal let down. The rest of the cast is incredibly unremarkable and no other actor stands out as having delivered a necessarily dreadful or enjoyable performance. Other aspects of the movie the movie succeeds in are the action, with every set piece in the movie (especially the Amsterdam chase) being extremely enjoyable and riveting to watch. The effects where implemented by CGI are also convincing, but it is the practical stunt work that is especially admirable. In the end, The Hitman's Bodyguard is, in my mind, a mixed bag to be sure. It's weighed down in large part by a weak supporting cast and generic story but it is brought up brilliantly by some fantastic leads, a lot of excellent humour, and some outstanding action among other things. In a summer of some great highs and some dreadful lows, it's certainly a solid movie.
Rating: 7/10
Starring Ryan Reynolds, Samuel L. Jackson, Gary Oldman, Élodie Yung, Salma Hayek, Yuri Kolokolnikov, Kirsty Mitchell, and Richard E. Grant
Logan Lucky
Now, this one was a pleasant surprise. Marking Ocean's 11 director Steven Soderbergh's return to cinema, Logan Lucky is a heist movie with a twist, focusing on a group stealing from a speedway rather than a casino or bank, and with a band of misfits who don't have access to some of the high technology seen in heist movies, or access to different people or areas like Danny Ocean for example. It's definitely an underdog story, and it really works. Soderbergh films the movie in an incredibly stylish way, which intertwines perfectly with the editing of the movie. The entire film is put together in an incredibly clever way to keep the audience on our toes, and in fact makes the whole movie much more engaging to watch. The use of colour in the movie is also excellent and makes the sets and shots look incredibly lively and vibrant. As I hinted since this is an underdog story, the plot is also quickly engaging since you of course want to see these characters succeed. What surprised me in regards to the plot is that there is actually a surprising amount of emotional resonance to be found in the film. The main character Jimmy (Channing Tatum) and his relationship with his daughter is a strong anchor for the story, and inspires us to support these characters even more in their endeavours than we already do. That said, there are a few story problems in regards to suspension of disbelief. Of course that is needed in most movies, but when the movie attempts to have a grounded plot and even cares to explain some of its more ludicrous concepts with science, some more ridiculous and ludicrous plot points in relation to the heist stand out much more than they perhaps would have in other circumstances. The acting in the movie is also excellent. Channing Tatum and Adam Driver make for a fantastic lead double act as Jimmy and Clyde Logan, while Riley Keough also deserved much higher billing in the marketing due to her excellent performance as their sister Mellie. The stand-out of the cast as you might have guessed from the trailers is Daniel Craig's phenomenal turn as explosives expert Joe Bang. Craig steals every scene that he is in, and the remarkable change of appearance and diversity from his usual type of role makes this all the more impressive. That said, there are a few performances which stand out as especially terrible. Seth McFarlane is a black stain on this movie as what I suppose the writers think is a British stereotype, and is dreadful throughout. Hillary Swank also appears for the final 15 minutes despite her fourth billing in the marketing, and delivers a terrible performance in this time, conveying no emotion and little to no skill in her delivery. Other aspects of the movie are also excellent, such as the music, perfectly capturing the movie's Southern essence, and the sense of humour the movie has throughout feels natural and is incredibly funny. Credit is due to both the writers and the actors for their delivery in that regard. All in all, it's not a perfect movie, but Logan Lucky is certainly a fun ride.
Rating: 8/10
Starring Channing Tatum, Adam Driver, Riley Keough, Seth McFarlane, Katie Holmes, Dwight Yoakum, Katherine Waterston, Hillary Swank, and Daniel Craig
IT
Full review link: "IT" Movie Review - Wanna Play A Game?
IT is about as solid an adaptation of the source material as we could have asked for as an audience, successfully separating itself from the 1990 TV miniseries. Although Skarsgård's performance as Pennywise is unlikely to be as iconic as Tim Curry's, it will undoubtedly stand as the more sinister and unsettling of the two. Not only that, but all of the acting is sublime, and the crew behind the scenes have also done an excellent job. The cinematography and editing in the film are stylishly controlled and put together under the often masterful direction of Andy Muschietti, and the CGI is also put to good use, particularly in making Pennywise seem more unsettling and otherworldly than ever before. However, it is the kids of the Losers' Club who are the anchors of this film, truly brining the humour and likability to the film that separates it from practically every other modern horror film. They transform what could have been a movie about children facing off against a demonic entity into a more poignant examination of modern fears. Make no mistake, Pennywise and his presence is felt throughout, but he is not their main adversary. Their main enemy is their own fears which extend from their personal lives and relationships. By making the true horror of the movie elements of everyday life and having the kids stand up to what scares them the most, director Andy Muschietti has ultimately crafted a more engaging and heart-waring tale than perhaps another director may have opted for. It is this emotional connection and engaging conflict that makes the film as enjoyable as it is. With all of these successes combined, IT doesn't just float - it soars.
Rating: 9/10
Starring Bill Skarsgård, Jaeden Lieberher, Sophia Lillis, Jeremy Ray Taylor, Finn Wolfhard, Wyatt Oleff, Chosen Jacobs, Jack Dylan Grazer, and Nicholas Hamilton
Kingsman: The Golden Circle
Full review link: "Kingsman: The Golden Circle" Movie Review - For King and State
Kingsman: The Golden Circle is unfortunately far more of a mixed bag than the original movie. Where the first one took it's time and was ingeniously self-aware, this one overcomplicates itself to an unfortunate extent, creating an absurd amount of plot contrivances and unnecessary scenarios for itself throughout. While the first movie's action sequences had some real weight and intensity, this one's feel strangely artificial, weighed down by a strange amount of CGI which, rather than adding the flair director Vaughn was clearly hoping for, only serve to weaken the sequences themselves. Most unfortunately, while the original film's sense of humour was strong and based on genuine character dynamics and actor chemistry, this movie takes a more crude option, with a number of jokes failing to stick their landing and instead coming across as cringeworthy, forced, sexist, or, in one particular case, all three. That said, it isn't all bad. While not the main source of humour this time round, the character dynamics are still the highlight of the movie, supported in large part by strong acting from the all-star cast here. The action is bolstered by some underwhelming visual effects but the stunt work, and sequences themselves are still wildly fun and entertaining. The couple of Statesman sequences and the finale set in Poppyland stand in my mind as particular highlights. The soundtrack is also great and the movie is beautifully shot at least when the camera isn't spinning during action sequences as if they have asked a professional American football player to throw the camera with some spin on it and see what happens. This is a disappointing movie for me, without a shadow of a doubt, and with regards to everything I said above I think the main reason for this is that it is coming off of the back of it's predecessor. I liken the situation to the Guardians of the Galaxy movies. The first came out with no expectations and took the world by storm. With the sequel, expectations were naturally much higher but praise was a little more muted, generally due to the disappointment that it failed to live up to it. That is where I feel a great number of people are coming from when delivering criticisms of this movie. Make no mistake, as I've said, it's flawed (deeply flawed in all honesty), but, if I was to sum up this movie in a statement it would be this: it is a victim of the first film's success. With expectations so high, it only made the failings of the film more apparent to us all and it is completely understandable why it has received such harsh reception, and rightly so to an extent. That said, despite the shortcomings of this film, I really would like to see a third movie. Director Matthew Vaughn has created some great movies in his time, including the first film of this franchise, so a redemption feels possible. This film, in the meantime, is fun, but regardless of that flawed and feels capable of offering so much more.
Rating: 5/10
Starring Colin Firth, Taron Egerton, Julianne Moore, Mark Strong, Pedro Pascal, Halle Berry, Channing Tatum, Sophie Cookson, Elton John, and Jeff Bridges
Starring Colin Firth, Taron Egerton, Julianne Moore, Mark Strong, Pedro Pascal, Halle Berry, Channing Tatum, Sophie Cookson, Elton John, and Jeff Bridges
Geostorm
When I saw Baywatch, I thought at the very least that was the low point of the year. It couldn't possibly get any worse, there would obviously be spikes but that was at least the worst out of the way. Oh, how very, very, very wrong I was. Geostorm is the absolute bottom of the barrel, and not just the worst film I've seen this year, but quite possibly one of the worst I've watched in a long long time. The blatant fact is this: this is not a movie. It is a product, and a defective one at that. Need proof? The two main countries involved in the space station controlling the weather (I sigh as I write that) are the USA and China...coincidentally the two primary movie markets in the entire world. Strange how the world works sometimes, isn't it? Baywatch was at the very least fun to watch in its awfulness; this is so fascinatingly bad, such a bewilderment in its existence, that it is not even a fun movie to witness. The movie is purposefully designed in a way that it hopes to appeal to every possible demographic, and somewhat spectacularly fails in all of its efforts. The acting in the movie is all terrible. Gerard Butler confirms in my mind that he is one of the worst - if not the worst - leading man currently working in the film industry, and Jim Sturgess is a consistently aggravating presence as his hilariously unconvincing brother. The movie attempts to inject humour into the proceedings but it comes across as the most misplaced effort in the entire movie. Baywatch got laughs at its awfulness; Geostorm got cringes. Quite often. The plot is a convoluted and hopelessly confused mess. The pace will grind to a halt every few minutes to have the "science" of the space station (named "Dutch Boy" for yet another convoluted reason) explained. The problem here is that when I sit down to watch a movie called GEOSTORM I know what I should be in for, and the fact is that I shouldn't be forced to care about the plot. The effects are dreadful, the script a joke, and all in this was an outrageously painful experience to sit through. And to add insult to injury, the titular Geostorm does not even happen. What could they possibly have been thinking?
Rating: 1/10
Starring Gerard Butler, Jim Sturgess, Abbie Cornish, Alexandra Maria Lara, Daniel Wu, Eugenio Derbez, Amr Waked, Andy Garcia, and Ed Harris
Blade Runner 2049
Blade Runner 2049 is one of the most cinematic movies of the year and a small step short of a masterpiece. Boasting an impressive cast, anchored by Ryan Gosling's incredible lead performance as K, and an engaging story, the movie is an intriguing watch from start to finish, firmly making the most of a runtime that might at some points seem a tad excessive. A shout out should also be given to Harrison Ford's fantastic turn as Rick Deckard once again, giving his best performance in years, while Ana de Armas gives perhaps the best supporting actress performance of the year as K's virtual girlfriend Joi, bringing a surprising humanity and empathy to a character you'll often find yourself forgetting is a hologram. The movie take the time to advance on the themes of humanity of the original film, while also choosing to explore some other new themes, most notably that of memory. The move takes a great deal of time to question what it means to have a soul, whether that decides if something should be regarded as having a life of its own. The writers are clearly keyed into their philosophy, and develop these ideas in an interesting and meaningful way. The direction from Denis Villeneuve throughout is phenomenal and never ceases to amaze, while the rest of the technical aspects of the movie are also on point, most notably the stunning visual effects and Roger Deakin's cinematography which is enough to make any film analyst cry. It's practically impossible not to be gobsmacked by various shots in the movie. The action is brutal and intense; the music both harkening back to the original film and bringing something new at the same time; and the movie as a whole has a deep respect for the legacy which has been left by Ridley Scott's sci-fi classic. It maintains the history and mysteries of that film, but continues to advance the story in a meaningful and substantial way. Modern cinema is a downpour, a snowstorm, a seemingly endless wave of releases, from which it can often be difficult to pick out movies which will go on to become classics. They become lost to us, and so many will go by, missed, unnoticed, hidden away, like tears in the rain, or snowflakes in a snowstorm. Blade Runner 2049 is not one of those movies. It is an inspiration which reminds us why cinema is such a powerful storytelling tool, and opportunities it truly offers. It might not be noticed now (unfortunately), but mark my words, this is a tear which will be noticed, will be looked back on in the years to come, and the beauty of it will be recognised. Movies like these are why I love cinema, and why I love doing this.
Rating: 10/10
Starring Ryan Gosling, Harrison Ford, Ana de Armas, Sylvia Hoeks, Robin Wright, Dave Bautisita, Barkhad Abdi, Lennie James, and Jared Leto
The Babysitter
The Babysitter is another Netflix original movie and is so delightfully insane and uncaring in its stupidity that it is an absolute joy to watch. Acting as an homage to the horror and home invasion movies of the 80s, director McG (responsible for the disastrous Terminator: Salvation but redeemed here) delivers a consistently fun romp, following a young boy scared of everything who decides to stay awake one night after his babysitter goes to bed to see what she gets up to, only to find that she is a member of a murderous satantic cult, now eager to keep his silent. Yes, it's a somewhat simplistic set-up and right from the get-go you admittedly can guess every direction and turn the story is going to take, and that is one of the movie's big downfalls. That said, it may be predictable, but the plot still moves at a breakneck pace, and the fun derives from the jokes pointed at the tropes of older movies and the simple enjoyment everyone involved in this project is clearly having. If I had one other small negative to point out, it would be that there are some creative additions made at some points to the film, for example, when naming a list, a retro style neon effect appears to show the list a la Sherlock. Now, these are fun and interesting stylistic choices which add an extra dimension to the movie, but it's strange then that these are only occasionally used, randomly being dropped and picked up again at different points during the movie. It makes the film seem strangely inconsistent, and some portions less stylish in comparison to others. That said, these are only minor issues in a movie which, at only 85-minutes long, is highly enjoyable. The acting in the movie is surprisingly solid for an 80s parody like this, especially Samara Weaving, Robbie Amell (who gives a particularly hilarious turn as babysitter's Bee's jock friend), and Judah Lewis, the latter of whom makes for an engaging and likeable lead character in Cole. The action in the movie is exciting and fun as well. You might have noticed that the word I keep using in this review is "fun", and, basically, that's exactly what the movie is. For any faults and predictable moments this may have, it is still an absolute delight to watch for the most part. It's 85-minutes long, as I said, so it's a good movie to watch on the side, and one which guarantees you a good time and some laughs at the very least.
Rating: 8/10
Starring Judah Lewis, Samara Weaving, Robbie Amell, Bella Thorne, Hana Mae Lee, Andrew Bachelor, and Emily Alyn Lind
Thor: Ragnarok
Thor: Ragnarok is a conundrum to me, and quite honestly I don't know how to treat it. On the one hand, this is an absolutely hilarious movie, with director Taika Waititi bringing his trademark brand of humour to the filmy way of quirky characters and a lot more of a focus on funny character dynamics as opposed to action. There's nothing wrong with that inherently. Except that it doesn't work with the rest of Marvel. Yes, the other Marvel movies are funny, but they still take their stories seriously, they focus on developing characters and showing how "superheroes" can be treated like real people with real problems despite the absurdity of the situation as a whole; the humour is a natural part of that and how characters interact but it doesn't take the focus away from the story or the action or the building of a universe Marvel has been so focused on. Ragnarok is a straight-up comedy, through and through, and unfortunately that perhaps goes too far. I never thought I'd be complaining about too much humour in a Marvel movie, but Ragnarok verges dangerously close to spoof territory on too many occasions. It doesn't feel like a movie that blends well with the rest of the universe, and not even a movie which feels contingent with the rest of the THOR movies, never mind the entire universe. Characters have dramatically changed since their last appearances in the Marvel universe, most notably Thor who is no longer the noble and serious would-be king, and is now a quip-making warrior. The action is also slightly lacking, but that is clearly a consequence of Waititi's lack of action experience. Now comes the conundrum part: I like this film. A lot. Yes, despite all of my complaining so far, this is actually a wildly enjoyable, non-stop fun ride. The humour of the movie is very funny (please note that I only mentioned this as a criticism because there is such an over-focus on it, and clashes with the rest of the MCU), and most of it sticks the landing. The performances in the movie are all excellent, especially Chris Hemsworth who seems to work better with this version of Thor since it allows him to unleash his charms and comic timing (again, only complained because it clashes), and Mark Ruffalo, the two of whom have a great dynamic and chemistry. Tessa Thompson gives the MCU another much-needed strong female character in Valkyrie, Tom Hiddleston's Loki is predictably great, and Cate Blanchett marks one of Marvel's strong female villains in Goddess of Death Hela. The action is lacking in terms of it's quantity, yes, but what is there is helped massively by some mind-boggling visuals, as well as a head-rocking soundtrack. It's simply impossible not to have fun watching an adrenaline-fuelled opening and ending, both to the sound of Led Zeppelin's "Immigrant Song", which even despite that, never gets boring as a backing track. The pacing in the movie is excellent and, again, the aesthetic of the movie, dripping in 80s neon and nostalgia, is fantastic. All in all, it should say something about Thor: Ragnarok that my main criticisms revolve around its assimilation in the wider MCU, only a problem given the nods and references to it throughout, and a couple of small points, but it gets a great deal more right than it gets wrong. Don't take the score the wrong way: it may be more spoof than Marvel, but it is regardless a hell of a lot of fun.
Rating: 7/10
Starring Chris Hemsworth, Tessa Thompson, Tom Hiddleston, Cate Blanchett, Mark Ruffalo, Idris Elba, Karl Urban, Jeff Goldblum, and Anthony Hopkins
Paddington 2
I'll say this, I didn't think of all the movies I would see this year that I would come out of Paddington 2 saying it was one of the best films of the year, and yet that's exactly what I'm doing. Frankly, I struggle to think of any area where this movie puts a foot wrong. The movie is all about Paddington, having settled into life with the Browns, as he seeks out a gift for his Aunt Lucy's birthday, eventually deciding on a pop-up book, before ending up in the slammer after being framed for its theft. It's a fun story and one which gives all characters, not just Paddington, their moment in the limelight and great individual moments. The movie is paced perfectly, and spends the ideal amount of time on each scene. Nothing goes on to the point that it is dull or repetitive, but is never so short that a joke feels rushed or an emotional moment under-developed. The emotional beats are surprisingly effective, being spread throughout the movie, and derive largely from the fantastic chemistry between the cast. Even though Paddington is not there, you always seem to forget that. Partly down to the fantastic effects work (which deserves to be commended), but mostly due to the actors fantastic ability to emote and connect with a digital creation which is not even there. The comedy in the movie is consistently funny, and utilise a great blend of verbal and visual gags, including some great background jokes that are not the focus of the scene but are nonetheless hidden in there. The best part is that every small but of humour in the film contributes to the plot in some way, and helps to develop characters throughout. As I've already said, the acting in the movie is excellent. It's truly striking how perfect Ben Wishaw's voice is for the role of Paddington, bringing a great naïvety but still sternness to the role, and Hugh Bonneville, Sally Hawkins, and Brendan Gleeson also put in fantastic work. The actor who should really take a bow though, is Hugh Grant. He gives quite possibly the turn of his career as the villain of the piece, Phoenix Buchanan, an out-of-work actor reduced to starring in dog food adverts. Grant perfectly gets into the vanity, into the selfishness, into the egotistical mindset of Buchanan, and is hilarious throughout the movie. His scenes are perfectly placed, and you are always looking forward to seeing what antics he is up to next. The cinematography and set design of the movie is absolutely excellent, and makes the movie one which is absolutely beautiful to look at. The action scattered throughout the movie is exciting and engaging, but equally (and most importantly) doesn't feel out of place. The direction of the movie is consistently stylish and interesting, including some really interesting visual changes throughout. I can't go too deeply into what that means, but it adds a further dimension to the movie, and the same can be said for the editing of the movie. The score by Dario Marinelli also deserves to be commended. Basically, with excellent acting, humour, heart, effects work, music, and style, Paddington 2 is one of the hidden gems of the year and a movie I highly recommend watching if you get the chance.
Rating: 10/10
Starring Ben Wishaw, Hugh Bonneville, Sally Hawkins, Brendan Gleeson, Julie Walters, Jim Broadbent, Peter Capaldi, Madeleine Harris, Samuel Joslin and Hugh Grant
Justice League
Justice League is perhaps the most emotional movie I've sad through this year or, perhaps more accurately, the movie which affected me the most after seeing it. Not because of a hard-hitting story (which is so confused that one will struggle to comprehend actually what is happening or why) or because of an emotional connection to these characters (of which there is none given the rush to get this movie out of the door), but because Warner Bros. have finally obliterated my favourite characters once and for all. Admittedly, that may be an over exaggeration; there are good things about this movie. There just aren't very many, but we'll start with those. There are a few good performances. Gal Gadot is once again great as Wonder Woman (the character herself is another issue all together but we'll get to that later). Jason Momoa and Ezra Fisher are excellent newcomers and fulfil their duties as to how their characters may have somewhat unfortunately been written. There are some fun action sequences scattered throughout the movie, and these are very comic book-esque, in that they are absolutely insane and delightfully don't care. The final point I might say, but this is admittedly a somewhat niche point considering this is based on fandom so will not apply to anyone, but, no matter how they are handled throughout, these are still the characters I grew up with. Just seeing Aquaman, The Flash, and Cyborg teaming up with Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman in the same movie, with glimpses of other characters throughout, was a great experience the first time I watched it. I enjoyed this movie enormously the first time I saw it, and I think that that will generally be down to this love of the characters. Then I thought about it, and the issues came flooding into the light, and it is honestly difficult to know where to start. Besides the three characters I have already mentioned, the rest of the characters and their performances suffer. Even Ben Affleck's Batman suffers this time round, with Affleck clearly not having a good time filming this movie, and the other two main offenders are Ray Fisher who gives a wooden performance (fitting for his underwritten and underused character), and Cíaran Hinds villain Steppenwolf. The latter tries his best to make the script work, but ultimately this is one of the most confusing villains in any movie, and quite possibly the worst comic book villain in a big budget movie of all time. This leads quite comfortably onto the issue of effects, which are notorious at this point especially in relation to the all-CGI villain. He does not look even remotely convincing, and therefore there is never any real sense of threat or urgency in the fights no matter how fun they might be. The same can be said for the Parademon henchmen (read "cannon fodder") throughout the movie. Think the Chitauri aliens in The Avengers, except they look dreadful. The plot is a nonsensical mess, riddled with a somewhat contradictory mix of plot contrivances and heaps of exposition, leaving me with a length list of questions. Why did Aquaman need to be given an air bubble to speak underwater when he can live and breathe underwater? Why did Cyborg's powers only glitch at random points for plot convenience? Why did Batman, the World's Greatest Detective, ever think that aliens were invading the world for wealth or money? Moronic issues that did not need to be present. Perhaps the main issue, however, is the tonal clashes of the movie. The movie is sometimes dark, and then there are random injections of humour (usually courtesy of The Flash) in the hopes of recreating the Marvel team dynamic but falling flat at any turn. This movie is clearly the product of two different directors, and the continued Warner Bros. studio interference has turned whatever this initially started out as into a confusing, painfully formulaic, and generally below average effort, saved only by some performances (Gal Gadot perfectly displaying that actors and actresses need to be paired with good directors to truly shine) and dumb action. There's fun to be found at some points, but when you start to pull away the layers, it doesn't take long for cracks to begin to show.
Rating: 4/10
Starring Ben Affleck, Gal Gadot, Jason Momoa, Ezra Miller, Ray Fisher, Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Jeremy Irons, Diane Lane, Connie Nielsen, J.K. Simmons, Joe Morton, and Cíarin Hinds
Star Wars: The Last Jedi
There has been some great fan contention over the quality of Star Wars: The Last Jedi. Whereas critics loved it, a lot of fans were entirely against this from release. I honestly do not understand why. Yes, this movie is not the next Empire Strikes Back, but it is by absolutely no means a bad film. Where the film is slightly let down is a frankly drab casino side plot, which ultimately proves rather pointless and rather dull for the most part; and some severely under-utilised side characters, a problem continued from The Force Awakens to some degree (Captain Phasma really can't seem to catch a break). Everything else in the film, however, is extremely well done. The acting is excellent all round. Daisy Ridley continues to prove herself a strong lead for this new franchise, but the stand outs are Mark Hamill as a finally-speaking-again Luke Skywalker, marking Hamill's finest performance in the role to date; and Adam Driver's formidable but vulnerable Kylo Ren, clearly wrestling with an internal struggle between his old life as Ben Solo and the draw to the darkness of Kylo Ren. Driver balances the performance perfectly, and continues to prove himself as one of the strongest Star Wars villains. Ridley and Driver also have an excellent dynamic, and they are an electric pairing to watch play off of each other throughout the film in a surprising and engaging way. The action in the movie is a great deal of fun, and it all builds to perhaps the finest third act in Star Wars history, as well as an incredibly choreographed dual lightsaber fight towards the end of the second third. The effects of the movie are naturally incredible, and are certainly going to be nominated for the Oscar next year, and John Williams also does fantastic work as usual with these movies. The cinematography is excellent, and the movie takes some different approaches to the visuals in comparison to other movies in the franchise. What this movie benefits from most of all, however, is the more mature and surprising approach it takes in the entire plot. Yes, the plot is somewhat drab as a whole in comparison to some other movies (at least in terms of the Resistance story; the Luke/Rey/Kylo story excels throughout), but it opts to take risks in the interests of doing something different, and the results are entirely unpredictable, building up to some genuinely shocking moments throughout. It also dares to talk about some surpassingly heavy themes, and the emphasis on hope is a great underlying theme. The more subtle exploration as opposed to other Star Wars movies, however, is the exploration of morality. This takes a more gray approach than other Star Wars movies - the galaxy is no longer portrayed as black and white, the light and the dark, it is a broken place where even good people do bad things in the interests of whatever they stand for. The fact is that director Rian Johnson portrays everyone with dirt on their hands, living with guilt and their own situations. This is a supremely well-structured character study and drama, that has clearly been crafted in the interests of moving away from the past in the interests of the future. Decisions that have been deemed "selfish" or "vain" have been made in the wide interests of the series - this is a film which does not care what fan theories or speculation has taken place online. That is one of the advantages of it - this is written by film writers, not fans, and the willingness to ignore that in the interests of the film itself is massively admirable. It is individual character explorations in this vein that make Star Wars: The Last Jedi such a profoundly enjoyable movie, and it is one that gives me great faith in the new trilogy Rian Johnson is now making. If it follows in the style of this movie - daring to be different and pushing for progression of old themes - then we should have a lot to be excited about.
Rating: 8/10
Starring Daisy Ridley, John Boyega, Adam Driver, Oscar Isaac, Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, Kelly Marie Tran, Gwendoline Christie, Domnhall Gleeson, Benicio Del Toro, Laura Dern, and Andy Serkis
Bright
Bright was Netflix's first stab at tackling a big budget blockbuster, getting some big names involved with Will Smith and Joel Edgerton to lead, alongside an ambitious concept from writer Max Landis and Hollywood director David Ayer. It's a shame really, that taking on such a high-level idea as their first attempt, has therefore proven that you definitely need to learn to walk before you can run. There are some good things to be said for the film. For one thing, the acting in the movie is solid all round. Will Smith is as compelling lead as always, while Joel Edgerton brings a humanity to his orc character Nick through all of the make-up to let the audience sympathise with his situation. Naomi Rapace is also good in the film as villain Leylah, leader of elf anarchists Inferni, as are Lucy Fry as Tikka and Édgar Ramírez as FBI magic specialist Kandomere. The problem here is that, while all of these performances are good, the writing well and truly wastes them. While the two leads are good, with actual chemistry and some good banter (although the humour will definitely feel out of place in the latter sections of the movie), the rest of the cast and characters are wasted. Leylah is given no character development or motivations beyond that she is evil to let Rapace form a three-dimensional character, while Fry and Ramírez are also well and truly wasted throughout the whole film. The latter in particular tends to only occasionally appear and only serve to pad out the runtime even further to 2 hours, although it feels like an eternity thanks to decisions like this and poor pacing. Where the writing is good is setting up the world which these characters are living in. A modern-day world where humans are living with elves, orcs, and faeries is an intriguing one, which is explored to some extent in the film. Unfortunately, it's been said that this script was cut down from a script for 3 movies and it definitely shows. The story occasionally picks up but is largely dull, and fail to make good use of the world and explore it, beyond some weak and forced social commentary on racism and discrimination in society. The effects work and the make-up in the movie is excellent. The practical work done on all of the actors who are taking on roles of other races is stunning, while the CGI used int he movie is also great (although somewhat unimaginative). The flip side of the CGI, however, besides the creativity, is that it is never used to full effect in the action sequences. For some utterly bizarre reason, in a world of orcs, elves, and magic, the action is practically all...gun fights. Why on Earth would you abandon the creative possibilities in favour of some bland firefights, none of which are exciting and none of which are well-shot. Clearly, Bright is a movie a bit like a coin: there's always two sides to it. The acting is solid, but the characters poorly developed. The world interesting, but insufficiently fleshed out or utilised to its full potential. The effects decent, but the action dull and unimaginative despite that. It's a decidedly average affair, and if you're not extremely invested in the fantasy genre, I'd recommend skipping this one. Unless you enjoy being massively bored for the large part of 2 hours.
Rating: 5/10
Starring Will Smith, Joel Edgerton, Noomi Rapace, Édgar Ramírez, Lucy Fry, Veronica Ngo, Alex Meranz, and Happy Anderson
Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle
No one asked for a sequel to classic Robin Williams movie Jumanji, but, after seeing it, thank goodness Sony made it anyway. This is an incredibly fun thrill ride which is pretty much guaranteed to put a smile on whoever watches it. The plot alone is delightfully absurd. Picking up as a semi-sequel to the original film (only respectfully paying homage to it at one point), the board game has now magically become a video game which, rather than bringing things into the real world, subverts the original premise and transports four high school students into the game as the avatars they selected, some of which are drastically different from their real bodies, whether in size or gender. The plot moves along at a good pace, never boring the audience and keeping you engaged (although there are some pacing issues I'll come on to). The acting in the movie is excellent and the four leads have great chemistry. All four, both the teens in the real world and the adventurers in the game, put in excellent work. The writing in the movie is great, with the main relationships being developed and advanced in interesting and fun ways, while the majority of the jokes in the movie are creative and land even on second viewing when you might remember what's coming. You'll get a chuckle out of any joke regardless. The action in the movie is also fantastic. Appropriately balls-to-the-wall insane, the movie knows that nothing needs to make sense since it is a video game, and takes full advantage of that fact. The variety of locations in the movie is great, and all of these sequences have a surprising amount of tension, granted by a three-life system each of the characters have. This makes sure the tension is there in the action, and manages to remain so thanks to this even though you naturally have the expectation of nobody dying, which is a nice twist from typical action movies like this. That said, this is nowhere near a perfect movie. The villain is a big let down in this regard. Possibly a poke at the fact that some video game villains nowadays are very weak, Bobby Cannavale's villain Van Pelt (a new take on the hunter from the original film) nonetheless is not a very compelling presence. Although he is not the focus, very little is done to flesh the character out or explain his motivations outside of being evil; I don't think it's asking for the world to expect a little bit of development on the part of the main villain. The pacing is also an issue. The movie is 2 hours long and although the events in the jungle actually kick start surprisingly quickly following a sufficient amount of character introduction, the rest of the movie varies between a snail's pace and that of a jaguar. Some jokes are drawn out over an exasperating length of time to the point that they are not particularly funny anymore (although thankfully these are few and far between), while some sequences are rushed and not given proper focus to fully flesh out some of the development (although, as I said, this is still fun and great to watch). The final issue I have is that while most of the humour is great and works extremely well, there are some points where the movie become unfortunately juvenile. Although it is to be expected when one character is a teenage girl transported into a man's body that there will be at least one joke concerning genitalia (admittedly the first of these made me laugh), when the begin to pick up they start to tire, alongside some other jokes. For example, one joke involves characters having to touch their chest in a certain area to see their characteristics, and it feels a bit unnecessary and down market in comparison to some of the other more creative humour in the film. It's not a bad film by any means, however. It has problems, but these are clearly problems anyone not expecting a great deal from this film could overlook. Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle is extremely enjoyable as a dumb, fun action movie, and to be frankly honest, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
Rating: 7/10
Starring Dwayne Johnson, Karen Gillan, Kevin Hart, Jack Black, Nick Jonas, Alex Wolff, Morgan Turner, Ser'Darius Blain, Madison Iseman, and Bobby Cannavale
Pitch Perfect 3
Oh my God, was this a difficult movie to get through? It's a real shame for the Pitch Perfect franchise. The first movie is a harmless but highly enjoyable movie with some great music and solid performances, although this all stand to go down hill with the sequel. It still had some good music and performances, but the plot was much less interesting, the humour more downgrade, and the characters more stereotypical. That was the precursor to this disaster. This is a movie which seems intent on dismantling and destroying anything you might have enjoyed about the first two movies. The fact is that it is painfully obvious that none of the actors care or are trying to make this work anymore, the only exceptions being Anna Kendrick and Hailee Steinfeld, who are both trying their best to make the paper thin script and bottom market humour work bless them. Everyone else, however, knows exactly what movie they are in, and are simply holding out until they can cash in their pay cheques. New additions to the cast are also dreadful, no matter how big the names, with even John Lithgow not bothering to put any effort in, instead choosing to ham it up by way of a horrendous Australian accent. I can't even imagine what the writers were considering when they constructed the plot for this movie. Some sort of Frankenstein's monster of the usual a cappella singing competition, this time on a globe trotting adventure to Europe clearly because the writers couldn't think of another idea, and, even more strangely, a spy-esque plot which takes up around 60% of the movie. Quite what the writers were thinking is clearly beyond the capacity of the normal human being to understand. The movie attempts to be aware of the clichés characters are constantly spouting by making fun of these, but, unfortunately, being self-aware does not automatically lead to the "jokes" being funny. By pointing them out in the manner they do, the writers only serve to draw more attention to the issues of the script. The action set pieces - yes, honestly, action set pieces, with which the movie opens and bookends - are pointless and out of place, weighed down even further by some dreadful CGI explosions and flames. Even the music in the movie has no effort put into it and is not particularly enjoyable. The problem is that this is not only a worn-out idea, but the writers of the movie have forgotten the roots of the franchise. In trying to focus more on a confused plot and action as opposed to the chemistry of the cast, music, and natural humour of the scenario, they essentially sentenced this movie to it's own death. The best thing that I can say about this movie is that it is mercifully short - clocking in at just 95 minutes, at the very least this was not a drawn out experience. Equally, the pacing in the movie is so dreadful and takes a long time to go anywhere, that the movie regardless felt like 4 days. I pray that this is the end of the franchise if the writers are content to go down this particular route. I would be terrified to see how this could possibly sink any lower.
Rating: 1/10
Starring Anna Kendrick, Rebel Wilson, Hailee Steinfeld, Brittany Snow, Anna Camp, Hana Mae Lee, Ester Dean, Alexis Knapp, Chrissie Fit, Kelley Jakle, Shelley Regner, Elizabeth Banks ,John Michael Higgins, and John Lithgow
The Greatest Showman
The Greatest Showman was a fun way to round out the year for me. A movie musical with songs from the lyricists of La La Land, this is a movie which undoubtedly has flaws as many critics have taken great care to point out, but the positives of this movie far outweigh the negatives. To turn to the latter first, the main issue here is the pacing for me. This is an hour and 45 minutes movie, and for a "biopic" therefore this moves at a breakneck pace. Character development is glossed over and therefore certain people in the movie change their attitudes or relationships are formed without any real build-up. This is clearly a problem for the issue of believability. We are meant to believe that these are events which actually happened, but the problem with moving at such a pace, although it is needed for a movie to cut some things out, is that these supposedly "real" relationships ultimately feel hollow and artificial. The other main problem I have is with editing and a few effects. Some CGI in the movie looks surprisingly unfinished, but the main problem here is with lip syncing. This is a musical, but I'm not expecting them to sing the songs in the takes themselves. That said, the very least I can ask for is decent lip syncing. It's not always the case, but there are some points where the editing is so poor it's painfully obvious that the actors on screen are not singing. These are the only issues I find, however, because the rest of this movie was a fun-filled and highly enjoyable ride, albeit one that takes heavy liberties with the truth of the matter (it is a movie, however, it is being made, quite poetically, as a show itself, so enjoyment is the key). The acting in the movie is excellent all around, with Hugh Jackman delivering excellent work as always while Michelle Williams continues to cement herself as one of the best actresses working today. The cinematography is the movie is gorgeous, and is partnered with some stunning set designs and excellent choreography during the musical numbers. These three things work in perfect harmony to not only beautifully recreate the time period, but also to make the movie something to truly admire. Even without the music, this is a movie to send shivers down your back. The pace of the movie is a large part of it's downfall, but it also makes the plot possibly slightly more enjoyable and easy to watch whatever the situation. You're never bored, and the emotional beats in the movie land every time. These points said, however, the main positive I can say for this movie is that the music is truly excellent. All of the songs we hear in the movie are catchy, and bad lip syncing aside, the actors do a good job with singing these songs. It's a great soundtrack, and one that works as well to listen to on it's own as it does in the context of the movie itself. All in therefore, The Greatest Showman is flawed, undoubtedly, but if you go in expecting a fun musical, then there's very little chance you won't come away with a smile on your face as I did.
Rating: 8/10
Starring Hugh Jackman, Zac Efron, Michelle Williams, Zendaya, Rebecca Ferguson, Keala Settle, Yahya Abdul-Mateen II, Paul Sparks, and Gayle Rankin
Well, there you have it, those were the 48 films I've managed to see this year. Even despite them, however, this has been a pretty big year for this little blog. This was the year I finally decided to put myself more out there as it were and share whenever I wrote something. I didn't know how people would react or how it would be received, but I need to take this opportunity to thank you all so much for reading this, and taking time to give some feedback when you can. I honestly massively appreciate it and can't thank you all enough. Any support you give is amazing, and I hope you all are enjoying this content. Hoping you had a great Christmas, and everyone have a fantastic New Year!!
No comments:
Post a Comment