Review: Midnight Special

Since finding out who was involved, I was definitely excited to see the trailer. I may have only seen one of Jeff Nichols' previous work (Mud), but that was enough for me to the potential in where he could go next.

With a stellar cast also announced, this intriguing sci-fi showed me a trailer with a lot of potential.

Nichols has yet to do sci-fi. But I felt this was a genre that I feel he could succeed in. But maybe not in the mainstream fashion.

A striking opening definitely shows the look that Nichols is going for. We seem to have jumped right in the middle of the story and it is the job of the film-makers to give us subtle bits of info for us to catch-up with the history of why our characters have ended up at this point in time.

As the film goes on there are moments of surrealism that is never over-blown and does not de-tract from the pacing and tone. Whilst trying to work everything out, there was a particular scene about two-thirds of the way through that got me completely hooked. Then we get a pleasing conclusion for every character involved that also leaves some questions opened to our interpretation.

Firstly, it pays wonderful homage to those sci-fi's of the late 70's and 80's. You can see similarities from Close Encounters Of The Third Kind, E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial, Starman and even FLight Of The Navigator and Cocoon.
Nichols and his team even show moments of mixing in religion and sci-fi. When done well, it gives us very interesting ideas and theories and this done it in spades.

Nichols regular leading man Michael Shannon captures his character so well and gives us powerfully subtle performance. Partnering with Joel Edgerton, it was a strong on-screen partnership and made me confident that we were in safe hands for these two to carry this film.
A big bonus was the wonderful acting from Jaeden Liberher. The 12-year old child actor gave us great moments throughout and is certainly a big draw. It was also nice to see Kirsten Dunst. After being busy with TV work over the last couple of years, her solid supportive role keeps me interested in any of her future projects. The only other notable performance worth mention was Adam Driver. For the short time he was on screen, the fitted the tone perfectly and also gave nice moments of comedy relief.

The general look of the film was gorgeous to look at. The use of lighting in the night scenes felt soothing and the cinematography made the most of those moments. The action scenes are well made, especially in the final act.

It is an entertaining slow burning sci-fi that leaves us wanting to know more about it. Nichols gave us a great ideas driven story whilst still managing to feel like it is done on a small scale. I loved it that it began in the middle of the story, and that we're catching as the films goes a long, and most importantly they are not spoon feeding us the info along the way. I also liked the execution of mixing in religion with sci-fi that felt so real. The performances in every department were spot on, the score is wonderful and it really does take you back the 70's and 80's with those similarities to sci-fi's that were released back then.

I was really unsure whether to give it a 7 or an 8. But I think the main reason why I eventually gave it a 7 was the pacing. It was too slow for my liking. I like a lot of slow burners. But there were too many moments that lingered too much in my opinion. I think this did not quite work enough for me in this type of film to give it an 8. However, this is an entertaining watch and goes into ideas that we do not see enough of.

Rating: 7/10

Review: Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice

A title like that is enough to turn peoples heads, grab their attention and getting highly excited about.

It is definitely many people's most anticipated film of the year, and therefore the pressure for this to be a critical success rather than a box-office smash is more important. This is obviously going to get bums on seats. But deserving the amount of money that it will make is more pressurising in my opinion. Especially, when this is being billed as the start of the DC cinematic universe.

With Marvel having money coming out of their ears at the amount, their main rivals DC are finally joining the party. With Man Of Steel being a good film with problems, all the eggs are certainly in one basket for this next installment. Will it deliver, can they catch-up to Marvel, or will it be like Avengers: Age Of Ultron, too many characters making the film over-bloated and therefore not giving enough time for story development. As I have purposefully not seen any trailers, I am going into this as open-minded as I can be.

On the whole, I like Zack Snyder's films including one that is my top 100 of all-time. However, there is a group that see Snyder as an incoherent story-teller but great with his visuals and over-the-top on his slow motion. I can see that with Sucker Punch, and bits of Man Of Steel. But I was fairly confident that this was a good viewing experience.

There are some good parts, but boy are they some problems that I'm afraid does remind me a lot of Avengers: Age Of Ultron. I think the bad side of Snyder comes out in this. He has a hard time mixing in the amazing visuals with story-telling and structure.
The first half sees a few nice set-up scenes with some that felt out of place. The second half moves along really well but there are more

It is annoying to have mixed views on this, as you can see so much potential in there and yet it did not have me totally satisfied. It's more complicated and incoherent then it needs to be. I don't know how it manages over complicates it self. It seems that simple story-telling seems too easy.
I hate having to mention this again, but it is basically DC's version of Avengers: Age Of Ultron. It's got too many sub-plots that it's trying to fit in, and it was pretty dis-jointed. The writers seem to be juggling everything that they want to do or are being asked to do. That also slipped into the editing as it kept me thinking that I have missed something.

By the end of it, everyone is rushing towards the final act and make sure everything is set-up for a series of more films. I could even say that it feels more like four films in one.They just decided to rush everything and not development enough to make this an more enjoyable watch.

One a side and less serious note, the amount of destruction is probably even more ridiculous then in Man Of Steel. Things like that just make wonder that the construction companies within Metropolis and Gotham must be busy people.

As for the performances, Ben Affleck and Jeremy Irons were the stand-outs. Affleck was pretty good as a rugged Batman. This was a pretty bad ass version of Batman. I was definitely more interested in the Batman moments then the Superman moments. Jeremy Irons was great as Alfred and had some nice comedic moments.
Cavill like in Man Of Steel is given very little to work with. In fact, the character of Clark Kent for me was seen as bit of a dick (pardon the bad language) in my eyes.
Jesse Eisenberg was distracting and annoying rather than threatening for the most part as Lex Luthor. There was only one scene that saw his character actually feel like a villain. Everything else was over-the-top in a poor man's Jim Carey in a way.
The use of Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman felt totally unnecessary. It was nothing but set-up instead of being an important character. However, for the short screen time, it is definitely crowd pleasing. I think the solo movie that is currently in development should have been done before this movie so that it could explain her powers and reason for being in certain situations.
The only other performance that I care to mention is Amy Adams as Lois Lane. She felt in-the-way and just an object to be saved several times during the film. I am not sure if she even deserved to be in this.

I should at the point give it some praise as it look like I'm bashing it. Like with Snyder films, the visuals are great. The whole design of the characters, costumes, gadgets and the world of Metropolis and Gotham was pretty good to look at. The action scenes are enjoyable. It is just the lack of piecing everything together made them feel more like individual pieces rather than one complete story.

Despite the many problems I had with it, I was still engaged, never bored, there is still enough in there for me to give it a solid rating and I don't feel this will effect future films within the DC universe. It still makes me excited for the other DC films.
My feeling throughout most of the film left me thinking that a lot of the decision these characters did not seem to fit what we've just seen. That is just sloppy editing.

The amount of set-up does prevent this from working on its own. There are a number of dream sequences that again was basically set-up including that was so forced it could not have tried any harder and shoving it down your throat.
Most superhero movies these days are concerned about trying to set-up the next movie rather than making the current one stand on its own. A great example is Deadpool. It works because it is just one movie that was highly entertaining that was not concerned about putting in set-up for the next one. Now we all want another one because we loved it. Guardians Of The Galaxy could fit into this category as well. Even though it was part of the Marvel universe, it was planned for one film. After all the deserved lot it got, we now have a second one in the making.

Some advice I would give is to not go in with high expectations and controversially I would recommend kids see this. Despite the rating allowing them to see it, I cannot see them enjoying it. The tone is dreary, there is barely a handful of comedic moments. If you want to please your kid, then watch first two Christopher Reeve Superman's instead.

I have now seen the trailers and I cannot believe they showed so much in the trailer especially the big reveal within the final act. If I had seen the trailers, then my viewing experience would definitely have lacked surprises as there is little left to see for the first time in the theatre.

Rating: 7/10

My Top 10: Films Based On DC Comics

Most of the DC films seem to either be really good or one of the worst films I have ever seen, which four in this list I would give that title to. It also includes my number one film of all-time.

As I have seen all but 7 of the 32 DC Comics films. I have decided to rank all of them with a short review for each of my top 10. I have to give honorable mentions to Constantine and Batman. The former is a surprisingly entertaining fantasy horror that sees Keanu Reeves play the supernatural detective. It transports you into a fascinating world that scares me every time. You will also be amazed at the cast that is involved.

The latter is the box office smash that began the dark gritty tone of the Batman world. Director Tim Burton definitely changed the way people portray the caped crusader after years of the campy TV series with Adam West. It also sees a memorable supportive role by Jack Nicholson as the evil Joker.
Now, here are my top 10:

34) Catwoman
33) Superman IV: The Quest For Peace
32) Batman & Robin
31) Supergirl
30) Jonah Hex
29) Batman Forever

29) Aquaman And The Lost Kingdom
28) Green Lantern
27) Batman V Superman: Dawn Of Justice
26) Birds Of Prey

25) Suicide Squad
24) Justice League

23) Shazam! Fury Of The Gods

22) Blue Beetle
21) Aquaman
20) Superman III
19) Wonder Woman 1984

18) The Suicide Squad

17) Superman Returns
16) Man Of Steel
15) Wonder Woman
14) Constantine
13) Batman

12) Zack Snyder's Justice League

11) Joker

10) Shazam! - The latest offering from DC, and it is probably their most fun and feel-good live-action adaptation. It sees a foster teenager be introduced to a world of wizards and monsters.

He is given the duty of protecting the world from the seven deadly sins whilst trying to find his family along the way.

While it is hilarious for the most part, the themes of the family is what gives it its extra edge of being an exceptional film.

9) The Lego Batman Movie - A wonderfully entertaining animation that manages to make fantastic self-aware gags of Batman's flaws.

In this adventure, Batman must battle with his accidentally newly adopted son, whilst taking on The Joker and hundreds of new accomplices.

This has fantastic re-watchability as the number of references are insane.

8) Batman Returns - My favourite of the pre-Nolan Batmans.

With brilliant performances of Michelle Pfeiffer and Danny DeVito as villains Catwoman and Penguin, this is a highly enjoyable sequel that I never get tired of watching.

7) Superman - The one that started it all.

1978 saw the superhero genre get elevated so much that it ended up winning a special Oscar for its visual effects.

Christopher Reeve was hailed as the man that was born to play Superman.

6) Superman II - The sequel that many including myself see as the best Superman film of all-time.

The action is terrific, the story is well developed and it has some of the most memorable villains lead by a terrific performance by Terrence Stamp.




5) Batman Begins - The first part of the The Dark Knight trilogy.

It saw director Christopher Nolan rejuvenate the character after the truly terrible Batman & Robin almost kicking the franchise down the toilet.

It's great mix of arthouse and blockbuster won a lot of new fans over, and as they say, the rest is history.

4) The Dark Knight Rises - The epic conclusion to the Dark Knight trilogy sees Gotham facing a new threat.

For what I felt were harsh criticisms, I see this as a terrific final chapter to one of the most important trilogies in modern cinema.

The cast is as stellar as ever and Nolan's direction continues to be phenomenal.

3) The Dark Knight - One of the highest praised films of the 21st century.

Winner of two Oscars, Christopher Nolan's vision of the world of Batman is made to be as real as it can be.

It also contains what I consider to be the best supporting performance of all-time, in the form of Heath Ledger.

2) Watchmen - Despite its mixed reviews, there is a lot of love for this film portrayal of the most celebrated graphic novel of all-time.

For me, Zack Snyder has created the best feature possible and I completely loved it.

With it containing the most amazing opening credits ever, this is definitely not your average superhero movie.

1) V For Vendetta - As many people know, this is my number one film of all-time.

Everything works for me, the pacing, the development of the story and the unreal performances by leads Natalie Portman and Hugo Weaving.

I cannot recommend this movie enough.

Nostalgic Review: The Dark Knight

After director Christopher Nolan dug the Batman franchise out of the grave with the sensational Batman Begins. We now have the long awaited sequel that features Batman's most famous villain, The Joker.

It was interesting to see Nolan save The Joker for the sequel instead of using him straight away. But with the trailers showing a lot of promise. It looked to be the right move.

Well just like Batman Begins, this does not play out like your normal superhero movie. It also manages to open out to a much grander scale than the first installment did.

Like I and many people have always said, Christopher Nolan's movies are all about ideas. But doing it within a big budget blockbuster is all the more impressive. He made Batman Begins look like an art-house trapped in a heavily hyped summer flick. He's done it again, and then some.

The whole opening segment is terrific. Not only in the way that it is shot by Nolan's regular cinematographer Wally Pfister, but in the way they introduced The Joker.
Then we get a story that has great message and the way they are portrayed are incredible entertaining that had me totally invested and believed in every character involved.

Despite the film being a Batman film, it is Heath Ledger as The Joker that is pretty much the main character. He is not only the star and the biggest draw despite being officially a supportive role. But he is also become my and I'm sure many others favourite supporting role of all-time. It is the performance of a lifetime, and he gave us a Joker that we never thought could be created. The way he is written gives a villain makes sense in his decisions, and once you first see him, you want to see more of him.
He totally deserved his Oscar, and it was such a shame that he never got to receive it after his tragic passing.

Christian Bale does another job as both Bruce Wayne and Batman and does good work in what I feel purposefully side-lining himself to give Ledger his moment. The rest of the ensemble cast all give great performances.
Gary Oldman's under-stated performance is fantastic, totally believable and I feel people will respect it the more they watch this film. Aaron Eckhart surprises everyone with a great job with Harvey Dent. This is an Eckhart we definitely do not see enough of.
It was a shame to not see him be there to receive his well deserved Oscar due to his tragic death.
I was initially disappointed that they re-cast Rachel Dawes' character. Instead of Katie Holmes, we get Maggie Gyllenhaal. After seeing the film, Gyllenhaal would definitely have been the better choice considering the amount of involvement her character had in this film.

This is clearly one of the best film in the last ten years and is firmly placed in my top 100 of all-time. A film like this would not be possible without Nolan. Despite its sources, this is not a comic book film. The type of story and feel of realism makes this more like gritty crime action thriller. The cast is pretty much flawless with Ledger leading the way.
Wally Pfister continues to out do himself with some of the most gorgeous cinematography possible.

The writing is incredible. There are so many memorable quotes. The stories that Nolan and his team make give are some deep message that you just don't see in many films. Also, Nolan is a big believer is using as much practical effects or at least making them look genuine. The effects used in this one are great to look at and give a lot of weight to them, especially as they don't look digital.

While Batman Begins introduced a lot of people to Nolan, it is this film that everyone agreed that Nolan can do anything and make a film that is one of the greatest of all-time.

Rating: 9/10

Nostalgic Review: Superman Returns

The Superman character has been etched into cinema history and is now a firm favourite.

Christopher Reeve made us all believe that a man could fly. But it has been 19 years since we have seen the man from Kyrpton. Is he still an important character to re-visit, and will it be a worthy follow-up.

Well, firstly this is set 5 years after the events of Superman II. This was a choice that I was heavily in favour of. I am not too bothered that they ignored Superman III even thought it was a solid film. But I am so happy that they have not referred to the god awful Superman IV: The Quest For Peace. What I liked about this decision, was that it was not trying to be a re-make or re-boot, but a follow-up.
It even pays homage by doing the same style of opening credits that we all remember seeing. With the epic John Williams being played in the background, it just brought everything back.

Taking the almost impossible steps of donning the cape from Reeve is the relatively unknown Brandon Routh. I felt Routh was pretty good. His Superman was nothing spectacular, but definitely not bad. However, his Clark Kent was there he shined the most. That great clumsy feel to him was just like what I remembered Kent being.
I felt sorry for Routh as he never got many big roles after that. I do remember him being Scott Pilgrim vs. The World and little known film Lacrosse film called Crooked Arrows. However, in recent years he has found a resurgence in various superhero TV series which I am glad to hear.

Kate Bosworth was really as Lois Lane. I got that tenacious reporter vibe throughout. However, Margot Kidder still feels like the Lois. But thankfully, Bosworth was not as annoying as Kidder has been at times.
Despite being as cast as Supermans main villain, Kevin Spacey was just ok I felt. He was definitely no Gene Hackman. I did not feel Spacey to be a threatening presence at all.
He was not terrible. The performance was not memorable at all.

My negative seemed to benefit one of my positives. Despite the villain being weak and the Lois and Clark relationship lacking. It managed to give time and gives us a deeper insight into Superman. This also gave us a sub-plot that eventually had big implications in the second half of the film which I was not expecting at all.

This does not get mentioned enough for me, and I feel this would make a really nice family film as well.
I like it that it had the same tone as the Richard Donner films had that a lot of people including myself loved. I also completely forgot that Bryan Singer directed this. A long with his success with the X-Men films, he and his team certainly know how to do superhero films.

I know you could say that this film is just people doing impressions of the original cast. But I think that was fine to do, especially as they were following on from the events of the first two.

It might not as engaging as the first two Superman's. But it is still a solid piece of entertainment. I'm glad that it wasn't a re-make.

Rating: 7/10

Nostalgic Review: Batman Begins

After the high amount of hate for Batman & Robin in 1997. It was going to be a long time before we see another one.

8 years seemed to be enough as director Christopher Nolan took the reigns. After making mind-bending thrillers Memento and Insomnia, this was definitely an ambitious choice by the studio

I remember at the time not caring for it. But that was mainly due to me not being being as much of a film nut as I am now. I also did not know who Christopher Nolan was and was still remembering how bad Batman & Robin was.

However, it seemed Nolan respected the source material and gave us a Batman we have not seen on the big screen.
Nolan and his team managed to make a world where everything seemed plausible and therefore draws you in a lot more then your usual superhero film.

The first hour has so much character development that it feels more like an art house film trapped within a big-budget blockbuster. But it seems the power of Nolan can make any studio go with the plans that he has for any film, even one such as big and popular as Batman.

Despite this being rated a 12A, this is definitely not for youngsters. It takes a while before you actually see Batman begin. There are also some genuinely scary moments mainly involving Cillian Murphy's creepy and slimy psychotherapist character.

Speaking of characters, the ensemble cast is quite exemplary. Christian Bale is such a big draw as Bruce Wayne/Batman. I was not sure how he would do in this. But it is totally a believable performance.

Liam Neeson was really imposing and makes us forget how good of an actor he can be outside of the mindless action flicks. Katie Holmes was a strong presence, Gary Oldman played a really good in a subtle supportive role as Detective Gordon, like I said Murphy is super creepy in every scene and Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman are as good as you expect them to be. Also, despite the questionable accent, Tom Wilkinson was a pretty good villain.

While Nolan concentrates on making in-depth character and story development, there is still great action. The fights are well choreographed, the big final act has a great chase sequence involving the best Batmobile imaginable. Known as the Tumbler, the design is truly amazing. It is probably as real as a Batmobile can get, if Batman existed in the real world. The vehicle is like if Lamborghini made tanks.

While the previous Batman's are either solely aimed at kids or has enough for the kids to like. This is much more mature with such a dark and gritty tone that no other superhero has done.
Nolan has manageed to break into the mainstream with a Batman film that no-one thought would make this franchise rise from the grave back into the light once again. It is amazing how real the world Nolan and his team have created. The character and story development is spot on. Nolan is the modern day pure cinematic director. He knows how to make well-rounded characters and fully detailed story.
The cinematography by Nolan regular Wally Pfister is gorgeous to look at and the score by Hans Zimmer is some of his best work.

This was my first experience of Christopher Nolan and I love it the more times I watch it.

Rating: 9/10

Nostalgic Review: Batman & Robin

Franchise killer, worst film of the year and for some, the worst film of all-time.

Whatever it is, this definitely a really bad film that ruins one of the most famous superheros of all-time.

Even the first line of the film gives you an indicator of what horror will be evolving in front of your very eyes.

The look of it is very similar to Batman Forever. However, it is a lot more campy and over-the-top with some of the worst one-liners imaginable. While the costumes and sets look impressive. They just don't belong in a film like this. They belong in a Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers episode or a stage musical. All the action scenes are light and silly and pretty ridiculous overall. I felt myself shaking my head fairly regularly. It does shock you how far they have come since the dark tone of the 1989 film that received a lot of positive reviews.

The whole thing is basically one big toy commercial. The amount of gadgets and costume changes is noticeable. There are even lines that even points fun of itself for selling so much merchandise. Director Joel Schumacher has admitted since that he was under a lot of pressure by the corporates involved to include certain things to expand their toy merchandise and make the film more kid friendly after complaints by parents of the darkness of Batman Forever. Things like that make me sick inside. It is supposed to have a dark tone and if parents don't like it then don't let your kids watch it. Imagine if everything was more kid friendly. Sadly, you do see that with a lot of blockbusters now.

The acting on a whole was either wooden or hammy. Some people made the most of the campy tine, but the majority of them delivered their lines as if they did not want to be there.

George Clooney was not a strong Batman. He does not add anything to the role. Chris O'Donnell probably gave the best performance out of everyone as Robin. As for Alicia Silverstone as Batgirl, she was a combination of forgettable and annoying.

The amount of cringe-worthy lines Arnold Schwarzenegger as Mr. Freeze makes is unprecedented, even by his standards. You could make a very dangerous drinking game from just his quotes.
Uma Thurman managed to play the tone, but still managed to not be that good anyway.
One performance that really angered me was thankfully just a supporting one. Elizabeth Sanders who played Gossip Gerty managed to be even more annoying then she was in Batman Forever.

The score is pretty much the same from Batman Forever. It is good to hear it again. But in the end, it is just lazy to go for the same thing.

One thing I forgot to mention was the choosing of the villains. Their partnership seemed illogical. It was obvious that both of their plans would never work.

One positive that I would to like mention was that I was engaged with the subplot of Mr. Freeze's wife. It showed great potential. But with it being a subplot, we would not see it for that long.

In the end, it is an insult to the franchise and is plagued with shocking writing and awful acting. Over-time it has become so bad that it is funny, and you can give it credit as it does stand its ground by maintaining its high level of campness. It even uses those cartoon sound effects when someone falls down. But it still feels like a chore to watch.
This is type of thing you would normally see in a Saturday morning cartoon. Kids will probably like it, but that's as far as it will go to get its best reviews.
Despite being a financial success, it so badly received that no further films were made. However, the biggest saving grace was that it managed to spark one of the greatest trilogies of all-time in the form of Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy.

Review: 4/10

Nostalgic Review: Batman Forever

The two Tim Burton Batman's were huge success and loved by many including myself.
With this third installment, we have new villains and it's doing the same as Batman Returns by having two of them. However with Joel Schumacher as director, would his style be as good, better, or worse then the first two?

With the opening of the Warner Bros. logo turning into the Batman symbol, it really gets the juices flowing, as does the romping score by Elliot Goldenthal. However, the first line of the film does slight put things on a downward spiral. Thankfully, it does not free-fall. It's just a gradual descent.

From being dark and gothic, we now have a more upbeat and gradually campy tone that even has glimpses of the Adam West's TV series. I've forgotten how flashy the fight scenes and character introductions are made.

Like with all Batman films, it does still manage to focus on the developments of the villains instead of Batman. Tommy Lee Jones plays the campy tone well as Two-Face. But it is Jim Carey who makes this film an entertaining watch. His style of acting works with the tone really well, has many memorable quotes that I remember saying as a kid and is a constant scene stealer. The on-screen partnership between Carey and Jones was a particular highlight. They camped up enough to be entertaining rather than be seen as terrible.

As for Batman, it was Val Kilmer taking the reigns from Michael Keaton. He was pretty solid. Definitely did not show anything exceptional, but did nothing to down-grade the film.

Nicole Kidman as the leading female was given an interesting story to her character. Being a psychiatrist was a good choice as it gave an angle of helping Bruce Wayne confront his fears. It was totally executed well, but it showed the potential. Also, it seemed Kidman was accompanied by a wind machine in every scene she was in.

My big positives was the introduction of the Dick Grayson/Robin character. The first time we see him was a pretty tense and emotional scene. The end credits song choice of U2's 'Hold Me, Thrill Me, Kiss Me, Kill Me' was a great choice and I have played many times since first hearing it.
One positives that does not help the film was production and set design. It was impressive, but for this film it felt a bit over the top. I also noticed one small mention of Metropolis which was a nice to hear.

The writing was a mixed bag. There was a lot of ex-positioning that felt forced rather than genuine. But there was moments that had me invested to still make this solid viewing.

I was not a fan of the re-visiting of how Bruce Wayne's parents were murdered. It felt hugely unnecessary, and they could have gone on a more interesting angle on the relationship between Batman and Two-Face perhaps.

The big negatives were some of the choices made by the characters which seemed odd and out of place with everything that has happened. There was the occasional cringe-worthy moments and a lot of them take place towards the end. We will see more of that in Batman & Robin.

In the end, it's ok. For many people, it was seen as not that good but with a small amount of positives. But you can enjoy it if you're in the right mood. However, for the long terms this is now seen as the beginning of the end.

Rating: 6/10

Review: 10 Cloverfield Lane

After a masterful marketing campaign to get everyone talking about the 2008 film Cloverfield. J.J Abrams is back as producer for what many people are expecting to be a sequel in the form of 10 Cloverfield Lane.

I am a huge fan of Cloverfield. I love the concept and its execution was everything I could have ever hoped for.
So you can tell how excited I was to see what they have conjured up eight years since the first one.

Well, the trailers were going the same way as its predecessor. It has got people excited despite showing very little, and surely it is showing the perfect way of how to market a movie. It probably won't change a thing, but I hope the blockbusters take notice.

Without giving much away, I can definitely say you can have the same enjoyment even if you have yet to see Cloverfield. It looks to be more like to be an anthology of films with a similar tone. If that's the case, then keep 'em coming Mr. Abrams.

While Cloverfield was known for its clever techniques with the found-footage genre, 10 Cloverfield Lane has immersed itself into a classic thriller with your traditional camera style.
It has a small setting with only a few characters to keep up with. That gives you time to embrace the story development and get ever slightly tenser the longer the film goes on. The mystery nature of it will keep you hooked and excited to see how all of this will end.

The final act will definitely divide people. For me, it did feel separate from everything else you've just seen. The style of camerawork changes for example. But thankfully I was not disappointed by it. It was just fine in my eyes. It did not bring me out of the film, and it still made me want to know more what is going on. What I think may be the film's saving grace if you were not satisfied with the ending, is that it leaves open holes for you to discuss what you may think is going on that the film did not cover.

The performances were great throughout. John Goodman is the biggest stand-out in the main supportive role. He gives us a stunning performance and certainly terrified me throughout. I am so glad that he was cast. We always seem to love his performances. But it is always a very minor role. Especially with his involvement in recent films like Trumbo, Argo, Inside Llewyn Davis and Flight.
Mary Elizabeth Winstead is a wonderful lead also. Felt really likable, was rooting for her throughout and has a really impressive powerful female presence.

The biggest positive from the technical is the score by Bear McCreary. It is terrific. It has that old school score that you would hear from a Spielberg popcorn classic. It is definitely one that I will be listening to for some time. It ended up being an integral part of the film as it was effective and kept you on the edge of your seat.
The script was pretty solid overall, but nothing exceptional. The camerawork for the most part is done really well by teasing us at the right times with clever positioning.

I won't rate it as high as Cloverfield. But I still highly recommend this as it is a terrific watch. J.J Abrams along with first-time director Dan Trachtenberg have done a fantastic job. You feel unsettled throughout as this big mystery keeps you hooked whilst also enjoying these characters trying to find out for themselves. Goodman is the big attraction and should get the most love from the viewing public.
The film takes brave paths. A lot of it works really well. Most of its potential problems are all in the final act. It can be a bit of a let down as the rest of the film makes really good use of its tense moments.
All that is left to say is don't go in expecting a straight sequel. If you like the concept of the first Cloverfield, then I feel you'll enjoy this as much as I did.

These films really show how to market a film. In an age where the trailer seemingly show far too much, especially for films that are going to get big box office numbers anyway. It's a long-shot, but I really hope other films marketing campaigns take note of how to properly get bums on seats whilst also giving people the best possible viewing experience possible.

Rating: 8/10

Nostalgic Review: Batman Returns

People may have the 1989 Batman film as there main childhood memory of this particular superhero.

But for me, this was the one that introduced me to the Dark Knight.

It remains to be my favourite of pre-Nolan Batman's. The structure of the plot seems more solid, it's more appealing and the interplay between the three main characters is gripping viewing.

It would be easy just to call this a simple comic-book action movie. However, this sequel is much more complex then that. It is more of a Gothic tragedy and the premise of good versus evil is not so black and white as you would think. Yes the action sequences are fun to watch and has vintage Batman moments. But that is just a minor part to a story between three well written characters with many struggles.

The opening really sets you in the mood beautifully. It shows you that we are going to see a totally different type of story.
Like with the 1989 installment, the story is more about the villain then Batman, or in this case villains. Burton and his team have gone for the well known villains Penguin, and Catwoman.

Danny DeVito as Penguin was a brilliant choice. I definitely would not have even thought of him as a possibility. But he manages to give a troubled character with a sad story that we actually end up sympathizing for.

But the star of the show for many was Michelle Pfeiffer's portrayal of Catwoman. A pretty flawless performance that many including see as her best ever performance. Her great mix of sexy and crazy works so well in what we have always associated with both Catwoman and Selina Kyle. Her transformation scene is quite disturbing. Her possessed/zombie like face amplifies the scene really well. Also, the look of Kyle has reminded of Camren Bicondova's portrayal in the current Gotham TV series. I recommend you watch it just for Bicondova's performance as it is clear to see that she has done her homework on this character.

While Keaton is solid throughout, he does play third fiddle too our main villains. However, his on-screen relationship with Pfeiffer's character is a particular highlight of mine. Another performance worth mentioning is Christopher Walken's performance as the sleazy Max Schreck. Definitely a chilling coolness about him.

For me, this is the one that Burton truly cast his magic spell on. His ingenious interweaving of various stories makes this captivating viewing. It sees Batman take a back seat whilst we see the struggles of Penguin and Catwoman.
The dialogue does get a bit mature for the rating that it has been given. But that was the beauty of 90's films back then. You definitely would not see the same film being made now. The production design might not be as impressive as the one that won their only Oscar in 1989. But it is still an impressive set that define the tone of Gotham City. I cannot forget the Danny Elfman score that manages to stand-out from its predecessor. It felt slightly more like a vintage Burton movie whilst also having Batman vibe as well.

You can also make a cheap excuse for watching it at Christmas, which is always a nice bonus.

Whilst also being as a strong popcorn movie for the general audience, there is also a tragic story with well-rounded characters for the hardcore fans to enjoy.

Rating: 8/10

Nostalgic Review: Batman

The only Batman most people knew of back then, was the hugely camp TV series with Adam West.

But comic book fans knew that the real character has darker tone. 1989 finally saw this style of the caped crusader on the big screen.

Directed by Tim Burton, who has just come off doing Beetlejuice had many people thinking that his tone might not suite the source material. But with the rating been a 15, a lot were getting quite intrigued in why this has gone for a mature approach.

I was only a few months when this got released. But I have seen clips of how big this film was. Posters were everywhere and people were queuing round the block to see this. That was the pure definition of a blockbuster.

Burton and his team has now corrected everything by showing us the dark, sinister and gothic side that all the comic bans were waiting for. From the adrenaline rushing opening score by composter Danny Elfman gets you pumped and preparing for the tone that they are going for.

One thing that they show straight away that I loved about this film the most, is that it's not an origin story. It does go over Bruce Wayne's origin of becoming Batman for a short moment. That moment for me actually felt really haunting and favorite part of the film. But other than that, it is all about the development of the main villain and is clash with Batman. No superhero film would do that now.

It ended up winning one Oscar, for set direction, and I can see why. The design of Gotham City still looks great now and was probably as big as it could get at that time.

Michael Keaton was good as both Batman and Bruce Wayne. His mysterious persona was done really well to make us want to know more about his character by the time the film ends. However, the film belongs to Jack Nicholson, who plays The Joker. Only until recently, many saw as THE joker, and they were quite right. It might not be as intimidating as Heath Ledger's was in The Dark Knight. But it is still a role that many people associate with Nicholson the most.
Kim Basinger was a solid female lead as Vicki Vale, as was Robert Wuhl as investigator Knox and Michael Gough was a great Alfred. I would have liked to have seen more of the always smooth-talking Billy Dee Williams who played Harvey Dent.

My only negatives were probably the villain not being as threatening as he could have been and the use of the Prince songs do not feel right now. But they are only minor ones.

Despite some of it looking quite dated, it remains to be a really good watch. I liked the look of it. It reminded of crime noir flick set in the 50's or 60's. It is the Batman that everyone had been waiting for. The dark and gritty tone felt right with Burton directing. There are many great action scenes including the introduction to the Batmobile which was totally bad-ass.
Burton truly set for what is now a franchise with many successful additions.

Rating: 8/10

Nostalgic Review: Superman IV - The Quest For Peace

I am embarrassed to say that I remember loving this as a kid and watched it countless times.

Thankfully, my maturity has seen the error of my ways and I am now with the majority.

This is made by Cannon studio. The most famous studio for making a stupid amount of really bad films on an annual basis. I remember seeing a film documentary about them which was an interesting watch. They did have a bit to talk about this film and it was shocking to see how badly it was made.

Seeing this again brings it all back. The graphics for the opening credits are so amateur it is unbelievable. Not a very promising start.

So many of the scenes either felt pointless or made no sense. You can see that the budget was super low. The writing has no logic and the visual effects are poor.

I even noticed one moment that I remember watching as a kid that is NOT included in the DVD version. Apparently the studio cut it from any future releases. That being the only scene removed I hard find to believe. What about everything else?
It was basically a scene involving Superman saving a girl from a tornado and it happened just after Superman took on the main villain for the first time in the film.

There are so many lazy moments. The most notable one is the constant use of one Superman flying scene for any scene involving him flying to the rescue.

It ended up being so bad that Christopher Reeve initially did not want to do it. The only reason he did it was to do the story that he wanted. Despite getting his wish, you can see throughout that he does not want to be there. I felt sorry for Reeve, Gene Hackman, Margot Kidder and any of the other regulars that were involved in this pile of rubbish.

The continuity is beyond shocking. One moment a character looks to be on the verge on dying, then he's suddenly fine in the next scene without any explanation.
The more so called "scenes that needed Superman" became more excruciating the more times it happened.

I would have normally have given this a 3, or possibly a 4. But there is one moment in the final action set-piece that I had to massively marked down due to its level of stupidity and no reasonable person would have done that.

The only positives I got was the comedic moments between Reeve and Mariel Hemingway's character. It got laughs out of me in what was generally a film that made me angry. There were other moments that got the odd chuckle from me also.

Whilst not all departments have done a bad job making this. The negatives are so incredibly strong, that the good parts just can't cope with the amount of bad vibes that is make this drown down to the depths of being one of the worst films of all-time. This is a pure franchise killer, and it took 19 years before we saw our most famous superhero on the big screen again.

Rating: 2/10

Nostalgic Review: Superman III

After the huge successes of both Superman and Superman II, could they make it a hat-trick of box office successes.

Things take an odd turn for this third installment. But whilst it may have more comedic than superhero action moments, this can still be a fun watch.

It has really a pretty entertaining opening credits segment. It definitely does not feel like a Superman film. But it still is very funny and in-keeping with the tone of comedy which still feels odd, but does manage to work.

Despite it being labelled as a Superman film, this film belongs to an out of luck low-life called Gus Gorman, played by well known comedian Richard Pryor.
I thought Richard Pryor was good. Some moments that he is involved with does feel out of place with what you expect from a Superman film. But if you look at them as individual set-pieces, then you can still have enjoyment out of this rather than frustration on wanting more Superman.

The moments with Superman are pretty good as well. Reeve is still great as Superman and Kent. Superman at one point does take an odd and dark turn that ends up being quite a tense action set-piece. Whilst Margot Kidder as Lois Lane has more of a cameo in this one, the love interest is the character of Lana Lang brilliantly played by Annette O'Toole.
They have great on-screen chemistry. I love the screwball nature of Clark and Lana's moments together. When one talking about something, the other is talking about a totally different thing. It always brings out a laugh from me.
Seeing their chemistry does make you believe that Clark and Lana deserve to be together rather than Lois.

The villain in this film is just a poor man's Lex Luthor. I guess Gene Hackman was busy doing other stuff. So instead, they brought in Robert Vaughn along with Annie Ross and Pamela Stephenson as his assistants.

From a technical aspect, the model shots are still as good as ever and the soundtrack has pieces that are very good and worth listening to.

So despite the laughs, it seems to rely too much on the comedy on not on what we expect a Superman film to be. That being said, it is still a fun movie to watch.
I am baffled to see a lot of the ratings elsewhere be so low. I thought it was perfectly fine. Yes it is by far weaker than both its predecessors and I can understand if the campiness tone of it puts people off. But there is still solid content throughout despite the tone being almost totally off-piste.

Rating: 7/10

Nostalgic Review: Cloverfield

A lot of people remember the build-up to this. It started in July 2007 which what I still believe to be the best form of trailer I have ever seen.

It got everyone talking, there was mass media speculation, and it did not even have an official title. At the time, it was billed as '1-18-08' which was the release date for it.

There were rumors that it would be a new Godzilla film or a spin-off to the Lost television series.
The viral marketing campaign was gearing it up perfectly with still very few things explained in the trailers, posters etc.

January 18th 2008 finally came around and I remember being their at the first screening at my local cinema. That was during a time when I rarely went to the cinema. So you can tell how excited I was to see what all this hidden secrecy is all about.

What I got in the end was a cleverly made found-footage monster movie that had me hooked throughout.
It begins with some underrated character development I feel. This is because many people were just waiting for the big reveal to happen. But I got really enhanced with these six main characters, I cared for them and I remembered their names. Whilst we're understanding their history together, we are also intrigued by some of the hand-held camera trickery to make this a real as real can be.

The rest of the film is case of survival for our main characters and whilst getting a Jaws-esque approach to revealing the monster. There is also a point towards of what I felt to be motion-sickness. Thankfully, it was only a minor one. But I heard reports Again, there remains the feeling of found-footage and more Easter eggs to be found right up to the very end of the credits, which I did say for. I just knew that with the amount of secrets they were hinting us, that they just had to give us another thing after the credits.

The performances for me are fantastic. They feel real throughout and the writing gives them a great amount of history that we can fit together to give six strong characters that we can care for. So props to Michael Stahl-David, T.J. Miller, Jessica Lucas, Odette Yustman, Lizzy Caplan and Mike Vogel for their terrific work on this.

This was definitely was the best films of 2008 for me. There is a perfect amount of suspense that is built up nicely. The way they use the found-footage technology felt to be done with grace compared to what is done now, and that has to be its biggest positive. It also gave them the opportunity to add in lots of little goodies to look for during the film that does give you some more info on why these events are happening on screen.
It managed to not overlong itself. The 85 minutes duration showed its snappy nature to this little project. Another theme that it encapsulates is the feeling of '9/11'. It's set in New York, it genuinely feels like a terrorist attack and there are even some scenes that are pretty identical to moments we have seen from that tragic day.

Despite Matt Reeves directing this, it is clearly producer J.J Abrams that is controlling everything around him. This is his baby and I welcome more films to be part of the Clover-verse.

Many see it as a cult film, and it is continuing to grow. For me Cloverfield is a landmark film. It gave us the perfect marketing campaign, it made the best use of the found-footage genre that has now become a pastiche of itself and it managed to make a gripping story with such well-round memorable characters.

Rating: 9/10

Review: Zootropolis

We are in a golden era of animation films. It is not just the major studios that are involved. But independent studios with all sorts of different types of animations.

However, the godfather of animation that is Walt Disney Animation Studios are now releasing their 55th feature film.

We are now far beyond the studios lowest point such as Chicken Little and Home On Range. We are now in another high point with hits such as Meet The Robinsons, Bolt, The Princess And The Frog, Tangled, Wreck-It Ralph, Frozen and Big Hero 6.

Looking to join this list of Disney classics is Zootropolis, or as it's known in America, Zootopia.

Well, it is clear to see that Disney have another hit on their hands and possibly another Academy Award winner. I think this easily make a claim to being up there with some of the classics we all know and love.

Firstly the idea an interesting idea, and it is put to great use. If you have seen the trailer, they do not do it justice at all. It makes out as some fluffy story with cute animals that only the kids will like.
It is far from that. Yes, the animals are cute and has cheap gags. But there is a lot of interesting themes going on throughout the film that are surprisingly very mature. If this is the way Disney and Pixar are going with their newest releases, then count me in. We have already seen that with Inside Out.

One thing that is always a recipe for success with animated films in the perfect mix of gags that can appeal to kids, adults and both. This has it in spades. There are even some gags that only people with a solid amount of knowledge of particular animals behaviors would get.
While it does have those laughs, it manages to focus more on the story. Yes, I laughed out loud consistently throughout the film. But the story goes into some really interesting topics that you just do not see that often from Disney animated films.

The voice work by everyone is great, not just Ginnifer Goodwin and Jason Bateman. It is hard to find a stand-out in any performance. The two lead characters are great together. It is well-rounded development and awesome chemistry. I definitely want to see more of them together.
It was also great to see the main character be female. We have been getting a lot of strong female leads lately, and they are all bad-ass.

The only nit-picks I would give, is that there are small lulls that can slow it down a fraction. But like I said, it is just a nit-pick. Also when you break it down, the story is becoming similar to a lot of their recent films such as Wreck-It Ralph. But as I still loved it anyway, I'm not complaining too much.

When a Disney animated film works, magic is really happening in front of your eyes. It is far from passable, the animation is top-notch as usual and it is relentlessly entertaining in so many ways. Like with Inside Out, I honestly think that the adult will get more enjoyment out of it then the kids will.

I loved the genre it went for. It has been a while since we have seen a good crime mystery film. It has also been a while since we have seen a buddy cop movie, which is what this is.

I liked the risks it took in terms of the themes it was going for. It has a lot to say on social issues such as racial stereotypes, gender stereotypes, friendships, relationships and even drugs. In writing, that does sound a bit heavy. But trust me, it's a wonderful family movie, this looks to be a certain candidate to end the year in my top 10 and is another Disney classic.

Rating: 8/10

Nostalgic Review: Superman II

Despite a lot of controversy with the firing of the director from the first film Richard Donner during production. I have yet to see the Richard Donner cut of the film. But I hear the added scenes give some interesting development.

This much anticipated sequel eventually got made and it ended up being many including myself best Superman film of all-time, now under the film of Richard Lester. Also, it was one of the few sequels at that time and only the second time a production has made two films back-to-back.

What I think could be a first and possibly only time. The opening credits is basically a catch-up from the first installment and shows the main events that took place. I honestly can't think of any other film that has done that.

With the first film mainly dealing with the origins of all of our characters, we are now straight into the action with this sequel. There are also some new villains, and they mean business.

The action scenes have improved from the last one and really entertaining to watch. There is one particular action sequence that I always like watching. It really shows the destructive power these villains have and it really gives you concern for Superman. Also, the final action scene which is about 35 minutes long is really well done, I never get tired watching them and is the action we have been wanting to see.

Christopher Reeve manages to surpass himself with his performance as both Superman and Clark Kent. It does help with the film going more in-depth with Superman. We get to see a different side to his character. His on-screen relationship with Margot Kidder really works. Kidder gives probably her best performance of all her appearance within this film series. She is definitely more involved and we really believe her in this film.

Even with Reeve, this real stars of the film are the villains. It is lead by Terrence Stamp, who is terrific as General Zod. You can feel the evil in his face and voice. He even manages to give comedic moments with his subtle roll of the eyes. It is definitely one of the best performances of a villain I have ever seen. Sarah Douglas as Ursa was both sexy and a bad-ass. She played the evil role well, was the most interesting to watch and I think stole the show.

Gene Hackman returns and continues to be great as Lex Luthor. That great mix of being a villain and having comedic relief manages to work with Hackman. A lot of great quotes coming from him throughout.

It is a shame that John Williams did not return to make the score. But Ken Thorne manages to do a good job mixing in Williams previous score and his own pieces.
Also from a technical standpoint, the visual effects are pretty good for its time. But the model shots are terrific. It is films like this that show how underrated using models are for action sequences.

This is a hugely entertaining film. Despite a lot it looking dated, the content is still great to watch and the writing keeps the story interesting that will appeal to anyone of any era.
For an era where CGI was still in early development and a good story was essential, this is a great film and definitely one of the best superhero films of all-time. The performances are all memorable, especially from the villains. Also, the strange use of humor still seems to work in a weird way.

I hope to see the Donner cut soon to see what was taken out and if I believe they enhanced the film or not.

Rating: 8/10

Nostalgic Review: Superman

!MINOR SPOILERS!

1978, one year after Star Wars. The face of blockbuster cinema is changed forever and now we see more ambitious projects being made.

This year belonged to Superman. A huge film for its time as there had been nothing like this for a superhero film ever. It ended up getting 3 Oscar nominations, including receiving a special award for its visual effects, got nominated for 1 Golden Globe and won a BAFTA as well as four other nominations.

After years of directing numerous TV series and riding off the success of directing The Omen, Richard Donner was given the task of showing how Superman came to our world. One vital member of the crew that I was surprised to see be part of the writing was Mario Puzo. The main writer behind The Godfather trilogy was the head writer for the man from Krypton.

Already after the opening credits, your adrenaline is already running at a fast pace. The style of the opening credits has not been seen before and it is done during one of most recognisable piece of music in film history from John Williams.

The setting of the tone is crucial for something that on paper sounds ridiculous. The terrific open segment on Krypton with awesome model shots, well developed story to introduce into the world and of course the memorable performance of Marlon Brando, along with other notables such as Terrence Stamp, Trevor Howard, Sussanah York and Harry Andrews sets you in nicely for what is to come.
We then get a segment that I think does not get praised enough and that is Clark Kent's early years on Earth. Brilliantly played by Jeff East, his chemistry with Glenn Ford and Phyllis Thaxter as Ma and Pa Kent really developed well into when Clark grew up and Christopher Reeve took over for the rest of the film.
Then we get to see the Superman performance that a lot see say will not be toppled, and this is the late great Christopher Reeve. I much prefer Reeve's Kent then his Superman. His bumbling and clumsy nature to life is great to see.

Whilst Reeve is leading the way, the supportive cast manages to distinguish themselves really well. Gene Hackman is terrific as Lex Luthor. Despite his characters intentions being truly horrible, his character has a strange charm and warmth to it that makes him entertaining to watch.
Margot Kidder as Lois Lane overtime can get annoying. But there is enough of a charm that Kidder shows to make us still care for her. There are also great minor roles by Ned Beatty, Jackie Cooper and Valerie Perrine.

There are so many more positives to talk about. The whole sequence of seeing Superman for the first time always gives me chills. Just seeing the delight and shock on the peoples eyes and the use Williams' score is definitely one of those moments to not be forgotten in cinema history.
Sadly after that, it gets a bit dated as suddenly all these moments happen within Metropolis that need Superman's help. I know they're trying to show off his abilities and their film-making skills to show that. But I think it is too much of a coincidence.

The build-up and actual first encounter between Luthor and Superman is really well done and possibly the films biggest highlight.
The model shots used in the big final action segment is terrific to watch, and really makes you appreciate how hard it is create something like that without CGI. If you have seen this, then you will agree with me that their is one particular moment that is really emotional and you can feel the anger in Reeve's eyes as he tries to correct everything that is happening around him.

Despite a fair bit being dated, the magic is still there. I forget how good this film really is as I remember being introduced to Superman II before this one. Now after seeing this, it ties in nicely with its sequel. It is a shame that we won't see superhero films like this anymore. It relies on its writing and the development of the human element. Now, it relies on CGI to conduct the action, and does not have much depth to the rest of the story.
It goes without saying that John Williams' score is perfect. He has made one of the most iconic scores of all-time and it is the films strongest positive. Reeve's portrayal will never be forgotten and the supporting roles give that film really clever subtle amount of depth.

What this makes it so much better then the recent remakes was the lasting impact this had. It will be hard to see if any new Superman related films can surpass the early ones.

Rating: 8/10

Review: Anomalisa

On first glance, this was definitely the type of stop-motion animation we don't usually see. It's not clay like in Wallace & Gromit, it's more like puppets that are being used. The film that I feel is the closest to Anoamlisa is the 2004 adventure Strings or even Team America: The World Police where the entire film is puppets with strings.
However, this one seems to be puppets that can stand on their own.

Nominated at the Oscars for Best Animated film and getting high praise from various film festivals, this was one definitely intriguing to see how it all works.

I do like director and writer Charlie Kaufman's work, especially for his work on one of the best films of all-time, Eternal Sunshine Of The Spotless Mind. His vast imagination really got me and that made me really intrigued in where this would go.

However I must say straight away, that I was disappointed. Thankfully, there is stuff to like. But boy do I have problems with this.

Yes, the animation is highly captivating. But the unusual story and the way the characters are written troubled and ended up with a bland outcome in my honest opinion.
I get what Kaufman and his team was trying to do. The feeling of isolation and that everyone is the same person in your eyes, and then you finally find someone different. But I just did not get it, be invested in it or even care enough to appreciate it.
Too many things were bugging me and I am gutted that I did not join the majority. I did try, I really did. But sadly, not for me.

The film was giving hints of something else happening. I honestly thought that there was going to be a huge Matrix like twist and that would make me end up loving the film for being that clever. Sadly, it remained on the path it had been on throughout the movie.

The main thing that usually does not get people interested is not caring for the main characters. We are meant to sympathize with this main character who is out of luck and being fed up with the world. For me, I felt he was doing things in the film that made me not root for him and therefore lost interest in the film. It was a real shame as I can feel the love on how stop-motion films are made.
I could even call this a sexist film as my main problem could involve sexism. All the supporting characters whether they be male or female or voiced by one man. It really bugged me throughout. Again, I can see what Kaufman was trying to do. But that just did make me react in the way the director wanted.

There is also one awkward scene that instantly made me want to watch Team America: World Police again. You can probably tell what the scene entails.

Despite a lot of negatives vibes coming from fingers as I type this. I will give it its due. The animation is great and the story is a brave one. But in the end, I would call this an honorable failure. It has really good moments. But the amount of problems I got from it was too much too ignore.
Kaufman's work is an acquired taste. It seems to polarize me. One of his works I will love till the end of time, the rest I admire but have no desire to watch them again.

Rating: 7/10

Review: The Witch

Who'd have thought that this year I would have already seen two horror films. A genre that does not usually appeal to me has suddenly got me interested, well in two at least.

Goodnight Mommy was the first one, which was a very interesting story with a twist that made me think about the film in a totally different way. Now, we have The Witch. Both had trailers that had my attention as they looked as if they would be something more than just a generic horror movie that would not interest me to pay money and see it on the big screen.

2016 has been billed as the year to discover the hidden gems if you want to find a good horror film, and I'm certainly doing that with some pleasing results.

Well, I can definitely add this to the list. While it does not feel like most horror films, this slow-burning, tense, thought-provoking and disturbing made me unnerved. What I think will win a lot of people over is the realism of it and how it relates well to the era that it is set in. The period felt so appropriate as it was a time where people were very particular about religion and the occult, especially in the location of New England. The paranoia of what portrays evil is so well done, and really makes you question and what is really going on. It is so accurate that even the characters talk in 'ye olde English'. Even though you might need to tune your hear to understand what is being said, you will get the general gist of it, and it is wonderfully delivered.

One great positive about this entertaining piece of work is the stellar acting. Anya Taylor-Joy was phenomenal as the lead. Her character was incredibly strong, really well developed and I was rooting for her throughout. I would definitely consider to be an early contender for an Oscar nomination. The rest of the main roles were terrific. Harvey Scrimshaw was as amazing as Taylor-Joy, and could quite possibly be part of the most intense scene in the film. Ralph Ineson's character was really well developed. His was probably the most human out of everyone. Kate Dickie was intense throughout and was perfectly cast for this role as the mother figure.

The only part of the film that could find problems with, was the final scene. This could be seen as the wacky part of the film. I was fine with it. But it is definitely opened up for interpretation.

It has been a while since I have praised a horror film that positively. It's lingering atmosphere is done really well from the very beginning. The acting is top-notch, you have no idea where this is going, it doesn't rely on cliches, the whole subtle nature of it I feel will make it stand-out and it even has moments of a fairy tale nature to it.
I was scared, gripped and would happily watch it again if I was given the opportunity. Director Robert Eggers has done a fantastic job in making the type of horror film that I have been wanting for some time.
If your type of horror films are ones that are scary but not jump-scary, then this will be the film for you.

Rating: 8/10

Review: Disorder

I was not sure what to expect with this. But I was definitely intrigued with the two leads, Matthias Schnoenarts and Diane Kruger.

I like a lot of the films that they star in. So it will be interesting to see what their chemistry is on screen.

The premise was definitely one I do not see that often. Also, the story that director and writer Alice Winocaur had put onto screen got me invested. But despite me still finding it reasonably enjoyable, I felt that we have a missed opportunity here.

One thing is for sure, Schoenaerts was great as our main character. A bit like Tom Hardy, most of his success comes from the physical part of the performance. You can really see the killer instinct in his character and his charisma definitely carries this film well. I was feeling his characters problems and I was rooting for him to overcome them. I think without Schoenarts, this could have been something quite boring.
The rest of the cast were not that memorable, even Kruger.

For the few action scenes that were on screen, they were really well constructed. You could really feel the hits being taken. The score was fascinating and surprisingly atmospheric. The style felt different, but managed to fit in well with the film. However, there were some moments where I felt the moment to use that score felt unnecessary or badly timed.

Like I said before, there are problems with it. While it may feel slow for the most part, you can feel the tension throughout. You do feel that something does not feel right and we get some well executed action scenes.
But I think in the end, the lack of drama and thrills may make people impatient as they know this could go down more interesting routes. I don't get a lot of the slow no-dialogue moments that we seem to see with most of European cinema. It's not often that style gets me totally invested.
I was not a fan of the camerawork as well. There was a lot of shaky moments that I felt were unnecessary, and it made me struggle to see what was going on.
This negative is a bit of nit pick. But I felt there were too many times when they were reminding us of our main characters anxiety problems. That just seemed to signal to me that they have little more to show and just lingered on that particular part.

For what looked like an interesting premise, for me it did not manage to make the most of it. But don't worry, it still remains to be a solidly delivered thriller with an amazing lead by Schoenarts. The way they portrayed his characters problems on screen was quite clever. I also liked it did not have that cliche feeling at all, and that might be the reason that I remained interested. Despite its problems, I will still recommend this. Winocour should be proud of this. I will definitely check out the rest of her work.

Rating: 7/10

Review: Kung Fu Panda 3

I remember in 2008 seeing the title for the first film. It definitely sounded silly and I thought would not be entertaining viewing.

However, many positive reviews got me intrigued. When I finally saw it, I was proved so wrong.

Now, I cannot get enough of these films. Most of them might not be anything exceptional or have deep substance. But they are great fun that everyone in the family can enjoy and has the most amazing fight sequences and visuals in any animation film.

This third installment never fails. It is another welcomed addition to what is now an accomplished trilogy.
It is everything you would expect in a Kung Fu Panda feature. The story is an expected one. But the pacing is solid, the comedy made me laugh at regular intervals and the villain is a memorable one. The style of comedy has that subtle mix of silliness with maturity.

Like with every other Kung Fu Panda, the style of animation is just gorgeous. A lot of it is paying homage to the Asian art style. It is like watching those Japanese anime cartoons with that mix of clear and crisp of the modern American animation style.
The voice performances by everyone involved are good all-round that is full of surprisingly stellar cast. The names that appear during the end credits doing the voices will amaze you.

One technical aspect that managed to surpass itself from its previous installments was the score. As usual, it is done by Hans Zimmer. The style you associate with martial arts films is noticeable and it is put to great use. It is a soundtrack that I will definitely listen to during the year.

The only reason why I am not ranking it highly is that the concept and premise is pretty predictable and not exceptional. It does not challenge you with interesting themes. But thankfully, it is not a negative that I would heavily criticize as these are not the type of films to argue about. Especially when the positives are strong enough to ignore it.

Dreamworks Animation has always been considered as a poor man's Pixar. Most of the time, you would be right. But there are the odd occasions where some of their films are as good or better then some of the leading animation studios.

Kung Fu Panda 3 is not an instant classic by any means. But it is still really good fun and definitely worth watching, especially if you liked the previous two. Like I said, the action is great, there is a pleasing amount of well executed character development, the visuals are so striking and there are gags in here that can definitely appeal to kids and adults. I would rank it in the middle of three.

This will surely have a chance of getting an Oscar nomination at the end of the year, I will never get tired of seeing these films. Keep 'em coming.

Rating: 7/10

Review: Truth

When done well, newsroom dramas always make for a very interesting setting.

With this one, we go back to 2004 and the Presidential election between George W. Bush and John Kerry. Like in the current race to be President, various members of the media are always looking for any flaws in the candidates. In this film, we see a group of CBS journalists investigate Bush's military history to see if they are true or not.

Throughout the film, I felt interested in finding out where this was going as I did not know this story at all. But I was not getting fully gripped with it, and I think that is mainly due to the film not making itself entertaining. It felt quite pedestrian most of the time.

Thankfully, the performances by the leads Cate Blanchett and Robert Redford gives this film enough entertainment to make this solid viewing.

We know how good Blanchett and Redford can be. In this one, it is Blanchett's character that this film focuses on and this is definitely a performance worth mentioning. As for Redford, it was solid. But I think his character could have been branched a bit more, especially when he is portraying one of America's most celebrated anchorman.
It was nice people like Dennis Quaid and Topher Grace on screen. Especially Grace, who his character was giving some regular comedic relief that worked throughout.

Its main flaw was the biased nature towards the story. It goes for the 'journalists are heroes' and 'Bush is evil' stand-point. I think we would have had a tenser viewing had the film shown the development from both sides.

Overall, it's solidly made and engaging enough. But to me, it felt like there was more to this story then what is being told on screen. This probably relates to biased nature to it and therefore we did get the story from the Bush side of things. This definitely could have been better. But with James Vanderbilt in his directing debut in this, I will give this film some leeway.
On the whole, Vanderbilt has done a pretty good job. I can definitely see him direct a lot more, with premises that will attract mainstream audiences.

It's a shame this film won't get a lot of box office as a similar film Spotlight is getting a lot more noticed due its success at the Oscars.

Rating: 7/10

Review: Goodnight Mommy

Two types of genres that I do not usually go to the cinema to see, foreign language and horror.

The trailer for this film completely intrigued me and I just had to check this out and see what's what.

Well, I can definitely say this a very interesting film that goes down many unexpected paths.

This Austrian horror does have a slow opening 30 minutes. But it is by no means a boring start. It is a simple premise with not many characters to keep up with. There is a strong sense of mystery and is tense throughout. This is mainly due to the characters definitely not feeling themselves.

Then we have a third act that takes a really disturbing turn and can feel heart-breaking depending on who you are rooting for in this. There is also a scene towards the end that definitely made me think differently about the film entirely. I don't know if I wasn't paying attention throughout, but I definitely did not expect it to end in the way that it did. I would also recommend to keep an eye on the people on screen in final couple of scenes as it is quite a clever addition to the finale.

Despite the upsetting moments, it's film-making is very effective to make this an engaging feature. Some people might not be satisfied with the ending. But I was fine with it.

The performances by our three main characters were very good. Lukas and Elias Schwarz felt natural and definitely acted like many others in their age group would. The star of the show for me was Susanne Wuest. She really showed her variety throughout and gave us a character that I think people will really sympathize with.

The cinematography was another strong positive. It really made the most of the landscape our characters are surrounded in.

All in all, it's a well-made and solid psychological horror thriller. It might not have the scares the trailer might suggest. But it is definitely a tense watch.

The ending will definitely make or break this film. For me, it enhanced the film and made me think about it long after it finished.

The trailer and marketing definitely looks like a totally different film which was a shame to see. But for what the film actually was, I found it to be quite thought provoking.
It won't be in many cinemas. But if it is in your local cinema and you want to try out something different and are fine with subtitles, then I would definitely give this a go.

Rating: 7/10