Review: Call Me By Your Name

One of the big favourites from the Sundance Film Festival at the start of the year is finally here.

I knew very little about this. But what I saw briefly in the trailers looked highly promising.
Going into this, I was fearing it would fall into the category of 'appreciating the craft' and nothing more. But in the end, I was really impressed by this.

It is a slow-burner, and at almost 2hrs 15mins in duration, you really need to give this time. But trust me, it is worth it for a such romance.

Timothee Chalamet is an absolute star in this. You might remember him from having a minor role in Interstellar. But this leading role is his true breakthrough. His strong and influential performance can almost make you see this film as a coming-of-age drama.
Chalamet's romantic chemistry with Armie Hammer is some of strongest I have seen in some time. I have always thought Hammer as a super talented actor. I just don't think he gets the credit he deserves. He's brilliant in The Social Network and showed his blockbuster chops well in The Lone Ranger I felt.
I wasn't too sure about Mark Stuhlbarg's performance for almost all of the film. That is until he gives an almighty speech towards the end that could be one of the most powerful scenes of the year.
The only other performance that was worth mentioning was Esther Carrel's. She showed great potential and I hope this her breakthrough outside of European cinema and into some films with wider range.

The cinematography in general was right on the money. It had lots of close-up shots and the feel of intimacy really elevated the situations for the better.
Also, the way the Italian architecture and landscape was shot instantly made me what to discover that part of the world. It looked fabulous.

However, there were times were I was thinking "how do these characters live the life they lead when they don't seem to be earning anything to get all this nice stuff?". It will make sense when you watch it. Thankfully, the strength of the romance in this story kept distracting me from that problem that I found for the most part.

This is such a sensual romance drama and easily one of the most powerful of its genre I have seen for some time. As I mentioned before, it can also be seen as a coming-of-age drama and coming from either of those viewpoints, it still makes a really moving viewing experience.
I really hope this gets recognised in the major awards, especially for Chalamet's performance.

Rating: 8/10

Review: Breathe

I think its natural to first think 'Oscar-bait' when either looking at the synopsis of this story or the trailer. It is clear there is a certain formula that the Academy seem to like and you more or less can see certain films be considered as an Oscar contender. This film certainly fits the bill.

Whilst expecting that, I was also excited as this was the directorial debut of 'Mr. Motion Capture' himself, Andy Serkis.

The first act certainly had me thinking this was going to be over melodramatic, soapy and sentimental. It also felt rushed and far too old-fashioned in its tone.
But by the time the second half comes around, its charm and drama was winning me over. The comedy was working for me and the performances were being elevated especially by Andrew Garfield. Then a heart-breaking tearful finale just made it a worthwhile viewing experience.

As briefly mentioned before, Garfield is the biggest cog in this machine and it was a very enjoyable experience thanks to him. I believed in his character and felt every bit of pain that he was feeling. Claire Foy was a great support for Garfield. Their on-screen relationship together blossom really well and felt as strong as the main story.
There was also lots of top British casting choices in the supporting roles. Tom Hollander does an impressive roles playing himself twice as twin characters in an Armie Hammer way like in The Social Network. The comedic relief intention is there despite not working all of the time.
Hugh Bonneville gave it a nice bit of class in his minor role as this quirky inventor. Other faces that were nicing see be involed in this project were Stephen Mangan and young Dean-Charles Chapman from Game Of Thrones fame.
It was a wonderful surprise seeing Jonathan Hyde. I remember him always playing a cool minor role in some big films in the late 1990's such as The Mummy, Titanic and Jumanji. It looked as if he had not aged a single bit and I hope to see in more film projects in the type of role you would associate him with.

There is not much to mention from the technical side. Despite not being exceptional, it's all shot perfectly fine. Its stronger area in this department most certainly was the costumes. It fitted the time period nicely, they looked impressive creations and there was a lot of variety as the story spans from the late 50's to the early 90's.

I really liked this by the end of it. Yes it doesn't get off to the best of starts. But I felt it took a turn that just had me smiling and also saddened in what was a strong and emotional second and final acts.
This is the best of Andrew Garfield I have seen since The Social Network and he made me believe in the characters ambitions. His chemistry and Claire Foy was great to see develop throughout and was a powerful aspect to this story.
I think if you can get past the first 30 mins, then you eventually warm to this moving drama.

A fair amount of people will get sniffy about this and say it seems almost too cheerful, light-hearted and feeling like an Oscar-bait film. I'm fine with that as I can totally see where there coming from.
I somewhat agree that I would have liked to have seen a bit more of the darker side of this story. But the charming and light content was hard to resist and I just couldn't stop chuckling at the sweet comedy, or be emotional at the sad moments.
I can see great potential for Serkis in his directing career. Maybe this is the way we will see finally get an Oscar?

Rating: 8/10

Review: Thor: Ragnarok

It has been quite a busy and successful 2017 for superhero films. So far, they've all been pretty good and most importantly, a lot of fun. While there is still one more superhero film to be released this year, this is the last installment we'll see from Marvel until February.

The Thor franchise has been fine on the whole. The first one introduced us well to the God Of Thunder and the world he lives in. It also gave us what will probably end up being the best villain within Marvel, Thor's adopted brother Loki.
Then while it's sequel 'The Dark World' has universally been labelled as one of the most forgettable features within the Marvel Cinematic Universe, it is still a perfectly fine film that expands this magical world even more.

Now we have highly talented New Zealand director Taika Waititi at the helm of part three. I have heard many great things about Waititi for a few years now. However the only one of his previous films I have seen was the 2016 comedy Hunt For The Wilderpeople which was one of the years best. I will certainly be discovering his others works when I have time, and I think everyone else should do to.

As for Ragnarok, from the opening action set-piece, you can tell we are in something much different to other Thor films. Then the film just gradually more and more strange, and yet it all works and you go with the tone.
You could just say it's bonkers, but in the most fun way. There's a hint of Guardians Of The Galaxy in certain aspects. But I will say that Flash Gordon is a much stronger comparison. That is mainly due to the outlandish costumes, the style of acting at times and the world building involved.

The performances are strong and that is mainly how they all executed the style of humor this film possesses. Chris Hemsworth is still great as Thor and just don't get tired of him swining that damn hammer around. I could say exactly the same for Tom Hiddleston who returns as Loki. The dyanmic chemistry between the two is the core strength of all of these Thor films. For me, that is the secret as to why the character Loki will always be the best villain Marvel films have to offer.
Speaking of villains, Cate Blanchett was ok as the main villain. I was fine with her being over-the-top and being aware of the weird source material. But sadly, I would still put her in the bargain bin of disposable Marvel villains.
As you may know from the trailers, Mark Ruffalo as Hulk features in this fairly heavily and I think it is the best portrayal of that character that I have ever seen. It was a perfect mix of the usual smash action, as well some welcomed comedic chops.
Jeff Goldblum was a top choice in casting. His natural sweet quirky nature just added to the film at the right time.
I could be cruel and say that Tessa Thompson was forgettable. However, her physical performance was pretty solid.
There are plenty of surprises. I was happy to see Karl Urban back doing another project. We certainly don't see him that often and I hope this is another surge of Urban action in major new releases.
Waititi is known for his cameos in his films, and this one is quite different to what he usually does. But it works rather well. There were also some of his regular cast members involved which was great to see. A big mention to Rachel House who seemed to have the most involvement out of all of them.
Speaking of cameos there were plenty of ones no one knew about. That included two towards the start that really shocked me and made me smile.

Everything from the technical side was as you expect. The visual effects are really nice and bright for the most part, including some imagery that looked more like a tapestry. Also, the almost 80's-esque techno and synthesizer score by Mark Mothersbaugh enhanced the the overall feel of the film even more.

There are no major negatives, it is just the ones that I usually get from superhero films. I very rarely rank these types of films exceptionally high despite usually enjoying them. I think it is just the franchise formula that it has just lacks a certain depth and stakes that can't compete with other films that I feel are superior. I know it can't be helped, so those negatives are just a personal thing.

Despite all of that, I was impressed at how Waititi and his team brought all of this together and make it work.
This is by far the best Thor film, and one of the funniest Marvel films we've had. It has a lot of bold moves, some bigger than others and none of them felt out of place. It is a wonderful mix of fantasy and humor, the comedy is smart and flows beautifully with the tone and it really makes of the most of our familiarity with the characters and just makes it as silly as possible, but in the best possible way.

There are two scenes during the credits to look out for. The one in the middle gives us a little hint as to what the next big Marvel installment is leading up to. Whereas the scene at the end of the credits is just a bit humor that did not quite work for me. But it is still mildly amusing.

Rating: 7/10

Nostalgia Review: 12 Angry Men

For years, I have always seen this 1957 classic always be high up in people's all-time favourites list. It was not until the latter part of 2014 when I finally got round to seeing this.

All I knew going into it was that it was directed by Sidney Lumet, it starred Henry Fonda and that it was basically in one set with twelve guys talking. I knew Lumet had made a lot of films that have been widely celebrated despite himself as an individual never winning any Oscars. But his films have won multiple Academy Awards in other categories. The only Lumet films I had before seeing this were the brilliant Network and his last film Before The Devil Knows You're Dead.

You could have seen his entire back catalogue and still not be prepared for this film that I cannot believe was his directorial debut. Any film-maker would kill to open their account with something so powerful and dramatic and with one of the strongest casts you could possibly imagine.

The opening scene settles you in to what looks like a functional courtroom drama. But then as soon we get introduced to our 12 characters and get to know them, you can already feel something powerful is going to happen. The plot development is brooding every so slowly and then as soon as that first of many twists takes place, that level of shock just keeps you heavily engaged for the rest of the film and everything else just falls into place so beautifully and you are left leaving extremely satisfied.

The performances have so much heft and coming from so many makes it one of the best stellar casts the film industry has ever produced.
Henry Fonda carries this film so well like he always does as the central character and the chemistry he has with everyone else just brought all of their games up by several notches. Lee J. Cobb in particular I felt benefited from this the most with several scene-stealing moments especially towards the end. Jack Warden's comedic relief that gives the film its lighter moments, the sweetness of Joseph Sweeney's performance was great to see and the stubbornness of E.G. Marshall was a great addition were particular highlights. It is so strange to think that the 12 main characters are all now no longer with us, and I think this film shows all of them in their prime.

The camerawork is most definitely the under-rated part of this achievement. The way it is up close with our characters is quite striking that it is almost too close and you can really see the pressure in their eyes, their face and just intensifies everything.

I will say however, that there are some minor details that have not aged well. There are parts of the twists that feel too convenient and that could turn off those first time viewers who have probably seen similar tropes in films that were made long after this. Also, I think the level of enjoyment would go down in multiple viewing due to those moments.

That being said, this is still a highly impressive piece not just for its time, but still today. The story is a timeless one that can work in any time period and still be powerful viewing, every performance is strong or it at least plays its part and almost all the technical aspects are absolutely spot on.
While it might be just outside of my top 100 films of all-time list, it is certainly one of those films you must see before you die.

Rating: 9/10

Review: The Death Of Stalin

The only reason I wanted to see this was because of who was part of the writing team, as it is the same lot that wrote the TV series 'The Thick Of It' and the brilliant satirical comedy 'In The Loop'. All of their work seems to be farcical comedy and making fun of politics, dark subject matters or both. When it works it is comedy gold.

I get mixed feeling with comedies like this. I remember watching Dr. Strangelove which is universally seen to be the best of this sub-genre. While I appreciated the craft and laughed at some of the gags, I never thought of it as a masterpiece. So despite my excitement for this new feature, I should prepare for a possible disappointment.

Well I certainly laughed a lot. However, it was the story that will prevent this from giving this an exceptional rating. It starts off with a pretty funny sketch that sets us up nicely for what we are about to get ourselves into. Then the laughs just keep on coming in a way that you would always expect from director Armando Iannucci and his talented writing team. The 1hr 46mins duration absolutely flew by. I couldn't believe it was over so quickly and I think it was helped by the flow of the gags.
Despite laughing all the way through, there was something that just wasn't making think that this was brilliant. I'm not sure if it was because the story itself wasn't gripping me enough, the slight feeling of alienation with British actors speaking in broad accents despite playing Russian characters or something else.
If the story is the problem, then I guess the film worked well for me as a gag-reel more than anything else.

What I also really liked was the performances. If I hard to give one stand-out mention, it would have to be Simon Russell Beale. Despite being known for his work on British TV dramas, Beale looked at home in his role and executed everything he did really well whether it was intended to be serious or comedic.
Jeffrey Tambor did a great job and reminded us how good he is in films as well as TV. It was nice to Steve Buscemi back an in integral role and he got a good amount of laughs out of me. Seeing people like Paul Whitehouse and Michael Palin was a nice surprise. Whitehouse was certainly channeling his style from The Fast Show and while Palin was hardly given any gags to work with, it was still great to see the legend back on the big screen.
Jason Isaacs was a wonderful change of pacing and pretty much stole the second of the film, Rupert Friend and Paddy Considine were real treats despite not being in for many scenes. I've always liked Considine. He gives a great performance in his minor role. He has such a warming presence that it was quite sweet to watch.
While I liked the inclusion of Andrea Riseborough, I don't think she seemed fit in with the tone in my opinion. I have to mention one final surprise was the appearance of the always gorgeous Olga Kurylenko. A very minor role, but it was she did well with.

I hope I have explained myself as to why I am a mixed bag when to comes to films like this. I think I will always like the gags, but whether the story works well with it is the deciding factor for me calling it a brilliant film.
There is a lot to like about this, the gags are great and consistent in its quality and the performances are strong. They just did not seem to mesh well with the story. Either that, or I just was not interested in it at all.
I think the comedy aspect will work for a lot of demographics including a general mainstream audience member. If you like TV series like Veep, The Thick Of It and films like Dr. Strangelove and The Thick Of It, then you will get a real kick out of this.

Rating: 7/10

Review: The Party

About once a year, there is a film that I have no idea was coming out until a week before its release, that I decide to go and see. This looks to be this years.

I first knew about this when I saw the trailer just before seeing another new release not so long ago. It made me laugh, the cast list looked impressive and it seemed to be getting a wide release in a lot of the independent cinemas.

It has a simple set-up to it and has a feeling that it be ideal for a play. If this has not been a theatre production, then it should definitely be one. It is just one set, many characters and nothing but sharp and spiky dialogue being delivered by highly talented actors.

The execution of its structure is entertaining to watch with plenty of laughs. The more outrageous it gets, the bigger the laughs are. The ending is pretty satisfying. However, the risky 71 minutes duration had me wanting more from this.
I cannot remember the last time I saw a film at the cinema that was less than 90 minutes. But I always respect a film that has a snappy run-time and gets out when it feels it needs to rather prolong it to an unnecessary time limit. But I would have liked about 10-20 minutes more character development that would have given us more depth to the story and hopefully more investment in the characters involved.

The performances by everyone was great to watch. They certainly all played their part and became integral to the story. Patricia Clarkson and Cillian Murphy were the stand-outs. Clarkson got the biggest laughs, and that was thanks to her execution of the high-quality dialogue she was given. As for Murphy, it was a character that I have never seen him to do, and it was interesting to see him do something that we don't associate him with. I would've liked some more development from his character though.
Kristin Scott Thomas carried the film well as the central character like she always does and still reminds us all that she can still deliver. Another actor making it look effortless was Timothy Spall. This man can just pull off an awarding winning performance in his sleep.

There was not much on the technical side to speak of. It's filmed in black and white and while I'm not sure of the reasoning of it, I think out of the two options, this was the right one.
The camerawork enhanced the tension rather well. The way it moved around the characters in an almost intimate way really gave a sense of the situation you were witnessing.

While I did want some added run-time to enhance the characters, I still had a good time with this. The story is interesting, the performances are strong and the humor is consistent. Even when everything tears itself apart, it still manages to hold itself together and is very enjoyable to see how everything unfolds whilst hitting some great gags and poking fun at society.

Rating: 7/10

Review: Loving Vincent

Films that get a buzz from a showing at a major film festival, is always worth noting down for a possible appointment of checking out a screening of it in the future.

This particular one had my interest when I heard what the story was, and how it was being presented.

The story of Vincent Van Gogh during and after his life has been discussed for quite some time and by many different demographics of all ages.
Also, with it being shown in the style of his paintings I felt that this was a pretty cool way of paying homage to one of the most misunderstood humans of all-time.

But it wasn't until I saw the very start of the film, this was more than just paying homage. When you see at the start of the film how the film was made, your jaw has already dropped before the first images have even emerged on screen.
It turns out to be the first fully painted film. It was first filmed as live-action and the painters used that original footage as a guide to paint every single frame of the film that eventually took six years to make. That is some achievement.

The amount of time effort that went into making this film is astonishing and its end result is a phenomenal achievement. Seeing it reminded me of the Richard Linklater film A Scanner Darkly. While that comparison was not hand-crafted, it was certainly a similar experience.

As for the story, it's perfectly functional detective story that has a similar structure to that of Citizen Kane, which is a pretty safe formula to have whilst showing off these visuals.

The cast is impressive when reading it, and there performances kept this entertaining instead of just being all about the visuals. Douglas Booth continues to go from strength to strength and has becomed a really well developed British talent. There were also solid contributions by Chris O'Dowd, John Sessions, the always great Helen McCrory, Aidan Turnr, Saoirse Ronan and Jerome Flynn.
While he didn't have much dialogue, Robert Gulaczyk did a great job as Vincent Van Gogh. He looked the part, his facial expressions most certainly enhanced any scene he was in, and gave a great mystery to the man himself.

Another aspect that worked really well was the score by Clint Mansell. The style seemed to match the dream-like quality of the imagery and made it a pleasure for the ears as well as the eyes.

While the story doesn't match to the quality of the images, it is still a solid tale that has a winning formula. The imagery is the reason that this ends up being an impressive piece of work. It is all about the visual experience.
Every minute of watching this just kept me in amazement of what I watching was actually happening for real. Seeing his works come to life is quite an experience that needs to be seen on the big screen. I can certainly see this film being used in art classes for many years to come.

Rating: 8/10

Review: The Snowman

Tomas Alfredsson is certainly a director that I keep an eye on for any future projects. While I haven't seen his earlier work, I have certainly seen his most popular and well received features in the form of Let The Right One In and Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy.

The trailers definitely suggest a mixture of the two. The wintry setting and tension of Let The Right One In, and the mystery murder aspect from Tinker Tailor.
Also, it had a pretty impressive cast.

So I went into this with pretty good expectations. I've liked Alfredsson previous works, Michael Fassbender is a safe pair of hands, I'm liking what Rebecca Ferguson is doing with her casting choices and the Jo Nesbo book series that is film is based on are doing rather well.

I have to cut the chase and say that this was pretty messy. While the story on its own was solid at best and perfectly fine to follow. The editing went off into some strange tangents. It's as if they were trying to make it as confusing as possible on purpose.
It started with some potential. The slow pacing did not help it as the content was not that exciting. It did have its moments of tension, action and gruesome imagery. But the more awkward editing moments it had, the more I was getting frustrated by it. When we got to the main showdown, the finale felt really weak. While on the face of it, the ending seems poetic. But everything that happened was just a big coincidence and then wrapped itself up too quickly.

There were not many performances that stood out. Rebecca Ferguson was probably the best of the bunch. She looked the most committed to her character and you can see some passion and therefore create some investment in her development. While Michael Fassbender was fine, it looked as if he was just strolling through this one and not getting out of first gear.
J.K. Simmons and Toby Jones were such a waste in this one. For people of that calibre to be given such small and irrelevant roles is just insulting. I have no idea why an almost unrecognisable Val Kilmer was in this. He looked like one of those CGI characters like from 'Tron: Legacy' and 'Rogue One'.

Lots of problems with it. But I think its biggest flaw was its bad editing and therefore bad story-telling. Similar murder mystery stories from Scandanavia have done well as a TV series. So this sort of source material has been made into a success in the past. So why has it been made into a bit of a mess with some great film-makers? Something must have really gone wrong in post production.

For a film that's supposed to be a murder mystery with a dark subject matter, it never managed to grip me and not get that much investment.
This could very well be my most disappointed film of the year. The whole build-up and viewing experience reminded me of seeing The Girl On The Train this time last year. High expectations, got lots going for it and yet ends up being a bit of a mess and just wasted an opportunity of what could have been.
But there are some solid performances in there, it is nice to look at and you can see the potential. What a shame.

Rating: 6/10

Review: The LEGO Ninjago Movie

It still amazes at how Lego has transformed into the digital age so beautifully. After being a clever but simple activity involving blocks has now become a platform for promoting many new films.

You can pretty much get a Lego version of any popular movie franchise, not just as a physical Lego set, but as a video game as well. It has become more popular than ever.

Now, we have an original concept from Lego themselves as we delve into the world of Ninjago. I first knew about Ninjago through my nephew who can't seem to get enough of them. It seems to be as popular, if not more then its other creations.

As for its films, I really liked The Lego Movie and The Lego Batman Movie. Both have eye-catching imagery and visual effects, as well as smart and self referential humor and has fantastic re-watchability.

This latest venture started with something potentially interesting. But in the end, it went into a formulaic story that you see in a lot of family films. That wasn't necessarily a bad thing, as thankfully the gags made me laugh pretty consistently throughout and I was enjoying the world that I was being introduced to.
I must mention at this point that I cannot compare it to the TV series as I never seen an single frame of it. So I have no idea if it's being faithful to that material.
There were parts towards the end of the second act that did feel slow that almost took out me out of the film. But by the end of it, it was a solid final act and I came feeling pretty well entertained.

So many things you now expect from Lego films deliver in this. The imagery and visual effects are just a joy to watch take place. The vibrant colours are very effective and it just makes you feel like you're actually playing the Lego.
Another strong aspect that has worked with Lego's film are the gags. While they are primarily aimed at kids, there is enough humor in there to keep the adults entertained, especially if those adults have a childish mindset.

There weren't many negatives to speak of. Like I said, it does have its slow moments. But thankfully, there don't last long.
Also, I think like The Lego Batman Movie, there was a lot of stuff happening on screen that it was almost tough to keep up with everything. So that might work on multiple viewings, like what it is doing with Lego Batman.

So while it is definitely inferior to the two previous Lego films, it is still a fun time with a solid amount of laughs. It's not as clever or smart in its gags and ideas and the story is very formulaic. But it still introduced me to this world rather well, and I was enjoying the mythology surrounding it, the characters involved and the action that took place.
In fact, it pretty much felt like a Lego version of Kung Fu Panda mixed with Power Rangers and maybe Big Hero 6 as it had a similar story structure and vibe to it.
Kids will definitely love this and there are a lot of cool vehicles that will get a lot of sales from the films merchandise. It's got some fun themes and solid messages that I remember seeing in films when I was a kid.

On a final note, be sure to stay for the first half of the credits as there's a mildly fun sequence that could work out great if there are loads of kids in your screening, and there's also a nice out-take scene.

Rating: 7/10

Nostalgia Review: Spice World

The year is 1997, many influential changes are happening at this moment of my childhood and we are right in the middle of 'Girl Power'.

People who were not brought up in the 90's in my opinion find it easy to forget how big the Spice Girls really were. Also, you do fail to remember how many fantastic pop songs they created. Let's just say, they did a lot more then can you think off the top of your head.

It was quite the three years for the British girl band and this film was released right in the middle of it. I remember the hype for its release, the heavy amount of marketing, the box office success that it was and the silly number of times I watched it on video.

Looking back at it now, it still works for me. I think the nostalgia certainly help the enjoyment of it. Even seeing the fashion from back then just takes me back to how girls were inspired to dress like them. Everything about it is just silly, many scenes make no sense, and yet it manages to be brilliant at the same time.
It is purposely being a poor man's mix of 'A Hard Days Night' and 'This Is Spinal Tap' and there is some cool 'breaking the fourth wall' moments, especially in a cracking scene towards the end.

I think it is safe to say that while the Spice Girls can't act much, it didn't really matter as it still managed to fit the tone rather well. Richard E. Grant hammed it up so beautifully and was a real treat to see him go completely nuts from start to finish.
Roger Moore did a great job as this mysterious over-the-top Blofeld-esque character. I noticed some fun minor roles for Alan Cumming, Barry Humphries, Jason Flemying, Richard O'Brien, Meat Loaf and Naoko Mori of Torchwood fame.

Now to the cameos and boy are there some cameos. The amount is beyond ridiculous. I managed to spot Elton John, Jools Holland, Hugh Laurie, Stephen Fry, Dominic West, Bob Hoskins, Jennifer Saunders, Bob Geldof, Richard Briers, Michael Barrymore, Bill Paterson and Kevin McNally. There were also a few that I noticed, but could not put a name to them unfortunately.

Yes there are clear problems with it. But I think the fun nature of it all makes you brush them aside for the most part. I could say that it becomes a guilty pleasures. But it feels more than that. It's like a time portal, especially for me to remember the crazes that happened in the late 90's.

I think if you weren't brought up by the rise of the Spice Girls, then you would probably hate this or see this as a shameless bit of money-grabbing. I am aware of the hate for this, and that is perfectly understandable. But you might accept this or at least enjoy the music if you were a 90's kid seeing this. But fans of the group and 90's nostalgia will go nuts for this.
The nostalgia has me having such fun re-watching this and I think it will keep doing that forever more. All there is left to say is "Girl power, equalisation between the sexes, hmmmm".

Rating: 7/10

Review: The Glass Castle

The 2013 indie hit 'Short Term 12' is a big reason why this new release is being made.

It pretty much ignited the careers of director Destin Daniel Cretton and actor Brie Larson who has since won an Oscar since her breakthrough role.

Now four years later, and the two are back together again with this intriguing true story.
The trailers certainly intrigued me, and ever since I saw Larson in Room, I will pretty much watch anything she is in now.

The film hooked me in from the first scene and I could already see this was going to be quite a story. I was seeing similar themes and characters to that of one of my favourite films of last year Captain Fantastic. However in this one, the family is more a dysfunctional one
While it's not feel as deep and meaningful as that, it still had lots going for it that I got invested with.
It also reminded me of Saving Mr. Banks, especially the scenes with Colin Farrell.

The longer it went on, the more surprised I was at how profound and meaningful it was all becoming and it we ended with quite the deserved tear-jerking finale.

All of the cast were pretty exceptional. There were lots of strong performances that I would personally have in contention for awards at this moment in the year. Woody Harrelson lead the way with a strong performance that just grew and grew and was deserving of being involved in a tearful ending.
As I mentioned before, I think I've fallen in love with Brie Larson and she gives us another memorable performance. Her character is so strong-willed and Larson and shows that throughout and her relationship with Harrelson's character was integral to the success of telling this story.
It was not just Larson who player her character, but also Ella Anderson and Chandler Head were just terrific as the younger versions of Larson's character. Anderson was real star. Her chemistry with Harrelson was as strong if not better then with Larson.
I do have one disappointment in the acting, and that was Max Greenfield. I felt his character did not gel well with Larson's character and was not feel believable to me. If his character in real life was actually like that, then fair enough. But his characters reasoning for being involved in this story felt illogical.
One actor that I had no idea was involved until I saw the cast list afterwards was Sarah Snook. If you have not seen Predestination, watch that as Snook is phenomenal. It's great to see her again. But I hope she gets more leading roles in the future.

Despite a lot of high praise, there were moments where the story and characters contradict themselves. But I don't think that was enough to ruin my overall enjoyment. It might think twice about my views on the film after typing this.

When I noticed that flat with the film, it made me think that some demographics might get the wrong end of the stick with this and think that the film is making light of a story that is actually rather dark in real life. I can somewhat agree to that as apparantly the real ending is not as sentimental as the films. But I felt there was enough dark moments to make me understand the horrible situation our characters are involved with.

But despite the directors vision being slightly different, the whole film moved me and gave me very inspiring and profound messages by the end of it. It is all thanks to the performances who made this such a nice surprise.

Rating: 8/10

Review: The Mountain Between Us

I'm struggling how to introduce this film. So I'm just going to go straight into it.

While there was nothing exceptional about the film, it was still an fairly entertaining piece of work.
The story opens fairly conventionally and we get the situation our main characters are in. After that, it is a survival tale with a little bit of romance a long the way. As mentioned before, almost everything in the film is nothing we've seen before. However, there is one moment towards the end that if you don't jump in shock at, then you were probably asleep at that time. While a lot of it was mildly cheesy, it was only until the ending where I was rolling my eyes in disapproval of the melodrama involved.

I think without Idris Elba and Kate Winslet, this could have been quite a mess. They are oozing with charisma and thank god for the top choices of casting. But the romance we're supposed to get from these characters, I did not feel fully invested in. There is a spark, but no fire.

You definitely have to suspend your disbelief with certain aspects of the story to enjoy it as much as possible. I have to admit, there are parts that are hard to ignore. The main thing was that I felt none of our main characters were in serious danger. They still looked as fabulous and radiant as they were at the start of this ordeal.
I noticed that there was a solid amount of humor that had a similar tone to that of The Martin. However, unlike Ridley Scott's brilliant sci-fi, the laughs don't always hit the mark and almost felt a bit awkward.

I have to mention the ending in more detail. It could have been settled much earlier. The final couple of minutes ended up being quite soppy, melodramatic and a bit of a shame as everything was I felt was perfectly functional. It will probably win the award for the corniest ending of the year.

I was happy to hear that everything was shot on location and nothing was green-screen, as there were lots of lovely locations that were well shot and made it a very pleasant viewing in terms of the imagery.

So to conclude, yes it's cheesy, cliched, the laws of logic and consistency are thrown out of the window and it's nothing exceptional. But it still managed to entertain me, the pacing was solid and I was never bored and that is thanks mainly to Elba and Winslet for keeping my interest.
It would have been interesting if this was given a Christmas release as that would have definitely added a extra slice of cheese to it.

Rating: 7/10

Review: Blade Runner 2049

When this was announced, I instantly hated the idea. Ridley Scott created something so different and ground-breaking to the sci-fi genre, that it eventually became a pioneer and trend-setter for many future sci-fi films.
I felt a bit better when I heard Denis Villeneuve was directing the sequel as he is the type of director that would respect the tone and not go for a full-on action franchise. But what sealed it for me, was when I saw Arrival. It was one of the best films I saw in 2016, and I knew that they had found the right person to make a legitimate and worthy sequel to the 1982 landmark feature.

My first view of the original Blade Runner was one that made me appreciated the craft of it. But it was not until multiple viewings where I started get everything about the story and understand why many see it as a masterpiece and of the most influential films of all-time.

I was so happy to see straight away that the tone, pacing and themes continue from the first Blade Runner. It really expands on the world and ideas that Ridley Scott set out 35 years ago. I was also impressed by the technology on show. I loved that they advanced it from Scott's Blade Runner instead of advancing technology from today's world.
After being put at ease, I started being interested in a fascinating story that was slowly being unearthed. Then surprise after surprise made it such a tense viewing going into the final act. I also realised that the story somehow managed to further enhance the original and make it even more important. I was not expecting that and I loved what they did with that.

There were some really good performances to speak of. Ryan Gosling carries the film really well and was a great addition to this world. Harrison Ford felt like he had never left, you could feel the effort he was putting into his role and I still felt like I was watching Deckard. Some great stand-outs from Ana De Armas and Sylvia Hoeks who were great supports. While Hoeks shone in her physical performance, De Armas' chemistry with Gosling was great to watch and almost one of the most integral aspects to the film.
I also have to mention Dave Bautista who continues to prove he has the acting chops despite his role being a small one.
I was disappointed with Jared Leto's character. Thankfully it was not in his mysterious performance. It was the lack of development we had from his character. I felt with a bit more screen time, I think Leto's character would have been much more interesting.
I did notice a couple of cameos from characters from the original Blade Runner. Some were purposely front-and-centre during the film. Others were tough to spot. But it was fun seeing them be involved. There were also some other small roles from actors that I was really surprised and happy to see.

The entire technical side of the film was absolutely perfect. Cinematographer Roger Deatkins needs to be given the Oscar at the 14th time of asking. This was a feast for the eyes and I wanted to stuff myself with more.
While it is not heavy on the visual effects, any bit of CGI looked amazing and blended seamlessly into the live action. There is one scene in particular that really showed off the perfect mix that was really hard to tell where live action ends and visual effects begins.
One important part that people were hoping for is a similar score to the iconic one by Vangelis in the original. Hans Zimmer along with Benjamin Wallfisch gave us another gorgeous soundtrack that while pays homage to the Vangelis score, they also made it their own.
The set designs and locations were impressive to look at and kept that cyber punk look that made the world of Blade Runner so important to making future sci-fi's for the rest of the 80's and 90's.

I think the only part stopping me for giving it a higher score, is that the story did not give me that emotional impact that would see me give it a highly exceptional. While I most certainly was gripped by the plot, there was just not enough for me to have that feeling I had with other films that I gave a near perfect rating.
I am hoping that like with its predecessor, multiple viewings might make me understand it a bit more and we could see this up there with the all-time greats.

But for now, I was really impressed by this. Denis Villeneuve is becoming one of my favourite directors of this decade. While I really liked Sicario, it was not until I saw Prisoners, Arrival and now this that is making me put him up there with others like Christopher Nolan, Alejandro G. Innaritu, Alfonso Cuaron, Damien Chazelle and many others.
This is the type of movie that can stand-out in today's film industry, it's profoundly emotional and it deserves its 2hrs 43mins duration.
While it does show hints of a possible third installment, it most certainly felt like a stand-alone film. It never felt reliant on being a set-up for other films. It had a story to tell and it was told masterfully.

Despite not seeing the trailers beforehand, I have now seen them and I am happy that Villeneuve made sure gave very little away. Every film-maker should take note as there is a reason I don't watch many trailers, and doing things like this might get me back to watching them regularly.

On a final note, I fear that general audiences will not give its time as mainstream demographics don't seem to be interested in films close to 3hrs that are not about super-heroes. Also, with it being more of an art-house picture then a blockbuster, it does require your patience. However, if you have liked the directors past work, the original Blade Runner and if you are a pure film fan, you will love this or at least be interested by it.
I hope I'm proved wrong. But nevertheless, it is worth seeing on the biggest screen with the best sound system possible.

Rating: 8/10

Review: Goodbye Christopher Robin

When you think of films about the creation of famous books, you instantly think of films like Finding Neverland and Saving Mr. Banks which are both fantastic.

Also, when you read about what this film is about and what the trailer suggests, you do expect it be a pleasant and charming viewing.

I expect that also. But like the two comparisons, there needs to be a dark or sad tale to tell during the process of the main creation for it to possibly be exceptional.

Well in terms of content, it is what I hoped it would be. There were moments that surprised me as to how certain things were created within the popular novels. I also found great moments in the second act that explore things that are very topical in today's not just society, but movie industry as well.
But the aftermath from that I felt were not as well executed as the rest of the film. You get the message and the feel for the characters up to a point. But it is by no means the tear-jerker it is trying to be in the finale

Domnhall Gleeson was on the whole fairly good. But there were moments that came across as too robotic, despite his characters mannerisms being fairly rigid anyway. But I really liked his character development and it gave his character an impressive story arch.
It was great seeing Margot Robbie in a film like this. Her face fitted perfectly to the period and I can see her to many more movies from this era. As for her character, I always unsure of her decisions on certain things. Some bits were very sweet to watch. But other bits were just confusing and never fully explained.
Will Tilston was nothing short of fantastic as the real life Christopher Robin. You can see and feel the sweet innocence in his performance throughout and you just don't want his character to grow up at all.
As well as Gleeson, there is a surprising amount of characters from the Harry Potter franchise. Kelly Macdonald was almost as much of a standout as Tilston. Her strong and sweet presence as well as her chemistry with the young actor was pleasing to watch and you could feel a strong and genuine connection between the two characters.
Also, Geraldine Somerville has a minor role as a tenacious reporter.

A lot of the technical aspects are very well crafted. The settings are gorgeous and the cinematography just enhances the films setting so beautifully.
I liked the use of visual effect. The mix of CGI that looked like book illustrations and live-action that made it look like the books coming to life.

While I did feel disappointed with some parts, I found the whole thing to be lovingly charming and quite profound on the surface. Tilston's performance was the most important cog at keeping my interest moving along. One thing's for sure, I will certainly look at the Winnie The Pooh as more profound then I initially thought.
I think if there was a better execution of the dark side of this story, it would have left a bigger impact and pull at the heart strings with genuine effect. Instead of being perfectly fine viewing, with room for improvement.

Rating: 7/10