Review: The King's Man

It doesn't feel like seven years since the first Kingsman. But I do remember enjoying them, and so far, this growing franchise seems to be doing alright in every aspect.

So I was kind of surprised that the third installment is going to be a prequel. However, I remained excited as director Matthew Vaughan was still involved as well as it containing a whole bunch of new cast to this series.

While I have only seen the Kingsman films at the cinemas, seeing this one certainly made me want to check them out again.

I was surprised at how drama filled it was. It felt more like a war drama than a spy action comedy blockbuster which we associate with this franchise. 

Don't worry, it still has those over the top moments that you expect in Kingsman. But Vaughan and his team certainly concentrated more on the drama side of the story. Thankfully, I was kind of fine with these tonal shifts as they felt they blended in well for the most part.

I'm not sure it will work for everyone as there is a lot of ideas overlapping themselves. I was certainly on board with it.

I liked how they were using real world moments in history to incorporate the story and the way it ended has me really intrigued as to where the follow-up will go.

I will say that there were some scenes that shocked me in both a good and bad way and the final act had one big let down. But thankfully, it didn't effect my overall views on the film.

In fact, I think it can work as a standalone film and so doesn't force you to watch the first two Kingsman. But there are the obviously references that fans of the franchise will get.

One aspect that I think helped with the changes in tone was the cast, who were solid all-round. Ralph Fiennes is as great as you would expect, carried the film well and was believable at kicking some ass. Another that continues to show how underrated they are as an actor was Djimon Hounsou. Not only does it look like he hasn't aged a day since his breakthrough in Stargate back in 1994. But he can still hang it with the best and he deserves to be in more major studio projects.

Harris Dickinson was an unexpected surprise. The newcomer has been going from strength to strength in the last couple of years, and this could be a career best for him. A portion of the film that ended up being the most emotional for me, was down to him. So seeing the weight that Dickinson gave to this film shows that he is ready for bigger projects.

As for the majority of the rest of the supporting cast, there were some casting choices that really pleased me. Gemma Arterton is as solid as ever. Plus, I was pleased to see the talented faces of Matthew Goode, Charles Dance, Rhys Ifans, Daniel Bruhl, Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Tom Hollander, the under appreciated August Diehl, Valerie Pachner and Stanley Tucci.

One aspect that is important to work in a Kingsman film, is the action and the way it is shot seems to be unique to this film series. While I felt it was a bit much in The Golden Circle, this felt a bit more held back whilst still feeling like a Kingsman. That felt like the right move as it gave more coverage to the characters and paid off from my point of view.

The visual effects are still great and apart from one moment, never took me out of the film and felt seamless with the practical parts.

I think the only I felt was a let down, was the attempted comedy. While it did concentrate more on being a drama, there was some comedic moments in there. But I just felt none of them hit, and yet didn't downgrade my enjoyment. They were just obvious and there.

In the end, I was really pleased at how much I enjoyed watching it. It was a lot of fun, the story blended well with the action and flowed nicely, the story was well developed, there were strong surprises that were bold yet rewarding and it felt instantly rewatchable. It is definitely one of those films that while it won't break any new ground with its genre, you can have a fun time with this one.

Finally, I must mention that there is a mid-credits scene and it is worth staying for. It certainly has me intrigued into where this series will be heading.

Rating: 7/10

Review: The Matrix: Resurrections

With it being almost 20 years since the last Matrix film, my anticipation for this has been a strange one. While I am obviously excited to go back to this ground-breaking franchise, there is a part of me that is expecting something that feels out of touch.

The Wachowski's that created this world always get my appreciation. The way they subvert their audiences is great to watch. It may not work all the time like in Jupiter Ascending. However, they have been part of some of my all-time favourites like Speed Racer, Cloud Atlas, V For Vendetta and of the course The Matrix franchise.

With only Lana Wachowski involved in this one, I was intrigued to see how this would follow on from the event of Revolutions.

The first 20 minutes or so was strange, intriguing and quite meta all at the same time and I was surprisingly enjoying this opening act. It was quirky, it caught me off guard and had me thinking what was the reason for all of this happening in that typical Matrix way. Some of the additions that was linking in with past events I was on board with. As for the rest that I was unsure of, I was hoping that it would eventually win me over.

Sadly for me, I don't think it did. The longer the film went, I more I realised that I just wasn't getting into it despite some interesting aspects that the story had to offer. Some of the choices made in its story as well as its general style just felt the wrong thing do for a Matrix film.

There were some bold yet off-putting changes and choices that didn't have much of a journey to warrant the respective destinations. It felt it confused itself with its own lore despite having moments of clever self-awareness.

Plus, some of the performances of new or reprising characters didn't help either. That being said, Keanu Reeves I felt did a decent job at carrying the film. The world loves Keanu in every way and you can see his commitment to the material and that he wanted to give this story the best chance possible.

It was nice to see Carrie-Ann Moss again. It is a shame she isn't in enough films as she has a strong and powerful presence that many films could use to their advantage.

The way Yahya Abdul-Mateen II was used didn't feel justified for me and his performance wasn't strong enough to mask that initial distraction. The same is said for Jonathan Groff, who was always beginning with an uphill task. He gave it his best shot. But he never felt threatening and the way his character was used felt like a side note or annoying pest at best.

However, I think Neil Patrick Harris was a fun addition. His character was the most interesting, he gave the most charisma and engagement to the story and was clearly the best part of the film.

I'll give credit to Jessica Henwick as well. It was a solid performance and her character was interesting enough to have me wanting more.

There were some other nice unexpected surprise appearance that I won't spoil. But overall, the acting felt below average. It wasn't helped that there were plenty of forgettable minor characters.

I was sad to come to the conclusion that even the choices made in the technical department didn't work. While the visual effects served its purpose well, the camerawork was disappointing. The previous Matrix's just stood back and let the action speak for itself and it made you appreciate the large amounts of training involved for the combat sequences. It also paid homage to the martial art genre in its choice of camera positioning.

However in this, it felt too close to the action, with many cuts and even some shaky-cam moments which should not be at all considered in this particular franchise. The cinematography for me was the biggest disappoint, as it was this aspect that for me made it fail to be a Matrix film.

That is why I cannot give this a pass which I am really sad to say. Like with all Wachowski features, there's great ideas in there. But for this one, not all of them stuck the landing for me. I think on paper, it sounded better. But the finished product just didn't seem like the right one in the end.

You can see that it's really trying to be something and I do like a fair amount of it to stop seeing this as a total loss. So I won't be surprised if it gets some love. Just not quite from me I'm afraid.

I still believe in The Wachowski's. Not everything they make works. But I always appreciate their ideas and never going down the typical blockbuster formula. Despite now making consecutives misses now, doubt is creeping in that they could be past it now. But hope does remain. Their vision still has a place for modern audiences. With the right people, we can still have another cult classic.

Rating: 6/10

Review: Spider-Man: No Way Home

For someone who has been brought up with the 90's animated series, my excitement was pretty high for where this next installment of Spider-Man could go.

So far, I've enjoyed this current incarnation of the masked web-slinger. It's been fun, exciting and has given us some solid villains. I was particularly pleased with how they did Mysterio in 'Far From Home' as he was always my favourite villain.

As always, I hadn't seen the trailers. But I was aware of what it involves, and the concept they are going for had me as excited as the rest of the target audience.

I was expecting an action-packed fan-service filled extravaganza, and I certainly got that. But it wasn't without some added emotional depth and a story that was character driven to my amazement.

It comes hard out of the blocks and you are in the thick of it straight away. But even with the amount of characters involved, time was given for familiar characters to be developed and make us feel the emotions and stakes involved.

I was certainly caring a lot more then I was expecting for what was happening on screen. That I feel could the be the films biggest strength. For a story that is filled with fan service, it is not of the usual kind. It is all given a purpose and helps the story and its themes give us that pay off worthy of the journey that got us there.

With this surprisingly character driven story in place, the cast was obviously great in this. Tom Holland gives a much wanted amount of maturity to the character and it gave us probably the best Spider-Man we have seen in the MCU. The emotional drive he gave has made me excited to where the current Peter Parker will go next.

His chemistry with Zendaya is probably given the most development it ever has. I'm still not getting Zendaya as this beloved actor by the young generation. But she is still doing solid work in this franchise.

For the rest of the cast I'm going to mention, it will only be the ones that have been seen in the trailers. So if you literally know nothing about it before seeing it, avoid the next paragraph or two.

Willem Dafoe was a huge standout. Despite giving us a great Norman Osborn from the early Spider-Man films, he managed to give us a new personal best. Dafoe is still at the top of his game and elevated the disturbing and fearful aspects of his character and he gave us a terrifying and rewarding Green Goblin that I did not think was possible. You'll fall in love with Dafoe all over again.

Alfred Molina continued his brilliant Otto Octavius in this one and contributes well to the story and bounces off Holland really well.

It was nice to see Jamie Foxx's character of Max Dillon give some much needed depth from his previous appearance. Like the majority of his colleagues, his contribution felt important and was given a purpose rather than being just fan-service.

Last mention goes to J.K. Simmons. This is purely just go to still mention that he is and forever will be J. Jonah Jameson.

The technical side also elevated their game. Director Jon Watts and his team gave us a great mix of strong story-telling and paid great homage to several eras of Spider-Man that will please fans of the source material as well as general fans who won't be fully aware of Easter eggs to nods to various references.

Michael Giacchino did a great job with the score, added to the emotions well and mixed in familiar themes from previous films to great effect.

With their being certain characters involved, the visual effects have to be spectacular and they certainly pleasing to the eye, no matter how mind-bending they get.

I also have to give credit to the editing team, who paced a lot of it really well. With a lot going on, this could have been chaotic and confusing. But it never felt too much to process or incoherent.

The only gripes I had with it, was that there were some moments that lingered a bit too much for me and therefore dragged. Also, some of that vintage Marvel comedy didn't quite work for me and also felt forced to balance some of the downbeat moments.

With those thankfully being minor drawbacks, I was pretty satisfied with what we got in the end. The marketing definitely does not prepare you for the emotional side of this story and that's a really good thing. I love how they give the story some weight and this it is about the characters rather than depending on the action.

As mentioned, the fan-service I felt was given a purpose and never felt it was added for cheap thrills. All of that gave us a well developed story with many well rounded characters. This is a wonderful tribute to many eras of Spider-Man we have had in comic, film and TV mediums and all types of Spider-Mans fans I feel with will the same amount of enjoyment.

If I had to rank it with the rest of the Spider-Man films, it makes the podium. I still feel Into The Spider-Verse remains at the top, but No Way Home is right there with Spider-Man 2 for me. But while I don't have it at the top of my ranking with the other Spider-Man films, this particular one could well be the most important.

There is the usual mid and post credits scenes to stay for. Both are worth seeing and they give you enough ideas of where the Spider-Man series is going as well as the Marvel Cinematic Universe.

Rating: 8/10

Review: West Side Story (2021)

When you see something so beloved and cherished by millions of people be remade, the pressure is certainly on in many ways for the remake of West Side Story to be a success.

Does it need to be remade? What else can a near perfect film do to improve? Will this story still appeal to the next generation?

For me, I think it's a brave choice to remake a film that is important to multiple industries, treasured by so many and seen as a landmark and incredibly influential.

But when I saw it was Steven Spielberg directing this, I knew it was in safe hands. Spielberg needs no introduction and has a back catalogue that has seen him triumph in almost every genre possible from the late 1970's onwards.

However I did remain sceptical, as while he has made some well crafted pieces in the last 10 years or so. None have had that instant magic like a lot of his work from the 80's and 90's.

Those worries were quashed fairly quickly as Spielberg has showed everyone he can still make movie magic.

It was like I was watching the original all over again. They knew what to not change and the changes made never detracted from what this story is about. Some changes gave the familiar bits new life and the few necessary touches improved certain aspects that now feel dated.

I was also watching stars being made in the form of multiple cast members making their on-screen debuts. It was like watching those musicals of yesteryear where the cast have more a theatre background that can also have that natural transition into the medium of film.

By the end of it, I was thoroughly satisfied and felt as moved as I did when seeing the original. This remains an effective tragedy.

The cast is incredible in every way. It has a very strong ensemble full of newcomers with the right background that reminded of those classic musicals with more of a musical and theatre background than film. But there is also the odd familiar face that was nice to see.

From a physical perspective, the dance sequences are insanely good. The drama they bring to each set-piece was spot on and helped the music come alive like it did back in 1961. But also like the original, the acting side also shines.

Ansel Elgort was good in the lead, showed off his natural charisma well, looked the part and gave his character a harder edge to the original. Mike Faist had a strong presence about it and was constantly engaging. David Alvarez gave solid support and bounced off his colleagues well.

While the boys were definitely good, it was the ladies that gave us the wow factor. Rachel Zegler was great in the lead, an amazing talent and felt so in control of the screen whenever she was the centre of it. That natural innocence came through well on screen and was a great casting choice. 

Ariana DeBose for me was the star of the show and deserves to be an awards contender. The power and confidence she had in every scene was incredibly engaging and vital for such an important character. DeBose as well as Zegler have potential to be huge stars. Both gave wonderful breakthrough performances.

It's no surprise that the technical side is absolutely fantastic. The way it is shot and the tint it is given makes it looks like it was filmed back in that time period whilst also feeling new at the same time. There are even some techniques of that time that are used in this. With all of that and still feeling completely new is quite an impressive skill to have and that just made the viewing so much more memorable and impactful.

The explosive colours used in the palette as well as the costumes gave this film such life and soul, especially in the songs. Speaking of songs, the soundtrack is as rich and powerful as the original was. The cast gave the Leonard Bernstein score and Stephen Sondheim lyrics a new dimension and felt refreshing with the added Spielberg filmmaking style.

The sweeping cinematography by Janusz Kaminski is wonderful. You can get feel the scale and grandeur in the camerawork and he lets the cast do their thing so we can appreciate the talent and artistry.

The duration is pretty much the same as the original and it flowed really well. It never dragged for me, had a nice flow to it and had a nice variety in its cuts. It's gracefully flows when needed and it is also never afraid to be frenetic and sharp.

If I did mention any flaws, it would only be when comparing it to the original.

While I cannot quite match it to the original, it most certainly can stand alongside it. That I feel makes it fine for someone to see it without having seen the original. This is a strong portrayal of this story and Spielberg continues to show he can dab his hand at any genre and make a success.

It's constantly engaging, full of energy and drama and produced in an that classic cinematic way that you just don't get that often these days.

I did have my fears that this could have gone through the motions and just be a shot-for-shot remake that would feel hollow and lifeless. But this felt like the story was given a brand new motor for a new generation to enjoy and still be relevant.

I also liked some of the changes and additions Spielberg and his team made. They're all fairly subtle that never ruin the main themes of the film. But I felt the changes made sense in terms of the content from the original that now feel dated. Those little updates giving it a slight modern sheen to it shows why this deserved a remake.

Rating: 8/10

Review: House Of Gucci

From four years without a Ridley Scott directed feature, we suddenly get two in the same year. The first being an impactful medieval drama, the next  focusing on one of the famous fashion family brands in history.

To be brutally honest, apart from the name and some of its signature products, I know nothing about Gucci. So based on the strength of the people involved in front and behind the camera, this had the makings of a film shooting for the major awards.

It does start off well. The foundations are built with plenty of intrigue and enough characters with solid instructions to give us an idea where we could be heading. In terms of structure of character arch's, there was a hint of 'The Godfather' in many areas. It also hinted a few satirical moments which got the odd laugh out of me.

As the film takes a darker turn, the less interested I was in the film. In fact, I was close to nodding off and I rarely do that. While there was still some interesting developments occurring, the films duration started to drag and certain choices and directions it took slowed the momentum down.

One part that kept me going to the end was the cast. Lady Gaga did a good job I felt. She continues to show us all that she can make an established acting career in major films.

Adam Driver was a standout for me. It takes quite a talent to have many face expressions where some may feel he's not giving emotion, where in fact he is giving it everything. His talent knows no bounds and I continue to be impressed by outings in feature films.

Both Gaga and Driver together really worked elsewhere. Two contrastic personalities, who together gives us some of the films most memorable scenes.

Jeremy Irons utilised his experience with solid support and a performance that elevated what his character was given and Al Pacino was being Al Pacino, but in Italian.

As for Jared Leto, he gives a performance that will most certainly divide people. For me, it felt out of place with the rest of the film. But I can see others love this in a guilty pleasure way. While the prosthetics are impressive to make him unrecognisable. The character that he gives us felt as if it would be better suited to a sketch show. I was certainly entertained by it. But not always in the right way.

The technical side was pretty strong. It looked great, there it was shot was pretty satisfying and the costume design and make up is obviously strong for a film involving one of the most famous fashion lines in the world.

It was a bit more withdrawn than I expected. I think for a story involving these particular people, I think it should have been a more impactable then it ended up thing. While it is a solid piece of work, the source material used and the people involved, you naturally something special. The duration was also noticeable. At over 2hrs 30mins, it does take a while to tell its story and could have easily been cut by half an hour.

I'm a bit lukewarm with this one. There's a solid stuff in here. But as it's the type of film that I rarely go nuts for, I sadly cannot see myself watching this again and throughout most of the film, it just made me want to see far superior films of a similar genre.

I can see personally see general audiences getting bored by it. But I will be interested to see how this fairs in terms of the box office. If it does better than The Last Duel, I will be disappointed as The Last Duel deserved better financial success.

Rating: 7/10