Review: Empire Of Light

It's odd seeing a Sam Mendes film not being as heavily marketed as virtually all of his other films.

This seemed a lot more grounded and smaller in stakes with a lot of a personal touch.

The setting of a grand old cinema in a seaside town felt naturally appealing. Also with some amazing choices in casting, there was already a lot for me to draw me in.

The imagery just took me back to a previous life of working in a cinema, so the sequences shown felt very relatable and highly engaged.

But with it being set in the early 1980's, the addition of notable events at that time was coming into play. It did move the story into places I was not expecting. However, there were some aspects from the previous act that kept it moving along.

I'm not sure if the final act was satisfying. By this time, there is a lot it is trying to say and I'm not sure if everything worked.

Casting is solid on the whole. Obviously the star is Olivia Colman. Her talent is unmatched and we get a surprisingly troubled character where we witness polarising emotions from her.

Her chemistry with promising youngster Michael Ward felt natural and believable. Ward by himself felt caring in his execution and easily likable. I have never seen him in anything else. But I enjoyed what he gave to this and he deserves more projects of this calibre.

It was interesting seeing Colin Firth in a more antagonising character and of course Toby Jones always gives us some comfort in his performance.

The cinematography is by the iconic Roger Deakins. So as expected, it's really well shot and gives the whole film a mystical quality to its imagery. I think what made it effective was that it was never showy and made even the simplest of shots seem beautiful.

The same is said for composer's Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross. Their style of being unknowingly impactful worked well with this story.

I think even with the doubts I had with the second half, this was a pretty good watch on the whole. It covers topics such as the power of community and the influence music and film going experience have on us. When it comes to its intimate, more caring and simpler moments, it really works. There is a quiet magic that you can't take your eyes off.

But it also trying to cover a lot of moments that were topical around that time, and not all of them were pulled off. It's trying to be too much. It has its moments. But it doesn't quite fully focus on them to be justified on being in this film and almost becomes disjointed.

I think it's worth seeing at the cinema. But I think I can see doing better business on streaming. I know there are some people losing interest in films being made about films and them being marketed in a way that they are expecting you to like it as we are coming into awards season. But I hope this is enjoyed what it is.

Rating: 7/10

Review: I Wanna Dance With Somebody

While I would not call myself a Whitney Houston fan, it is hard to deny the power of her voice and how big of a knockout her songs were. Houston is known as 'the voice' for a reason and I am happy to agree that she was the best of her generation.

Going into this new release, I had seen a couple of pretty good documentaries within the last five years. The 2018 one in particular gives us a full and thorough look at her career.

Most of it feels like the traditional biopics of yesteryear where it is told in chronological order and moves along in a militarised procedure. But it does have nice non-linear moments to leave you going out on a high.

The standouts that make this film work are lead Naomi Ackie and the always brilliant Stanley Tucci. While it was always to be hard to replicate Houston's singing and natural beauty, Ackie did as good of a job as anyone else could have. The movements of Houston was noticeable as well as her personality.

The chemistry with Tucci's character was comforting and touching. Tucci still remains one of the all-time great actors for a supporting role. I don't know he does it. But he always manages to deliver.

There were also some nice moments from Nafessa Williams, Tamara Tunie and Clarke Peters.

I wasn't really into Ashton Sanders. I don't think he gave much to his character despite the importance of it. Plus, the dialogue he was given was pretty uninspiring.

In fact, I could say the script as a whole was a bit basic. It just did the dialogue to a serviceable level.

In terms of its production, it's perfectly fine. They recreate a lot of her iconic moments really well and the way they mix in the archive footage is seamless.

With the amount of music biopics in the last few years, this has to do really well to even compete with the likes of 'Rocketman' and 'Elvis'. So with the approach of this one being a bit too safe and traditional in tone and structure, I can see this being forgotten quicker than expected.

Most of the film is purely just recreating Houston's big hits and most her notable moments that we already know about. Whenever it gets the more controversial aspects, it's either quickly covered or doesn't hit it hard enough. 'Bohemian Rhapsody' got away with doing that in my view. But not quite with this one.

Even with those issues, it still felt a solid watch for me. It's thanks mainly to Ackie's performance. The mannerism's and attitude is on point and the energy during some of the recreated performances are done well.

I also liked the way they cut in the archive footage as it meshed in well with actual film footage.

Obviously Houston's music is hard to not be moved by in any situation. So it has enough going for it to get a pass rating. But I feel the 12A rating limited it from the truest portrayal possible. That's why I feel the 2018 documentary 'Whitney' remains the definitive version that tells this story.

Rating: 7/10

Review: Avatar: The Way Of Water

Even after 13 years, it still amazes me how the first Avatar is a film that is cool to hate. The visual spectacle from 2009 broke box office records and brought the art of 3D back into cinema fashion. On the whole, that last part was for the worst as many films were poorly retro-fitted into 3D to get a bigger profit. However, it did a launch several exceptions that made great use of the technology. Along with the universal themes within its familiar narrative and spectacular battle scenes, this was another all-time classic from the mind of director James Cameron.

What also makes Avatar special is the world-building by Cameron and his team. The moon of Pandora never gets tired of being seen on any screen. It really is a glorious creation in all aspects. Cameron always knows how to create a true large scale cinematic experience and many including myself were highly anticipating this. Especially when it sounds like it is the first of four scheduled sequels. So for all the people that criticise it with quite frankly weak arguments, it looks like we're in it for the long haul. Particularly when filming finished for the next film a couple of years ago.

So was it worth the wait? Absolutely. Just the opening frames and notes was enough to get me back into the world. Already there seems a lot to cover and be up to seed with where we're at. We are introduced to other parts of Pandora's terrain and civilisations. This then gives Cameron's new technology and oh my goodness is it glorious.

While the story is basically giving room to show off the unreal CGI. But underneath is plenty more lore to understand and it made for highly satisfying viewing.

All of this gave us a final act that has great action and tension with an almost vintage execution about it that has plenty going on with our characters in various types of peril. It takes some risks that I felt paid off well and sets-up for great potential for the future installments. There are some of the new characters that I enjoyed that are certainly hinted for a big story arch within this franchise and I am all here for it.

The creation of Pandora is a big part of the experience of seeing these films. Much like with Middle Earth, just being in this world no matter what is happening on screen with the plot is enough for some people as it is so rich with goodness its in landscape and its connection with its people is special to watch.

There are actually plenty of scenes in this film where the characters are basically playing the audience and drinking everything in with what is happening in front of them.

The visual effects are flat out fantastic. If you weren't impressed by the trailers showing its CGI magnificence that there is just no pleasing you with this art. This film shows what digital artists can really do when they're given the time needed to perfect the visuals.

Most of the effects are as impressive as you expect. But when it comes to the underwater sequences, it really is breaking new ground. Actually filming those scenes underwater really helped give it weight and true motion of the characters.

The team behind this aspect of the film deserves all the awards and I know they will win everything that is available.

The cast both returning and new do a solid job. While Sam Worthington hasn't had the career he was hoping for after Avatar, he still does a functional job back with this leading role. It's still nothing to shout about. But it remains serviceable and good enough to carry the story forward.

I felt like Zoe Saldana was partly side-lined for this one. With what she had, Saldana did a good job. But I can tell that this story did not have as an integral character on the whole, which was somewhat fine for me.

Instead we saw a lot of youngsters Jamie Flatters, Britain Dalton, Bailey Bass, Trinity Jo-Li Bliss, Jack Champion and Sigourney Weaver who is given such a strange new role. But it is one I am up for seeing more of.

I am aware that the film is filmed in different frame rates and to be honest, I didn't notice it. So maybe the technology has improved since those attempts with the first Hobbit film and now it feels seamless. Either that or I didn't know that my screening wasn't in the high frame rate option.

For the score, I think composer Simon Franglen did as good as a job as he could have done with it, as this was intended for the late great James Horner. It is obvious that some pieces from the first Avatar were re-used. But I was personally fine with it as it is the sound of this franchise and they were chosen well for those particular scenes.

So while not everything is of high quality, I did really like this. All of it seemed really well thought and you can feel the passion that has been put to screen. The action may be smaller in scale. But it is packed with more content and that reminded me of earlier Cameron with 'Aliens' and 'Terminator'.

It's almost 3hrs 15mins which is clearly lengthy and off-putting for some people. However, I felt the runtime was earned. Yes it does show off its visuals a lot and almost forgets to actually tell a story. But I think for a film that took this long to be made and perfected, I think it deserves to show off itself a bit.

It will be interesting if there is a directors cut of this and how long that will be as we know much like Ridley Scott, Cameron is known for releasing directors cut for his films.

The story while simple is not a repeat of the first one. That's just not Cameron's style. He loves this world too much to destroy it. He is expanding it and taking risks. We know Cameron can deliver and he keeps giving us these modern epics.

But what I will say is that even though I really enjoyed it, I think it lacks the punch the original had. With us now aware of this civilisation and world, it needed to be more character focused. That was still fine as I liked a lot of new characters. It just didn't result in a stronger reaction then what I got with its predecessor.

If you didn't like the first Avatar, then I cannot see this changing your mind as it is more of the same. Thankfully, there are plenty of fans out there and I know it will please them as much as it did me. It's great that James Cameron is still making films. It certainly reminded that films can be made like this with a classic storytelling vibe where it is pure escapism, has great spectacle and is an experience more than anything else.

Rating: 8/10

Review: Emancipation

We all knew this situation would have to come at some point. The first film for Will Smith since 'that incident' at this years Oscars.

So I think whatever film it was or how good it was going to be, there would be a natural backlash from certain people going into the film wanting to hate it.

Not with me, as like with any film I go into it with an open mind. Especially when it is Antoine Fuqua that Smith is collaborating with.

Fuqua may be more associated with crime or action. So seeing a bit of history being added to his back catalogue can only naturally raise my interest.

Given the subject matter, it's a tough watch from the very beginning and it doesn't let up. However the atmospheric tone and stylish camerawork avoids it from being hard to watch.

The tension keeps you invested and the brutal violence makes you want to actually not want to see any punishment inflicted. It really doesn't hold back.

There are clear similarities to 'The Revenent' that I noticed. There is a drive for revenge, the violence is raw and there is a lot of natural and sweeping landscapes. There is also a part that reminded me of '1917' with the long tracking shots and inclusion of a notable war.

Will Smith does a good job with this. The commitment is clear in both his acting and his characters story arch and I liked the physical aspect of the performance. But I wasn't into the accent that much. 

It was great seeing Ben Foster in this who was basically going back into his terrifying and unsettling role in '3:10 To Yuma'. I always feel Foster is one of the most under appreciated actors right now and this was a top bit of casting.

The style is the star of the film for me. Some of the sweeping camerawork used by drones is very well put together. The wide shots of the Louisiana swamps gave that sense of unable to escape the horrors our central character was facing and the way it travels through entire workforces was very pleasing. That for me is how you use drones to show actual film footage. Take notes Michael Bay.

Also, the colour choice is peculiar but effective. It almost looks like it is in black-and-white. But you can tell that there is some colour coming through in certain parts. It may frustrate some people as to the reason for this choice. But I personally didn't mind it as it felt different and well used in certain sequences.

The script wasn't anything to shout about for me. It served its purpose to keep the story to a satisfying standard. In the end, I did somewhat let it off as it was the visuals that really told the story.

So while I did think it was a gripping and stylish piece of work. It did look as if it was trying too hard to be liked and appreciated for awards consideration.

It also felt a bit long for me. The duration feels noticeable in the final act as some bits felt repetitive and there is a point where you feel we're at the end. However, there is still another large scale harrowing sequence to come.

It works at giving you that sense of fear and the brutal violence gives it great authenticity of that period in history. I can certainly recommend it as it is based on an important event and the overall style is pleasing to watch. But it's noticeable efforts to be awards worthy and not being convincing enough makes this pretty good, but not quite great.

Rating: 7/10

Review: White Noise

Every once in a while, you get one of those ambitious projects where it based off a book that has labelled as 'unfilmable'.

It doesn't always work. But my most favourite example is Cloud Atlas, one of my favourite films of the past ten years.

We have Noam Baumbach giving it a go with his latest venture. I always like the choices Baumbach makes and usually really enjoy his films. Particularly his last outing with the great 'Marriage Story'.

This was certainly a change of pace from Baumbach's regular works. It's hard to know where to start with this. But if in doubt, I'll start at the beginning.

The first half felt like a quirky, surreal, satirical, arthouse version of 'Vacation' with a section likened to 'Close Encounters Of The Third Kind'. I was liking the production design. It created a really strange reality that felt like a Tim Burton feature.

I was also enjoying at how eccentric it was and how it showed the American way of living, society in general and how we process information given by the media.

Then the second half focused more on some of its earlier themes such as social commentary and the consequences of consumerism. But its execution felt a bit incoherent and was shifting between genre's that didn't feel right.

Then it decided to end with a musical sequence that could well be a guilty pleasure moment for me.

For someone who hasn't read the book, I could see why it is celebrated novel through the script. It was interesting on the whole. But the dialogue for each character never felt that that was them actually talking and having those thoughts. It just felt like they were talking like the author. A bit like a poor man's Quentin Tarantino in that aspect.

I felt the cast did the best they could with what they were given. Adam Driver felt like he was channelling a combination of Chevy Chase and Alan Partridge. Greta Gerwig had some nice dramatic moments in the second half and fitted the look of the film perfectly.

Don Cheadle was good value, it's always great seeing Raffey Cassidy, Andre Benjamin and an almost unrecognisable Jodie Turner-Smith.

I was a great a strange feeling from seeing this. One that I very rarely get. It's that despite my issues with it and labelling it a hot mess, I kind of dug it. There is so much going on and its strange that while it is clear that not everything works, it intrigued me enough to not fully care about its problems. I think what worked for me were that it contained many strangely entertaining individual scenes. But it was hard to put them together and make it a cohesive story.

So many people are going to hate this. It's very up itself at times, snobbish and people will find it annoying by the end. Obviously if you've read the book, you will already have an idea of what to expect. But most audiences that are not aware of the book will find this odd and a waste of time.

For me, I could see the ideas there and that it wasn't all working and connecting. But I somehow remained intrigued and into it just about.

I can see others like me walking a fine between weirdly enjoying it and being confused and possibly frustrated by it. But despite me just about giving it a pass, I cannot recommend this. It's just too out there to be accessible for a mainstream audience.

Rating: 7/10

Review: Violent Night

This is a very rare moment when a Christmas film gets my attention to see it on the big screen.

But with the trailer hinting a lot of fun and members of the crew involved giving us some of the best action films of the past 10 years, this had all the potential.

The opening scene sets the tone of the film perfectly. So if you're not on board with it then, don't bother with the rest.

The plot is easy to flow and the narrative structure is nothing to be inspired by as you will have seen at any other action film. But it seemed to save space for its strengths to shine.

Our Santa Claus is easily likable and is a believable action star. You can feel the pain and be squeamish at the brutality in the fight sequences. 

It was even paying homages to modern Christmas classics like Bad Santa, Die Hard, Die Hard 2 and Home Alone.

I also liked how it's self-aware of its own issues by giving us excuses that every parent will understand. There is a cool backstory that manages to give the film a surprising amount of depth and weight to the story.

David Harbour gives us another memorable Santa Claus. But unlike all of them, this one is kicking so much ass whilst still giving us some touching Santa magic. This is a very likable performance. It's one of those casting choices that was so perfect that it should have been realised a long time ago.

While John Leguisamo is playing a pretty generic villain. He still to chew the scenery perfectly to be acceptable for this type of film as the main antagonist.

It was a surprise seeing Alex Hassell involved as I only remember him from one episode of Torchwood. Leah Brady gave the film its sweet and cute value and helped elevate the spirit of the story.

So while the plot is not inspiring and has been seen countless times, there is an infectious fun vibe to it. The action is brutally entertaining and it has the Christmas spirit at its centre which I love.

If you're overthinking the story when watching this, then you're going about it all wrong. This is a solid fun action feature that is best enjoyed when sitting back, relaxing and being in the Christmas spirit.

It shows that even today, simple action films with some depth can still be a hit. With any successful Christmas film, it needs to have re-watchability. This has it and I will be having this in my regular watchlist during future festive periods.

I must finally mention that there is a mid-credits scene to hold on for.

Rating: 7/10

Review: Armageddon Time

Most mainstream cinema-goers won't really know the name of director James Gray. But they may know his back catalogue.

He began life with middle-of-the-road crime dramas such as 'The Yards' and 'We Own The Night'. However, Gray started to be given bigger projects recently such as the underrated 'The Lost City Of Z' and the mixed bag 'Ad Astra'.

Now it seems Gray has gone back to his roots.

It's clear from the tone that it is coming from a personal story from the director's life. There is a lot of heart and detail in the emotion, and that is something we as an audience can easily understand.

When it comes from something you have experienced, you can see the passion in the detail. It paints a great picture of not just the first changes of modern America, but the evolution of its continuing issues.

Child actor Banks Repeta was great in the leading role. There was real authenticity and he had a natural innocence that worked perfectly. A great bit of casting.

Anthony Hopkins is great in this. The way he uses the dialogue that he has been given made everything he said highly profound. He felt constantly comforting in this.

Anne Hathaway gives a lot to her character as well. You can feel her characters struggle and is a solid support whenever it is required.

If I was being harsh, I would say this is not as profound as it should be. But I remained surprised at how much I liked this. This was a well put together coming-of-age drama. I liked the personal and intimate touch director Gray has given to this story. You can feel it in the conversations the characters are having and the emotions that is coming from Repeta's performance especially.

These are the type of films that you can't go wrong with as the person at the helm is the one who experienced it first hand.

Rating: 7/10

Review: The Menu

What made me excited about seeing this the most was that it contained some acting favourites of mine and certain combinations of actors that I haven't seen before.

Plus, the concept looked very interesting and the trailers gave it a lot of energy and potential.

But while the marketing seems to hint more of a horror comedy. It's more of a satire on the fine dining experience, class, chefs and food critics.

There's an Agatha Christie vibe to the initial set-up. From the remote location to the number of curious characters from different backgrounds. However, the restaurant setting gives us something a little different to the atmosphere.

There is a constant unsettling feel to everything and the story develops, we start more shock content and the sort of ideas that I am usually up for being explored.

I also liked at its silly moments that never went over board and was only teased for a moment. While the final act didn't quite go all out, it decided to give us the thing it intended to finish with and it remain as satisfying.

Anya Taylor-Joy did a good job at basically playing the audience. Her attitude and elegance was a deadly combination and she continues to show why Tayloy-Joy is one of my favourite female actors right now.

Ralph Fiennes is great. His natural intimidation makes this a perfect casting choice for the character he has been assigned to play. That mystery intensity he has whilst seeming kind of the surface was rewarding to see at work.

Nicholas Hoult gives a good amount of obnoxious to his character that gives us some memorable moments. As does John Leguizamo who is making a solid resurgence within the industry, Hong Chau, Janet McTear, Paul Adelstein and Arturo Castro.

The camerawork uses the space very effectively. There are a lot of pleasing wide shots that gives the audience a great scale of the characters environment whilst also doing these close-ups of the food to make them inviting and desirable.

Colin Stetson's score helps with the tone and gives you a fun piece during the end credits that is great to experience after just witnessing the film itself.

There are moments however towards the end where it's stretching out its ideas. But other than that, this was a very entertaining and effective piece of work that will work well with multiple demographics.

Its dark humour is consistently funny, has a good amount of effective thrills and I liked the direction it takes when it plays around with its ideas to see its message from different perspectives. That exploration of the plot is even greater when you see that majority of the film takes place in one room. That showed a lot confidence in the concept for me.

In other hands, it could have forgotten about its central premise for its final act and give us some middle-of-the-road action sequence to please its audience. But no, they fully commit to it and give us quite the memorable viewing experience that I would happily re-visit.

I've noticed it's been quite the year for films the are making fun of the mega rich, elite or privileged. We've had 'Bodies Bodies Bodies', 'Triangle Of Sadness', 'Glass Onion' and now this. With this now in the mix, I think it's safe to say there's plenty of options available if you are up for watching this sort of thing.

Rating: 8/10

Review: Bones And All

A new Luca Guadagnino film should never be ignored. You always get amazing looking films from him and his team. But it is the way he tells his stories that for me walks a fine line about whether it's the complete package or not.

There is always this sense of spectacle. But the pacing of the story is usually delicate and gentle and I feel it doesn't always fully work.

This latest project is kind of the same. But there is something here to be admired. 

It starts off by giving you enough of an appetiser of where we're going with this and how violent it's going to get.

I liked at how it softly pulls you in with its coming-of-age story and then in sudden bursts we get brutal violence that makes you see why it has been given an 18 certificate. That weird mixture I think worked for the most part. 

There are some cool and bizarrely interesting individual scenes that build up the tension. Plus the ideas of coming-of-age and having the brutal violence be a metaphor for addiction was perfectly fine. But I was still waiting for something else to make me see what all the fuss was about from the major festivals.

Taylor Russell did a really good job in this. I remember first seeing her in 'Waves' a few years ago and she has gone from strength and strength. The performance is effectively subtle. But there was a natural vibe to her that will make it easy for the viewer to be confident in her carrying this story.

Timothee Chalamet is great as always and was effective support for Russell. Mark Rylance was at his most creepy as was Michael Suthlbarg and David Gordon Green in their one scene in this film.

I'm not sure what to think of this one. Like with all Guadagnino films, you can see the craft and it has to be appreciated. The story is interesting, I never knew what to expect next, Russell and Chalamet work well together and there are some effectively creepy and gross moments. It's atmospheric and the imagery and sound design really transports you to its locations. You can feel the dirt, blood, dust and even smell.

But I still felt that something was lacking. It didn't have the emotional impact that I feel it should have. It goes along at a gentle pace and it tells the story at that speed throughout. I think it just needed a bit of punch to make it more than just good, because that's what it is.

Doing that I think would have not make it drag at times and give it some energy. The potential is there for something great and I still would recommend it as it has its strengths in particular aspects. But it's not the masterpiece that some have labelled it during its festival run.

To be honest, a better version of this is 2016's 'Raw'. It has similar themes of coming-of-age. But it has much more depth, the violence has more meaning to it and explores its themes better in a shorter runtime.

Rating: 7/10

Review: She Said

As a film fan, the Harvey Weinstein scandal was a story that I was keeping a close eye one.

I have never been a fan of the man before these events, let alone after. Despite his name always associated with successful films or as a produce or sorts, he's been more of a promoter than a genuine filmmaker.

It was only a matter of time before this became a film in itself.

With the setting being in a newspaper office and centred on journalists, this is a narrative foundation has a good track of record within the film industry.

I'm not sure how, but this is type of story and setting seems to work for a lot of people including me. I think it's just that tense environment, seeing the methods of a journalist and the determination of getting the juice of the story. It rewards the viewer with shock value and has a natural tension build that generally makes it a highly satisfying watch. A classic example would be 'All The President's Men' and a more recent example is Oscar Best Picture winner 'Spotlight'.

I like how it starts as you can tell the main story is actually not going to be about the scandal. That's just background noise. It's focus is on other perspectives. After that, it's then vintage investigative journalism action and the information unearthed and pacing of it is fairly gripping.

There are moments where you can feel the stakes and danger our characters are putting themselves in. While the ending does go we all know, the culmination of the journey we have just gone through still gets you hooked in to see it happen.

The cast are pretty good on the whole. The always great Carey Mulligan and Zoe Kazan serve their purpose well. They might not feel as dynamic as Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford. But they move the film along nicely and they are genuine together.

It was great seeing Samantha Morton be a part of this who has an amazing moment in her short on-screen time. As does Jennifer Ehle. Those two really give the film its emotion despite it being in small doses. It was also cool seeing actual Ashley Judd playing herself.

On the face of it, a lot of the film is just people talking in offices, phones or people's front doors. But sometimes you don't always need striking imagery or experimental camerawork to enhance the situation.

This film just needs the story. There are even cool uses of actual recorded footage that was used in the scandal case which gave the film solid authenticity.

I liked how the film never over dramatizes the content, because it doesn't need to do that. The strength of the story speaks for itself and the team behind the camera just the story tell as it is, because it's strong enough to give you a piece of work that can grip audiences.

While some may see that as a lack of creativity on the director to not give their style to the story. There are times when you are given something that telling it in a straightforward is the best option.

I thought they did a great job with this. Yes it is a story that most of us know due to the heavy news coverage. But it is the journey getting there and the way it focuses on the people that helped expose this story that gives the audience something new to understand.

This is a pretty good piece of work that works not just for today's audience. But it is told in a timeless way that will make people understand this story for people who will discover this in the future.

Rating: 8/10

Review: Matilda the Musical

While I was somewhat excited to check this out, I feel it would have been best to see the stage show first as that was this version it is based off rather than solely on the Roald Dahl story.

In the opening act, I was already see a production design that sadly wasn't agreeing with me.

It felt like a poor man's Tim Burton with the bright colours and fantasy like architecture. But of the casting choices, their performances and the creativity of the songs were keeping me partly invested.

I had a strange feeling throughout this as if something always felt off for me. Yet it was still giving content with a positive energy that you can't help but enjoy. The whole look of it didn't feel like it belonged on the big screen. It was like I just watching a recording of a stage show. But aspects of the story did feel cinematic.

But thankfully, it does end on a strong note both positive and heartfelt that should give everyone a spring in their step when leaving their screening.

Like with any musical, a big thanks go to the ensemble cast. Alisha Weir gives so much energy to give in the lead role and her determination is infectious. Emma Thompson is as great as you would expect. That almost pantomime villain is something she can do in her sleep and yet she still gave it more than just being bad.

It was nice seeing Lashana Lynch in a role of this kind as we normally see in something serious or killing bad guys as a secret agent.

Stephen Graham's hot streak continues as he and Andrea Riseborough worked great together in their exaggerated roles.

I also have to give a mention to the entire cast of kids who gave us some memorable choreographed sequences including one particular showstopper to end the film on a high.

So while I did have mixed feelings towards the film, I remain up for seeing it on the stage as I think this is where this version of the story should be.

The songs are solid and smart and there are some good performances in here. But a lot of felt too theatrical for my liking, the general look of it felt more like it was made for TV and not the cinema.

Also, it cut out or glossed over important parts of the '1996' version that made it work so well. Seeing this has certainly made me appreciate that 90's family classic a whole lot more.

There's enough good in it to get a pass off of me, and the energy and vibe is hard to be sniffy at. But I cannot see myself watching this again. However, it hasn't changed me wanting to see the stage show. I know I'll be in the minority with my issues as I am confident this will do well with kids and families. The tone is joyful and there is enough emotion that sticks at the right time. It just simply wasn't the complete package for me. I'll stick with Danny DeVito and Pam Farris.

Rating: 7/10

Review: Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery

It's crazy that it has been 3 years since Knives Out came out. Not only did this rejuvenate the murder mystery sub-genre back into modern films. It also reignited Rian Johnson's career after what he did as director for the extremely divisive Star Wars: The Last Jedi.

It gave me great reassurance that Johnson is a genuinely talented filmmaker with the right material. So when I heard that a sequel was in the works, I was very excited to see if the momentum can continue and it wasn't just a novelty comeback for the modern whodunnit's.

It certainly sucks you in straight away with a frenetic and intriguing opening. Then we get you're expected set-up of of a murder mystery and the gags and engaging characters pretty much guarantees your investment for the rest of the film.

I liked how certain information is revealed. There are non-linear moments, flashbacks, reveals that change their meaning and importance later on and it builds up to a satisfying climax.

The cast for this film may not be stacked with classic stars like in the original. But this impressive ensemble is an interesting mixture of stars that are established, rising and ones that some may have not seen for quite a while. Daniel Craig does another great job as Benoit Blanc. That awkward accent remains consistent and entertaining and his Bond experience is put to good use. His is definitely this generations Hercule Poirot.

Janelle Monae makes great use of how her character is used and by the end of it has many memorable moments and solid chemistry with Craig. Ed Norton is having a great time with his role and it was great seeing Kate Hudson given something worth our time for once and be in a role that isn't in a rom-com.

Dave Bautista continues to extend his character range, Kathryn Hahn continues to be nothing but fantastic and there are also some fun cameos to surprise you all.

Like its predecessor, the production design as a character in itself and gives clues hidden in plain sight that will be rewarding on multiple viewings.

I honestly did not have complaints with this one. So it's all about personal taste now whether how much I liked it.

For me, just like Knives Out this was a really enjoyable watch that kept you highly engaged throughout with many unexpected twists and turns, a solid amount of comedy and a narrative that mixes in the old school and the new style of the whodunnit' genre.

While there are obvious similarities with Knives Out in terms of the basic structure, there is plenty of aspects that makes stand on its own. I can see many having this as their favourite of the two. The pacing is solid, the imagery is pleasing and there's cool sub-plots that I can see being more memorable the more times you watch it.

I love that this has become not just a franchise, but a successful one. I am aware that a third one is already in production and I am certainly excited for of what Johnson has in mind.

Rating: 8/10

Review: Pinocchio

It's not totally uncommon to have two films of the same story be released in the same year.

I can recall seeing two 'end of the world' films be released at the same time and two Snow White films be released close to each other. Now we have our second Pinocchio film to be released and our third in the last three years.

To be fair, the story itself is profound and an easy bit of money for a studio to acquire. But as the Disney live-action re-make is still fresh in our memories, I wasn't sure if the more hyped of the two being released last would get the success it deserves. The reason for the superior hype is purely that Guillermo Del Toro is at the helm of this passion project.

We know his love for film and for particular genre's. Also, with this version being stop-motion animation, I was naturally excited as this art form is most patient of them all.

So while I was obviously loving the animation and the almost haunting production design, the themes coming through were surprising me. The themes of loss and needing to move on, fatherhood, love, death and war gave them the type of maturity that you rarely in animations that have a rating that is suitable for kids.

The setting is totally different and while the structure is very similar, some of the characters are different despite performing roles in this story that we know from another version. I felt this was working well and should keep a mass audience fully engaged despite the changes made.

There is also some spiritual moments that were glorious to experience. The design and overall vibe felt very satisfying for me. I just wish we got more of that. But I do that would have detracted our attention from the main story at hand.

I also liked that they committed to its ending compared to the recent Disney re-make. This kept to its ideas and whilst it isn't a happy ending, it focuses on a more realistic and truer outcome which I appreciated.

The voice cast on paper is incredible and so many I didn't realise were involved until I saw their name in the credits. David Bradley was a particular highlight as you could feel all the emotions he was giving to his character, and it made for probably the best Geppetto we've ever had. The same could possibly be said for Ewan McGregor who voices the Cricket. With the combination of the fantastic design and McGregor's voice, it gave us a very engaging character. I also have to give props to Burn Gorman, Gregory Mann, Ron Perlman, Christoph Waltz, Cate Blanchett, John Turturro and Tilda Swinton. They all did a great job.

There are also a few songs in this and while they were nice and fitted the tone well, they weren't wholly memorable to be honest. But it wouldn't surprise me if some got an Oscar nomination for 'Best Original Song'.

I will admit that were moments in the second half of the film that slowed the pace down a bit. That could lose the attention of younger viewers.

So did we need this so soon after the Disney release? Absolutely. This is the version of the two you need to see. The animation is glorious, the story is heartfelt and mature in its telling and doesn't hold back from its darker subject matters.

I don't feel it's scary enough to emotional scar younger viewers. So I think if your kids can cope with films such as Coraline and Kubo And The Two Strings for example, then they'll be engrossed by this.

While I still feel the Disney animated classic from 1940 is still the best version and remains an animation triumph. This is a notable version that stands alone with a refreshing look at the story that was most definitely needed to keep this celebrated tale alive with creativity.

In fact, this could hurt the Disney re-make even more than the critics and general consensus has already done.

Rating: 8/10