Review: Richard Jewell

The last great Clint Eastwood directed film was probably Gran Torino back in 2008.

Known for his procedural story-telling, Eastwood's style is always accessible.
However from a critical standpoint I feel his last few films haven't fully worked for me. For the last decade, Eastwood has made films that either been somewhat disappointment or be fine but flawed at best.

Going into this film, I had no idea about this true story during the 1996 Olympics despite being a big sports fan.

This managed to be one of his more effective pieces for some time. The story is interesting, and some incidents that happened during it is astonishing and had me feeling disgusted as to how America works within authorities and the media.

A lot of its success is down the performances, where a large portion of them are rather subtle. It always amazes that these types of performances can be as strong and memorable as the loud and in-your-face styles.
Paul Walter Hauser as the titular character showed great innocence and sympathy to make him someone you can root for. I remember seeing him shine in a minor but amusing role in 'I, Tonya' and he carried this film well as the lead.
Kathy Bates echoed that sympathy as Hauser's character's mother. You could really feel her pain as the story developed. Also, supporting well with Hauser was Sam Rockwell, who did what Rockwell does best.

The antagonists lead by Jon Hamm all did a solid job being as slimy and corrupt as you could possibly imagine and therefore instantly hatable.

As for Olivia Wilde, while I don't feel there was anything wrong with her performance, it just felt out of place with the overall tone of the film. It was cartoonish in my view and loud compared to everything else happening around this particular character.

Every other aspect was as you would expect with an Eastwood film. It's imagery is pleasant and it's cinematography is perfectly fine and never unsettles the viewer.

This was a good watch and it felt like Eastwood went somewhat back on track to how we expect his films to be. The story kept my interest throughout and the nuanced performances really worked with the tone that was chosen.
I thought Eastwood was gradually on the way out. But even at 89, he can make some entertaining features.

Rating: 7/10

Review: Queen & Slim

A film that contains both a first-time director and writer rarely gets a fair amount of buzz going into the general release.
That as well as Daniel Kaluuya being in one of the main roles had me going to see what all the fuss is about.

The film hits the ground running with some shocking imagery in the opening act. It certainly had my attention and set me up for the rest of the duration.

After that, the pacing does dramatically change in parts. But the impactfulness of the story as well as the tension gradually creeped up on me for such a memorable pay-off.

It had that modern indie style mix of Bonnie & Clyde and Thelma & Louise.

A lot of this film really works, and it is partly thanks to the strong performances by Daniel Kaluuya and Jodie Turner-Smith. Kaluuya has already shown amazing range in his previous roles at such a young age. He's such a talent that I hope it gets the consideration at the right time.
His chemistry with Turner-Smith is incredibly believable as well as its the surroundings that their characters live in.
I have never seen Turner-Smith in a prominent role. She showed great maturity in this and had a powerful screen presence throughout.
Both of these characters could have been incredible shallow. But the performances as well as excellent story development made it likable, relatable and sympathetic.

The themes of current racial tension in this film spoke of true authenticity and I can see many viewers relate to this.
The strength of its positives has given me a lot to like about debut director and writer Melina Matsoukas and Lena Waithe.

It does have its slow moments though and scenes that for me did not add to the story.

So while there is clear room for improvement in all departments, this is a very entertaining piece that executes its themes in a very effective way.
It pays great homage to similar films of the past, whilst also giving it a modern touch that will work with today's audience rather well.
Kaluuya and Turner-Smith are great together and gave us two titular characters that will surprise you in your view of them throughout.

Rating: 8/10

Review: A Beautiful Day In The Neighborhood

I've been unsure about how this one would perform in terms of box office. This is due to the fact that the Fred Rogers was never really shown in the UK.

While I do know enough about Mr. Rodgers through clips thrown into films such as Home Alone, I didn't think this film would get enough of the appeal it deserves.
Thankfully, a documentary that came out in 2018 called 'Won't You Be My Neighbor?' and the perfect casting of Tom Hanks could be enough for people not aware of Mr. Rodgers to check it out.

It was interesting to see that the film was not really about Mr. Rodgers in the end. It instead had Mr. Rodgers being either a supporting character, or background noise.
After that realisation, my adjusted approach to the film saw a much different story then I expected. The story in the end does have an 'Oscar bait' feel about it despite being based on a true story. But there were certain aspects that I noticed that made it feel more than that.

One major reason is that of Tom Hanks, who did a great job as Fred Rodgers. He really captured the spectacle and presence that the man himself had whenever people saw him. I honestly could not think of anyone else that could have played this role.

Also, some of the production design paid great homage to the actual TV show which was great to see. You can see the hard work that was put into that particular aspect, and that is what made it feel like a Mr. Rodgers story in a way I was not expecting.
That tone also contained parts that felt alienating to me and did not quite fully work in my view.

So despite not being what I expected, I still rather enjoyed this. I thought it was an enjoyable comedy drama that still managed to capture the vibe or Mr. Rodgers and his show.
While the tone and structure felt odd in its execution at times, I still felt uplifted and as converted as the main character. Without Hanks, I think this could have been a huge letdown. I'm sure an American audience would eat this up. So it would be interesting to see how the Brits react to this particular feature.
If this doesn't work for you in the end. Then maybe, the aforementioned documentary might work instead as that was more about Mr. Rodgers himself.

Rating: 7/10

Review: The Personal History Of David Copperfield

I had the chance to see this back in November at the Leeds International Film Festival. But sadly, I had a clash with other films that I took my priority over.

I think the reason I shunned this, was that I have seen previous versions of this story. Plus, I was unsure how director Armando Ianucci would portray this, as he is more into his  satires.

But when I finally got round to seeing this, I could not believe how much I was enjoying this.

Ianucci managed to make this really refreshing and give us so many memorable performances. The dialogue style that the director is known for managed to work so well throughout. The writing was also enhanced by the performances. This really was a strong ensemble cast.
Dev Patel showed great range throughout. From his execution to his dialogue, to his facial expressions to his physical acting, Patel showcased it all in this one. Hugh Laurie was a revelation in this. That sympathetic craziness that his character had made Laurie the perfect choice to channel his comedic days with Rowan Atkinson and Stephen Fry.
A couple of others that were as memorable were Peter Capaldi and Ben Whishaw. Capaldi, who is here a regular collaborate with Iannuci continues to showcase the best of his acting talent within the directors projects.
For Whishaw, he gave his character a really slimy presence throughout and you knew he was instantly untrustworthy. Whishaw's character was given a solid character arc and wonderfully capitalised by enhancing it with a memorable performance.
Also have to give props to Tilda Swinton, Benedict Wong, Gwendoline Christie and Aneurin Barnard for their contribution.

With it being a period drama, all the usual aspects of production design, costumes, makeup and hair were of the highest quality. Plus, the cinematography certainly made you appreciate the craftmanship within those aspects. It was a pleasant film to look at, had a nice colour palette and the imagery really made me appreciate the finer details that were on screen.

Considering there are multiple versions of this classic story that I have seen, this was a really nice surprise. Iannucci's style and choices made managed to work, Patel was a wonderful casting choice of the titular character and the entire cast were one of the strongest ensembles I have seen for some time.
I always appreciate Iannucci's work, and this is another strong piece of work that I would happily watch again.

Rating: 8/10

Review: Bombshell

I was very late to the party with this one.

When I first about this and it being released during the hotbed of Oscar season, there just wasn't anything hooking me in to watch this.
It was strange, because I've always been intrigued by the goings on at Fox News over the years.
Despite not being brought up in America, I was aware about peoples views on how Fox News presents itself and the stories you hear behind the scenes.

But I just had this feeling that because of the timing of this film being made, I was expecting a film being overly preachy about equality. But I think with it getting some actual Oscar success and the time of me seeing this was a bit of a quiet period for new releases made me eventually give this a chance.

I'm always happy when I'm proved wrong, and this film surprised me. I felt this to be an effective and gripping watch. The film sets the scene well and gives you a great insight as to how Fox News works. The way the characters are introduced paints a beautiful picture on how they think and where they could be going in this story.
That opening act felt crucial to me, as everything else just felt more impactful thereafter. The content that was supposed to shock you did its job really well and that just had me fully gripped for a satisfying finale.

The performances really helped make this a worthwhile watch and give a strong portrayal of the topics its covering.
It took me a while to realise that it was Charlize Theron playing the lead. For the most part, I think I  kind of knew it was Theron. But the makeup on her gave me hesitation. But the more I heard her speak, it confirmed for me that it was Theron. The performance was as good as you would expect for this talented female actor. That power presence her character has was perfectly portrayed and was the perfect casting choice.
John Lithgow reminded all of us how great he is as an actor. Despite being in mid-70's, I think Lithgow may have given us one of his all-time best performances. That look of a slimy and seedy man with a chilling presence in power with many ladies at his feet just made him not only instantly unlikable, but also highly engaging. That perfect mix is exactly how a successful antagonist should be made.
Margot Robbie was pretty good as well. She played to her strengths well and showed great innocence in her character to make her a very sympathetic character we can get behind. There is one upsetting scene in particular that focuses on Robbie's face and her expressions throughout that scene made it the films peak moment. Also, I enjoyed her chemistry with Kate McKinnon's character.

I liked that it almost had a similar vibe to that of a 90's Oliver Stone political drama. It moves a good pace that portrays their hectic lifestyle rather well.
Also, the makeup is top-top. As mentioned before, I was unsure whether I was watching Charlize Theron. Along with the makeup for John Lithgow's character, it deserves any major awards for that particular category.

This film is all thanks to the performances. If they were just perfectly fine, this would feel more like a film made for television. But the acting is what gives it that cinematic value. The cast really made me buy into this and made me regret not seeing it as it came out.
I'm glad this ended up better then I expected. I'm not going nuts over this as it lacks the depth and twists and turns that similar films have done better with. But it is most definitely a good watch with solid re-watchability that I would happily recommend to anyone.

Rating: 7/10

Review: The Gentlemen

After venturing out of their comfort zone to making Sherlock Holmes, The Man From U.N.C.L.E, King Arthur and Aladdin, director Guy Ritchie has gone back to what people associate with him best, a British gangster flick.

While I think the first Sherlock Holmes as well as Aladdin is good fun, his crowning achievements will forever be Lock, Stock And Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch. So I was intrigued to see if he would return to his comfort zone with another huge hit.

It was nice to see this side of Ritchie once again. The intimidating characters, the large cast all having their moments on screen and the intriguing way the story develops with some surprising and rewarding twists.
While the style and look may be a bit more polished then his previous gangster flicks, the almost Tarantino-esque dialogue gives you that Guy Ritchie magic that his fans love the most.

The performances were pretty good on the whole. Matthew McConaughey had a presence about him whenever he was on screen and gave us a character that made me believe you don't want to mess with. I can say exactly the same Charlie Hunnam who had multiple shining moments both in terms of execution of dialogue and physicality.
I was surprised by Michelle Dockery. She felt like she had been doing these types of films for years, and gave us another highly intimidating presence to contend with.
Colin Farrell gave us some nice variety and some of the vintage Guy Ritchie humor that we know and love. I can Farrell being the big crowd-pleaser and stealing the show for many viewers.
I was fine with Hugh Grant's performance. It felt a bit alienating for me, as it's not the usual character that he plays. I wasn't completely into it. But I think his solid execution of the dialogue he was given didn't detract my enjoyment of the overall product.
The rest of the cast I felt did a good job and never felt out of place with the rest of the tone. That includes Henry Golding, who I am glad to see get more opportunities after first seeing him in the really enjoyable Crazy Rich Asians.

There were some minor negatives that stopped me from thinking this film was great rather than good. It can get a bit too convoluted for its own good with the amount of twists it had. Also if I was going to be cruel about it, there was almost a smug feel about it. It was as if it felt smarter than the viewer and that the people making it were just inserting self-referential humor that only they would get. I hope I'm not the only one who felt this. But it wasn't a big drawback. It was just something I noticed then never effected my overall view of it.

So while it might not be as impactful or witty as Lock Stock or Snatch, this is still an enjoyable piece that will please the purist fans of Guy Ritchie. This genre is definitely his playground. You can see how adventurous he gets in all aspects and feel the confidence pouring off the screen.
Despite my negatives showing why it's not the total package, I remained entertained by it and I would happily watch this again.

Rating: 7/10

Review: Lady And The Tramp (2019)

Another Disney live-action re-make, and it's another one that I am both very nervous about and thinking 'Why does this need a re-make?'

I love the animated original. I think along with Bambi, this was one of Walt Disney's most mature films he ever made. I always seem to admire these more then the classics most people instantly go for.
I love the themes it covers such as major lifestyle changes from a dog's perspective as well as redemption. It was never afraid to contain scary imagery and get all the emotions out of you.

Despite going into every film with as much of an open mind as I possibly can, I just couldn't see the Disney of today to make something as daring.

Sadly, I was proven right with this one. However, I still had enough of a good time to not make it a total waste.
As re-makes do, they do pay homage to the original. Some of them in these were perfectly fine in its execution, some were just pure lazy. So lazy in fact, that they some basically took out the same thing from the original and just plonked it into the re-make, which actually felt out of place with how they were doing everything else.
When I mentioned before that today's Disney would not take risk, they managed to make an incredibly inoffensive film. They made a few changes to appeal to modern audiences even though it felt unrealistic with the time period. Some of that I was fine with, some felt either too forced or on the nose.
But what did make it watchable, was the overall vibe, some well executed scenes that I can see kids liking and one scene towards the end that had me getting similar feelings to how the original did it.

While the performances were never exceptional, they were all satisfactory. I liked the relationship between Tessa Thompson lookalike Kiersey Clemons and Thomas Mann. Speaking of Thompson, I honestly wasn't too bothered by her voicework of Lady. But there was nothing bad about.
Same goes for Justin Theroux as Tramp as well as almost every other cast member.
I liked the casting of Sam Elliott as Trusty despite his characters side plot being totally shunned as well as Benedict Wong as Bull.

The positives are like most Disney films, the production and costume design are great. It was genuinely like being in the set of the old film, but live-action obviously.
Some but all not of the music were pretty good and most of the visual effects felt seamless with the rest of the look of the film.
The negatives I have already mentioned. But to sum them up, making everything light-hearted and inoffensive managed to give it its biggest downfall and the changes felt more like it was just promoting equality rather than telling a story. Also, the dialogue felt a bit safe and uninspiring.

It's easy for me to go and say "it's just not the same". But I will say despite its problems, I still felt it was a passable viewing experience that still had me engaged. It has its expected sweet moments, has a nice vibe about it and it kept its charm up to a point. That being said, I think I'll stick with the original.

Like with all Disney live-action re-makes, I end with the question 'Did this need to be remade?' It's a pretty definitive no. It took a lot out of what made it an underrated classic and turn into a middle of the road forgettable feature that even the studio decided to release it via their streaming service.
That now pretty much make its at one in every three Disney live-action re-makes succeeding in what re-makes are supposed to set out and do in my opinion.

It's now been four films since I felt a good re-make was made. So we're in need of a critically successful one. Next up is Mulan, and that is one that I have been saying for some time, that if done right should hugely benefit from going live-action. Fingers crossed.

Rating: 7/10