Director: Rian Johnson
Cast: Daniel Craig, Ana de Armas Chris Evans, Toni Colette, Jamie Lee Curtis, Lakeith Stanfield, Christopher Plummer
Genre: Thriller
Year: 2019
A classic whodunnit thriller with a stellar cast leading the way, full of twists and turns, destines Knives Out to be a top contender for one of 2019's best films.
The famous Harlan Thrombury (Plummer) has died. Supposedly by suicide, discovered by his housekeeper Marta (de Armas), his throat slit open by his own knife. A week goes by when the Thrombury family are called back to the house to be questioned by the police and the mysterious Detective Benois Blanc (Craig), the latter whom suspects this is no suicide but in fact a murder. Thus the Thrombury mansion becomes a crime scene, where everybody is a suspect, but nobody, as the tagline for the film suggests, has a clue.
At a time where out cinemas are essentially polluted with an excess of superheroes and bottom-of-the-barrel quality comedies, Knives Out presents to us a film which we have been yearning for - a classic case of the whodunnit crime thriller variety. Clearly inspired by the works of Agatha Christie, Knives Out heavily contrasts with what cinemas have been dishing out to us audiences for these past few years. Whodunnits are hard to come by and probably even harder to pull off, but in the hands of Rian Johnson (you may remember him from his work on Star Wars: The Last Jedi; however, whatever your bias is on that movie, please do not let it deter you from seeing this one) it is meticulously crafted and stunningly executed.
As previously mentioned, this is not your typical movie. It is intricately laid out, spinning a rather unique perspective on the whodunnit genre which subsequently blends it with farcical comedy. Speaking of comedy, Johnson sprinkles delicious dry humour throughout his script - not the obnoxious comedy we see in blockbusters where they ram the joke down your throat until you choke on it - but subtler humour, akin to the Coen Brother's comedy. Its brief, sometimes so much so you could miss it, but its golden and its all the more because of the exceptional delivery and performances from all the actors, with Daniel Craig really giving a hundred-and-ten percent.
Craig does not appear in much, granted. People just know him from his role in the 007 franchise. Others might remember him from Layer Cake (Matthew Vaughn, 2005) which clearly shows why they cast him as Bond, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (David Fincher, 2011) or even Logan Lucky (Steven Soderbergh, 2017) for those more in touch with their independent cinema. And like Logan Lucky, we see him making a return not only to quirky independent comedies but also to his impression of an American accent.
We are first introduced to Detective Blanc from the shadows, out of focus, tapping a piano key to hurry the conversation if one of the relatives being questioned goes on a tangent. However he is abruptly robbed of this ambiguity when Morris Bristow (Don Johnson) enquires "Who the fuck is he?" (or something along those lines). As he leans forward to reply, we are met with a surprising accent which instantly contrasts to our expectation for the suited, stylish figure (he is dressed and shot with a very James Bond aesthetic so forgive us for anticipating his typical British accent). However, once you adjust to this slight deviation from Craig's normal voice, Detective Blanc is a lovable protagonist with some beautiful comedic undertones and invigorating mannerisms that make him irresistible to watch as he shines in the energy and enthusiasm of his performance. You will be grinning from ear to ear with this immaculate performance from Craig in this film - he is, in a word, delightful.
But let us not forget the rest of the cast that Johnson has assembled. Ana de Armas (Blade Runner 2049) is the protagonist of whom we follow throughout the progression of the narrative is the timid, mild-mannered assistant/waitress of the late Harlan Thrombury; Jamie Lee Curtis, Toni Colette, Michael Shannon, Katherine Langford, Jaeden Lieberher, Don Johnson and Chris Evans, the 'mourning' family members. As with all films that have a multitude of characters that all require unique and specific personalities in order to define one from another, they all suffer from not being fleshed out into detailed characters; however, they are far from one-dimensional and perhaps apart from some of the younger actors who have less to say, each character gets their time to shine but also their fair share of screen time. Nobody feels excluded and they all have their own stories and their own distinct personality. Each has their own enthusiasm within their performance and are to be merited in each of their portrayals. Rian Johnson does a commendable job at this.
In terms of the plot of the film, there is a lot to be spoiled because it is so dense with detail and riddled with twists; however, take this as a reason to see this film. Johnson leads the audience down multiple rabbit holes where they become convinced by one explanation until he suddenly takes you down a completely different route. But this is just a sign of a confident and talented writer. Some writers might stumble over the intricacies of such a film as Johnson has crafted here but instead he pushes forward, and delivers some incredible twists and an outright stunning narrative that is hugely entertaining from beginning to end.
There is lots to say about Knives Out as well as these above points, such as the beautiful cinematography, the exquisite set design and brilliant direction, but that would just labour the point, the point being - Knives Out is a film we do not really see often enough in cinemas. It needs to be experienced and appreciated on the big screen and most likely given multiple rewatches!
Verdict: 9/10
Tuesday, 26 November 2019
Tuesday, 19 November 2019
Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood
Director: Quentin Tarantino
Cast: Brad Pitt, Leonardo DiCaprio, Margot Robbie, Kurt Russell, Al Pacino, Dakota Fanning
Genre: Thriller, drama, comedy
Year: 2019
Tarantino's 9th film strays from his traditional ultra-violent, vulgar filming style to instead embrace his obsession and adoration of all things film.
In Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood, Tarantino is particularly interested in observing the films and television of the late 1960's, focusing on the year 1969. DiCaprio is Rick Dalton, a once famous and iconic movie star from a previous era who is now scraping the barrel for roles on television. His only shoulder to lean on is his 'stunt double' Cliff Booth (Pitt) who during the course of the film is drawn into the historical backdrop that Tarantino sets out for his film - this being the Manson family.
It is already exactly up Tarantino's street - the opportunity to drool over a past era of movies that he so clearly idolises while also setting up some incredibly violent situations with one of the most notorious cult families in history.
And on both accounts, Tarantino delivers.
The opening of the film introduces the audience to Rick through his character on a television show Bounty Law and a subsequent meeting with Pacino's Marvin Shwarz who warns Rick about how his career is imminently going down the drain, sending Rick into a crisis, realising he has become 'a has-been'. But with Cliff's encouragement 'Remember, you're Rick fucking Dalton', he proceeds with his next role, as the 'heavy' (villain - a role that Shwarz warns Dalton is the beginning of the end for a dying actor) on a pilot Western called Lancer, with a new confidence. Here we are introduced a subtly pivotal character who could go overlooked if viewers are not careful - that is Trudi Fraser/Mirabella Lancer (Julia Butters).
Rick Dalton at this point is at his lowest point - he is an alcoholic and failing at his career. He is desperately trying to stay strong in his industry, but is haunted by times where he lost the chance to star in The Great Escape (recreated with some extremely convincing VFX where DiCaprio replaces McQueen's character within the actual film) and sees very little hope for his future at this point.
This is until he meets Trudi, a young actress who endorses method acting and has a passion for the history of film. Tarantino writes a poignant and clever scene between the two actors - Trudi reads a large book about Disney films and passionately explains her love for these older films while Rick reads a small book, 'a Western', where the cowboy within it has been badly injured and is no longer as strong as he used to be. There is a lot which happens in this short scene but it perfectly epitomises Rick's situation comparatively to a young girl. She is passionate about being her wholeheartedly her character, while Rick frets within the make up studio that all the hair and make up will mean people would not be able to recognise him (still clinging onto the importance of the star system from the 1930s - 1950s).
From an objective point of view, this scene, while maybe some might see it as diverging from the plot, shows Tarantino's observing the death of Old Hollywood and the birth of New Hollywood (Rick and Trudi, respectively), and it is only when Rick pulls off an exceptional performance to which Trudi comments was 'the best acting' she had ever seen, does Rick finally realise that his worth is founded in those aspiring actors who look back with awe on the previous legends gone before them.
While all of this is happening (bare in mind this takes up probably a good hour of the film), we are simultaneously following Margot Robbie's Sharon Tate who is simply enjoying life in Hollywood and Cliff Booth's discovery of the Manson family.
On Tate's side of the story, it is Tarantino's way of just slowing down the film, not to bore the audience but allow them to breathe. While some might feel that there is no point to Sharon Tate being a character in this film other than to add historical context, there is a certain peace about her parts. First of all, Tarantino evidently wants to depict Tate in all her glory - kindhearted, optimistic, happy - and Robbie excels in her performance here. And Tarantino also uses the location of the cinema as a place to all the film to breathe. The cinema is a place of relaxation, escape from the rest of the world, a shelter, a place of refuge, evidently reflecting Tarantino's love for it. Tate watches her own film here and enjoys going incognito, listening to the rest of the audience reacting well to her scenes. Its a lovely homage to this woman and Robbie does an excellent job at portraying her.
Meanwhile with Cliff, after seeing a young girl, Pussy (Fanning), wandering the streets three times in the row, he eventually picks her up and takes her to where she lives, which happens to be an old film studio he used to work at. Intrigued by the nature of her living situation, he agrees to take her there, only to discover things are less than comfortable for him when he disturbs the members of the Manson family. Tarantino employs amazing tension and comedy here ("We love Pussy!"; "Yes we do"), and Pitt does not disappoint with his intoxicating performance, which mixes humour, heart and heroism, resulting in a satisfyingly bloody conclusion - although nothing in comparison to the excessively violent, gory and morbid ending.
Speaking of which, this is possibly one of Tarantino's most brutal depiction of violence in his movies to date. It acts almost as a much needed reward for the audience who have sat through a good couple of hours of mainly dialogue only to conclude with some brilliantly choreographed and performed, yet explosively brutal, violence, all elevated by Tarantino's charismatic and comedic writing.
One of the few issues of this film might be its excessive run time. While Tarantino never effectively wastes time, it could be made a more durable watch if maybe 20 minute were trimmed off, yet nothing feels out of place. It is a different film to what we are used to in the flesh; however, Tarantino's exceptional writing and passion for movies still remains a sure constant.
This might arguably be one of his best films because of how it cannot be judged in relation to his other films in terms of how graphic it is or how vulgar it is, nor is there a feeling that Tarantino is restricted by this stereotype or convention of his movie style. He focuses more of the cinematic quality of the film which is commendable. If this were to be his last film as he has openly confessed, it would put a perfect conclusion to the rest of his filmography. Has he reached perfection? Not quite but it is a film which begs it audience to return time and time again to appreciate every single detail that has been painstakingly achieved by Tarantino's exceptional craftsmanship and handiwork.
Verdict: 9/10
Cast: Brad Pitt, Leonardo DiCaprio, Margot Robbie, Kurt Russell, Al Pacino, Dakota Fanning
Genre: Thriller, drama, comedy
Year: 2019
Tarantino's 9th film strays from his traditional ultra-violent, vulgar filming style to instead embrace his obsession and adoration of all things film.
In Once Upon a Time... In Hollywood, Tarantino is particularly interested in observing the films and television of the late 1960's, focusing on the year 1969. DiCaprio is Rick Dalton, a once famous and iconic movie star from a previous era who is now scraping the barrel for roles on television. His only shoulder to lean on is his 'stunt double' Cliff Booth (Pitt) who during the course of the film is drawn into the historical backdrop that Tarantino sets out for his film - this being the Manson family.
It is already exactly up Tarantino's street - the opportunity to drool over a past era of movies that he so clearly idolises while also setting up some incredibly violent situations with one of the most notorious cult families in history.
And on both accounts, Tarantino delivers.
The opening of the film introduces the audience to Rick through his character on a television show Bounty Law and a subsequent meeting with Pacino's Marvin Shwarz who warns Rick about how his career is imminently going down the drain, sending Rick into a crisis, realising he has become 'a has-been'. But with Cliff's encouragement 'Remember, you're Rick fucking Dalton', he proceeds with his next role, as the 'heavy' (villain - a role that Shwarz warns Dalton is the beginning of the end for a dying actor) on a pilot Western called Lancer, with a new confidence. Here we are introduced a subtly pivotal character who could go overlooked if viewers are not careful - that is Trudi Fraser/Mirabella Lancer (Julia Butters).
Rick Dalton at this point is at his lowest point - he is an alcoholic and failing at his career. He is desperately trying to stay strong in his industry, but is haunted by times where he lost the chance to star in The Great Escape (recreated with some extremely convincing VFX where DiCaprio replaces McQueen's character within the actual film) and sees very little hope for his future at this point.
This is until he meets Trudi, a young actress who endorses method acting and has a passion for the history of film. Tarantino writes a poignant and clever scene between the two actors - Trudi reads a large book about Disney films and passionately explains her love for these older films while Rick reads a small book, 'a Western', where the cowboy within it has been badly injured and is no longer as strong as he used to be. There is a lot which happens in this short scene but it perfectly epitomises Rick's situation comparatively to a young girl. She is passionate about being her wholeheartedly her character, while Rick frets within the make up studio that all the hair and make up will mean people would not be able to recognise him (still clinging onto the importance of the star system from the 1930s - 1950s).
From an objective point of view, this scene, while maybe some might see it as diverging from the plot, shows Tarantino's observing the death of Old Hollywood and the birth of New Hollywood (Rick and Trudi, respectively), and it is only when Rick pulls off an exceptional performance to which Trudi comments was 'the best acting' she had ever seen, does Rick finally realise that his worth is founded in those aspiring actors who look back with awe on the previous legends gone before them.
While all of this is happening (bare in mind this takes up probably a good hour of the film), we are simultaneously following Margot Robbie's Sharon Tate who is simply enjoying life in Hollywood and Cliff Booth's discovery of the Manson family.
On Tate's side of the story, it is Tarantino's way of just slowing down the film, not to bore the audience but allow them to breathe. While some might feel that there is no point to Sharon Tate being a character in this film other than to add historical context, there is a certain peace about her parts. First of all, Tarantino evidently wants to depict Tate in all her glory - kindhearted, optimistic, happy - and Robbie excels in her performance here. And Tarantino also uses the location of the cinema as a place to all the film to breathe. The cinema is a place of relaxation, escape from the rest of the world, a shelter, a place of refuge, evidently reflecting Tarantino's love for it. Tate watches her own film here and enjoys going incognito, listening to the rest of the audience reacting well to her scenes. Its a lovely homage to this woman and Robbie does an excellent job at portraying her.
Meanwhile with Cliff, after seeing a young girl, Pussy (Fanning), wandering the streets three times in the row, he eventually picks her up and takes her to where she lives, which happens to be an old film studio he used to work at. Intrigued by the nature of her living situation, he agrees to take her there, only to discover things are less than comfortable for him when he disturbs the members of the Manson family. Tarantino employs amazing tension and comedy here ("We love Pussy!"; "Yes we do"), and Pitt does not disappoint with his intoxicating performance, which mixes humour, heart and heroism, resulting in a satisfyingly bloody conclusion - although nothing in comparison to the excessively violent, gory and morbid ending.
Speaking of which, this is possibly one of Tarantino's most brutal depiction of violence in his movies to date. It acts almost as a much needed reward for the audience who have sat through a good couple of hours of mainly dialogue only to conclude with some brilliantly choreographed and performed, yet explosively brutal, violence, all elevated by Tarantino's charismatic and comedic writing.
One of the few issues of this film might be its excessive run time. While Tarantino never effectively wastes time, it could be made a more durable watch if maybe 20 minute were trimmed off, yet nothing feels out of place. It is a different film to what we are used to in the flesh; however, Tarantino's exceptional writing and passion for movies still remains a sure constant.
This might arguably be one of his best films because of how it cannot be judged in relation to his other films in terms of how graphic it is or how vulgar it is, nor is there a feeling that Tarantino is restricted by this stereotype or convention of his movie style. He focuses more of the cinematic quality of the film which is commendable. If this were to be his last film as he has openly confessed, it would put a perfect conclusion to the rest of his filmography. Has he reached perfection? Not quite but it is a film which begs it audience to return time and time again to appreciate every single detail that has been painstakingly achieved by Tarantino's exceptional craftsmanship and handiwork.
Verdict: 9/10
Tuesday, 25 June 2019
Toy Story 4
Director: Josh Cooley
Cast: Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, Tony Hale, Annie Potts, Christina Hendricks, Keanu Reeves
Genre: Animation
Year: 2019
9 years since Toy Story 3, Pixar, seemingly out of blue, come back with a fourth installment for their extremely successful series with Toy Story 4 which reunites us where we left off with the toys in the possession of loving toddler Bonnie.
The beginning of the film starts off - after a brief flashback which introduces us to Woody's moral principle that he will go after any lost toy, no matter what - with Woody and the gang living at Bonnie's house; however, Woody is feeling rejected by Bonnie who has come to favour the other toys over himself and is developing increasing anxiety that he will be forgotten about and no longer loved by a kid. In a desperate attempt to cling to Bonnie's affections, he hides himself in her backpack on her first day in kindergarten. When she is abandoned by her other classmates and robbed of her arts-and-crafts materials, Woody comes to the rescue by inconspicuously delivering her items from the rubbish bin in order to salvage the situation. Using the bits and pieces acquired from the bin, she invents a new friend, an anthropomorphic spork - with a broken lollystick glued to his feet for legs and twisted red dustpipe cleaners for arms - whom she names Forky. To Woody's shock, Forky gains a conscience but cannot understand that he is Bonnie's toy, despite his incessant desire to return to the bin. Woody offers to watch over Forky when the toys are brought on a family weekend away, yet when Forky escapes, Woody chases after him, abandoning Bonnie and his fellow toys.
While many might argue that Toy Story was fine as just a trilogy, the fourth film surprisingly delivers a compelling, emotional and exciting narrative that feels fresh and while arguably it was not necessarily needed to tie up any pre-existing loose ends, as a standalone story, it works surprisingly well. Admittedly, it feels more like a spin off film and there is quite a strong sense that it is detached from the other films as there is not the motif of being Andy's toy (the trilogy - I will call it The Andy Trilogy - had the recurring theme in each film where the toys quest was to return to Andy, whereas while Woody and Forky's ultimate destination is to return to Bonnie, the actual quest they reach, which for spoilers will not be discussed, is quite different) but in a way the film accepts this and embraces its differences. Of course, that is not to say anything else is different - all the same characters and cast members return, such as Tom Hanks and Tim Allen as Woody and Buzz respectively, but we also meet some new characters (as per usual) who add additional flavour, comedy and interest to the film and in turn expand the all star roster with names such as Key & Peele and Keanu Reeves. Everyone is on top form with their voice acting as always and they bring the characters to life with their exceptional talent!
The film itself is excellently written with some of the best humour the franchise has had to offer (my personal favourite is the high fiving army men - you will understand when you see it) and a tear jerking, heartwarming conclusion too. The narrative itself is fresh although does not feel like it has as much depth as something such as Toy Story 3 which juggles a plethora of genre conventions such as horror, espionage, action, romance and comedy without breaking a sweat. Nevertheless, Toy Story 4's narrative feels very succinct, its progression feels mostly logical and most characters feel relatively well fleshed out. The plot is difficult to fault and is entertaining and has some excellent moments in it. One possible critique is that Woody and Forky take up quite a severe percentage of the screen time, alongside Buzz's subplot, so when the film returns to the rest of the gang in the car waiting for Woody, Forky and then Buzz's return, often it feels like they exist so that there is something else to return to and also to help keep the car at bay while, again, waiting for Woody, Forky and Buzz's return. It is not that they serve no purpose, it is more like their purpose is very one-dimensional within the film.
Pixar and Disney take some very interesting thematic approaches with this film too, in particular Forky's existential dread that Woody tries to console him about. Having existed purely as rubbish only to be morphed into a living being confuses Forky and his desperate attempt to return to the rubbish bin shows his attachment to a past life and his refusal to accept whom he has become. A complex theme that Disney pitches to a young audience but yet makes it feel quite simplistic for them to understand - somehow Disney are able to write about existential crises, something 70 year old scientists and professors are having, and make it comprehensible for children. It is a bold move but gives substantial depth to a potentially ridiculous character.
Ultimately, Toy Story 4 is an absolute blast to watch. Hitting all the same comedic, action and entertaining notes as it predecessors, it manages to fit comfortably into this franchise without seeming too forced. Its loveable, memorable characters and its entertaining plot makes for a great film - probably not the best to date but nevertheless attains to the same standard the previous trilogy had set. The conclusion this time feels much more concrete and this is very likely the last one and they have indeed gone out with a bang.
Verdict: 8/10
Cast: Tom Hanks, Tim Allen, Tony Hale, Annie Potts, Christina Hendricks, Keanu Reeves
Genre: Animation
Year: 2019
9 years since Toy Story 3, Pixar, seemingly out of blue, come back with a fourth installment for their extremely successful series with Toy Story 4 which reunites us where we left off with the toys in the possession of loving toddler Bonnie.
The beginning of the film starts off - after a brief flashback which introduces us to Woody's moral principle that he will go after any lost toy, no matter what - with Woody and the gang living at Bonnie's house; however, Woody is feeling rejected by Bonnie who has come to favour the other toys over himself and is developing increasing anxiety that he will be forgotten about and no longer loved by a kid. In a desperate attempt to cling to Bonnie's affections, he hides himself in her backpack on her first day in kindergarten. When she is abandoned by her other classmates and robbed of her arts-and-crafts materials, Woody comes to the rescue by inconspicuously delivering her items from the rubbish bin in order to salvage the situation. Using the bits and pieces acquired from the bin, she invents a new friend, an anthropomorphic spork - with a broken lollystick glued to his feet for legs and twisted red dustpipe cleaners for arms - whom she names Forky. To Woody's shock, Forky gains a conscience but cannot understand that he is Bonnie's toy, despite his incessant desire to return to the bin. Woody offers to watch over Forky when the toys are brought on a family weekend away, yet when Forky escapes, Woody chases after him, abandoning Bonnie and his fellow toys.
While many might argue that Toy Story was fine as just a trilogy, the fourth film surprisingly delivers a compelling, emotional and exciting narrative that feels fresh and while arguably it was not necessarily needed to tie up any pre-existing loose ends, as a standalone story, it works surprisingly well. Admittedly, it feels more like a spin off film and there is quite a strong sense that it is detached from the other films as there is not the motif of being Andy's toy (the trilogy - I will call it The Andy Trilogy - had the recurring theme in each film where the toys quest was to return to Andy, whereas while Woody and Forky's ultimate destination is to return to Bonnie, the actual quest they reach, which for spoilers will not be discussed, is quite different) but in a way the film accepts this and embraces its differences. Of course, that is not to say anything else is different - all the same characters and cast members return, such as Tom Hanks and Tim Allen as Woody and Buzz respectively, but we also meet some new characters (as per usual) who add additional flavour, comedy and interest to the film and in turn expand the all star roster with names such as Key & Peele and Keanu Reeves. Everyone is on top form with their voice acting as always and they bring the characters to life with their exceptional talent!
The film itself is excellently written with some of the best humour the franchise has had to offer (my personal favourite is the high fiving army men - you will understand when you see it) and a tear jerking, heartwarming conclusion too. The narrative itself is fresh although does not feel like it has as much depth as something such as Toy Story 3 which juggles a plethora of genre conventions such as horror, espionage, action, romance and comedy without breaking a sweat. Nevertheless, Toy Story 4's narrative feels very succinct, its progression feels mostly logical and most characters feel relatively well fleshed out. The plot is difficult to fault and is entertaining and has some excellent moments in it. One possible critique is that Woody and Forky take up quite a severe percentage of the screen time, alongside Buzz's subplot, so when the film returns to the rest of the gang in the car waiting for Woody, Forky and then Buzz's return, often it feels like they exist so that there is something else to return to and also to help keep the car at bay while, again, waiting for Woody, Forky and Buzz's return. It is not that they serve no purpose, it is more like their purpose is very one-dimensional within the film.
Pixar and Disney take some very interesting thematic approaches with this film too, in particular Forky's existential dread that Woody tries to console him about. Having existed purely as rubbish only to be morphed into a living being confuses Forky and his desperate attempt to return to the rubbish bin shows his attachment to a past life and his refusal to accept whom he has become. A complex theme that Disney pitches to a young audience but yet makes it feel quite simplistic for them to understand - somehow Disney are able to write about existential crises, something 70 year old scientists and professors are having, and make it comprehensible for children. It is a bold move but gives substantial depth to a potentially ridiculous character.
Ultimately, Toy Story 4 is an absolute blast to watch. Hitting all the same comedic, action and entertaining notes as it predecessors, it manages to fit comfortably into this franchise without seeming too forced. Its loveable, memorable characters and its entertaining plot makes for a great film - probably not the best to date but nevertheless attains to the same standard the previous trilogy had set. The conclusion this time feels much more concrete and this is very likely the last one and they have indeed gone out with a bang.
Verdict: 8/10
Friday, 26 April 2019
Avengers: Endgame
THIS REVIEW IS SPOILER-FREE
Directors: Joe and Anthony Russo
Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Mark Ruffalo, Chris Hemsworth, Scarlett Johansson, Jeremy Renner, Brie Larson, Bradley Cooper, Karen Gillan, Josh Brolin, Paul Rudd, Don Cheadle
Genre: Action
Year: 2019
The film which the entire Marvel Cinematic Universe has been leading up to over the past 10 years is finally out. Avengers: Endgame - the ultimate finale, following from the catastrophic events of Avengers: Infinity War.
The Avengers have lost. Thanos (Brolin) won - he managed to wipe out half of all life in the universe with the snap of his fingers. The remaining Avengers are left shocked, crippled and distraught when their friends all turned to dust unexpectedly. Iron Man (Downey Jr.) and Nebula (Gillan) are stranded on Titan, having lost all their allies with no feasible way of returning to Earth.
Not only did the events of Infinity War leave the Avengers shaken, but also the entire world. Never in a film franchise were the directors so bold as to simply eradicate over half the cast from existence. Never before have we seen our beloved heroes lose so traumatically. People were scarred from Spiderman's weak, trembling whimper "Mr Stark, I don't feel so good!" and heartbroken to find out that Groot's final "I am Groot" actually translates to "Dad" as he cries for Rocket's help. Devastation swept the nation and the Russo Brothers are back to inflict even more pain and suffering onto us all!
In Endgame, the Avengers have the simple goal of finding Thanos and getting their friends back. But naturally, it is never that simplistic. The Marvel team reportedly took three years to conjure up the plot for this film and with its complexity and the amount of twists and turns the film has to offer, it certainly shows. (Now this film is a minefield when it comes to spoilers - the slightest detail could ruin the entire experience for a viewer so I am going to avoid elaborating too much on what the plot consists of because the film is littered with so many spoilers, I cannot risk ruining it for somebody). Considering that fans have had about a year to submit their various wild theories about this film, the fact that the Russo's still pull the rug from under our feet with the direction they take this film is extremely impressive. There are some truly unexpected moments which are incredible and are bound to wipe the floor with any Marvel fan.
Speaking of which, this film is the perfect epitome of a love letter, written and addressed to all the loyal fans, in their masses, across the globe, as well as a fond retrospect on the whole of the MCU. In some ways the film does exploit fan service quite a bit - by that, the film often goes for plot directions which are used to solely satisfy its audience and excite all their fans. Its difficult to say this is a bad thing because a lot of these 'fan service moments' if you will are incredibly exhilarating moments in the film which just add to the adrenaline that it continually ignites and pumps its audience with, plus it is no bad thing to serve your fans, since they are the source that is keeping the films alive. From a critical perspective, one could argue that it distracts the directors from making their own personal film and instead making a film that the audience are wanting to see instead. But ultimately their decision to work with fan service throughout typically heightens the excitement and spectacle of the movie, leading to scenes which will undoubtedly leave the Marvel fandom giddy with elation.
The Russo's certainly deliver with this film though. Their passion for pleasing the Marvel fans and making a film that caps off the Avengers quad-rilogy, and essentially ten years of Marvel is so evident. They know what the fans want and they know how to make an exceptionally entertaining and technically brilliant film. The CGI and visual effects team are working on the double for this film, especially with the extraordinary climatic battle scene at the end, which is one of the most mind-blowing and insane battles to have occurred in Marvel history. Arguably, there is such a colossal amount of things occurring in this section of the film that the Russo's seem slightly overwhelmed with where to focus their attention when filming and some scenes feel rushed or inserted fleetingly in order to acknowledge certain topics but ultimately they refocus on the central element of the sequence (again, no spoilers at all here).
However despite this, the rest of the film, which keep in mind is three hours long, is very good at addressing each character relatively equally, in their post-snap state. Everyone has lost something or somebody as a result of Thanos and the Russo's do not gloss over any of the main characters. But they have a lot of ground to cover and while this is new territory that Marvel is entering into having a three hour movie, the film does have pacing issues. Despite this film being three hours, to its credit, it does not feel that long. In fact it feels relatively the same length film as Infinity War does. While the first act is a slow burn, this is somewhat necessary because it allows the consequences of Thanos' snap to really settle in with audience. This works actually really well as there seems to be a genuine sense of devastation among not only the Avengers but also the ordinary citizens of the world. However, there are multiple occasions scattered throughout the film which happen seemingly spontaneously and often with no explanation, or at least the explanation is quite cheap and more of an 'accept this is what happened, now let us move on with the movie'. It is a typical trope with these blockbuster movies - not to focus too much on the How and the plausibility of a thing that happens in the film but more that it did happen and therefore there is no need to question it. While there are some areas of the film which could be dismissed as simply adhering to the science and logic of this fictional world, there are other areas which seem too easily fixed or at least they were played up to be a much larger dilemma which ended up not being a problem and not even having that large an impact on the rest of the narrative.
Another thing which many critics also acknowledged with Infinity War and the same applies here is that Endgame is completely impenetrable to anybody who is not well versed in the Marvel films as its hardcore fans. While it is certainly made for its fandom, anybody who has missed maybe a couple of Marvel's previous releases, or even not watched any of their previous films, will find it nearly impossible to contemplate what is happening. Most other Marvel films work well as a standalone film but Endgame ensures that if you are not in tune with everything else has happened in this universe, you will simply not understand a thing which is happening nor the significance of any of the actions taken in the film. Nevertheless, on the other hand, what does occur is a delight for all those watching that are fully on board with the Cinematic Universe.
However despite all these criticisms, they are only small nitpicks of an otherwise really extraordinary film, which breaks the mould and sets a new standard for all opposing films to beat in the superhero genre. Marvel have definitely outdone themselves here and this is the perfect conclusion of this ten year journey that they have been leading up to. It is definitely an emotional rollercoaster and arguably the most emotionally poignant Marvel has been, yet it hits the nail on the head every time with these decisions. It is packed with heartbreak, humour, tension, danger and possibly some of the most exhilarating and engaging action set pieces they have offered in a film. It is so clear how much this franchise means, not only to the Russo's and Kevin Feige, but also to all the cast members who really put their all into every moment that their character is on screen. Endgame is the quintessential blockbusters of the ages; it has accomplished what no franchise has even come close to accomplishing before it.
Verdict: 9/10
Directors: Joe and Anthony Russo
Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Mark Ruffalo, Chris Hemsworth, Scarlett Johansson, Jeremy Renner, Brie Larson, Bradley Cooper, Karen Gillan, Josh Brolin, Paul Rudd, Don Cheadle
Genre: Action
Year: 2019
The film which the entire Marvel Cinematic Universe has been leading up to over the past 10 years is finally out. Avengers: Endgame - the ultimate finale, following from the catastrophic events of Avengers: Infinity War.
The Avengers have lost. Thanos (Brolin) won - he managed to wipe out half of all life in the universe with the snap of his fingers. The remaining Avengers are left shocked, crippled and distraught when their friends all turned to dust unexpectedly. Iron Man (Downey Jr.) and Nebula (Gillan) are stranded on Titan, having lost all their allies with no feasible way of returning to Earth.
Not only did the events of Infinity War leave the Avengers shaken, but also the entire world. Never in a film franchise were the directors so bold as to simply eradicate over half the cast from existence. Never before have we seen our beloved heroes lose so traumatically. People were scarred from Spiderman's weak, trembling whimper "Mr Stark, I don't feel so good!" and heartbroken to find out that Groot's final "I am Groot" actually translates to "Dad" as he cries for Rocket's help. Devastation swept the nation and the Russo Brothers are back to inflict even more pain and suffering onto us all!
In Endgame, the Avengers have the simple goal of finding Thanos and getting their friends back. But naturally, it is never that simplistic. The Marvel team reportedly took three years to conjure up the plot for this film and with its complexity and the amount of twists and turns the film has to offer, it certainly shows. (Now this film is a minefield when it comes to spoilers - the slightest detail could ruin the entire experience for a viewer so I am going to avoid elaborating too much on what the plot consists of because the film is littered with so many spoilers, I cannot risk ruining it for somebody). Considering that fans have had about a year to submit their various wild theories about this film, the fact that the Russo's still pull the rug from under our feet with the direction they take this film is extremely impressive. There are some truly unexpected moments which are incredible and are bound to wipe the floor with any Marvel fan.
Speaking of which, this film is the perfect epitome of a love letter, written and addressed to all the loyal fans, in their masses, across the globe, as well as a fond retrospect on the whole of the MCU. In some ways the film does exploit fan service quite a bit - by that, the film often goes for plot directions which are used to solely satisfy its audience and excite all their fans. Its difficult to say this is a bad thing because a lot of these 'fan service moments' if you will are incredibly exhilarating moments in the film which just add to the adrenaline that it continually ignites and pumps its audience with, plus it is no bad thing to serve your fans, since they are the source that is keeping the films alive. From a critical perspective, one could argue that it distracts the directors from making their own personal film and instead making a film that the audience are wanting to see instead. But ultimately their decision to work with fan service throughout typically heightens the excitement and spectacle of the movie, leading to scenes which will undoubtedly leave the Marvel fandom giddy with elation.
The Russo's certainly deliver with this film though. Their passion for pleasing the Marvel fans and making a film that caps off the Avengers quad-rilogy, and essentially ten years of Marvel is so evident. They know what the fans want and they know how to make an exceptionally entertaining and technically brilliant film. The CGI and visual effects team are working on the double for this film, especially with the extraordinary climatic battle scene at the end, which is one of the most mind-blowing and insane battles to have occurred in Marvel history. Arguably, there is such a colossal amount of things occurring in this section of the film that the Russo's seem slightly overwhelmed with where to focus their attention when filming and some scenes feel rushed or inserted fleetingly in order to acknowledge certain topics but ultimately they refocus on the central element of the sequence (again, no spoilers at all here).
However despite this, the rest of the film, which keep in mind is three hours long, is very good at addressing each character relatively equally, in their post-snap state. Everyone has lost something or somebody as a result of Thanos and the Russo's do not gloss over any of the main characters. But they have a lot of ground to cover and while this is new territory that Marvel is entering into having a three hour movie, the film does have pacing issues. Despite this film being three hours, to its credit, it does not feel that long. In fact it feels relatively the same length film as Infinity War does. While the first act is a slow burn, this is somewhat necessary because it allows the consequences of Thanos' snap to really settle in with audience. This works actually really well as there seems to be a genuine sense of devastation among not only the Avengers but also the ordinary citizens of the world. However, there are multiple occasions scattered throughout the film which happen seemingly spontaneously and often with no explanation, or at least the explanation is quite cheap and more of an 'accept this is what happened, now let us move on with the movie'. It is a typical trope with these blockbuster movies - not to focus too much on the How and the plausibility of a thing that happens in the film but more that it did happen and therefore there is no need to question it. While there are some areas of the film which could be dismissed as simply adhering to the science and logic of this fictional world, there are other areas which seem too easily fixed or at least they were played up to be a much larger dilemma which ended up not being a problem and not even having that large an impact on the rest of the narrative.
Another thing which many critics also acknowledged with Infinity War and the same applies here is that Endgame is completely impenetrable to anybody who is not well versed in the Marvel films as its hardcore fans. While it is certainly made for its fandom, anybody who has missed maybe a couple of Marvel's previous releases, or even not watched any of their previous films, will find it nearly impossible to contemplate what is happening. Most other Marvel films work well as a standalone film but Endgame ensures that if you are not in tune with everything else has happened in this universe, you will simply not understand a thing which is happening nor the significance of any of the actions taken in the film. Nevertheless, on the other hand, what does occur is a delight for all those watching that are fully on board with the Cinematic Universe.
However despite all these criticisms, they are only small nitpicks of an otherwise really extraordinary film, which breaks the mould and sets a new standard for all opposing films to beat in the superhero genre. Marvel have definitely outdone themselves here and this is the perfect conclusion of this ten year journey that they have been leading up to. It is definitely an emotional rollercoaster and arguably the most emotionally poignant Marvel has been, yet it hits the nail on the head every time with these decisions. It is packed with heartbreak, humour, tension, danger and possibly some of the most exhilarating and engaging action set pieces they have offered in a film. It is so clear how much this franchise means, not only to the Russo's and Kevin Feige, but also to all the cast members who really put their all into every moment that their character is on screen. Endgame is the quintessential blockbusters of the ages; it has accomplished what no franchise has even come close to accomplishing before it.
Verdict: 9/10
Sunday, 3 March 2019
Alita: Battle Angel
Director: Robert Rodriguez
Cast: Rosa Salazar, Christoph Waltz, Jennifer Connelly, Mahershala Ali
Genre: Science fiction, action
Year: 2019
Coming in as one of the first big blockbusters of 2019, Alita: Battle Angel reveals itself to be an action packed, adrenaline fueled joyride.
Based off of the comic book series Battle Angel Alita, Rodriguez's newest action film to hit the screen follows the story of the eponymous hero, Alita, a cyborg, who is resurrected and cared for by kindly 'cyber-doctor' Ido. However, despite her initial wonder and excitement in discovering life for the first time, her curiosity about the dark underworld gets the better of her, and in a spontaneous street alley conflict, she is revealed, much to her surprise as to everybody else's, to be much more than a simple cyborg.
It comes as no surprise that a science fiction film, written by James Cameron, would be a great, thrilling movie. Cameron's career is almost inherently based upon his ability to create thrilling science fiction action movies; look no further than Terminator 2: Judgement Day and Aliens. So the exhilaration which the film inspires amongst its audience is more than expected and Alita certainly delivers in abundance. While to begin with, there is a significant focus on Alita discovering the world of the Iron City and the vibrant culture bubbling within it, the film truly takes off after its first action sequence. Immediately here, a deeper backstory to Alita is hinted at, something that Alita becomes instantly motivated to seek out and discover more about (being oblivious to her life before being saved by Ido).
The fighting is meticulously choreographed and executed with mesmerising intensity and fluidity. Utilising the benefits of the intricate CGI employed within this film (which, as a sidenote, is of a spectacularly stunning and strikingly refined quality), Rodriguez manages to punctuate all the action through the brutal ferocity of the fighting, straying away from the usual 'family friendly' standard of such modern action movies (while still remaining in the '12' rated category).
Despite the fact that the fighting is set between cyborgs, something not necessarily new to this genre, having the characters laden with heavy machinery and with their bodies augmented with a series of lethal artillery allows for much more variety in the character designs and the structure of the action itself. While one might sport an array of razor sharp blades, another is built around reinforced impenetrable armour.
However, knowing Cameron's screenplays, he too often prioritises the action above most other elements that are required within a film.
Of course, there is no denying that James Cameron can construct and execute magnificent, unforgettable action sequences (who can forget the iconic motorbike chase in T:2 or the final showdown between Ripley and the Queen Alien in Aliens); yet he sadly suffers in his writing when it comes to depicting emotion. His character building is sufficient in this film - it reveals enough about Alita to keep her character interesting, yet confines enough information from the audience to keep her still enigmatic. Plus her relationships and interactions with the other people of the Iron City feels natural or as natural as a human-cyborg relationships can be. Her inevitable relationship with Hugo flows quite smoothly, which is a breath of fresh air for a genre which so frequently forces a romance. Yet during the climatic events at the end of the film, much of the emotional responses portrayed here (no spoilers of course) are so rigid, unnatural, and awkward that it is difficult not to laugh. Cameron is too eager for the action scenes to take centre stage that he too often dismisses the critical, poignant, emotional scenes which, in Alita at least, feel poorly executed.
Naturally, through a much expected cliffhanger at the end, Alita's story is not quite finished in this single installment of a however long franchise. However, it serves as a great introduction into what could potentially be another exciting franchise of films. Not quite perfect but nevertheless extremely entertaining, Alita: Battle Angel is a really enjoyable, well made action film, with lovable characters and enthralling action.
Verdict: 8/10
Cast: Rosa Salazar, Christoph Waltz, Jennifer Connelly, Mahershala Ali
Genre: Science fiction, action
Year: 2019
Coming in as one of the first big blockbusters of 2019, Alita: Battle Angel reveals itself to be an action packed, adrenaline fueled joyride.
Based off of the comic book series Battle Angel Alita, Rodriguez's newest action film to hit the screen follows the story of the eponymous hero, Alita, a cyborg, who is resurrected and cared for by kindly 'cyber-doctor' Ido. However, despite her initial wonder and excitement in discovering life for the first time, her curiosity about the dark underworld gets the better of her, and in a spontaneous street alley conflict, she is revealed, much to her surprise as to everybody else's, to be much more than a simple cyborg.
It comes as no surprise that a science fiction film, written by James Cameron, would be a great, thrilling movie. Cameron's career is almost inherently based upon his ability to create thrilling science fiction action movies; look no further than Terminator 2: Judgement Day and Aliens. So the exhilaration which the film inspires amongst its audience is more than expected and Alita certainly delivers in abundance. While to begin with, there is a significant focus on Alita discovering the world of the Iron City and the vibrant culture bubbling within it, the film truly takes off after its first action sequence. Immediately here, a deeper backstory to Alita is hinted at, something that Alita becomes instantly motivated to seek out and discover more about (being oblivious to her life before being saved by Ido).
The fighting is meticulously choreographed and executed with mesmerising intensity and fluidity. Utilising the benefits of the intricate CGI employed within this film (which, as a sidenote, is of a spectacularly stunning and strikingly refined quality), Rodriguez manages to punctuate all the action through the brutal ferocity of the fighting, straying away from the usual 'family friendly' standard of such modern action movies (while still remaining in the '12' rated category).
Despite the fact that the fighting is set between cyborgs, something not necessarily new to this genre, having the characters laden with heavy machinery and with their bodies augmented with a series of lethal artillery allows for much more variety in the character designs and the structure of the action itself. While one might sport an array of razor sharp blades, another is built around reinforced impenetrable armour.
However, knowing Cameron's screenplays, he too often prioritises the action above most other elements that are required within a film.
Of course, there is no denying that James Cameron can construct and execute magnificent, unforgettable action sequences (who can forget the iconic motorbike chase in T:2 or the final showdown between Ripley and the Queen Alien in Aliens); yet he sadly suffers in his writing when it comes to depicting emotion. His character building is sufficient in this film - it reveals enough about Alita to keep her character interesting, yet confines enough information from the audience to keep her still enigmatic. Plus her relationships and interactions with the other people of the Iron City feels natural or as natural as a human-cyborg relationships can be. Her inevitable relationship with Hugo flows quite smoothly, which is a breath of fresh air for a genre which so frequently forces a romance. Yet during the climatic events at the end of the film, much of the emotional responses portrayed here (no spoilers of course) are so rigid, unnatural, and awkward that it is difficult not to laugh. Cameron is too eager for the action scenes to take centre stage that he too often dismisses the critical, poignant, emotional scenes which, in Alita at least, feel poorly executed.
Naturally, through a much expected cliffhanger at the end, Alita's story is not quite finished in this single installment of a however long franchise. However, it serves as a great introduction into what could potentially be another exciting franchise of films. Not quite perfect but nevertheless extremely entertaining, Alita: Battle Angel is a really enjoyable, well made action film, with lovable characters and enthralling action.
Verdict: 8/10
Friday, 15 February 2019
The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part
Director: Mike Mitchell
Cast: Chris Pratt, Elizabeth Banks, Will Arnett, Stephanie Beatriz, Tiffany Haddish, Charlie Day
Year: 2019
Genre: Animated comedy
Predominantly set five years after the events of The Lego Movie (Chris Miller & Phil Lord, 2014), its worldwide phenomenon predecessor, The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part continues the story of Emmet (Pratt) and the people of Bricksburg, who face new dangers including destructive Lego Duplo toys and the threats of Queen Watevra Wa'Nabi (Haddish) and General Mayhem (Beatriz).
After The Lego Movie took the animated film industry by storm and surprised audiences with its lovable, hilarious characters and thrilling plot, there was natural cause for excitement upon the announcement of the much anticipated sequel, aptly titled The Second Part, in case it was unclear. The Lego film franchise has produced a number of other titles such as The Lego Batman Movie (Chris McKay, 2017) and The Lego Ninjago Movie (Charlie Bean, 2017), both receiving fairly positive reviews, yet most people were looking forward to the adventures (or misadventures) that Emmet would embark on in his sequel, after a rather intense cliffhanger at the end of the first film. Thankfully, The Lego Movie 2: The Second Part was able to deliver.
The general premise of the film is that the Lego Duplo figures caused havoc and mayhem within Bricksburg upon their arrival which sent their society into disarray, and we catch up with the citizens in an apocalyptic world, where morals and rules, that they had rigorously abided by, have long since been abandoned by everybody. Except of course the ever optimistic Emmet. However, disaster strikes when General Mayhem enters Bricksburg and takes five people, those naturally being Emmet's closest friends: Batman, Unikitty, MetalBeard, Benny, and Lucy, leading to Emmet venturing out into unknown space to recover his friends. Along his path, as with The Lego Movie, he encounters multiple allies and friends who help him reach his destination.
In terms of its narrative, while it does not feel as well polished and does not flow as smoothly as The Lego Movie, the plot still feels entertaining. However the plot twists in the third act seem a little bit forced and at times cliche, and the resolutions in the film do feel somewhat too convenient, suggesting that things were solved too easily with not as much poignancy as the resolution in the first film. The character arcs suffer from this too - while there was an emotional significance to Emmet's complete character arc in The Lego Movie, here, and this is not just limited to his character, the events of the narrative seem to weigh less on them as it probably could have done and there feels like no proper development has occurred, or at the very least, the arc and the core message (essentially translating to 'you are good enough' in both narratives) feels suspiciously similar to the first film.
As with its predecessor, The Lego Movie 2 does not lack in imagination for the people the characters meet during their adventure, and in the same way The Lego Movie did, the creators of this sequel fully embrace the absurdity of the other characters, be them friends or foe. And while there is not the same kind of awe and hilarity which was experienced from what the first film managed to conjure up through the use of Lego, it still leads to many funny and entertaining moments. The team behind creating the settings in this film definitely are talented and creative, granting a lot of the locations their own quirky personality, as well as allowing them their own individual identity, and do not feel like a rip-off of something else (they often pay homage to other pop culture, but do not necessarily steal the idea completely).
Furthermore, The Lego Movie 2, as to be expected from the talented writers behind this franchise, is oozing with witty, hilarious and frequently silly comedy. One criticism here is that occasionally it does try quite hard with its humour - while in the first film, the comedy seemed to flow naturally and succinctly, like in The Lego Batman Movie, the writers do try to cram in as many jokes as possible, and this leads to the odd bombardment of puns, jokes and humorous nods that feels a bit much, when they could have settled for the ones that landed well in those scenes.
Ultimately, this film, while being a worthy sequel, does not quite live up to what its predecessor managed to accomplish, and in a way, it would have been extremely difficult to have done so. And while there are a number of flaws with the movie, in essence it does what it says on the tin, that is being an exceptionally entertaining film, hosting the lovable, memorable characters from the first film and allowing its audience escapism into the world of Lego.
Verdict: 6/10
Roma
Director: Alfonso Cuarón
Cast: Yalitza Aparicio, Nancy Garcia, Jorge Antonio Guerreo
Year: 2018
Genre: Drama
2018 boasted many brilliant, emotional, terrific films, many of which deserve much more recognition from the Academy; however, one film that was not overlooked was Cuarón's beautiful masterpiece Roma.
Roma's protagonist is Cleo, a servant for a wealthy family in New Mexico, during the early 1970s. The family is made up of a husband and wife and four children. The parents, Antonio and Sofia, while initially a seemingly happy couple, are attempting to conceal their dysfunctional marriage, which is riddled with arguments and conflicts, from their children. Meanwhile, the four siblings are mostly supervised by their grandmother Teresa and their two maids, that being Cleo and her close friend, Adela.
Without exploring too much more into the film's synopsis, Roma tells the story of Cleo's life between the years 1970 and 1971, both through her relationship with the family she serves, as well as her personal life, such as her relationship with Fermín, and her friendship with Adela. While at the surface there is not necessarily a solid narrative (there is a vague narrative arc which occurs across the duration of the film, which is readily referenced to, but this does not dominate the film's plot), Roma instead values an examination of Cleo and the people around her, as well as the general culture in New Mexico during the early seventies. It is a beautiful portrayal of family, love and friendship; it explores the joy and heartbreak that exists within these dynamics of life. Yet it is not a film that intends to constantly expose its audience to a flow of emotion and feeling. Instead, it avoids melodramatic sequences, often hiding an argument or a moment of sadness outside of the frame and builds up to the intense, heartbreaking moments, which makes seeing these scenes even more poignant and emotional.
What is instantly striking about Roma is its gorgeous, flawless monochromatic cinematography, photographed by Cuarón himself, and his authorial power vividly speaks through the images he portrays in his film. He takes advantage of the medium of cinema, and intends to tell a story as clearly as possible, even if it means focusing and examining minute details in seemingly inconsequential or banal moments. To reference an early example of this in the film, Cuarón visually explains to the audience how Antonio intricately and pedantically parks his car in the garage. Through a succession of quick close ups, the audience is told that he must drive in and out of the garage a number of times in order to be precise in his parking. Even though the audience are not even shown his face at this moment, we are told that he is a man who prides himself on things being done correctly and prides himself on his property (as he avoids scratching the car, despite the fact that he has only a small area to park it in). Cuarón uses sequences like this to inform character's later decisions and also adds significantly more context and weight to decisions made later in the film. It is arguably a subtle film making choice he makes here, yet it shows that Cuarón himself prides himself on the precision of his own work.
Cinematography aside, Roma boasts an impeccable cast of magnificent actors, namely amongst those being Yalitza Aparicio, who portrays Cleo. Her ability to convey emotion through her body language, even when she hosts a blank, emotionless face is fantastic. Yet her expression of emotion throughout the film feels so authentic and genuine, be that pessimistic or optimistic emotions - Aparicio fully adopts the character of Cleo and often the film feels like the camera is simply observing reality.
According to many descriptions of this film, many people claim Roma is an autobiographical film; be that as it may, there is no doubt that this film is incredibly heartfelt and digs into the core emotions of humanity. Cuarón depicts beauty in every day life, through family, through friends, and through the vibrant city of New Mexico. It is truly a marvelous film, with a central message reminding us that all around us we have people who love us, despite the fact that there are many who may not. A scene within the final act of the film which takes place on the beach beautifully exhibits this message.
Verdict: 10/10
Cast: Yalitza Aparicio, Nancy Garcia, Jorge Antonio Guerreo
Year: 2018
Genre: Drama
2018 boasted many brilliant, emotional, terrific films, many of which deserve much more recognition from the Academy; however, one film that was not overlooked was Cuarón's beautiful masterpiece Roma.
Roma's protagonist is Cleo, a servant for a wealthy family in New Mexico, during the early 1970s. The family is made up of a husband and wife and four children. The parents, Antonio and Sofia, while initially a seemingly happy couple, are attempting to conceal their dysfunctional marriage, which is riddled with arguments and conflicts, from their children. Meanwhile, the four siblings are mostly supervised by their grandmother Teresa and their two maids, that being Cleo and her close friend, Adela.
Without exploring too much more into the film's synopsis, Roma tells the story of Cleo's life between the years 1970 and 1971, both through her relationship with the family she serves, as well as her personal life, such as her relationship with Fermín, and her friendship with Adela. While at the surface there is not necessarily a solid narrative (there is a vague narrative arc which occurs across the duration of the film, which is readily referenced to, but this does not dominate the film's plot), Roma instead values an examination of Cleo and the people around her, as well as the general culture in New Mexico during the early seventies. It is a beautiful portrayal of family, love and friendship; it explores the joy and heartbreak that exists within these dynamics of life. Yet it is not a film that intends to constantly expose its audience to a flow of emotion and feeling. Instead, it avoids melodramatic sequences, often hiding an argument or a moment of sadness outside of the frame and builds up to the intense, heartbreaking moments, which makes seeing these scenes even more poignant and emotional.
What is instantly striking about Roma is its gorgeous, flawless monochromatic cinematography, photographed by Cuarón himself, and his authorial power vividly speaks through the images he portrays in his film. He takes advantage of the medium of cinema, and intends to tell a story as clearly as possible, even if it means focusing and examining minute details in seemingly inconsequential or banal moments. To reference an early example of this in the film, Cuarón visually explains to the audience how Antonio intricately and pedantically parks his car in the garage. Through a succession of quick close ups, the audience is told that he must drive in and out of the garage a number of times in order to be precise in his parking. Even though the audience are not even shown his face at this moment, we are told that he is a man who prides himself on things being done correctly and prides himself on his property (as he avoids scratching the car, despite the fact that he has only a small area to park it in). Cuarón uses sequences like this to inform character's later decisions and also adds significantly more context and weight to decisions made later in the film. It is arguably a subtle film making choice he makes here, yet it shows that Cuarón himself prides himself on the precision of his own work.
Cinematography aside, Roma boasts an impeccable cast of magnificent actors, namely amongst those being Yalitza Aparicio, who portrays Cleo. Her ability to convey emotion through her body language, even when she hosts a blank, emotionless face is fantastic. Yet her expression of emotion throughout the film feels so authentic and genuine, be that pessimistic or optimistic emotions - Aparicio fully adopts the character of Cleo and often the film feels like the camera is simply observing reality.
According to many descriptions of this film, many people claim Roma is an autobiographical film; be that as it may, there is no doubt that this film is incredibly heartfelt and digs into the core emotions of humanity. Cuarón depicts beauty in every day life, through family, through friends, and through the vibrant city of New Mexico. It is truly a marvelous film, with a central message reminding us that all around us we have people who love us, despite the fact that there are many who may not. A scene within the final act of the film which takes place on the beach beautifully exhibits this message.
Verdict: 10/10
Saturday, 9 February 2019
Green Book
Director: Peter Farrelly
Cast: Viggo Mortensen, Mahershala Ali
Year: 2019
Genre: Comedy
Set in 1960s America, Green Book follows Frank Vallelonga a.k.a. Tony Lip (Mortensen), who is hired by Doctor Don Shirley (Ali), a black pianist, to transport him across the Deep South of the US for him to perform at various concerts.
From the set up, the audience is made aware that the film is intending to provide another message about the injustice ingrained in society, using the climate of racism in the sixties as an observation on how in many cases, although not as conspicuous in today's world, things have not necessarily changed. However, it also offers a further inspection on the overt racism of the sixties - perhaps a somewhat recycled idea, and in a sense it offers little more than other films of a similar nature have done in the past, yet it is still a poignant message regardless.
Certainly there is no denying that the film is quite entertaining. Most noticeably is the excellent chemistry exhibited between Tony and 'Doc', especially by the end of the film when 'Doc' had accepted Tony's obvious quirks and Tony had been through his slightly forced character arc of becoming respectful for African-Americans and diversity within America. The relationship between the two really acts as a simplified message of discouraging judgement and racism, which for the purpose of the film works somewhat well. At its core, Green Book does not go out of its way to provide a deep, severe commentary of these issues, like BlackKklansman (Spike Lee, 2018) might have done; instead it aims to bring these issues to light, in the context of the sixties, while retaining its comic aspect.
The comedy in this film improves as the plot progresses, especially as the audience become gradually more accustomed to the two's friendship dynamic. To begin with, the film is slightly clumsy and takes a while to properly find its footing. It throws the audience into a narrative with little context and set ups such as Tony's affiliation with the mafia and his discrimination of other races feel rushed in order to push the plot forward. It is a typical shortcut many of these films might take in order to keep the audience engaged with not much exposition and the smallest amount of information to make sure they are on the same page.
Nevertheless, once the situation between 'Doc' and Tony, and their conflicts have been established, the film does pick up and becomes much more entertaining. Again, the film is not unique in its depiction of two conflicting forces soon accepting the others flaws and becoming friends - many films have done very similar notions (again, to reiterate, watch BlackKklansman), yet despite lacking originality, as with these narratives, it is impossible not to avoid its wholesome conclusion in the third act.
Mahershala Ali is brilliant in his role as Shirley and manages to evoke sincere and authentic emotions when dealing with personal conflicts, especially during pivotal scenes in the film. It is clear that 'Doc' deals with attackers coming from all sides, yet forces himself to keep a calm facade amidst his interior chaos, and this is beautifully transferred to screen by Ali. Mortensen, while being the central protagonist in the film, often works as more of the comedic relief in most scenes, yet his struggle to adjust to the cruel way of life is equally poignant, as 'Doc' teaches him a refined sense of morality and shows him humanities true colours.
Ultimately, Green Book is a heartwarming, funny film with a poignant message to offer, which other films may have expressed better or more powerfully, but Green Book's contribution works well. Mortensen and Ali both give great performances and work exceptionally as a double act. The plot lacks complexity and the film does not attempt to explore many of its topics with much depth, leaving much to be desired for the film resolving or elaborating on some key issues, but what the film does offer is enjoyable.
Verdict: 7/10
Cast: Viggo Mortensen, Mahershala Ali
Year: 2019
Genre: Comedy
Set in 1960s America, Green Book follows Frank Vallelonga a.k.a. Tony Lip (Mortensen), who is hired by Doctor Don Shirley (Ali), a black pianist, to transport him across the Deep South of the US for him to perform at various concerts.
From the set up, the audience is made aware that the film is intending to provide another message about the injustice ingrained in society, using the climate of racism in the sixties as an observation on how in many cases, although not as conspicuous in today's world, things have not necessarily changed. However, it also offers a further inspection on the overt racism of the sixties - perhaps a somewhat recycled idea, and in a sense it offers little more than other films of a similar nature have done in the past, yet it is still a poignant message regardless.
Certainly there is no denying that the film is quite entertaining. Most noticeably is the excellent chemistry exhibited between Tony and 'Doc', especially by the end of the film when 'Doc' had accepted Tony's obvious quirks and Tony had been through his slightly forced character arc of becoming respectful for African-Americans and diversity within America. The relationship between the two really acts as a simplified message of discouraging judgement and racism, which for the purpose of the film works somewhat well. At its core, Green Book does not go out of its way to provide a deep, severe commentary of these issues, like BlackKklansman (Spike Lee, 2018) might have done; instead it aims to bring these issues to light, in the context of the sixties, while retaining its comic aspect.
The comedy in this film improves as the plot progresses, especially as the audience become gradually more accustomed to the two's friendship dynamic. To begin with, the film is slightly clumsy and takes a while to properly find its footing. It throws the audience into a narrative with little context and set ups such as Tony's affiliation with the mafia and his discrimination of other races feel rushed in order to push the plot forward. It is a typical shortcut many of these films might take in order to keep the audience engaged with not much exposition and the smallest amount of information to make sure they are on the same page.
Nevertheless, once the situation between 'Doc' and Tony, and their conflicts have been established, the film does pick up and becomes much more entertaining. Again, the film is not unique in its depiction of two conflicting forces soon accepting the others flaws and becoming friends - many films have done very similar notions (again, to reiterate, watch BlackKklansman), yet despite lacking originality, as with these narratives, it is impossible not to avoid its wholesome conclusion in the third act.
Mahershala Ali is brilliant in his role as Shirley and manages to evoke sincere and authentic emotions when dealing with personal conflicts, especially during pivotal scenes in the film. It is clear that 'Doc' deals with attackers coming from all sides, yet forces himself to keep a calm facade amidst his interior chaos, and this is beautifully transferred to screen by Ali. Mortensen, while being the central protagonist in the film, often works as more of the comedic relief in most scenes, yet his struggle to adjust to the cruel way of life is equally poignant, as 'Doc' teaches him a refined sense of morality and shows him humanities true colours.
Ultimately, Green Book is a heartwarming, funny film with a poignant message to offer, which other films may have expressed better or more powerfully, but Green Book's contribution works well. Mortensen and Ali both give great performances and work exceptionally as a double act. The plot lacks complexity and the film does not attempt to explore many of its topics with much depth, leaving much to be desired for the film resolving or elaborating on some key issues, but what the film does offer is enjoyable.
Verdict: 7/10
Tuesday, 5 February 2019
Metropolis
Movie Recommendation:
Metropolis (1927, dir. Fritz Lang)
Metropolis (1927, dir. Fritz Lang)
For anybody who has a love for films and wants to see a truly spectacular, iconic and beautiful movie, I cannot recommend Fritz Lang's 1927 sci-fi masterpiece Metropolis enough.
Some people have reservations about silent movies and I don't blame them - some of the original, experimental films are quite gimmicky and often dull in comparison to today's standard. Metropolis however definitely breaks such stereotypes of silent features. Directed by visionary German director Fritz Lang, Metropolis tells the story of Freder, son of Joh Fredersen, the oppressive leader over the dystopian society depicted in Metropolis, in which the aristocrats live a life of wealth and prosperity above the surface, while millions of workers and laborours suffocate and slave away beneath, doomed to work the machines for eternity.
During his time there, Freder falls in love with the pacifistic leader of the workers, Maria, who is also convinced Freder is the much anticipated saviour of the workers. However, she is captured by mad scientist Rotwang who, by order of Fredersen, transfers her image onto the body of a robot, creating a sadistic, hell bent, destructive doppelganger which he utilises to incite a revolution among the workers and seduce and manipulate the aristocrats.
Not only does Metropolis provide a cautionary tale and host critical social commentary from the time, especially in the wake of Bolshevism and the USSR, it is a stunning film to watch. During this period of film making, directors were set on experimenting with camerawork and editing to see what they could create through this new phenomena of entertainment. This is evident in Lang's film, with intricate set pieces and strictly choreographed scenes involving hundreds of actors, marching across the screen. His experimentation with editing is abundant, with multiple uses of montage sequences (evidently one inspired by the works of Sergei Eisenstein and similar directors from the era) and striking images, such as the collage effect used to evoke the notion of an obsessive male gaze in Maria's clone's hauntingly seductive dance routine, which branded the controversial nature of film upon release. This forced Lang to edit the originally 150 minute film down to 91 minutes upon its American release (the thought-to-be lost footage was recently recovered in 2010 of the cut scenes and a now fully restored 150 minute version of the film has been re-released to the public).Metropolis' influence upon cinema since its initial release spans far and wide. Ridley Scott evidently took significant inspiration from the film when making his equally masterful neo-noir science fiction thriller Blade Runner (1982), in which much imagery shares many similarities with Metropolis. But also, inspiration can be seen in films such as Star Wars (1977, dir. George Lucas), 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968, dir. Stanley Kubrick) and even The Terminator (1984, dir. James Cameron), and no doubt many more. Its importance in cinema is paramount and to dismiss it as a dull silent film is almost a crime in itself.
Despite it being a silent film, it is a superbly entertaining and gripping movie, with a lot to say about the state of society as well as the path the world appears to be taking. I cannot stress how excellent, poignant, terrifying, and exhilarating this film is. Do yourself a favour and watch it!
Wednesday, 30 January 2019
The Favourite
Director: Yorgos Lanthimos
Cast: Olivia Coleman, Emma Stone, Rachel Weisz, Nicholas Hoult
Year: 2019 (U.K.)
Genre: Dark comedy / drama
The Favourite depicts the brutal feud that develops between Abigail (Stone) and Sarah (Weisz) in a desperate attempt to gain the Queen's (Coleman) affection and become her 'favourite'.
Set in 18th Century Britain, against the backdrop of a war between the British and the French, The Favourite explores the lives of the wealthy aristocrats of the time who appear more excited by the apparent thrills of duck racing and private gossip about their peers than the actual threat of the French. At the head of these, Queen Anne resides over England with Lady Sarah at her side, who acts as her counsellor, friend and representative within meetings. Unbeknownst to Anne and Sarah, a once-royal, Abigail, is hired to work in the kitchens and as a maid in the Queen's palace. When Abigail's surreptitious attempt at treating the Queen's injured leg yields positive results, her treatment is acknowledged by Sarah and Anne, allowing her to rapidly climb the ranks within this hierarchical system. However, when the Queen starts to take an equal liking to Abigail, a feud emerges between the two ladies as they fight for Anne's affection and favour.
Across the board, the performances from all the actors are astonishing and highly commendable, in particular that of Olivia Coleman, who truly embraces the impatient, sometimes almost schizophrenic behaviour of the Queen. Her mood swings so frequently that there is a certain tension developed in the film as to what mood the characters will find her in from scene to scene. Similarly, Stone and Weisz produce equally excellent performances and the subsequent vicious battle between the two of them is elevated to such a state of authenticity through their evocative, emotional performances within the film. The characters have intricate personalities and surprising depth, and in an interesting twist, there are no inherent protagonists or antagonists. In essence, whatever fate they endure, they might arguably deserve and there is no definitive character to root for throughout - they are all essentially bad people with their own selfish intentions, even if do attempt to craft a solid facade to disguise their ulterior motives. Yet there is a kind of brutal and twisted entertainment derived from seeing them being successful in their various ploys against each other.
The direction also is absolutely impeccable. Lanthimos does not waste any shot within the film with his immaculate use of lighting (especially the chiaroscuro effect of the candlelit shots), the beautiful, jaw dropping cinematography and his elegant use of camerawork. The camera seems to delicately flow across the rooms, constantly shifting framing, and Lanthimos does also implement the occasional, yet meticulous whip pans within his scenes, adding a smooth and constant sense of motion throughout the film.
The dark humour embedded in the script adds another element of quirkiness and personality to what could have been an otherwise dull movie. The comedy is sharp and witty, with the occasional overt but nonetheless hilarious jokes which allow for a sense of relief amidst the tense relationship between Anne, Abigail and Sarah. The tone throughout the movie shifts quite frequently from comedy to melodrama or even to something resembling a thriller. Regardless, there never feels a moment in which tension or emotion is forced or overly contrived.
Ultimately The Favourite is masterfully crafted by Lanthimos, exhibiting astonishing performances across the board as well as displaying Lanthimos' intricate and near perfect direction.
Verdict: 9/10
The dark humour embedded in the script adds another element of quirkiness and personality to what could have been an otherwise dull movie. The comedy is sharp and witty, with the occasional overt but nonetheless hilarious jokes which allow for a sense of relief amidst the tense relationship between Anne, Abigail and Sarah. The tone throughout the movie shifts quite frequently from comedy to melodrama or even to something resembling a thriller. Regardless, there never feels a moment in which tension or emotion is forced or overly contrived.
Ultimately The Favourite is masterfully crafted by Lanthimos, exhibiting astonishing performances across the board as well as displaying Lanthimos' intricate and near perfect direction.
Verdict: 9/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)