“Disney’s Aladdin” (2019)
In cinemas May 23, 2019
“Aladdin” is the exciting tale of the charming street rat Aladdin, the courageous and self-determined Princess Jasmine and the Genie who may be the key to their future. Directed by Guy Ritchie, who brings his singular flair for fast-paced, visceral action to the fictitious port city of Agrabah, the film is written by John August and Guy Ritchie based on Disney’s “Aladdin.”Teaser trailer
Television review: “Doctor Who – Arachnids in the U.K.” (Episode 4, Season 11)
Television/Sci-Fi
Ten Episodes
Produced by: Chris Chibnall
Featuring: Jodie Whittaker, Bradley Walsh, Tosin Cole and Mandip Gill
The Doctor: “I eat danger for breakfast.”
[pause]
The Doctor: “I don’t. I prefer cereal. Or croissants.”
Into the fourth episode of the eleventh season of “Doctor Who” (1963 – present) and after a couple of adventures in the past and in outer space the gang have arrived back home to an almost old fashioned monster of the week story which again is a callback of sorts to a much older serial in that it addresses something that has only gotten worse over time, that is the waste that humans produce and what we do with it – which is burn or bury it. The callback is to Jon Pertwee’s time as the Doctor in the classic “Doctor Who and the Green Death” (1973) which dealt with a giant corporation, waste and giant fly’s/maggots, this one is different in that it deals with giant spiders, as well as showing a possibly more compassionate Doctor, I guess the question is: Do we need a more compassionate Doctor?
The other aspect of this episode is an old ‘Who’ trope, the seeming inability of the titular character to control the TARDIS properly so seemingly ending up in places that were not planned but seem to be destined to intervene in events. One other aspect, that is possibly going to be an ongoing theme, is the left wing political stance that the Doctor is on, this has only increased with the possible first time a real ‘current’ politician has been name checked in that there is a slight diss of Trump, which immediately shows what side this show is coming down on, and after the fact that we have a female Doctor as well as a multi layered cast is that really any surprise – it could also be setting up guest star Chris Noth for a return at a later date as his character seems to be set up as a political rival to Trump in the near future.
As with the previous episode while it might seem that the bad guys are the most obvious thing in the room, there is a little more going on. So we have giant spiders set up as the bad guys but of course it is the billionaire developer who has made the choices to actually create the monsters, so it is him that we are supposed to be against while the arachnids of the title are confused as well as ultimately a little disappointing as some real monsters is what this show needs at episode four. From the trailers advertising this weeks episode I was not only looking forward to the giant spiders but also to seeing a real star, albeit a TV star, really strutting his stuff in an English show with some very good actors. Unfortunately we are a little lumbered with having to feel sorry for the spiders as ‘victims’ which personally is not what I want at all – I have to admit I was hoping we would have a link back to another Pertwee story, I will let you work out which one I am thinking of, but that would have been far more entertaining and menacing from a viewers point of view. As much as I love Noth, and his performance was spot on I am a little tired of the billionaire as villain which has been used time and again not only in “Doctor Who” but in multiple other properties, its tired and played out.
The unfortunate aspect about having an extremely left leaning “Doctor Who” as well as a similarly put together behind the scenes is that in the quest to please everyone, especially the snowflakes, the show can become bland, fearful of offending anyone and ending up with monsters we have to feel sorry for – those are not the spiders I want to see. Also having a female Doctor, who I really like, would have been an opportunity not to make her dark, but to make her more of a realist, one way to do that is to let her break free a little. Some of the best Doctors have been able to see the difference between protagonists and antagonists, I am thinking of Tom Baker, Pertwee and David Tennant who had to make three dimensional decisions dealing with multiple antagonists, sometime in the same episode – between those three there are not many bad stories considering hours of programming they made.
Speaking of course of the biggest change in the casting of Jodie Whittaker, how is she going after four episodes? Well I think the answer is very well, she seems to understand the randomness as well as the whimsy of the character as well as how to deliver her lines, should we have expected anything less of someone who has skill and time in her profession? Probably not, however she does have something that many of the great ‘Doctors’ have, that is that ability to project true emotion in the understanding of what is important to the main character.
I watch “Doctor Who” on a 4K television and the step up in effects, especially the CGI is noticeable, especially this week with some CGI spiders of varying sizes all looking very good, not how some effects have looked previously which is a welcome relief as time and money has been invested to make them look as good as possible.
As with the three most recent incarnations of the Doctor we see her ‘friends’ wanting to return home but after a taste of adventure realize what. a special place the TARDIS and the Doctor can be, so they all have to make a choice which they do; they are going to keep traveling with her, I mean who wouldn’t. However unlike all of the previous companions these ones are a little different, we see them all interact together as well as having very different arcs, for me again it is Bradley Walsh who is the heart of the three, he lost his wife in episode one, has had to deal with how his step Grandson feels about him as well as being the oldest companion ever which to be fair could have been a turn off for fans. This episode also sees us visit Mandip Gills family which is interesting as it seems to offer us a glimpse into her life as well as the possibility of her being gay, I assume this will be fleshed out in the coming weeks.
All in all though I am very much enjoying these new episodes quite a bit, it is a big step up from last season, with stand alone episodes being a very good decision to get audiences used to some very big changes, I am looking forward to what is to come.
“Doctor Who – Arachnids in the U.K.
Written: Chris Chibnall
Directed: Sallie Aprahamian
Arriving back home in Sheffield, the Doctor and her friends discover massive spiders are attacking the population. They enlist the help of a local scientist, Jade, who helps them track the source of the spiders to a hotel where Yaz’s mother works. The group confronts the hotel owner and American politician, Robertson, who reveals that there is a chemical dump under the hotel. This infected the spiders, causing them to grow to unusual size. The group successfully traps most of the spiders in a bomb shelter, but the mother, the largest spider, is already dying due to her abnormal size. The Doctor wishes to spare it and let it die peacefully, but Robertson shoots and kills it despite her protests. Later, Graham reveals he’s not ready to go back to the apartment he and Grace shared, and he, Yaz, and Ryan inform the Doctor they wish to keep traveling as the group sets off on their next adventure.
“American Horror Story – Season Seven” (2018)
Television/Horror
Eleven Episodes
Created by: Ryan Murphy & Brad Falchuk
Featuring: Sarah Paulson, Evan Peters, Cheyenne Jackson, John Carroll Lynch, Chaz Bono, Adina Porter, James Morosini, Emma Roberts, Mare Winningham, Frances Conroy, Jamie Brewer, Billie Lourd and Alison Pill
Ally: “You were wrong. There was something more dangerous in this world than a humiliated man. A nasty woman.”
Released this week on DVD & Blu-ray is the US drama/horror/anthology show “American Horror Story” (2011-present) which has been going from strength to strength since its first season. It has routinely used many of the same actors to tell very different stories with this seventh season, whose secondary title is “Cult”.
Taking place straight after the 2016 Presidential election this is a reactionary response to the election of Trump as well as many of the ramifications that could and have taken place since as well as the fear and paranoia that has occurred since. There is far too much to go into a review but to say that this season looks at cults from the past five decades is a simplicity but is a good start.
This is a season that needs to be seen to be believed with Evan Peters and Sarah Paulson the standouts as usual with many guest stars that fill out the season.
This season takes place in fictional city of Brookfield Heights, Michigan which is left divided by the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Local restaurant owner Ally Mayfair-Richards (Sarah Paulson) is utterly distraught by Donald Trump’s victory and several of her longstanding phobias flare up as a result. Similarly devastated is fellow Brookfield Heights resident Winter Anderson (Billie Lourd), a liberal college dropout. Contrarily, Kai Anderson (Evan Peters), Winter’s estranged and manipulative brother, rejoices at the election results and is enticed to pursue political power. Kai recruits a disillusioned Winter and frustrated newscast reporter Beverly Hope (Adina Porter).
Ally finds herself relentlessly terrorized by masked clowns. Those close to her, including her psychiatrist Dr. Rudy Vincent (Cheyenne Jackson), question whether the attacks are real or merely anxiety-fuelled hallucinations. Ally’s paranoia, escalated by suspicious activities perpetrated by new neighbours Harrison (Billy Eichner) and Meadow Wilton (Leslie Grossman), hinders her relationships with her wife Ivy (Alison Pill) and their son Oz (Cooper Dodson).
Episodes:
Episodes:
“Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again” (2018)
Musical
Running Time: 114 minutes
Written & directed by: Ol Parker
Featuring: Lily James, Amanda Seyfried, Christine Baranski, Julie Walters, Pierce Brosnan, Andy García, Dominic Cooper, Colin Firth, Stellan Skarsgård, Jessica Keenan Wynn, Alexa Davies, Jeremy Irvine, Josh Dylan, Hugh Skinner, Cher, and Meryl Streep
Tanya: “Be still my beating vagina.”
Critical Commentary:
This week sees the release of “Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again” (2018) the sequel to the 2008 “Mamma Mia!” which at the time was a massive global hit that consisted of a large ensemble cast, written and directed by women based on the stage musical of the same name. Now ten years later while not being the hit the original was it has garnered some very positive critical acclaim with an even larger cast coupled with it also being a prequel as well as a sequel of sorts, which is an interesting narrative gamble as well as possibly confusing for audiences. Now written and directed by Ol Parker who has a track record in these kinds of comedy/dramas brings something a little different, that is a narrative complexity that is present mainly because it is trying to be original and a step on from the previous movie which works well enough, although the flashback scenes are a little overdone seemingly covering up the absence that a star like Meryl Streep creates. Which leads to the largest difference in this sequel the almost complete absence of Meryl Streep which is underplayed in marketing materials but is obvious from the outset, she does make an appearance at the end of the movie which is welcome but feels more like lip service than a real role. However by the time the end credits roll the feeling is that “Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again” is a completely worthy follow up as well as an antidote for the cultural, economic and most importantly political malaise that we find ourselves in, this is as advertised a true feel good movie with sun, smiles, music, laughter and love, I defy you not to have a smile as you watch this, especially with other people in the same room.
Written and directed by Ol Parker who is best known for writing “The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel” (2011) and its sequel “The Second Best Exotic Marigold Hotel” (2015) here he takes similar narratives but adds music as well as a far larger cast, which to be fair is a massive undertaking when dealing with some of the biggest movie stars of the past four decades. Parker wisely recognises that audiences are coming for a few key elements, a story that reinforces the original, some dancing and songs from ABBA’s catalogue that viewers know off by heart and can either tap their feet or even sing along, which some screenings offer, to me that sounds like real fun. “Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again” does rely on a large element of brand recognition as well as nostalgia, for the past, yes, but more importantly for the feeling that the previous movie brought out in people which of course this one succeeds at accomplishing, again Parker as a smart writer knows this as well. The larger question is how the narrative holds together switching between time periods at what can be a frenetic pace with the use of parallel cutting so as to highlight moments of plot, music or even geography which do work well, but there is so much happening I did feel it was a little overlong, which it isn’t but to me feels that way, I have no doubt though that for some it will not be long enough.
The movie begins with Sophie Sheridan who is preparing for the grand reopening of her mother Donna’s hotel, following Donna’s death a year earlier. She is upset because two of her fathers, Harry and Bill, are unable to make it to the reopening and she is having trouble in her relationship with Sky. The story then switches 1979; a young Donna graduated from Oxford’s New College with Rosie and Tanya, and prepares to travel the world. From here we visit both time periods with music playing a big part in the narrative, we are introduced to new characters as well as plot points from the previous movie being expanded on as well as of course the obligatory big final number that seems to take up the final act of the movie.
In terms of performance this is a huge cast with many A-list actors involved, the previous movies cast are all returning along with a few more, including Cher, as well as Andy Garcia who are both wonderful, Garcia in particular is always great to see on the big screen and is having something of a resurgence thanks to supporting roles in a great many projects big and small in a variety of genres. There have been some younger actors cast to play versions of other older actors, for me the stand out is Hugh Skinner who makes an immediate impact as a young Harry who threatens to steal the movie away from whoever he shares scenes with, this for me was the highlight of the cast as well as the movie, he has expert comic timing as well as expert special awareness for what is occurring around him. Of course the singing as well as dancing ability is of most importance and as you expect from the previous movie it is the women who are the standouts, with Lily James the newest main cast member doing an outstanding job and proving why her three previous roles have been unmitigated success, Collins is proving to be the real deal in terms of young actresses.
The strength of this movie is its happiness factor which may sound flippant but after a long two years of seemingly brutality in the media, much cynicism as well as the erosion of peoples rights it is a breath of fresh air to see a movie that is all about singing, dancing, family and friends who all get along and actually want to be together, there are no real dark pasts or indecision just people living lives on a Greek Island with really little care or seriousness. Of course it is a very white middle class movie that offers nothing of real culture or substance, there are little people of other cultures, in fact culture has been appropriated, if this does not bother you then this will be a fun time to be had as well as repeatedly viewed I am sure along with the original movie.
When I watched this movie I was not expecting much but I had a good time watching it, while its not the most original or significant of the year or decade it does offer something that will reveal itself when watched and I have to say the more people watching at the same time the better.
Technical Commentary:
The 4K UHD release of “Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again” comes packaged in your standard two-disc 4K UHD amaray case. Within that case is the standard 4K copy of the movie as well as the standard Blu-ray copy. There is also a digital copy redemption pamphlet that’s been included as well as a slipcover that’s been made available during the original pressing that features the same artwork that’s included on the case.
Video:
Despite being an upscaled 4K release, “Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again” ultimately shines best with its utilization of Dolby Vision. Giving its viewers a bright and vivid color presentation that really offers a detailed look into the scenic views. While the majority of the movie really didn’t have much that stood out over other parts, I will certainly say that the scenery in which the story takes place really stood out the best with me personally, and really helped with the fun to be had with the various dance numbers.
Audio:
Bundled with a Dolby Atmos audio track, the 4K UHD release of “Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again” really does a decent job at offering an all out immersive audio experience. The musical numbers really sounded great through my home theater system, almost as if I were sitting there at a live show. The dialogue is spoken cleanly, ensuring that the characters could be heard without having to adjust the volume levels as it progressed.
Special Features:
“Halloween” (2018)
Horror
Running Time: 105 minutes
Written by: David Gordon Green, Jeff Fradley and Danny McBride
Directed by: David Gordon Green
Featuring: Jamie Lee Curtis, Judy Greer, Andi Matichak,Will Patton,Virginia Gardner, Nick Castle
Laurie Strode: “Do you know that I prayed every night that he would escape?”
Hawkins: “What the hell did you do that for?”
Laurie Strode: “So I can kill him.”
This week saw the release of the latest Blumhouse horror movie “Halloween” (2018), which was yet another box office success for the producers costing a miserly US$10 million, but generating almost US$100 million at the global box office, on its opening weekend alone, making this yet another example of how Jason Blum is ruling the horror genre as well as utilizing talents such as David Gordon Green and Danny McBride who are not known for the horror genre but have created a sequel in a franchise that was going absolutely nowhere for decades, not only that but they did the impossible, getting original creator John Carpenter on-board before the cameras had even rolled so that it was legitimized in audiences eyes. The other major coup was being able to bring Jamie Lee Curtis back, playing her age as well as proving she has some unfinished work with the”Halloween” franchise.
I have made the point before but the past ten years has been a bonanza for genre movies, especially horror, not only does there seem to be more being produced than ever before, especially with the advent of cheap film making equipment, more quality filmmakers entering the genre as well as more production companies realising there is money to be made, especially with the increase in online streaming services. This is where Jason Blum and his Blumhouse production company has entered the market finding a cost/revenue model that works for them, partnering with a major distribution partner in Universal and not limiting itself to theatrical projects, but also partnering with Netflix. In fact this year Blumhouse will have released eighteen movies over a variety of mediums their most ever, including their Oscar hopeful Spike Lee’s “BlacKkKlansman” (2018), a belter of a non genre film. What is even more impressive is that all the movies that they have released have made enough money to all be profitable which is something few other production companies is able to claim.
The beauty of this new instalment in the franchise is that it more less follows on from the original “Halloween” (1979) but set forty years later all the while acknowledging that those years have passed by, it also vey quickly dispels the idea that Laurie (Jamie Lee Curtis) was related to the killer, Michael, which negates much of the stories told in the subsequent sequels. Interestingly it actually appears that this movie would not have been produced without the ability to bring back original star Jamie Lee Curtis or having the approval of John Carpenter who also supplies some original music along with his son. What is interesting is that Carpenter has become more reconcilable as a musician than a director which is a stunning turn of events. Not only that it has taken the combined talents of David Gordon Green and Danny McBride to initially set up a vision for a sequel then to bring it all together to create a truly exceptional horror movie.
“Halloween” has been co-written by David Gordon Green and Danny McBride as well as directed by Green, it should come as no surprise then that they have made some drastic decisions in terms of the history of the “Halloween” franchise by publicly distancing themselves from all the movies that came after the original. Both of these filmmakers have a huge amount of experience in both micro budget as well as larger budget movies, they know how to work to not only a strict budget but a timetable as well – which is vital when working with Blumhouse. Both filmmakers have worked together for over two decades on a variety of projects so for them to team up on a horror movie seems obvious, but it is a testament to their skill that they had an idea to relaunch the franchise, bring in Blumhouse and create something very special that new fans will enjoy and old fans should be treated by, in fact they are taken back to a time when horror movies were not only original but surprising and enjoyable. Green as Director has kept with the style of Carpenters original even taking some key moments from that first movie, repeating them but with twists, this is the best example of a director not aping someone else’s work but paying homage to one of the greatest and most successful horror movies of all time, as well as a director who was more in the mould of a classic Hollywood director.
“Halloween” begins with true-crime podcasters Aaron Korey and Dana Haines who travel to Smith’s Grove Sanitarium to interview Michael Myers. Dr. Ranbir Sartain, who has been treating Michael since Loomis’ death, informs them that Michael is able to speak but chooses not to. Aaron fails to get Michael to speak, even after brandishing his mask. They then head over to Laurie’s house to interview her. She has spent the last forty years dealing with post-traumatic stress and preparing for Michael’s inevitable return. Her trauma has resulted in two failed marriages and losing custody of her daughter Karen, who went on to have her own daughter, Allyson.
Michael and other patients are loaded onto a bus transport, Dr. Sartain insists on accompanying Michael. Later, the bus crashes in a ditch, the security guards are killed, and the inmates scatter about the road, allowing Michael to escape. Laurie learns about the crash and breaks into Karen’s house to demonstrate her lack of security, causing an argument with Karen and her husband Ray. From here the movie becomes a cross between an intergenerational drama/horror that addresses many issues as well setting up a finale that pays off the promise of the first three quarters of the movie.
There is no doubt that the central and most important performance is that of Jamie Lee Curtis, in fact this movie probably would not be the great movie it is without her, the same could be said of the original as well. The other factor is that Curtis is such an underrated actress in terms of all her work it can be easy to forget that she was so young when she made the original so the key for her was to play her part in a realistic way, which she does. Curtis is vulnerable as well as fierce which is not an easy place to be in a horror movie. The rest of the cast is made up of veteran character actors as well as new faces but they are all secondary to the story of Michael and Laurie who are two such dominant characters that when they are both absent from the screen the movie does lose momentum but thankfully that does not occur very often.
David Gordon Green has directed a very tight story wrapped up in a narrative that most will recognize, it follows a fairly simple hunter and hunted format that succeeds with some very practical kills that highlights how vulnerable people can be either in their homes, in public spaces as well as what should be private places, like the very visceral kills in a bathroom at a gas station. What cannot be underestimated is that much of this film takes place at night with lights off or the heavy use of shadows but as an audience it is always clear what is happening and specially where all characters are at all times.
“Halloween” succeeds on every level, it is an excellent part reboot of a franchise, it is a scary horror movie that does not rest on jump scares but in fact introduces some new element’s to the legend of both Michael Myers and Laurie Strode while eliminating one that tied the franchise down for years, not only that it was eliminated in one sentence. The movie has been a runaway success even after its first weekend so I am assuming that there will be some plan for a sequel especially when the budgets are so low. In fact it has to be said that everyone involved in this movie is not only top notch but executes at the very highest level delivering what is simply one of the best horror movies of the year. On another note it is a treat to know that John Carpenter one of the greatest and under appreciated directors of the past fifty years was involved in this, we can only hope that this will bring him out to direct another movie.
“Halloween” is out now only in cinemas.
“A Star Is Born” (2018)
Drama
Running Time: 135 minutes
Written by: Eric Roth, Bradley Cooper and Will Fetters
Directed by: Bradley Cooper
Featuring: Bradley Cooper, Lady Gaga, Andrew Dice Clay, Dave Chappelle and Sam Elliott
Jackson Maine: “Can I tell you a secret?”[Ally looks over to him]
Jackson Maine: “I think you might be a songwriter. And don’t worry, I won’t tell anybody. But I’m not very good at keeping secrets.”
When I first heard about the “A Star is Born” (2018) remake it had Clint Eastwood as director and Beyonce as the ingénue that is fated to eclipse her older mentor which was enticing enough, but when both dropped out and star Bradley Cooper came on as not only actor but producer/screenwriter/director it seemed like the world may have been turned upside down, especially with the casting of pop Diva Lady Ga Ga in the pivotal role. This is at least the fourth direct remake of the original movie from 1937, and it is possibly the best version (which is really saying something), told in a modern context with not only pop music at its centre but also County music as well, which play extremely well against each other. What is so surprising is the way in which all levels of this movie work in relation to each other, the performances, the original music, the way in which it is filmed both on locations, in sound stages as well as the musical numbers, the way in which supporting actors have been cast in roles that they would not normally be known for, down to the way the plot has been deployed through its editing as well as its classical Hollywood narrative.
The biggest question about this film especially coming out of festivals was, is it any good or was it just a vanity project, the great news is that this is not only a good film, it is a great one, that is going to have long legs quite a while after its release date, and going into awards season where I believe it is going to do very well on all fronts, notably for Bradley Cooper across a few categories as well as for Lady Ga Ga where I think she is a lock for an Academy Award for ‘Best Song’. There are so many examples of films similar to this that do not fare well, especially when they are released at this time of year, feature good casts, could be considered atypical of their genre and are built around big performances but fail to either make an impact or are just bad. This is not the case with “A Star is Born” which is pretty much built about two central performances, they are so strong that they mitigate any other deficiencies that are contained within the film from a first time director.
Speaking of directors, “A Star is Born” has not only been directed by Bradley Cooper, but he has co-written, co-produced and even co-wrote some of the music which is as impressive as you can get, particularly when this is the first film behind the camera. By the way, he gives the performance of his career in the role of Jackson Maine, an alcoholic, pill popping country singer who is as believable as any role he or anyone has ever been in. The key to Cooper’s success I believe in this film is the first hour where you get to know the two main characters from their introductions, which does let up for the next hour, this also represents the best hour from any film this year, it is almost perfect with every aspect, however the last third of the film is a little more uneven but to be fair this is the heavy lifting for the audience as well as the plot and is when this film comes together into the final few scenes which really bring the narrative to a final full stop. My only nit-pick would be it seems like Cooper may have had a difficult time putting together a completely coherent narrative as it seems the time the movie takes place over is a little confusing as are the jumps that are made. Not that this is a negative as this is still one of the great films of the years.
“A Star is Born” concerns Jackson Maine, a famous country singer privately battling an alcohol and drug addiction. After one show, Jackson happens upon a drag bar where he witnesses a performance by Ally, a waitress and singer-songwriter. Her talent amazes Jackson; they spend the night speaking to each other, where Ally discloses to him the troubles she has faced in pursuing a professional music career. Jackson invites Ally to his next show. Despite her initial refusal she attends and, with Jackson’s encouragement, sings on stage with him. Jackson invites Ally to go on tour with him, and they slowly begin to form a romantic relationship.
“A Star is Born” is really based around the Lady Ga Ga character but this is a deceptive film as it to me is really about addiction, as well as the arc of the person that Bradley Cooper portrays which is a difference from other versions of this story. As I have already stated this is Coopers greatest performance, which is saying something as he has already been nominated for three acting Oscars, however this is the one that should win it for him. What is stunning about this performance is that Cooper appears in most of the scenes but is directing at the same time while giving a three dimensional performance. Not only that but at many times he is either singing or playing an instrument, as well as performing in front of real audiences, this is one of the more unique performances of the modern age, it is inspiring to see what he is capable of. On the other hand this is the big screen debut of Lady Ga Ga who of course excels in the musical scenes as well as the more naturalistic scenes but there is no doubt that that inexperience plays a part but she does acquit herself exceptionally well, I am sure we will be seeing her onscreen for years to come. There are three supporting actors that are all excellent they are Andrew Dice Clay, Dave Chappelle and Sam Elliott, the two former are comedians who do their jobs well, but the real stand out is the actually great Elliott as Coopers brother. Elliott is an actor that has appeared in almost every genre, but it is with his performance here, while small makes a massive impact on the main characters and lends some of the heart to the movie outside of the music, look out for his name to be announced at awards time.
The final aspect of the film that is really worth noting is the music, which really is another character. Many films that are not strictly musicals but feature music heavily are normally at least written by third parties but this is where “A Star is Born” really makes its mark with the music being supplied by both its principal’s in Lady Ga Ga and Bradley Cooper. Because this music is written by one of the co-writers of the movie it all not only adds to the narrative but actually means something and is poignant which is an additional layer of meaning which can only mean great things for this movie’s future.
This is a film that should and actually deserves to be seen in cinemas, it is one of those rare films that presents itself as a classic and actually succeeds on almost all levels. Sure there is currently a high amount of hype that surrounds this movie but unlike many others it is an instant classic that tells an almost universal story about love, talent, loss and success in equal measures. What Cooper has done is take a previous plot, cast some very good actors, created some great music and combined all of these with great behind the scenes talent to produce a great unmissable film.
“A Star is Born” is out now in cinemas.
“Doctor Who – Rosa” (Season 11)
Television/Sci-Fi
Ten Episodes
Produced by: Chris Chibnall
Featuring: Jodie Whittaker, Bradley Walsh, Tosin Cole and Mandip Gill
The Doctor: “Operation Rosa Parks: We have to make sure we keep history in order.”
Into the third episode of the eleventh season and its a bit of a flashback to very early ‘Who’ in that it takes place in Earth’s past and involves making sure an event occurs to a seemingly pivotal figure in that history. Trips to Earths past used to be a staple of ‘Who’ episodes from the 1st Doctor and well into the Russell T Davies episodes, they were a way to instantly capture an audiences attention while keeping budgets low as well as shortcutting narrative as hopefully viewers we would have an idea of who the episode was about. In this case this new episode deals with Rosa Parks who refused to sit in the ‘coloreds’ only part of a bus in the South of the United States. The events of the her actions would be profound, helping to ignite the civil rights movement along with many other actions, protests and people who believed that all people should be created equal.
The other aspect of this episode is an old ‘Who’ trope of the inability of the titular charter unable to control the TARDIS properly so seemingly ending up in places that were not planned but seem to be destined to intervene in events. So we have two aspects that collide as well as being illustrated directly by the fact that two of the Doctors friends are non-white and within a few minutes of arriving in the South are confronted by the racism that existed in that time, of course as we find out these may be magnified by the fact that Rosa Parks might not actually succeed in her actions because of some other worldly event – remember this is still “Doctor Who”!
Of course the main ‘bad guy’ of this episode is not really the person from another planet but the treatment of minorities in the South in 1955, it also illustrates perfectly how far we as a people have come, as well as how far there is to go. It goes without saying that the real heroes of this episode are the characters of Rosa Parks as well as all those who were around here, as well as those that were to come and exist now. What I loved about this historical episode was how subtle it was, how it wrapped a narrative around real events all the while balancing humor, drama and it has to be said the horror of racism. The central premise, as well as the pivotal event when it occurs, is a completely powerful scene, as well as overwhelming, this is fitting with the casting of the new Doctor as well as the supporting cast; has there been a more poignant episode ever of “Doctor Who” to date without being preachy or knowing, witnessing history through the eyes of others who all know how important their part in history was.
Once again though the set up of the villain is completely forgettable, in fact half way through episode I had forgotten about him as well as what he was trying to do and his motivations for doing it. My feeling is that he was unnecessary and another reason for the episode could have been created quite easily. It is easy to see that these regular characters are growing into their roles, I do think it is about time to have an antagonist that is worthy of this Doctor as well as her friends to really open them up to new experiences as well as some adventure that tests them as well their production team.
Speaking of course of the biggest change in the casting of Jodie Whittaker, how is she going after three episodes? Well I think the answer is very well, she seems to understand the randomness as well as the whimsy of the character as well as how to deliver her lines, should we have expected anything less of someone who has skill and time in her profession? Probably not, however she does have something that many of the great ‘Doctors’ have, that is that ability to project true emotion in the understanding of what is important to the main character. Another aspect of The Doctor is the humor which comes to the fore in one particular joke about Banksey which is not only hilarious but surprisingly relevant for a show filmed months ago, just shows the Doctor is indeed timeless.
The other element of this new season are The Doctors friends who after this episode we are starting to get a real for, the best for me and the most obvious stand out is Bradley Walsh who seems to be the main comic relief who also has a feel for what he and his friends are involved in, he delivers his lines like a pro, he plays his part much like he did in his outstanding role in “Law and Order: UK” (2009-2014). As for Tosin Cole and Mandip Gill they act as the audience asking questions about almost everything as well as sometimes being in peril, especially in this episode, so The Doctor can assist them. As the audience we see each new world through the supporting characters eyes which is something that has been true for almost all the seasons of “Doctor Who”.
Even though we have been led to believe that the Doctor is returning her friends to Earth it is obvious they are going to be around for a few more episodes yet, my only concern is that with three of them one or more is likely to get short changed in the story department but other than that I am looking forward to seeing where this season will be headed, if it is one off stories then that may be a good re-set for the series heading into twelve.
“Rosa“
Written: Chris Chibnall & Malorie Blackman
Directed: Mark Tonderai
The Doctor’s attempt to return her friends to modern-day Sheffield goes awry when the TARDIS lands in 1955 Montgomery, Alabama. The team soon encounter civil rights activist Rosa Parks, just days before she refuses to give up her seat on a bus and ignites a historic black rights movement in the Deep South. However, the Doctor soon realises someone is meddling with history: a white supremacist from the future, determined to stop Rosa from sparking a revolution. The TARDIS team must work against the clock to put history right, and soon end up embroiled in the legendary moment themselves.
Teaser Trailer: “The Curse of the Weeping Woman” (2019)
La Llorona. The Weeping Woman. A horrifying apparition, caught between Heaven and Hell, trapped in a terrible fate sealed by her own hand. The mere mention of her name has struck terror around the world for generations. In life, she drowned her children in a jealous rage, throwing herself in the churning river after them as she wept in pain. Now her tears are eternal. They are lethal, and those who hear her death call in the night are doomed. La Llorona creeps in the shadows and preys on the children, desperate to replace her own. As the centuries have passed, her desire has grown more voracious…and her methods more terrifying. In 1970s Los Angeles, La Llorona is stalking the night—and the children. Ignoring the eerie warning of a troubled mother suspected of child endangerment, a social worker and her own small kids are soon drawn into a frightening supernatural realm. Their only hope to survive La Llorona’s deadly wrath may be a disillusioned priest and the mysticism he practices to keep evil at bay, on the fringes where fear and faith collide. Beware of her chilling wail…she will stop at nothing to lure you into the gloom. Because there is no peace for her anguish. There is no mercy for her soul. And there is no escape from the curse of La Llorona.
THE CURSE OF THE WEEPING WOMAN is produced by Emile Gladstone, Gary Dauberman (“IT” and “Annabelle” franchises) and James Wan (“The Conjuring” universe). Michael Chaves, who won Shriekfest’s Best Super Short Film in 2016 for “The Maiden,” makes his feature directorial debut. The film stars Linda Cardellini, Raymond Cruz; Patricia Velasquez; and Marisol Ramirez. The cast also includes Sean Patrick Thomas, Jaynee-Lynne Kinchen and newcomer Roman Christou.
THE CURSE OF THE WEEPING WOMAN releases in New Zealand on April 18, 2019.
“The First Purge” (2018)
Action
Running Time: 97 minutes
Written by: James DeMonaco
Directed by: Gerard McMurray
Featuring: Y’lan Noel, Lex Scott Davis, Joivan Wade, Mugga, Luna Lauren Velez, Kristen Solis, and Marisa Tomei
The Architect – Dr. Updale: “Please don’t tell me your sending mercenaries into the island disguised as purgers?”
This week sees the arrival of the fourth movie in the ‘Purge’ franchise, the confusedly titled “The First Purge” (2018), on DVD and Blu-ray, it actually defies belief that there is even a franchise based around this high concept idea from Blumhouse Studios. I believe, and I also can’t help but think that everyone involved with the original movie was going to be one and done. But leave it to Blumhouse to not only market the original to some success both in the US as well as internationally, but to tap into something during the Obama administration that would, to a certain point, reflect what was to come with the Trump administration as well as to actually infect society with the term ‘purge’ to such an extent that it is now a pop culture reference. In fact 2018 could be seen as the year of the ‘Purge’ as the rights of people around the world are being restricted, many hard right parties are either coming to power or gaining power not forgetting that on the small screen there is a new television series “The Purge” (2018-) that is exploring one night over several plot-lines of the purge where we see how it has infiltrated different segments of society and how people are either embracing it or fighting back. That brings us to the latest cinematic instalment which acts as a prequel exploring the very first purge night, with all that entails, of course this one centres on the most vulnerable in society as well as a ‘test case’ if you will for what has unfolded in the previous movies.
Unlike the previous two instalments that carried a small arc as well as a main character in Frank Grillo’s ‘Sarge’ this new movie is much like the first one in that it is stand alone and offers more of an insight into the origins of ‘purge night’, which is not only a good way to reset the franchise but to also measure if audiences are still interested in this run of movies, judging from the global box office of US$135 million people are not ready to give it up, this is the biggest grossing film so far, internationally. So is this worth a watch or not? In fact it is just as good as the others which is about as you would expect, in fact this is the first part of a shared Universe as this night is referenced in the new television show, so I am assuming we can expect more of both to come in the future.
“The First Purge” has been written by original creator as well as director of the first three movies, James DeMonaco who knows his subject, writing to its strengths while still attempting to maintain some political commentary as well as keeping the narrative intact so that as a whole the franchise makes sense to those watching. There are of course elements of the franchise that have been borrowed from elsewhere with paranoia playing a big part as does Frank Miller’s graphic novel series “Give me Liberty” with the masses paying the price so that those in power can carry on while seemingly giving people the gift of some kind of freedom. New director Gerard McMurray gives the series a shot in the arm, he also lends some authenticity as an African American who is giving a point of view that is very different from the white one we have had before which is in fact a relief. It can be disingenuous for white people to be writing and directing a movie that could be seen as the black experience, which this is and is welcome especially after the past few years with ‘Black Lives Matter’.
“The First Purge” takes place sometime in the mid-21st century, turmoil has caused the government to be overthrown by the New Founding Fathers of America (NFFA). NFFA members Arlo Sabian and Dr. May Updale announce an experiment to take place on Staten Island where for 12 hours, citizens will be allowed to purge and release their inhibitions in any way they choose. The NFFA offers residents of the Island $5000 to stay in their homes during the experiment and a compensation for those participating as well. They also outfit the participants with tracking devices and contact lenses with cameras in them so that they can monitor all activity. The actual narrative should be familiar to any viewers by now; survival is key as is the resistance that is formed by the characters that we are introduced to.
This movie like the previous three has been cast with some relatively unknown actors as well as a few experienced ones to keep the budget low as well as giving audience members a familiarity factor so that they have something to hang on to. What is great is that all the new actors are individualistic and unique so that even though we have been through this night before it is fresh for them in almost every way, which works well, the director has to receive kudos for casting the right people for the correct roles. Another thing this movie is wise about is the physicality of the actor’s where some are lean and fit who are obviously able to take care of himself or herself, the newcomers to action look out of place which is in keeping with how they would be on the first purge night. We also begin to see how some of the ‘purgers’ start to really enjoy themselves as well as donning other personas to make them apart from the atrocities they will commit.
Speaking of the first night of the purge, the outcome is always going to be inevitable but the way in which the plot unrolls is interesting in that it paints a picture very quickly of the need for resistance as well as how that resistance takes place. “The First Purge” does illustrate a few things quite nicely in that it shows how easy it would be for a government to be dominated by a right wing ideologue as well as how the rich are always pitted against the poor especially those without a real voice or power. One could almost imagine this happening now in this day and age. Of course this is exactly what is occurring in many countries throughout the world, in Brazil, México, the US, Australia and so many more which is a sad indictment on the ability of the ‘resistance’ to mount a counter attack. We are often told of coups being sudden and violent but in fact they can be slow moving as well.
“The First Purge” is fiction, it should be treated that way as escapist fantasy of the ‘What if?’ kind, for that it is successful, as are the other three movies in the franchise. I actually enjoy these movies more for the motivations of the politicians than anything else, so I would recommend this as well especially if you enjoyed the others, and have or are going to watch the series. Remember the rich and powerful always cheat.
“The First Purge” is out now on DVD & Blu-ray.
“Skyscraper” (2018)
Action/Thriller
Running Time: 101 minutes
Written and directed by: Rawson Marshall Thurber
Featuring: Dwayne Johnson, Neve Campbell, Chin Han, Roland Møller, Noah Taylor, Byron Mann, Pablo Schreiber and Hannah Quinlivan
Will Sawyer: “If you can’t fix it with duct tape… you ain’t using enough duct tape.”
Critical Commentary:
First things first, with this new movie featuring Dwayne Johnson, released this week on 4K Blu-ray with the aptly if not on the nose moniker “Skyscraper”(2018), is a terrible exercise in crossing a number of previous movies yet done in such a way as to be bland as well as so obvious that viewers are far better off either watching “Die Hard” (1988) or even the not so great “The Towering Inferno” (1974). The main issue with this movie is quality control as well as the seemingly inability of Johnson to say no to any movie that comes across his purview, which is a horrible way to maintain a career that is either built on box office success, critical reactions or audience reactions. If you judged “Skyscraper” by any of these measurements then this movie failed on all accounts, which actually joins a long line of Johnson’s movies, they only seem to be increasing as time moves on. It appears that outside of the ‘Furious’ franchise Johnson seems more than happy to fill out his career with some poor remakes, reboots or reimagining’s that all mostly seem to be variations on his own persona that people are starting to catch on with so are avoiding the trip to see them at the cinema. Of course there has been the odd exception “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle” (2017) is one that audiences enjoyed whilst generating almost US$1 billion at the global box office. Which brings us back to “Skyscraper” a movie that is just a ludicrous idea of a movie that seems happy to bring together Johnson, some sub par CGI, a story that makes little sense as well as a narrative that doesn’t mind reminding you that this is based on other far better ideas executed much better with main characters that can actually act.
There is one other aspect of this movie that is troubling, that is the fact that Dwayne Johnson’s character is only supposed to have one leg, as part of one was amputated because of some vague event that happened in his past when he was some kind of special forces operative. The odd thing is that this aspect of the character really does not come into play, it serves as just a way for him to overcome a physical obstacle, it exists for no other reason which I am surprised that more was not made of this when there has been an outcry from the public in regard to able bodied people portraying characters with physical impairments. It may be because this movie didn’t come up on peoples radar as it is just that bad that it was not a story.
“Skyscraper” has been written and directed by Rawson Marshall Thurber who has not only worked with Johnson before, on “Central Intelligence” (2016) that was quite funny although suffered from some of the problems as this, but also wrote and directed the excellent “Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story (2004), his first feature movie. What seemed like a great debut that may have heralded a very good comedy career and has in a way did not have in its future a mess like “Skyscraper”. Thurber whose other movies have at least been funny as well as in their own way, original was a welcome figure in the comedy genre. Not only that but they all used the casts provided in very funny original ways, which except for one actor definitely does not happen in this movie. This is definitely Thurbers highest budget so I can only assume there was some tinkering behind the scenes especially with Johnson’s friend and producer Hiram Garcia who seems to be behind some of Johnson’s decision-making. My feeling is that Johnson needs to start making original movies as well as original characters, he needs to start gambling on originality not retreads.
So what is “Skyscraper” about? U.S. Marine war veteran and retired FBI Hostage Rescue Team leader, Will Sawyer, assesses security for skyscrapers. A suicide explosion from a previous mission has left one leg amputated, below the knee. He is fitted with a modern prosthetic leg, which keeps his full mobility. Sawyer is tasked with inspecting the Pearl, and his family – wife Sarah and twin children Georgia and Henry move into the building. Sawyer confirms to Zhao, security directors Ajani Okeke and Sawyer’s friend and fellow ex-FBI agent Ben Gillespie, and insurance executive Mr. Pierce, that the building’s fire and security systems are secure, but he needs to inspect the offsite security center that controls the system. Zhao then hands Sawyer a tablet computer that gives full administrative access to The Pearl’s computer systems that can only be unlocked by facial recognition. So from there it moves into familiar territory that if you have seen any movie will be familiar and you can guess from queues throughout how this will end.
Make no mistake this is a Dwayne Johnson movie that presents him as that everyman as well as superman who is a career guided professional yet has well rounded beautiful children with a brilliant beautiful wife who not only has her own career but supports her husbands. Now there is nothing inherently wrong with this but no hero is perfect, I mean look at John McClane from the “Die Hard” (1988-present) franchise, he has flaws throughout his character, most notably dealing with his family. Johnson has no such issues which makes him one dimensional, not only that, it makes him about as deep as a video game character which really is all this movie is, a video game on the big screen. It is so paint by numbers that it is boring, this is an issue with all the characters Johnson plays in all his movies, supermen who are everyman all bland and supremely unrealistic something he still has in common with his wrestling alter ego. The highlight of this movie is definitely Neve Campbell who plays Johnson’s wife who is just terrific in her limited role, in actuality I could have watched this movie with her as the protagonist and Johnson in a supporting part, if only. Campbell reminded me why she could have been the actress of her generation especially making a movie mistake like this at least watchable, the same can be said of the young actors playing their children.
Sometimes, just sometimes movies can paste over their inadequacies with big moments, action set pieces or great special effects, sadly “Skyscraper” really has none of these, there are no surprises and the immense amount of CGI is quite subpar to say the least. One of the issues is that there is an extreme lack of physical effects so when we have humans interacting or attempting to dodge what are just CGI effects there is a lack of danger or peril which leads to that word again boredom. Attempting to create peril using a family or a fake missing limb is just cheap on the filmmakers part, what they seemed to have missed out on is to create something that is based in reality then giving the audience three dimensional characters that are then thrust into a story where it is natural, understandable and makes sense. After watching “Skyscraper” go and watch that first “Die Hard” movie, see how similar movies do things different so that one is a classic, the other not so much.
While I wouldn’t go out to cinemas to see this and to be honest I have not felt the need to see a Dwayne Johnson movie at the cinemas since “San Andreas” (2015) (not counting ‘Furious’ movies as I don’t really consider them his), and judging from his upcoming movies I do not see myself returning I would say it is enough to watch his movies at home on the small screen. “Skyscraper” is a movie I would say is fine to watch at home with your brain off, it is laughably stupid but if you are wanting something to just watch and forget then, believe it or not, you could do much worse.
Technical Commentary:
Video:
“Skyscraper” arrives on 4K UHD with a crisp and colorful 2160p transfer with HDR10 and Dolby Vision that easily rises above its 1080p counterpart.
The image enjoys a nice color upgrade with Dolby Vision HDR. With Dolby Vision and the added resolution, there is an appreciable improvement in depth and color saturation where the whites don’t feel like they’re blooming as harshly.
A good example of the improvement is the scene where Johnson’s family is running around the giant park as well. In 1080p, the image is dark and murky without much depth. With the added resolution and WCG, the 4K Blu-ray offers more shadow separation. Overall this is a pretty great looking transfer that displays a clear improvement over it’s SDR counterpart.
Audio:
An action movie needs a great audio mix and “Skyscraper” gets that with its Dolby Atmos track. Dialogue is crystal clear throughout and never at odds with the other elements. Sound effects have a nice natural quality to them with many featuring pint-point object places.
Special Features:
“Doctor Who – The Woman Who Fell to Earth” (Season 11)
Television/Sci-Fi
Ten Episodes
Produced by: Chris Chibnall
Featuring: Jodie Whittaker, Bradley Walsh, Tosin Cole, and Mandip Gill
Tim Shaw: “Who are you?”
The Doctor:“I was a hologram once… for three weeks! The gossip I picked up!”
Well we are now officially underway with the eleventh season of “Doctor Who” as well as the new Doctor and her new friends, the only thing missing now, made conspicuous by its absence is the TARDIS, the main technological aspect of the show that enables as well as sometimes motivates each weeks new adventure. Not to worry though, and I suppose its a spoiler but it does show up this week, like the new Doctor, it is all new and somewhat different which marks the final change from the previous incarnation of the show. My guess is after a new Doctor, new friends, a new look, new show runners the TARDIS is the icing on the proverbial cake. Not exactly, in fact there is one more new change which is right at the top of the show, the new title segment as well as the alteration of the theme music, something that is routinely done with each new Doctor.
Firstly the new opening is interesting in that it does not figure the TARDIS or the Doctor at all, instead opting for a muted theme as well as a quick title card that eschews robust movement or hyped up sound for something more simple which seems to be in fitting with the style of the show. This is in direct alignment with the new TARDIS interior as well as modified exterior. Like this entire show the TARDIS has indeed been revamped in the biggest shift since the series returned all those years ago. It has left behind its steam punk days to be a modernized version of the original version but with a very modern style that plays up to the new Doctor’s individuality and uniqueness that really is pushing the entire show into new directions, I am actually enjoying all of the choices made as it is a shot in the arm for a series that after eleven years had gotten a little stale as well as repetitive.
This new episode itself like many within the genre is based on an idea many people may be aware of, so it takes the framework of a show like “The Amazing Race” giving it an intergalactic spin but as its main prize, for our intrepid heroes that is, the TARDIS so the fates of our heroes and some strangers are intertwined for the remainder of the show. Of course we learn about our guest stars and their stories as well as their motivations and why we should be interested in their story as a whole. Like many other stories similar to this of which there are many, especially in the “Doctor Who” canon, it isn’t the non regulars fate we really care about. In fact the plot of “The Ghost Monument” is like the first episode, pretty standard fare with little surprise as to its outcome. This is setting the scene and completing introductions from the first episode so in that it succeeds without being too flashy.
In terms of guest stars there are three character actors appearing who all do great work considering their limited impact on the story or regular cast, however because I am a big fan of Susan Lynch it was a treat seeing her in a science fiction show something out of her wheelhouse, she did incredibly well especially as it was a very physical role. Rounding out the guest stars are Shaun Dooley and Art Malik all playing very recognizable trope laden characters who all perform their parts admirably. Moving forward from this episode it will be interesting to see how and when larger named guest stars are deployed and to what end, particularly with a reliance on them if Whittaker begins to be second guessed in her performance.
Speaking of course of the biggest change in the casting of Jodie Whittaker, how is she going after two episodes? Well I think the answer is very well, she seems to understand the randomness as well as the whimsy of the character as well as how to deliver her lines, should we have expected anything less of someone who has skill and time in her profession? Probably not, however she does have something that many of the great ‘Doctors’ have, that is that ability to project true emotion in the understanding of what is important to the main character. In this weeks episode the major aim was to retrieve the TARDIS which she does, but when they are reunited her performance in portraying how important this was is done extremely well, the bond between them is undeniable which is illustrated in her words but also in the actions of the TARDIS itself, this is accomplished like few times before in the series, maybe only executed better in “The Doctors Wife” (2011) which really is saying something.
Even though we have been led to believe that the Doctor is returning her friends to Earth it is obvious they are going to be around for a few more episodes yet, my only concern is that with three of them one or more is likely to get short changed in the story department but other than that I am looking forward to seeing where this season will be headed, if it is one off stories then that may be a good re-set for the series heading into twelve.
“The Ghost Monument“
Written: Chris Chibnall
Directed: Mark Tonderai
The Doctor and her new friends are rescued from deep space by Angstrom and Epzo, aliens competing in an intergalactic competition playing out across the stars. Caught up in their contest, they join them in a trek across a deadly planet to reach the ‘Ghost Monument’ – a mystical box that the Doctor quickly recognises as her TARDIS. They soon discover that the planet has been ravaged by lethal science experiments, a testing ground for the Stenza – the warrior race they previously encountered in Sheffield – to develop new weaponry. The team eventually reach the site of the Ghost Monument and the Doctor is reunited with her TARDIS, sporting a new look.
“Ideal Home” (2018)
Drama/Comedy
Running Time: 91 minutes
Written by: Andrew Fleming
Directed by: Andrew Fleming
Featuring: Steve Coogan, Paul Rudd, Allison Pill, Jake McDorman, and Jack Gore
Paul:“Wait, you have a grandson?”
This has been such a very good year for comedies that there is always the risk of taking them for granted which after a terrible 2017 for the genre audiences should never do. This trend seems destined to continue with the release of yet another, this time a semi-high concept movie in the form of “Ideal Home” (2018) which sees the teaming up of English comedian Steve Coogan and the always fantastic American actor Paul Rudd as a gay couple living in Arizona. This is primarily a movie about a gay couple who have to look after a child but it has so much else going on within the narrative that this is only part of the story. What is refreshing about this movie is that it is a character based comedy first, with much of the script given over to that, as well as the plot, which does get reduced to being a message or issue based movie, this is not only refreshing but adds to the humour of the movie with a natural ease not often seen in today’s cinema. This movie takes for granted that the main characters are not only gay but are in a (mostly) stable relationship, they have many friends, as well as work colleagues, that do not bat an eye about their personal lives or their sexual orientation which is again something refreshing, in that it takes a lot of comedic tropes out of the picture to make way for some very real issues as well as some great comedy from the entire cast.
“Ideal Home” is written and directed by veteran Andrew Fleming who is no stranger to mixing drama and comedy to great effect as well as working with fantastic comedians. He is able to harness their talents to create some very individualistic movies, like this, as well as the very underrated “Hamlet 2” (2008) again featuring Steve Coogan. Here Fleming takes what could normally be seen as a pretty standard drama about a potentially orphaned boy, mixes in the fact that he has to stay with his gay Grandfather who is also a television chef and then introduce all the elements that make it a kind of fish out of water story for all involved. The comedy comes in the form of the interactions they all have with each other as well as all the other stakeholders in the child’s life who have to navigate the couple as well as the couple having to test their own relationship, which is kept in the real world apart from the comedy. Do not be fooled though the comedy in this movie is very real and what you would expect from the two leads who are so talented it is easy to take their characterisations for granted.
The movie is based around Erasmus (Coogan) and Paul (Rudd) are a gay couple whose life is turned inside out when a ten-year old boy shows up at their door claiming to be Erasmus’ grandson. Neither Paul, nor Erasmus, are ready to give up their extravagant lifestyles to be parents, but maybe this little kid has thing or two to teach them about the value of family.
The leads of the movie Steve Coogan and Paul Rudd are just great in this comedy that is made all the better by not only their characters but the way in which they have built those characters into three dimensional people who could have either been trope laden or caricatures but aren’t, they are not only a fascinating couple but are hilarious for all the right reasons, not relying on the fact that they are gay but that they are original as well as them dealing with people they would not normally interact with. Both of these actors take their job seriously so that the way in which they behave or react to situations feels so honest that the humour they elicit seems to come from an genuine place and is not forced or ring hollow or false just because they may appear to be over the top or sometimes even being camp. The other main performance is by Jack Gore who plays ‘Bill’ who is for such a young boy excellent and rarely offers a false note in his performance even though he has to deal some very adult themes.
Another aspct of the movie which has to be mentioned is that that both Erasmus (Coogan) and Paul (Rudd) work on a cooking show or a show about cuisine that is based in Arizona, which are all very original as well as offering the audience a world that is rarely seen, it also illustrates the importance of food and becomes the starting point for an ongoing joke about the food Bill will eat. In fact much of the humour with the movie derives from food as well as its place within the home, the fact that the surroundings of the environment directly relate to food and the juxtaposition of how gourmet food can directly effect mass produced food which we see within the movie and how this can either split people or unite them which again is as original as can be particularly in a comedy.
“Ideal Home” is all about the family unit and how this has changed, where it is now and possibly where it is headed, nothing is ‘normal’ or whatever that means but what we see throughout the movie is how different cultures, family types and people can influence others as well as how the acceptance of difference can lead to some truly special experiences and relationships. Even though there are very different people within the narrative of this movie as with many familial comedies or dramas you know instinctively that all will be well in the end, but in terms of the story it is not about the main characters being gay but the fact that the real father comes back to take his son away which does seem like a trope but where the movie ends up seems natural and not forced like so many other familiar themed movies which is a extremely refreshing.
This is a very well made and interesting movie that touches on many elements as well as themes and I can recommend it as a very funny enjoyable watch with two charismatic and funny leading men who lend the movie some authenticity as well as light heartedness that touches on some very serious issues, a fun viewing for all.
“Sicario: Day of the Soldado” (2018)
Drama/Thriller
Running Time: 122 minutes
Written by: Taylor Sheridan
Directed by: Stefano Sollima
Featuring: Benicio del Toro, Josh Brolin, Jeffrey Donovan, Isabela Moner, Catherine Keener, and Manuel Garcia-Rulfo
Alejandro: [to Isabela] “You have no reason to trust me, but trusting me is how you’re going to survive.”
Critical Commentary:
There is no doubt in my mind that the release of “Sicario” (2015) three years ago not only announced a few new talents but also solidified quite a number more in front of, as well as behind the camera, it also was possibly the most underrated film of that year. It should have scored multiple Oscar nominations but for the most part flew under many peoples radar which is a crime. On the surface it was a film about drug cartels, revenge as well as the journey of a young idealistic DEA agent, of course it was much more than that as well as a precursor to the unruly politics that would follow just a year later. It also stated that the war on Mexico was just beginning, one that would not only rage at the border but on nightly television, ultimately right now in the White House itself. “Sicario” was that rare breed of film that had at its heart a female protagonist surrounded by men who were undermining her at almost every point, it had a well thought out plot as well as an almost Cinéma vérité narrative but with a look that was stunning in its widescreen lushness and not afraid to, at times pull back for the big picture eschewing star power and good looks for some kind of grittiness even though at times it was still a Hollywood film. The one aspect of the film that was overwhelming was that I know when I saw it I wanted more, now three years later the sequel has arrived, “Sicario: Day of the Soldado” (2018).
On the surface this sequel may seem like a real mixed bag, undoubtedly the star of the first film has returned in Taylor Sheridan the screenwriter, who has gone from strength to strength in his career having written the magnificent Oscar nominated “Hell or High Water” (2016), writing and directing his magnificent noirsh “Wind River” (2017) as well as the upcoming series “Yellowstone” (2018). Also returning are the definitely now great character actors, Benicio del Toro, Josh Brolin and Jeffrey Donovan in the same roles. Unfortunately there is a downside with the loss of Denis Villeneuve, Emily Blunt, Daniel Kaluuya, Roger Deakinsand Jóhann Jóhannssonare all not returning which does lessen the impact of the sequel but it is still a fascinating affair to be sure. What is great to see is that new fresh talent has replaced these non returnees to the betterment of the film overall.
“Sicario: Day of the Soldado” has been directed by Stefano Sollima an Italina filmmaker who is possibly best known for directing a large proportion of the series “Gomorrah” (2014 – ) based on the film of the same name, so the subject matter is not far removed from this new film. The great aspect of both films was to have foreign directors in charge as it always seems to be a benefit to politically charged movies, that to have someone removed from the situation in charge, opens up the narrative as well as the plot in ways someone who has a stake in the subject matter might do. This is accentuated by the look of the film, here Deakin’s has been replaced by Ridley Scott’s long-time cinematographer Dariusz Wolski who like his predesscor is an expert at creating both interior as well as exterior palate that are not only original but subject sensitive and eye catching.
The film is set fter discovering that Mexican drug cartels are smuggling terrorists across the United States border, the CIA sends Matt Graver (Josh Brolin) and former undercover operative Alejandro Gillick (Benicio del Toro) to eliminate the problem. They kidnap Isabela Reyes (Isabela Moner), the daughter of a drug lord, in a false flag operation designed to incite war between rival cartels. The mission goes awry when it is discovered by the Mexican government, prompting Graver to order Reyes’ death; when Gillick refuses, he turns rogue to protect her as Graver assembles a new team to hunt them both.
The quality of the leads goes without saying in Oscar winner Benicio del Toro who has become one of the great character actors as well as someone who can play physically imposing men that with the subtly in his face can play deep emotion, while Josh Brolin has aged well into his middle age and someone who knows how to build a character from the ground up, one need only look at his increasingly complex roles over the past five years to see the evidence in that. While they are both playing the same characters from the first film, it is del Toro who is the one with real growth especially when thinking about his arc from “Sicario”. Added to the mix are Isabela Moner, Catherine Keener, Mathew Modine, Shea Whigam and Manuel Garcia-Rulfo who all play new characters designed to reinvigorate the film with the light shining directly on Moner as the maguffin of this new story. Moner has to show a range of very tough emotions as well as starting her character in one place of dominance but winding up with her persona changed in a very extreme way with layers peeled back for all to witness. The other relative newcomer is Manuel Garcia-Rulfo who like his co-star is a changed character from beginning to end, something that is a very rare to witness not just in film but also for minority characters that are normally marginalised or reduced to stereotypes. All of the actors do incredibly nuanced work with material that is not only complex but much of the narrative just have been found in the edit so to see performances as good these is rare indeed.
There is no doubt that this is a narratively as well as plot heavy film that rewards those that stick with the complex goings on within the story, following different characters at different times with varying objectives as well as never losing sight of the human drama at the core of this challenging piece of work. The ways in which the story begins to unfold on different fronts of the world may seem scattershot but they are executed in a way that the audience witness how in the dark, law enforcement can be losing sight of the people they are trying to protect so that lines are blurred between the good of the many against destroying the rights and loves of the few, especially when we are talking about cross border skirmishes. For me the key to the film is the returning character of Alejandro Gillick who as we know from the previous entry lost his family to the drug war in particular one cartel leader who is one the plot points of this film. In fact the key scene and one I imagine the writer loved creating involves sign language, a family in the middle of nowhere and a small explanation of his past which for me was one of the two best scenes of the movie. This is a film loaded with meaning as well as motivations of everyone involved, one scene sees Matt Graver going to meet the Secretary of Defence a comment is made about him being sunburnt as he is always in the field carrying out covert actions. The next scene we see a roomful of Generals and politicians, it is easy to see the pale faced men who make decisions sending the tanned men out into the danger to do the dirty work, something that should not be lost on viewers especially as we hear and see these politicians changing their minds on a whim without a thought of those doing the work in the field. It could also be seen as a comment on those holding high office especially the Presidency who have never served in their life.
As far as this years films go “Sicario: Day of the Soldado” is one of the best so far, it is a truly great sequel that stands on its own in every way. It transcends the first film in that it is about so many elements of not only human nature but incorporates social, political and personal issues that are as relevant today as they have ever been. We see the fingers of the White House through an unnamed President who fears impeachment over public support or anything else, sound familiar? Another important aspect of the film that cannot be underestimated is the mix of genre that takes place within its narrative, at points it is a road movie, a drama, a political movie, a thriller and at times even has some comedy, it melds all these genres into one coherent narrative that never lets up from its shock beginning to its almost ultimate conclusion that is at once revealing, shocking but expected.
This is a film that must be seem and seen on a big screen it takes risks with its plot and narrative which pay off for the audience it is almost all believable in its own way with nary a false move which is something to behold. Even though it is missing some key figures in front of as well as behind the camera, the screenwriter has wisely pivoted the plot to make it more of an original movie with familiar characters than attempting to make it a fully fledged sequel which seeing this movie now would have been a major error. I recommend this even for those that have not seen the first movie as it stands on its own in almost all ways which is not something that can be said of all movies even though that is how it should be, something that has been lost over the past few decades.
Technical Commentary:
Video:
“Sicario: Day of the Soldado” arrives onto 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray with an upscaled 2.40:1 2160p transfer with HDR10 from a 2K digital intermediate. Dolby Vision is not an option on the disc. While upscaled, the image offers a notable uptick in detail clarity over the 1080p Blu-ray – in particular for close-ups and middle shots.
With HDR10, the image enjoys a kick in the primaries without overdoing things. Reds, blues, and the abundant yellows throughout all see some nice enhancements.
While that is a plus for Dolby Vision, a negative is in some of the night sequences things just look too dark. The brief scene where the Spec-Ops team halo jumps in the middle of the night to capture the smuggler Bashiir is an example. That scene in HDR10 is still dark, but light enough that you can actually make out some of the details of the soldiers as they fall. Dolby Vision goes dark almost to the point where they’re shadowy blobs falling from the sky. Regardless, this 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray is a solid effort from Sony and provides a clean and clear improvement over the 1080p disc.
Audio:
On 4K Ultra HD Blu-ray, “Sicario: Day of the Soldado” is upgraded to a full object-based Dolby Atmos mix.
Dialogue is well balanced throughout and, like the DTS-MA 7.1 mix, Hildur Guðnadóttir’s score offers some great mood and atmosphere pumping up those low LFE tones giving that creepy dissonant vibes. Levels are spot on without any softness issues or need to raise the volume higher than you normally would.
Special Features:
“Doctor Who – The Woman Who Fell to Earth” (Season 11)
Television/Sci-Fi
Ten Episodes
Produced by: Chris Chibnall
Featuring: Jodie Whittaker, Bradley Walsh, Tosin Cole, and Mandip Gill
Tim Shaw: “Who are you?”
The Doctor: “I’m glad you asked that again. Bit of adrenaline, dash of outrage, and a hint of panic knitted my brain back together. I know exactly who I am! I’m the Doctor, sorting out fair play throughout the universe.”
After what seems like an inordinate amount of time the latest season of “Doctor Who” returned to screens with some of the biggest changes in its fifty year history which in my mind are not only welcome but long overdue. The most significant as well as most obvious change is the Doctor’s latest regeneration from the older male Scottish actor Peter Capaldi to the more youthful female Jodie Whittaker is going to divide fans of the show like no previous alteration. The other changes that have occurred this year are a new show runner, a different screening time, a cosmetic change in the look of the show and the way in which the companions are going to be used in relation to the Doctor herself. To be fair on everyone it is far to early to tell how all these changes are going to be received or which ones are going to work and of course which ones are going to fail, you cannot please everyone all of the time.
After viewing the initial episode, “The Woman Who Fell to Earth”, it appears on the surface that their have been some very wise decisions made and the decisions to cast Whittaker was a canny one by Chibnall who does share a past with the actress after casting her in previous roles. Change whether it works or not is good, it shakes things up, challenges the status quo, keeps audiences guessing and introduces new points of view. After introducing two new ‘Doctors’ as well as following the person that re-started “Doctor Who” in Russell T. Davies, it was time for David Moffat to hand over the reigns especially since the show had seemed to reach a peak and was seemingly a little lost in terms of its arc for the characters as well as feeling that casting Capaldi may have been a mistake as well as little backward looking. There had been from some quarters a call to have a regeneration from Matt Smith that was not a white man, but in fact asking the question that if the Doctor was indeed an alien why would race or gender need to be the same each time, especially for a being that is hundreds of years old, after change is the spice of life.
There is no doubt that Davies struck gold with the casting of David Tennant who was an instant success as the Doctor, he ‘got’ the role like few before, possibly second only to Tom Baker whose career it must be said was to the point of being cast very similar to each others. Tennant, of course has gone on to be in many successful television shows and a few movies that have realised his strengths in creating characters and have let him shine in whatever he appeared in. It was always going to be a struggle following Tennant but the then new show runner cast a seemingly unknown Matt Smith who acquitted himself well, then followed by Capaldi who was an extremely well known actor, he had stamped his authority in movies and film for over four decades, who as I have said may have been too senior for the role in this new millennium. Whoever followed Capaldi was going to have to reset the character as well as be someone who could carry a series that had been around for fifty years. It could have been viewed as stunt casting by having a woman but that really is not an issue when you look at Jodie Whittaker’s oeuvre, she may be one of the most experienced Doctor’s to ever be cast, that is extremely impressive to say the least. I believe she is one of the better actors to be cast, in her career she has played some complicated characters as well as acting opposite some truly great actors, matching them in talent every time.
In contrast to the casting of Whittaker, Chibnall as the new show runner has made some smart choices in supplying a mixed supporting cast to help the main star with her first season in a very unique role where she must be many things to a great many people. So we have young as well as older companions that will be offering very different skills in each adventure, possibly with the light shining on each in different stories involving different antagonists, which is something “Doctor Who” has been doing for years. The other element in the all of the new casting is that there are no holdovers from previous seasons in terms of characters, plot lines and even the TARDIS so that we, as viewers, are starting from the beginning of a narrative that has lasted for decades.
In terms of this first episode it is very definitely an introduction to all the new elements of the show, especially of course with a female Doctor. However in terms of the story it is an example of the kind of first episode that is common for a new Doctor going back to at least the Jon Pertwee era where there was a reset of sorts as well, these type of episodes have become routine, concentrating not on an antagonist but how a new Doctor begins to interact with the world around them. So what we have is the new Doctor with her new friends without a TARDIS facing off against a villain of the week that matters little, in fact this villain is extremely forgettable once the credits roll. What is important is how this new Doctor interacts with everyone as well as delivering lines that may sound absurd but actually link to a greater story as well as being completely believable in regards to the previous incarnations of the character. In terms of this episode it did everything correctly not only delivering a new Doctor but setting up the rest of the season whetting viewers appetites, hopefully living up to this episode for the next few months.
“The Woman Who Fell to Earth“
Written: Chris Chibnall
Directed: Jamie Childs
In Sheffield, Ryan Sinclair accidentally calls an alien pod to the planet, leading to a strange being attacking his grandmother Grace and step-grandfather Graham. He and traffic officer Yasmin Khan attempt to stop it when the newly regenerated Doctor falls out of the sky and sees it flee. Investigating the strangeness, the five discover a second alien is tracking a local construction worker as a hunting game. The Doctor manages to rework the alien’s systems, causing it to flee home, but Grace is killed in the fight against it. After Grace’s funeral, the Doctor reworks one of the alien’s escape teleporters to find the TARDIS. She bids goodbye to Ryan, Yas, and Graham, but accidentally teleports all four of them into deep space.
“Bombshell: The Hedy Lamarr Story” (2017)
Documentary
Running Time: 88 minutes
Directed by: Alexandra Dean
Featuring: Hedy Lamarr, Mel Brooks, Diane Kruger and many others
Hedy Lamarr:
“People are illogical, unreasonable, and self-centered.
Love them anyway.
If you do good, people will accuse you of selfish ulterior motives.
Do good anyway.
If you are successful, you will win false friends and true enemies.
Succeed anyway.
The good you do today will be forgotten tomorrow.
Do good anyway.
Honesty and frankness make you vulnerable.
Be honest and frank anyway.”
By Kent M. Keith
If there is one aspect of Hollywood that stands out above almost anything else it is the talent that comes to work there, as well as the many lives that are forever lost or damaged under the pressures that are faced when success comes too young or even at all. It is a place like nowhere else in the world, dreams are dangled in front of people with little support for those that require it, or for those that are left on the wayside as life passes them by with little thought for the chaos this might bring. This new documentary “Bombshell: The Hedy Lamarr Story” (2017) is just one of those stories, on the surface not too unique among the many people it could have been based on. There is of course a difference in that the actress it revolves around, Hedy Lamarr, had a side many were not aware of, not a dark side but one that should have been celebrated almost a hundred years ago. As far as biographical documentaries go “Bombshell: The Hedy Lamarr Story” is almost run of the mill, not too spectacular about a woman from pre-World World II Vienna, moving to and making it big in the US, then running afoul off very personal demons as well as drugs and all that entails. However, it is her imagination as well as genius that drives this story of someone that should have been known for far more than a pretty face and talent in front of the camera. Unlike most stories this one has serious repercussions for not only those in power now, but reflects a staggering point of view of not only women, their opportunities, but what they were allowed to accomplish then and of course now.
The person behind this documentary, as well as the driving force that has designed the narrative is Alexandra Dean, an Emmy Award-winning journalist and producer. Dean has amongst other things has produced news-magazine documentaries for PBS before becoming a series and documentary producer at Bloomberg television, creating the series “Innovators, Adventures and Pursuits.”
What writer/director Alexandra Dean has managed to do is paint a portrait of a woman who was boxed in by her times as well as her looks, although she was canny enough to know how to use her beaty for her own benefit, especially in the precarious times she was living in, as well as the future that was to face the Continent where she came from. Dean had the challenge of bringing to the screen a story that would mostly consist of others remembrances of the subject that would all ultimately be here as second-hand witnesses, which would have been a weakness in the story as well as the narrative. Of course that was not to be as the director would be given a treasure trove of audio recordings that the narrative could be built around, as well as background to the entire story. To her credit Dean has managed to bring to life a story that may have been forgotten but now has formed part of the post ‘Me To’ movement and age we occupy at the moment, in this current climate of revelations as well as truth.
“Bombshell: The Hedy Lamarr Story” follows the life story of Lamarr from her youth as the daughter of assimilated Austrian Jews through her rise to fame, the Nazi onslaught, her departure for the United States, six marriages, her acting career, her landmark invention, decline, and finally her death at the age of 85 in 2000. The focus of the film is on her co-creation with George Antheil of the technology of frequency hopping.
The film delves into Lamarr’s different, seemingly unhealthy relationships with Louis B. Mayer (the head of Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios), Max Jacobson (Dr. Feelgood), and director Cecil B. DeMille. The film also shows how Hedy Lamarr became so reclusive at the end of her life.
There is no doubt that the backbone to this documentary are the interviews that were recorded with a reporter over twenty five years ago for an article in a major publication. If these had not existed or been discovered this documentary may not have existed or been very different to what has ended up onscreen. However, what has been produced is something very special as almost every question that is asked is able to be answered by Hedy herself in the archival interviews, at least in some form. The wise decision that has been made in terms of the narrative is to not reveal these interviews too early in the documentary thereby allowing the director to build to them in a more organic way. This means that we can see Hedy in her onscreen persona, as well as through her children, then we get to hear her talk candidly on a wide range of issues which inevitably lead to the revelation of her inventions as well as her enquiring mind – that coupled with the interviews form the basis of this story as well as the relevance that can be drawn to the present day as well the themes of woman in society, their treatment as well the place in which society is governed particularly in the US, but also in other parts of the world.
Of course if this documentary had been able to include filmed interviews of Hedy it would have been perfect but she died in 2000 so that was never going to be an option for the director. Luckily there are many people to interview who either knew her, knew of her, admired her or can relate to her. So we have Hedy’s son and daughter as well as their children being interviewed about a woman that they knew from a certain perspective letting us in on the life of this misunderstood woman, but of course they like other relatives do not know the full story. The other interviewees spend less time talking about Hedy directly, but the choice to have German actress, Diane Kruger, talk about Hedy in terms of a similar background as well as reading letters Hedy wrote to her mother are excellent choices as she is not only a respected actress but there is some authenticity to her reading as well as giving her own perspective on the actress arriving in Hollywood, and for want of a better term, making it.
As Hedy was a major star in Hollywood there are literally hundreds of hours of not only movie footage but news footage as well, with some obvious home movie footage. When creating a documentary about a person that lived over a hundred years ago there has to be footage of them to give the audience something to hang their own ideas of who that person was in the time they lived, the only real issue is to decide is what footage to include, as well as what to omit. With someone like Hedy who was extremely beautiful, as well as someone who for a portion of her life relied on her looks there may be a tendency to use as much of that footage as possible, here the director does that as well. However, what the director does is to slowly move the narrative away from her heyday to the more realistic and unglamorous parts of Hedy’s life exposing her growing older as well as the failed plastic surgeries she endured so that we see the damage done to her face, which is a harsh reality as well as a lesson to be learned by both men and women of all ages and time periods.
There are some pretty serious realities that are revealed in the documentary, such as Hedy being used by older men because of her looks as well as how she struggled with this, the psychological impacts on her life as a result were not obvious but horrific. We also see that she was never taken seriously as a person, this is directly reflected in variety television shows that interviewed her, talking down to her even though she was an elderly women with experience to offer others. Finally we see her penniless even though others were making huge amounts of money off an invention that she at least had a part in creating. We witness a marginalisation that many women can identify with to this day, something that has been reiterated and talked about in a post-Weinstein world where there have been individuals telling similar stories to Hedy’s that are variations on some very dark themes.
There are many other aspects to this documentary that I will not spoil as they really are a revelation to be enjoyed, even if they are not all happy, in fact many parts of Hedy’s story are deeply disturbing as well as raising questions about what goes on in male dominated industries, in fact to this very day, one can only imagine.
“Bombshell: The Hedy Lamarr Story” is an excellent documentary that sheds light on not only a misunderstood woman but also gives insight into how little progress has been made in our modern age. If there is a lesson to be learned it is not to judge people on surface looks or values but to go deeper into what people can offer to a society not matter their background, gender, culture or age. Not only that but it is very entertaining as well, offering glimpses into lives one can only imagine how complicated they were when the World was on a knifes edge.
“Aquaman” (2018)
The film reveals the origin story of half-human, half-Atlantean Arthur Curry and takes him on the journey of his lifetime—one that will not only force him to face who he really is, but to discover if he is worthy of who he was born to be…a king.
AQUAMAN is directed by James Wan and stars Jason Momoa, Amber Heard, Willem Dafoe, Patrick Wilson, Dolph Lundgren, Yahya Abdul-Mateen II, Nicole Kidman, Ludi Lin and Temuera Morrison.
AQUAMAN releases in New Zealand cinemas on December 26, 2018.
“The Mule” (2018)
From Warner Bros. Pictures, Imperative Entertainment and BRON Creative comes Clint Eastwood’s newest feature film, the drama “The Mule.” In addition to directing, the veteran actor will step in front of the lens again, alongside fellow stars Bradley Cooper, Laurence Fishburne, Michael Peña, Dianne Wiest and Andy Garcia, as well as Alison Eastwood, Taissa Farmiga, Ignacio Serricchio and Loren Dean, Eugene Cordero.
Eastwood stars as Earl Stone, a man in his 80s who is broke, alone, and facing foreclosure of his business when he is offered a job that simply requires him to drive. Easy enough, but, unbeknownst to Earl, he’s just signed on as a drug courier for a Mexican cartel. He does well—so well, in fact, that his cargo increases exponentially, and Earl is assigned a handler. But he isn’t the only one keeping tabs on Earl; the mysterious new drug mule has also hit the radar of hard-charging DEA agent Colin Bates. And even as his money problems become a thing of the past, Earl’s past mistakes start to weigh heavily on him, and it’s uncertain if he’ll have time to right those wrongs before law enforcement, or the cartel’s enforcers, catch up to him.
“The Mule” marks Oscar-winner Eastwood’s first time on both sides of the camera since he starred in 2009’s critically acclaimed “Gran Torino.”
THE MULE releases in New Zealand on January 24, 2019.
“Venom” (2018)
Action
Running Time: 112 minutes
Written by: Scott Rosenberg, Jeff Pinkner, and Kelly Marcel
Directed by: Ruben Fleischer
Featuring: Tom Hardy, Michelle Williams, Riz Ahmed, Scott Haze, and Reid Scott
Dr. Carlton Drake: “Look around at the world. What do you see? A planet on the brink of collapse. Human beings are disposable. But man and symbiote combined, this is a new race, a new species… a higher lifeform.”
The new Marvel branded movie “Venom” (2018) opens this week in cinemas everywhere, it is a mix of horror, thriller, action and comic book movie that arrives after a slew of great examples of the genre in this year alone, such as “Avengers: Infinity War” (2018) and “Black Panther” (2018). To say that expectations have been set low for this movie is an understatement. As soon as the movie was announced by Sony there was confusion among fans about what this movie would be and what it would link to, as well as would it be a part of something greater, especially with all the success of the rebooted Spider-Man in “Spider-Man: Homecoming” (2017) that linked directly to the Disney branded MCU. It became obvious pretty quick that this new movie was going to be its own thing with Sony hoping to create their own 100% owned Marvel spinoff which initially was going to be started after the earlier Spider-Man movies, however they ended up failing commercially and being rejected by critics and fans alike. However, after early trailers for “Venom” failed to inspire anybody it became apparent that this was not going to be a great movie especially after the rumored R-rating was reduced to a PG-13 shaving any hard edges off, making the movie more suitable for children than adults. The questions is how has “Venom” landed, especially after realising this is a movie that has been made by committee, so much so that this more than other similar movies has visible cracks throughout it. The answer as is usual is more complicated than it might seem, it is actually not a bad movie in the strictest sense, in fact it is mostly enjoyable but the reasons for that enjoyment come down to a mixture of subject, actors, story and director, with nothing hitting 100% of the time.
“Venom” is directed by Ruben Fleischer who made a name for himself when he emerged with the zombie comedy/horror hit “Zombieland” (2009) that proved the zombie genre was not dead, not only that but there was more than one way to approach a genre. Unfortunately from there Fleischer’s success as a director has been extremely limited so it was with some mixed feeling when he was announced as the director of “Venom”, but in the same breath it appeared that it was going to be R-rated which seemed to suit the director down to the ground. While I have no doubt that Fleischer is a director that can put a scene together his story telling as well as the ability to create a logical narrative are elements that I think he lacks which is evident in all his movies. This is something that is present in “Venom” whether or not audiences think this should have been a PG-13 or R-rated movie. One of the reasons that “Zombieland” was such a success is that there was little or no real plot, it was a road movie that linked nine or ten separate segments but had no arc and did not need one. My personal opinion is once Fleischer learns how to create a movie that has a beginning, middle and end with a coherent narrative he will be an excellent director of not only genre movies but all kinds.
“Venom” is based around journalist Eddie Brock who following a scandal attempts to revive his career by investigating the Life Foundation, but comes into contact with an alien symbiote that bonds with Brock, giving him superpowers as long as they share the same body.
“Venom” has been played before by Topher Grace who was a little closer to the comic book character, here Sony have recast the character with Tom Hardy who has proved himself an extremely capable character actor in many movies, with a fondness for Christopher Nolan films in particular where he has excelled, this is the first time he has carried a movie for the entire running time. What I enjoyed was that this Eddie Brock is almost a fully formed person that lives in a real world where there are consequences for his actions, even though he is portrayed as a martyr, almost as the symbiote calls him, a loser. Hardy does incredibly well to stay the course even while the movie itself threatens to run of the rails as well as performing around some uninspired special effects, its pretty easy to see that it is a stunt man in the bike chase featured in the trailers for example. There are also two supporting characters both doing different things as well as serving different purposes in Michelle Williams and Riz Ahmed who both do a great job as they have learnt the secret of being in a comic movie, they know they are in a comic movie, like Hardy, and so acquit themselves very well. It’s been said that actors who make these kind of movies are challenged by acting in front of nothing where CGI will be filled in later, but it is a disservice to good actors when their performances are met by, what is in this movie, some really subpar CGI that should have been better, if I were watching this later as an actor I would frankly be disappointed.
“Venom” is a spinoff from the main ‘Spider-Man’ franchise although that character does not make an appearance here there is no doubt that the original DNA of Venom comes from him. This is supposed to be an origin story of Eddie Brock/Venom, for most of the run time this plays out like any other comic book origin story that audiences are by now familiar with but the issues in it lie in the obvious restructuring as well as narrative that jumps around for seemingly no reason at times leaving the audience a little bewildered. The issues really stem from two elements, that is that there were some behind the scenes meddling that meant some parts have been left out as well and reshot, the other is something that has a direct effect in the tone and what is seen onscreen. This is the fact that Venom in his comic book origin was a villain that was murderous as well as full of rage which has been watered down to make him not only more of a palatable hero but more appealing to young audiences with some of his original motivations left over, like his need for eating living beings head first for no real reason which is an abrupt tonal shift much like the mixed narrative. What is baffling is that this entire aspect of Venom could have been cut out completely without any consequence at all and made it immediately appealing for families. This leads to another aspect of the movie which is the violence without consequence which is something that exists in all comic book as well as action movies where people are thrown around like plastic toys but get up or survive without injury which has to be a negative for families especially if young people identify with these heroes and anti-heroes.
In saying all of that “Venom” the movie is possibly receiving too much of a hard time from critics as its not an entirely bad movie, it is nowhere close to the best comic book movies but it does hold together for its running time which is more than can be said for many really bad adaptations. What works is the casting from Tom Hardy down as well as some of the humour which works as intended, the actual origin of the character of Venom is a little non-sensical, as is the narrative that attempts to hold the plot together which is a shame but to be expected. What will be interesting to see is if there is a sequel will it be better than this, I hope so. The first thing that needs to happen is to tighten up who Venom is going to be moving forward, how he will operate in this new world and if there will be a compelling story to get audiences interested. If you are looking for a fun, brainless night out then you could do far worse than this, it is an action movie that has a long lead in time to try and establish its humans before it turns to its genre roots which is a throwback to its early 2000s counterparts.
“Venom” is out now only in cinemas.
“Solo: A Star Wars Story” (2018)
Sci-Fi
Running Time: 135 minutes
Written by: Jonathan Kasdan & Lawrence Kasdan
Directed by: Ron Howard
Featuring: Alden Ehrenreich, Woody Harrelson, Emilia Clarke, Donald Glover, Thandie Newton, Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Joonas Suotamo, and Paul Bettany
Han Solo: “I heard a story about you. I was wondering if it’s true.”
Lando Calrissian: “Everything you’ve heard about me is true.”
Critical Commentary:
Was anyone really wanting a Han Solo origin story? Had Disney and Lucasfilm’s run out of ideas so quickly that this was their second non-episode movie out of the gates? Not only that but with all the behind the scenes shenanigans that took place would this even be executed very well – expectations were set pretty low for me on this one. The producers had begun by making a decision that at this point for any blockbuster is de rigueur, that is assembling a relatively unknown (and cheap) main actor (Alden Ehrenreich) then surrounding him/her with a bunch of well-known character actors or lead actors slumming it, as well as taking a large pay check, which explains the presence of Woody Harrelson, Emilia Clarke, Donald Glover, Thandie Newton and Paul Bettany. As has been the case with the previous ‘Star Wars’ spinoff you hire an up and coming writer or director, let them do their work, then fire them for not making a movie you like, hence the original directors Lord & Miller were replaced with a safe middle of the road director like Ron Howard, who knows how to follow a mandate. What remains to be seen is if “Solo: A Star Wars Story” (2018) is really a worthy entry into ‘Star Wars’ lore or will it fall short with a simple story, routine characters, or will it be fondly remembered in the long term. Unfortunately with expectations so low it could manage to be seen as a victory that may please fans after the negative reaction that fans (not critics) had with the what I think is the excellent “Star Wars: The Last Jedi” (2017). What I found was that I enjoyed the experience of watching the movie but it had no real impact once the credits started to roll, judging from the reaction in the sparsely populated screening I attended the feeling was a common one.
The one thing that Ron Howard as director knows how to do is direct a script, place a camera, deal with actors as well as studios and to bring a coherent story to the screen. However, the one thing Howard has never had to do is to deal with a studio like Lucasfilm, operate with the budget here, in excess of US$200 million or to rescue a perceived troubled production. To be fair Howard had a lot going for him, some supportive producer’s as well as a mostly extremely experienced cast, that he bolstered by adding Paul Bettany as well as a crew that had seen it all before he arrived. What he has put onscreen is as you would have expected some great CGI sequences as well as some humour, which he knows very well and has let his stars shine in a movie that is all about bravado and one of ‘Star Wars’ best loved characters who here is not the brave General from the past three movies but more of the braggard from the first movie that audiences have loved over the past forty years.
The movie is centred on Han Solo who finds adventure when he joins a gang of galactic smugglers, including a 196-year-old Wookie named Chewbacca. Indebted to the gangster Dryden Vos, the crew devises a daring plan to travel to the mining planet Kessel to steal a batch of valuable coaxium. In need of a fast ship, Solo meets Lando Calrissian, the suave owner of the perfect vessel for the dangerous mission — the Millennium Falcon.
The star of this movie is in the title, anyone who was going to try and play Han Solo, filling the shoes of legendary superstar Harrison Ford was not only going to have a big job on their hands but was going to have to face the wrath of all the fans who would be judging him from the first stills that were published last year. It has fallen to relative newcomer Alden Ehrenreich to play Solo, who for the most past does a passable if not admirable job, which is saying something as there had been some early negative reports about his performance from the set. The supporting cast is absolutely filled with some terrific actors who all give their usual high standard of performance, they include Woody Harrelson, Thandie Newton and Paul Bettany, all playing tropes you will recognise from hundreds of other science fiction movies not forgetting any number of characters from the ‘Star Wars’ universe. As for the new blood of actors that have been cast including Emilia Clarke, Donald Glover and Phoebe Waller-Bridgewho all contribute something special in a movie that could have seen them marginalised in a variety of ways it is Glover who really shines stealing the movie from all involved. Donald Glover playing Lando Calrissian is all about performance of a character that has only been hinted at and seen very little in the canon, here we see Lando as a young man who is all about legend and action, if there is going to be one character from this movie that should be seen in a stand-alone it is Lando being played by Glover whose status as a performer is only getting bigger. Then there is the voice of Phoebe Waller-Bridge who has become famous for her excellent series “Fleabag” (2016 – present) here does an Alan Tyduk playing a robot with all the right moves as well as all the right lines, something that has been expected in a ‘Star Wars’ movie for the past few years.
This is, in the end a very safe bet, there is nothing offensive in its execution, it has no teeth or makes no real leaps from any other similar movie, which is a shame as it could have been so much more. There are no real narrative surprises at all, no real surprise reveals, in fact as the narrative rolls on you can guess what is going to happen next, almost everything is covered off in the first half of the movie. I actually struggle to see the point of a movie like this other than making a lot of money, which is fine as thats what studios are supposed to do. However in the long run do movies like this hurt the brand of the ‘Star Wars’ brand? I think they do, I was only drawn to this to do a review, I think I will be giving the next spinoff a miss only because they lack any real narrative surprise or bite.
As with all major blockbusters as well as ‘Star Wars’ movies there is a reliance (some may say over reliance) on special effects that seem to up that stakes from movie to movie. “Solo: A Star Wars Story” is no different with not only some great set pieces but the time and money needed to pull these off has been dedicated to them and they look simply amazing especially for a movie that is essentially a spin off from the main run of movies. My only concern is that the next few spin off movies will attempt to increase the CGI stakes, it might be a nice break to have a character driven story instead of one driven by special effects.
There really is nothing negative about this movie, it is a run of the mill origin sotory something we can expect more of as the years go by and Disney/Lucasfilm want to release a ‘Star Wars’ movie each year, we can probably expect to see a drop off in quality as well as more issues behind the scenes as filmmakers attempt to make something different while the producers want to make more of the same vanilla type movie. It actually does not matter what anyone says about this movie, it is going to have a huge opening weekend, and go on to make around US$1 billion dollars worldwide, giving licence to Disney to make more of these movies. The only thing stopping the money making machine will be the time of year it is being released at, this is the first ‘Star Wars’ Summer movie release so there is definitely more competition, this will be a true test of the brand in terms of other blockbusters, this will be an interesting time indeed.
Technical Commentary:
Video:
“Solo: A Star Wars Story” was shot at 3.4K and 6.5K with Arri Alexa cameras and given a native 4K digital intermediate, though the home release lacks Dolby Vision. I have nothing bad to say about the image at all. It looks superb throughout, and on an OLED the vast number of HDR highlights pop off the screen. Even when there is a full field of snow, the brightness isn’t too high so it won’t blind you. As far as the image goes, I’ve got nothing but great things to say about Solo.
Audio:
There is good use of the Atmos channels for scenes, action scenes pan around you, and vocals are clear, but the impact is lacking.
Special Features:
“Jane” (2017)
Documentary
Running Time: 90 minutes
Written & directed by: Brett Morgen
Featuring: Hugo Arndt Rodolf van Lawick, Jane Goodall and Hugo Eric Louis
Jane Goodall: “The more I learned, the more I realized how like us they were in so many ways.”
The new documentary released this month on DVD, “Jane” (2018) is a very interesting as well as completely original document that not only charts some of the beginnings of the famed naturalist but concentrates on her former husband as well as her son, following her journey to end up in the present day with commentary on her work as well as where the world is headed. Sitting down to view this documentary I was ready and expecting to see Goodall in Africa surrounded by apes, being told about wildlife as well as the dangers of not only the disappearing animals but dwindling habitats, the negative aspects of humanity with a human story being told as well. What I actually viewed was something very different, inspiring, sad and eye opening as well as something that was very entertaining. “Jane” asks what is given up in spending a life in service to one thing, from many different sides which for me was a revelation, sacrifices are witnessed in this documentary by not only Jane but her entire family leaving a legacy that is rarely seen in modern life away from the public but realised by one in this poignant film that is expertly framed by candid film footage shot by Jane’s compatriot, first husband and father to her only child.
This year has been an excellent year for documentaries not only on streaming or DVD but in cinemas which is a trend that goes against what many people may have expected. However I find this to be exactly what should be expected especially with the concentration of so-called ‘fake news’ that now exists on the internet, coupled with what has been coming from the White House under the Trump Presidency. In fact there was a thought that cinematic documentaries might be a thing of the past especially with the success as well as saturation of Disney-fied blockbusters invading multiplexes, in fact audiences have been flocking to cinemas to seek out stories about real people making real differences in times and places where many others have been marginalised and made powerless by the people in charge in their respective times. Some of the great, as well as critically received, not forgetting making money documentaires at the box office are: “Wont you be my neighbour?” (2018), “Three Identical Strangers” (2018), “RBG” (2018), “McQueen” (2018), and my personal favourite “Bombshell: The Hedy Lamarr Story” (2017) with so many more. What this says about audiences is that they will seek out true stories told in the relative first person that are not only inspiring but are direct counter programming to the politics of the day as well as the lies that are being produced by a President who is not only artificial but hate fuelled. My belief as a fan of documentaries is that this genre will only gain in popularity, with the coming years being a boon as well as revealing the importance of truth in the media as well as the importance of researching decisions made by the electorate. It is no surprise that the rise in fake news, Donald Trump, racism and may other hate fuelled elements has been answered by artists creating documentaries that prove there can be positive outcomes when people choose to buck the system as well as believing in others, differences, freedom and most of all, love.
This new documentary “Jane” follows Jane Goodall, a young and untrained woman, challenges the male dominated scientific consensus of her time with her chimpanzee research and revolutionizes people’s understanding of the natural world.
There is no doubt that the central charter in “Jane” is Jane Goodall who drives the narrative as well as the plot of this new film, she is the star and after fifty years has told her story a thousand times but it seems refreshing every time you hear it. Goodall at eighty four seems to be in the prime of her life moving past just studying, protecting and honoring animals but more recently attempting to educate the public on a myriad of issues effecting the planet as a whole. The narrative of “Jane” is built around the newly discovered early footage of Goodall and her apes, as well as her family with her own new narration explaining her own internalised thoughts of the time, coupled with answers to questions put to her in the present. It paints the picture of a woman who knew what she wanted even if she did not know the path to get there but stumbled through her life making decisions, discoveries and friendships that would help create the life she wanted. There are two other important people in this film, one being Jane’s ex-husband (now deceased), Hugo Arndt Rodolf van Lawick, who filmed almost all the footage seen in the documentary and their son Hugo Eric Louis (referred to as ‘Grub’) seen as a young boy, both of these people support Jane in life and in the film. With these three people we see a humanising of Goodall as a person who made some tough decisions to get where she is today, possibly losing her husband and son. What is interesting is that both the men in her life were equally driven in their own lives, with her then husband going on to become one of the greatest nature photographers who ever lived as well as her son who ended up making Africa his home who lives there now. Watching the three of these family members is the central point and narrative arc of this movie that makes it worth watching, as well as illustrating onscreen how lives lived apart can still compliment each other in very real ways altering the very fabric of the world which is a welcome reminder in 2018 when so many people feel so powerless.
Many people who only have a passing awareness of Jane Goddall will (or should) know about her relationship with animals, especially apes, more specifically in the Gombe Stream National Park, in Tanzania where she made her breakthrough studies and observations that catapulted her to fame with the footage shot by her National Geographic photographer (later her ex-husband). The footage shows Goodall in the wild, although some of film is used to describe times that were not actually filmed which becomes obvious when Goodall explains how and why a cameraman was assigned to her. In fact there is no footage that exists of her first trip to Gombe or her actual discoveries that ended up paving the way for her life. What we see is the footage shot later as well the problems she faced with her techniques which we see fail, then we see improvements which assist her in her observations which are revelatory especially when she comments on them in her interview within the film.
It can be difficult for people to look back on their own lives and see mistakes that they have made or decisions that have left them in a very different place to where they could have ended up, that is, the road not taken. In “Jane” we see her mistakes, the tragedies as well as the triumphs in particular with the apes then with her own family. It is not difficult for a viewer to see Jane and her husband not willing to give ground on their own work which is extremely detrimental to their relationship, ultimately their marriage which of course impacts on ‘Grub’. In fact their son decided to spend his life in another country away from Jane, it is not talked about but it is not a stretch to think there were breakdowns in their relationship. Of course there was an upside for Jane in terms of her driven persona, that was that she became famous as well as a spokesperson for animals and other wildlife everywhere which is incalculable in its payoff, can you think of a world without her?
“Jane” has been expertly directed by Brett Morgen who has been directing within this genre since 1996, he has a signature as well as the ability to expertly take relevant footage from archives making salient points about real people while intercutting within the present which is exactly what happens within this film. Morgen has directed at least three great documentaries, “On the Ropes” (1999), “The Kid Stays in the Picture” (2002) and “Kurt Cobain: Montage of Heck” (2015). With “Jane” however he has woven a plot around a ready-made narrative that is his perfect documentary that not only says something but also shines a light on a person on the twilight of her years. Not only that there have been many specials and documentaries made about Goodall but this is the only one to see, it encompasses her past fifty years but keeps an eye on not only her future but ours as well.
This is a great documentary among great documentaries, which deserves to be seen, not only that it is worth purchasing, giving as a gift and showing people when they visit. I have seen many documentaries but this one was about many things that touched me and it is worth revisiting to see how one person who makes sacrifices can make real differences in peoples lives, probably beyond her own, something rare and special indeed.
“Jane” is out now on DVD.
