spryfilm.com

Reviewing Film, TV and home releases

recent posts

about

I am a reviewer of films and television at Spryfilm.com and I upload stories to thisissouthtaranaki.com.
  • Film review: “Geostorm” (2017)

    Film review: “Geostorm” (2017)

    “Geostorm” (2017)

    Sci-Fi/Action

    2,0

    Running Time: 109 minutes

    Written by: Dean Devlin & Paul Guyot

    Directed by: Dean Devlin

    Featuring:  Gerard Butler, Jim Sturgess, Abbie Cornish, Alexandra Maria Lara, Richard Schiff, Robert Sheehan, Daniel Wu, Eugenio Derbez, Ed Harris, and Andy García

    Cheng: “There’s potential for catastrophic weather events on a global scale. A geostorm.”

    There is no doubt in my mind that this has to be one of the worst movies to be released into cinemas this year. What I am not sure about is how this movie turned out this way, sure it had a troubled production, the director and producer were replaced when reshoots had to be done to attempt to make “Geostorm” (2017) at least watchable – but judging from the finished product no one really knew what to do with it – it is a mess of film with a muddled plot, narrative and no real logical elements that make this compelling viewing at all. The blame can be put at the studio who trusting a US$100 million plus budget to a debut director who had produced some profitable movies but had no right in being put in charge of this mess.

    “Geostorm” had a kind of competent idea behind it, solving the issues of global warming through technology, with a bunch of countries coming together to build the solution – if only we lived in that world now. The problem is when the story turned to a way to put people as well as the world into peril so that someone could emerge to save the day – a typical Hollywood story, it has been done many times – the most recent movie that did this was “2012” (2009) the disaster porn film that seemed to end the endless scenes of cities being destroyed wholesale – it was a monster of a movie with a large cast that get picked off until a family is left at the end to look forward to a brighter future together. Unfortunately Devlin has taken a movie that could have been interesting miscast the hell out of it, supplied endless tropes that do not work, supplied endless plot holes, had ridiculous twists that make no sense and then supplied special effects that seem not only sub par but offer nothing new in terms of spectacle at all.

    “Geostorm” is set in 2019, a coalition of 18 nations, spearheaded by the US and China, band together and commission “Dutch Boy”, a system of satellites designed to control climate on a global scale, following numerous extreme natural disasters that have left millions dead.

    Three years later, a United Nations field team stationed in Afghanistan comes across a village that has been frozen, along with its inhabitants. U.S. President Andrew Palma calls an emergency meeting of his Cabinet, where the blame is placed on a malfunction in Afghanistan’s weather satellite. Back up on the ICSS, a satellite engineer suspecting foul play secretly and preemptively copies the log data from the Afghanistan satellite and stores it in a locker, but dies when he is suddenly ejected into space in an apparent accident. The designer of ‘Dutch Boy’ is sent to the satellite is sort of what is going on, while his brother who works in the White House attempts to find out what is going on in terms of a conspiracy he has uncovered.

    Frankly from the opening scenes of real life disastrous weather patterns to the CGI creations, the writing is on the wall, with a voice over narration that explains everything that is going on to dialogue like “Sorry I’m late, I literally just flew in from space”, delivered in the most stilted way by Gerard Butlers character Max. From there it only gets worse by taking the two leads, Butler and Jim Sturgess (playing brothers) and separating them with their only interaction being on some kind of video link, that is the worst conceived piece of technology I have ever seen. If that wasn’t bad enough there are way too many subplots that are all superfluous to the plot, and are only there to get people from point A to point B in the easiest way possible – the best example is the relationship  between Sturgess and Abbie Cornish, that only exists to make it easier to get to the President without having to bend the narrative too far. Another example is at the climax of the movie in the space scenes a character who left the space station in a shuttle, which you are shown onscreen, literally turns up out of nowhere to save the day – I mean it is ridiculous to the extreme.

    Another aspect of this movie is the casting that is a little odd to say the least. Firstly Gerard Butler is the hero of the piece but pretty much disappears at key moments and at times is restricted to yelling at a giant monitor and pushing buttons. Jim Sturgess seems all at sea as well, with no time to cement his relationship with his brother or his fiancee, he seems to be offering at least two different performances – which hinders the tone of the movie. Abbie Cornish plays a Secret Service agent who is supposed to be the partner of Sturgess, but this comes off as one note, as well as completely mishandled. Cornish who has been in some very good films (and who is possibly the most talented person in this film) seems to have signed on to a different movie, one where she has some agency and is not being ordered around by Sturgess, not really being asked just told to do things that serve the plot. The rest of the cast led by Ed Harris, also has Andy Garcia, Richard Schiff and Mare Winningham who show up for a few ridiculous scenes then all but disappear leaving the heavy lifting to some dodgy effects. To be able to get so many great film actors together in supporting roles there must have been a better script floating around, one where they were playing three dimensional characters, but the movie has ended up with really stilted meaningless performances which is a missed opportunity. The movie attempts to do what many Roland Emmerich movies do, that is to show the carnage from a street level, with the audience identifying with ‘normal’ people as they face the disasters in separate countries. But Emmerich does this through a slow build where we meet people to give them background then the disaster happens. Here Devlin has just headed straight to the action sequences with people we don’t know, but are supposed to feel empathy for – it does not work.

    The final aspect that needs to be addressed is the ham fisted way global warming and extreme weather events are handled, as well as what a missed opportunity this was in terms of framing what could have been a much better movie. “Geostorm” instead of making the story about the extreme weather conditions, solves this problem in the first ten minutes with a voice over. This is a missed opportunity to create something special, an actual commentary on global warming in what should have been a major tent pole movie. Instead they have produced a movie about a giant gun, then as the movie progresses we see the technology causing damage through different kinds of weather. By the time the end of the movie arrives even the director has reduced the ‘weather machine’ to a laser ripping through Moscow destroying and killing people and property – hang on I thought this was about killer weather not a giant laser.

    There is so much else that could be written about “Geostorm” and there normally is about really bad movies that are released in cinemas where they are asking people to pay quite a lot to see them. I would not recommend this movie at all – give it a miss and watch any other disaster movie; you will have a much better time and be more rewarded.

    “Geostorm” is currently in cinemas now.

     

  • Trailer: “Geostorm” (2017)

    Trailer: “Geostorm” (2017)

    Error
    This video doesn’t exist

    After an unprecedented series of natural disasters threatened the planet, the world’s leaders came together to create an intricate network of satellites to control the global climate and keep everyone safe. But now, something has gone wrong—the system built to protect the Earth is attacking it, and it’s a race against the clock to uncover the real threat before a worldwide geostorm wipes out everything…and everyone along with it.

    Dean Devlin (writer/producer, “Independence Day”) makes his feature film directorial debut with suspense thriller “Geostorm,” starring Gerard Butler (“Olympus Has Fallen,” “300”), Jim Sturgess (“Cloud Atlas”), Abbie Cornish (“Limitless”), Alexandra Maria Lara (“Rush”), Daniel Wu (“The Man with the Iron Fists,” “Warcraft: The Beginning”), Eugenio Derbez (“How to Be a Latin Lover”), with Oscar nominees Ed Harris (“The Hours,” “Apollo 13”) and Andy Garcia (“The Godfather: Part III”).

    Butler stars as Jake Lawson, a scientist who, along with his brother, Max, played by Sturgess, is tasked with solving the satellite program’s malfunction. Cornish stars as Secret Service agent Sarah Wilson; Lara as Ute Fassbinder, the ISS astronaut who runs the space station; Wu as Cheng Long, the Hong Kong-based supervisor for the satellite program; Derbez as space station crew member Al Hernandez; with Garcia as U.S. President Andrew Palma; and Harris as Secretary of State Leonard Dekkom. The film also stars Zazie Beetz (upcoming “Deadpool 2,” TV’s “Atlanta”), Adepero Oduye (“The Big Short,” “12 Years a Slave”), Amr Waked (“Lucy,” “Syriana”), and Robert Sheehan (“The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones,” “Season of the Witch”).

    The film, written by Dean Devlin & Paul Guyot, is being produced by Skydance’s David Ellison, Devlin, and Skydance’s Dana Goldberg. Herbert W. Gains, Electric Entertainment’s Marc Roskin and Skydance’s Don Granger are the executive producers. Rachel Olschan of Electric Entertainment and Cliff Lanning co-produce.

    The behind-the-scenes creative team includes director of photography Roberto Schaefer (“Finding Neverland,” “Quantum of Solace”); production designer Kirk M. Petruccelli (“White House Down”); editors Ron Rosen (“Godzilla”), Oscar nominee Chris Lebenzon (“Crimson Tide,” “Top Gun”) and Oscar nominee John Refoua (“Avatar”); costume designer Susan Matheson (“The Big Short,” “Safehouse”); and VFX supervisor Jeffrey A. Okun (“Clash of the Titans,” “The Day the Earth Stood Still”). The music is by Lorne Balfe (“The LEGO® Batman Movie”).

     

     

     

  • DVD & Blu-ray review: “Baby Driver” (2017)

    DVD & Blu-ray review: “Baby Driver” (2017)

    “Baby Driver” (2017)

    Action

    images

    Running Time: 113 minutes

    Written & Directed by: Edgar Wright

    Featuring:  Ansel Elgort, Kevin Spacey, Lily James, Eiza González, Jon Hamm, Jamie Foxx, and Jon Bernthal

    Doc: “So here’s the thing, I’m looking at some of the country’s finest thugs and of course young Mozart in a go-cart over there. People love great bank robbery stories, so let’s give them something full and brazen as fuck to talk about over their lattes.”

    After much anticipation Edgar Wright’s career course correction has arrived, after leaving the super hero project “Ant-Man” (2015), (which in fact turned out very well thank you) he has brought to the screen an almost entirely original proposition. In seeing this weeks new release “Baby Driver” (2017), we can only wonder what his vision of the diminutive super hero may have been. To be frank I was shocked watching this new film as it hits the mark on almost every cylinder, it is full of action, drama, comedy, music and thrills, all packed in at under two hours, pedestrian by the lengths of some of the movies released this Summer – especially considering some of them go absolutely nowhere.

    After all the shenanigans with mates Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, as well as the overtly pop culture referenced work of “Scott Pilgrim vs. the World“ (2010) it is great to see him create something (albeit with a nod towards Walter Hills now classic “The Driver” (1979)) original as well as slick not forgetting smart. This feels like the movie that Wright has promised for so long after the double hits of “Shaun of the Dead” (2004) and “Hot Fuzz” (2007). With “Baby Driver”, Wright has built a film around solid if not extreme characters, that are all driving towards goals that while not unified are understandable in the world they are living in. When you watch this movie it works because of the nature of the narrative that builds the plot which is the use of scene appropriate music that frames almost every scene, whether believable or not. This is a fantasy, a dream that asks us to leave real life at the door, welcome the madness as well as holding on to our seats for a truly unique experience.

    The film is centred around Baby (Ansel Elgort), a young getaway driver in Atlanta, Georgia. When he was a child, a car accident killed his parents and left him with severe tinnitus, which he blocks out by listening to music. He also records his everyday conversations and remixes them into songs using vintage audio equipment. Baby works for Doc (Kevin Spacey), a mastermind heist planner, to pay off a debt he incurred after stealing one of Doc’s cars. Baby lives with his deaf foster father, Joseph. After pulling off a robbery, Baby is told that the next job will pay off his debt. Baby meets waitress Debora (Lily James) at a diner he frequents, and they fall in love.

    Wright has done something few writer/directors are capable of, that is he has reinvented his style to accomodate a new movie. Now while the pace of this film is quick, the actual editing and the way we shift from scene to scene is not. This is in contrast to Wright’s previous films, pretty much all of them, where the audience would be taken from scene to scene with a frenetic style that may have been hiding some of the flaws that were hidden within the plot. Whilst music has always played a large part in Wright’s movies this is the first time he has injected them into the narrative without them being a crux that the move relies on. What I mean by this is if you remove the music from this movie you still have a heist/chase film. With the music added you are witness to a deeper story that invigorates the characters motivations – something special indeed.

    The plot of this movie is something audiences have seen many times before, you know, the one about a person trapped in a situation that they cannot extricate themselves from, but can see a way out, particularly after meeting a third party, which normally turns into their love interest. However, this films plot is framed by the well thought out, as well as the soundtrack, full of deep cuts which opens with the toe tappingly great Jon Spencer Blues Explosion ‘Bellbottoms’, where Baby and his crew rob a bank, this plays while they make their outrageous getaway, something that hints at the pace for the rest of the film. The opening also makes a statement about the movie as well as Wright saying “I have arrived!”, in the loudest way possible. Most, if not all the music is diegetic which is unique in itself without the movie being a musical, although at times this movie has many of the same beats as a musical – witness the opening credits sequence with Baby moving in a single shot to the original ‘Harlem Shuffle’, as well as the ending all choreographed to the amazing ‘Brighton Rock’ by Queen. Baby moves as well as drives like a dancer, and the car fu (if you will) beats almost anything seen in the ‘Fast’ franchise, seemingly without the massive CGI that is needed for those behemoths.

    Talking about Baby, played by relative newcomer Ansel Elgort, is a character that almost reaches the heights Wright had for him, but maybe his face is a little too baby, without the lived in physique another actor may have had – they try and rough him up by scarring him, but he is almost too pretty – maybe even prettier than leading lady Lilly James – who in my mind seems a little too twee for the part as well as out of her depth in the role. However none of this really matters when the stars come out to play with some of the best dialogue around, they chew it up and roughhouse with each other like the pros they are. Witness Kevin Spacey as ‘Doc’ (an obvious homage to Steve McQueen) who runs the show, Jon Bernthal as Griff (seen all too briefly) and Eiza González as Darling a a lovingly twisted partner to the scene stealing (saying that in this film is a real compliment) Jon Hamm as Buddy.

    Speaking of the absolute best performances, they come from the aforementioned John Hamm as Buddy and Jamie Foxx as way too crazy Bats. It can be no mistake that these two actors have the best roles as well as give the best performances; they are polar opposites in this and are set up against each other for most of their time onscreen. However, it is Hamm in the bigger and more defining role that steals the entire movie – including the music. Hamm shines like no other time onscreen in his career, here he is not relying on his winking at the camera or chiseled looks, it is just his menace as well as his complete understanding of Baby that makes his part in this film timeless. Foxx is excellent as well in a dangerous role that sparks the entire third act into motion as well as offering some menacing looks and dialogue, he is always great, but here like Hamm he is off the hook, unlike anything I have seen him in since possibly “Django Unchained” (2012). These two performances are reason enough to see this movie at the cinemas.

    Judging from the box office success of this film, quickly approaching US$100 million at the US box office alone this will be one of the bigger success of this Summer season, given that this is an original movie, much like “Dunkirk” (2017) which at this stage looks like it too will be a big success. It can be no coincidence that these two original films (both written and directed by Englishmen) will be surpassing expectations, unlike the glut of sequels, reboots and comic book movies which have mostly lagged behind expectations both critically and financially. What does this say about the tastes of audiences, for one thing maybe its time that more original movies were being made and that filmmakers should be left alone to create original properties?

    If you want to see an excellent action/thriller movie this year then this will be the one for you. You will definitely get a kick out of the music as well as the interplay with Baby, as well as the rest of the cast. This is a modestly budgeted film with a cast that is worth their weight in gold. You would be crazy to not see this on the big screen with the volume turned up to 11.

    Oh yeah, and look out for the great Paul Williams dressed in a white suit – priceless.

    Track list:

    1. Jon Spencer Blues Explosion – ‘Bellbottoms’
    2. Bob & Earl – ‘Harlem Shuffle’
    3. Jonathan Richman & The Modern Lovers – ‘Egyptian Reggae’
    4. Googie Rene – ‘Smokey Joe’s La La’
    5. The Beach Boys – ‘Let’s Go Away For Awhile’
    6. Carla Thomas – ‘B-A-B-Y’
    7. Kashmere Stage Band – ‘Kashmere’
    8. Dave Brubeck – ‘Unsquare Dance’
    9. The Damned – ‘Neat Neat Neat’
    10. The Commodores – ‘Easy (Single Version)’
    11. Rex – ‘Debora’
    12. Beck – ‘Debra’
    13. Incredible Bongo Band – ‘Bongolia’
    14. The Detroit Emeralds – ‘Baby Let Me Take You (in My Arms)’
    15. Alexis Korner – ‘Early In The Morning’
    16. David McCallum – ‘The Edge’
    17. Martha and the Vandellas – ‘Nowhere To Run’
    18. The Button Down Brass – ‘Tequila’
    19. Sam & Dave – ‘When Something Is Wrong With My Baby’
    20. Brenda Holloway – ‘Every Little Bit Hurts’
    21. Blur – ‘Intermission’
    22. Focus – ‘Hocus Pocus (Original Single Version)’
    23. Golden Earring – ‘Radar Love (1973 Single Edit)’
    24. Barry White – ‘Never, Never Gone Give Ya Up’
    25. Young MC – ‘Know How’
    26. Queen – ‘Brighton Rock’
    27. Sky Ferreira – ‘Easy’
    28. Simon & Garfunkel – ‘Baby Driver’
    29. Kid Koala – ‘Was He Slow (Credit Roll Version)’
  • DVD review: “Land of Mine” (2016)

    DVD review: “Land of Mine” (2016)

    “Land of Mine” (2016)

    Drama

    images

    Running Time: 90 minutes

    Written & Directed by: Martin Zandvliet

    Featuring: Roland Møller, Mikkel Følsgaard

    Sgt. Carl Rasmussen: “Those of you who count the mines, make sure my card is updated. This task is as important as defusing mines.”

    After the recent German elections where for in everything but name, the Nazi party has made a big comeback securing many seats in the parliament, it may be hard to remember that they drove Germany to a War as well as huge defeat, marking some of the darkest days in that countries history. There have always been films made about the War, as well as Nazis, but there has been an increasing trend to make more films about the aftermath of that War and what happened to people that were on the losing end. This is partly what “Land of Mine” (2016) is about, it also gives an insight into what it was like to win, the feelings that were aloud to run rampant by the victors, as well as the plight of young men who really had no idea what they were getting into.

    Writer/Director Martin Zandvliet who hails from Denmark where “Land of Mine” is set, has created a film that touches on many subjects as well as themes, obviously war, its aftermath, are the primary themes, which sit on the surface waiting to be defused. The film also concerns itself with a country that was occupied by the Nazis, once liberated shows no compulsion in treating its prisoners of war like human garbage, in some cases mobile toilets. What makes this situation worse is that the prisonsers we are concerned with are all nothing more than boys, who were sent into battle when the Third Reich was crumbling and running out of soldiers.

    “Land of Mine” is set n the days following the end of World War II just after the liberation of Denmark from Nazi occupation in May 1945. A group of young German prisoners of war are handed over to the Danish Army and subsequently sent out to the West Coast, where they are trained to remove the more than two million mines that the Germans had placed in the sand along the coast.

    Zandvliet has crafted a simple tale that resonates through its characters as well as their situation. The very reason that the boys are in the army is because of hate, the very reason that their Danish captor is there is because of hate. The boys who are defusing the mines do not have a choice about the horrendous job they have to complete. Going into it they realize how dangerous it is, but they get to their task as willing as they can be knowing that some of them will be maimed or even killed because of it. Their Danish supervisor after ill treating them starts to realize he has a need for revenge but these boys are essentially innocent, having been born a few years too late to avoid being drafted. This of course leads to some surprising friendships that none of them could see coming. This is truly a film about forgiveness, as well as understanding, but also the fatalistic future one has because of something others have perpetrated on behalf on others. There is nothing more relevant than this, it can be related to the world we are living in today – I don’t mean to sound political but this is what the film is a metaphor of – our world, right now. The world is being led by a couple of people in power down a path that we will all pay the price for, whether its political, economical or sociological.

    The cast are all completely suited to the film as well their parts, considering a large portion of them are under twenty years old, they all show great composure in what must have difficult parts to play. If there is a lead it is Roland Møller as Sgt. Carl Rasmussen the ‘leader; of the pack as well of course the jailer of the boys. Møller has the job of playing a character who is conflicted both internally as well as externally, he must juxtapose many emotions, sometimes within the same scene which is an acting challenge few would be able to meet – especially in a believable way. This is a man playing a person who has a hatred for the vanquished enemy but also must reconcile this with the fact that his ‘enemy’ that he is able to punish are little more than children. It is his burden to carry when these children meet some pretty sad ends, and then is double-crossed by their own captors.

    One of the central aspects of this film that makes it so gripping is the main location of the film,  at a beach, which would normally be innocuous enough, but the fact that this beach has land mines laid all around makes it a unique danger to anyone that ventures there. Not only that but all of the German prisoners as well as their Dutch jailer are living in accommodation that holiday makers may have stayed at in more peaceful times. The location lends itself to casualness, as well as a general looseness among the boys, so much so that they sometimes forget what they are there for; this leads to deadly consequences for the young men. Of course this is not just restricted to the boys as a few scenes involving the Dutch Sergeant, his family as well as his dog who he loves, remind him of the seriousness of the plight they all find themselves in. This seaside locale should be a retreat, a place of fun as well as a location for people to bond, but it hides a deadly secret which is what the people of Denmark will do (at least for a while), they are liberated, true, but there will be a secret they hide in regard to the years of occupation, which unlike the mines cannot be swept away easily.

    This is a truly remarkable film, with no easy answers about what the Dutch had to face after the War, as well as what to do with their prisoners of war There is no doubt that as a people they would have felt the need for recrimination against the German soldiers that had invaded and inhabited their country. Of course the unfortunate aspect is that the face of the German Army as well as Germany itself were teenage boys who just wanted to go home, rebuild Germany, as well as seeing their families. It is probably certain that the boys here were not even part of the Hitler Youth, just conscripted boys put into service by the Third Reich.

    I recommend this highly you will not be disappointed by a film that is full of high drama as well as suspense that is set in a real world that existed, and may exist again one day if we are not careful to repeat the mistakes of the past.

    “Land of Mine” is out now on DVD.

  • Streaming review: “Mindhunter – Season One” (2017)

    Streaming review: “Mindhunter – Season One” (2017)

    “Mindhunter – Season One” (2017)

    TV Series/Drama

    images

    Episodes: 10

    Created by: Joe Penhall & Jennifer Haley

    Featuring: Jonathan Groff, Holt McCallany, Anna Torv and Hannah Gross

    John Douglas: “[Talking about Monte Rissell] …and like Ed Kemper he was able to convince the psychiatrist he was making excellent progress while he was actually killing human beings. This is kind of a sick version of the old joke about how many psychiatrists it takes to change a light bulb. The answer being, just one, but only if the light bulb wants to change.” 

    It has been three years since David Fincher directed the Academy Award nominated “Gone Girl” (2014), an adaptation of Gillian Flynn’s well regarded novel about a possible murder, as well as an unhinged relationship between a man and a woman – called marriage. Now comes something of a return with the new Netflix television show “Mindhunter” (2017), again an adaptation, but this time of a non-fiction book by infamous FBI profiler John Bradley. Bradley as well as his work has been the inspiration for a number of fictional characters and work, including the now legendary book and film, ‘The Silence of the Lambs’. Bradley is famous for catching the legendary ‘BTK’ serial killer so he knows his subject, here in this show his name is changed, but this is definitely part of his story.

    This new show takes many of the real life serial killers as well as situations that Bradley found himself in, that he wrote of and fictionalizes certain aspects, which means there is more of a license with names and places. However in saying that many of the real serial killers are portyated, as well as the interviews that took place over the years that “Mindhnter” is the subject of. This is not the first foray into television for Fincher, previously he helped bring the US version of Lynda La Plante’s “Prime Suspect” (1991 – 2006) from the UK to the small screen – this only lasted one season as well as having a protracted journey, so it was one and done. This new series is a very different beast with it seeming more personal as well as Fincher having more freedom given by Netflix to make something special that will be of a much higher quality.

    Set in 1977 — in the early days of criminal psychology and criminal profiling at the Federal Bureau of Investigation — Mindhunter revolves around FBI agents Holden Ford (Jonathan Groff) and Bill Tench (Holt McCallany), who interview imprisoned serial killers in order to understand how such criminals think and apply this knowledge to solving ongoing cases.

    Fincher is such a gifted director that I wish he was more prolific, so it is when he does bring something to the screen it should be treated with much deserved respect. Here he is bringing a third part to an unofficial trilogy of serial killer projects. The first, his now classic film, “Seven” (1995), the second, his procedural “Zodiac” (2007) and now this, the longer form “Mindhunter”. What is interesting is that the further we move through these three very different but similar projects they move closer and closer to some kind of truth as well as being more about the hunters of the killers than the actual killers themselves which shows a more consistent talent in telling stories. It is means that Fincher is more interested in exploring themes that run through all of these incredibly scary as well as poignant stories.

    Whilst one person, Joe Penhall, writes the series there are four credited directors. Fincher has the bulk of the work with four; Tobias Lindholme, Asif Kapadia and Andrew Douglas each have two. This is an interesting mix of talent with a nice four way split with the experienced as well as highly recognizable Fincher, the up and coming documentarian Kapadia, with the inexperienced but genre experienced Douglas and Lindholme. The balance of talent is tipped to the directors as the two cinematographers, Christopher Probst and Erik Messerschmidt, are both inexperienced in terms of cinema as well as television so it is up to the directors, and I belive the key comes from Fincher as to the look, feel as well as sound of this show. Each episode links up perfectly with its partners in terms of look, which is important as the narrative grows.

    Speaking of narrative, which leads to plot, this is a very plot driven show, it deals not only deal with some extremely grizzly details, but it also looks at bureaucracy within the FBI, sexual relationships between same as well as the opposite sex, politics of the day and deep psychological details. Even though the narrative is within ten episodes each episode is dense with information as well as being linked with a very definite ‘B’ story that will come to light – but not this season. In relation to themes as well as storylines you will recognize some of these as well as tropes, what is interesting is that this is the time period where they originated so this is an origin story of sorts. What we see is the origins of serial killer profiling as well as those techniques put into practice, we also see some of the jargon you will recognize being formulated and explained to lawyers and others for the first time – it is a fascinating trip down some dark alleys that will leave you wanting more.

    For a ten episode run there are a surprisingly small amount of permanent characters that we follow, which could be off putting if they were not all intensely likeable as well as fascinating. We also follow each of the arcs of those characters through the run of the show. The genius is in the casting; I imagine that there were many high profile actors interested in the main roles of Holden Ford (Jonathan Groff) and Bill Tench (Holt McCallany). Even though the flashier as well as main part is Jonathan Groff’s, it is character actor Holt McCallany who is the real star of the show. McCallany, is a Fincher regular, but this is a show where he has the time to really work through an arc as well as get in the mind of his character, with all this he really shows what he is capable of, I only hope there is a second season for him to re-enter this world of serial killers. The other casting is the great Australian actress Anna Torv who plays a Doctor of Psychology who heads the team directing them in clinical ways to explain jargon as well as create it with the boys in tow. Make no mistake Torv ends up being the ‘boss’ of sorts as well as a kind of moral centre.

    This show is not just concerned with the hunting of serial killers in the 1970s but is also concerned with how the current climate of serial killers is viewed by the hard work as well as bravery of early pioneers who stood on the shoulders of giants to arrive at a larger picture of why serial killers exist as well as how to catch them, then treat them. This is an antecedent of any serial killer show or movie ever made, it also makes you think about the things people do behind closed doors as well as peoples fear that can snowball to ruin real peoples lives.

    This is one of the shows of the year; its talkier than you might expect as well as funnier as well – which is a relief from some of the interviews the team carry out. There is also a heavy dose of family life which helps humanize the FBI agents, as they deal with their stresses much differently as they at much different stages of their careers and lives. I can honestly say this show will surprise you as wel as entertain you and once you start you will not want to stop until the end.

    “Mindhunter” is streaming now on Netflix.

  • Blu-ray & DVD review: “My Cousin Rachel” (2017)

    Blu-ray & DVD review: “My Cousin Rachel” (2017)

    “My Cousin Rachel” (2017)

    Thriller/Drama

    images

    Running Time: 106 minutes

    Written & Directed by: Roger Michell

    Featuring: Rachel Weisz, Sam Claflin, Iain Glen and Holliday Grainger

    Philip: “Whatever it cost my cousin in pain and suffering before he died I will return with full measure upon the woman that caused it.”

    If you have never heard of author Daphne Du Maurier that is a loss you can solve by going and finding some of her books, reading them and coming back to this review. Maybe start with the novel that is the basis for this review, ‘My Cousin Rachel’. In fact you may have seen her two most popular works as Alfred Hitchcock films, the timeless “Rebecca” (1940) as well as “Spellbound” (1945) which had hallmarks of Du Maurier’s work, the supernatural, lost love and a heightened sexuality in many of her creations. Some of these can also be found in Roger Michell’s film adaptation “My Cousin Rachel” (2017), which will have you enthralled not just with the story but the performances of the leads Sam Claflin and Rachel Weisz. There is a real air of mystery to this story that strikes a note with modernity as well as the time it is set in.

    The film is primarily concerned with Philip (Sam Claflin), a young Englishman who finds his cousin Ambrose (also played by Claflin) dead after traveling to Florence, Italy. He vows revenge against Ambrose’s missing wife Rachel (Rachel Weisz), blaming her for his untimely demise. When Philip meets Rachel for the first time, his mood suddenly changes as he finds himself falling for her seductive charm and beauty. As his obsession for her grows, Rachel now hatches a scheme to win back her late husband’s estate from the unsuspecting Philip.

    Whilst “My Cousin Rachel” could be seen as a thriller as well as a ensemble piece the real thrust of the story, as well as the reason for any thriller aspects is driven by the excellent performance by Sam Claflin as both Philip and his Uncle Ambrose. I found the character of Philip to be completely fascinating, the word I would use to describe him is juvenile. Once you watch the film you may think he plays the innocent but in fact he has been raised to be ignorant of almost everything to do with relationships as well as perceived outsiders to his family unit of two. In fact he is given the opportunity to expand his horizons, mix with new people of a different social strata as well as receive an education but he spurns this as he sees this as unimportant, something he will of course later regret, as he is clueless about anything outside his extremely narrow field of vision.

    The very reason that Rachel is a mystery as well as the reason that she is able to spin her web, entrapping Philip seems so obvious to not only the audience but to all of his friends  – the only others that seem not to notice Rachel’s hypnotic spell are all the workers and servants that work for Philip – much like they are extensions of his will, they, like him are manipulated by others with no power of their own. In fact the simple fact is that there is no challenge for Rachel, she in fact does very little up to the point Philip makes his sad intentions clear – she is as passive a person or antagonist as I have ever seen in a thriller. It is Philip with his seemingly simple way of viewing the world as well as the people who inhabit it, that he has trouble with. Philip is completely without the ability to rationalize his thoughts in terms of anything he does immediately, understanding and reacting with emotion whilst putting logic to one side, he is a pure emotional being, not confined to one he seems to be only able to cope with one at a time, anything outside of that does not compute.

    In fact the film is so closely associated with Philip that every scene only concerns Philip, his relentless drive towards some truth about his own situation. In saying that of course it means that the lead actor has to be on his game – in that, Sam Claflin, who plays the protagonist is excellent here as the Philip – he has to carry this entire movie from beginning to its gripping, sad, conclusion – he has the opening narrative dialogue as well as the haunting final statement. Claflin has been making some extremely interesting choices in terms of movies this year, one only has to watch the excellent Dunkirk film “Their Finest” (2017) to see that. He strikes me as a more austere and serious Hugh Grant, which believe me is a compliment. Claflin could be making bigger budgeted movies or be the lead in charming indies, but sees to have chosen a slightly different route – not unlike his peer Dan Stevens.

    The rest of the cast is rounded out with some great English talent, no more so than Oscar winner and titular character Rachel Weisz, who plays the role of Rachel with reserve as well as a hint of coldness – watching her you are not sure really what her motivations are at all, she enters the film about a quarter of the way in, all the while being built up to some kind of super woman that has a true dark side. Of course the reality of her arrival is not what Philip or the audience expect, like most things the expectant evil genius is not what she seems, or is she? The two other actors that witness what is going on are “Game of Thrones” stalwart Iain Glen, as Philips legal guardian, Nick Kendall, and Holliday Grainger as his daughter, Louise. As you would expect they are both excellent, underplaying the happenings in Philips life, trying to not get in the way until it really is far too late for the plot, which ends up snowballing to its eventual climax.

    Roger Michell, the director as well as adapter of the original novel has created a real elegant looking film, that owes a debt to Kubrick’s “Barry Lydon” (1975), with its lush settings, real props, on the nose art direction, but most importantly its use of subtle source lighting that has to be seen to be believed. Michell who is South African born had had a varied career with his biggest hit being the Julia Roberts/Hugh Grant classic “Notting Hill” (1999), it is with “My Cousin Rachel” he has created his best most personal work to date – when I view this film it seems to me he is in complete control of performance as well as camera. The elegant nature of the daytime scenes, as well as scenery is as good as it gets – there is one scene in a barn full of hay with Phillip in conversation with Louise that looked like a painting from the period, shafts of light entering windows up high – just breathtaking.

    In case you have not guessed I really enjoyed this film, it stayed with me many days after I had seen it, mainly because of the relieve complexity of the plot, it does remind me of elements of “Gone Girl” (2014) with a female protagonist as an unreliable narrator – even though in this film it is a male narrator who is letting us in on the story. What is interesting here is the way in which Rachel is able to manipulate almost everyone around her not only with ease but also with a real lack of action. It is almost like people see in her what they want to see – their own emotions are cast back at them – we see what we want to see until it is too late.

    I thoroughly recommend this film to people who enjoy thrillers that are not only based around gender as well as the standings of people but that will not mind the steady pacing that could leave some modern audiences craving some movement as well as a complete ending.

    “My Cousin Rachel” is out now on DVD & Blu-ray.

    Actor Sam Claflin and Pierfrancesco Favino are seen on the set of the movie My Cousin Rachel on June 06, 2016 in Arezzo, Italy. Photo BEESCOOP.COM exclusive

  • “Star Wars: The Last Jedi” (2017) – Latest Trailer

    “Star Wars: The Last Jedi” (2017) – Latest Trailer

    Error
    This video doesn’t exist

    In Lucasfilm’s Star Wars: The Last Jedi, the Skywalker saga continues as the heroes of The Force Awakens join the galactic legends in an epic adventure that unlocks age-old mysteries of the Force and shocking revelations of the past. 

    The film stars Mark Hamill, Carrie Fisher, Adam Driver, Daisy Ridley, John Boyega, Oscar Isaac, Lupita Nyong’o, Andy Serkis, Domhnall Gleeson, Anthony Daniels, Gwendoline Christie, Kelly Marie Tran, Laura Dern and Benicio Del Toro.   

    Star Wars: The Last Jedi is written and directed by Rian Johnson and produced by Kathleen Kennedy and Ram Bergman. J.J. Abrams, Tom Karnowski and Jason McGatlin are the executive producers. 

    In Cinemas December 14th

  • New “Justice League” (2017) Trailer

    New “Justice League” (2017) Trailer

    Fuelled by his restored faith in humanity and inspired by Superman’s selfless act, Bruce Wayne enlists the help of his newfound ally, Diana Prince, to face an even greater enemy. Together, Batman and Wonder Woman work quickly to find and recruit a team of metahumans to stand against this newly awakened threat. But despite the formation of this unprecedented league of heroes—Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Cyborg and The Flash—it may already be too late to save the planet from an assault of catastrophic proportions.

    Error
    This video doesn’t exist

    JUSTICE LEAGUE is directed by Zack Snyder and stars Ben Affleck, Gal Gadot, Jason Momoa, Ezra Miller, Ray Fisher, Henry Cavill, Jeremy Irons, Amy Adams, Diane Lane, J.K. Simmons.

    JUSTICE LEAGUE releases in New Zealand cinemas on November 16, 2017

  • DVD & Blu-ray review: “Spider-Man: Homecoming” (2017)

    DVD & Blu-ray review: “Spider-Man: Homecoming” (2017)

    “Spider-Man: Homecoming” (2017)

    Action

    images

    Running Time: 133 minutes

    Written by:   Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley

    Directed by: Jon Watts

    Featuring:  Tom Holland, Michael Keaton, Jon Favreau, Donald Glover, Zendaya, Jacob Batalon, Laura Harrier, Tyne Daly, Marisa Tomei, and Robert Downey Jr.

    Peter Parker: “I’m sick of Mr. Stark treating me like a kid.”

    Ned Leeds: “But you are a kid.”

    Peter Parker: “Yeah. A kid who can stop a bus with his bare hands.”

    After five previous iterations (some great, some quite sub standard) comes the newly crowned Spider-man, released on DVD and Blu-ray this week. The titular hero arrives in the form of the young English actor Tom Holland, probably the closest in age to Peter Parker than either Tobey Maguire or Andrew Garfield ever were, as well as being fresher of face coupled with being an original choice. After the two failed “Amazing Spider-Man” movies both critically and ultimately financially, it seemed rights owners Sony had dug themselves into a bit of a hole – with that desperation Kevin Feige pounced (him the overlord of the MCU at Disney), he was able to strike a deal that allowed Disney to use the character in (introducing Tom Holland) “Captain America” Civil War” (2016), as well as steering the direction of this new Spider-Man movie, making it into a much better proposition – one that people will actually like, as well as making money at the box-office – it would seem they have succeeded in both. I have to say here that this is not only a great Spider-Man movie but an exceptional comic book movie, something Warners could still take a lesson from after the last half hour of this years other comic blockbuster “Wonder Woman” (2017).

    “Spider-Man: Homecoming” (2017) begins in 2012, Tony Stark and the federal government create the U.S. Department of Damage Control (D.O.D.C.), driving salvage company owner Adrian Toomes (Michael Keaton) out of business after the battle of New York which ocurred in “Marvels Avengers” (2010).

    Years later, after preventing Toomes’ associates from robbing an ATM, Peter (Tom Holland) returns to his Queens apartment only for his best friend Ned to discover his secret identity. On another night, Peter comes across Herman Schultz and Jackson Brice selling Chitauri weaponry to local gangster Aaron Davis. When he tries to intervene, Peter nearly loses his life at Toomes’ hands but is rescued by Stark at the last minute.

    The movie then moves on into the main plot and many various sub-plots, with great relief  we do not have to sit through yet another origin story. In this new incarnation Peter already has his powers, of course we have already seen them in another MCU film, so introductions are not required – this is so refreshing which can be seen as the direct influence of Kevin Feige, he is a real master when it comes to the MCU, I only wish other companies – I am looking at you Fox – would do something similar with the properties they own, having treated them in a dismal fashion (Fantastic Four anyone?).

    I do have to admit that when this creative team was announced I was not looking forward to their output, the director is Jon Watts, yet another independent film maker, as well as the writing team of Jonathan Goldstein and John Francis Daley. Those writers had previously written the underwhelming remake “Vacation” (2016), as well as the creators of the “Horrible Bosses” (2011-2014) movies – not inspiring stuff. However, amongst their work there was one bright spot, “Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs 2” (2013), a very good animated movie as well as being an even better sequel. So it is great to see these two writers being a part of a global franchise, where they can just concentrate on a great story – where set up is not a part of their brief – just a plot that makes sense, has humour, but as like all of the MCU movies it has heart as its center – not gimmicks, violence or other distraction – just what it means to be a young guy trying to make a mark when all he wants to do is follow his heart. John Watts on the other hand has had a lot of experience, as well as having a long career in a variety of genres and formats. Even though his largest success was the Kevin Bacon starrer “Cop Car” (2015), my favorite film of his was his theatrical debut, “Clown” (2014), a horror movie where a man puts on a cursed clown costume and is unable to remove it – just great original film-making (there are aspects of that story here with Peter and his new suit). Here Watts is taking a genre movie, that he had a hand in writing as well as putting a twist on it to keep the audiences engaged with a property they have seen five times previous – Watts does a great job of managing the action, the narrative as well as the plot which is enormously layered for a comic book movie – it has to set up quite a bit for the coming sequels. The last fifteen minutes of the movie are priceless with a great cameo, as well as a nod to other versions of out friendly neighbourhood Spider-Man.

    As with all Marvel films (the Disney ones anyway) the casting is perfect, with Tom Holland in the title role who gives as much of his performance as Peter as he does as Spider-man. If you have seen Holland in his breakthrough performance in “The Impossible” (2012) you will know he is a young man with an incredible talent that will only grow in time – the only question is can he be the lead in a major motion picture, that question is answered about half way through the movie as you can see he is relishing this worldwide stage to give one of the more fun and personal performances yet in the MCU. It is so refreshing to see Spider-Man being played and enjoyed, much like Tobey Maguire did in “Spider-Man 2” (2004), just an actor having a great time with one of the more original characters created by Stan Lee.

    Its hard to just say the ‘rest of the cast’ as the caliber is so high, Michael Keaton as the antagonist, ‘The Vulture’, once again shows why he was a superstar throughout the 80s and 90s – with a well deserved and hard fought career resurgence he shines here, he has a ferociousness that he takes from the script but translates so that it leaps off the screen. If you thought Robert Downey Jnr. was a captivating hero, wait until you see Keaton as a villain. Marisa Tomei as Aunt May, Jacob Batalon as Ned and Donald Glover as Aaron Davis all round out the cast and give support to movie where it is needed. One of the great aspects of the movie is that no one or nothing out shines Tom Holland as the centre piece of this movie – it may have been tempting to give others the emotion thereby protecting the young actor, but this is not the case and he shines under his own steam, this is to his merit for such a young man – Holland like this new Spider-Man is the real star and revelation in this true Summer blockbuster.

    Of course the real story here is how this new film fits into the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) as well as how fans have been wanting a combined story with all the Marvel characters – if this is a success (there is no doubt people will love this movie) maybe we will see the Fox Universe, with all its X-Men make an appearance, so far the word is no, but really this film was not on the cards just a few years ago. The great thing is that Tom Holland will be making appearances in upcoming Marvel movies which is an injection of youth these films required to stay current as well as attracting new audiences – it also gives Sony its third platform to lauch some more Spider-verse characters – lets hope they don’t stuff that up – their track record has not been great.

    This new movie offers much in the way of story, as well as some twists on some previous storylines, we also see the return of some MCU characters that maybe we though were done with – I found those to be a welcome return. What this film does is give a nice first outing while re-setting some of the older Spider-Man characters, as well as introducing old favorites directly from the pages of the comics as well as hinting at some future characters that will make a splash in the inevitable sequel. What this movie does not so, and I am thankful for that, is to keep us guessing or clumsily setting up a sequel – the people behind this were not counting their chickens, which is something the MCU learnt from “Iron Man 2” (2010).

    All in all this is a fantastic film, one that will stay with you after it is over, you may even want to revisit it in the cinemas – I know I will be. All in all this is far superior to the two Andrew Garfield outings, is ahead of “Spider-Man 3” (2007), but just lacks something to put it ahead of “Spider-Man” (2002) – of course the benchmark is the great “Spider-Man 2” (2004) which remains one of the finest comic book films ever made.

    “Spider-Man: Homecoming” is out on DVD & Blu-ray on 11th October 2017.

  • Streaming review: “Tin Star” (2017)

    Streaming review: “Tin Star” (2017)

    “Tin Star” (2017)

    Drama

    images

    10 Episodes

    Produced & Created by: Rowan Joffe

    Featuring: Tim Roth, Christina Hendricks, Leanne Best, Christopher Heyerdahl, Roark Critchlow

    Episodes:

    1. Fun and (S)Laughter

    Directed by: Rowan Joffe; Cinematographer: Dale McCready

    1. The Kid

    Directed by: Marc Jobst; Cinematographer: Paul Sarossy

    1. Comfort of Strangers

    Directed by: Alice Troughton; Cinematographer: Dale McCready 

    1. Jack

    Directed by: Marc Jobst; Cinematographer: Paul Sarossy 

    1. Bait

    Directed by: Alice Troughton; Cinematographer: Dale McCready 

    1. Exposure

    Directed by: Grant Harvey; Cinematographer: Paul Sarossy

    1. Exposure

    Directed by: Giles Bannier; Cinematographer: Dale McCready

    1. This be the Verse

    Directed by: Grant Harvey; Cinematographer: Dale McCready 

    1. Fortunate Boy

    Directed by: Craig Viveiros; Cinematographer: Dale McCready

    1. My Love is Vengeance

    Directed by: Giles Bannier; Cinematographer: Dale McCready

    There is a popular term being used at the moment, that this is the ‘Golden Age’ of television, which is a ridiculous thing to say, as that age was in the 1950s, when the idea of what television could be started to take shape. That was when some of the most original and cutting edge television was made, watching some of those programs can be very refreshing. There is also the attitude that we are in the best time of television where writers are the kings of the medium – this might be truer, but it is not a new idea. One thiing is for sure, there are more scripted shows than ever with a few of them being great, a larger number being very good, but a large amount being a complete waste of time. The trick is of course knowing which ones to start viewing as well as when to give up or stay with them. The beauty is that many of these series are only normally up to ten episodes so its not a long term commitment if they do not follow through on their initial promise.

    That brings us to the latest drama featuring Tim Roth in the main role as an English police officer who has been transplanted to the Canadian Rockies, something that is already an original idea. Couple that with the opening ten minutes of the first episode, this is a show that digs its hooks into you and will not let go for its first season.

    There is little real need to explain a plot with this show as it would remove any mystery or drama as this is show that really shouldn’t be spoiled at all.

    “Tin Star” is based around former London police detective Jim Worth is the new police chief of Little Big Bear, a small town in the Canadian Rockies, where he has moved with his family to escape his past. The influx of migrant workers because of a new big oil company, headed by the mysterious Mrs. Bradshaw, forces Worth to confront the resulting wave of crime that threatens the town. Worth’s stand against the criminals results in vigilante groups attacking him and his family, leading Worth to slip into the violence of his past.

    Many modern police dramas, particularly those on pay sites or cable channels will touch on family matters as well as any home life – this is mainly to broaden the main character’s appeal, as well as give depth to his life, making him three dimensional. The show may even create some kind of drama at home, making this an integral part of the plot. What “Tin Star” has done is to integrate the home and work life, making them interwined in a very natural way that causes almost all of the players to, at some time, interact with everyone else. It also negates the reason for the main character to have some kind of double life separating his work and home. This also means he can be as honest as he can be with the people most important in his life – this is something many stories will not do. Honesty in a television drama is something that is normally not used as a narrative device, in fact what this main character finds is that honesty is all he has left after the first few episodes. This is a person that has made some mistakes as well as lied to many people, this show illustrated in a stylised way what can happen when the chickens come home to roost.

    “Tin Star” involves many different genres, it is political, it is definitely nourish, has action, involves minorities and uses its landscape as a fully fledged element that is rarely seen in this kind of show. What it doesn’t do, which many many shows do, is make the actual story a ‘slow burn’, the narrative moves along at a surprising pace. I found this refreshing, not only did it keep me interested but it also helped to maintain the point of the story – which I can say is very good. The main part of the story is completely resolved by the end of the last episode, as well as many of the subplots are fully explained. What is done, however, is that if there was a second season (which I believe there is) there is enough in the closing minutes to continue some kind of story – which is pretty fantastic.

    The casting of the show, in part due to the nature of the transplanting of an English family to Canada is just great, and it may be in part due to the juxtaposition of many English accents around so many Canadian, as well as Native American, accents that seems to keep the show fresh each episode. With Tim Roth in the lead as the Sheriff you get immediate legitimacy as well as an actor that knows his craft, can play many different emotions as well as someone who is extremely physical both being able to inhabit a space specifically as well as not being afraid to really commit to a part in a unique way. The cast is expansive but I loved seeing Christina Hendricks playing someone who is more than the she seems, particularly in the first few episodes. In fact she has such a good story arc that I hope she returns at some point for any subsequent seasons. Lastly, there is the Canadian charater actor Christopher Heyerdahl, who genre fans will know from his years of work on many different science fiction and horror shows, here he plays a man who has secrets that are revealed slowy and as such subtle changes in performance is required, Heyerdahl is more than capable of showing us these.

    Rowan Joffe the creator of “Tin Star” is an experienced writer/director, who has worked with many top talents as well as being behind some pretty good movies. He has created a show that is compelling, as well as fitting in with his previous work. His work often involves people that have become isolated for a variety of reasons, that incorporate a variety of genres, which is unique in itself. This is probably why “Tin Star” has been such a success in terms of the finished show – he has also used the location as well as showing how this landscape affects the characters as well as the motivations behind some of the arrivals to the town. Some of the same themes that are presened here are also in the new film “Wind River” (2017) to a lesser or greater extent – I am sure that is a coincidence.

    I recommend this show highly, it is ten episodes of well written, directed and acted drama you will see this year. There are top performances, especially from Roth who shines here in a role that seems like it was written for him, but that’s just how good an actor he is. Seek this out now.

  • Film review: “Blade Runner 2049” (2017)

    Film review: “Blade Runner 2049” (2017)

    “Blade Runner 2049” (2017)

    Sci-Fi

    images

    Running Time: 163 minutes

    Written by: Hampton Fancher and Michael Green

    Directed by: Denis Villeneuve

    Featuring:  Ryan Gosling, Harrison Ford, Ana de Armas, Sylvia Hoeks, Robin Wright, Mackenzie Davis, Carla Juri, Lennie James, Dave Bautista, and Jared Leto

    Niander Wallace: “Humanity cannot survive. Replicants are the future of the species. But I can only make so many.”

    Was anyone actually waiting for a sequel to “Blade Runner” (1982) the (now) seminal piece of Sci-Fi directed by Ridley Scott who at the time was coming off his masterpiece “Alien” (1979). At the time “Blade Runner” was considered a major disappointment, which was compounded by the disaster that was “Legend” (1985), Scott’s follow-up. It actually appeared at the time that “Alien” may have been a fluke, sure Scott was one the great stylists but could he tell a story? This is a pertinent question as this is something that probably has not been answered to anyone’s satisfaction. After his relative unsuccessful go at revisiting his ‘Alien’ origins I was not looking forward to a Scott directed “Blade Runner” sequel, but because of timing he is a producer here, the director is French Canadian auteur Denis Villeneuve.

    The good news for people wanting a film that was able to capture the originals look and feel is that Villeneuve has the skills to make this happen. Whilst he is no slouch in the visual department it is his story telling ability as well his attention to detail that is needed to not make this a carbon copy (albeit a generation removed) of the original – a ‘replicant’ if you will. If you need a taster before you watch this new film, there are three prequel shorts that have been created; “Nexus Dawn”, “2048” and “Blade Runner: Black Out 2022”. These shorts will give a bit of background as well as little more understanding to this new movie, they act as a small bridge, each one progressively moving backwards to the end of the orginal “Blade Runner”.

    This new film follows a newly appointed blade runner, Officer K (Ryan Gosling) of the LAPD, discovers a dark secret that could bring an end to humanity. The discovery leads him to Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford), a former blade runner who had disappeared 30 years earlier.

    This really is all you really need to know about the film itself, if you have seen the trailers then you will have a pretty good idea about the story, as well as the main players the pepper the narrative. So there is no need to go to deep with any revelations, but this is a movie that will be enjoyed by those who have a love for the original, but want to keep an eye on the future. This movie is all about the humanity repeating the mistakes of the past while trying to forge ahead on new worlds.

    Villeneuve as a director really is an original, he has tackled high concept dramas as well as extremely high concept science fiction so for him to be involved in this film seems obvious. He places, like Christopher Nolan, a high importance of in camera special effects, trying not to rely on CGI as much as possible. Of course with the canvas he has to paint on here there is going to be a heavy dose of special effects. What he has done is to have master shots that have a depth of field not normally associated with this kind of movie, where you are able to see physical, practical props and facades. The production designers have their work cut out as well as I imagine a huge budget that pays off when viewed on a large screen.

    To give the film a really decent chance of looking different as well as original, at the same time the original Villeneuve has recruited his usual cinematographer, the legendary Roger Deakins (who surely must finally win his Oscar for his work here). Deakins has not just replicated Jordan Cronenweth’s stellar work from the original, instead he has used that as a base and has created his own palate over several different locations so as to almost offer separate lighting and camera set ups depending on the mood and stage of the story – it looks amazing, if there is one thing Deakins was born to do and that is to make his director look very good, this he does like a pro.

    What is surprising is that the story constructed by original writer Hampton Fancher and newcomer (to the franchise that is) Michael Green is like the first film, noir inspired, which of course helped to inspire an entire Sci-Fi noir sub genre that obviously is alive and well today. Now I wouldn’t say that this story is the most original, nor does it push any real boundaries within the genre, but it does serve a purpose, that is to frame the movie with something that is not only interesting but makes logical sense. The original themes of the first film are present here, what does it mean to be human? Who is humanity to judge life? What is the purpose of a soul? Is any kind of slavery just? What does it mean to create? Are corporations going to govern more than people? Will populations be told what and how to think? There is more but I think you get the general idea. Does the film answer any of those questions? Of course it doesn’t, it leaves conclusions up to the viewer, it is up to the filmmakers to ensure that points are made as well as remembered. The narrative is fairly straight forward, with Gosling as a detective hunting down clues to mysteries that he didn’t even know existed, with the film eschewing big action showdowns for a satisfying personal touch that is what the original was all about.

    Like the first movie casting is of paramount importance, in saying that it is pretty great that Harrison Ford has returned to the role of Deckard, however it is also a treat to see Edward James Olmos return as Gaff, surely one of the more memorable characters from the original. Make no mistake the main character here is ‘K’ played with noirish ease by Ryan Gosling who slinks through the movie making a mark wherever he turns his gaze. The rest of the cast is led by Jared Leto, as Niander Wallace, who seems to be trying to get the “Suicide Squad” (2016) out of his mouth (and ours), playing a Tyrrell clone for want of a better description. There are appearances by character actors Lennie James, Robin Wright, Mackenzie Davis, Dave Bautista and many others. As per the marketing Harrison Ford is back as Deckard who looks great, here at ease not needing to play the lead just to show up and do what he does best.

    The music by Hans Zimmer is well suited, here he echoes the “Blade Runner” score by Vangelis, but makes it his own. At times it was easy just to relax into the score, sometimes just forgetting about music. This would be a great watch sans dialogue with the music just playing to the action. This has to be one the best scores of the year, as well as one of Zimmers best, and thats saying something as he is one of the greatest composers working in film today.

    There are no two ways about it this is a great movie, definitely one of the best of the year so far. In saying that it is not without its faults, it is too long at least by half an hour, it is also a little too in love with not only being a sequel to one of the best science fiction films, but it also wants you to know two things; one, this is an important film, and two, this is its own film, standing apart from the Scott masterpiece. One of the great moments of “Blade Runner” was the last fifteen minutes with the face off against Deckard (Harrison Ford) and Roy Batty (Rutger Hauer), as well the incredible dialogue, “I’ve seen things you people wouldn’t believe. Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time… like tears in rain… Time to die.” It is unfortunate then that this movie lacks anything that will be remembered like that or have at least two actors in their prime, both Ford and Hauer who could match anyone, anytime.

    In saying all that this a movie that should be seen in cinemas, it could also be rewatched rather easily thanks to good actors, a decent script and one heck of a great director. Villeneuve is the MVP of this film, he had the audacious task to not only direct a sequel to one amaing movie, but had to marshal everyone to be on the same page at the same time. Just wonderful. I would recommend  this to anyone that loves mysteries, science fiction or both, you will not be disappointed!

    “Blade Runner 2049” is out now only in cinemas.

  • DVD & Blu-ray review: “Transformers: The Last Knight” (2017)

    DVD & Blu-ray review: “Transformers: The Last Knight” (2017)

    “Transformers: The Last Knight” (2017)

    Sci-Fi/Action

    2,0

    Running Time: 149 minutes

    Written by: Art Marcum, Matt Holloway and Ken Nolan

    Directed by: Michael Bay

    Featuring: Mark Wahlberg, Stanley Tucci, Josh Duhamel, Anthony Hopkins and John Turturro

    Sir Edmund Burton: “It started as a legend, one of the greatest of all… For a thousand years, we’ve kept it hidden, to protect Earth from what is expected to arrive…”

    One thing about Michael Bay’s ‘Transformers” movies is that every single one of them boast an ‘A’ list cast, it seems that there is an endless queue of actors just waiting to be in this now five picture series. In “Transformers: The Last Knight” (2017) the latest big name actor to appear is the great Anthony Hopkins who chews scenery like the pro you would expect him to be – it is easy to see he knows exactly what kind of film this is – even if other members of the cast seem a little lost within this franchise. The question is now, after all these films that seem to be eerily similar, can there be anything more to see and experience from a new movie?  Is there a plot that can convince people to pony up the bills to not only go and see this movie but to take the family as well? The simple answer is that this is a hot mess with little real point to exist other than to try and buy Paramount a much needed hit as they struggle to make any money this year.

    I am not a Michael Bay hater at all, in fact I probably like most of his movies, he is unashamedly a male movie director, caring little for anything else other than testosterone to be made physical onscreen. I truly believe he loves movies, the problems is he is making movies only he wants to see. Bay has the clout to pretty much do anything he wants, yet he has continually returned to this ‘Transformers’ Universe, even though with each movie he says it will be his very last – something he had echoed to the days leading up to this movies theatrical release.But why wouldn’t he return, the last four ‘Transformer’ movies have generated almost US$4 billion at the international box office – surely one of the biggest franchises in film history. These movies gave Shia LaBeouf, Josh Duhamel, Megan Fox, Tyrese Gibson careers, as well as solidifying Mark Wahlberg as a box office giant (although this last film may damage that repuataion). They also created great over the top roles for character actors John Turturro, Jon Voight, Stanley Tucci, TJ Miller and Kelsey Grammer to name a few.

    There is much to like with these movies, of course there is much to dismiss – one of these is the bloated running times, another is the action which at times can be hard to follow – something that harkens back to the first film and continues through to this fifth one.

    This new Transformers movie is concerned with the absence of Optimus Prime and the war that has commenced between the Transformers Reaction Force (humans) and the Transformers. To save their world, Cade Yeager (Mark Wahlberg) forms an alliance with Bumblebee, an astronomer named Sir Edmond Burton (Anthony Hopkins), and an Oxford University professor named Viviane Wembley (Laura Haddock) to learn the secrets of why the Transformers keep coming back to Earth.

    I am not going to get into plot details but needless to say Bay and his new team of screenwriters have attempted to keep the plot simple (as much as they can), however I did feel myself start to get a little confused at one point with the myriad of characters as well as their motivations. There is a lot to the story that seems to contradict itself particularly in the last thirty to forty minutes. In terms of that if you are willing to let these elements go then you will be able to cope, however if plot is important to you then you probably shouldn’t be watching this movie. At some points it almost seems like Bay has too much power of the studio, Paramount, a studio that seems lost amongst its peers and competitors.

    There are a few reasons why I actually enjoy these movies; I am talking specifically about the Transformer films here, not overblown expensive and non-sensical blockbusters as a rule. I really like Optimus Prime as a characters, as well as a hero, he leads a seemingly endless, while small number of characters, the highlight of them is always Bumblebee. Prime’s home, Cybertron, has been left broken (there have been a few reasons given) as a refugee from space he is really trying to fit in and do his best for his people among humans. The action and special effects are almost always excellent, although the way in which they have been directed have been uneven over the entire run of these movies, a problem that is getting solved a little better with this film especially. I found it was much easier to follow what was happening onscreen, this could have something to do with a lot more wider shots being incorporated by Bay and his special effects team. The other thing that I enjoy is that whilst they attempt to be broad in scope as well as onscreen, they are nothing more than the original cartoon version’s brought to life at cinemas, they are escapist where there is a good guy as well as a bad guy, one will win, one will lose. Of course Bay overly complicates this by having multiple good and bad guys with different (not really) motivations but in the end it is always sorted out – the good guys win and vanquish the baddies. Of course the issue always is where to go to next, Bay has an answer, as does his new cadre of writers – or so they would have us believe – but i saw nothing here that was really new enough to justify the running time let alone another movie but as long as audiences keep turning up at the cinemas, the will keep churning them out.

    After saying all that there are still issues with the movies, it mostly for me boils down to plot as well as narrative choices that are made – as well as characters that are introduced, then dumped for no reason. There is also the issue of choices that are made that seem to contradict motivations that have been set up either in the current story or previous films. More troubling, particularly with this current installment is the fact that the finale is not one, as we are given a pre-ending credits sequence that vainly attempts to set up another film, making me feel like I just sat through two and a half hours for nothing more than reinstating Prime’s home, Cybertron, as a macguffin for the number six.

    As I have said there are any number of good actors that appear in these movies, the reason to have them is that they are the ones bringing the story to life, in this case the three standouts are Mark Wahlberg, Laura Haddock and the great Anthony Hopkins. These three main characters, when together onscreen, or just interacting with each other, really made this movie fun for me – even when the plot was way out of control or over the top. Wahlberg has turned into such a star that it is easy to forget he has made some pretty terrific films, just over the last year he has appeared in two legitimately great under seen films in “Patriots Day” (2016) as well as “Deepwater Horizon” (2016), both directed by Peter Berg. Here he carries a movie that could have dreadful but is saved by his expert ability to incorporate not only massive amounts of green screen acting but also bringing in two other actors to let them showcase their own skill. The highlight for me was Anthony Hopkins, brilliantly playing his age, acting against at times, green screens, other actors, a phone as well as giving great reaction shots – my favorite is him flipping people off during a high speed chase. Laura Haddock who almost plays like a Megan Fox lookalike comes into her own towards the end of the film, she could have been just another Bay babe, but has the chops to know what film she is in, and unlike previous versions of her character has much more experience in film to be treated too badly – I mean she seems to be playing her age – 31 – and has multiple degrees – so I think that is a step up from previous versions of this character.

    Another thing that Bay has seemed to want to do is make some narrative sense out of the previous films, by not only upping the reason why Sam (Shia LeBeouf) was so important in the first three films – it involves his heritage and the great Witwicky name, but also bringing back John Turturro as some kind of Transformer legend expert – although he spends the entire film on a phone from Cuba – which was a little jarring – the entirety of this sub-sub-plot could have been removed easily with no harm to the plot – yes I used the word plot.

    This is primarily an action movie with a sci-fi twist as well additions of humour, that is it – it is not a drama or a war film (although I think Bay may have grander things in mind). The best action films always move forward in terms of narrative, plot as well as the action itself – if it doesn’t do this it fails. One of the best action/sci-fi films that did this was James Cameron’s “Terminator” (1984), it was exposition heavy but when something was explained to the audience there were action set pieces taking place so we felt like it was perfectly natural – by the way it always lowers the running time of the movie, something Bay could take lessons from. What we have with these Transformer movies is action then explanation then more action – not only that it seems the action has nothing to do with the story, even with the massive ending, there are major holes of logic where the goal of the movie just keeps changing to encompass these huge CGI scenes, of really, after a while, is of  little interest.

    It’s a real shame to see how this movie turns out; I thought there was going to be more meat on the bones, especially with Mark Wahlberg and Stanley Tucci returning to the movie – it seemed there was going to be a logical progression from number four, but this is put to rest in the opening scenes of Camelot (oh dear), with a particularly nasty bait and switch with Tucci, then an exposition heavy catch up on where we are in terms of the Transformers – by then I was more than a little confused as well as let down. The other element I disliked, which added to the confusion was the arbitrary way characters enter the story, disappear completely, then reappear, again for no real good reason. My feeling was that this was not a completed script with the special effects being planned before anything else – to me it feels like an Ed Wood film with hundreds of millions of dollars thrown at it. Look I have no problem knowing that people will go to this movie, but the question remains will enough people go to make a sequel worthwhile – who knows? There is some kind of Bumblebee movie planned for next year, but at this stage it may be too little too late for that character to have any impact on this behemoth of a franchise.

    After all that I would actually say that this is an action movie that is PG, so all the family can enjoy it for what it is – a truly forgettable popcorn movie – it lacks the heart of Marvel films but also eschews the darkness of those terrible DC movies as well. It is more concerned with wowing an audience with CGI characters that are mostly fun but lack depth. This is the perfect example of a post-modern action film, there is nothing new to be added to a shallow legend, it has all been done before, but maybe thats the comfort of the Transformer movies. When I was a child I would have loved these movies, after all that is who they are aimed at. I would not bother buying this movie, maybe if it is streaming it might be worth a watch, but at a bloated running time I would not be hanging out for it – I for one will not be watching this again!

    “Transformers: The Last Knight” is out now on DVD & Blu-ray.

  • Streaming review: “Gerald’s Game” (2017)

    Streaming review: “Gerald’s Game” (2017)

    “Gerald’s Game” (2017)

    Horror/Thriller

    images

    Running Time: 103 minutes

    Written and Directed by: Mike Flanagan

    Featuring: Carla Gugino, Bruce Greenwood. Henry Thomas

    Gerald: “Isn’t this why we came up here? To spice things up and try and push the boundaries.”

    Mike Flanagan the writer/director of “Gerald’s Game” (2017) the latest Stephen King adaptation to hit screens this year, in what feels like a year in which we have had an endless supply of Kings work onscreen, with the quality running from dire to excellent. I am happy to report that this new film is on the excellent end, with a refreshing take on a novel that had remained untouched until now. Its a film full of drama, tension and human truths that touch on the main characters life choices that have led her to her predicament.

    Over the past four years Michael Flanagan has carved out a niche for himself in the world of the Horror genre, he has created and adapted as well as rebooted a nice variety within the genre. His movies all have the common theme of isolation as a backdrop to some pretty heavy character drama. He also is able to introduce his audience to characters in a quick efficient way, so that when there is jeopardy there is an instant identification with the fate of the films protagonist. This is one of the greatest let downs of current (and past) horror movies in that there is no time given to give characters depth, this is eschewed in favour of action and gore.

    In “Gerald’s Game” we are introduced to Jessie and Gerald who are preparing for a weekend away to try and save their marriage and sex life. The pair arrive at the lake house where Gerald takes a Viagra pill. He walks out of the closest with handcuffs in hand, handcuffing Jessie up willingly to the bedposts. Both excited over the thought of what happens next, Gerald takes another Viagra pill. Gerald begins to be rough with Jessie, and whilst she plays along, she begins to become uncomfortable by Gerald’s behaviour. Gerald goes too far and causes Jessie to panic and demands that he stop and un-handcuff her. During some rough housing Jessie bites his lip, making him stop. He then grabs for his chest and suffers a heart attack. Jessie tries to break out of the handcuffs and calls out for Gerald to wake up, but, after a minute, she sees blood pouring out of Gerald’s head. Jessie calls out for help, however nobody can hear her.

    That’s really is just the set up to a movie that will, for the most part stay within the confines of a bedroom in the middle of nowhere with little hope for rescue from any third party – well almost but that would be giving too much away.

    Mike Flanagan has created a really unique movie that cracks along at a really good pace, it uses its location extremely well, making you feel, like the main character, helpless as you watch her realize the serious predicament she finds herself in. Flanagan has made this a movie not only about being helpless, handcuffed to a bed, but also what its like to be stuck in a marriage that is going nowhere fast. It is also about the past and how this can trap you into a trajectory you don’t even know you are on – it is a masterful way of creating an adaptation of a book that retains that books atmosphere, whilst changing and introducing elements that make the movie a very separate entity from the novel. There is a reason why genre movies are so popular, as well as so successful, that is because within their structure you can make them about anything, commenting on whatever you would like under the guise of scares, violence and thrills. The audience doesn’t even have to be consciously aware of the deeper meanings (even if they aren’t really that well disguised), which makes the analysis so much fun, which in turn can lead to great conversations about these films.I dare you not to talk about Gerald and Jessie’s relationship if you are married or have a long term partner.

    One of the elements that makes “Gerald’s Game” so interesting is that once the main character, Jessie, realises she is alone she starts to acknowledge some truths not only about her marriage but also her past as well as her own self. These realizations all come through hallucinations of not only her dead husband, Gerald, but a version of herself as well as her Father, and one other seemingly otherworldly figure you might expect to see (at least some version of one) in any Stephen King based story. The version of Gerald that Jessie starts to see can only give information that Jessie either already knows, suspects or unconsciously realizes which leads to some pretty horrible personal reveals that only come to light in the most dire of situations. The advice Jessie gives herself are more from a personality type that she wishes she was in real life, so she is a go getter, a pragmatist and brave. Jessie ends up giving her the help he needs to get through her situation while the Gerald hallucination is always trying to tell her she is going to die.

    For this movie to work you needed two actors that were going to be able to sell the myriad range of emotions that are needed to make this plot believable, as well as engaged with an audience that would find them both sympathetic as well as flawed to make the story something that could be interesting. So it is fantastic Flanagan was able to cast Carla Gugino and the great Bruce Greenwood. The strength of these two actors is that they have both been believable character actors for decades as well as having the skills to carry an entire movie – something they have to do here – true it is Gugino who has the main part but this would not work without the skilled Greenwood to act as her foil. Gugino is just different enough in the dual roles she plays, so that they are not just stylised performances but they end up being very different so we can tell them apart – put that down to a canny reading of the material from Gugino who has to be one the most talented actresses (and unsung) working today.

    This is a horror film, it fits alongside the great “Misery” (1992) very easily in that it also has equal parts drama and thriller elements with little reliance on comedy – which is something some horror films rely on to get an audience through some possibly disturbing subject matter. To be fair none of Flanagan’s movies rely on any comedic elements, they all play like real world movies, with exceptionally strong characters that ground everything else. You care for his characters and don’t want to see them in peril or at least escape from the clutches of whatever situations they find themselves in. This is an excellent film and I recommend to all fans of Flanagan, King and of course horror fans.

    “Gerald’s Game” is streaming on Netflix now.

  • Film review: “Wind River” (2017)

    Film review: “Wind River” (2017)

    “Wind River” (2017)

    Drama/Thriller

    images

    Running Time: 111 minutes

    Written and Directed by: Taylor Sheridan

    Featuring: Jeremy Renner, Elizabeth Olsen, Gil Birmingham and Graham Greene

    Cory Lambert: “I’d like to tell you it gets easier, but it doesn’t. If there’s a comfort, you get used to the pain if you let yourself, I went to a grief seminar in Casper. Don’t know why, just, It hurt so much, I was searching for anything that could make it go away That’s what I wanted this seminar to do, make it go away. The instructor come up to me after the seminar was over, sat beside me and said, “I got good news and bad news. Bad news is you’ll never be the same. You’ll never be whole. Ever. What was taken from you can’t be replaced. You’re daughter’s gone. Now the good news, as soon as you accept that, as soon as you let yourself suffer, allow yourself to grieve, You’ll be able to visit her in your mind, and remember all the joy she gave you. All the love she knew. Right now, you don’t even have that, do you?” He said, “that’s what not accepting this will rob from you”. If you shy from the pain of it, then you rob yourself of every memory of her, my friend. Every one. From her first step to her last smile. You’ll kill ’em all. Take the pain, Take the pain, Martin. It’s the only way to keep her with you.”

    A director that is given a broad canvass to work with as well as top talent in front of as well as behind the camera can count themselves very lucky, but when the film they work on turns out as well as “Wind River” (2017) it is an auspicious occasion indeed, especially when that director is a screenwriter as well. In this case writer/director Taylor Sheridan has already had a pretty good start to his career with his first produced screenplay being the incredibly successful and criminally underrated “Sicario” (2015), directed by Canadian auteur Denis Villeneuve. Sheridan then quickly followed up that triumph with the Oscar nominated screenplay for the David McKenzie directed “Hell or High Water” (2016). The success of both of these films, both making money as well as being critically lauded, meant that Sheridan had the power to direct his next screenplay. I must say this was a wise choice as this is a truly great film, it seems September has been a very good month for film releases in general.

    Sheridan has been able to line up two extremely experienced leads in the always-reliable Jeremy Renner as well as the talented Elizabeth Olsen who after an auspicious debut in “Martha Marcy May Marlene” (2011) has finally found a film that matches her early promise. Sheridan has written a film that is at once a character piece but is more than that, in dealing with familial loss as well as racial issues that haunt not only the US but almost every country in the world. He asks what does it mean to be a man, or a women (although to a lesser extent), where do we come from as people and the brutality that one person (or persons) can inflict on another for nothing more than the promise of a thrill or a boredom breaker? It seems that Sheridan is always querying the human condition and all that entails, something that possibly comes from his acting background as well any education he may have.

    The film is et in the Winter on the Wind River Indian Reservation in Wyoming, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service agent Cory Lambert discovers the body of Natalie Hanson, an 18-year old resident of the reservation. Her corpse is frozen solid, she is without shoes and proper winter attire, and there is a blood stain on her pants at her groin. Rookie FBI special agent Jane Banner arrives to determine whether a murder has been committed, as the federal government has jurisdiction over capital crimes on reservations.

    This film rests squarely on Jeremy Renner’s shoulders as the lead, as well the emotional tether that really binds all the characters in this film together. He does a wonderful job as being the ‘know everything’ character that really leads his co-star around the general area they are operating in. Renner has been nominated for best actor twice at the Oscars, it is roles like this where you see his strengths as an actor (in particular a film actor) who can really get under the skin of whomever he portrays. Even in his MCU movies as the archer Hawkeye he brings something deeper to the character, as well as the movie, than he needs to. Over the past fifteen years since his lead role in “Dahmer” (2002) Renner has been an actor to watch, it is no fluke that he gives his all to his work, which you can plainly see onscreen. It is a little unfortunate then that the character played by Elizabeth Olsen really is nothing more than a fill in for the audience. She is playing a fish out of water right up to the end of the movie, which is a shame because she is a diminished character, as well as this being a tired trope in a film that is original. In saying that I understand why Sheridan has created this role, it is a way to answer any questions or situations that may crop up for the audience. The highlights of the rest of the cast are two Native American actors Graham Greene and Gil Birmingham who have long been around in a variety of films so have experience to burn in films of this ilk. They both offer very different aspects of tribal life as well as the reflection of how Native Americans are seen by not only non-Native Americans but by the government where they are still being persecuted in more insidious ways than ever. Both actors represent where their people have finally ended up with nothing more than isolation and silence – something that can’t be taken away from them, until the actions taken by some non-Native American visitors to their small isolated and insular world.

    Sheridan definitely writes from a male perspective which of course is his prerogative, women in his movies are all either out of time or out of touch or both. Even taking that into account this is still a beautiful movie that, like many other movies today uses the geographic location of its setting as a definite character – more often than not the main character has many of the same elements as the area they live in, this is more obvious as you work through each of his movies. In fact it is this very hostile environment that is responsible for (indirectly) all of the death that has taken place, believe me there is a lot of it. The way in which the loss by all the main players in this film has been framed is done so well. Not only are all the people isolated by their own emotions, but they are landlocked by the continent itself, then the weather plays a major part with all the inherent dangers that it represents (literally) – which we see twice in the movie. Sheridan has made the main character the only person with any real agency, he has taken responsibility for many things in his life, we see him throughout the movie making his own mark, with his own actions – we see him tracking animals, offering advice, making his own bullets, not afraid about owning up to loss and advising a father on what happens if grief is not embraced in a conscious way. This is different to all the other characters as they seem to stumble around lost in the physical or emotional world.

    As I have already said this is a film about loss as well as the consequence of loss, what it means to lose a part of life that will never come back. This loss is physical, the loss of life, but is also the loss of identity whether that be as a father, or, in the wider context, the loss of Nationhood, what that does to a people and how this can lead down self destructive paths. We see small elements of personal self-destruction as well as, in many instances self-sabotage. One of those losses is what becomes the inciting incident, where choices are made along sexual, political and racial lines, people go too far in their decisions and its too late to go back on them – something the US could take a page from in its dealings with its own people as well as on the international stage.

    If you enjoyed Sheridan’s other films you will love this. It is a murder mystery with layers that go deep; they help to illustrate the effects of loss, a society on the edge of disappearing as well as what can happen when people actually care for others. There are many elements to a Taylor Sheridan movie, these are all present here, the older wider man, someone who is clueless to what is really going in and of course a crime. I recommend this film highly and I would not be surprised to see Sheridan shortlisted for a screenplay Oscar in a few months.

    “Wind River” is out now in cinemas only.

     

    When a Native American teenager is found dead, FBI agent Jane Banner (Elizabeth Olson, center) works with local police (Graham Greene, right, Hugh Dillon) to figure out what happened.
    Heathers (1989) Directed by Michael Lehmann Shown: Winona Ryder (as Veronica Sawyer)

  • DVD review: “Delicious” (2017)

    DVD review: “Delicious” (2017)

    “Delicious” (2017)

    TV Series

    3-stars

    Episodes: Four

    Created by: Dan Sefton

    Featuring: Dawn French, Emilia Fox, Iain Glen, Sheila Hancock

    Dawn French: “This is Cornwall – there are no secrets.”

    These days cooking and comedy go together so well that it’s easy to forget when shows about cooking were relegated to Saturday and Sunday afternoons with Julia Childs and Hudson and Hall. Of course now they are an industry unto themselves, so it stands to reason that combining a good story, great actresses as well a touch of cookery would be an obvious thing to do. Introducing the dramedy “Delicious” (2017) featuring Dawn French, Emilia Fox and Iain Glen. “Delicious” follows in the footsteps of other similar shows going back to “Shelly” (1979-1992) where there was a dramatic edge with a comedy heart. Of course “Delicious” skews to the more dramatic elements but with a central talent like Dawn French and support from Sheila Hancock this show was always going to have humour,  it doesn’t seem to want to take itself to seriously.

    Sure there are elements of the soap opera genre that are present right from the outset but for me that’s what made it fun, not to be taken too seriously at all – it also had elements from the HBO show “Six Feet Under” (2001 – 2005) but transferred to the location of a high class restaurant instead of an undertakers business. Interestingly the talents behind the scenes, creator Dan Sefton as well as Directors John Hardwick and Clare Kilner, have all had a breadth of television experience in the UK which is a breeding ground for this kind of show – that can be a positive as well as a negative as it can limit the impact of the show as well as being confined to a formula of a sort. This is not a perfect show but it is very good, and is extremely entertaining.

    The series is set in Cornwall, England, where celebrity chef Leo is married to the beautiful Sam and has a successful hotel business. However, he is having an affair with his first wife Gina, a talented cook from whom he stole many of his recipes and cheated on for years. After his death things hot up for all the lives he touched.

    For me the real strength of this show is the talent that has been assembled onscreen, with Dawn French and Amelia Fox as the duel antagonists/protagonists, with the awesome Sheila Hancock and Iain Glen in meaty supporting roles that show off talents not seen before in other roles. There is no doubt that Dawn French is the star of the show, having really taken a backseat to writing and producing partner Jennifer Saunders for years, it is great to see French in a role she can sink her teeth into over four episodes – something she has never really done dramatically so this is refreshing for an audience. I do admit I was waiting for the other shoe to drop in terms of her performance, that is move into some kind of character shtick, but this never happens. On the other hand Emilia Fox, best know for her work on “Silent Witness” (1996 – present) is a real revelation as she shows her comic timing, matching French scene for scene, line for line. Then there is the always-reliable Iain Glen who is on another level thanks to his role as Jorah Mormont in “Game of Thrones” (2011 – present). What is nice to see is that he has range, which he has shown before but it is here with other experienced actors that he excels, you can see the glint in his eye – he doesn’t have to hold back or be reserved, he can just let loose, a sight to see for sure. Glen has always been that character actor who could be relied upon to show up and do his job, but for all intents and purposes he is the catalyst for this story, which endures after he is long gone.

    As with many television shows produced about ‘real’ people the geographic area they inhabit, work and live in becomes vital and important, but instead of representing isolation “Delicious” uses its locations in very different ways. Set and shot in Cornwall it is a holiday destination for families and has a warm climate which is a great setting for a restaurant as well as fine food which a large aspect of this show relies on.

    The other interesting aspect is the show has been written with four episodes in mind, which is great from a storytelling point of view. It has a very definite beginning and ending and of anything it leaves you wanting more – which is a good thing as it means it will have a bit more life in the already announced second season coming next year.

    This is a really good first season of a show that could have been mundane in different hands or with different onscreen talent. There is a B story involving the children of the two main characters, which is nice. There are also ‘soap’ and drama tropes that have been overused in the past few years, and are on hand here, i can only hope these might be dispensed with on the second season. I think that this is a real new millennium family drama about people who want to fit in but have issues because of one person’s vanity and bad choices. It is a real affirmation that the women in this show are the real heroes that have to not only come to terms with a real loss but also need to start to forge a future for their respective families. This show is defiantly worth owning, it can be rewatch and that is down to the narrative as well as the cast which is top notch.

    “Delicious” is out now on DVD.

  • Film review: “A Ghost Story” (2017)

    Film review: “A Ghost Story” (2017)

    “A Ghost Story” (2017)

    Drama

    5stars_small

    Written and Directed by: David Lowery

    Featuring: Casey Affleck and Rooney Mara

    Houseguest: “We build our legacy piece by piece and maybe the whole world will remember you or maybe just a couple of people, but you do what you can to make sure you’re still around after you’re gone.”

    It can be revelatory when filmmakers have a limited budget, limited time or even limited time with talent and crew what they are able to produce. It is one of the reasons why some filmmakers produce their best work at the beginning of their careers, when they are ‘struggling’ with resources. With that said it is fairly rare for a director to release two movies within twelve months of each other that could be considered to be so far apart in the type of film produced. So we have writer/director David Lowry who this week has the excellent independent US$100,,000 budgeted “A Ghost Story” (2017) released less than a year after his US$65 million remake “Pete’s Dragon” (2016), what a contrast.

    David Lowry made a splash with his high profile film “Ain’t Them Bodies Saints” (2013) featuring Casey Affleck and Rooney Mara in lead roles, it was a slow burning drama with hints of thriller elements as well as a touch of film noir. It was primarily based around three characters, their relationship that transcended time as well as geography and the pull that people can have with each other in extreme situations. With his new film “A Ghost Story”, Lowry reteams with Affleck and Mara in a tale that has a fairly straight forward plot but comes alive in its narrative discourse as well as its meta-physical leanings that are its real strength. Like the best films it really does defy an easy description, will be enjoyed by people looking for some deeper meaning, not needing any concrete answers and wanting something that will stay with them long after the credits roll at the conclusion of this well crafted ode to love, death, loss and ultimately hope.

    C (Casey Affleck) is a musician living with his wife M (Rooney Mara) in a small suburban house in the Southern US. One night, they hear a heavy bang on their piano, but are unable to find the cause for the noise. Some time later, C is killed in a car accident outside his home. At the morgue, he awakens as a ghost covered in a white sheet with two black holes for eyes. As he wanders aimlessly through the hospital, while no one else is able to see him, he comes to the end of a hallway and sees a doorway of bright flashing light open in front of him. After staring at it, the doorway eventually closes and he walks away. C’s ghost leaves the hospital and returns to his house, watching his wife grieve over her loss.

    This really is a different kind of film for those brought up on the love story featuring a ghost, “Ghost” (1990), which traded on the idea of an afterlife that was all righteous and full of comedy with a hint of religious affirmations thrown in for good measure. In fact “A Ghost Story” offers the idea of being linked to a place that is so strong that time becomes meaningless, as do the people you may leave when you die. The very notion of being bound to someone is something many people have in common; the idea that you may somehow stick around watching your loved ones is not an uncommon thought. At the outset of the movie ‘M’ says that she leaves a note behind in every house she has lived in so that there is always something of her within that building – a budding memory or a seed that only she would know about. So it is interesting that within this story when ‘C’ eventually dies he is that thing that is left within the building that no-one knows about, a haunting memory that becomes part of the structure around him, he stays the same, while everything else alters throughout time.

    This is beautifully crafted and directed by Lowry who lingers on characters in very long takes that are in and by themselves mundane, but put together show the passage of time in precise segments. These long takes are extremely important for a variety of reasons; they give the actors freedom to really go for it within the frame, with no sense of urgency – reflecting real life. This is no more so than when after a friend leaves a pie for ‘M’ to eat, she returns home, obviously feeling low, proceeds to attempt to eat the entire pie – almost all done in real time. This highlights something that I feel strongly about, that is that grief makes you do the strangest things and there can be little rhyme or reason for them – just feeling something else anything else other than grief can be ones aim.

    It may be difficult to believe but it is indeed Casey Affleck under a sheet for a majority of this film, and as daft as that may sound I thought it actually worked incredibly well, it’s a good way to deal with having a ghost in a room. A sheet with a person underneath is one of the early ways you describe someone as a ghost, it is a primal thing to see on screen, particularly for an extended period of time. The leads of Affleck and Mara have definite chemistry onscreen and I thought they were totally believable in their roles. I found that even though we do not spend an inordinate amount of time with them as a couple, I was heartbroken when he died; the scene when ‘M’ is at the morgue, it is just a sad moment in her life, once again a long take sharing her grief in real time.

    I don’t want to give away too much with this review, because as the actual plot shifts from being relevant to not being important to being relevant again, it is the narrative that takes over, where as a viewer we will live for a large amount of the running time. I will say that every aspect of this film is important; we will stay with ‘C’ for the entire film, as he stays with ‘M’ wanting to look after her, to hold her but of course is unable to. The way his story unfolds is unique as he (and us) wonders what the point of existence is, why he is hanging around, until he (and us) slowly seem to be working out his purpose, albeit in an extremely surreal way.

    I have to say that if you want to watch just a really great film that is not afraid to tackle some serious and scary subjects then you will be richly rewarded with “A Ghost Story”. I would recommend taking someone close to you to view, as you can have a good chat about it afterwards. So far this year there have been too many mediocre films that are afraid to really go for it. This is a film by a gifted director who has had the opportunity to make a film with two excellent film actors’ that know their place in the story and are able to accommodate the directors vision. I for one hope the three of them make more films together.

    “A Ghost Story” is out now only in cinemas.

  • DVD & Blu-ray review: “Shin Godzilla” (2016)

    DVD & Blu-ray review: “Shin Godzilla” (2016)

    “Shin Godzilla” (2016)

    Science Fiction/Horror/Action

    images

    Running Time: 119 minutes

    Written by: Hideaki Anno

    Directed by: Hideaki Anno and Shinji Higuchi

    Featuring: Hiroki Hasegawa, Yutaka Takenouchi, Satomi Ishihara

    It may defy imagination but there have been twenty-eight previous ‘Godzilla’ films, including the Hollywood versions with the release of “Shin Godzilla” (2016) (a.k.a. “Godzilla: Resurgence”) being the twenty-ninth – this is truly a historic movie series, as well as being a franchise for the ages. There has never been any franchise with the longevity of the ‘Godzilla’ series, and there has never been revenue inducing phenomenon in the history of movies.

    What is unique about this particular entry into the ‘Godzilla’ lore is that this is the first time Toho Studios have consciously rebooted their property, pretty good timing really considering all the free publicity from Hollywood, as well as the new productions coming out of the US over the next few years. Wisely Toho have employed two Japanese directors that have a large amount of experience in genre films as well as being relatively young, so as to boost the hopes for the future of their iconic monster franchise.

    “Shin Godzilla” starts as the Japan Coast Guard investigates an abandoned yacht in Tokyo Bay, but their boat is destroyed. After seeing a viral video showing the area, Japan’s Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary Rando Yaguchi theorizes that the incident was caused by a living creature. His theory is dismissed at first but later confirmed when news reports show a massive tail coming out of the ocean.

    Yaguchi is put in charge of a task force to research the creature. Due to high radiation readings left behind, the creature is theorized to be energized through nuclear fission. The U.S. sends a special envoy, Kayoko Anne Patterson, who reveals that a disgraced, vehemently anti-nuclear zoology professor, Goro Maki, had been studying mutations caused by radioactive contamination.

    The creature, now named Godzilla after Maki’s research, reappears, now twice its original size, and makes landfall again near Kamakura en route for Tokyo.

    Of course this is just the beginning, so look out Tokyo!

    This movie carries much of the paranoia that featured in the original “Godzilla” (1954) after the dropping of two atomic bombs on Japan by the US military as well as all the cold war tensions that would become the norm. Much like the science fiction movies of the 1950s and 1960s that were produced by the US, which featured the fear of what atomic as well as later, nuclear weapons would and could wreak on the world, Japan had its own answer. So the West had movies like the classic “Them” (1954) featuring giant size ants, a product of nuclear testing, “Tarantula” (1955), you guessed it a giant spider, but Japan gave us the biggest and baddest of them all, what would happen if nuclear tests created something nobody could control, ‘Godzilla’.

    It is no coincidence then that the US plays a large part in this new interpretation of “Godzilla” as people responsible for his creation then their covering up as well as trying to destroy him using the same weapons. This is a trope, the one where the unknown threatens mankind, and then it transpires mankind is responsible for the very creation of the problems. Think the white walkers in “Game of Thrones” (2009 -2019). Surely this is something that we can all look at in the world we live in today, with problems such as global warming, crazy people in seats of power, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and a super power run amok with a feeling of unearned entitlement.

    This movie is a real ride, it is Japanese cinema at its B grade best, it is true that Japanese cinema has been influenced by US cinema, particularly after the end of World War II, and of course there are any number of auteur directors that have been produced. But by any measure it is the monster movie, in particular ‘Godzilla’ that most people know. With a couple of US remakes and reboots over the past few years it is refreshing to see ‘Godzilla’ once again being produced in Japan, set in Japan and being worked on by the Japanese.

    The directors Hideaki Anno and Shinji Higuchi have much experience in their own seperate work,  this shows in their storytelling as well as the way the action has been set up. I think they have an eye on the social, political and environmental issues that face their home county, illustrating all these points within their monster movie. And why not, there is precedence for this in US monsters movies of the 1950s. The directors also know their audience, with the type of effects used to show their very individual monster, they are a kind of throwback to the older versions of Godzilla, when you see them you will have to laugh- they are fantastic.

    If you love monster movies or just love Godzilla then this movie will be for you. If you have seen the many monster movies from the US in recent years then this is a great way to see where the mother of all monsters originated – at least its country and culture of origin. This movie would be a worthy addition to any personal library, it has everything a monster movie should have with the added advantage that it works very well even though you will spend the entire running time reading.

    “Shin Godzilla” is out now on DVD & Blu-ray.

     

  • Film review: “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” (2017)

    Film review: “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” (2017)

    “Kingsman: The Golden Circle” (2017)

    Action/Comedy/Thriller

    3-stars

    Written by: Jane Goldman and Matthew Vaughn

    Directed by: Matthew Vaughn

    Featuring: Colin Firth, Taron Egerton, Mark Strong, Edward Holcroft, Sophie Cookson,  Julianne Moore, Halle Berry, Pedro Pascal, Elton John, Channing Tatum and Jeff Bridges

    Whiskey: “Manners… maketh… man. Want me to translate that for ya?”

    Unsurprisingly after the hit that was “Kingsman: The Secret Service” (2015) comes a sequel with many of the original players back, both in front of and behind the camera, as well as the addition of a heavy dose of Americans to round out the huge cast. It also has a   bulbous running time – sitting at almost two and a half hours. I eventually found the movie to be a marathon of excess, instead of the mid distance run I would have preferred, with a pared down sense of its own self importance that the filmmakers would like you to ignore.

    Based on a graphic novel by (the now) legendary Mark Millar and Dave Gibbons, the original movie was the launch pad for Taron Egerton and the first action movie that Oscar winner Colin Firth had been asked to make. Needless to say the fish out of water as well as origin story of sorts were a couple of the keys to its success, as well as what has become the ever reliable partnership of writer/director Matthew Vaughn and his writer/producer wife Jane Goldman. There is no doubt that the first modestly budgeted first film punched well above its weight and so the sequel was put into production with another modest budget, but with the onscreen stakes raised to entice a larger audience to witness a film on a larger canvas. Has this been successful? Judging by early box office results there has been a bigger return, but for my mind this is a scattershot affair with many needless cameos, set pieces and callbacks.

    A year has passed since Eggsy Unwin and Kingsman saved the world from Richmond Valentine’s neurological wave broadcast, and he has since taken his late mentor Harry Hart’s title of “Galahad” and is living with Crown Princess Tilde of Sweden. One day, on his way home, Charlie Hesketh, a former Kingsman trainee, ambushes him. Eggsy loses Charlie and his henchmen in a car chase across London. While Eggsy dines with Princess Tilde and her parents in Sweden, a volley of missiles destroy the Kingsman headquarters.

    Eggsy and Merlin follow the Doomsday protocol, which leads them to “Statesman”, a secret American organisation posing as a Bourbon whiskey distillery in Kentucky. Eggsy and Merlin are briefed by Statesman head, Champagne, about a secret terrorist organisation called “The Golden Circle” and start their mission.

    One of the truly unfortunate things about this sequel is that major plot points were given away in all of the marketing, which is a real shame because some of the revelations (not in my review) are well done, but the effect has all been obliterated by ham fisted marketing from the studio, 20th Century Fox. There is no doubt that this movie is going to be some kind of success, but there should be some surprises left for people that actually pay to go and see this at cinemas.

    Matthew Vaughn is back for his first attempt at a sequel, which he has shied away from even though he was supposed to originally direct the sequel to his own somewhat reboot “X-Men: First Class“ (2011). Vaughn has followed the old adage that you must ‘pump up the volume’ when making a follow up, but unfortunately this movie lacks any nuance that may have been present in his original ‘Kingsman’. He has created a plot that makes little sense, has gone to America and imported a bunch of actors that are more interesting than the original cast, then not used them in any kind of interesting way. Going so far as to bring a character back to life without using him in any kind of real meaningful way, then given his main character terrible lines in a try hard working class accent.

    What may have been some kind of comment on mass consumerism has been swallowed whole in product placement and name dropping that would make the ‘Transformers’ franchise blush. This entire movie is a walking, talking breathing advert – I get it, I really do, even the villain (played with joy by the Oscar winning Julianne Moore), Poppy, has a lair that has been created with nostalgic product placement in mind. Vaughn who is really from the Guy Ritchie school of film making has fallen into the overblown movie making that has recently dogged Ritchie’s own work – which is a real comedown from the filmmaker that brought “Layer Cake” (2004), “Stardust” (2007) and “Kick-Ass” (2010) to the screen with such originality as well as success. This has to Vaughn’s first real miss-step as well as let down which does not bode well for yet another sequel to this franchise.

    Now the news is not all bad as the action sequences are all very good, if not a little overdone as well as a touch too much CGI for my taste. There also seems to be a few sequences that have been lifted from “Baby Driver” (2017), except done better in that movie as well as a maybe too much reliance on old James Bond action gags, which were not present in the original. As well as that there is a nod to John Denver, but again this has already been done in “Logan Lucky” (2017), again done better in that movie as well as being more nuanced. Even though there is a huge cast, one cannot argue with the pedigree of the people that want to work with Vaughn, so that fact does help the future of this franchise. I still think that Taron Egerton was a great choice in the lead of both movies; he has so much charm as well as the ability to deliver humor that it is obvious he is going to be a big star moving forward.

    Something that was a gamble was to take the ending of the original movie with Tilde the Princess who offered a certain part of her anatomy to Eggsy, making her an actual character in this new film. Not only that there is an entire subplot that is handled pretty well involving their relationship, something that you would have thought may have been cut after an initial viewing, but to Vaughn and co-screenwriter/producer Jane Goldman’s credit was left in which was a wise move. In my mind and this may be a bit controversial, but the entire ‘Statesman’ storyline could have been excised which would have made the entire movie run faster, slicker and would have not wasted all of those actors involved. They add nothing to the plot except adding exposition as well as plot mechanics that could have been solved a lot easier in other ways.

    Ultimately though there is enough to recommend this movie as something to see in cinemas, but there are better movies on release at the moment. One example is a remake that advertises its possible sequel without having to rely on it, that is the fantastic horror “IT” (2017) – this is a far superior film that offers originality, humor, horror and action coupled with great performances from everyone involved. If you want some action that is far less than its sequel I would not blame you for going to and liking “Kingsman: The Golden Circle”, but for me it did not meet my expectations which is a shame, but it is not a bad movie which is saying something after the glut of dreck that has been produced this year.

    ‘Kingsman: The Golden Circle” is out now in cinemas.

  • DVD review: “Adult Life Skills” (2016)

    DVD review: “Adult Life Skills” (2016)

    “Adult Life Skills” (2016)

    Comedy/Drama

    3-stars

    Written & Directed by: Rachel Tunnard

    Featuring: Jodie Whittaker, Ozzy Myers, Brett Goldstein, Alice Lowe, Lorraine Ashbourne, Eileen Davies, Edward Hogg, Rachael Deering

    Brendan: “I am not Gay. Why does eberyone think I am Gay?”

    It’s remarkable the seeming ease that the British Film Industry is able to produce great independent drama, comedies and horror movies each and every year. Not only that, but the talent on show always seems to be original as well as first class. Take the release this month of “Adult Life Skills” (2016), featuring the newly crowned ‘Doctor Who’ Jodie Whittaker, she features here in a role that her talents suit right down to the ground. Originally based on a short film by the same writer/director, Rachel Tunnard , this feature feels like a natural blend of drama and comedy set in a seemingly remote small English village where there seems to be a rather limited population, this film highlights the interactions between three generations of women who live (almost) under the same roof – as well as their friends and the attempts they go through to heal two vulnerable souls.

    “Adult Life Skills” revolves around Anna (Jodie Whittaker) who is stuck: she’s approaching 30, living like a hermit in her mum’s garden and eighteen months ago her twin brother died. She spends her days making videos using her thumbs as charaters. A week before her birthday her Mum serves her an ultimatum – she needs to move out of the shed, get a haircut and stop dressing like a homeless teenager. However, when her school friend comes to visit, Anna’s self-imposed isolation becomes impossible to maintain. Soon she is entangled with a troubled eight year old boy obsessed with Westerns, and the local estate agent whose awkward interpersonal skills continually undermine his attempts to seduce her.

    I have to say upfront I really enjoyed this film; it hit a spot that I really appreciated in terms of the drama displayed as well as the comedy that helped introduce the ensemble cast in a really easy way. The film covers some pretty serious ground, not only for the main character of Anna, but for the small boy she is forced to befriend that leads to a deeper understanding of her life – which ultimately is the main point of the film. “Adult Life Skills” deals with death of not only a sibling, in this case a twin brother, but also the death of a parent. It doesn’t shy away from the feeling of loss as well as the way this can have a detrimental effect to ones mental health – it also shows how healthy it is to talk to other people about feelings of loss and malaise.

    This is the first full length film that Rachel Tunnard has written and directed ,which is difficult to believe when you look at the finished product. Tunnard has been an extremely experienced editor (she also edited this film), which is a great training ground to become a director as it helps hone story telling skills to a point where it becomes clear what story you are trying to tell. There are far too many movies released that not only have bloated running times (see any blockbuster, this weeks “The Kingsman: The Golden Circle” (2017) is a prime example, an action film that runs almost two and a half hours) but also lose sight on what the purpose of the film was in the first place. Tunnard has created a little movie that hits many of the buttons that make an audience respond to a story that is universal in nature but in an intimate way. She has kept the plot extremely simple but utilized a narrative with originality that uses characters as the catalyst to move the plot forward to a very satisfying as well as realistic conclusion.

    The first great element, as well as one of the unique things about “Adult Life Skills” is the cast, as well as their characterizations of the parts they are playing. The lead is the fantastic Jodie Whittaker who plays Anna, the surviving twin who is suffering a crisis with the loss of her brother as well as the seeming permanent limbo she finds herself in. The great supporting cast that is led by Lorraine Ashbourne and Eileen Davies as Anna’s Mother and Grandmother are just superb, playing parts where they are eternally opposed to each other – they off Anna’s character in ways that are surprising given the familial relationship. These are three separately identifiable women that are strong characters’ in their own right as well as having their own thoughts and actions which interact with the story – most importantly they are believable. The remainder of the supporting cast is Brett Goldstein and Alice Lowe as Brendan and Alice, Anna’s friends who are there for her at every turn, but of course she does not seem to be able to give them what they want from her. Finally in his first film is Ozzy Myers as Clint, a young boy who is wanting answers from his own life without really knowing the questions, he is facing an even bigger loss than Anna has, if that is even possible. When child actors are asked to be in movies it can be difficult to believe that they are really coming to grips with what they are doing, that is acting, but Myers is exceptionally strong and this has to come to down to a very gifted little boy.

    This is first and foremost a movie about personal loss and grief, what both of those can mean to someone who thinks they might be alone in life after that loss. More often than not those people can recover and move on with their own life, find a purpose and learn to live without that piece they have lost. However, it is possible that without support or some kind of previous purpose a person may not fully recover; anxiety and depression can take over, they can have trouble interacting in a healthy way with the outside world. In Anna’s case she feels she has lost a part of her but in her grief she finds someone that is going to go through something she has, so identifies with that person to such a degree that she lets her friends and family into her life (or back into), its not the same, its different and in her case it may be better – sort of.

    I can honestly say I recommend this movie highly, it has much going for it, primarily the performance of Jodie Whittaker, as well as the fantastic job writer/director/editor Rachel Tunnard has done with her first full length feature on what must be considered a tight budget. Another thing it has going for it is that it is a family film, there is some coarse language but not enough that it should be off putting. If you or you know of someone that has suffered a loss you or they will appreciate this movie for what it is, a positive outlook on life and those people left behind.

    “Adult Life Skills” is out now on DVD.

  • DVD & Blu-ray review: “Colossal” (2017)

    DVD & Blu-ray review: “Colossal” (2017)

    “Colossal” (2016)

    Action/Thriller/Horror/Science Fiction

    images

    Running Time: 110 minutes

    Written and Directed by: Nacho Vigalondo

    Featuring: Anne Hathaway, Jason Sudeikis, Dan Stevens, Austin Stowell, Agam Darshi, and Tim Blake Nelson

    Gloria: “Keep it cool. These people are looking at us.”

    Oscar: “She’s the monster.”

    Its been five years since Anne Hathaway received her Oscar for supporting actress  the for musical “Les Miserables” (2012), at the same time blowing everyone else off the screen, really announcing herself as a force to be reckoned with – if film-makers don’t have her as one of the top five actresses in Hollywood they need to have their heads examined. Since the Oscar Hathaway has appeared in a Sci-fi (“Interstellar” (2014)), a comedy (“The Intern” (2015)), an animated sequel (“Rio 2” (2014)), and a fantasy movie (“Alice Through the Looking Glass “ (2016)). She has proved over the course of her career to be one of the most versatile as well as bankable actresses around. She further proves her talent in her latest movie “Colossal” (2016), an independent comedy/drama about a giant monster and robot, as well as offering quite a few surprises along the way.

    Gloria (Anne Hathaway) is an unemployed writer struggling with alcoholism. Her errant behavior prompts her frustrated boyfriend Tim (Dan Stevens) to break up with her and kick her out of their New York City apartment. Gloria ends up reuniting with her childhood friend Oscar (Jason Sudeikis), who now runs his late father’s bar.

    Working with Oscar at the bar does not help Gloria’s alcohol problem. After each shift she joins Oscar and his friends Garth (Tim Blake Nelson) and Joel (Austin Stowell) in their ritual of hanging out and drinking until morning. Gloria takes to sleeping it off on a bench near a children’s playground. At the same time, a giant reptilian kaiju appears in Seoul, South Korea, leaving death and destruction in its wake. Gradually, Gloria realizes that when she walks through the playground at exactly 8:05 in the morning, she causes the monster to manifest.Gloria reveals her secret to Oscar and his friends with even more complications – some you will not be prepared for.

    This is a move and a half, that starts with a concept that is leftfield and then keeps going. The film is written and directed by Spanish Nacho Vigalondo, who directed the excellent genre film “Timecrimes” (2007) which played with time travel conventions as well as subverting the tropes involved in such films, giving the plot as well as the narrative a twist that was extremely satisfying. Here with “Colossal” he does something similar but with results that may not satisfy all audiences, especially those that have seen the amazing trailer for this movie. There has been a serious decision to subvert the expectations of the audience with the marketing for this film, which is a great idea, it seems to experiment to see how the public will react as well as seeing if this will be a success for future films. This is an interesting thing to do as it is not uncommon for a shot or two to be missing from a movie after the trailer plays – but not an entire storyline.

    Tensions between the two main characters as well as Gloria’s boyfriend are extremely interesting particularly in terms of gender politics. Hathaway herself has been the aim of vitriol on the Internet – there is even a line of dialogue that pertains to this, veiled in conversation – which I do find odd, she is not the most polarizing actresses I can think of. Within the film things do take a violent turn, I wont say what but its fascinating – as well as being unnerving and quite scary. There are parallels in real life where women who possibly take a stand or are seen as threatening to men (by men of course) are routinely torn down, sad but true. Look at any male dominated section in society where women try and make in-roads and you will find gender specific hostility much like this movie. It truly is a rare film that can show us this with monsters and robots.

    The film balances two main geographic areas, South Korea and the US, the juxtaposition between a large city, Seoul as well as the small town Gloria has come home to in the US are pivotal as the film unfolds. What is great is that these locales become instrumental within the narrative that will become clear in the denouement.

    Nacho Vigalondo at his stage of his career knows the horror/science-fiction genre extremely well having spent most of his career surrounded by it. This is no bad thing and definitely not a knock on him or his obvious talents. It seems like this needed a special director to take hold of the plot through the what becomes a unique narrative to not only show us why things happen as well as the motivations of the characters. There is a slight hole in the plot at one point but what is cool is that the chapters talk about this hole- what fun.

    This is a small budget (compared to other monster films) movie; it has parallels to the great micro budget movie “Monsters” (2010) directed by Gareth Edwards who coincidently directed the big budget version of “Godzilla” (2014). It is about a relationship or relationships that are under pressure from outsize forces. The other element they have in common are their female characters that have issues and are not defined by their gender. In “Colossal” Gloria is an alcoholic who is not defined by a man, who has agency to control her own destiny, in fact what she lacks is not strength but a purpose – something many people male or female can identify with.Like the monster for part of the film she stumbles though life destroying most things in her life until some self awareness takes place – just wonderful.

    As I have said Anne Hathaway as the star of the film is fantastic but the supporting cast that rounds out the film is terrific as well. Particularly Jason Sudeikis who for the most part of his career has played a wise cracking sidekick, he has been pretty reliable as well as likeable in everything he has been in, here is playing someone quite different – believe it or not that can be quite jarring but actually fits within the film extremely well. The other two standouts are Dan Stevens as the boyfriends who dumps Gloria, he (as an actor) is starting to gain momentum in his career after the huge success of “Beauty and the Beast” (2017) as well as critical success from televisions “Legion” (2017). And then there is the always-reliable Tim Blake Nelson who like so many of his talented contemporaries has become the classic character actor, always reliable in big movies with big moments. It can never be underestimated how important great character actors can be in movies, think about any big budget or high profile films, then think about the actor that steals that movie even for short amounts of time.

    Now some people may find this movie underwhelming after seeing the trailers but I loved this movie from the get go. All of the actors are perfectly suited to this small town drama with huge ambition as well as the fact that we get to see a larger world that impacts all the lives of those involved. I recommend this unique film highly, it oozes charm and heart, and while watching it you may be move to think of your childhood and where you have ended up.

    “Colossal” is out now on DVD & Blu-ray.