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: “Life” (2017)

    Film review: “Life” (2017)

    “Life” (2017)

    Sci-Fi/Thriller/Horror

    images

    Running Time: 103 minutes

    Directed by: Daniel Espinosa

    Featuring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Rebecca Ferguson and Ryan Reynolds

    Dominique: “Are you bringing the alien back to earth?”

    Roy Adams: “No, we’re going to keep it up here where it’s safe.”

    I don’t normally like reading or hearing other peoples reviews but somehow going into “Life” (2017) I had heard a few and was pretty discouraged by them, the theme that came through was that this was a cross between “Alien” (1979) and “Gravity (2013), but inferior to both – which is not only not true but fairly insulting for all three films to be reduced to a type but also insulting to the film-makers themselves. Its no surprise then that this isn’t the greatest film ever made, but as far as genre films go it is exceptionally watchable with some very original content – you just have to suspend your disbelief and it will all be ok.

    “Life”, is set on as well as revolving around a crew aboard the International Space Station performs a successful capture of a space probe returning from Mars with a sample inside. The crew is tasked with studying the sample, which may be the first proof of extraterrestrial life. However, the study eventually backfires as the organism displays incredible strength and gains intelligence, becoming extremely hostile and killing them all one by one. Trapped aboard the ISS with the rapidly growing organism, the crew must find out how to kill it before it manages to escape and destroy Earth.

    If you have seen any marketing for this film you will probably know it is about an aggressive alien that is hunting its prey on a space station, and yes on the surface this is similar to “Alien”, but the type of alien as well as the crew and the motivations for the crew are pretty different to the film “Alien” in almost every way. The similarities to “Gravity” are that it is set in space, on a space station orbiting the earth – a fairly pointless and obvious statement.

    Daniel Espinosa, the director of “Life”, whose previous film, the extremely poorly received historic Russian serial killer film, “Child 44” (2015) was a bit of a bloated mess is clearly in his rear mirror as this film is a fast paced thriller, with time given over to most of the characters for moments that make you feel for them when they all face their respective fates. The director make effective use of the two shot to maximize the claustrophobic feeling within the space station as well as point of view shots as well, particularly through a tense and gruesome space walk scene. The exterior wide shots look amazing considering this is a low budgeted sci-fi film and has a lot to accomplish with its special effects.

    The spcial effects are acceptable at this films budget, however there are some shaky scenes towards the end as well as some of the moving exterior shots. The alien, “Calvin”, in my opinion is very well designed, I am pretty sure it is original, as well as terrifying in most scenes “he” appears, although by the end of the film I was feeling sorry for it and was wondering why we all just couldn’t get along.

    The film is cast extremely well with the characters of Miranda North (Rebecca Ferguson) and David Jordan (Jake Gyllenhaal) given the most to do, as well as having the most depth for them to play with. The cast is round out with Ryan Reynolds who doesn’t miss a beat with his personality and motor mouth – the one thing I did think was he was a bit of stunt casting to draw people into the cinema. I have to admit that I really enjoy seeing Reynolds given the chance just to do what he does best, look good and talk.

    The best thing to do before going to this film is to avoid all spoilers, go in clean and be prepared to be shocked as well as seeing a lot of blood and horror. The alien looks excellent as well as gross – it is not a humanoid at all, this for me is a relief. I am pretty sick of creatures from another world taking humans over or assimilating them, I think this has been done to death and the very idea of a new creature being created is a great idea and one not done enough in cinema.

    If you like a good Sci-Fi with scares, the idea of the world hanging in the balance and some good performances from some really great actors then this is the film for you. Just go in with no spoilers or expectations, and you will have a good time.

  • Film review: “CHiPs” (2017)

    Film review: “CHiPs” (2017)

    “CHiPs” (2017)

    Comedy/Action

    stars-2-5

    Running Time: 101 minutes

    Directed by: Dax Shepard

    Featuring: Dax Shepard, Michael Peña, Vincent D’Onofrio, Adam Brody, Rosa Salazar, Vida Guerra, and Kristen Bell

    Jon Baker: I hope that you’re not praying on girls with low self-esteem.

    Frank ‘Ponch’ Poncherello: “How are you judging them, like by their hair, like how straight their teeth are?”

    Jon Baker: “Yeah.”

    Frank ‘Ponch’ Poncherello: “That’s really shallow. Real talk, she ate my butt.”

    Jon Baker: “She ate your ass?”

    Frank ‘Ponch’ Poncherello: “Everyone’s eating everyone’s ass now?”

    Jon Baker: “What about hygiene?”

    Frank ‘Ponch’ Poncherello: “If you go to the bathroom and you see some baby wipes, green light.”

    This film has been in the offing for a number of years, frankly I am surprised it was made at all; I thought the recognition for this would be all but dead. Warner’s have had other ideas and some success with modestly budgeted R-rated comedies, in this case they have given the reigns of this project to Dax Shepard, who at this stage may be more famous for his marriage to Kristen Bell, than anything he has accomplished in the film business. Judging from the results and relative success of this film that may remain the case for Shepard, who has an ally in the form of always-reliable Michael Pena as his sparring partner in this 1970s re-tread.

    The story (for what its worth) of “CHiPs” (2017) in this incarnation follows Jon Baker (Dax Shepard) and Frank “Ponch” Poncherello (Michael Peña) who have just joined the California Highway Patrol (CHP) in Los Angeles but for very different reasons. Baker is a beaten up pro motorbiker trying to put his life and marriage back together. Poncherello is a cocky undercover Federal agent investigating a multi-million dollar heist that may be an inside job, inside the CHP.

    When they are teamed together they clash more than click, so kick starting a partnership is easier said than done. But with Baker’s bike skills combined with Ponch’s street savvy it might just work. Soon they find themselves in a situation like none other when a sadistic ex-cop, Vic Brown (Vincent D’Onofrio), and his motor vehicle theft hit men are wreaking havoc throughout their city.

    The only other film that I think about comparing ““CHiPs” to is the excellent and funny re-make of the TV series “Starsky & Hutch” (2004). That film not only had the benefit of something cool to draw on, that is the original television series, but the incredible talents of Ben Stiller, Owen Wilson, Will Ferrell, Vince Vaughn, and Jason Bateman, in front of the camera all doing the things they were so successful at then. But behind the camera you had Todd Phillips in the directors chair who was about to come into his own with the “Hangover” Trilogy, which would land him on the A, list of comedic directors.

    Unfortunately the only actor close to a star in “CHiPs” is Michael Pena who all respect to him has not carried a film by himself yet, but he has excellent comic timing that I pretty much forgive him for everything. Dax Shepard as comic actor is very good and his turn in “Idiocracy” (2006) is a must see; but he is a little uneven, my only real problem is that he should either stick behind the camera or stay in front of it – it takes very special talents to direct themselves. My thought was that there was no other male actor of a similar look and age that was available so this was rushed into production – and that may explain some of the issues with the movie.

    “CHiPs”, ultimately, is just a standard action comedy romp with little attention paid to the script or really even the characters. Even though there are a lot of jokes they feel out of place in 2017, are gay jokes still funny or did Benny Hill and The Two Ronnies have a hand in this? Not everything is bad but when you have a modestly budgeted movie, the characters had better work, then the dialogue will flow – even comedies work that way – have a look at “Starsky & Hutch”, although the talent once again speaks for itself – in the end it is an unfair comparison.

    I really wanted to like this movie but the writing is on the wall fairly early on, maybe it would have been better and funnier to have the two cops in an out of time plot or something that made sense to the original series. I for one was pretty disappointed and found myself asking how Shepard could write, direct, star and produce this without hitting the goal once. As i said earlier I think Dax should just act and leave the more behind the camera stuff to others.

    The one thing this film does do is to offer some counter programming to the glut of films being released over the next two weeks and for all its weaknesses it is a studio R-rated comedy for adults. The downside is that its not the greatest comedy, but you will have a laugh and if you do remember the original from the 1970s or have seen repeats you will recognize certain touchstones, such as the uniforms and the bikes – which is about it, as LA has changed so much that the geographic area fom the original is unrecognizable.

  • Film review: “The Lego Batman Movie” (2017)

    Film review: “The Lego Batman Movie” (2017)

    “The Lego Batman Movie” (2017)

    Animated/Action

    images

    Directed by: Chris McKay

    Featuring: Will Arnett, Zach Galifianakis, Michael Cera, Rosario Dawson and Ralph Fiennes

    Alfred Pennyworth: “Were you looking at the old family pictures again?”

    Batman: “No, I wasn’t!”

    Alfred Pennyworth: “Sir, I have seen you go through similar phases in 2016 and 2012 and 2008 and 2005 and 1997 and 1995 and 1992 and 1989 and that weird one in 1966.”

    Batman: “I have aged phenomenally”

    After more than a few comedies having been released this year, with more misses than hits, it is refreshing to go and watch “The Lego Batman Movie” (2017) and have some honest to goodness laughs. I can happily report that this film takes up from where “The Lego Movie” (2014) left off, with appearances of some of the same characters from that film. It was an extremely high bar that writer/directors Phil Lord and Christopher Miller set with their film, while this new film never reaches those consistent heights it does have more than enough to keep everyone very happy, with an expectation to look forward to the next installment.

    “The Lego Batman Movie” is set appropriately three years after the saving of the Lego Universe with Emmet, Wyldstyle and the rest of the band of heroic misfits. Batman continues fighting crime in Gotham City, attempting to vanquish the baddies – sort of. During a mission to prevent the Joker from destroying the city, Batman hurts his arch-rival’s feelings by telling him he is not as important in his life as he thinks he is, leading Joker to seek the ultimate revenge on him.

    The following day, Batman attends the city’s winter gala as his alter ego Bruce Wayne to celebrate the retirement of Commissioner Gordon and the ascension of his daughter Barbara as the Gotham City Police Department’s new police commissioner, but is infuriated when she announces her plans to restructure the city’s police to function without the need of Batman. The Joker crashes the party with the rest of Gotham City’s villains, but has all of them surrender to the police. Despite realizing that this makes him no longer relevant to the city’s safety, Batman suspects his arch-rival is up to something and decides to stop him by banishing him into the Phantom Zone, a prison for some of the most dangerous villains in the Lego multiverse.

    From this point the action and humour are ratcheted up with many many villains from the Warner archive making an appearance, I don’t do spoilers but the story is fun and great, you have to see it to believe the insanity that unfolds.

    Chris McKay, who is essentially making his debut as a film director has had more than enough comedy and animation experience from his extensive work on the television show “Robot Chicken” (2005 – present) where the fast paced humour, as well the homages to other properties serve him well here. McKay does an outstanding job of juggling the immense amount of characters, giving them all the time they need to make an impact, his own sense of humor is obvious as well as being broad enough for a wide audience. As a technical director  he moves everything so fast you would be forgiven if there were elements that did not hang together or were not framed quite right. However, in saying that, the pace of the movie can be frenetic, sometimes it would be nice for time to slow down a little, which trust me it does not.

    As you would expect if you have seen “The Lego Movie” (and if you haven’t go out and get a copy now) the voice cast is second to none, it all starts at the top with Will Arnett who audiences demand return after his debut as Batman in the original film. Arnett’s portrayal of the Batman has to be one of the best around, it towers above George Clooney, Val Kilmer and the Ben Affleck. Arnett is able to distill with just his voice what makes the character so special, both parts of it – he is able to portray a soul that, is at once real but also lives in some kind of adult fantasy land where he has permission to work outside the law with no repercussions. This is an aspect that only Chris Nolan has been able to get close to, but the Lego movies do it with ease. Also of course, he is hilarious.

    The remainder of the cast is of course top class, Rosario Dawson voices Barbara Gordon, the newly minted Police Commissioner who wants to work with Batman to clean up Gotham, Michael Cera as Dick Grayson/Robin who is conflicted to say the least, Ralph Fiennes as Bruce’s butler Alfred, more than a match for anyone in the film, while attempting to father Bruce, and who almost steals the movie. Finally there are the two main villains, The Joker voiced by Zach Galifianakis and Harley Quinn voiced by Jenny Slate who play off each other more effectively than two other actors who have played them recently. This film for all its laughs and craziness is about both positive and negative relationships as well the possible health of each.

    The film, much like the first one is about family as well as what that family unit means, particularly in regards to shouldering responsibility and all that entails for young and old alike. Like the best-animated films this has a beating heart that resonates with anyone that will takes it’s pulse. If you don’t laugh and cry throughout this film then it is possible you don’t have a pulse. The truth is Batman has never been a true loner and definitely not the misery guts he turned into from the 1980s onwards, it’s been four decades and he needs to lighten up. This film not only shows why he, and of course we, need friends and that we should never shoulder all the responsibility all of the time – something in New Zealand we need to learn especially with our young people – in true Lego style it takes a village.

    I recommend this movie whole heartedly, not only is it a great-animated movie it is a great film, with a message that never preaches but shows a valid point of view. The other important thing “The Lego Batman Movie” does is illustrate how to make a funny super hero film for all of those people that are too young for “Deadpool” (2016), this does that easily. In fact some of the other Warner/DC properties could take a page out of this movie’s playbook.

  • Film Review: “Power Rangers” (2017)

    Film Review: “Power Rangers” (2017)

    “Power Rangers” (2017)

    Sci-Fi/Action

    stars-2-5

    Directed by: Dean Israelite

    Featuring: Dacre Montgomery, Naomi Scott, RJ Cyler, Becky G, Ludi Lin, Bill Hader, Bryan Cranston and Elizabeth Banks

    Zordon: “The answer to what is happening to you is here. You five are the Power Rangers.”

    Zack Taylor: “Did I just hear you say we’re Power Rangers?”

    Hart: “Is this some kind of joke? We’re talking to a wall.”

    Alpha 5: “I was kind of expecting a little more.”

    I am not going to go into the full history of the Power Rangers, however it was a TV show originally using footage from a Japanese show, then imported this to the US with a change up of actors  – it became a touchstone for a certain generation, and now it is a big budget movie hoping to go on to become a successful franchise, after this entry we shall see.

    The film revolves around five teens with attitude who are inexplicably brought together by coincidence or destiny to become the newest generation in a line of warriors known as the Power Rangers. The world rests in their hands as Rita Repulsa (Elizabeth Banks), a powerful witch and former Green Power Ranger, launches an assault seeking the Zeo Crystal with an army of stone golems called Putty Patrollers and a giant golden monster called Goldar.

    Make sense of that if you can – there is a bit more to the story but i don’t want to spoil anything in case you actually see the film.

    The narrative is extremely straight forward so it fits in with the formulaic plot very well and should not be confusing at all.

    With the US summer blockbuster season getting underway earlier and earlier every year, this is the prime time to release “Power Rangers”, as it gets a jump on what will probably be higher quality as well as possibly (hopefully) more high minded films. There is definitely going to be more sequels in the coming months, so launching a new franchise at this time of year could be considered quite canny. It is also a counter programming measure against the monolith that is “Beauty and the Beast” (2017), which opened huge in the US and some parts of the world last weekend.

    I do believe with all best intentions that the studio did set out to make a movie that introduced new fans to the Power Rangers, as well as servicing the existing fan base, however what you end up getting is a mish mash of other films, which in some hands could be homage, but in this directors case is so ham fisted that it comes off as a rip off. The story telling devices if there are any come off as being extremely lazy. Dean Israelite, the director, whose previous film was the tired sci-fi teen time traveling movie “Project Almanac” (2015), has seemed to take a step backwards in this new film. It is filled with tired giant mechas fighting each other,  attempting to save a small town in the US, while at the same time absolutely destroying it – making little sense at all.

    The young adults that play the five Power Rangers are all doing a perfectly fine job, obviously cast in the mold of the original five from the television show. However these characters, as written, are all now tired archetypal characters that we have surely moved on from. To set up these teens at the start of the film Israelite shamefully steals from the John Hughes classic, “The Breakfast Club” (1985) to make a point about the characters that the are misfits and rebels that fit into archetypes – something Hughes does but shows us that in fact there is more to people than meets the eye, we do not fit into one stereotype, we are more than the sum of our parts. Of course this is lost on Israelite who instead attempts to say teens are reductive and are exactly what they seem.

    Another trend that has become tiresome and talked about in many other places is that the trailer for this film gives away the entire story, so if you have seen that then there is no real surprise in this movie – not that there should be.

    There are some bright sparks, the early appearance of Bill Hader as Alpha 5 a robotic sidekick, he is also used as a tool for all of the stories exposition, he is great but even he gets tiresome and disappears for the entire third act which is disappointing. Elizabeth Banks seems to be the only major characters as the villain, Rita Replusa, who knows what film she is in and chews the scenery as much as possible. In fact by the time she appears I was hoping she would win and banish the Power Rangers.

    If you are a fan of the original then you are in your thirties,  there is more out there for you with far more interesting films in the offering. This is a pretty soulless film that encounters the same problems many giant blockbusters face, it is not really aimed at anyone in particular, money has been thrown at problems with little thought for story, it runs at two hours which is half an hour too long, the set pieces look cheap and the problems are all solved with violence. When the characters try and bond with each other it does come off as lip service and attempted character growth – which ends up failing.

    Now, with all that said if you want to see a big movie at the cinema this weekend and one you can take the family to without worrying about reality or any real violence then this is the one for you. It may pay to explain to younger family members that young white boys are not always leaders, do not have the answers and may not save the world.

    _KF17640.NEF
  • DVD Review: “Allied” (2016)

    DVD Review: “Allied” (2016)

    “Allied” (2016)

    War/Thriller/Drama

    3-stars

    Directed by: Robert Zemeckis

    Featuring: Brad Pitt, Marion Cotillard, Jared Harris, Simon McBurney and Lizzy Caplan

    Max Vatan: “Heard a lot about you, saying you were beautiful… and good.”

    Marianne Beausejour: “Being good at this kind of work is not very beautiful.”

    War films have been a staple of Hollywood for over a hundred years, for the most part they work, they have told stories of pre, ante and post war situations thay have resonance through the ages, whether this is because some have been ‘boys own’ adventures or they delve into why mankind must continually fight for their place in the world is not clear, there a truly a multitude of reasons they are still being made.

    This new film from writer/director Robert Zemeckis is a kind of throw back to classic war films with hints of action and thriller genres implicitly available for the audience to enjoy. For many years the director had been heavily involved in the motion capture 3D world of cinema that has led to many breakthroughs in technology. His last two films, “The Walk” (2015) and “Flight” (2012) were dramas heavily imbued with CGI effects – they seemed like an attempt to marry heavy drama with some kind of CGI spectacle. “Flight” was easily the more successful with a modest budget that garnered lead actor Denzel Washington with an Oscar nomination and a worldwide box office gross of US$160 million. “Allied” was not the critical or box office success that he had hoped for, with a much larger budget and decreasing returns for the studio. It’s a shame because this is not a bad movie, just not a great one from a director who still has much to give and create.

    The film is initially set in 1942 during World War II, Royal Canadian Air Force intelligence officer Max Vatan (Brad Pitt) travels to Casablanca in Morocco to assassinate the German ambassador. He is partnered with a French Resistance fighter named Marianne Beauséjour (Marion Cotillard), who had escaped from France after her resistance group was compromised and killed. The mission goes well and they both escape. Max asks Marianne to come with him to London and be his wife. The two get married, settle down in Hampstead, and have a baby girl named Anna.

    A year later, Max learns from the Special Operations Executive that Marianne is suspected of being a German spy, having adopted her identity after the real Marianne was killed in France. In order to test their suspicions, SOE run a ‘blue dye’ operation: Max is ordered to write down a piece of false intelligence at home, where Marianne can find it. If the information is picked up from intercepted German transmissions, Max must personally execute her, or be hanged for treason. Max is told otherwise to act normally.

    When a film arrives with a cast that includes Brad Pitt, Marion Cotillard, Jared Harris and Lizzy Caplan is directed by Zemeckis and takes place during World War II there are some pretty high expectations that are in place even before you start to watch the film. The film starts well but hampered by what is, putting it mildly, a pretty formulaic script the film descends into a bit of mess – at one point it wants to be a complex melodrama about spies who really don’t know who to trust and then descends into the most predictable thriller.

    There is some chemistry between the leads as they are left to carry the film to it’s bitter end. Pitt seems to be playing the a-typical against authority American who doesn’t trust anyone around him and comes up against the prim and proper English hierarchy- a very played out trope in cinema history that is a bit tiresome to see once again.The supporting cast is great led by the inimitable Jarod Harris, as the officer in charge, who steals scenes like the professional he is. I love seeing him in whatever role he plays – he inhabits them, he also reminds me of a Timothy Spall type, which is the highest compliment I can make. The only casting issue I had was with Lizzy Caplan who seems to be overplaying and overacting her part as Pitt’s sister – I always thought she was a pretty good actress but her part here  seems to be changing my mind.

    Now don’t get me wrong this is not a bad film, in fact it is very good which has to be laid at the feet of Robert Zemeckis, someone who has been making films for over five decades and knows how to tell a story as well as where to place the camera for maximum effect. Once again though my feeling is he wants to deliver the maximum bang for his back special effects wise, this he does perhaps too well, taking his eye off the minutiae of the actual story. There were some parts of the film that seemed odd, the so obvious hand double when Pitt is shuffling cards, as well as Cotillard giving birth outside during an air raid. The film is filled with stereotypes, tropes and archetypes so if you don’t mind that or have not seen a film set in England in World War II then this might be the movie for you.

    Despite all this I would recommend seeing the film just for a fantastical look at a couple of spies during World War II that have more to hide than they ever let on. If you want to see Pitt really shine in a spy film then re-watch “Mr. & Mrs. Smith” (2005), a nice variation and full of great action.

    “Allied” is released on DVD and Blu-ray next week.

    Brad Pitt plays Max Vatan and Thierry Fremont plays Paul Delamare in Allied from Paramount Pictures.
  • DVD Review: “Hacksaw Ridge” (2016)

    DVD Review: “Hacksaw Ridge” (2016)

    “Hacksaw Ridge” (2016)

    War/Drama

    3-stars

    Running Time: 139 minutes

    Directed by: Mel Gibson

    Featuring: Andrew Garfield, Sam Worthington, Luke Bracey, Teresa Palmer, Hugo Weaving, Rachel Griffiths and Vince Vaughn

    Desmond Doss: “With the world so set on tearing itself apart, it don’t seem like such a bad thing to me to want to put a little bit of it back together.”

     

    This is the most conflicted I have been about a film for quite some time, I went into it with a very open mind and I have liked most of Mel Gibson’s directorial efforts, my absolute favorite being the excellent “Apocalypto” (2004), which was also his last film as director – it was at this time that his much publicized issues were raised, when almost everyone turned on him. He has appeared in a handful of films since 2010, but they have all been pretty ordinary, in fact it has been well over a decade since Gibson made anything remotely interesting. Unfortunatelt for all the promise, the Oscar nominations and wins this is not a great film, it should not be remembered fondly.

    “Hacksaw Ridge” (2016) revolves around Desmond Doss who takes his Seventh-day Adventist upbringing seriously, in particular the commandment: Thou shalt not kill.

    At the outbreak of World War II, Doss is motivated to enlist in the Army. His father, a troubled World War I veteran, is deeply upset by the decision. Because he is a conscientious objector, Doss intends to serve as a combat medic. Doss is placed under the command of Sergeant Howell. He excels physically but becomes an outcast among his fellow soldiers for refusing to handle a rifle and train on Saturdays. Howell and Captain Glover attempt to discharge Doss for psychiatric reasons but fail. Howell then torments Doss by putting him through grueling labor, intending to get Doss to leave of his own accord. Despite being beaten one night by his fellow soldiers, he refuses to identify his attackers and continues training.

    Doss’ unit is assigned to the 77th Infantry Division and deployed to the Pacific theater. During the Battle of Okinawa, Doss’ unit is informed that they are to relieve the 96th Infantry Division, which was tasked with ascending and securing the Maeda Escarpment (“Hacksaw Ridge”). In the initial fight, both sides sustain heavy losses..

    The next morning, the Japanese launch a massive counterattack and drive the Americans off the escarpment. Doss hears the cries of the dying soldiers and decides to run back into the carnage. He starts carrying wounded soldiers to the cliff’s edge and rappelling them down by rope, each time praying to save one more. The arrival of dozens of wounded once presumed dead comes as a shock to the rest of the unit below. After rescuing 75 soldiers at Hacksaw Ridge, Doss is awarded the Medal of Honor by President Harry S. Truman.

    There are a variety of moving parts to any film, these can either benefit or hurt the movie depending on how well each is handled and carried out. I don’t believe this is a bad film, but I do think the structure, casting and ultimately budget hinders what could have been a great film, it could have done much better worldwide. To see that it was up for six Academy Awards was at the time, and still is disappointing, this says more to the make up of the Academy than anything else.

    I am assuming it was Gibson’s reputation itself that limited the budget to a paltry US$40 million, which means that all the effects and casting were extremely limited. It also means that he had to shoot in Australia on a beach instead of anywhere that actually looks like the South Pacific. As well as this, it means the special effects look amateurish and any extensive practical effects cannot be done, as time is very limited. The other thing that is limited is any kind of wide shots as well as aerial shots – when I was watching this you could see that this was a production short on money. By comparison “Saving Private Ryan” (1998), film made almost twenty years ago cost US$70 million dollars to make, this is over $100 million dollars in todays dollars.

    The cast in the film is predominantly Australian except for Andrew Garfield as Doss and Vince Vaughn as his drill Seargent. Vaughn who has not appeared in a drama for years seems like he is playing his normal straight man except this time there is no comedian to back him up – his performance rings as untrue as any performance I have ever seen. Garfield is fine as Doss but in my opinion his Oscar nomination was for the wrong film – not once did I think he carried off the performance in any realistic sense.

    The narrative that is used to push the plot along is flawed as well; it is obvious that over half the film is about Doss and his family prior to the outbreak if World War II as well as an extensive section of the film set in boot camp. This is such a weak part of the film and meanders for a long time until we arrive in the South Pacific and the action. It’s the first time I felt war being a welcome relief to the boredom I was feeling beforehand.

    The one thing Gibson did well was to create a film that does stick together despite its weaknesses and it is coherent as well which is saying something. He has an excellent eye, which you can see in all of his films – and he can direct action as well as any other great director around. I only hope that his next film has a budget and other talent to make it a true return to form.

    “Hacksaw Ridge” is out now on DVD and Blu-ray.

     

  • Film review: “Trespass Against Us” (2017)

    Film review: “Trespass Against Us” (2017)

    “Trespass Against Us” (2017)

    Thriller/Drama

    stars-2-5

    Directed by: Adam Smith

    Featuring: Michael Fassbender, Brendan Gleeson, Sean Harris, Lyndsey Marshal, Rory Kinnear, and Killian Scott

    Colby Cutler: “Blessed are the cracked.”

    Who is Michael Fassbender, and what does he want to be? These are both good question’s to think about after viewing this movie. He has to be one of the hardest working mainstream actors in film today – since his huge break in “300” (2006) he has averaged almost four films per year – that’s not counting shorts and television appearances. In the vast majority of these films he is either the lead or one of the top co-stars. He has amassed a large body of work, has appeared in some major directors films as well as a handful of first time directors. It is admirable that Fassbender supports first time directors or screenwriters, here he is doing both but I cant help but think the outcome was not what he had in mind.

    “Trespass Against Us” (2017) is set across three generations of the Cutler family who live as outlaws in their own anarchic corner of Britain’s richest countryside. Chad Cutler (Michael Fassbender) is heir apparent to his bruising criminal father, Colby (Brendan Gleeson) and has been groomed to spend his life hunting, thieving and tormenting the police. But with his own son, Tyson (Georgie Smith) coming of age, Chad soon finds himself locked in a battle with his father for the future of his young family. When Colby learns of Chad’s dreams for another life he sets out to tie his son and grandson into his life. The quality of storytelling and direction is very low, it does not match the talent in from of the camera.

    The film not only has Fassbender appearing but also the incredibly talented Brendan Gleeson who shines here in a role where he leaves nothing on the page,  I can see why he accepted as the appeal to play this part must have been pretty high. The other major talents in supporting roles are Rory Kinnear and Sean Harris. To be perfectly honest it was the cast that drew me into this film, I can imagine other people feeling the same way. Whats not to love with this cast and the story about an English underworld we might not have seen before on television, but have seen elsewhere.

    Unfortunately what we are served up by first time film director Adam Smith and first time screenwriter Alastair Siddons is a pastiche of a film culled from better gangster films such as “Snatch” (2000), “Face” (1997) and too others too numerable to mention. In my mind this is a film that looks and feels like a project and something to complete, especially when you have Fassbender and Gleeson interested in doing your film.

    In respect to this film and future like films it would be wise for both Fassbender and Gleeson to choose their projects more wisely, and maybe do some research on the director or storyline first. Both of these actors are great, always entertaining to watch on whatever they are in, but maybe they need to take a breath, as well as realising that they only reputations they hurt are there own.

    This is not to say this is a terrible film but not one worth going out to the movies for, in the old days this may have been a title that would be considered a high ‘B’ title and would be released direct to a video/DVD rental store, it would then be worth a watch but for now I would say wait until you can watch on Netflix or some other provider when it shows up.

  • DVD Review: “The Family Fang” (2015)

    DVD Review: “The Family Fang” (2015)

    “The Family Fang” (2015)

    Drama/Comedy

    3-stars

    Running Time: 105 minutes

    Directed by: Jason Bateman

    Featuring: Jason Bateman, Nicole Kidman and Christopher Walken

    Baxter Fang: “Don’t be afraid. Own the moment. If you’re in control then the chaos will happen around you and not to you.”

     

    Jason Bateman had such success at an early age as a kind of alternative to Michael J. Fox it may have been easy for him to have been dismissed, with him fading into obscurity. What he has done however is take roles as supporting characters in both drama and comedy’s, with the upshot that he has also slipped into leading man roles as well. He is so versatile that it looks easy and so he has added more strings to his bow, directing being one of them. This is his second directing effort after the excellent “Bad Words” (2013) and this is a heartfelt comedy/drama that finds him with a nice supporting cast with him upping his own game in all departments.

    The film is primarily about Annie and Baxter, the adult children of the controversial husband and wife conceptual performance art couple famous for their quirky macabre public performances, have never got over the fact that their parents kept using them during their childhood in their often gory and disturbing satirical public performances. They often clash with their now elderly parents over this and blame them for their problems in their adult life. However, the two become worried when the police advise them know that their parents have gone missing during their trip outside of town. The brother considers the possibility that something horrible might have happened to them, but the sister is convinced that it’s just another one of their stupid games or twisted conceptual performances. She convinces him that they should go and look for them themselves.

    As with most American independent movies as well as Jason Batemans last film as director, “Bad Words” (2013), the central commonality is the choice and performance of the actors – and “The Family Fang” is no different. The central performances are simply flawless and you can see why these performers are some of the most in demand characters actors in film today.. Bateman has of late been the straight man in many comedic roles, but here we find him playing characters without a hint if irony, as well as seeing what middle age holds for him and his family. I really enjoy seeing Nicole Kidman in these character roles where she is always original and heartfelt; I think this is her real strength and look forward to many more years of scene stealing. Christopher Walken has always had a way with dialogue and here he uses his gravitas in a way I have not seen in some time – just a great technique in his work as always. Among the uniformly terrific supporting cast, Harris Yulin is memorable as the Fangs’ art school mentor and the pawn in one of their first major statement pieces.

    As a second time director Bateman has had to learn how to take a plot and narrative that express very different themes as well as aspects of storytelling, such as moving the story back and forth through time whilst making sure plot ties together in an organic way. The film could have been all melodramatic and sentimental but I believe he skims these to transcend what could have been quite a self indulgent movie.It must help him that he has surrounded himself both in front and behind the camera with professionals who know exactly what is required of them.

    For people who enjoyed Kevin Wilson’s book, this faithful adaptation will be a welcome reminder of its “beautiful spontaneity,” to quote from the Fang manifesto. And for those unfamiliar with it, the film will provide reasons to seek it out.

    This excellent film is out now on DVD.

  • DVD Review: “Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk” (2016)

    DVD Review: “Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk” (2016)

    “Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk” (2016)

    Drama

    3-stars

    Running Time: 113 minutes

    Directed by: Ang Lee

    Featuring: Joe Alwyn, Kristen Stewart, Garrett Hedlund, Vin Diesel, Steve Martin and Chris Tucker

    Billy: “It’s sort of weird, being honored for the worst day of your life.”

    Ang Lee has had a most interesting career so far, his latest film “Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk” (2016) is a welcome addition to his oeuvre as it does a few things the director is best known for, breaking new ground technologically while telling a very personal story about aspects of American life. In my opinion an outsider’s point of view can be more revealing than someone telling a story from within the eye of the storm. This is Lee’s first film since the incredible 3D spectacle “Life of Pi” (2012) for which he was awarded the Best Directing Oscar in 2012 – a worthy achievement and a bit of a make up award for him not winning in 2005 for “Brokeback Mountain” (2005).

    “Billy Lynn’s Long Halftime Walk” revolves around the titular Billy Lynn (Joe Alwyn), a 19-year old Army specialist from Texas, is caught on camera dragging his wounded Sergeant Virgil “Shroom” Breem (Vin Diesel) to safety during an intense firefight in Iraq. This act of courage quickly ascends him and his unit, incorrectly designated “Bravo Squad” by the media, to celebrity status, beginning a weeks-long nationwide victory tour culminating in a Dallas Cowboys Thanksgiving home game halftime show.

    The film is light on plot but has a narrative that sees the story take place over a few hours but cuts back and forth from the previous action in Iraq as well as Billy visiting home with his sister (Kristen Stewart) and the rest of his family. This makes the film intensely personal but also feels like a bit of a mess. We don’t really feel a kinship with Billy at all and I am not sure if this is because of Lee or the limited talent of the lead actor.

    Lee does attempt to deal with larger ideas and themes and so we are witness to what was the public perception of the war in the Middle East, as well as post traumatic stress from many sides, loyalty what it means to be a man and a hero, the way in which people are perceived and the inherit greed that exists in the US.

    Like all Ang Lee films he seems to attract some amazing actors who want to appear in any capacity, this film is no different, with Kristen Stewart, Garrett Hedlund, Vin Diesel, Steve Martin and Chris Tucker all making appearance in very different roles, that some are not known for. In fact the roles are so supporting that they may have been quite bland in lesser talents, so it is quite nice seeing these actors flitting in and out of the film.

    The film itself used an unprecedented shooting and projection frame rate of 120 frames per second in 3D at 4K HD resolution. It is the first feature film ever to be shot in such a high frame rate, over twice the previous record (Peter Jackson’s 2012 “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey”, shot at 48 fps) and five times the standard speed of 24 fps. Lee undertook such a bold step after reading the book since he wanted the film to be an “immersive” and “realistic” experience of the reality and emotional journey of soldiers.

    After working on “Life of Pi” (2012), Lee wanted to up his use of technology in filmmaking, especially in terms of frame rate, since he thought pursuing a higher frame would help him find answers. So while Lee did use this frame rate there is only one projector at the moment that can handle this film and that is in New York where the film premiered to one audience as part of a festival there.

    The film does look good on Blu-ray but because the shot selection is directly tied in with the frame rate and how Lee wanted to present the film it does not feel natural, particularly when the characters are addressing the audience directly which happens a lot.

    While I love most of Lee’s work this was a bit of a difficult watch and in the end is not as rewarding as I would have liked. This film is out now on DVD and Blu-ray and is worthy of a viewing but I would not purchase – I would not see any advantage in multiple viewings.

  • Film Review: “Kong: Skull Island” (2017)

    Film Review: “Kong: Skull Island” (2017)

    “Kong: Skull Island” (2017)

    Action

    3-stars

    Running Time: 118 minutes

    Directed by: Jordan Vogt-Roberts

    Featuring: Tom Hiddleston, Samuel L. Jackson, John Goodman, Brie Larson, Jing Tian, Toby Kebbell, John Ortiz, Corey Hawkins, Jason Mitchell, Shea Whigham, Thomas Mann, Terry Notary, and John C. Reilly

    Hank Marlow: “That’s Kong, he’s king around here. Kong’s a pretty good king. Keeps to himself mostly, but you don’t go into someone’s house and start dropping bombs unless you’re picking a fight.”

    Here we have the second in a proposed meeting of the monsters movie series that will continue with “Godzilla 2” (2018) and then the hopeful “Godzilla vs Kong” at some later date. This is the reintroduction of King Kong and the Skull Island some may remember from the Peter Jackson directed “King Kong” (2005) which was a dream project from him that he was rewarded with after the “Lord of the Rings” (1999 – 2002) albeit from a different studio. What I liked about this film “Kong: Skull Island” (2017), is that it doesn’t necessarily ignore Jacksons film even though this Kong is much larger.

    The movie is set in 1973, where a secretive organization known as Monarch finds an island that is shrouded in mystery and identified as the origin for new species. The resulting expedition to the island reveals that a giant monstrous ape named Kong is at the center of a battle for dominion over the island, against the apex predators, nicknamed “Skullcrawlers”, responsible for wiping out his kind. As the expedition crew makes plans to fight for survival against Kong and the other monsters on the island, some of them begin to see that Kong is worth saving.

    Its hard to talk about this film without first acknowledging its stellar cast that starts with the always charismatic Tom Hiddleston, better know to international movie audiences as Loki from the Marvel Cinematic Universe, who is trying to branch out here in another A typical blockbuster movie. Brie Larson who is making her first appearance post her Best Actress Oscar win as a photographer trying to search for the truth is not bad either – she seems to be warming up for her next big screen role in the MCU. The always excellent John Goodman, John C. Reilly and Samuel L. Jackson, who once again steal any films they appear in, round out the rest of the cast and here they all take turns in the spotlight.

    This is a big dumb and most of all fun movie, that kicks off the Summer Movie Season early this year with a bang. The film has a lot of CGI in it as you would expect but part of it feels rushed with no real story for all the promises of the marketing and early trailers.

    The one major let down for me was that there was no real plot that all the characters (and there are way too many( could hang on to. The one thing positive thing that both “King Kong” (2005) and “Godzilla” (2014) had going for them was at least a plot that had goals, which involved all the major characters. At some point I was wondering why did they even come to the island if there was no end goal – they didn’t have the equipment to get anything off the island so what was the point? There are clues in the names of the characters but i felt this was an afterthought as once again there was no payoff. Did they hire well known actors just to kill them off – which mostly happens off screen thanks to the PG rating.

    One of my favorite things about this film is that it is set in 1973, just as the Nixon government was coming to an end in one of the most deplorable ways possible, and frightening ones as well. That this time in US and global politics reflects what we are now going through and that safeguards that existed in the 1970s seem to have all but disappeared in this new political climate shows just how much things have changed. In those heady days when it was the fifth estates job to hold a mirror up to those in power and hold them accountable we now see the hobbling of these same people by the government itself – something that will spread if we allow it.

    It is actually quite canny of Larsen to play a reporter in this film and for her to be identified as someone who is looking for the truth amongst men and men who are focused on either destruction or taking advantage of something they don’t understand at all – as well as exploiting for evil the natural resources they don’t have any right interfering with. These kinds of issues will become all too real and relevant as we move through the next few years and see what kind of planet we are going to be left with after a Leftish government that will influence world affairs.

    I recommend this for all people that love monster movies as well as action films that seem to be over the top and aim for a grand spectacle with little plot but a lot of scene stealing by CGI creatures that we will see again the next few years.

  • Film Review: “A Streetcat Named Bob” (2017)

    Film Review: “A Streetcat Named Bob” (2017)

    “A Streetcat Named Bob” (2017)

    Drama/Comedy

    images

    Running Time: 103 minutes

    Directed by: Roger Spottiswoode

    Featuring: Luke Treadaway, Ruta Gedmintas, Joanne Froggatt, Anthony Head and Bob the Cat as himself

    “Cats are notoriously picky about who they like. And if a cat doesn’t like its owner it will go and find another one. Cats do that all the time.”

    ― James Bowen, A Street Cat Named Bob: And How He Saved My Life

    We live our lives surrounded by the natural world that includes many aspects of life – one of these aspects is the connection we have with animals of all different types, some of the most common are cats and dogs – as well as birds and fish. For some reason we feel the need to draw lines that say we like certain animals more or less, for example I had been a dog person most of my life until I met my wife and we both fell in love with cats – so I guess I am a cat person. Some people have to wait their entire lives until they realise the wonders an animal can bring to into their personal situations, this is one of those stories.

    Movies are full of animals both in animated films, documentaries and narrative film. Some of these films are uplifting some are heartbreaking and I can say now that if you have even a small place in your heart for any animal then “A Street Cat Named Bob” (2017) is for you. Based on the book of the same name this tells the story of James Bowen and Bob, his cat and friend.

    Homeless and a recovering drug addict, James Bowen (Luke Treadaway) is running low on his luck. He’s given a last chance to turn his life around by his support worker, Val (Joanne Froggatt), who helps him to finally be given his own flat to live in. As James attempts to build a life and future for himself by busking in Covent Garden, he struggles to gain any traction as the London crowd passes him by. Whilst in the bath one day, he hears a break-in and finds a ginger cat in his kitchen eating the corn flakes. Thinking it belongs to a neighbor, he sets out to find the owner but with no luck concluding that it must be a stray. Over the next few days, the cat continues to linger on the estate, and James discovers an infected wound on the animal’s leg. He takes the cat to be treated by a charity vet and from that point onwards, the two lives become entwined.

    This is the perfect film for people who want to watch the arc of a character  who is at their lowest, cannot see a way forward and is given one break, that leads to something special for everyone, that has something positive to give in life and towards a man, James, who is trying to beat one of the most destructive addictions in our society. Of course he is also helped but the arrival of an animal that could be classed as independent needs as much love and companionship as he does – for all he knows Bob is at his lowest as well. It is a pretty remarkable true story and yes there are embellishments but the ending is happy and true and extremely inspirational. I found myself looking up both characters achievements after the film, it was pretty great to find out their stories.

    Luke Treadaway as James leads the film and his co star for most of the film, Bob played mostly by the real Bob the Cat from the real story and multiple books. It would have been the easy option for director Roger Spottiswoode to have the human cast upstaged by Bob but this does not happen, and Treadaway shines in a role that he must not only act in but also sing and play guitar – and for most of it Bob just looks relaxed and calm knowing he is the star of the movie. Ruta Gedmintas, Joanne Froggatt and Anthony Head are the supporting cast as James neighbor, social worker and father who all throw in advice, support and love where needed but at different times that lead us to the fact that this is not a singular story but one that illustrates that family is not always defined by blood.

    This is actually a great family film with touches of social realism and how something simple can changes lives. It also speaks to the power of family, the generosity of strangers as well the ability to change the path of ones life. This is highly recommended.

  • Film Review: “John Wick: Chapter 2” (2017)

    Film Review: “John Wick: Chapter 2” (2017)

    “John Wick: Chapter 2” (2017)

    images

    Action/Thriller

    Running Time: 122 minutes

    Directed by: Chad Stahelski

    Featuring: Keanu Reeves, Common, Laurence Fishburne, Riccardo Scamarcio, Ruby Rose, John Leguizamo and Ian McShane

    The Bowery King: “He’s offered seven million dollars for your life. seven million dollars is a lot of money, Mr. Wick.”

    John Wick: “So I guess you have a choice. Do you want a war or do you want to just give me a gun?”

    The Bowery King: “Somebody please get this man a gun!” 

    The first “John Wick” (2014) was a surprise but modest hit at the box office and had just enough of following so that this ramped up sequel was produced and so far had been the critical and box office hit that will probably lead to a Chapter three, or at least we can hop. The first film also saw the return of Keanu Reeves to a high profile action film the seemed to be what audiences were waiting for, and he was excellent as the single minded hit man seeking revenge for the death of his puppy, a gift from his now deceased wife.

    “John Wick 2: Chapter 2” takes place shortly (about four days) after the events of the first film when Wick (Keanu Reeves) tracks down his stolen 1969 Boss 429 Mustang at a chop shop owned by Abram Tarasov (Peter Stormare), brother of Viggo and uncle of Iosef, the main antagonists from the first movie. John dispatches Tarasov’s men in a violent fight that heavily damages his car. He then spares Tarasov under the auspices of “peace” and returns home.

    It is revealed that, years ago, to complete his “impossible task” – allowing him to retire and marry Helen – John asked D’Antonio for help. As a form of contract, D’Antonio swore John to a “Marker”, an unbreakable promise symbolized by a “blood oath” medallion. D’Antonio presents the medallion to demand services from John, but John refuses, claiming that he is “retired”. In retaliation, D’Antonio destroys John’s house with a grenade launcher.

    Winston (Ian McShane), the owner of the Continental hotel in New York City, reminds John that if he rejects the Marker, he will be violating one of the two unbreakable rules of the underworld: no killing on Continental ground, and Markers must be honored. John accepts his duty and meets with D’Antonio, who tasks him with assassinating his sister Gianna D’Antonio).

    To say that this film ups the ante in terms of action, violence, story and world building is an understatement, it is refreshing to find a sequel that not only increases the action and violence but also offers more of a peek into this hyper stylized universe of assassin’s that seem to populate this world.

    Screenwriter Derek Kolstad and director Chad Stahelski return from the first film to really get their teeth into the story along with star Keanu Reeves who seems really invested in the character of John Wick, as well as the way in which he embraces a philosophy that defines the world he inhabits. I believe it only assists the new film that there is a continuation of talent that moves from film to film to keep the idea of a what a John Wick film is and can be as well as how the films keep getting produced.

    The action in this new chapter has been upped as has the body count, there has also been more humor and over the top scenarios introduced just to make sure we all know that this movie is not only fictional but at times absurd in the way it treats what Wick is able to do and get away with. Both this film and the previous one have to be the greatest pure action films of the past ten years at least. They both do what primal action films at their best do, they keep moving forward and never let up, even if you think they are.

    The star here is of course Keanu Reeves, who has proven time and time again he is a force to be reckoned with, particularly where you may have a tendency to underrate him. His best performances have been in films where you may think he is not the right choice; even those films that may have been unsuccessful have more than likely aged very well. Reeves has a knack for choosing not just good but great projects to be a part of. The ‘Wick’ films are no different and with the possible announcement of a third it may mean that Reeves will have his own franchise that is not overblown with ego and special effects. One of the great things about these films is the use of CGI, there is very little which is refreshing for action films in this new millennium.

    The supporting cast sees holdovers from the first film making very welcome reappearances, Ian McShane playing Winston the father figure/mentor to Wick who offers advice as well as offering exposition to the audience, Lance Reddick as Charon the hotel manager and all round cool guy, he adds dog minder to this film and the always smart ass John Leguizamo as the mechanic and finder Aurelio. The addition of Common as fellow assassin and protagonist Cassian, Ruby Rose as mute bodyguard Ares and Riccardo Scamarcio as master manipulator Santino D’Antonio all add real value in the new characters they are portraying.

    If you enoyed the first film then this is a step up in the way this world operates, it offers more of a glimpse behind the curtain that John Wick operate in as well as broadening the existing characters and seamlessly introducing new ones. Of course the standout is Reeves but kudos need to be paid to the producers, writer and director for all the new characters and the casting of those characters. It feels to me like there are no miss-steps or issues at all. This is the action film we have been promised for years, go and see as soon as possible.

    “John Wick: Chapter 2” is out this week in cinemas only.

    JOHN WICK: CHAPTER 2 (2017) John Wick (Keanu Reeves) and The Bowery King (Laurence Fishburne)
  • Film Review: “Fist Fight” (2017)

    Film Review: “Fist Fight” (2017)

    “Fist Fight” (2017)

    Comedy

    stars-2-5

     

    Running Time: 91 minutes

    Directed by: Richie Keen

    Featuring: Ice Cube, Charlie Day, Christina Hendricks, Jillian Bell and Tracy Morgan

    Strickland: [From red-band trailer] “Snitches get stitches.”

    In recent years Ice Cube has been teaming up with veteran comedians (Cedric the Entertainer, Kevin Hart, Jonah Hill, Mike Epps and many others) in fish out of water films that have proven him to be an able straight man in most situations. To be fair the films have been successful business propositions but have failed to garner any real critical success – I assume he was hoping to change that with a high concept idea and a very successful foil in Charlie Day. As a talent Charlie Day is best known for the ensemble TV comedy “Its always sunny in Philadelphia” (2001 – present) where he not only appears onscreen but also co-produces and writes many episodes, oh yes and even writing music for the show. However their teaming up here does not lead to comedy gold.

    “First Fight” is set on the last day of high school where there has been chaos from the students’ senior pranks. Andy Campbell (Charlie Day) was teaching English to the kids but was unamused by the kids’ pranks from the drawing board. History teacher Ron Strickland (Ice Cube) was unamused as well once he witnessed a student turn off the TV and VCR with his smartphone app. Strickland noticed the prank again and used an axe to destroy the boy’s table, which horrified Campbell. Both Campbell and Strickland were brought to Principal Tyler (Dean Norris) for the matter. Campbell convinced Tyler that Strickland started the outburst, for which Strickland was fired. Strickland threatened Campbell for a fist fight sometime after school for making him lose his job.

    I am not going to lie this is not one of those classic comedies that takes a central goofy idea, say “Dodgeball” (2009) and turns it into a must see, now classic – with amazing turns by a great supporting cast that could anchor their own films – and have. What this film does is take quite a good idea and saddle it with a lumpy script that seems to go nowhere – it does however have some great comedic characters actors trying to save the film with their own branded humor, in particular 30 Rock’s, Tracey Morgan who steals the film for the time he is in it.

    Richie Keen who is making his feature film debut as director has great comedic chops from his stint on “Its always sunny in Philadelphia” (and many other sitcoms) while Day is porting over his ‘Charlie’ character to some effect, but like on that show it can wear a little. Ice Cube here is playing for laughs but even that cannot save the film from the script.

    If you want to chuckle in a film and like character driven humor, you could do worse than this film – but I would wait for the DVD, Blu-ray or streaming release.

  • Film Review: “Logan” (2017)

    Film Review: “Logan” (2017)

    “Logan” (2017)

    Action/Thriller

    images

    Running Time: 135 minutes

    Directed by: James Mangold

    Featuring: Hugh Jackman, Patrick Stewart, Richard E. Grant, Boyd Holbrook, Stephen Merchant, Dafne Keen, Eriq La Salle, Elise Neal and Elizabeth Rodriguez

    Charles Xavier: “Logan, what did you do?”

    Logan: “The world is not the same as it was, Charles. Mutants… they’re gone now.”

    Never has one movie owed more to another movie than in this case, “Logan” (2017) owes a huge debt of to not only “Deadpool” (2016) but to Ryan Reynolds as well. “Deadpool” was the first R-rated (an American term) comic film to do huge global box office as well as getting rave reviews and setting up an erstwhile franchise it also broke new ground in terms of what a comic book movie could be. Both of these movies incorporate their own meta meanings into their plots as well as pushing the narratives of both along.

    “Logan” (2017),  as the title suggests seems to be distancing this current film from the two previous efforts, the average “The Wolverine” (2013) and the supremely inferior ”X-Men Origins: Wolverine” (2009), all three spin-offs from the X-Men series of films. A very wise move for a number of reasons, if you have seen the previews you will see why – this is a very different comic book and Wolverine film, it not only takes place in an all too real future it also embraces its own pop culture narrative – in its own unique way of course.

    This is also the long touted last time Hugh Jackman and Patrick Stewart will play Logan/Wolverine and Professor X/Professor Charles Xavier in this comic book cinematic universe. It is fitting this has come to pass for no better reason than this is one of the greatest comic films put to screen – in fact I will take the previous two efforts if I am left with this one – it shines a shadow over all the X-movies, except maybe X2, still the one to beat.

    “Logan” is set in the near future, one in which no new mutants have been born in two decades. As their numbers dwindled, Professor X’s (Patrick Stewart) dreams of a new stage in evolution slowly died. Logan (Hugh Jackman) is scraping a living as a limo driver in the town on the Mexican border and hustling for medication that he takes out south to a remote, makeshift home he shares with Caliban (Stephen Merchant), nursemaid to the infirm Professor X. Logan attempts to hide from the world and his legacy. However, when a mysterious woman (Elizabeth Rodriguez) asks for Logan’s help with Laura (Dafne Keen), a young mutant being pursued by dark forces, he is drawn back into action despite his hopelessness.

    First up Hugh Jackman and Patrick Stewart nail their roles, as usual, but it always seems there is something more in them this time, maybe because they are both playing super heroes on the downside of their lives, for very different reasons. However, as is the case with these type of films the supporting cast really make the film that much better and believable, here we find the comic actor Stephen Merchant shine as Caliban a mutant with the power to sense other mutants and the incredible Dafne Keen as Laura (or if you like X-23) – Dafne is amazing and steals the film as a mutant being hunted by her creators. It is one of the more memorable cinematic debuts ever and in particular in a blockbuster.

    The film is directed and co-written by James Mangold, who also directed “The Wolverine” (2013), who I feel had some unfinished business with the character and ably puts his stamp on this film. Mangold who has directed both big and small budgeted films acquits himself here nicely. As you watch the film you feel you are in the right hands, it is also obvious Mangold had a vision and an ending he wanted to get to without a trace of irony to be found. Make no bones about it this was a tough assignment for all involved but Mangold has not had an easy run of it over the past few years – however with this film he has knocked it out of the park. Onscreen it is obvious that everyone wanted to make the best movie possible and wanted to round out this trilogy on the very strongest notes, and they succeed in ways few films do. They embrace the flaws of the previous installments and make Logan a three-dimensional character that feels like he has nothing to lose, has fought the good fight and in his mind has lost everything.

    There is so much going on in this film, there are issues of serious mental illness, as well as what happens when an entire way of life disappears, are there second acts truly for people who have lost everything? I don’t think there has ever been a comic book movie like this, one that explores what it means to be all-powerful in one life and then be hobbled in another. This film is so much about the future of a race of people that have been pushed to the brink of extinction and are brought back by the goodwill of a hero who is wiling to sacrifice everything for the good of the many. When the X-Men were created they were an allegory of the civil rights movement and over the years have represented other minorities in US and later in international culture – more than any other comic before or since they spoke to the perceived outsiders in popular culture. Only now could we say we need a film like this for the masses than ever before with the hostile environment that exists within not only US culture but seemingly the entire Western World.

    I admit it is difficult to watch both Logan and Charles in both cases broken men, both physically paying for their past deeds and actions. I have grown up with these characters both on paper and onscreen, in previous efforts never once do you feel there are real stakes in terms of their success and survival no matter who they face, Apocalypse, Magneto or anyone else. In this film there is everything to play for, we even see Logan get badly beaten by some thugs at the beginning of the film, so the very real question is what happens to a broken down old mutant. I will leave you to discover this, but I assure you this film is original in almost every way.

    This is the supposed last outing for both Jackman and Stewart so that should be reason eboug ti see this film on theatres, it is not the only one which is great, this is a fantastic film and I would rate it in the top 5 of comic book films, it is that great. We are being given the best X-Men film yet and this deserves to be seen on the big screen. All the character’s are drawn well, the action is incredible and there are at leat three or four surprises you will not see coming. Go see now!

  • Blu-ray Review: “Hell or High Water” (2016)

    Blu-ray Review: “Hell or High Water” (2016)

    “Hell or High Water ” (2016)

    Thriller

    Running Time: 120 minutes

    Director: David Mackenzie

    Featuring: Ben Foster, Chris Pine and Jeff Bridges

    T-Bone Waitress: “I’ve been working here for 44 years. Ain’t nobody ever ordered nothing but a T-Bone steak and baked potato. Except one time, this asshole from New York ordered a trout, back in 1987. We ain’t got no goddamned trout.”

    Old Man: “You fellas robbin’ the bank?”

    Tanner Howard: “What’s it look like, old man?”

    Old Man: “But you ain’t Mexicans.”

    Having heard early reviews of this movie I had been looking forward to watching this film for some time, and it did not let me down, from the rugged depressed landscapes, to the real life characters, as well as the performances from all the  actors. The inhabit their roles like they were born to them with a deserved mention of Chris Pine in a role that he has been waiting for a long time. I will mention him again later but he is a revelation in this role, and i would like to see him rewarded for it.

    Plot and narrative wise “Hell or High Water” is pretty tight, it takes place in West Texas, where we find divorced father Toby Howard (Chris Pine) and his ex-con brother Tanner (Ben Foster) carrying out early morning robberies of two branches of the (fictional) Texas Midlands Bank. They plan to commit several small-scale bank robberies over the course of a few days. Though the robberies are well planned, Tanner’s wild nature leads to him taking unnecessary risks. It is revealed that their mother has recently died, leaving their ranch in debt due to a reverse mortgage, which, if not paid off in a few days, will result in foreclosure on the property. Toby is determined to pay off the mortgage and, because oil has recently been discovered on the land, he plans to sell the oil rights in order to pay for a comfortable life for his estranged sons.

    While on the run they do not appear on either the local polices or FBI’s radar because of the low amount taken but they do come to the attention of two Texas Rangers, Marcus Hamilton (Jeff Bridges) and Alberto Parker (Gil Birmingham), are sent to catch the robbers. Hamilton, who is close to retirement, quickly determines the brothers’ methods and personalities.

    From here the film really gets going and the description of the plot will end here to avoid any possible spoilers but this film will not end how you might think – after all many of the characters have been raised in similar environments over an eighty year period and have seen their homes and economy change so much.

    There are three main elements of this film I absolutely loved and they are in no particular order, the transportation of a classic film noir into a socially conscious Western Neo Noir that captivates with its story and takes into account the real stresses on human life in dealing with their jobs, lifestyles, choices made and to make as well the human condition. The frailty each of us faces in our daily lives – it is also about choices and the consequences of those choices and where we are led by them.

    The direction is simple but effective using the natural surrounds of the country and representing Texas in a kind of backward way where people say what they think and everyone has a gun – but there is always someone with a bigger one.

    Finally the key to the believability and success of this film relies on the four main characters led I believe by the brilliant Chris Pine fresh of playing Captain Kirk it is great to see him reacting without special effects and playing someone real who has a family and motivations many people can understand especially in poor rural town s in the US. Jeff Bridges and Ben Foster give their normal great character performances but I do believe it is Pine’s show and it is fantastic.

    I recommend this without hesitation. Out now on DVD and Blu-ray.

    Features Include:

    • Enemies Forever: The Characters of Hell or High Water (HD, 13:36) – An EPK that basically goes over the entire plot of the film, with interviews gauging the filmmaker’s and cast’s interpretations.
    • Visualizing the Heart of America (HD, 9:28) – A look at the locations found in the film.
    • Damaged Heroes: The Performances of Hell or High Water (HD, 12:24) – A look at the actors featured in this film and what they bring to their roles.
    • Red Carpet Premiere (HD, 1:53) – A brief clip mixing footage from the Austin premiere with clips from the film.
    • Filmmaker Q&A (HD, 29:51) – All four lead actors and director David Mackenzie speak about the film, following a screening at Arclight Hollywood in the Cineramadome.
  • DVD Review: “Picket Fences” (1992 – 1996)

    DVD Review: “Picket Fences” (1992 – 1996)

    “Picket Fences” (1992 – 1996)

    images

    Drama

    88 Episodes

    Created by: David E. Kelley

    Featuring: Tom Skerritt, Kathy Baker, Costas Mandylor, Lauren Holly, Holly Marie Combs, Zelda Rubinstein, Adam Wylie, Fyvush Finkel, Ray Walston, Kelly Connell, Don Cheadle, Lisa Chess, Justin Shenkarow

    While David E. Kelley is widely known for his successful legal shows (“The Practice”, “Ally McBeal”, “Boston Legal” and writing on “LA Law”), the producer’s shows away from the courtroom, such as “Boston Public” and especially “Picket Fences”, were also well-recieved by both critics and fans alike. Although the series did have some trouble with ratings, the show’s fans remained devoted, as the series ran for four seasons from 1992-1996 on CBS, winning 14 Emmys and 1 Golden Globe in the four years on-air.

    The series follows the lives of the residents of the small town of Rome, Wisconsin, where weird things happen, including cows’ udders exploding and a spate of people turning up dead in freezers. Struggling to maintain order in the community is Sheriff Jimmy Brock (Tom Skerritt). Sheriff Brock is married to the town doctor, Jill (Kathy Baker), his second wife. They attempt to raise their three children, Kimberly (Holly Marie Combs) (from Jimmy’s first marriage to Lydia), Matthew (Justin Shenkarow) and Zachary (Adam Wylie). Max (Lauren Holly) and Kenny (Costas Mandylor) are impulsive and somewhat immature sheriff’s deputies.

    Although Baker and Skeritt offered strong performances in their roles, “Picket” is another example of a Kelly-produced series that attracted a strong ensemble cast and was able to spread the focus around to all the characters. Aside from the sheriff and his wife, there’s Judge Bone (a terrific Ray Walston), Deputies Kenny and Max (played respectively by Costas Mandylor and Lauren Holly) and lawyer Douglas Wambaugh (Fyvush Finkle).

    Bombastic lawyer Douglas Wambaugh (Fyvush Finkel) usually irritated Judge Henry Bone (Ray Walston). Wambaugh refused to hear any confessions of guilt from his clients as he feared that it would only stand in the way of adequately defending them in court and Bone’s rulings seemed to be directed more by his own moral compass than by point of law. After several prosecutors came and went, Don Cheadle joined the cast as John Littleton. Kelly Connell played medical examiner Carter Pike (who was regularly begging to be deputized) and Zelda Rubenstein portrayed police dispatcher Ginny Weedon.

    The show dealt with unusual topics for prime-time television such as abortion, incest, homophobia and LGBT adoption, trans sexuality, racism, belief in God, medical ethics, polygamy, polyamory, adolescent sexuality, date rape, cryonics, the Holocaust, shoe fetishism, masturbation, animal sacrifice, spontaneous human combustion, and constitutional rights.

    Picket Fences is a show that is just as enjoyable today as I’m sure it was when I was twelve years old and it first started airing. The storylines are serious yet fun and that is what keeps the show entertaining from one episode to the next. The cases are really far out there sometime and each one has a gimmick to it instead of being a normal shut and close murder or robbery. One of the best cases in this season and one of the strangest is “The Frog Man.” There is no rhyme or reason as to why anyone would leave frogs at the scene of all their crimes as their so-called calling card. It’s a scene right out of Home Alone and the Wet Bandits.

    The creativity just continues to flow with each different, and absurd, criminal or motive. But the good thing is that there is continuity in the show, but not too much of it. The crimes don’t carry over to each episode but are solved by the end of whatever one it starts in. Yet anything that happens to someone in town or the Brock family will be mentioned in the next or future episodes. For instance, the mayoral race actually runs for about three or four episodes with bringing up past occurrences of why certain candidates bowed out of the election or just couldn’t continue. It was quite enjoyable to watch everything in order and actually remember back a few episodes when something was mentioned and you can just be like, “Oh yeah, that was when the maid stopped being a mute and said murder!”

    The Video

    The episodes are shown in 1.33:1 Full Frame format and look perfectly fine. Doesn’t seem as if much was done to tweak the colors or anything during the transfer to DVD from when the episodes originally aired. But things look bright when they need to be and never are scenes too dark too see; so all works out nicely.

    The Audio

    The episodes are heard in Dolby Digital 5.1 sound and also sound good. Everything can be heard clearly and crisply without any sort of interference at all. As with the video though, there is no apparent upgrade in the sound as to when you would see the episodes in reruns.

    Out now.

    APN ADVANCE FOR SUNDAY, FEB. 9–Actor Fyvush Finkel poses at the Edison Cafe inside the Edison Hotel in New York’s theater district Dec. 23, 1996. Finkel, who got his start as a 9-year-old child actor in the Yiddish theater in New York, is starring in his own Broadway show detailing that story, “From Second Avenue to Broadway.” (AP Photo/Kathy Willens)
  • Film Review: “Rings” (2017)

    Film Review: “Rings” (2017)

    “Rings” (2017)

    Horror

    Running Time: 107 minutes

    Directed by: F. Javier Gutiérrez

    Featuring: Matilda Lutz, Alex Roe, Johnny Galecki, Vincent D’Onofrio, Aimee Teegarden and Bonnie Morgan

    Holt: “I keep… thinking about this story. There’s this video that… kills you. Seven days after you watch it. The second it’s over… the phone rings. And this voice says…”

    Samara: [voiceover] “Seven days.”

    If only the best laid plans worked out perfectly then maybe this latest film in this long dormant horror franchise would be good, not a knock-off of the original American remake “The Ring” (2002), that had so much going for it – an up and coming actress, Naomi Watts, as well as a director who was about to break out, Gore Verbinksi. This was of course a remake of the Japanese Horror film of the same name, which was, at the time, one of the scariest films around. Now in 2017 we are lumbered with this hollow remark and no amount of scene stealing by the great Vincent D’Onofrio can help this movie come off as nothing more than a curio.

    “Rings” is primarily about college professor Gabriel who buys an old VCR, discovering a videotape trapped inside – you can guess what’s on the video. Elsewhere, Julia sees her boyfriend Holt off to college, but becomes concerned when he falls out of contact. She inspired to find him when a panicked girl, Skye, contacts her asking for Holt’s whereabouts. Julia meets Gabriel, following him to a private area of the college where a number of students are involved in an experiment involving the cursed video, watching and filming themselves, before passing the task to another person, called a “tail”.

    Holt arrives shortly after. Unwilling to let Holt die, Julia watches the video, experiencing a vision of a door, and a mark is burnt on her hand. Turning to Gabriel for help, he notices Julia’s copy of the video is larger than usual. She watches it, discovering new footage hinting at the fate of Samara’s body. Gabriel sends them to the town where she was cremated.

    Where to start? Its been fifteen years since the first film and I have to ask do the kids these days, who this film is aimed at, even know what a videotape is, and do they care? I would say no on both counts – and good on them!

    This is more a re-boot than a sequel, you might think judging from the relative success the re-booted Blair Witch Project had and the welcoming back of M. Night Shyamalan, that this would be a good idea. However, what both these success stories had going for was a great cast, a very good idea and excellent directors. Unfortunately “Rings” misses out on originality and an original vision for the film from the director – relying on jump scares, the almost exact same premise from the first film and characters that might act in an original manner. There are logical leaps at time that make no sense as well long exposition that again make for a very trite storyline.

    The director and writers seem assigned to the reboot rather than something that they should be doing, I hope the payday was worth it, because this film is entirely unsurprising and plays out just like you mighty think it would. It is odd because Akiva Goldsman is listed as a writer and he has a career that is not only Oscar worthy but he has started to direct his own projects. Unfortunately his recent career decisions seem to be a move in the wrong direction and he may be mirroring that other great hack, Damon Lindelof.

    It is not very often I recommend giving films a miss but if you want to save time and money then given this a big miss and go and see “Split” (2017) instead – or even better find the original (remake), “The Ring” (2002) instead and watch that – it has a better cast, story and director.

  • DVD Review: “Life, Animated” (2016)

    DVD Review: “Life, Animated” (2016)

    “Life, Animated” (2016)

    Documentary

    3-stars

    Running Time: 92 minutes

    Directed by: Roger Ross Williams

    Featuring: Jonathan Freeman, Gilbert Gottfried, Alan Rosenblatt, Owen Suskind, Ron Suskind

    Alan Rosenblatt: “The image of autism in the early 90’s was not terribly flattering.”

    Documentaries highlighting hardships in life are not new and the way people cope with these things are ripe subject matter, particularly when they are unique as well as having the potential ability to help others. In this case Roger Ross Williams takes a story about a man with autism who copes using Disney animated films as a conduit for life as well as communication with his family and potential friends and peers. This is a film well worth seeking out as well as meeting a family that are loving towards their son and brother, as well as coping with some pretty serious issues.

    Owen Suskind was a boy of considerable promise, until he developed autism at the age of three. As Owen withdrew into his silent state, his parents almost lost hope that he would find some way to meaningfully interact with his world. However, that way was found through animated films, especially those Walt Disney Pictures, which provided Owen a way to understand the world through its stories to the point of creating his own. This film covers the life of Owen and how he manages to become as functional as possible with the help of Disney and his families to the point of having his own life. However, Owen soon learns as well that there is more to real life than what Disney can illustrate in animation even as his family prepares itself for an uncertain future with him.

    This documentary is one of five nominated for Best Documentary at this years Academy Awards and while I see the appeal of the movie, I am not sure it is one of the best of the year. This may sound harsh but this is a very documentary but it has a few weaknesses that detract from the overarching original and inspirational story.

    As a film lover I have always been a fan of animated films and the Disney oeuvre of course stand out as milestones in the genre, they have since seen the challenge of other studios as well as the increased popularity of computer animation, the waning of the musical and now, in the past ten years, there has been a resurgence in their overall popularity. This film has many clips from the most popular and “classic” Disney films, while I watched I could not help but think this was a bit of an advert for their back catalog. Now, this is cynical and a little unfair but feelings are feelings.

    The crux and best part of this documentary are the first third where we learn about Owen and his family –the hardships and the breakthroughs. When watching a documentary about this and in particular with someone who has challenges with the outside work i always ask the question: “What happens when the parents are either unable to look after their child, or pass on?” In this case the parents are extremely pragmatic, and deal with Owen in a loving respectful way – I wont go into it here, as there are still story elements that are better revealed watching the film.

    The main issue is that in the last two thirds the film and film-maker seem to run out of plot and narrative devices and so its turns into a reality TV like documentary which for me is not compelling at all. My feeling was it was still enjoyable but with autism as the central hurdle with Owen I wondered if he would behave differently if the camera was not in his face all the time. There also seemed to be some obstacles that were “created” for atmosphere and to keep an audience interested – again that was my feeling.

    I would still recommend this documentary because it does show the power of film (which I love) and how it can be a transformative experience, and opens a new world in ways we don’t even realize. Movies have only been in existence for just over a hundred years, we as audiences and creative are still exploring and discovering what the moving image is capable of.

    This DVD is released on 9th March 2017.

  • Film Review: “Denial” (2017)

    Film Review: “Denial” (2017)

    “Denial” (2016)

    Drama

    images

    Running Time: 110 minutes

    Directed by: Mick Jackson

    Featuring: Rachel Weisz, Tom Wilkinson, Timothy Spall, Andrew Scott, Jack Lowden, Caren Pistorius and Alex Jennings

    Deborah Lipstadt: “Now, some people are saying that the result of this trial will threaten free speech. I don’t accept that. I’m not attacking free speech. On the contrary, I’ve been defending it against someone who wanted to abuse it. Freedom of speech means you can say whatever you want. What you can’t do is lie and expect not to be held accountable for it. Not all opinions are equal. And some things happened, just like we say they do. Slavery happened, the Black Death happened. The Earth is round, the ice caps are melting, and Elvis is not alive.”

    Films about the Jewish holocaust could be considered a staple of American cinema, you would think by now that any angle to approach them from would be exhausted. However one of the more fascinating aspects of the holocaust is the person that denies it ever happened. Then there are those people that are capable of making a living out of denying it ever happened. The first time heard about one of these people was in Errol Morris’ documentary “Mr. Death: The Rise and Fall of Fred A. Leuchter, Jr.” (1999), which is a great film that touches on some of the same subjects as “Denial” (2016).

    “Denial”, centers on Deborah Lipstadt (Rachel Weisz) an American professor of Holocaust studies whose speaking engagement is disrupted by David Irving (Timothy Spall), a scholar of Nazi Germany. He files a libel lawsuit in the UK against her and her publisher for declaring him a Holocaust denier in her books. In the United Kingdom the burden of proof in a libel case is on the accused. Therefore, it was up to Lipstadt and her legal team, led by Anthony Julius (Andrew Scott) as lead solicitor and Richard Rampton (Tom Wilkinson) as lead barrister, to prove that Irving specifically knew he was lying in claiming that the Holocaust did not occur.

    This is truly a fascinating film, I was not aware that this court case had taken place in our very recent history. Once the film starts you can see why the subject matter was so appealing to the director as well as the cast involved with this stellar piece of work.

    It is no coincidence that the film has a real and legitimate feeling to it as its veteran director Mick Jackson, cut his teeth on documentaries before becoming a very successful Hollywood director. His biggest commercial success was the Kevin Costner/Whitney Houston starrer “The Bodyguard” (1992) which meant he had the pick of projects for the next ten years – he has worked in a wide variety of mediums and genres. After a ten year break he has returned with “Denial” what may be his best and most personal piece of film making to date.

    As you would expect with a film that deals with some serious issues of truth and the type of prejudices that people have as well as the kinds of prejudices some people have to deal with it comes as no surprise that “Denial” boasts a truly stellar cast of veteran, established and new actors that help bring this story to life.

    Leading the film is the Oscar winning Rachel Weisz who embodies her part, fully committing to the role of being persecuted by someone who is not up to her level of education, with no room for pity for her antagonist in the form of Timothy Spall who plays the very evil and very real David Irving. To Spall’s credit he never plays the character in an arch or unreal way, in fact he gives Irving much humanity, perhaps more than he deserves. The other highlights in the cast are Tom Wilkinson and Andrew Scott who portray the legal counsel that have to prove that Irving is a liar and incorrect about all his assertions, at the same time legitimising Lipstadt.

    In many other years this film would have been a front runner at many of the awards ceremonies in 2016, it does fell like a throw back to film’s like “Inherit the Wind” (1960) or even “The Verdict” (1982) but for modern audiences it may seem tame compared to other dramas being shown and getting a lot of the acclaim in the past few years.

    Leading into watching this film I was not sure what to expect, on the surface it looks and feels like it could be a television movie of the week. Instead once you start watching, it becomes completely obvious that this is indeed a special film where there has been meticulous attention paid to the characters as well as the storyline. I recommend this highly to people with an interest in a good story, great acting and attention to detail.

    “Denial is released in New Zealand on the 13th April 2017.

  • Film Review: “Split” (2017)

    Film Review: “Split” (2017)

    “Split” (2017)

    images

    Thriller/Horror

    Running Time: 117 minutes

    Directed by: M. Night Shyamalan

    Featuring: James McAvoy, Anya Taylor-Joy, Haley Lu Richardson and Betty Buckley

    Dr. Fletcher: “An individual with multiple personalities can change their body chemistry with their thoughts.”

    M. Night Shyamalan has been making films for some time now and achieved huge world-wide success with his second film, “The Sixth Sense” (1999) but since then has had mixed critical and box office success. His follow up to “The Sixth Sense” was one of the first post-modern superhero films, “Unbreakable” (2000), one of the most under-rated films of the past twenty years. There is nothing wrong with that but he set the bar so high early on that when he makes a miss-step people seem to pile on in droves. I have enjoyed most of his films, he seemed to have a fresh take on the horror genre with “The Visit” (2015), a collaboration with the Blumhouse production company, and so it comes as no surprise he should revisit the genre with “Split” (2017) – this time mixing new talent with some experienced actors.

    The film finds three teenagers, Claire (Haley Lu Richardson), Marcia (Jessica Sula) and Casey (Anya Taylor-Joy), kidnapped by “Dennis”, one of the 23 split personalities inhabiting the body of Kevin Wendell Crumb (James McAvoy), a victim of childhood abuse with severe dissociative identity disorder, and held captive in a cellar. Kevin’s psychiatrist, Dr. Karen Fletcher (Betty Buckley), who believes that in such cases the psychological unbalance can cause physiological changes, is concerned to find an email from Kevin’s dominant personality, “Barry”, asking for a meeting. Over the years Kevin has been treated, he appears to be stable: all of his personalities sit in chairs in a room, waiting for their turn “in the light” (controlling the body), while “Barry” controls who gets to go in the light.

    At the heart of this film lies the performance of James McAvoy, if this movie has a chance of succeeding it is going to be through his performance of the various personalities that are going to be on display. Of course McAvoy has been in plenty of genre movies before, he knows how to play to the camera with extreme characters, it just so happens that here he plays more than one in one film. McAvoy has great skill in choosing how to play each personality, here he is ably assisted by Shyamalan who at this stage has no problems in directing characters with strong personalities while balancing the performance with the storyline, where required.

    Shyamalan, as I have mentioned is coming off an excellent last project so it makes a certain sense to see if he can not only revisit that well, but up the stakes in terms of both the storyline, actors and genre. He adjusts his directing style to the budget and the themes of this new movie. McAvoy is shot mostly in close up to intensify the changes in his behaviors and physical nature – which as the film movies on is revealef more and more. The full impact and nature of Kevin’s issues are not really revealed until the ending, and then the epilogue-like ending should be quite revealing for those that don’t know about it.

    The other central characters is Anya Taylor-Joy’s Casey, who as the film reveals has her own demons to deal with, which are all too real, we see these in flashbacks which come as she sleeps – so she is trying to push them down into her sub-conscious which is not working. As it turns out she and Kevin are both victims but deal with their emotions in a completely different manor. I will always find it amusing that many mental health issues are vilified and used to drive horror films to the precipice of the supernatural and then blur the lines – which is what happens here. Anya Taylor-Joy whilst having appeared in two other horror films, “The Witch” (2016) and “Morgan” (2016), this year alone, plays a very different part, not the girl being used or the killing machine, this time she is a hybrid of sorts that kicks ass when required.

    This is a genre film so it does follow certain tropes, which it actually needs to so that it can also subvert the very same genre, which it does.. at times. There is a sub-plot involving Kevin’s psychiatrist which seems to only act as an information dump about the condition, but in truth this could have been excised and tightened the pace up a bit – this is something that Shyamalan does do to seemingly fatten his films out, but it really is not needed.

    The film feels claustrophobic at its very heart both with the location of the abduction as well as the fact that Kevin is trapped in his own mind surrounded by voices that will not let up and must be confusing to him, much like his real life captives who are in a disoriented world of their own.

    One word of caution I would not read anything that would spoil this film,  whilst the word Shyamalan has been used as a verb to describe his endings this one does not have the twist you might be expecting from him, but there is still an ending that should satisfy the people that have long been fans of his films.

    This is an excellent genre film and I can honestly recommend this very highly and its worth going to see at the theatres, with a group of people and it wont hurt to have seen a few Shyamalan movies previously, I would recommend “Unbreakable” (2000).