Tag Archives: Movies

Insidious : Chapter 3  (2015)    70/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   70/100                                                                       97 Min        15

One of the more infamous horror franchises of recent times returns to the fore after a fairly lacklustre second outing, on this occasion taking us back in time to before the hauntings of the Lambert family with spirit medium Elise (Lin Shaye) the link between the films, as young Quinn Brenner (Stefanie Scott) seeks her guidance regarding contacting her recently deceased mother. Elise tells her to do one (I’m paraphrasing) as she’s haunted by an evil entity bent on destroying her whenever she enters the spirit world, the same one from the previous films, leaving poor Quinn to her own devices and to making the rookie error of contacting the wrong spirit who, unfortunately, decides to try and make her his own little pet in the nether realm. Though, in the spirit’s defence, Quinn does look good enough to eat, so you can’t blame a (dead) guy for trying, right?

Everything has been improved dramatically since the last outing with Leigh Whannell bolstering his screenplay this time around and indeed his appointment as director as well appears to have paid dividends as there are some genuinely scary moments and ideas in there, much like there was in the first one. It’s not as taught throughout as the original was – everything in part one was about turning the screw on the tension in tandem with the story unfolding, here there are multiple moments of ‘hmm, OK just have the dead thing scare the pretty girl and chuck her around the room for a bit, that’ll do’, and most of the support here is pretty lame, but Shaye and Scott do a great job and with more attention given to the story this time the franchise is (ahem) alive and kicking again.

Spy  (2015)    71/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   71/100                                                                     120 Min        15

Comedy adventure that reunites its main star Melissa McCarthy with her ‘Bridesmaids’ (11) and ‘The Heat‘ director Paul Feig, who this time also penned the screenplay and indeed will repeat this feat for the forthcoming Ghostbusters reboot with its all female central line up including, you guessed it, Melissa McCarthy. Susan Cooper (McCarthy) is the overqualified but shy CIA tech support for suave spy Bradley Fine (Jude Law), whom she is also hopelessly in love with, providing vital comms intel until something goes awry and she volunteers to go into the field to try and help catch dangerous criminal kingpin Rayna Boyanov (Rose Byrne) before she can offload a nuke for a load of cash, much to the chagrin of seasoned agent Rick Ford (Jason Statham) who is quite convinced he can handle things alone. Rather than the overdone routine of the ‘buddy’ film, the two agents effectively do go it alone, travelling to Paris for the first leg of their mission.

All the main players are on form here and the story is a lot of fun, full of the sort of improv zeal we can expect from McCarthy but also random inanity which works quite well, such as the spy headquarters having multiple random pest infestations every time we see it. The beginning chugs precariously along but it’s not long before kinks get ironed out and although there is on occasion a little too much patter and perhaps a few too many chase/action sequences, the film retains attention throughout and has enough gas and gags to stand as a proud addition to the canon of its director and star. Also with Miranda Hart, Allison Janney and Bobby Cannavale in support.

Danny Collins  (2015)    69/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   69/100                                                                     106 Min        15

‘Hey baby doll, what’s going on …’ Aargh! That song’s stuck in my fucking head! It’s not even like it’s stuck in there in the sort of ‘ah this is really catchy I’ll listen to it a few more times’ kind of way – it’s shit and it’s not even sung very well, noooooo ….

As you may have guessed, this film features a song called ‘Baby Doll’ and it is performed by none other than acting legend Al Pacino in the titular role of aged, drug abusing, successful, and yet distinctly disheartened Danny Collins, whose manager one day presents him with a hand written letter from John Lennon that tells him to stay true to his music and to give him a call sometime. Never having received the letter in the decades since it was written, and in his view having sold himself out artistically since then, Collins questions how different his life would have been if he’d been able to speak to his musical idol at the time, and he begins to take everything back to the drawing board to salvage his soul from ‘the road’ and endless performances of music he has long since lost interest in.

Shown after a brief credits role at the end is the real performer, Englishman Steve Tilston, this is based on (the central plot with the letter is true, though the rest appears to be fiction), and director/writer Dan Fogelman has done a great job of keeping us interested in what is a fairly low key film, one ultimately revolving around two dynamics – the main one of Collins trying to reconnect with a son (Bobby Cannavale) he has never had anything to do with before, and the second his attempt to seduce the manager, Mary (Annette Bening), of the hotel he permanently checks into and the ensuing relationship between them that results.

It’s very well paced for what it is and performances full of charm all round really ground the film in the characters, but mostly this works because it all feels very real, a lost soul trying to reconnect with what he has been missing for most of his life. Jennifer Garner plays his son’s wife and Giselle Eisenberg their young daughter, who is supposed to have ADD (attention deficit disorder) but really she seems just like a normal kid enjoying herself. The music comes predominantly from John Lennon with the occasional little ditty from Collins, although Al Pacino has apologised for his crooning in the film, and whilst billed as a comedy the focus is very much on the family drama here. With Christopher Plummer in support too (also, the brunette in the pic above is only in that one scene, disappointing I know).

San Andreas  (2015)    71/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   71/100                                                                     114 Min        12A

A traditional and yet very well executed disaster film that effectively detonates the San Andreas fault line that runs up much of the coast of California. The film’s release comes just after the recent devastating earthquakes in Nepal, and like all good disaster films this works precisely because there is a strong element of reality permeating the movie – things are taken to an extreme here, but if anyone remembers the quakes in L.A. in 1994 and the enormous amount of damage they caused it really is only a matter of time before the next large scale disaster happens in the area. Cinematically, this isn’t the first time the story has been told – 1974’s ‘Earthquake’ with Charlton Heston and Ava Gardner has, from memory, essentially the same storyline replete with early scenes on the Hoover Dam.

Paul Giamatti plays the scientist working on magnetic resonance technology that can help predict earthquakes coming – leading to several moments of him looking slowly up toward the camera to declare ‘no, it’s even worse!’ or words to that effect, but the main story surrounds fire department air rescue extraordinaire Ray Gaines (Dwayne Johnson), his ex-wife Emma (Carla Gugino – look out for the scene that plants her firmly between the proverbial rock and a hard place) and their extremely fit and happily unsuitably dressed for the film daughter Blake (Alexandra Daddario) as all hell breaks loose throughout the Golden State and Ray tries desperately to save his family. Decent support from Ioan Gruffudd and Hugo Johnstone-Burt, and bizarrely there’s even an appearance by Kylie Minogue, but strong central performances from everyone make a big difference here, combined with a story that never feels too silly (well, almost never) and effects that convince throughout, making this one of the better of its kind of the past two decades.

Man Up  (2015)    60/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   60/100                                                                       88 Min        15

British romantic comedy that sees lonely thirty four year old Nancy (Lake Bell) mistaken for the blind date of lonely, and in the process of getting divorced, forty year old Jack (Simon Pegg) and who decides to run with it for a bit before being discovered but, wouldn’t you know it, they were having a good time up until then – is it possible they were meant to be together? Puke. Moments of merit do appear every now and then but initially their date plays out more like a tedious horror film with sycophantic, fake conversation and you think to yourself ‘surely no one in the world would actually want to be on this date’. There’s no chemistry between the pair whatsoever, but then after the truth is inevitably dragged out things get much better, and in reality this kind of event with the ensuing arguments is exactly the sort of thing that can bond two people together as it’s unique and more like a random adventure.

As is the par for romantic comedies the laughs don’t exactly come thick and fast, although there are a few decent ones stuck in there, and unfortunately there are multiple cringe worthy moments and areas where the story breaks down completely, such as Jack walking into the ladies toilets because Nancy had ‘been there for a while and he was concerned’. Really? It’d been like, three minutes max, and of course this is the fudge to uncover what’s going on but it’s pretty lame, and the film never completely overhauls its terrible and torturous first third, but at least there is more heart in the remainder and although the trailer suggests it’s the female here that will have to ‘man up’, it’s a little misleading as it remains the male that has to do the lion’s share of the work. Some grit to also be found with regard to moving on from old relationships and bizarrely there’s even an homage to ‘Rocky’ (76) at one point. Not bad, but could so easily have been better.

The Connection / La French  (2014)    70/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   70/100                                                                     135 Min        15

A thriller centred on the true story of the French Connection in Marseilles throughout the 1970s and early 80s – the drug smuggling cartel immortalised by William Friedkin’s Oscar winning 1971 film of the same name (it won best film, director and actor for Gene Hackman, as well as best adapted screenplay and editing). I’ve seen this film billed as a remake of the original but that’s not accurate as this is a French language film focusing the story on the police investigators in Marseilles trying to combat the organisation whereas Friedkin’s movie was largely concerned with the operation on the other side of the pond in New York City. The French Connection themselves were responsible for the vast majority of the heroin that found its way onto the streets of the U.S. at the time and there is a wealth of material there for storytellers going all the way back to just before World War II, and then also the French Gestapo during the Nazi occupation and in some cases even a few of the resistance fighters.

Indeed, it is perfectly possible that ‘The French Connection’ had an impact on real events as the year of its release saw an intensification in international efforts and resultant successes in tackling the organisation. Here, Jean Dujardin plays new magistrate in town Pierre Michel, who very much personally spearheads fresh efforts to tackle the trade, and he gives his best performance since his Oscar winning turn in ‘The Artist’ (11), one well matched by his opposite number Gilles Lellouche playing crime lord Zampa. It’s a well executed, thoroughly traditional and enjoyable crime thriller and one positively influenced by Marseillais director Cédric Jimenez’s familiarity with the city and its past. Expect violence from start to finish from a film that also works really well as a missing piece in the puzzle previously illuminated by both ‘The French Connection’ and its 1975 sequel, but also to a lesser extend ‘The Godfather’ in 1972.

Poltergeist  (2015)    34/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   34/100                                                                       93 Min        15

Did ‘Poltergeist’ (82) need to be remade? The answer is no of course, and yet it was on the ever dwindling list of classic horror films not already hammered to bits and rehashed so it was pretty inevitable it would reappear at some point. Falsely suggesting hope for the film is the casting of well known actors Sam Rockwell and Rosemarie DeWitt but, although Rockwell has a few good moments, even they look frustrated and bored throughout, as if they realised their mistake early on in the production.

The story is in principle the same – evil spirits behind the TV screen in a family home use the naivety and innocence of the young daughter to enter into the real world and abduct the child in the process, cue the arrival of demonologist Carrigan Burke (Jared Harris, clearly not having learned his lesson from ‘The Quiet Ones‘) who will try to rid the family home of the evil malevolent spirits and save the child in the process.

Despite being bluntly unoriginal in concept it also still manages to be unoriginal in every other way it can possibly be, scares are rubbish, predictable and largely don’t even make sense for the concept – the family begin hallucinating, for example, pretty sure poltergeists don’t traditionally posses the power to do this, and it has the misfortune of a story focusing on the crossing into another realm by a child which is a theme currently at the forefront of other modern and more robust horror films, most notably the Insidious franchise. The acting is unfortunately consistently as believable as the story, although it’s probably less the fault of the performers and more writer David Lindsay-Abaire (Steven Spielberg came up with the original story incidentally) and director Gil Kenan here – at one point a male character witnesses a chair fly into the air and smash into pieces by itself, and the next minute he’s trying to insinuate the family have made up their haunted house story. Dire.

Tomorrowland : A World Beyond  (2015)    71/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   71/100                                                                                  130 Min        12A

There really is a lot wrong with this film, and yet it somehow manages to deliver its upbeat message of ‘the world needs dreamers’ in a really effective manner and coupled with a brilliantly precocious performance from twelve year old Raffey Cassidy (who plays Athena) the overall effect convinces you to overlook its many faults. It’s a live action Disney film based on a story from Brad Bird, Damon Lindelof and Jeff Jensen with Bird directing the project too – you can see Lindelof’s imprint throughout as he has a penchant for putting the focus on the spectacle rather than the details (his past credits include the ‘Lost’ TV series, ‘Prometheus’ (12), ‘Star Trek Into Darkness‘ and ‘World War Z‘) and there’s a definite loose feeling permeating the structure of the film.

The beginning shows us what would appear to be a countdown – toward what, we can only guess as George Clooney and Britt Robertson (who play Frank Walker and Casey Newton respectively) provide voiceover letting us know they are about to regale us with their story that will eventually explain the clock. What unfolds is a sci-fi adventure that crosses time and space to the mysterious ‘Tomorrowland’ with strong warnings about our effect on the Earth’s environment as well as deeper, and yet often overt, philosophy on the nature of man, such as the metaphor that we are beset by two wolves, one representing fear, hatred, despair, anger and jealousy and the other hope, forgiveness, love and compassion and we decide which wolf wins by electing which one to feed, this is not an original concept but I quite liked seeing it in there nonetheless. Indeed, in terms of philosophy the film has its origins in what Walt Disney was working on at the time of his death, a new age cityscape teeming with innovation that was meant to create a real world Tomorrowland and inspire the world to solve its many problems of pollution and overcrowding, alas nobody really continued with his vision and the area of land he bought for the project in Florida was turned into just another part of Disney World, Tomorrowland demoted to a mere attraction at the company’s parks.

Detracting heavily from the merit worthy foundation of the film is its execution, over the top product placement for the likes of Disney’s recently acquired Star Wars franchise begins to grind and there are simply too many moments of silliness, such as characters enduring accidents that ought to leave their limbs dangling in tatters but they emerge with tiny cuts, and then watching them make decisions that are incredibly stupid given the information they have and yet they seem somehow surprised by the inevitable consequences. Much of this is by way of a failed attempt at comedy but it would be a much better film with it all removed, and it’s also true to say there is an equally unnecessary level of brutality involved with many of the fight scenes as well, commonly feeling very out of place for a Disney film. There is one amusing scene, possibly unintentional, which riffs off the Terminator franchise, you’ll know it when you see it …

Performances vary, but Cassidy is really the star of the show and easily the best thing in the film – you can absolutely expect to see a lot more from her in the future, although sadly one of the film’s key moments with her character seems a little hurried and ought to have more oomph than it does in the end. It’s in many ways amazing that the film carries its own weight at all, but ultimately it manages to prove a fairly memorable and worthwhile adventure, although by no means expect anything consistent or approaching perfect.

Far From the Madding Crowd  (2015)    71/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   71/100                                                                                  119 Min        12A

A very solid period drama with great performances from central players Carey Mulligan and Matthias Schoenaerts and equally well balanced direction from renowned auteur Thomas Vinterberg (whose last feature film was ‘The Hunt‘). Based on Thomas Hardy’s 1874 novel (although he did revisit the text significantly in 1895 and again in 1901) of the same name, I had fully intended on reading the book before watching the film so as to get a proper historical context but alas my plans were thwarted on this occasion, which is a shame as the feminist aspect of the story for the time period (the Dorset countryside is the setting, incidentally, and the film was largely shot on location) in itself suggests it may be a worthy read. Mulligan as Bathsheba Everdene is the central character (Hardy appears to have relished coming up with character names – the other significant ones here being Gabriel Oak, Sergeant Francis Troy, Fanny Robin and William Boldwood {could Bathsheba have been the inspiration behind Katniss Everdeen?}), and we essentially watch as the local men in the area vie for her attention with a mixture of gentile sensibilities as to how to go about doing this, and then the, erm, not quite so gentile, as the fortunes of Bathsheba herself wax and wane, going from educated but poor into the inheritance of a sizeable farm with a score of staff and potential profits to be made admixt with mishaps delivered by the whims of nature.

So, in this sense there is an overt feminist aspect in that Bathsheba is a strong willed, intelligent and capable young woman surrounded by men whom she must on the one hand with their amorous advances reject, whilst on the other she must lead and command the respect of and also be able to barter with and hold her own against the competition. Mulligan is nigh on perfect in the role as she brings to the fore through subtlety the difficulties this incurs – we can see the adrenaline pumping as she faces off against one of the larger men bearing down on her, and yet her steely nerves carry her through, just as the imperfections and naivety of the character are also there to see as she makes mistakes and allows her ego, bolstered by position, to occasionally overstep the mark.

Yet, the absolute central crux of the story remains rooted in the fact that she is considered physically desirable by the majority, if not all, the males around her – would the novel have been commercially viable if she was perceived as a munter and no one wanted her? Now that would be interesting – men wanting to her marry her for financial gain only, she desiring someone but unable to woo him and at a loss what to do about it given the special constraints of the time, ravaged by the vagaries of her lust and jealousy. Male writers engage with the notion of extreme feminine beauty primarily because it’s what they themselves ultimately desire and thus it provides them and their characters with the most efficient fuel, and yet if literature is to endorse the idea of a universal enchantress then the opposite must also be true, feminine ugliness, generic repugnance, therein you would find a much more hard hitting and relevant expose of humanity. Art in general has always been more than happy to sidestep this concept and indeed you almost never see this kind of story told, although Vinterberg would have been the perfect person to tell it really – Far From the Madding Crowd: Redux.

As it is, the director gives us a distinct duality – the moments of expected beauty where we are spoiled by lovely scenic shots of the countryside with its rolling drumlins, valleys and sunlit lustre, coupled with much more down to earth scenes which look exactly as they would if one were standing there while they were being filmed, lacking much in the way of any filmic sheen but working really well because of it. Make no mistake though, this is much closer to a traditional romance than an exploration of the human condition, as there are several resolutions in the plot that will leave you thinking ‘hmm, that’s convenient’, or deus ex machina if you prefer, and Vinterberg himself buys into this, cue kissy moments with rotating camera and rays of sunlight flitting between mouths and bodies. Support from the likes of Tom Sturridge, Michael Sheen and Juno Temple proves continually apt and fitting and certainly if you are a fan of period dramas and classical romance then you should enjoy this one, and indeed it’s been done well enough to please the casual dabbler in the genre as well.

Mad Max : Fury Road  (2015)    65/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   65/100                                                                     120 Min        15

Relentless, sometimes drearily so, but ultimately impressively spectacular. I wouldn’t recommend watching this in 3D as it turns the beginning into a huge mess – what’s meant to be a frantic and high octane intro to the film just looks like it’s playing in fast forward with overly jerky camera action despite the impressive stunts on display, as we are introduced to main character Max Rockatansky (Tom Hardy) just as he is being introduced to his captors for the immediate future.

This is the fourth time director and writer George Miller (he was joined by Brendan McCarthy and Nico Lathouris for the screenplay) has brought Max to life onscreen, the previous three ventures being with Mel Gibson in ‘Mad Max’ (79), ‘Mad Max 2 : The Road Warrior’ (81) and ‘Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome’ (85), and it’s a series that not only made historic returns at the box office and became a cornerstone of the Australian cinematic boom at the time, but also one that begins in a future dystopia that isn’t visually too removed from our own modern experience and then it heads steadily downward into increasingly archaic and savage distortions of humanity, with disparate tribes living rough in the remaining desert lands of civilisation: all scarce essentials tightly controlled and contested for by gasoline craving heavily armed tribes. This latest instalment continues that downward trajectory and takes it to the nth level with a production scale that is simply mammoth and a central character who’s sanity is constantly prayed upon by his own haunted memories, standing very much as the metaphysical portal to the living hell that surrounds him.

The personal element with Max’s backstory is overplayed and it kind of drags, especially since many will already know what happened from the original film, and although it could anchor a degree of canonical lineage the Max onscreen here is very much a rejuvenation of the character rather than the original a little further down the line from ‘Beyond Thunderdome’. Similarly, it’s the simpler things that detract from the film – the writing in non-action scenarios often feels weak, such as central characters trusting one another too quickly for example, and so too with the direction in these quieter, relatively speaking, moments. The vast majority of the film focuses on a road chase and here the scale of the production is immediately apparent, and indeed it must have been a complete nightmare to film but these sections have been pulled off extremely well, to the extent that they must be a shoe-in for the Oscars, but again it becomes difficult to engage with the same thing happening repeatedly and there is no real grounding for the audience with the characters, as Charlize Theron as Imperator Furiosa and Nicholas Hoult as Nux join the central fray along with Rosie Huntington-Whiteley as The Splendid Angharad in her second role since ‘Transformers : Dark of the Moon’ (11).

All the actors very much look the part and Hoult and Hardy do really well, although there remains something a little too refined and soft about Theron for the setting, but where the film shines is when Max hatches his plan for the finale. You very much share in the other characters’ initial reaction to the idea as although in theory it sounds fine, the execution they have planned sounds more than a little foolhardy – but my goodness do they make a proper go of displaying it on film, and it’s this that really lifts the movie back out of the humdrum desolation it was heading into.

As a bit of an aside, at one point in the film they come across a lone tree in the wilderness, the first they’ve seen, and they end up using it as a harness and uprooting the thing – it’s possible, albeit extremely unlikely, that this could be a nod in the direction of the Arbre du Tenere, a tree which was thought to be one of the most isolated living things on Earth standing in the middle of the desert in Niger as the only one for hundreds of miles in any direction and as such it was used by nomads as a waymarker for centuries. Standing, that is, until a reputedly drunk Libyan truck driver accidentally ploughed it over one day. It must be quite an impressive claim to fame to hit the only obstacle that exists within a several hundred mile radius. It’s in a museum now.