RECENT WATCH: THE GIRL ON THE TRAIN

Image Source: imdb.com

The Girl on the Train is a mystery thriller based on the bestselling novel by Paula Hawkins. Rachel is an alcoholic divorcee who rides a commuter train to the job she has been fired from for over a year, when a woman goes missing she becomes entangled in the investigation.

We follow Rachel on a continued downward spiral, she spends her days drinking vodka like its water and gazing in to the windows of the houses along the train track. She indulges in her obsession for a young couple she thinks she knows as she watches every day. Emily Blunt is unsurprisingly brilliant as Rachel, while reading Paula Hawkins novel I’ll admit I didn’t picture anyone like Blunt but she won me over. The wonders of makeup have transformed her in to someone that looks truly downtrodden and she plays Rachel with the right balance of subtly and eccentricity to portray a character that is deeply troubled but wishing to do the right thing.  In fact I was happy with all of the casting choices; I particularly liked Luke Evan’s as the unsettling Scott, the husband of the missing Megan.

Image Source: imdb.com

What made the book stand out was how it developed in to a layered story of voyeurism, alcoholism and desperation. For me, this is where the film adaptation fell flat as it failed to reach the depths of its source material. I really struggle with films that use narration as the main form of storytelling. There was so much to pack in to the film to build tension and emotion and the main vehicle of this seemed to be stirring monologues. This created some really problematic pacing; the story seems to chug along with character development before rushing to a conclusion with little build up.

While the novel is set in London the film has been moved to New York in an attempt to make Blunt’s British Rachel even more of an outsider. Call me picky but I really think that the setting should have remained the same. Seeing the drama of your cavorting neighbours play out through their windows seems far less likely on a property of two thousand square feet. There’s something off putting by the glamour that surrounds the lives of many of our New York set characters while the book described the behind-the-scenes chaos of their home lives.

The Girl on the Train fails to stand against its genre predecessors but will hold up at the box office thanks to Emily Blunt’s performance and is a faithful adaptation that sticks closely to its source. Although this could be its downfall as the film hears like an audio book with questionable pacing.

 Twitter | Instagram | Facebook

RECENT WATCH: GHOSTBUSTERS (2016)

Image Source: imdb.com

Three paranormal enthusiasts and a subway worker team up to fight ghosts after a series of other-worldly forces threaten New York.

I can’t even attempt to review this film without acknowledging the amount of negativity surrounding this film. I said in a previous post that I was set on seeing this film no matter what and I stuck to that, seeing it as soon as I had the chance. I wanted to really like this film and when you want to really like something you can get a case of tunnel vision but I couldn’t avoid the negative reviews that appeared on the day of the films cinema release. I don’t agree with the amount of hate this film is drowning in, but it’s true that this film is severely flawed.

First let’s talk about what I actually liked; the four main cast members were great. Kristen Wiig and Melissa McCarthy have such great chemistry and comedic timing together. While I wasn’t as aware of Kate McKinnon and Leslie Jones pre-Ghostbusters I really liked their performances. Kate McKinnnon’s wacky antics as inventor, ‘Jillian Holtzmann’ take a moment to get used but eventually she has a certain charm. Understandably the CGI has massively improved which quite simply means the ghosts look better. Although, care has been taken to not lose the retro charm of the story and it isn’t lost in technological advances. Green slime and floating bodies remain. The iconic theme tune is back but there are multiple remixes that added a modern feel, my favourite version is by ‘Fall Out Boy’ and ‘Missy Elliott’ which played on the first assembling of the Ghostbusters in uniform. That whole sequence was probably my favourite part of the entire film. The action sequences are also well choreographed and up to a certain point the final battle makes for a satisfying conclusion. (More on this later)

Image Source: imdb.com

Now I have to talk about the things I did not like. First of all, I did not find Ghostbusters funny. More than anything Ghostbusters should be a comedy but apart from some well-timed pop-culture references and a little acute self-awareness the ‘jokes’ fell flat. This was a big disappointment after the many literal laugh-out-loud moments of Paul Feig’s other comedies, most notably ‘The Heat’ and ‘Spy’. The male representations are horrendous. Every man in this film is either evil or a total idiot. It annoys me so much that a film that attempts to break new ground with a female led action/comedy would do so by just flipping a stereotype dynamic. There is no need to stereotype to that scale, to attempt comedy in this way is cheap and quite frankly lazy. While the original film was male led, the female characters were worthy and developed. Sigourney Weaver's ‘Dana Barrett’ was one of the most memorable parts of the original for me. The constant appearance of stereotypes created an alarming anti-man tone that reached its cataclysm in the final act. A certain part of the concluding battle is currently doing the rounds on the internet for all the wrong reasons. With the risk of spoilers all I will say is that the conclusion revolves around something that I can only guess was intended as a joke but ended up being a cheap and messy conclusion that you’d expect in a bad Adam Sandler movie.

Image Source: imdb.com

I saw the original Ghostbusters for the first time in full last October at a drive-in. While I enjoyed it, it is not a favourite and I have no loyalty to it. However, even I couldn’t help but closely compare the 1984 original to the 2016 reboot. The original is an iconic product of cinema of the time and more importantly; has stood the test of time. Scratch the surface of this reboot and there’s nothing new to boast about. The film also seems to be afraid to stand on its own, it’s a reboot but with a ridiculous amount of clumsy cameos and nods to the Bill Murray led original.

It wasn’t until I sat down and really thought about this film that I really questioned why it had to be Ghostbusters in the first place. The acting talent in this film could have been used on new characters that broke gender norms but told a story in its own right. If all we need to create something new is to swap the genders of characters then screenwriters can put down their pens for the next 100 years. It’s about time that we are seeing new roles for women in film but by simply stepping to the shoes of a much beloved film, Ghostbusters was set up for a fall. With other all-female remakes in the pipe line, including an all-female ‘Ocean’s Eleven’; I worry Ghostbusters will leave a bitter taste.

I had high hopes for Ghostbusters but it has fallen short of expectations. While undeserving of the lynch mob that is after it at the moment, CGI advances and acting talent couldn’t save it from a poor script and the risks of remaking an 80’s classic. 

Twitter | Instagram | Facebook

RECENT WATCH: THE NICE GUYS

Image Source: imdb.com

Set in 1970’s Los Angeles, Ryan Gosling and Russell Crowe star as two private investigators who, after discovering links between suspicious cases, begin looking in to the apparent suicide of a fading porn star.

Ryan Gosling plays ‘Holland March’, a licensed private eye while Russell Crowe’s ‘Jackson Healy’ is much more of an enforcer, the man you call to scare of the person that is following you. Through different events the two cross paths and realise that they separate cases they’ve been hired for are linked. The two characters have different personalities, different backgrounds, different issues, but together are a cool, stylish and hilarious team. The Nice Guys is action packed but at its heart it is driven by the layered characters. We aren’t just shown two obviously mismatched characters a ’la Rush Hour because on the surface ‘Mr March’ and ‘Jackson Healy’ aren’t so different. It’s throughout the plot that past events and underlying baggage is revealed, displaying to the audience why the two make a mismatched but brilliant team.

Image Source: imdb.com

I love Ryan Gosling in comedy, ‘Mr March’ seems made for him as he shows of his perfect comedic timing. Its also refreshing to see Russell Crowe in a role like this, making a detour from the dramatic roles we’ve seen previously. While he may not be the main source of comic relief out of the two nice guys, he shines in the moments where he has some fun flexing his comedy muscles. Another stand out was Angourie Rice’s ‘Holly March’. Holland March’s thirteen year old daughter, she is a key player in the plot. It can be risky to throw a young character into such an adult setting but Holly is wise, quick-witted and relevant enough to be a truly useful element in the story.

Image Source: imdb.com

While the titular Nice Guys are the main selling point, the intriguing crime and mystery components should not be overlooked. They are rich, developed with conspiracy, clues and an equally cool ‘bad guy’ in the form of Matt Bomer’s ‘John Boy’. The writing and direction of Shane Black is smart and genuinely funny. It avoids predictable jokes and cheap punches.

The Nice Guys is a 70’s throwback that is bursting with originality. From the writing, performances and fully realised setting, it is deserving of a lot of attention this month. 

Twitter | Instagram | Facebook

RECENT WATCH: X-MEN: APOCALYPSE

Image Source: comingsoon.net

As the first ever mutant re-emerges to extinguish modern civilisation, the X-Men must unite to defeat him and his followers.

The plot of this film takes place ten years after the events of Days of Future Past, at first such a large gap in the timeline surprised me but it worked really well. There was just the right amount of references back without letting past events get in the way of the present. This film is very ambitious and attempts to both establish beloved X-Men characters and ‘check-in’ with key players. The film manages to pull this off very smoothly; I specifically enjoyed the parts Jean Grey and Scott Summers aka ‘Cyclops’ played. Cyclops, a character I never paid much attention to in previous films, really got a chance to shine with a developed personality and layered character. The younger takes on ‘Storm’, ‘Nightcrawler’ and ‘Angel’ were also great. A problem often encountered by X-Men films is how to fit in so many powers within a story. The plot of this film manages to really make use of the powers of characters and the wide ranges of characters are naturally incorporated throughout. Again, Quicksilver was an absolute highlight of this film. Completely topping that show stealing sequence from ‘Days of Future Past’ and becoming a key player in the mutant team, dishing out comic relief and emotional investment in equal measure.

Image Source: chss.gmu.edu

The final third of this movie is probably the most action heavy of any previous X-Men film. The epic scale action is so well choreographed and thanks to the continued focus on character and emotion, is constantly interesting. However X-Men Apocalypse is not a perfect film, because of the scale and number of characters, old and new, the plot requires a long set up that left the first third feeling very long. But don’t tune out or judge Apocalypse prematurely because the set up completely pays off by the end and the plot comes together in a satisfying conclusion.

Image Source: comicbookmovie.com

Besides slight nit-picking with set up my only other problem with this X-Men was ‘Apocalypse’ himself. This mutant is thousands of years old, worshipped as a god and long believed to be the most powerful. It’s always interesting to see a villain that is a real test for the titular heroes but more than anything ‘Apocalypse’ needed development before, as an audience member, I really cared about his motives. It’s at this point that I can’t help but look at past villains for comparison. The greatest antagonist in the X-Men universe is ‘Magneto’. It’s the crucial mix of villainy and reasoning that makes an entertaining villain. While the look, sound and power of Apocalypse was menacing, I could never get on board with his character or understand his motives.

Image Source: comicbookmovie.com

X-Men: Apocalypse is another excellent X-Men instalment by Bryan Singer. Somehow it manages to feel fresh in a franchise of already six films. The faithful re-imaginings of much loved characters work in a plot that may take some lengthy set up but the pay-off is worth the wait. I’m looking forward to watching it again. 

RECENT WATCH: PRIDE AND PREJUDICE AND ZOMBIES

Image Source: youtube.com

The five Bennett sisters seek husbands to avoid being left destitute on the death of their father, all while fighting an impending zombie apocalypse. 

As much as it pains me to say, Pride and Prejudice and Zombies was very disappointing. After reading and watching other reviews my expectations were already low but I maintained the opinion that I would be seeing this film in the cinema no matter what. While I did walk in with very low expectations, I just couldn’t see past the many flaws of the film. With the clumsy pacing and questionable editing choices it comes across that the film doesn’t know what it wants to be. There are moments of horror, action, comedy and romance all with a sprinkling of Austen prose that don’t fit. Having the zombie apocalypse as merely a back drop the well-known love story doesn’t work. The story would have worked better if it had attempted to adapt the original Pride and Prejudice story to include a more a natural flow between decapitating the undead and proclamations of love. 

Image Source: moviestillsDB.com

Apart from Elizabeth Bennett and Mr Darcy, there is no character development. Of course these two characters are the protagonists but anyone who has seen or read any other Pride and Prejudice will know the personalities of the supporting characters and their importance to the story. On the whole, the cast did their best with their characters; I specifically liked Matt Smith as Mr Collins and Charles Dance as Mr Bennett. Even with the array acting talent the delivery of the Austen dialogue is awkward and feels like every line should end with a knowing wink to the camera. The ongoing joke about the unlikely plot of the film is run in to the ground. The Bennett sisters crushing zombie brains in petticoats, we get it; now please find something else to joke about. 

Image Source: imdb.com

The film is lacking in grace and at times a bit lazy. In the first big fight scene with all of the Bennett sisters the action is hard to follow and so cartoonish that it becomes boring. Also, five kills in and not one of the swords had blood on it which was seriously distracting. 

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies is less ‘Bloody Lovely’ and more ‘Pretty Terrible’. While we can applaud the attempt at something original, I’m afraid Jane Austen will be turning in her grave at this adaptation of her best loved novel. 

RECENT WATCH: DEADPOOL

Photo Credit: imdb.com

After being diagnosed with cancer, a former Special Forces operative takes part in a rogue experiment to unlock mutant powers. The experiments leave him with accelerated healing powers but physically deformed, he adopts the alter ego of ‘Deadpool’ to seek revenge on the leaders of the extreme experiment programme.

From the opening credits to the very end Deadpool knows what it is, the first splash before a tidal wave of super-hero releases this year. Ryan Reynolds really shines in this film, you can feel that he’s enjoying every moment of playing the character. After all, Deadpool’s underwhelming first outing in X Men Origins: Wolverine clearly didn’t do that character justice. The character strikes a balance between arrogant, crude and smart. He jokes about Ryan Reynolds, Green Lantern and 20^th Century Fox all with erupting laughter from the audience. I loved the humour in this film. When used well, breaking the forth wall is something I love to see and in this instance it works brilliantly to embellish Deadpool’s character and give a real personality to a masked man. It may be an ‘Action Adventure’ but Deadpool is one of the funniest films I’ve seen in a while. It was a brave move for the studio to make a Rated R Deadpool, and it was not an insurance move. Everything from the violence, language and love story carries on the mature tone. This tone ensures that Deadpool stands out from the excess of comic book movies that we have coming in 2016. 

Photo Credit: imdb.com

 

I also really enjoyed the villain in Deadpool, and Villains are often where Marvel trips itself up. Ajax has personally wronged Deadpool, and it is Deadpool who wants him to pay for that. Ajax isn’t trying to conquer the world or blow it up and that’s okay. He’s a bad guy and we rejoice in seeing our titular protagonist take him down. 

I really liked Deadpool but it is not without its flaws. Morena Baccarin’s Vanessa needed some serious development, her character felt like a bit of throwback to superhero love interests of yester year when they had no other role in the plot other than to be captured then saved. If you wanted to make a spoof of X Men or the comic book genre – and do it well – you’re likely to end up with something like Deadpool. It’s this that I sometimes struggled with, attempting to critique a genre that you play right in to does not excuse you from the conventions of a super hero origin story. The film as a whole is still hugely entertaining but self-awareness does not immediately mean self-bettering.

Photo Credit: imdb.com

 

As an action adventure comedy, Deadpool is a lot of fun. It pokes fun at the comic book movie world and you’ll be laughing out loud in cinemas but it doesn’t forget to expertly craft action sequences. There may not be any contenders to the throne just yet but Deadpool could easily maintain a position as one of the best comic book movies of the year. 

RECENT WATCH: THE HATEFUL EIGHT

The Hateful Eight is the eighth film by Quentin Tarentino. Kurt Russell’s John Ruth is a bounty hunter who takes shelter with his prisoner from a blizzard in a secluded cabin. In this cabin he meets a collection of enigmatic characters. The plot of The Hateful Eight has been shrouded in mystery since its announcement and I do think it is good to walk in to cinema not knowing too much about what you’re about to see. It plays out like a ‘whodunnit’, no-one can be trusted and someone isn’t who he or she seems.  Think Agatha Christie with more violence and humour with a western backdrop.

What I really liked about The Hateful Eight is that all of the characters are interesting, part and parcel from the fantastic writing and the high class performances of the cast, Samuel L Jackson making a triumphant return to a leading role of a Tarentino film. The depth of each character means that you are suspicious of everyone, an element that is too often missing from some mysteries. The action of The Hateful Eight is in the careful constructed dialogue and at times felt like a recording of a play.

You cannot deny that this film will stand apart from every other film out at the moment, with the division in to clearly marked chapters, intermission and occasional narration by Tarentino himself. The fantastic score by Ennio Morricone also transports you back to cinema classics of times past.

 

Ultimately, the real test of a film lasting over 3 hours is if it feels as long as it is. The film did feel long. I will admit that there were moments where I was a bit bored and wasn’t really sure where the story was going. With eight principle characters there needs to be lengthy set up and in the end there is some pay off with a Tarentino style showdown. However a quick shoot-em-up and trademark blood spill just weren't enough for the long development that had come before. When I was presented with the ‘final chapter’ I couldn’t help feeling relieved, more than ready for the conclusion of this western tale. Unfortunately not my favourite film from the iconic director. 

RECENT WATCH: THE MARTIAN

Based on Andy Weir’s bestseller of the same name, ‘The Martian’ is a sci-fi adventure about a botanist stuck on Mars and the team of people trying to get him home. The Martian is set in the near future where NASA is on to its third successful Mars mission. Presumed dead, Mark Watney (Matt Damon) is left behind when his team aborts the mission during a storm. He awakes to find himself alone on Mars, needing to survive on a planet where nothing grows.

First it has to be said that Mark Watney is a great character, carrying the story, he needed an actor with a strong presence that Matt Damon definitely brings. Watney is very likeable and it’s just so enjoyable to witness his determination to survive. In a story that could so easily slip in to a morbid tale of barely cheating death, the dry humour and positive attitude of Watney keeps the tone warm and often inspiring. The Martian is a lot of fun but doesn’t forget the underlying death-at-any-minute threat to build up much needed tension. 

On earth, putting a focus on the media frenzy over an abandoned astronaut kept everything realistic. In a time where the media is often filled with death and destruction, it is so nice to witness (fictional or not) the world coming together for something positive. Kristen Wiig does a great job playing the Head of Media Relations for NASA during one of the hardest PR jobs ever.

Although often an intimate character study of our titular Martian, the ensemble cast pulls together some of the best acting talent from across the globe. The cast includes Jessica Chastain, Michael Pena, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Kate Mara and Sebastian Stan to name only a handful. With only about ten minutes of screen time together and the equivalent of instant messaging for communication, Ridley Scott still manages to develop a convincing relationship between Mark Watney and his fellow crew members. The idea that these people have spent years working together becomes truly believable. 

For a plot that literally spans across worlds, what I loved about The Martian is that the plot remains pure and simple, a quest to bring a man home. It’s this simplicity that works so well, keeping the focus on people in the most extreme of settings is the best way to keep science fiction engaging. Of course there is mind bending physics and chemistry that goes way above my head but this is explained without crossing the fine line in to patronising.

In the end The Martian is a glorious celebration of one man’s will to survive and the value of human life. It is easily one of the best films of the year.

RECENT WATCH: LEGEND

A biographical film about two real life criminals can be a difficult balancing act. If you don't allow the charm of the characters to shine through you are left with a suffocating crime-doesn't-pay cautionary tale that is no fun for anyone. Go too much the other way and you seek to idolise, making murdering gangsters in to heroes. Using the perspective of Reggie’s first wife Francis allows us to walk the fine line between being enamoured and frightened.

What I liked about Francis was that she is not naive. I've seen a lot of gangster films and too often the female characters are shallow and careless. They stand by their men through every fight and dodgy deal, just as long as the money keeps rolling in. Maybe in a more realistic mind set, Francis constantly wants Reggie to leave crime behind and go straight.

In many ways 'Legend' is a film of two halves. Like Francis we spend the first half growing fond of Reggie while looking past violent crime. Ronnie is there to make us feel uneasy but at the same time provide occasional comic relief. Through to the second half and the charm filled facade begins to disappear and the tone of the film darkens through the eyes of Emily Browning's Francis to the point where we eagerly await the downfall. 

One problem I had with legend was that I was never sure where we were on the timeline of events. Maybe I was being unobservant but when the film ended I couldn’t work out what the time span of the plot was. While browning's East end narration feels clichéd at times, it aids in understanding the plot and bringing the audience up to speed. 

The use of body doubles and shot layering is seamless and as expected Hardy pulls off playing two characters brilliantly. You find yourself forgetting you are watching one actor opposite a body double and see two completely different men. Hardy achieves chemistry with himself to produce a convincing on screen brotherly relationship between two different characters. This is a tale of two brothers but has only one protagonist – that is Reggie. The twins share a face and parents but the similarities seem to end there. Reggie is the brains while he attempts to manage his unhinged and erratic brother to be the brawn of the pair. The film spends a lot of time discussing the mental health of Ronnie Cray and how Reggie tried to control him. 

Legend is stylish with substance. Two performances by Tom Hardy are more than worthy of awards season buzz. Supporting actors including Emily Browning, Paul Anderson and Taron Egerton also hold their own against the acting heavy weight. My hopes for Legend were fulfilled; a high bench mark for what could be an exciting winter at the cinema.

RECENT WATCH: TRAINWRECK

Photo: imdb.com

Trainwreck is a romantic comedy written by Amy Schumer and Directed by Judd Apatow.  We follow our titular ‘Trainwreck’ Amy Townsend played by Schumer. Disillusioned with monogamy, Townsend lives her life by strict no-strings rules. Enter resident love interest; Bill Hader’s sports doctor ‘Aaron Connors’.

At first glance Trainwreck is a by numbers rom-com, you have your character with commitment issues who then meets someone who makes them question everything they have always believed about relationships. I would be lying if I said that Trainwreck isn’t a little bit predictable. What saves it from the slim line in to cliché is the underlying criticism of your usual rom-com practises, Schumer’s narration hilariously pointing out the sickly sweetness of movie relationships. The gender dynamic is flipped on its head but isn’t rubbed in your face to the point where the laughs get lost in a statement about Hollywood gender roles.

Photo: imdb.com

In true Apatow style the film feels on the longer side, it could also be categorised as a ‘dramedy’ rather than your straight up comedy.  Of course you can’t have to have some drama to give the film heart and avoid slapstick but at times the plot of the film felt a little bit messy with an array of sub plots. I would have liked if the relationship of Amy and her younger sister Kim could have been explored more than it was.

If you are familiar with Amy Schumer’s brand of comedy the tone of film will not surprise you. Self-deprecating and tongue in cheek satire that manages to avoid obvious punch lines and childish humour. It has been a while since I have seen a ‘comedy’ that has made me laugh out loud as much as Trainwreck did. What is so important in this comedy is that the humour is unapologetic but smart and the jokes are actually relevant (take note Adam Sandler). 

Photo: imdb.com

Walk in to the cinema awaiting a date movie that has romance and humour but enough edge to feel fresh, you won’t be disappointed.