Tumgik
cinedave · 6 years
Text
REVIEW: Jumanji; Welcome to the Jungle - Game for Laughs
Some people say you can’t make a good film based on a video game. Those people are right.... and those are people are wrong. This generation has seen many failed to “meh” adaptations of big game franchises onto the big screen; like the recent efforts of Warcraft and Assassin’s Creed. Most fail through a combination of taking themselves too seriously despite their natural absurdity or trying to condense 20+ hours of video game story into a 2 hour movie. Then consider films like War Games, Tron or Wreck It Ralph that succeeded. Why? They were films about made up video games allowing for greater creative freedom, removing detrimental game medium comparisons and making the film about more than just its featured game. You can make a good video game movie if you also make the game. That’s one of several reasons why this two decades belated sequel of the wild board game, Jumanji, succeeds. It’s a parody of its own creation and because of that it’s an effective comedy. Cue those drums....
When four high schooler students are thrown together in detention they find an old adventure video game called Jumanji. Playing transports them inside the game’s jungle world as their avatars Bravestone (Dwane Johnson), Shelly (Jack Black), Finbar (Kevin Hart) and Ruby (Karen Gillian). Their only way home is to complete the game. Or will it be game over?
Tumblr media
The Breakfast Club in the jungle. That’s exactly what the film is going for with its mix of main characters and shows that said John Hughes special is still a winning formula. The main quartet are typical high school movie archetypes and their game characters are vast contrasts which creates the film’s main source of comedy. The timid geek becomes the big tough adventurer (Johnson), the big football jock is a diminutive weakling (Hart), the shy outcast girl is a badass (Gillian) and the self obsessed popular girl becomes Jack Black. It’s effective comedic source material from start to finish such but more importantly it gives each of 4 actors ways to shine. Jack Black steals many scenes playing it as a high school girl. He even makes the dick jokes brilliant. Or you have moments like Johnson as the big tough guy getting scared by sudden noises. Then there’s standout a scene of Gillian trying to flirt and distract some guards but as the clueless shy girl in the body or Lara Croft. It it’s a lot of really good plays on the typical typecasting and stereotypes of the actors themselves and in places in genuinely feels like the cast were having a blast with this. Although Kevin Hart is basically still Kevin Hart the whole frustrated motor mouth routine actually works well here because we can relate back to his high school jock alter ego.
The above out of character humour in itself would be enough for a decent comedy film but Jumanji stands taller because that’s only its left bulging bicep. It’s right flexing gun is drawing humour from its video game subject matter; playing on common game staples and clichés. Even devout non-gamers will still get where the laughs are coming from. They poke fun at cut scenes, impractical outfits, over exaggerated fight moves, pre-emptive dramatic music (“I hate those drums!”) or unhelpful NPCs repeating the same set answers among other things. By continually switching between gags about and gaming and character switches neither wears out across the film. That keeps Jumanji feeling like a fun and surprisingly immersive adventure. The self aware nature of many game based gags also makes the film seem smarter than most will expect. It’s got a lot of enjoyable video game-esque action sequences that utilise its established over the top, almost cartoon like physics. Plus the simple idea of players having limited lives creates some meaningful peril and stakes while allowing for some fun death sequences.
This game still makes a few miss moves though. In places it’s quite slow paced and feels like its spinning its wheels rather than moving through the story. Granted this is often at the reward of good character banter but at times it feels like Jumanji has a, “don’t laugh and drive policy”. The story has to pull over comedic scenes before continuing. The film does link itself to the 1995 original nicely including some name dropping to Robin William’s (RIP) Alan Parish from being trapped in Jumanji’s jungle. Yet there are inconsistencies concerning the game’s jungle world. This time around it’s shown as more of a Mad Max meets Far Cry setting which doesn’t fit in to Alan parrish emerging from it wearing mostly leaves. The villain character of Bobby Cannavale’s Van Pelt felt rather pointless and forgettable. Like some game villains he existed purely to put a face on minions and enemies of the game but ultimately Jumanji would have been fine without him. Finally the later introduced with 5th player, Nick Jonas’s, is more of a 5th wheel. The starting 4 produce great chemistry and his addition only serves to obstruct that while offering nothing noteworthy himself.
Despite the adversity of being a reboot, Jumanji; Welcome to the Jungle is a very enjoyable adventure comedy with quite a broad appeal. If you and your in laws are going stir crazy together this Christmas, then Jumanji would be ideal film for everybody to escape to. The quality of the cast chemistry and established world building leaves things very open to the possibility of sequels too. Are you ready player one.... two, three and four?
0 notes
cinedave · 6 years
Text
REVIEW: The Last Jedi - Strong with ambition, weaker with execution
A long time ago on a VHS player far away, a youngling me first watched The Empire Strikes Back... and if I’m honest he wasn’t blown away by it. He may have spent many hours running round his dad’s legs playing AT-ATs and speeders or talking like Yoda; but much of the film went over his little head. It didn’t have the simple, easy to follow story of the Star Wars or its rewarding happy ending. Neither did it have the cute fluffy animals of Return of the Jedi (he was young... forgive him). It was only as the youngling became a Padowan watching back that worn home recorded VHS cassette that he came to see what made the film so special among his favourite trilogy. It took time. It took the patience and understanding that his younger self could never master. It was this journey that the older, now “Master” (he wishes), was reminded of when walking out of The Last Jedi. While on the surface there were mixed feelings of disappointment Vs expectations. Underneath there were seeds of greater purpose and meaning to the film’s content. This is a Star Wars film that may take some time and understanding to be truly appreciated.... but still not without its flaws.
With The Republic’s destruction The Resistance are on the run from the conquering First Order. Finn (John Boyega – Detroit) and Poe (Oscar Issac – Ex Machina) hatch a dangerous plan to save them. While Rey (Daisy Ridley – Murder on the Orient Express) hopes finding the legendary Luke Skywalker will spark a new hope.
Tumblr media
In many ways The Last Jedi feels like the Star Wars franchise looking at its own reflection for deeper purpose. It opens with the typically closing, “we must destroy the big thing” set piece. While much of what follows revolves around showing that making change and overcoming an all powerful evil is about more than shooting torpedoes into a thermal exhaust port. There’s a greater emphasis on the cost of such heroism and the difference between being a hero and being a leader; largely through the eyes of Poe Dameron as the impulsive hot head learning to see the bigger picture. That The Resistance and not the rebellion.... they are the spark that will ignite a rebellion within everyone. It shows the story as more than just good guys Vs bad. It’s about the inspiration and belief that both can create. It’s the kind of hidden depth that helped make Rogue One feel so special. This is echoed well within Luke and Rey’s scenes as Luke attributes his failures to overconfidence in being labelled a hero and legend. Or a few touching little moments like new character Rose (Kelly Marie Tran) overwhelmed to meet Finn from reputation or some ordinary kids playing with homemade Star Wars toys. A worthy mention also to Laura Dern’s (Jurassic Park) Vice Admiral Holdo for embodying the teachings of composed leadership.
Where the film falters is not from intent but sadly from execution in film making. The story quickly breaks off into multiple arcs in different locations that the script can’t seem to juggle smoothly. Particularly through the first half the pacing is clunky and uneven as it cuts to and from. This isn’t helped by polarising tones. Many parts of the film have a darker tone revolving around desperation and hopelessness. Yet against this the film still tries to be the kind of fun and enjoyable adventure most would expect from a Star Wars film. Now in places it absolutely nails this contrast, like the side mission of Finn and Rose to a lavish casino. It’s full of joyous mad-cap antics and great laughs but with the edgier undertone of all the wealth being derived from war profiteering over the Resistance/First Order conflict. For the rest of the film there’s a reliance on unexpected humour injections that at many points feel terribly goofy. Case and point, Domhnall Glesson’s General Hux is reduced to slapstick comic relief, best likened to Starscream in the Transformers sequels. Director Rian Johnson clearly wants his movie to contain all the core strengths of the franchise but didn’t listen enough to his lessons about The Force. He doesn’t respect the balance. Then there are The Porgs. They’re adorable and funny yet never overstay their welcome on screen which keeps their comedy effective. Compared to an early unfunny communication problems gag that goes on so long and so awkwardly you’ll wish George Lucas’s head would appear in space shouting, “Get on with it”. It’s creates a frustrating sense that the film is not aware of when it is succeeding or failing; that both appear to happen by chance.
Despite having less of an emphasis on bigger set pieces this is still a Star Wars film that delivers on its action and visuals. The aforementioned opening space battle not only has spectacle but fantastic variety as the fan favourite A-Wings on hulking B-Wing style bombers join the mix. The human element to the bombers also likens the sequence to a WW2 piece like Memphis Belle. The film offers one of the most creative and stunning light sabre battles since Maul sparked up his double on Naboo. There are some moments of genuine beauty. A final act set piece sees forces battle on salt planes of a white top layer and red beneath. Every explosion, every skim against the surface hurls up plumes and clouds of red against the vast white (like the colour themes of the posters) for a truly breathtaking visual effect.  Then there is, quite literally, the best 10 seconds ever. A ship collision sequence shown like samurai movie sword slice. You could have force choked me while that was happening and I wouldn’t have noticed.
Finally let’s pilot things back towards the Empire Strikes Back comparisons. Said 1980 offering is not just considered an incredible film, but many consider it one of the greatest sequels of all time. That is where The Last Jedi crucially differs. Some of its continuation from The Force Awakens is excellent. Everything about Mark Hamill’s performance and his relationship with Rey is a lovely continuation from that infamous silent ending. Similarly the bond of opposites between Kylo and Rey develops well through their Sense8 like communicating and becomes very entertaining. On the flip side, much was hyped of Supreme Leader Snoke’s actual presence within this sequel and reveals over his identity. Instead, he’s not a character, he’s a lack of. He’s nothing more than a CG Voldermort devoid of personality; a Death Star sized disappointment. Ultimately Kylo also falls short. He stood out last time for his fascinating complexity of aspiring towards being the next Darth Vader but fearful of never achieving it. This time much of that feels abandoned for an overall sense of uncertainty over just what they are trying to do with his character other than being a villain presence of necessity.
There were moments of The Last Jedi that embraced me in full blown Star Wars euphoria but more that pulled me out of the immersive escapism for their failings. I firmly believe that I will come to appreciate and enjoy The Last Jedi more in time but for now I can’t look at with the level of positively the youngling and Padowan inside me would like. It does give Carrie Fisher some good moments if this is to be her send off. It is generally very well acted from its talented cast. By no means is this a Phantom Menace or deserving of any such negative comparisons to the prequel trilogy. In the end The Last Jedi a good film where there should have been a great one.  
0 notes
cinedave · 6 years
Text
REVIEW: Justice League - An imperfect yet fun DC team up
Ben Affleck is looking for a Batmobile ejector seat and Gal Gadot is threatening to walk away unless a certain heavily accused producer doesn’t. Things are not well within the DCEU towers. What they really need right now is a win. A positive to show whatever is going on behind the scenes will be worth it in the end. Will the much anticipated Justice League be that film? Not entirely put is a marked improvement on their last superhero crossover.
With Superman dead, Steppenwolf, The End of Worlds will return to Earth with an army of Parademons to transform it into a nightmare world. Only the united heroes of Batman (Ben Affleck), Wonder Woman (Gal Gadot), Aquaman (Jason Momoa), The Flash (Ezra Miller) and Cyborg (Ray Fisher) stand in his way.
Tumblr media
This film has no shortage of problems but it is a better film than Batman Vs Superman and confirmation that the DCEU can make a multi-character team up work. In fact it’s best viewed as a sequel to BvS, rather than a stand alone because the League’s first accomplishment is the way it successfully builds upon those BvS events. As you may have seen from the trailers, this is set in a world after Superman, dealing with his death and a general sense of losing hope. Wonder Women’s introductory action sequence looks like a bank robbery but is in fact an embodiment of this hopelessness. Instead of criminals, it’s a group of activists trying to destroy financial institutions believing nothing else can save this failing world (led by Stannis Baratheon no less). This propagates Batfleck’s character arc is seeing the value of Superman and how the world needs the Man of Steel as a symbol much more than a night prowling bat. Finally it justifies the entire alien invasion story film. With its champion defeated they attack the Earth now because it is vulnerable.
Next this film really worked for me as superhero team up because of the great variety in characters and character experience. If we take 2012s Avengers, all 6 of Marvel’s team went in as experienced heroes at the height of their game. Justice League takes a far more staggered approach. At one end of the spectrum Batfleck is the aging Frank Miller esque Dark Knight questioning how long he can keep doing this. At other we have Barry Allen’s Flash presented as a clueless young rookie, a Cyborg still coming to terms with his evolving abilities and a reluctant hero Aquaman. It gives the overall team greater purpose as they learn and develop from fighting together; whether that’s Batfleck and Wonder Woman stepping up as leaders or The Flash getting mentored in heroics. A lot of the fight and action scenes focus on the team working together and combining their powers rather than making them shine as individuals.
The film has a lot of great action sequences but the most enjoyable are those that work in the wider supporting characters and extended DC affiliates. A first act set piece of Steppenwolf attacking the Amazons of Themyscira sees a few welcome returns from this summer’s Wonder Woman movie and turns into a great affair of desperation in keeping him from a crucial object. Then there’s a the Lord of the Rings style 5000 year flashback of all Earth’s forces and races uniting against Steppenwolf’s first invasion in a colossal pitched battle. It’s got nice scale to it, cameos of the Old Gods and even our first on screen look a Green Lantern in tease of 2020s Green Lantern Corps movie. You’ll probably recognise many action moments from trailers but there are still plenty more you won’t.
We’ll never know exactly how much Joss Whedon changed when tagging for Zack Synder in the re-shoots but it feels like he’s the reason the film as a lot of good comedy, consistently across its duration. It’s the key tool in getting several of the new characters over. I went into Justice League with, “Grant Gustin is my Flash” practically tattooed on my forehead but I left with complete love for Ezra Miller’s take on Barry Allen and can’t wait to see more of him. They nailed his tone of being very excitable yet socially awkward. Miller’s comedic timing was on point with running gags (...sorry, couldn’t resist) like having a poor sense of direction going down a storm. They even developed a fun Flash/Cyborg relationship buddy relationship as, “the accidents”. Similarly Jason Momoa’s powerhouse suffer dude Aquaman was played well for laughs and prevented anyone taking him too seriously. He has charisma dripping off him like arctic sea water across abs and puts a fork any Big Bang, “Aquaman sucks” jokes.
...and the bad? This film’s evil and failures has a face. It’s villain Steppenwolf. Imagine every Marvel villain labelled disposable; Yellow Jacket, Maleketh, Ronan... the works. Steppenwolf makes all of them look like Heath Ledger’s Joker by comparison. He is an utter and absolute waste of screen time with no discernible personality or likeable qualities other than an obscure mother issues. He’s nothing but an ill defined, shambling mass of mo-cap CG that sometimes doesn’t even look good. Even his ending is terrible cop out with a poor resemblance to 1998s Lost in Space film. The Parademons fair little better. Yes, they’re nothing more than flying monkeys/cannon fodder and they fill that role but they feel completely out of place against the more grounded areas of the film.
The story also has its fair share of problems. Rumour has it studio executives forced the film to be less than 2 hours long. As a result several sections feel skipped over and go without sufficient explanation or exposition. Yet bafflingly several scenes of a random Russian family still made the cut. This meant to make them more relevant when placed in during the final battle... but it doesn’t because their scenes have nothing memorable about them. There is too much Amy Adams/Louise Lane for such little content.
Then there is Superman. Now his return has been so widely reported for a good year that I’m not going to call it a spoiler (he’s on all the merchandise!). I really liked what they did in terms of bringing him back because it provided the necessary mid-film inter-team conflict over whether or not their crazy resurrection attempt should be done. Rather than finding an excuse for the team to fall apart over little, purely so they can reunite again for the final fight, this conflict felt very natural with clear opposing viewpoints. The problem is not Superman returning, it’s how the film uses him when he does. That is, as little more than deux ex machina in the final battle. His impact is so big and decisive that it actually feels detrimental to the rest of the team. It makes the five other heroes combined look weaker than Superman and therefore the whole Justice League team up redundant if Superman had been there in the first place. While of course they want to show Superman as being a powerful figure, the balance is painfully off and stands as the biggest lesson to learn for any Justice League sequel.
I left BvS with negatives of the film but positive feelings towards future DCEU films like a Winder Woman solo venture. Justice League was the same but with more positives about the film itself. I left thinking Justice League was passable to good entertainment but really excited about the planned Flashpoint film and next year’s Aquaman solo venture. So the DCEU still isn’t what many would want it to be and may not be doing its league justice but there are signs of improvement. Justice League may frustrate many devout comic readers but casual fans are likely to enjoy it as a fun and funny spectacle.
0 notes
cinedave · 6 years
Text
REVIEW: Paddington 2 - Complete and Utter Magic!
I’ve always hated the stigma around going to the cinema alone but understand why many prefer to see a film with company. For them, it adds to the experience and makes in more memorable. In truth I see most films solo but that doesn’t make their experience any less memorable for me. I still strongly remember seeing the first Paddington film 3 years ago. I’d had such a bad day going into it but the film was such a wonderful feel good experience that I left feeling fantastic. Part of me almost missed that in the run up to its sequel; knowing I was unlikely to feel the same again.... only I did. Earlier that day I received a rather horrible that email from a random stranger in the US (getting my email address from a website) about how he hated my writing in a few vile sentences. Needless to say, I wasn’t feeling my usual self afterwards so I went for it. That evening I went in to Paddington 2, hoping to find that same magic once more. To find a film that would make those feelings go away.... and I did. The marmalade connoisseur bear is back with another outstanding broad appealing family film. This is the kind of film you’ll have to work extremely hard not to fall in love with.
The London dwelling bear, Paddington Brown (Ben Wishaw – Cloud Atlas, Spectre) wants to buy his Aunt Lucy an antique book for her birthday. When their neighbour and fading actor Phoenix Buchanan (Hugh Grant – Every 90s dithering English guy) believes the book is more than it seems, getting it will a become a hard time.
Tumblr media
The returning director and co-writer Paul King clearly has no shortage of love for his work as he effortlessly recaptures the feel of his first film’s well made and creative simplicity. There’s nothing complex about the story, being a straightforward mcguffin affair with steady easy to follow plot points. Neither is there anything to understand about its open book of a central character; a young bear trying to be kind and polite in a world that often isn’t. That allows the film to develop into excellent situational based material whether that’s a small comedic barber shop scene or the film’s feature attraction of Paddington being sent to prison. The strengths of characters and dialogue shine through and make us care about what the feature cast are doing rather than where they’re going. Its tone is pitch perfect. It’s silly but never stupid, balancing slapstick with smart wit. It’s heartfelt but never sappy, creating meaningful emotional moments throughout the film but never sustaining sadness by remaining upbeat. A manliness warning; a couple points will have you fighting back the tears so tell your girlfriend you’ve got a sore eye before the film starts.
One of the many returning strengths is the excellent visuals and inventive transitions between scenes. A standout early sequence depicting Paddington and Aunt Lucy inside the featured book is a beautiful homage to the card cut out animation of the 1970s TV show. It turns the film into a stunning blend of reality and Paddington’s imagination blended seamlessly before our eyes. While there some our interesting adaptations on first film sequences there’s plenty of originality and the film always feels like it’s got something else up its blue duffle coat. There’s more action you’d expect too, from a standout early chase of Paddington riding a Wolfhound like The Lone Ranger to a rather elaborate CG heavy climax. The latter in particular is a testament to the film’s quality because despite being a clear step out of the film’s comfort zone it doesn’t feel out of place. Admittedly, by that point you’re so entranced within Paddington’s world that he could be fighting off sharks in space with a light sabre chainsaw and you’d happilly roll with it.
Paddington 2 is essentially a comedy sequel and as such comes with some repeating and recurring material. There are more great film references along this journey. The aforementioned prison scenes have many excellent visual nods to The Grand Budapest Hotel. There’s a genius little Chaplin inclusion and several others to spot. A number of gags and minor characters are cleverly recycled and adapted from the first film. However, that does bring me to my one solitary criticism. Maybe it’s a bear thing but Paddington 2 does a Ted 2. It needlessly brings Peter Capaldi’s Mr Curry back is a minor villain and times it feels like the film is merely making excuses to fit him in.
Thankfully Curry is not only villain as Hugh Grant is an utter camp delight as Phoenix Buchanan, throwing himself wholeheartedly into the role and every costume change along the way. All the returning Brown family impress with each their own small but rewarding character arc. We have son Jamie trying to be cooling before realising that it’s ok to be himself. While daughter Judy is budding journalist, playing ideally into the investigations into clearing Paddington; joined by mother Mary’s (Sally Hawkins – Blue Jasmine) craving adventure after a summer of illustrating it in stories. Finally we have Hugh Bonneville’s (Downton Abbey) Mr Brown being given a mid-life crisis have fun with... and indeed he does. Add superb supporting roles and cameos from British talent like Brendan Gleeson, Jim Broadbent, Richard Ayoade, Jessica Hynes, Joanna Lumley and many more to create this lovable local community.
They’ve really got something here with this franchise as this sequel denounces notions of being a one off success. Despite some pop culture references they carry a real timeless feel that, dare I say it, sets that out to become modern classics. These are the kind of films young adults will be watching now then happily again with their kids somewhere down the road. It may be too soon to judge but this sequel does feel like it has surpassed its original. While I hope that I’ll be a bit happier going to see the already confirmed 3rd film; it’s comforting to know it will raise my spirits if required. A bear is for more than just Christmas adverts. Young or old, this film will take good care of you.
0 notes
cinedave · 6 years
Text
REVIEW: Jigsaw - Blood & Bore
Do actors really die? Their lives may end but with so much of it captured on camera and on screen you could argue that in way they’ll live forever through their works. Death isn’t exactly an obstacle on screen either. If your character dies in a film they can always find a way to bring you back for a sequel if there’s money to be made from it. Colin Firth’s Harry Hart was shot in the brain during 2015s Kingsmen but still made it into The Golden Circle. Then there is Tobin Bell in Saw franchise. The terminal cancer sufferer who died in film 3 yet still managed to appear in films 4 through to 7. Now after a hiatus and a name change the franchise is back for 8th film.... but he couldn’t possibly come back again? Could he? For his sake I hope not because the film isn’t great.
John Kramer aka The Jigsaw killer (Tobin Bell) has been dead for 10 years but when a new game and new marked bodies start turning up the police wonder if they have a copy cat killer; or if John Kramer is in fact still alive.
Tumblr media
So the horror franchise that gave us 2 great films followed by 5 more average at best follow ups is back to play another game. The rules here are simple. The game is not the problem; it’s the players. The Saw/Jigsaw Killer/death by booby trap concept will always no matter how ridiculous the setup and story gets as long as set piece games/kills stay at least vaguely creative. The reason why some of its films, like 2017s Jigsaw, don’t work is because the cast are so poor and so disposal that you just can’t care about the outcome. The whole point of survival horror is that as an audience we’re supposed to become invested in the idea of the characters surviving no matter how unlikely that gets. That just doesn’t happen here. Other than being mildly annoying no characters caught up in these games have any form of personality or any reason to create audience engagement. This is made even worse when any information we do get about these victims is purely designed to justify their murder. Ok, you could argue that some of this is intentional. That would be fine if the typical police/detective character base that are trying to catch the killer and save the victims could be those likable and entertaining characters; to make us care about their purpose. If you take Saw 2 in particular that film was made by the sit down battle of wills between Jigsaw and Donnie Wahlberg’s Detective Matthews. Instead all this Jigsaw has to offer is bunch of dull police and forensic types all trying to make us think one of them could be the new killer but they’re all so terrible the outcome has almost no value. It’s like everyone’s audition was just to stare at someone a little bit awkwardly because that’s a good chunk of the film.
Jigsaw is nothing but a horror film for the sake of horror porn.... but in that respect it does succeed. Despite being a 7th film offering a variety of death tricks and traps delivered is better than several previous entries with blood and gore sprinkled over everything like parmesan at an Italian Restaurant. There are a number of moments that will have you wincing, burying your face or laughing hysterically if you’re a therapy patient in waiting. There’s plenty of creative twists on the victims back stories and uses of technology upgrades. Do you remember the shotgun collar from Saw 3? Well here you’ll get with high powered surgical lasers. The recurring set pieces throughout the film are the spikes on a heartbeat monitor keeping it from flat lining (like the Flatliners reboot did). Yes, in between you’ll have to suffer a lot of boring people dissecting every victim body for the sake of it or trading awful buddy cop banter but it won’t be too long before the real game gets going again. This does mean that the story is a mess of mixed pacing among other issues and even after that all important big reveal not everything will make complete sense (because it doesn’t). It’s also best to consider this film in isolation because there are a lot of clashes in continuity from the prior films and ever tangled/knotted/theown in a big pile on the floor back story of John Kramer.
If you need this film to be any more than bloody flesh mangling kills from ever elaborate scenarios then do not see it....but if that’s enough to make you happy than have at it this Halloween. More than anything else Jigsaw frustrates because it shows that the Saw franchise is still a game worth playing if done so properly. Now further sequels look bleak..... this really could be game over.
0 notes
cinedave · 6 years
Text
REVIEW: Thor Ragnarok - Asgardians of the Galaxy is an absolute riot!
Be weird.... it’s more fun. Either I read that of a t-shirt or I will do soon. We all need something quirky in our lives whether that’s a random friend, an unpredictable life or maybe even just the occasional brilliantly weird film. New Zealand director Taika Waititi had the latter fix well and truly covered last year with the insanely enjoyable Hunt for the Wilderpeople (it’s on Netflix if you missed it). It was packed full with the kind off-beat humour that we don’t see enough of in the bigger blockbuster films. That’s why I was happier than Star Lord with Spotify when Marvel announced he would be directing their 3rd (and presumably final) Thor solo movie. The prior 2 Asgardian adventures have shown that their characters have great comedic assets and if this Kiwi can do a James Gunn and get himself across through the requirements of the Marvel blockbuster we could have something really special on hammer wielding hands...... and indeed we do. Thor Ragnarok is the most outright fun and hilarious marvel film to date. See it and laugh ‘till something pops.
After the exiled Goddess of Death, Hela (Cate Blanchett - LOTR) returns to claim the throne of Asgard, a defeated Thor (Chris Hemsworth - Rush) finds himself banished to the fighting pits of Sakaar. After a surprise reunion with a big green friend (Mark Ruffalo - Spotlight) and with the help of his treacherous brother Loki (Tom Hiddlesden – Kong: Skull Island), Thor sets out to take back his home.
Tumblr media
I really hope James Gunn treats this as, “challenge accepted” for Guardians 3 because Thor Ragnarok has well and truly stepped up to the plate with a fun roller coaster science fiction fantasy. There probably is a little too much going on for one film but like the best Buckaroo players somehow Waititi makes everything balance. The first act in particular moves at quick pace in picking up from Dark World and Age of Ultron to depositing its leads into the subsequent makeshift Planet Hulk section; yet it everything is easy to follow and if doesn’t let up on the action or gags. There are some sections where the story slows or feels like its being wrenched back towards titular Ragnarok story instead of further exploring the new, interesting location of Sakaar (it’s like a cosmic Room of Requirement). Then there’s Hela. She’s awesome, full of character and one of Marvel’s better villains but between her initial takeover and the big showdown final act the story seems constantly grasping for something to do with her. Yet many of the smaller squeezed in elements are brilliant. As teased in his 2016 debut, Doctor Strange features, hilariously dominating the screen for a few minutes before disappearing like magic. The opening Sutur sequence is both a mini action movie and really sets the film’s tone with a few well placed gags.
Then there is Sakaar.... pretty much everything makes you want to smash the glass and jubilantly shout, “another!”. It looks fantastic being part junkyard part vibrant colourful city. It comes with its own soundtrack of eerie and edgy electronic that you could happily leave on repeat for entire house party. It provides great action spectacle with the much hyped Thor Vs Hulk gladiator fight and an impressive air combat sequence. Yet the real magic of this section and really the entire film is the new characters it provides. First there’s Jeff Goldblum’s laid back but apparently tyrannical Grand Master running the show. It’s like Goldblum took a long look at his performance in Independence Day Resurgence and said, “right, next time I’m having some fun”. He’s clearly given free reign over his character and wonderful to watch as a result. Then there’s Tessa Thompson’s (Creed) Valkyrie who becomes a great parody of alcoholic ex-warrior with a killer first entrance and if they want to develop her as new love interest for Thor I’m all on board with that. Waititi even fits in Wilderpeople’s stern faced Rachel House as Goldbum’s assistant but every single one of these people pales in comparison to Korg; a rock man motion captured and voiced by the director himself. His every line is dripping with dry New Zealand wit and frequently becomes the satirical towards genre troupes. Yet his routine never gets old throughout as even his final line will reduce you to hysterics. I don’t care when or how, the MCU needs to see more of Korg.
There is a flipside to such joyous madness as for some this will be too much of a departure from what they’ve come to except of a Marvel movie. Or those that like a film to occasionally take itself seriously for dramatic investment. Even those in love at first Korg may still get the odd moment of feeling that it’s getting too silly. Ultimately Thor Ragnarok is like the most imaginative and full of life 5 year old you’ve ever met; you can be mesmerised by it for hours but every now and then it becomes a danger to itself. Then there’s its use of The Hulk in his continual “No Banner” state. That will likely be divisive among fans. In conversation/non-action scenes he comes as very childish in way really contradicts his prior Avenger incarnations. Rather than being the tortured monster of age he’s meant to be he’s shown more like a stroppy toddler. Although to the film’s credit, Hulk gets probably the best emotional moment in the entire film when Banner finally makes a comeback and Ruffalo’s Banner scenes are all great. Then there’s dressing up Odin like The Walking Dead’s Hershel.... nobody needed to see that.
Of course there are post credits scenes. It’s what’s now become the norm of a mid-credits scene teasing a future film and a final coda catching up with someone from this film. It doesn’t have the best Stan Lee cameo but you won’t care following a certain actor’s appearance much earlier. If you want Marvel movies to be more serious you’ll leave Ragnarok wishing it was the end of the world but if you love their typically fun approach this will become one of your favourites. Thor Ragnarok makes it very clear that this is the last Thor solo movie of this incarnation but Asgard goes out with a bang.... and yes, it Ragna-rocks!
0 notes
cinedave · 6 years
Text
REVIEW: Geostorm - A Downpour of Dumb Fun
Sometimes you really are your own worst enemy. You make judgements based your own experiences and over thinking the scraps of available information but sometimes that’s little more self projecting. Like when you’re deciding to see a new film based on its promos and trailers. Sometimes instead of judging what you see you just latch on something that stirs bad memory of old..... forgive me film fans for I have sinned. From everything in the lead up I really thought Geostorm was going to be a flaming pile of awfulness. It screamed to me of those terrible weather based Syfy b-movies like Weather War. Yet against all odds and all preconceptions the forecast is bright for this film. My God it’s dumb.... but it’s actually a lot dumb fun.
In 2019 scientist Jake Lawson (Gerard Butler – “Sparta!!!”) creates a satellite network to control the Earth’s weather and avert natural disasters. It’s all blue skies until years later he’s called to investigate a series of malfunctions that could trigger a catastrophic global weather event.... you guessed it, a “geostorm”.
Tumblr media
This film is an over the top cheesy late 90s blockbuster for a double decade throwback (which makes sense being directed by the writer of Stargate and Independence Day). More specifically this is a weather based reincarnation of Michael Bay’s Armageddon; right down to Butler and Jim Sturgess (Cloud Atlas) as his brother echoing the relationship of Bruce Willis and Ben Affleck before them. It has the same pattern of breaking up the narrative with globetrotting city destroying set pieces where people helpless cannon fodder or that one person/cute little dog that miraculously survives everything. It’s got the same dialogue style that gets away with occasionally being too sappy by balancing it with humour and interesting supporting characters..... and all of that is great! It compromises a film that will trouble no awards lists and be staring at the upturned nose of many critics but if you can accept Geostorm as just being a movie you’ll have the sun shining down on you. It’s frequently ridiculous but there’s no delusion whatsoever; everyone involved knows the score. There are no attempts to give Geostorm a modern edge of gritty realism making it ideal for those sick of such saturation. It’s pure implausible science fiction for the sheer sake of an entertaining spectacle and because of that it’s a riot. Hell the featured space station is the size of a flagship aircraft carrier and the entire Earth is covered by a physically linked net of satellites but nobody wastes your time trying to make the logistics convincing. In fact speaking of time, this storm is comfortably under 2 hours in length and as such is not a needlessly drawn out affair.
Then there are the money shot set weather disaster set pieces that for the most part look great. Most seem to have been selected on a, “wouldn’t be funny if...” basis; tidal waves in deserts, blizzards on tropical beaches, heat wave in Russia etc. Yet they’re fast, frantic, creative and a couple of cases heart pounding and thrilling. The highlight being a lightning storm from the perspective a few key characters trying to drive out of it with bolts all over the road around them. It’s nothing more than popcorn cinema.... but its good popcorn cinema. The space elements of the film also look pretty good. Not every set aboard the space station looks perfect but the very nature of the film makes you roll with details like this.
The story could still do with some work though as not everything comes together. For instance, the film has an Optimus Prime like opening and closing narration by Butler’s daughter (Talitha Bateman – Annabelle Creation) and early scenes establish her as a significant character... except then she disappears for nearly entire film. Just popping up at the end to be shown worrying if her dad will come back (like he promised he would... of course). Other smaller character stories also feel chopped and shoved in; most likely because they were. After poor initial test screenings the film underwent re-shoots in which new characters were added. Then of course, while I’m generally saluting the dumb entertainment value of this film there are points where it becomes just plain dumb.
While Gerard Butler feels like he’s merely going for the motions, Geostorm has some worthy cast mentions. For starters Jim Sturgess is giving off enough emotion for both half of the paired brothers. Although, the highlight of the cast is Abbie Cornish (Suckerpunch) as his arse kicking Secret Service girlfriend; balancing the professional requirements of her job and their relationship. The likes of Andy Garcia (Oceans 11) and Ed Harris (Westworld) are on hand as POTUS and Secretary of State. There’s even Deadpool 2’s Domino (Zazie Beetz) as tech genius Max.
Look, you are going see and hear a lot of bad things about this film. It will be stinking out Rotten Tomatoes, YouTube film bloggers will be stomping it into the ground.... and many of them will have a point. But if you just want a film you can’t possibly take seriously, to kick back and laugh with for a while then (against all expectations) Geostorm is actually a great viewing choice. I’d forecast that’ll soon by eclipsed by Thor Ragnarok in this capacity but that’s a storm most films will have to weather.
0 notes
cinedave · 6 years
Text
REVIEW: The Lego Ninjago Movie - Are the Bricks Beginning to Break?
This third Lego movie marks the franchise’s first attempt to generate internal value. While both prior films had elements of originality they were both heavily populated other pop culture characters and elements thanks to Lego’s many licences (...mostly Batman). It’s a bold move to hope their current wave of popularity can carry them towards making one of their own lesser known brands into a big screen commodity. It would have been a great one too if its directors (all 3 of them) could only follow the instructions left by Phil Lord and Chris Miller. Instead what we have here is a lot of good parts that don’t look as good the way they have been thrown together. It’s a laugh and enjoyable viewing but everything is not awesome this time around.
The Lego city of Ninjago is under attack by Lord Garmadon (Justin Theroux – The Leftovers). The only hope of stopping him is a secret ninja force led by Garmadon’s son, Lloyd (Dave Franco – Now You See Me).... but are they a match for the ultimate weapon?
Tumblr media
“Lego Power Rangers”.... that’s the film. A bunch of high school kids living secret lives as martial arts gifted superheroes with gigantic robot mechs/”definitely not Zords” at their disposal. It carries a lot of the problems people criticised the recent Rangers reboot for too. Its central band of power ninjas are lacking any character beyond a single overused trait; the nervous one, the one that says “brah” all the time, the one that’s pretending not to be a robot.... ok, that last one is quite fun but the rest become nothing more than single note running gags. It makes it really difficult care about them. Worst of all is lead character Lloyd. While he has a bit more depth than the rest of his crew courtesy of evil warlord father/heroic ninja son relationship, as a protagonist he’s weaker than a wet spaghetti bridge. Whether by comparison to Emmet and Batman before him or just to kids/animated films in general he’s a dull and often annoying protagonist. Even more surprising is that Ninjago seems to forget its Lego movie. There’s minimal incorporation the wall breaking troupes that make the franchise work like characters master building their way out of situations or the incorporation of real world objects to imply things are taking place in someone’s gigantic model play set. The bits that are featured aren’t great either. You’ve problem seen a cat in the trailers. While cute, fluffy and initially funny it appears too early and massively overstays its welcome (imagine if Team America’s “panthers” were in half of the movie... the gag would get old). While the book ending real world scenes with Jackie Chan (who also voices the mentor Master Wu) are a nice touch this all feels like a film/script that started life as a different project and has been salvaged into a Lego based film rather than being built for purpose.
Thankfully Ninjago did learn some key lessons from its masters by building the film a central emotional story that forms a parody on certain film clichés. Just like Lego Batman was at heart a Batman/Joker relationship drama, Ninjago becomes an absent father/son bonding story to back drop of a martial arts fantasy. It produces all the film’s best comedy material over having Garmadon clueless to his son’s paternal needs before working in bonding material to less likely situations. It also develops into stronger emotional material than expected as the story progresses to the point of reveal, more akin to the father/son scenes of The Lego Movie. Visually, this film is 100% up to its franchise standards. The animation and vastly detailed Ninjago city scenes look more spectacular than a finished Lego Death Star and the mech battling actions sequences are some of the best Lego footage to date. Whatever faults this film has in story or there will still be something on screen for you to enjoy. I also liked the visual presentation of Garmadon and his army from the over use of shark theming to his fish costumed lackies. Speaking of the 4 armed, fire crying black warlord, Garmadon is hands down the best part of the film. Justin Theroux gives him character than the rest of the cast combined and while not every gag lands (his running “La-Loyd” pronunciation gets old quick) his every scene finds something to make you smile.
In a year of two Lego movies this will be remembered as, “the other one” and carries less adult appeal than its predecessors. While being great half term fodder for parents looking to occupy their kids for an afternoon; it’s blood in the water for the Lego franchise. Ninjago is a harsh reminder to the Master Builders that their films, like their product, do not make themselves.
0 notes
cinedave · 6 years
Text
REVIEW: Blade Runner 2049 - A Re-Masterpiece
You keep seeing it as social media trend; being asked to post a picture of yourself from 5 years back and now next to each other. Cue a lot of insightful comments like, “OMG I was totes weird back then” over how different you look. Saying that someone looks different from one year to the next is like saying a cat is bigger than a kitten. Time changes our appearance as a certainty, be that through age or social trends. Yet people and films have something in common in here; with enough money, you can make anything or anyone look like their old selves. Looks are easy. Looks are surface and shallow substance. Can you become something or someone again? That is the real question. A long settled father can get his old leather jacket out the closet but can be that same larger than life 19 year old with an attitude? A film can make a sequel after 30 years; it can bring back its old cast, it can remake its old sets but can it be the same film again? Too often it can’t (Crystal Skull, Independence Day Resurgence). Today it can. Blade Runner 2049 is many things but above all else it is without doubt another Blade Runner and another stunning piece of science fiction.
In 2049 synthetically grown humans known as Replicants are created for the work regular humans no longer care for. One of them is K (Ryan Gosling – La La Land), an LAPD detective tasked with “retiring” Replicants gone rogue; known as a Blade Runner. When a case reveals something impossible it threatens to change everything.
Tumblr media
The biggest problem with any long belated sequel is re-capturing the feel of its original material while still presenting as a modern film. The best thing about Blade Runner 2049 is way it manages to merge the two together. Some dim smoky streets and markets look fresh out of 1982 with meticulous attention to detail. Even comparable visual shots like city fly-overs may be sharper in resolution but still feel like the same dystopian future setting as the emotive scoring resonates around the images. Yet at the same time the film utilises present day production values (and a much bigger budget than the original) for the kind of jaw dropping moments fans would expect like a science fiction blockbuster of this generation. That’s not a case of a modern tech do over as there’s no shortage of creativity on show here from the director of last year’s seminal Arrival. Even smaller moments become standout out sequences and the physical sets look as amazing as the visual effects. Although the story is of a different nature, 2049 also recaptures Blade Runner’s tone. Gosling delivers a similar grim and emotional restrained performance to Deckard before him. Ideals of humanity and subjugation are still at the fore front of the story and are extremely well handled. In many ways this story is a flipped perspective as we see the world through K’s Replicant eyes.
That brings us to the biggest problem so to speak. While it is a fair for any sequel to expect some level of existing audience knowledge, this film 100% for existing fans only. It is not accessible to newcomers as there are many call backs with minimal explanation. As confirmed by a friend of mine seeing it fresh and being confused throughout (admittedly he went in thinking it was a Running Man reboot). That said, the way the story developed and evolved areas of the first film really impressed me. It’s a film that’s less interested on being a continuation and more an expansion. There’s a real strong theme over perceptions of reality through artificial minds driven a surprisingly rewarding subplot between K and his holographic/computer girlfriend Joi (Ane de Armas – Knock Knock)... take a moment to consider that K is a K is quiet, socially awkward guy with an imaginary girlfriend. Nerd cultures most relatable protagonist ever? Anyway, the pair accepts they are both artificial but define themselves as real to each other by the feelings they share. If you enjoyed the way 2013s Her explored the practicalities of such a relationship (which I did... a lot)  this will equally hit home with you. In fact, a particularly surrogate syncing scene was my highlight of the film. There’s a bit less action this time around but in lands in quick and effective bursts to accentuate moments of the story rather than forming set peices. Most fights or shoot outs are over quick due to the efficiency of the Replicants involved which makes a particular final show down all the more impactful for its duration. The film may also be a touch too long, pushing past 2 hours 30 but it’s methodically structured and paced throughout.
There’s one other significant fault that I’m surprised in calling out but there were issues with Harrison Ford’s contributions to the film. Now I did enjoy him on screen and in particular the whole first meeting between him and Gosling excellent but at no point did I feel like I was seeing Rick Deckard again. This is Harrison Ford being Harrison Ford in the same kind of lovable way that worked for The Force Awakens but Deckard was meant to be a more sombre and contrasting for him and he doesn’t re-find that performance here. On the other hand I have nothing but good things to say about Ryan Gosling in this film. The character suits him perfectly as he conveys the hollow defeated nature of a world that will always see him as a lower class. Elsewhere the film has a strong ensemble of smaller supporting roles. While Jared Leto’s blind head of the Wallace corporation feels the wrong kind of artificial, the rest all serve to enhance the film. This includes Dave “Drax” Bautista, Robin Wright (The Princess Bride), Mackenzie Davis (The Martian), Barkhad “I’m the Captain now” Abdi and Lennie “Walking Dead’s Morgan” James (playing it very crazy Morgan).
The film does end with many things unresolved and questions unanswered.... but this Blade Runner, what the hell did you expect? An credits gag reel before a post credits coda that ties it all together? 2049 is a respective trip back to a fascinating world with a story that’s just smarter than you think it is. Look out for plenty of Easter Eggs (like the Sulaco from Aliens making an appearance). Most importantly of all I left wanting to see what happens next should Ridley Scott wish to go there. Whether in 3 years or another 30 there are still more things to see that we wouldn’t believe.
0 notes
cinedave · 7 years
Text
REVIEW: American Assassin  - Nope.... just ass
Well this is a pickle (Rick).... I really really wanted to make a perfect storm analogy to open this review but something tells me that with Irma and the rest of her big scary friends still smashing up Florida, it may be a little insensitive. I really had it all planned out too, before that little light bulb of being inappropriate dinged over my head. So instead I’ll cut straight to the point; just like Hurricane Irma, this film sucks.
After losing his fiancé to a terrorist attack Mitch Rapp (Dylan O’Brien – The Maze Runner) seeks revenge. This leads him to the elite CIA unit of Stan Hurley (Michael Keaton – Spiderman Homecoming) and trying to stop a Ghost of Stan’s past (Taylor Kitsch – Lone Survivor) obtaining a nuclear weapon.
Tumblr media
Watching American Assassins was one of those very rare film experiences where you struggle to believe how bad things actually are because on paper (and promotional material) this should have been a decent film. Director Michael Custa previously helmed some great season one episodes of Homeland (earning him an Emmy nomination) within the same action/spy genre this film is trying to cover. Its source material is the first chronological story in the late Vince Fylnn’s best selling Mitch Rapp series and there’s clear intent to make this a franchise around Dylan O’Brien who has already proved he can anchor The Maze Runner series. So what went wrong?... Well pretty much everything. Although the story may be an adaption (that I won’t claim to have read) it’s the same generic affair of a loose cannon hotshot agent overcoming his personnel demons with the help of his father figure mentor. It’s been done to death and almost always better. Next up, this film has less clue what it wants to be than your mate that still says they’re going to quit working at McDs 10 years later. It’s caught between being a hard and gritty action thriller driven by moments of realism to an over the top Bond like action affair making the tone into an inconsistent mess. Take the opening tragic origin scene in which much of the camerawork follows Mitch around in a Saving Private Ryan style as terrorists start gunning down civilians everywhere... without any consideration as to why said terrorists are conducting a massacre at a large beach resort in Ibiza. The film cannot film consistent logic over events or character motivations and makes the CIA look dumb. In fact much of it even devolves into a Team America-esque depiction of terrorism and foreign cultures. It is needlessly over violent featuring close up torture shots fingernails being sliced, skin blow torched and many more items on my list things I’d rather do than watch this film again.
Yet despite everything I’ve just mentioned, this film could still have been an enjoyable mess. That does happen and usually the resulting film makes for passable viewing by having some good bits among the wreckage. Yep you guessed it, this film is a Pulp Fiction style shooting of a full clip and hitting nothing but air. The action elements of this film are not bad but they are made to be terrible by some unforgivably awful camerawork. Any quality in the fighting is lost in blur of incoherent camera cuts that make nothing look or feel natural. It negates any skill from actors/stunt team involved by leaving its audience unable discern what’s actually taking place. The boat fight in particular is so dodgy it looks like it’s taking place on a bouncy castle. Then there are the CG effects. There’s a lot more of them than you’d expect as the final act tries (and fails) to really up the drama and the results are visually disappointing. Yes, this is only a modest film at $33m but plenty of films have done much better with much less and so I hold American Assassin to their standards. The script and dialogue are also pretty poor. The four different screenwriter names to this film imply it’s been passed around and re-written a lot trying to find a version that works. We can assume they eventually just said, “ah screw it, that’ll do”. CBS films acquired the film to rights to this book series back in 2008. They contractually had to get a film in production by April 2016 or the rights reverted back to the late author’s estate. Hence, they rushed in with what they have and the rest is not worthy of history.
Alright, lets pause this evisceration for a moment for the film’s sole positive; the ever reliable Michael Keaton. His character still isn’t the most rounded but Keaton still finds ways to interject entertaining quirks making his character feel deeper and more real than the rest of the cast combined. He even raises a few smiles and laughs in the process. Dylan O’Brien also gets a free pass in terms of this film’s criticism. While he’s certainly not the anchoring lead protagonist the film needs it’s not through lack of trying with clear evidence he is putting a lot of effort in; he just doesn’t have the material to work with. By contrast I’m giving Taylor Kitsch 2 in the chest and 1 in the head for this performance. Just because his character is called Ghost doesn’t mean he should be pale and lifeless. In fact I’m still not 100% certain actually turned up for filming. This is a big deal because the film places heavy importance on the relationship between Ghost and certain other characters but all that feels meaningless as a result.... yet he’s still not the worst. That honour goes firmly to Sanaa Lathan’s (Alien Vs Predator) CIA bigwig. It’s like she’s stuck in first gear the whole movie. No matter dramatic or fast moving a scene is, she’s only capable of thinking or reacting very very slowly. As such her every moment on camera drags this film down. At all times she looks like an actress struggling to play character which is a complete buzz-kill when this film is trying to have an edge of realness to it.
Now look, some people reading this may still het some kicks out of seeing American Assassin... and some probably already have. That’s cool, you like what you like but for me this is not the kind of film we should be giving a “meh... it’s alright” pass to. This is somewhere we should draw a line in the sand and say this is not standing of action/thriller movies we want to receive. We want films like John Wick, like The Raid, like Free Fire; films of quality production and character work that push the genre forward. Not lacklustre efforts that show a film can just be thrown together and people will still buy into it. This Assassin has hit me at a nerve..... be warned that it may do the same to you.
0 notes
cinedave · 7 years
Text
REVIEW: IT - Yep.... they nailed IT!
Sometimes we really do over react. Despite the current “get offended by everything” perceptions I’m not going to pretend this is a recent development because 20th century history begs to differ. Yet sometimes we get so desperate to see the worst in a situation that we’ll the most insignificant detail or flaw out of proportion. That’s certainly what happened when the first images of Pennywise the Clown hit the web from this year’s new adaptation of Stephen King’s IT. People couldn’t call IT or Bill Skarsgård terrible fast enough..... well, it seems they are the ones with the last laugh. Both this film and its feature clown menace are excellent.
Every generation bad things happen in the town of Derry. A shape shifting entity lurks within its sewers; Pennywise the Dancing Clown (Bill Skarsgård – Hemlock Grove). In 1988 kids start being haunted by their nightmares and disappearing until the “Losers Club”, led by Bill (Jaeden Lieberher – Midnight Special) decide to face their fear once and for all.
Tumblr media
Now while this IT-carnation has been in development for some time the film resonates with the same well captured immersion into 80s childhood that many will be familiar with from the recent likes of Stranger Things (helped by sharing a Hawkins alumni in Finn “Will” Wolfard”). In fact IT is very much the upside down to said Netflix smash, being set primarily during bright summer daytimes rather than eerie nights. It helps convey a Stand By Me/E.T. level aesthetic to the central “Losers Club” kids and helps create films most important theme; childhood innocence and coming of age. While IT is at its core a horror film underneath that it’s a small town set fantasy adventure that boils down to battle between good and evil as these kids confront the embodiment of their greatest fears. Whereas as most horror films that aspire towards being a franchise want you embrace the villain, IT keeps the kids feeling like strong and likeable protagonists throughout. Scenes of the kids having fun (and just being kids) are given just as much importance as the horror money shots, with no shortage of humour. It even manages to make their more conventional evils of bullies and overly affectionate fathers seem as bigger deal as their supernatural demons. That’s taking nothing away from the clown based antics (more on that later) but this film really impressed me with the way gave its young group actual character. Even if nothing more than an archetype like the loud mouth or the hypochondriac each gets their own development and the sense that these events are changing them. Pay particular attention to Sophia Lillis as token girl Bev, delivering what will come to be known as her breakout performance. Though chances are everyone watching will find at least something or someone they can relate too within the diversity of the Losers Club.
Another feature that really made the film work for me was its pacing and story progression. Horror 101 is to deliver an early big scare then spend another two thirds of the film building up and teasing towards an all out climax , often stagnating along the way..... but thankfully, not in Derry. Not only does the horror based material begin early in the film but it becomes a steady and consistent reoccurrence throughout as the story builds around it rather than towards it. You’ll never have to wait too long for another creepy or scare based scene if that’s what floats you’re balloon. For the most part the story progresses very nicely, helped by a quick moving first act. There are a couple mid/two thirds points where things get a bit slack. The required later stages group fall out especially feels like a speed bump in the narrative but overall director Andrés Muschietti (Mama) deserves credit for keeping this circus moving in time. It even justifies its 2 hour plus run time and when the hell was the last time a horror did that? The story has also been well split for this first of two planned films. Those familiar with Stephen King’s novel or the previous Tim Curry incarnation will know that IT takes place when these characters are kids and 30 years later as adults. Making this film entirely about that childhood section of the story was emphatically the right choice. It makes the film so much more approachable by giving IT an easy to follow linear story rather than two tangled timelines to unravel. No prior knowledge or familiarity is required to enjoy this film.
As for the film’s horror based content that is an interesting mixed affair that almost constitutes a rope-a-dope. Many scenes are deliberately less scary (even goofy in places) as the kids a menaced by the kind of generic CG monster you’d see on an evening TV show. Although you will find yourself questioning the moment (“is this meant to be scary”)... fear not because they make the real scares seem bigger and all the more terrifying by comparison. At several points this film is genuinely messed up with moments that stretch every inch of its age certificate (how did they get away with that bathroom scene?). Of course all the best moments come from the clown IT-self and this is where cinematographer Chung-hoon Chung should take a bow for the intensity and visceral way these clown attacks are presented. From a signature shaky cam lunge towards the camera to perfectly framed close ups. What’s more the transition that Skarsgård achieves between happy grinning clown and nightmare creature is at times terrifying. If you already have an issue with clowns I would (regrettably) advise giving this film a miss. Overall, while hardcore horror fans will raise an eyebrow to the softer scary scenes they will be satisfied by the full picture. This film is also quite open towards the less horror inclined because of its strong character and coming of age charm along with clear breaks in between the horror based scenes.
I walked out of IT feeling that this wasn’t just a case of getting a good horror remake/adaptation for a change. This was more of what I would like horror movies to be. Yes, give us blood, scares, elaborate villains and the whole damn circus but give us content and depth behind that too. If you’re even slightly horror inclined/tolerant I would strongly recommend checking it out.
0 notes
cinedave · 7 years
Text
REVIEW: Detroit - Solid and hard hitting drama
For a long time the term, “stranger than fiction” always confused me. Maybe it was growing up with some wonderfully imaginative fantasy and science fiction that and made the idea of reality being stranger, little more than comic. Yet over time grew to understand it. We don’t say that things are stranger than fiction in regards to creativity but their illogic. The things that by common principles of morality and humanity should not have happened, but did.... that is stranger than fiction and I’m pretty sure that in 50 years time we’ll be describing Brexit that way. Even our recent history contains more examples than we’d like to admit and Kathryn Bigelow’s new film Detroit tells the story of an infamous American case of police brutality.
Following the 50th anniversary of Detroit’s 12th Street Riots, this is the story of the infamous Algiers Motel Incident through the eyes of local security contractor Melvin (John Boyega – Star Wars), Police Sergeant  Phillip Krauss (Will Poulter – The Revenant) and R&B singer Larry Reed (Algee Smith) among others.
Tumblr media
Now let’s begin where the film ends. By saying that facts of the Algiers incident have never been “officially” confirmed and as such parts of this film are dramatised based on eye witness reports. It only feels fair to state that before rather than in an afterthought as Detroit delivers. With that said Detroit is an excellent period drama/thriller that well captures the atrocities and racial prejudice of its mid 60s setting. It’s intentionally unsettling in places but director Kathryn Bigelow does well to the focus on driving motivations of fear in both the police officers and their victims. In fact as the hotel incident progresses the most fascinating aspect becomes position of the key police officers still trying to maintain fear and intimidation over their captive hostages while becoming increasingly terrified they’ve made a huge mistake as no evidence or suspects emerge. The story becomes a fascinating examination of desperation in just how far the officers will pursue the worsening situation in fear of the consequences. I particularly enjoyed the way this reflected through the reactions of others involved like deployed military personnel losing their taste for the interrogation tactics to leave or even conspire against the police. The first two thirds of the film are also very well paced. The earlier scenes slowly work the key characters into preceding events while the riot gets underway before the hotel incident begins. Yet it’s only the first two thirds for a reason.
Detroit’s length is something of an issue; or rather the unexpected final act that stretches further than you’ll expect. With the main bulk of the main bulk of the film being the night’s events at the Algiers Motel you’d expect the film to conclude swiftly in its aftermath. Instead a new lengthy story section begins over the fallout and eventual trial process of those involved. Now in terms of historic representation this section without doubt crucial as the lack of justice is genuinely shocking. However this could have and really should have been condensed to preserve the film’s earlier momentum rather than feeling like a restart. I have one other significant grip with this film and the casting of Will Poulter as essentially the lead villain of the racial intimidation and brutality. I’ve liked Poulter as an actor since he was kid in Son of Rambow but I really couldn’t buy him as his character here. His youthful appearance doesn’t help but neither does he rise to the evil he’s supposed to be portraying and keeps key sequences feeling like a Hollywood dramatisation rather than an immersive re-telling. Even when flanked by the more convincing Jack Raynor (Sing Street) and Ben O’Toole behind in there’s a lack of presence and menace to him that puts a ceiling on some events.
However, Detroit does have several castings worthy of solid applause. Front and centre is John Boyega. Our boy Finn recently stated in and interview that he wants to prove himself to people as an actor in roles outside of Star Wars.... and he most definitely has. His performance is outstanding from is solemn composure in recognising the danger around to a genuine breakdown of terror at a crucial plot turn his every minute is magnetic. Also under the motel roof we have Anthony Mackie (Marvel) as a war veteran caught up in the events. Many will recognise Straight Outta Compton’s Eazy-E aka Jason Mitchell as Carl Cooper. Mitchell is thoroughly engaging in his displays of attitude and overconfidence. Look out for Game of Thrones’ Gilly (Hannah Murray) among the hostages too.
I walked away feeling like Detroit was a good and meaningful token viewing experience; I’m unlikely to re-watch it but I enjoyed this viewing a lot. Definitely be mindful of the serious subject matter when considering seeing Detroit because this is not a casual viewing choice but I’d still recommend checking it out. Watch it and thankful that so much of what you see is now history.
0 notes
cinedave · 7 years
Text
REVIEW: The Dark Tower - Just about stays standing
At the centre of the film universe lies the most powerful force in existence... us. Whether we like it or not, as films are made and shaped in response to consumer trends our every decision decides our future. If we support a CG driven action movie, they’ll be many others like it (<insert Transformers reference>). If we mention that films are taking themselves too seriously we get things Deadpool in response. Everything is connected. That’s why we’re most definitely responsible for this summer’s trend of shorter running blockbusters. For years people have been vocally against films more commonly reaching 2 or even hours in length. So naturally filmmakers will see a shorter run time as a more marketable attribute. While ether cases like Dunkirk of this being a success (I couldn’t have taken 2 + hours of that intensity) there are sadly more cases of these cut run times having detrimental effects on their films. Dark Tower becomes the latest casualty of the short run summer; losing some of its magic from fast tracking out its story.
At the centre of the Universe stands The Dark Tower, pretending all from the monsters that lie beyond. The troubled young Jake (Tom Taylor – The Last Kingdom) may be the key to bringing it down for the Man in Black (Matthew McConaughey – Interstellar) unless the Gunslinger (Idris Elba – Pacific Rim) can stop him.
Tumblr media
Now I’m an 80s child; you give a young protagonist adventuring into a fantasy world and I’m all yours and The Dark Tower has more than enough potential to spark my interest. Yet my biggest problem with this adaptation of Stephen King’s literary world was its lack of depth; or rather how much of it the film skips over while racing through its story. The “Mid-World” is shown as being post apocalyptic without any explanation, with vastly inconsistent levels of technology and barely any thought given to its inhabitants. No, I don’t have the shine but I what you’re thinking fanboy. The connected 2018 TV series (in which Idris Elba & Tom Taylor will reprise their roles) is supposed to be filling in the back story of the book series. That’s all well and good and hopefully will result in a deep and rewarding viewing when able to watch them all together.  Yet that does not help The Dark Tower as single viewing experience, especially for casual cinema goers less concerned over waiting a year to fill in the blanks. Director Nikolaj Arcel would have been better off keeping his mind in the present and giving us more to go on. Instead Mid-World feels like a generic cut and paste of studio back lot sets and props.
However, despite some rushing I did like the overall story of The Dark Tower. It carried good classic themes good Vs evil with underlying ideas heroism and sacrifices for the greater good. The Gunslinger is the last hero standing and broken because of it. The events move well enough from location to location and returning to “Keystone Earth” aka Earth provides some good fish out of water material for Elba to play with. What’s more its position as a story continuation rather a book adaption is rather fascinating. For those that haven’t read the books the series concluded in a tad on the timey whimey. After finally reaching the end of his journey at The Dark Tower the Gunslinger wakes up back where it all began with no memory of the events but carrying an artefact he didn’t have last time and whispered message that if he reaches it again the result might be different. So that is the story they’re picking in the films. It’s almost like a 2009 Star Trek reboot, only sticking closer to its original events.
The visuals are at times very impressive and although there is occasional stretch on believability the gun fighting based action set pieces are entertaining and occasionally thrilling. Seeing Elba face down vast ranks of assault rifle wielding minions with a pair of six shooters makes the villains look incompetent more than the hero strong but this is saved by focusing on The Gunslinger’s precision and skill. Despite this the film loses itself in its western theme and there some frustrating points where the story doesn’t give events enough time to sink in and be impactful. The atypical fall out at the two thirds point between the heroic pair lasts barely 2 minutes before they’ve completely moved passed it, leaving it feeling rather pointless.
Another casualty of the condensed running time is villain quality. The Man in Black is quite literally Matthew McConaughey in a black shirt that’s borrowed a few tricks from Killgrave. He has no depth and no discernible personality other a Family guy interpretation of Matthew McConaughey. Similarly his lieutenants are rarely named, given significant screen time or given anything to do other than being a physical presence. The heroes fair better. Elba is certainly believable in his grub stubbornness being the product of his tragedy and holds the film together like its titular Tower. Similarly young Taylor is decent as Jake. He gets almost no establishment time to sell his , “troubled kid” angle but in fact does a lot better with it than he really should. There are moments when he seems to lose his character but despite taking a few hits he stands strong.
So The Dark Tower is an affair of promise Vs problems. It’s the promise of an interesting developing story and a decent lead pair pairing against problems of execution. The future of this tower now rests firmly on the 2018 TV show. If that delivers and successfully fleshes out the world than a potential film sequel could get away with this kind of rushing. It the show crumbles then there’s no rebuilding this tower. I’d call this film worth a watch for genre fans but keep in mind that you’re not getting the full picture.
0 notes
cinedave · 7 years
Text
REVIEW: The Hitman’s Bodyguard - A great comedy pairing
We all have those moments of hindsight when something suddenly clicks. Out of nowhere it’s a game changing idea with a mild downer aftermath it the reality hits you, “why didn’t I think of that sooner?”. When something amazing no seems like it’s been painfully obvious all along. I’m pretty sure that’s what the executives at Millennium Films were screaming after a test screening of The Hitman’s Bodyguard. Putting Ryan Reynolds and Samuel L Jackson together.... why the hell didn’t we think of it sooner? Because this is kind of comedic match made in heaven they haven’t witnessed since Hill & Tatum hit the Jump Streets. Strap in, this one is going to be one hell of a ride.
The notorious hitman Darius Kincaid (Samuel L Jackson – “he’s in everything”) is duo testify to the UN against a villainous Eastern European dictator (Gary Oldman – The Dark Knight) determined to kill him before he gets the chance. He’ll reluctantly need the help of ace protection agent Michael Bryce (Ryan Reynolds – Deadpool).
Tumblr media
What we have here is an all out comedy action film somewhere between Rush Hour and Crank (even sharing some soundtrack choices with that Statham affair). Its action is mostly fast frantic and at times quite ridiculous best encapsulated by a feature hardware store bawl. Director Patrick Hughes makes good use of quick moving camerawork to make the various chases energetic as those involved blaze through the streets of Manchester and Amsterdam. While some sequences feel more generic most boast inventive creativity in for a comic/cartoon like tone. Reynolds is cornered in a kitchen, does he pick up a big chef’s knife? No, a big rolling pin, that’s way more entertaining. The clear message is a film that refuses to take itself seriously. Even romantic subplots (which add to the film than expected) are used as more of a conduit for less action based laughs. Speaking of laughs....
This is a decent action film but is a great comedy. Both Reynolds and Jackson are tearing a page out Jason Statham’s book from Spy in playing their characters comically exaggerated personifications of their own image. Reynolds is a cocky smart mouth and Jackson is a smooth badass that could finish a sentence without either bitch or mother f*****. Their odd couple combination of sending half the film annoying each other works incredibly well. Especially on Jackson; he looks like he’s having more fun than the last decade of his career combined. The pair and banter and rip on each other with superb timing and Tim O’Connor’s script gives them plenty of ace lines to throw at each other. The pair also has a secret weapon in a third comedic knockout; Salma Hayek (Dusk Till Dawn) as Jackson’s imprisoned wife. She’s effortlessly hilarious in even the most simple of moments and in particular her, “how we met” scene with Jackson is comedy gold.
The only wasted opportunity here is not letting Gary Oldman off the leash as the villain. The general OTT tone of the action scenes would have perfectly complimented his eccentric villain routines of the 90s like Air Force One and The Fifth Element . Yet instead he stays stern and composed for the most part. There’s nothing overly bad about his performance but letting Oldman go all out could have been that extra cherry on top to make things truly special. You also have call this film on a few logic points. Early on Jackson takes a bullet to the leg and limbs throughout... unless scene requires to run then someone he’s more nimble. Somehow they started in Manchester, headed west to the coast then caught a ferry to Amsterdam so if the person next you was crying they’re probably a geography teacher.
Yet when it all comes down it this is just outright, doesn’t take itself too seriously fun (in fact a certain flashback is almost a riff on Airplane) and for that reason it is hugely entertaining with a perfect odd couple at the centre. In all honestly it does have the feeling of a comedy that will diminish in appeal upon repeat viewings but takes nothing away from how much you’ll enjoy the first time. If we’re going to be suffering through a third Olympus Has Fallen movie next year then it’s only this hitman & bodyguard come back for another round..... because weeeeee, will always love them mother f*****.
0 notes
cinedave · 7 years
Text
REVIEW: Annabelle Creation - A better crafted 2nd edition
Recently a certain Lanister was telling us there are always lessons in failures and he was right. Whether or not we chose to learn them is another thing. In film terms, if your film has problems do you try to learn from them in a sequel or just keeping them even bigger (aka the Michael Bay Transfomers approach)? Arguably the worst offending genre for not learning or improving on failures through a film series is horror.... yet some do. Last year we had this with Ouija. The first film was poor. The prequel continuation looked to be the same but turned out to be not only improved a genuinely decent horror film. That brings us to the Hot Topic of creepy dolls, Annabelle. Her first film as a Conjouring spin was not only a snooze fest but one of 2014s worst films. Now 3 years later that spin off is getting a prequel. Can the horror prequels kill it 2 years running? Or will it be, “Dull Doll: The Beginning”? Thankfully it’s the first as through superior direction we finally get the creepy doll movie we should have had in the first place.
A group of orphans in the care of Sister Charlotte (Stephanie Sigman - Narcos) move into the house of toymakers Esther (Miranda Otto – LOTR’s Eowyn) and Samuel Mullins (Anthony LaPalgia – Without a Trace) who lost their young daughter in a car accident. One of the orphans finds herself drawn to a rather creepy looking doll that may be much more than in seems.
Tumblr media
This second offering is a much stronger (toy) story. Rather than the first film concentrating on linking the titular doll into the Conjouring “horrorverse”, Creation focuses on the origins of its evil and as a result is much stronger horror material. Yes this is about as generic is horror movie stories gets with a group of innocents moving into a creepy old house only to find (non-spoiler alert) that it’s haunted/possessed/has someone crazy living in the walls. Similarly there are many elements of the setting that are completely signposted as being used for later scares (like a well and a stair lift) to make the film far too predictable. Yet despite those cracks in the porcelain, Creation has a crucial trick in its toy box that keeps it being more enjoyable. That is its pace. So many horror films fall flat on their face by slowing down to draw out their intrigue and suspense only to lose all momentum and get flat out boring. By contrast, this Annabelle is as energetic is its featured daughter. After an introductory 20 minutes or so the scares start only to stay frequent and consistent right through to the finish. It counters its predictability by giving you less time to think about it due to the more rewarding on screen distractions. It’s here we remember that director David F Sanberg gave us last year’s impressive Lights Out. His work behind the camera is the hat on the Malibu Stacey doll that transforms Annabelle into an entirely new product. While we still plenty of still shots down corridors or across rooms, when they add to the tension, the film also makes great use or more quick & dynamic shots. Not only do these provide some fun scene transitions but add to the desperation of frantic moments.
The horror imagery on display is mostly well crafted. CG is not Annabelle’s friend but practical effects most certainly are. The film knows how to use its principle creepy looking prop and all the best moments come from twisting the anticipation over whether or not something will happen when the doll is on screen. This makes for some big jump moments and really tantalising tension when things are lingering in and out of darkness. Some of the more simple tricks are also quite affective; such as an oversized dollhouse replica of the house made by the toymaker father. It’s excellent trigger for over active imaginations. Then there is the CG monster imagery. This continues the idea from the first film of doll being a conduit for a big nasty evil which occasionally makes its way on screen. The trouble is that feels completely out of place with more suspenseful sections of the film. It’s the same problem that killed the last Paranormal Activity movie by, “showing you the activity”. When a horror film creates fear from the unknown and uncertainty the last thing you should do is give that a face or a shambling shape. It does still provide some good moments here but should have been used more sparingly.
Creation makes an interesting transition into being a slasher movie in its final act and more the most part it actually works. There are enough cast members still kicking about to create multiple situations of action and peril while but crucially these are still interwoven into the existing suspense format to have scenes and characters make snap changes in tone. This section and some early moments do make Creation far more graphic than its original with a number of rather gory images so if that’s not your ides of playtime maybe give this game a miss. The cast are nothing memorable but do the job of conveying their fear and emotions when required even if their dialogue is nothing special. Lord of the Rings fans should be wary that Miranda Otto has much less screen time that you’ll expect and feels quite underused. However, bonus points for having the young Annabelle played an actress called Samara.
Creation even finishes itself with a bow by ultimately linking up to its 2014 film seamlessly to round off an entertaining horror prequel with far more merit than expected. For fans that like suspense and can tolerate some graphic imagery, Annabelle Creation will likely make for a good night’s viewing.
0 notes
cinedave · 7 years
Text
REVIEW: Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets - Ambitious but flawed
People don’t forget; at least not when it matters. Even before we started capturing and uploading everything/way too much online people would not forget if you made something great.... because they’ll want you to do it again. If a musician writes an incredible song the rest of their career could be garbage but people listen out in case lightning strikes twice. If you’re a film director that makes a classic, era defining film, people will remember and with each new release will be waiting for something equally good. We watch Simon West deliver poor action movies in the hope he’s got another Con Air in him. We watch M. Knight Shymalan badly landing twists for just one more Sixth Sense knockout (and we may actually get it if his recent form continues). Then there is French director Luc Besson. The man whose science fiction miss-adventures we’ll still flock to see because he gave us the joy that was The Fifth Element. Now 20 years later he makes his closest ever return to that subject matter with the space odyssey Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets (adapted from a long running French comic series). While it will still leave you waiting for The Sixth Element (time is not important.... only life), it’s an eye catching shambles of a space romp that delivers some entertainment.
In a galactic 26th century Major Valerian (Dane DeHaan – Chronicle, Amazing Spiderman 2) and Sergeant Laureline (Cara Delevingne – Paper Towns, Suicide Squad) are Federation special agents that must deal with a mysterious threat to their vast space station home; Alpha, The City of a Thousand Planets.
Tumblr media
Now I’m not going to fault this film for ambition other than having too much of it. A lot of artistry and creativity has clearly gone into bringing the film’s vast scenery to life with some CG tracking shots being more detailed than a politician’s expense claims. However there are some noticeable moments where it’s quantity over quality as some heavily populated CG scenes do no not feel as polished as they should be. It’s like when you full screen a video beyond the limits of its resolution; losing its detail from a scale it can’t cope with. That said the visuals the film gets right are at time genuinely breathtaking. The highlight is the opening act “Big Market” mission that sees the duo on a mission across parallel dimensions of space. It’s a completely fun and engaging early set piece that sets the tone for the film’s successes; just being bonkers in space. It were the film’s entirety it would he fared much better but it also incorporates more Trek akin deeper morality issues that require the film to take itself seriously which is a major mission failure. Not only is the story’s underlying darker plot painfully obvious but it can’t find the balance between the gravity of its back story events and translating their impact into the present story. The ending in particular is something of a letdown.
Ultimately when this film is just being daft in space it’s good and at times even great. Feature moments like Valerian taking a “direct” route through various zones of the space station or the final act shoot out are quite the riot. Neither the story nor script is amazing but focusing on the fun of setting eases that for the welcome feeling of a fun summer blockbuster that also puts a lot of effort into building an immersive world. There are plenty of enjoyable surprises from the various weapons and technology employed by the different characters and races. Not to mention a lot of colourful and entertaining aliens along the way.
The film heavily revolves around the central pairing of Valerian and Laureline yet they’re a very one sided pairing because Daniel DeHann has been badly miss-cast here. He’s pledged as a smooth lady killer comes across like the guy whose Tinder dates never bother to show up. They’ve tried to make a quirky outsider into a lovable rogue and unsurprisingly it hasn’t worked. Yet by contrast Cara Delevingne works great as his partner/reluctant love interest in her nonchalance parrying his advances with a witty overtone. So much so that through her lead the pair even have passable chemistry together as the film builds the idea of their co-dependency through their adventures. As for the rest of the cast Valerian shows considerable skills in the art of underutilising great names in supporting roles. The likes of Clive Owen (Sin City) and Ethan Hawke (Boyhood) are thoroughly wasted in confining single note roles devoid of anything memorable. Then by contrast, the heavily advertised appearance of Rihanna as a shape shifter is a feature role that really should have stayed a single scene cameo. Even ignoring the fact that they called her Bubbles and her blue blobby nature form looks ridiculous she adds nothing to film by hanging round for another 15 minutes after her stage performance.
Luc Besson has reportedly already written the first Valerian sequel and is working on the second. Although the first offering was independently funded to reach its €197m budget (making it the most expensive European film and most expensive independent film in history) it looks like the film’s returns will struggle to match such ambition. It seems unlikely we’ll see this incarnation of Valerian flying again. While there is value in seeing its visuals on the big screen I wouldn’t call this essential viewing for casuals or genre fans because a safer bet for streaming/DVD release. Despite Valerian’s flaws it does show that Luc Besson’s imaginative heart is still in the right.... and hopefully one day, the rest of his film-making will catch up.
1 note · View note
cinedave · 7 years
Text
REVIEW: 47 Metres Down - Deep tension, shallow characters
There’s a problem with shark movies.... and we’re it. In the way we seem to make sharks the great white exception when separating film fiction from fact. We watch a film about a human serial killer but afterwards we don’t look at all humans thinking they’re serial killers. Yet we see a film in which a shark selectively attacks people and come out assuming real sharks are the same. If that sounds dumb.... congratulations, you’re awesome.... but as someone that’s spent a fistful of years working in an aquarium I can tell you that a worrying amount of people have taken the likes of Jaws and Deep Blue Sea as factual (ok, Sharknado they get). When in fact globally, barely 6 people a year are killed by sharks; more than double that are killed are killed by vending machines. The problem is not the films themselves it is the fools that mistake them for documentaries. So if you check out the latest offering 47 Metres Down (for tense horror/thriller fans I recommend you do) just remember; the sharks are acting too.
Sisters Lisa (Mandy More –Tangled, This Is Us) and Kate (Claire Holt - The Vampire Diaries) are on holiday in Mexico and persuaded to try cage diving when sharks. When they’re cage breaks sending them 47 metres down to the sea bed with only an hour of air and predators circling above..... they’ll wish they stayed at the hotel.
Tumblr media
Once the film literally gets 47 metres down and into its main story it has a lot going for it but you’ll have to stay with until that point. Following a creative horror parody opening the film suddenly decides it would rather spend 20 minutes being a rom-com; complete with cheesy electro pop montages and over written romantic subplots. Now the clear intent is survival horror 101. It’s a non-horror opening section to create audience investment in its leading ladies. Sadly little actually comes across in their shallow archetypes as, Lisa “the fun one” and Kate “the boring one”. Neither does Kate’s moping over her recent breakup (you guessed it.... he left saying she was boring) endear her or provide believable motivation for the shark diving venture in making the ex jealous. So it’s important to know that beginning will not hook you in because the rest of the film is worth staying for.
Once the cage sinks, the film rises to the top of its game and creates some really intensity purely by focusing on its environment. While the aforementioned sharks do feature all the best moments come from simplicity of their bleak sea bed surroundings and possibility of a shark attack within the minimal visibility rather the attack itself. The story finds plausible reasons for the trapped pair to venture outside the cage like getting back into radio contact rage or collecting something sent from above. Every time comes with a grinding unnerving sense that something could happen at any moment as Johannes Roberts (The Other Side of the Door) twists the knife of suspense like his audience is a juicy buttered lobster. In particular some POV shots looking straight out into the almost nothingness will really have you on edge. It’s like being a car passenger on a quiet road at night and the driver suddenly switches the lights off (which a driving friend of mine thinks is hilarious to do and I can confirm is bloody terrifying!). Then there’s effective use of natural perils like suffocation such as dwindling air supplies or the constraints bulky diving equipment. One particular scene sees Lisa take off her tank and mask to fit through the bars and the simple act of her fiddling with the mask straps to get it back on again is one of the film’s most nerve wracking moments. Some elements suffer a little from repetition and the final act is more predictable than a Littlefinger betrayal but overall the film uses its setup successfully.
Yet unfortunately, despite the strength of the setting there is consistent problem in this main bulk of the film. That is its two leads in the centre of it. At many points they’re annoying to the point of detracting from the tension and horror narrative. Now they get some passes because we know this is a film and at many points they have to needlessly say what they’re doing for the purpose of storytelling. Even moments that seem dumb like stating they need to conserve oxygen only to have a heart to heart conversation can be forgiven because they need to fill the scene rather than just sitting there in silence. Yet in many cases you’ll wish they just shut the hell up as they’re needlessly shouting and screaming to other about what’s going on when the visual storytelling is clear and strong enough to render it obsolete. Neither do their efforts at survival make us invested in their fate because unlike most survival horror films there’s no feeling of consequence or significance among either character. Take its 2016 shark peril cousin, The Shallows. That film worked as a survival story because of how we witnessed Blake Lively’s character growing in strength through her ordeals. Whereas here, there’s no feeling that survival would leave either lady any different. While we constantly appreciate their peril and the danger of their circumstances; as characters they are too shallow to register on a depth gage.
At the end of the day I did still enjoy this film despite the ways it harpoon gun’s itself in the foot. Save a couple early Jurassic World worthy moments the shark depiction is passable. For horror/thriller fans this is a familiar survival story that you’ll probably enjoy in a more unique setting with characters that you’ll forget by the time credits role. A decent disposable viewing choice for those less interested in the bigger summer blockbuster titles.
0 notes