I have stuck with a spoiler-free version, even though the trailer they released with a day to go before the film smashes the worst of the spoilers right out in the middle of it.
Basically if you liked the first two of the new-generation Star Trek films you will love this. It keeps all the in jokes, the character building, the action, the music, the TOS references, and basically charges along at a rate of knots.
It has by no means the depth or scope of the older movies, and there isn't really the same political message tucked underneath the story that you might like from a classic Star Trek, and once you sit down and think of it later there are plot holes and continuity errors that you could drive the Enterprise through.
But for the 2 hours you are sat there it is going so fast that you probably won't get time to spot them.
Sunday 24 July 2016
Tuesday 12 July 2016
Film Review - Secret Life of Pets
It is basically a half-arsed version of Toy Story with all the hidden adult jokes stripped out and no soul. You should put about as much effort into seeing it as I put into writing this review.
Sunday 5 June 2016
Film Review - Warcraft: The Beginning
Not learning from Batman vs Superman they take too many new characters, new locations, new powers, new back story, new ideas and throw them all at you in rapid succession, and then hope that you are so busy digesting all of these that you ignore the holes in the plot, the lack of development of most of the major characters and the blatant rip-offs from Lord of the Rings.
I want to give them credit for the special effects, but they still looked like computer game special effects. In some parts they were fabulous, in others they were 'lacking'. In particular on the lacking side were the dwarves with the funny shaped heads, this was especially telling as we know that a bit of forced perspective and a decent director can turn the tallest cast member into a dwarf well (LOTR again). There were a couple of things that I couldn't tell if they were CGI or physical effects and I am going to give the CGI guys the benefit of the doubt and assume the shoddy rubber elf ears were a physical. The floppy swords and the obviously plastic armour definitely were.
A couple of other things kept bugging me about the film and I realised too often that I was distracted by them and pushed out of the story. The hipster beards just annoyed me, Ben Foster and his character almost got away with it but the other male leads just looked stupid. And Ben Foster gave me a different problem, in that I kept wondering why Lance Armstrong was wearing a hoodie and pretending to be an evil wizard.
The female characters, from a movie based on a computer game, I expected to be over-sexualised, and instead I didn't think any of them were even portrayed as mildly attractive. Maybe that was just my expectations being set incorrectly.
The balance of powers was severely mismanaged, some of the creatures were ridiculously over-powered, which led to a deus ex machina issue with the lead flying half the length of the country, (with no shoes on) in a couple of minutes, on his gryphon which then easily shreds dozens of the Orcs. Why were the gryphons not included in the army if they are so powerful, and we know he has more than one because he mentions them earlier, and why did it take so long to get Intel if they are so fast? Similarly if the Orcs are storming all over the country crushing anything that stands, why are they still all back at their camp whenever the story justifies it?
And those sort of things just bugged me, again and again, throughout the entire film.
Oh, and I almost forgot, (actually I did forget for a week and came back to add this) 30 uncredited seconds of Glenn Close that you might miss if you aren't watching closely.
Overall 5 out of 10, and a decent amount of money bet on the next in the series never getting past a rumour.
I want to give them credit for the special effects, but they still looked like computer game special effects. In some parts they were fabulous, in others they were 'lacking'. In particular on the lacking side were the dwarves with the funny shaped heads, this was especially telling as we know that a bit of forced perspective and a decent director can turn the tallest cast member into a dwarf well (LOTR again). There were a couple of things that I couldn't tell if they were CGI or physical effects and I am going to give the CGI guys the benefit of the doubt and assume the shoddy rubber elf ears were a physical. The floppy swords and the obviously plastic armour definitely were.
A couple of other things kept bugging me about the film and I realised too often that I was distracted by them and pushed out of the story. The hipster beards just annoyed me, Ben Foster and his character almost got away with it but the other male leads just looked stupid. And Ben Foster gave me a different problem, in that I kept wondering why Lance Armstrong was wearing a hoodie and pretending to be an evil wizard.
The female characters, from a movie based on a computer game, I expected to be over-sexualised, and instead I didn't think any of them were even portrayed as mildly attractive. Maybe that was just my expectations being set incorrectly.
The balance of powers was severely mismanaged, some of the creatures were ridiculously over-powered, which led to a deus ex machina issue with the lead flying half the length of the country, (with no shoes on) in a couple of minutes, on his gryphon which then easily shreds dozens of the Orcs. Why were the gryphons not included in the army if they are so powerful, and we know he has more than one because he mentions them earlier, and why did it take so long to get Intel if they are so fast? Similarly if the Orcs are storming all over the country crushing anything that stands, why are they still all back at their camp whenever the story justifies it?
And those sort of things just bugged me, again and again, throughout the entire film.
Oh, and I almost forgot, (actually I did forget for a week and came back to add this) 30 uncredited seconds of Glenn Close that you might miss if you aren't watching closely.
Overall 5 out of 10, and a decent amount of money bet on the next in the series never getting past a rumour.
Friday 20 May 2016
Film Review - Xmen Apocalypse
As with Civil War my first comment has to be, 'Why the hell can't DC learn from this?'. There is nothing particularly clever about this movie and yet it is on a completely different level to their recent efforts.
This second strain of Xmen continues to move along nicely by building around its existing characters while slowly introducing new ones where necessary to the greater story. There is development of the older characters. Even those where we have already seen their distant future the story builds within that framework and it's own internal consistency (allowing for the alternate timelines at least).
There is a villain with a clear and understandable motivation of his own.
There is a villain with a clear and understandable motivation of his own.
There are some great 80's references. My favourite was the Michael Jackson / Eddie Murphy leather jacket that Nightcrawler wears but there were many others. Star Trek and Knight Rider on the background TV screens almost pipped the jacket.
There are some great in jokes. 'The third movie is always the weakest'.
There are some subtle nods to the comics just for the fans. Jean Grey's Phoenix is the obvious one, other than the appearance of Apocalypse himself.
There are some subtle nods to the comics just for the fans. Jean Grey's Phoenix is the obvious one, other than the appearance of Apocalypse himself.
There are some great links back to previous movies. 'I feel a great swell of pity for the poor soul who comes to this school... looking for trouble'.
Anyway, enough ranting about how Marvel have again taken worse source material than DC and turned it into a vastly better film.
Overall 7 out of 10, because it wasn't quite an 8.
There is a brief, but largely pointless, Wolverine appearance.
And of course, there is Stan Lee!
So that is 8-1 for Marvel vs DC if you just take this film against BvsS. And I give DC their one point for the subtle nods to the comics but they weren't subtle at all, they were so blatant that someone might as well have been waving the comic book at the screen during them, at least that might have made more sense than the Flash and his weird time vortex smashing right through the middle of the film.
So that is 8-1 for Marvel vs DC if you just take this film against BvsS. And I give DC their one point for the subtle nods to the comics but they weren't subtle at all, they were so blatant that someone might as well have been waving the comic book at the screen during them, at least that might have made more sense than the Flash and his weird time vortex smashing right through the middle of the film.
Anyway, enough ranting about how Marvel have again taken worse source material than DC and turned it into a vastly better film.
Overall 7 out of 10, because it wasn't quite an 8.
Thursday 12 May 2016
Film Review - Eye in the Sky
Lots of heavyweights, a couple of Oscar nominees, the obligatory Game of Thrones actor.
The story goes at a decent 'real-time-ish' pace even when things are being kicked upstairs.
A few niggles with the beyond-realistic tech making it feel a bit like a superhero movie rather than a drama. And that in turn leads to some plot issues
And a bit of a squeak in the story when they finally realise that a slight change in target might get them the desired effect. I had figured out their eventual solution almost an hour before the team of professionals and I can still offer 3 or 4 better tactical solutions that they don't even consider. The second strike option that suddenly materialises then makes that even more of a glitch.
I like the idea, it raises good questions about the politics and ethics of drone strikes and much of the execution is solid. It just is a bit of a damp squib considering the power of the material and the personnel involved.
Overall 7 out of 10.
The story goes at a decent 'real-time-ish' pace even when things are being kicked upstairs.
A few niggles with the beyond-realistic tech making it feel a bit like a superhero movie rather than a drama. And that in turn leads to some plot issues
And a bit of a squeak in the story when they finally realise that a slight change in target might get them the desired effect. I had figured out their eventual solution almost an hour before the team of professionals and I can still offer 3 or 4 better tactical solutions that they don't even consider. The second strike option that suddenly materialises then makes that even more of a glitch.
I like the idea, it raises good questions about the politics and ethics of drone strikes and much of the execution is solid. It just is a bit of a damp squib considering the power of the material and the personnel involved.
Overall 7 out of 10.
Fim Review - Captain America Civil War
Can't really write a review of this as I will be hugely biased as a fan of the Marvel series. So much so that I went to see this twice in 4 days.
Once again they managed to juggle a multitude of characters and personalities, from the very original and now ageing Iron Man through to the brand new Black Panther and the rebooted Spiderman in a film driven by Captain America while fitting them all into an over-arching story that makes sense, drives the action and fits well within the greater universe.
Basically I loved it, and the biggest gripe I have is that it makes DCs rush attempt to jam their characters into Batman vs Superman seem all the more terrible.
9 out of 10.
Once again they managed to juggle a multitude of characters and personalities, from the very original and now ageing Iron Man through to the brand new Black Panther and the rebooted Spiderman in a film driven by Captain America while fitting them all into an over-arching story that makes sense, drives the action and fits well within the greater universe.
Basically I loved it, and the biggest gripe I have is that it makes DCs rush attempt to jam their characters into Batman vs Superman seem all the more terrible.
9 out of 10.
Friday 22 April 2016
Film Review - Batman vs Superman
The shortened version of the title BvS still has a letter too many. This film is pure BS.
The story wanders all over the place as they try to twist their way to the fight at the end.
Is Zack Snyder colourblind? Really someone who knows him should go and check. His films are all shot in this stupid monochrome that he obviously thinks is arty and clever but is actually just dull.
The guys at Marvel must be wetting their pants at this disaster coming on the heels of Man of Steel. The fanboys will go to see Justice League whatever but unless Suicide Squad is absolutely stunning I won't be joining them.
Overall 5 out of 10.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)