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.
Thursday, 12 May 2016
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.
Film Review - The Revenant
Inarritu has spent a lot of time polishing this turd. Some of the artistic shots are absolutely fabulous. They have obviously had the second unit out in the snow for a great long time shooting scenic trees, snow, and sky. Lots and lots of sky.
The rest of the film is a half-written 30 minute script, packed out with some nice scenery and some hyper-violent scenes to make sure you don't fall asleep. There is no need for a lot of the extremity of the violence. Human vs Human, Animal vs Human, Human vs Animal, all ridiculously bloody and disgusting for no real reason.
The damage done to several of the characters would be unsurvivable in a modern well-staffed emergency room with a full surgical staff on hand. Instead these characters have almost zombie-levels of un-kill-ability. Huge amounts of blood loss, broken bones, field surgery with darning needles, 100ft falls that kill a horse, even being castrated by teeth looked to have been a survivable event. And through all of this no-one even gets an infection.
Also there is so little in the way of story development that I don't even know where to start. Maybe with the first scene. Where a fully armed team of about 40 professional hunters are completely shredded by 20 native americans with bows and arrows, some of the natives even having managed to penetrate right in to the middle of the camp and climb trees while no-one in what amounts to a small village even noticed them. Rather than fight back the well armed professionals all run away, leaving the equivalent of millions of dollars of furs and most of their compatriots on the beach.
Leo picking up an Oscar for this film is an absolute travesty. It is a perfectly average performance. It is not his worst work, but it isn't even close to his best. He got votes based on his body of work rather than this role. All four of the other nominees can rightly be offended. (Although in Cranston's case he might struggle to make any better a case than Leo).
Overall 6 out of 10.
The rest of the film is a half-written 30 minute script, packed out with some nice scenery and some hyper-violent scenes to make sure you don't fall asleep. There is no need for a lot of the extremity of the violence. Human vs Human, Animal vs Human, Human vs Animal, all ridiculously bloody and disgusting for no real reason.
The damage done to several of the characters would be unsurvivable in a modern well-staffed emergency room with a full surgical staff on hand. Instead these characters have almost zombie-levels of un-kill-ability. Huge amounts of blood loss, broken bones, field surgery with darning needles, 100ft falls that kill a horse, even being castrated by teeth looked to have been a survivable event. And through all of this no-one even gets an infection.
Also there is so little in the way of story development that I don't even know where to start. Maybe with the first scene. Where a fully armed team of about 40 professional hunters are completely shredded by 20 native americans with bows and arrows, some of the natives even having managed to penetrate right in to the middle of the camp and climb trees while no-one in what amounts to a small village even noticed them. Rather than fight back the well armed professionals all run away, leaving the equivalent of millions of dollars of furs and most of their compatriots on the beach.
Leo picking up an Oscar for this film is an absolute travesty. It is a perfectly average performance. It is not his worst work, but it isn't even close to his best. He got votes based on his body of work rather than this role. All four of the other nominees can rightly be offended. (Although in Cranston's case he might struggle to make any better a case than Leo).
Overall 6 out of 10.
Film Review - Creed
All in all it is a very suitable successor to the Rocky franchise.
Rocky himself is in. The training montage is in. The soundtrack is in. The boxing plays a large part but the story is still dominated by the characters rather than their circumstances. The references back to previous films are tastefully done rather than being shoved in your face. Anything that makes a Rocky film is in there somewhere.
Michael B Jordan is fairly believable as the pushy kid trying to make his own way in the world. His girlfriend is unfortunately styled a bit too much like Denise Huxtable and her role is limited but she holds her place. And most of the supporting cast do efficient jobs. Tony Bellew is the only one who is a bit out of place. He always seems to be trying to act. Even playing himself, right down to his own football club fandom doesn't really help.
But none of them really matter, they are all window dressing for Stallone himself. He is the stand-out of this entire movie. It is a fantastic reminder that 40 years ago, before the excessive action violence of the 80s got hold of him, he could actually act. And putting him back in a character that was his own original creation gives him freedom to inhabit the role in a way that probably isn't available to anyone else in the Hollywood machine.
His nomination for an Oscar was absolutely deserved, his failure to win was a shock to me. I can understand him losing out to Network for both his Best Actor and Best Writer nominations in 1976, although Rocky then taking Best Film over Network shows that the Academy were stuck somewhere in trying to reward both films. I have yet to see Rylance's Bridge of Spies Best Supporting Actor performance but if it was truly better than this work from Stallone then I am in for a treat.
And they have been quite smart about how they have set up for future movies. If Stallone wants to get out they can let the cancer or the chemotherapy beat him and still be consistent with the way they have previously treated Adrian and Paulie. If he wants to stay in they can size his part to suit, anything from a single sick bed scene to the same major supporting role that he plays here.
I want to give this 10 out of 10. Bellew almost costs it that score on his own, but it is some of the jive talk between Creed and his girlfriend that just seemed too forced and was the final nudge to cut a point off.
9 out of 10.
Saturday, 19 December 2015
Film Review - Star Wars: the Force Awakens (no spoilers version)
Cheers JJ. Feel free to show that to George as what he should have done in 1999.
Sunday, 22 November 2015
Film Review - Hunger Games 4
Finally we get to the end of another over-length trilogy built on an under length book, and once again the whole thing makes no sense.
The premise is not quite as full of holes as the Divergent series. The story isn't as drawn out as the Harry Potters. The CGI is not as bad as the Hobbits. It is better acted than the Twilights. So all those seem like it won't be the worst series. And it certainly isn't but at the same time it is not a good series either.
The first 90 minutes or so is pretty much a match for the previous 3. Lots of set piece action scenes, minimal sensible story tying them together.
Another huge weapon cache in a military base under a mountain, completely undermining stated 'facts' from the first two stories. The two boyfriends suddenly sorting themselves out by one of them being good at his job, that skill being abused by someone else, completely outside his control, and somehow this makes everything his fault.
There is no explanation of how the rebel armies of the Districts, who we are repeatedly told are under-armed and outmanned by the existing Capitol forces manage to make any ground at all. How they do so against the ridiculous devastation of the defensive 'pods', is never even discussed. Some of the traps are so devastating that even our team of special forces superstars well behind the front line can't handle them without huge loss of life, so how are your average untrained farmers making any sort of progress?!
They finally come towards a point where they almost, nearly, just about, explain how and why the Hunger Games exist in the first place. Four movies after that explanation was really warranted.
Then they tack on not one, but two unnecessary endings. The credits could have rolled straight after the Presidential assassination. Job done, film finished, victory and democracy assured. They certainly should have rolled after the next 'real or not real?'. Happy ending for everyone. Instead they stick in a very strange scene, not just for it's meaningless tacky content but more so for the freaky CGI baby. It is weird. Up to this point the CGI has been fairly un-noticable, however ridiculous the effect that is being created it is still smoothly, but suddenly it is like they gave the office junior the job on this scene.
In the midst of that they throw in Woody Harrelson reading a letter from Plutarch which is obviously bodged in due to the death of Phillip Seymour Hoffman. Not only is that whole scene a mess but it ruins the whole tri/quadrilogy. Instead of the message that none of the President's ever really held the power, it was always in the hands of the media, we are treated to an apology and an excuse for why the alternative new President that the media has selected instead is somehow going to be 'better'.
It is certainly no worse than the previous 3 and it does at least finish off the story of the trilogy. I have rated each of the others as 5/10 and this one is no worse.
The premise is not quite as full of holes as the Divergent series. The story isn't as drawn out as the Harry Potters. The CGI is not as bad as the Hobbits. It is better acted than the Twilights. So all those seem like it won't be the worst series. And it certainly isn't but at the same time it is not a good series either.
The first 90 minutes or so is pretty much a match for the previous 3. Lots of set piece action scenes, minimal sensible story tying them together.
Another huge weapon cache in a military base under a mountain, completely undermining stated 'facts' from the first two stories. The two boyfriends suddenly sorting themselves out by one of them being good at his job, that skill being abused by someone else, completely outside his control, and somehow this makes everything his fault.
There is no explanation of how the rebel armies of the Districts, who we are repeatedly told are under-armed and outmanned by the existing Capitol forces manage to make any ground at all. How they do so against the ridiculous devastation of the defensive 'pods', is never even discussed. Some of the traps are so devastating that even our team of special forces superstars well behind the front line can't handle them without huge loss of life, so how are your average untrained farmers making any sort of progress?!
They finally come towards a point where they almost, nearly, just about, explain how and why the Hunger Games exist in the first place. Four movies after that explanation was really warranted.
Then they tack on not one, but two unnecessary endings. The credits could have rolled straight after the Presidential assassination. Job done, film finished, victory and democracy assured. They certainly should have rolled after the next 'real or not real?'. Happy ending for everyone. Instead they stick in a very strange scene, not just for it's meaningless tacky content but more so for the freaky CGI baby. It is weird. Up to this point the CGI has been fairly un-noticable, however ridiculous the effect that is being created it is still smoothly, but suddenly it is like they gave the office junior the job on this scene.
In the midst of that they throw in Woody Harrelson reading a letter from Plutarch which is obviously bodged in due to the death of Phillip Seymour Hoffman. Not only is that whole scene a mess but it ruins the whole tri/quadrilogy. Instead of the message that none of the President's ever really held the power, it was always in the hands of the media, we are treated to an apology and an excuse for why the alternative new President that the media has selected instead is somehow going to be 'better'.
It is certainly no worse than the previous 3 and it does at least finish off the story of the trilogy. I have rated each of the others as 5/10 and this one is no worse.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)