Ant-Man DVD Review

Age of Antron 

Released : July 17th 2015

Certificate : 12A

Director : Peyton Reed

Cast : Paul Rudd, Michael Douglas, Evangeline Lilly, Corey Stoll, Michael Peña

Plot : Scott Lang (Rudd) a master thief who has been in and out of prison, resulting in legal restrictions on seeing his daughter, has decided to go straight. However when one last job leads him to rob Dr. Hank Pym (Douglas) he discovers a suit with extraordinary powers.

As the film universe juggernaut that is Marvel continues with one of its biggest years to date, with Deadpool which has become the biggest grossing R-rated movie ever with a total worldwide gross profit of $745.7 million, beating The Matrix: Reloaded which grossed $742m worldwide. Additionally to this Captain America: Civil War is to hit British audience very soon, which contains the biggest development to the story since Avengers Assemble. Ant-Man was the little man slipped in next to Avengers: Age of Ultron, both together bring all the characters and plot points needed for the faceoff that is Civil War. So before Deadpool, Ant-Man was the first origins story that Marvel had put out in the Avengers universe since Thor and Captain America, both released in 2011. So did Marvel still have the capability to pull off the origin story, which had a chequered past with Iron Man, Hulk, Thor and Captain America, with only half really pleasing audiences. Of course with hindsight Deadpool has shown that they can, regardless of this films performance. And as with all origins story, there needs to be a different vibe created for each superhero, with Ant-Man they brought on funny man Paul Rudd to give it a light-hearted edge.

The establishment of this story has some issues that are not of concern for the target younger audiences, but might prove tiresome for everyone else. The film later in the story arc has its benefits but within its set up there was some annoyances. Firstly the film was very cliché and generic dealing with issues of the villain (Stoll) having a rather purpose built back story. Additionally the setup of the relationship with Rudd’s character and his daughter had scripting and an overall feel that had didn’t feel very genuine, of course not that Marvel has got to where it was today solely on the strength of its stories. Then there was the issues of Rudd’s team of thief friends, which were there for the purpose of providing extra comic relief to Rudd’s efforts, but Marvel could have been a bit less 2D. As despite the high quality humour they did provide, the racial stereotypes that were made are cringe worth at some points, no doubt the children will love them, but they at points bared resemblance to Skids and Mudflap (the two racially stereotyped mess that featured in Transformers 2). Of course not to the same severity by far, as Ant-Man had a tongue in cheek effect that makes it just about bearable. But having the thief gang of a Mexican, Russian and African American, was initially alike the film annoying.

Joined with this was an overall set up of the story that while was light hearted and fun in nature, wasn’t quiet as rich in origin story as Thor or Captain. With Thor having the fall from grace story which was well executed enough, and Captain being the down trodden weak man (which as familiar as it might have been, functioned, regardless of the rest of the films quality) used as propaganda piece. With Scott Lang it was just a lovable bad guy who happens across the suit, and has the skills that Douglas’s character needed. Of course this is all quiet hyper critical for a kids film, but these little things slightly gave the film a bumpy start in regards to appealing to a wider audience age group (something that Marvel has since addressed again with Deadpool) as it all felt a little purpose built and rushed in order to progress the narrative into Rudd’s training as the Ant-Man, lucky enough from here on out the film retained great entertainment to allow for the other aspects to be mostly forgotten. As once again the special effects joined with the needed good presentation, this time from Peyton Reed (a director with little mainstream success but experience in the comedy genre) which made for a thrilling visual rich action comedy flick vibe to continue throughout the film.

There was even has the film got into its full swing some dregs of the predictable and generic, most obviously revolving around the plot point introduced in the training, to avoid spoilers will just be referred to as the quantum realm. But overall there was great entertainment here with a friendly unique tone that hasn’t been quiet present in the Marvel world before, as all others did contain there darker elements for thrills. Ant-Man was able to effectively provide a light-hearted fun time, via a moderate dose of tongue in cheek humour (for some might translate into corny understandably) that dealt with the superhero element very well. This provided laughs and great vibes that joined with the lack of death and destruction present in most other Marvel films, made for a film that felt like a true children’s film (mins the use of ‘shit’ now and again). To summarise, it can be seen here the level of self-awareness and less serious approach that resembles where the series has been now taken with Deadpool, except in that film, there is the possibility to be more mature in the way it pokes fun at the source material. Rudd’s place in the film is a good choice which didn’t over sell his comedic side to push the film over the edge.

Ant-Man is a welcome treat to the Avengers universe, resembling Better Call Saul in the sense that it takes the structure and formula of the ‘originals’ and slaps more of a smile on its face. There are some aspects that where present in the other origins films that could have been used here. This could be in the form of a much stronger back story for our lead, a stronger villain, and a ditch of a cliché generic script that thinks it can slip by audiences with the bribery of jokes. Luckily the film is saved by the imagination that is behind the hero’s powers, as all scenes that bugs are on screen is a joy, an overall attitude and the jokes which a dosed well enough through the film. The laughs aren’t hysterical, but bring a grin to the faces of audiences that get us on board with this fun little flick. So while it can be argued that this is another pawn in the money making machine of the Marvel world, that gives you little extra than a good guy versus bad with some good special effects, it is the film recognition that it isn’t trying to be anything more than simply that joined with a fun script that makes Ant-Man a worthwhile watch.

Verdict : Welcome the next side man of the Avengers. He might be the least relevant, and you get what you expect, but he makes for a good time.

Verdict : 3/5

Quote : “That is one messed up looking dog.”

Review: Passion

Year: 2012

Certificate: 15

Director: Brian De Palma

Screenwriter: Brian De Palma

Cast: Rachel McAdams, Noomi Rapace, Karoline Herfurth, Paul Anderson

Passion charts the toxic relationship of predatory advertising executive Christine (Rachel McAdams) and her shy but sharp subordinate Isabelle (Noomi Rapace). As their amicable dynamic gradually becomes poisoned by jealousy, betrayal and ambition both professional and personal, Isabelle finds herself accused of a terrible crime.

An English-language remake of 2010’s Love Crime, De Palma weaves a well-made if irredeemably pulpy tale of executive backbiting. Saturated in bright colours, dark shadows and consecutive Dutch angles, the cinematography reflects the heightened nature of the connection between Christine and Isabelle, by turns erotically charged, heady and- ultimately- deadly. McAdams is on top form here, although her casting has an unfortunate side effect of framing the film as an almost-plausible ‘10 years on’ scenario for her poisonous teen diva Regina George from 2004’s Mean Girls. Similar to George, Christine is a committed life-ruiner, her charming facade hiding an impressively sadistic personality. Rapace also excels playing the apparent ingénue who comes to take her role as Christine’s protégée perhaps more literally than Christine intended.

Riffing heavily on the connection between professional ambition and romantic desire, De Palma perhaps oversteps the mark a little, ultimately coming off more schlocky than sinister. The much trailed girl-on-girl eroticism is aimed squarely at a hetero male audience, and the framing of the career ambitions of its female characters as cut-throat, two-faced and irrevocably intertwined with their sexuality betrays an ambivalence towards women that feels at best old-fashioned.

Verdict: 2/5

Image credit: imdb.com

The Gift DVD Review

Couple Retreat 

Released : August 7th 2015

Certificate : 15

Director : Joel Edgerton

Cast : Rebecca Hall, Joel Edgerton, Jason Bateman

Plot : Childless married couple, Simon (Bateman) and Robyn (Hall), with a bumpy past move into a lavish new house in a new city for a fresh start. Upon arriving Simon is approached by Gordo (Edgerton), a high school friend of Simon. Gordo’s persistent attempts to become friends is uncomfortable and soon leads to dark waters.

The Gift is first feature length film to be directed by Joel Edgerton, and first written film in the sense that it’s his first feature length film that he hasn’t adapted from other material. Edgerton has had a limited acting career (in the sense of mainstream success), but since his arrival has turned out some critically praised performances, most famous for his lead role in Warrior, and more recently a supporting role in Black Mass. As well as Edgerton going into new water, Bateman is a lead who has the famously comedic runaway star of Arrested Development, how has had limited success with his ventures into drama grounds, with the films being little acknowledge in the mainstream and receiving modest critical praise (the films not Bateman). Hall is most at home within the genre, after her famous turn in The Awakening has proven herself a worthy thriller component. As a writing and directing debut, it gives a good insight into the tone and style the Edgerton could be taking with his future career outside of acting. Here we have a twisting, jarring thriller about one man’s friendly yet sinister relationship with a couple. With a limited cast and restricted setting of story, there’s little to distract from Edgerton three components in this film.

To open by addressing his storyline, it’s a patchy piece of brilliance, with a conflicting amount of falls and success. The film has a mostly fresh and exciting concept, which devolves issue with its deliverance with a slight issue of pacing. Reaching the end of the film, it falls into a bad trap of feeling slightly too long, the reason for which can be spotted easily. The middle act of the film is slightly extending and the plot point aren’t gone through as fast to allow for what is Edgerton directorial padding which has the function of building tension and displaying his acting talent. Some of the sequence could have been without, and the great story premise might have gained better impact if it was delivered more relentlessly. Secondly the issue that fights against the power of the strong story premise are slight issues with predictability. While the overall ending and third act of the film comes as a surprise, there are scenes which set up for later tools of tension and thrill building that you can see being constructed, which will not be named for the sake of spoilers. These two issue due reduce from what is an irrepressibly dark thriller story that has some inventive twist on the generic for an opening stance.

For Edgerton directing, he is stronger than his writing, with ability to build very impressive set pieces of tension for a first directing job. It isn’t a Sam Mendes American Beauty, but it’s the most notable quality of the film for Edgerton and why it’s exciting to see where he will next take his talent. The shot choices did use its share of the generic modern horror effects, but they were few and far between his own directing ingenuity, that they weren’t a bother. From the opening shots that prowl the house the couple are moving into you can tell that Edgerton has thought through the shot choices very well for both meaning and effect. For effect he’s presentation of the house, the camera looming with creeping shots around the house, clever camera trickery to create a really high quality jump scare and fair share of meaningful shots choices such as glass imagery in the beginning to forebode certain plot points. As upon reflection of the story not a huge amount of action or progression is actually present in comparison to modern day thrillers, however the directorial work presents the tense scenes that are effective enough to mostly account for the lack of quantity. Some might find the iconography of toys and gifts for atmosphere not quite as effective as many other Blumhouse production films, but the film tastefully relies on other effect.

For the acting, the performance that surprisingly prove the strongest out of the trio would have to be Jason Bateman for a believable and vivid performance which is the strongest performances outside of the comedy genre ever. Bateman was able to deliver a performance that served the mystery aspect of his and Edgerton characters past well enough to keep the audience entrenched in the enigma of the film, whilst the same time come across as a genuine grounded character. The strongest parts of the performance were generically the ones with the extremist of emotions, particularly within the final act of the film, where he effectively reflected the gravity of the threatening situation. There are faults in the acting, such as the scenes of childish mocking of Edgerton character which seem a little over the top. Edgerton performance in the film seemed slightly stiff, an impression was built that Edgerton was very conscious of his performance as so much was invested in this character. Resulting in a character that didn’t quiet smoothly flow on the screen as most villains do, but it can be forgiven has the first attempt at having such a wide involvement in a films making.

The Gift unfortunately isn’t up there with the greatest writing/directing debuts of actors, so this is no Dances With Wolves, however it did show promise. The initial plot concept was enough engaging the audiences from the start, however as the enigma element becomes more prevalent as the narrative progresses the quality of the film pals. As this side of the story as to the murky past of the Egerton and Batemans character is just not unpredictable enough to render a lapse in the films thriller elements, which the film sets aside for Hall’s character investigation. The directing work is by far Edgerton’s best achievement of this film as a feature length debut, as it has a slightly greater level of originality than the writing did, and only ever featured the generic effects in sprinklings. The overall feel of the film has a great establishment of an all aspects, but the different trio of genres that it attempts to incorporate create for an uneven and patchy arch of the film, not committing to either one enough. However, The Gift is an undoubtedly thrilling experiences while it lasts with a twist ending to catch the majority of audiences off guard, and a maintain atmosphere of unease and threat to provide the best film Blumhouse has made since for a while, but their recent content isn’t much to compete with.

Verdict : Edgerton has enough imagination to keep you on board for his next outing as a writer or director, but not enough talent here to establish his skill in either field, as it can’t quiet shake some aspects of the generic.

Verdict : 3/5

Quote : “You see what happens when you poison other people’s mind with ideas?”

Steve Jobs DVD Review

The Anti-Social Network

Released : November 13th 2015

Certificate : 15

Director : Danny Boyle

Cast : Michael Fassbender, Kate Winslet, Seth Rogen, Jeff Daniels, Katherine Waterston, Michael Stuhlbarg

Plot : Depicting the life and legacy of Steve Jobs in three acts, each set in the short time before the unveiling of a new Jobs product. Backstage he struggles with his dysfunctional family dynamic, personal rivalries and his general attitude to his fellow man.

Aaron Sorkin returns with his third biopic of this decade, again returning to the digital world after he won his Oscar for The Social Network, and although with hindsight of late viewing, Steve Jobs was definite Oscar bait (only though for acting talent of Fassbender and Winslet). The award fame the film did gain was Golden Globes for Winslet and Sorkin and a BAFTA for Winslet to. But to back track to look at the films building blocks, as accustomed for Sorkin we get an elite director to guide his screenplays, here in the form of Danny Boyle, who’s last appearance with Trance left both audience and critic’s confused and ultimately disappointed. So what better way to re-enter critical appeal with a biopic, a genre known for its ‘purpose’ of being critical and award bait. Additionally, what made the film stand out was Sorkins limited scope for the film, regarding to his three acts setting, and although this may sound like a claustrophobic challenge, it appeared to play to Sorkin strength of fast paced fiery dialogue nature. For many this may be a disappointment as it fails to give a large overall insight as to how Apple (to the desired biographical extent) as The Social Network did and captivated audiences.

So straight of the bat to address Sorkin’s contribution of the film, this is the most ‘entertaining’ screenplay he has made. In particular, regards to the script here, which is the films foundation, he has created a symphony of crazy paced intelligent and gripping dialogue. The script manages grips audience in the same surprising nature that Whiplish final act does (not quite to the same memorable quality), to depicts the stress of backstage antics perfectly while also effectively intertwining the more emotive parts of the plot. There are some issues though, some dialogue may go over the heads of some audience members as they struggle with the speedy pace of the film. Also it does fall into the traps of most biopics of late being that with the very direct and blunt way in which it delivers the emotive aspects of the film, explaining each emotion to the audience isn’t always needed. And although this blunt technique is brilliant (really brilliant) for the plot points not connecting to family, the more personal emotive sets are rather lacking in subtly to the drama, for some this may be perfect, others slightly spoon fed. For this reason, it still functions as ever so slightly generic biopic material, but thankfully its generically perfect to take itself up a level.

Now for the under rated aspect of the film, Boyle’s contribution, for a director who is no stranger to the limited claustrophobic set, with the chillingly shot 127 Hours, it is a joy to be reminded of his talent. In many regards his work complimented the music score of Daniel Pemberton (a little known composer who has brought great added tone to films such as The Awakening and The Counsellor) to create a film that delivered Sorkins script in a way to create this enthralling orchestrated drama piece, they match was made for each other. The gripping following story within a limited time was slightly reminiscent of Birdman, of course not as memorable due to a failure to shake off a generic biopic aura. Alike the script, some of Boyle’s shot types can drift into obviously emotive ground, overall Boyle was very inventive with both his own additions to the film, presentation of the crowd was an effective tension builder, as well as the structure of Sorkin’ set poignant pieces, particular an address to the team before they escape from him into an elevator as he barks instructions, which uses has the one shot feel that was maintained in Birdman to create a great level of realism to the scene.

For the acting force in the film, before the heavy hitter are addressed in the film, there was a surprise gems across the supporting cast, a needed addition to the film, as many biopics fail in placing to much of the acting prowess within the lead characters. These other performances made the film much richer and gave Fassbender abusive Jobs a sense of reality as other actors reacted to it with such a high standard, a recent biopic that could have used this was Trumbo, also bait this past awards season. Out of all of the supporting; Seth Rogen, Jeff Daniels, Katherine Waterston, it was Michael Stuhlbarg who was most notable. Despite his very limited screen time and slightly type cast nature, Stuhlbarg embodied the little man under the pressure of the Jobs titan to an extent that had great chemistry, particularly in the final act, with his experience in nervous mannerisms and down-trodden acting abilities gained from other roles where on top form for this role. Personally Fassbender turned in a better performance than Winslet, but both actors in another year (with 2016 having huge acting talent across all categories) could quiet easily have taken home all the statues.

Steve Jobs is the biopic of the year by many a mile, but isn’t enough of a game changer to gain all the award success that it could have done. Sorkin has delivered his probably least realistic (as the dialogue sometime feels more staged for effect) but most invigorating script within the decade, you can definitely see the slightly cliché nature of A Few Good Men slipping into his recent sophisticated style. Regardless he has anchored himself as the best repeat offender of the true story genre within this decade (across all film making aspects) with an amazing trilogy of contribution with five years. And Fassbender has gone from strength to strength, having come a long way from breakout performance Hunger typified with 2015 being his strongest year with this film as well as lead in Macbeth (one of the strongest Shakespeare films to date). Fans of Sorkin will not be disappointed by this film despite its flaws, which can be summarised as the following. Sorkin was ambitions with his choice of the three act setting, but with making screenplays half come from script and half from the acting advice, set pieces and general scene construction. With a limiting setting you get a tunnelled screenplay and a miss on the rich set situations that made were present in Moneyball and The Social Network.

Verdict : Whatever genre falls or story issues that exists here, Steve Jobs is irresistible as an insightful and gripping drama. Sorkin has pulled it off again, but this isn’t a a one man show as the title suggest, across the filming making board, high standard.

Verdict : 4/5

Quote : “I’m gonna put music in your pocket.”

 

Mini review: Freeheld

Year: 2015

Certificate: 15

Director: Peter Sollett

Screenwriter: Ron Nyswaner

Cast: Julianne Moore, Ellen Page, Michael Shannon, Steve Carell

Julianne Moore stars as Laurel Hester, whose struggle to transfer her police pension to her partner Stacie Andree (Ellen Page) in the wake of Laurel’s terminal cancer diagnosis had a lasting impact on gay rights in the States. Despite excellent central performances from Page and Moore, the by-the-numbers screenplay and straightforward direction leave Freeheld feeling ultimately televisual. Frustratingly, the civil rights element and domestic drama element seem to jostle for position, each ultimately undermining the other as Laurel and Stacie’s relationship is not allowed sufficient screen time before the cancer diagnosis and subsequent legal struggle (with the supporting characters it brings in) become the central focus of the narrative.

Verdict: 3/5

Image: Fandango.com

BFI Flare review: The Girl King

Year: 2015

Certificate: 15

Director: Mika Kaurismäki

Screenwriter: Michel Mark Bouchard

Cast: Malin Buska, Sarah Gadon, Michael Nyqvist, Patrick Bauchau

Amid the Catholic-Protestant conflict raging throughout 17^th century Europe, Kristina (Malin Buska), only child of the late King Gustav II of Sweden, is raised under the watchful eyes of Sweden’s Lutheran court and it’s chancellor, Axel Oxenstierna (Michael Nyqvist). However, when Kristina comes of age and begins to rule as queen, her* radical proclamations and unconventional conduct in private cause tensions within the court.

A Sweden-Canada co-production, The Girl King is a valiant if ultimately flawed attempt to illustrate the life of an extremely unusual monarch. Buska, already a well-known theatrical actress in Sweden, is a perfect choice for the intelligent and rakish Kristina, and is a commanding screen presence. However, one can’t help wonder if she is being held back slightly by the requirements of performing in a second language (other than the occasional exchange in French, the film is spoken in English), as her delivery of the lines doesn’t quite equal the exquisite subtlety of her facial expressions. Michael Nyqvist (known for the Swedish Girl With the Dragon Tattoo trilogy) does admirable work here as Sweden’s Chancellor, showing a surprising deftness in the more comic moments. The exchanges between Axel and Kristina, particularly when he is trying to delicately approach the subject of her tomboyish nature, are some of the best scenes in the film. Other highlights are Sarah Gadon as Kristina’s love interest, Countess Ebba Sparre, and Patrick Bauchau as the French philosopher René Descartes, with whom Kristina strikes up a correspondence which scandalises the pious members of her court (while Sweden and France had a mutual enemy in Germany, France’s allegiance to the Pope made their truce an uneasy one).

Despite the quality of the acting and some clever cinematography courtesy of Guy Dufaux, The Girl King ultimately feels a little ramshackle. Bouchard’s screenplay makes much of Kristina’s love for Ebba, and while it’s refreshing to see such an unapologetically queer historical figure pursuing their desires, the arc of Kristina and Ebba’s romance feels clichéd and despite an elegant turn from Gadon as a character Ebba is paper-thin. Indeed, even Kristina’s crisis of faith- surely hugely important for her as a character- feels glossed over here, and this lack of achievement of the script in really getting under her skin leaves the whole piece feeling too light. This, coupled with the slightly uneven tone where moments of high camp sit uncomfortably next to overwrought emotional scenes, serves to eject the audience from the narrative. A few moments of sloppy editing further underscore these problems.

All in all The Girl King feels like a film which is punching below its weight somewhat. However, there is still much to like here, particularly given the dearth of LGBT historical figures represented on screen. The narrative holds together well enough to showcase the film’s stronger components, and if this is Malin Buska’s Hollywood calling card she will certainly be one to watch in the future.

Verdict: 3/5

BFI Flare is the British Film Institute’s annual LGBT film festival in London. More information about the festival can be found here.

*A note on pronouns: in terms of the historical record, there seems to be a fair amount of debate between academics over both Kristina’s gender and sexuality, with varied theories suggesting Kristina may have been any one of what we now know as gay, bisexual, transgender or intersex. As there is little historical consensus on this, and as the film portrays her fairly unwaveringly as a cis lesbian, I have used female pronouns in my review. If this is a problem let me know and I can edit to gender neutral. Many thanks to my historian friend Katie for doing some academic investigation into Kristina’s history.

Image credit: facebook.com/TheGirlKingFilm

Enemy DVD Review

Spider Man 2

Released : February 7th 2014

Certificate : 15

Director : Denis Villeneuve

Cast : Jake Gyllenhaal, Mélanie Laurent, Sarah Gadon

Plot : A history teacher, Adam Bell (Gyllenhaal), lives a monotonous repetitive life. One day at work out of the blue a co-worker recommends a film to him, while watching it Adam discovers an extra who is physically identical to him. He takes it upon himself to investigate and meet his double.

Denis Villeneuve and Jake Gyllenhaal second team up of 2013, however this one went hugely unnoticed, surprisingly given the huge critical acclaim and audience praise their other film Prisoners received that year also. But this film did not come with half as much advertising or marketing that Prisoners did, and after seeing the film unaware of the moderate level of chatter that it received due to its confusing nature, it is clear why. As stated, watching it so late after release and completely unaware of the excitement it caused for a niche amount of fans and critics, it gave great perspective. It also made it possible to research the speculations behind the films meaning after viewing to piece together the metaphorical meanings behind the film, and most poignantly the ending. As a film that has gained attention only due to its murky hidden meanings and shocking ending, I high recommend this video which gives a very detailed explanation for everything in the film, but it does contain huge spoilers as well so view film before viewing video     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9AWkqRwd1I     Understanding of the films hidden themes in my opinion is vital to enjoying the film to a greater level, as there a specific meanings to the film, it is not polysemic or open to interpretation.

The film is by no means a straight doppelganger feature, as I was expecting, viewing purely out of respect for the actor and director. If a straight doppelganger is what is desired, then The Double will make for much more grounded and clean cut thriller about identity issues, despite its striking directing and cinematography. Regardless of fully understanding the film on first viewing or not, it will undoubtedly make an impression on the viewer. It is easy to see why many might instantly dismiss the film due to its unsettling nature and very dark moody themes. Equally upon the discovery of the films hidden meanings, many could easily reject the film still due to its unapologetically obscure way to deliver its message (which many could claim is deliberately obscure for the sake of gaining attention and praise, not for the sake of quality cinema) as well as again still the issue that its vibe is not one many would classify as entertaining.  For these reasons it is very much a Marmite film, both for critics and audience members, but it can’t be denied that it is an extremely unique cinematic experience, alike Only God Forgives in many respects.

Villeneuve work in this film was complimented beautifully with the addition of little known cinematographer Nicolas Bolduc. Bolduc work in this film may be too obverse and over the top for some, as the dark green tinge brought to the screen for some may overdo emphasis the films dark mood which is blatant enough with the story. As he recreated with Sicario, Villeneuve use of both rolling landscape shots and claustrophobic tight obscured shot presents the film in a way the greatly compliments the films tone. For directing, the story of Enemy is most likely on of the best suited to Villeneuve style, unfortunately that story is not one that appeals to the wider audience. Other tastefully skilled shot choice from Villeneuve are the soaring high shots over the apartment buildings as well as the very imaginative presentation of the interaction between the two Gyllenhaal characters interaction, which was vital due in first meet due to the tension built around the meet, and Villeneuve pitched it perfectly to leave the viewer feeling unsatisfied and threatened. As far as Villeneuve directing is concerned, he has cemented his style and film type with a hat trick of dark thought provoking thrillers which always remain with the viewer long after the credits have rolled.

Now for Gyllenhaal, who with this film demonstrates his great versatility as an actor, by playing two characters in the film, not a hugely radical move, but much less celebrated than Jesse Eisenberg in The Double or must recently the hugely publicised Tom Hardy performance in Legend. For a most part as with many doppelganger films, the two characters are needed to be polar opposites of each other, true in this case. Gyllenhaal throws himself into this role as he did with Prisoners for Villeneuve, as an actor who is renowned for his involvement in darker roles, he is a wise acting choice for this film. The skill of the performances grow throughout the film as the drama ensues and the emotions fly, but the performance is likely to be looked over by fans due to the characters being most subdued and grounded (despite topic matter) than many of his other roles. Because of the subtle characters, the meeting and discovering isn’t fully grounded as much as it could have been via Gyllenhalls performance, but is done well by the supporting roles of Mélanie Laurent and Sarah Gadon who are partners to each of the Gyllenhalls.

Villeneuve and Javier Gullón (screenwriter) have made a very bold film here, since the book the film is inspired by (The Double) contains none of the creepy imagery which the film was made famous by. Taking such a new approach to convey the themes that the book holds is a great skill, and seeing Villeneuve imagination flow in the dark recreation of Toronto is brilliant in the sense it lets this dark director off the lead. It could be said that watching the film so late gave the vantage point of Sicaro, meaning the director is more widely respect now, adding to Enemy’s prestige. But this doesn’t take away from its skill, as many of his now trade mark directorial action can be seen in this film. It is undeniable also that the discovery of the films hidden meanings adds a great amount of appreciation for the film, as much more is going on under the surface of the film. But also while the end result may scramble your brain, on first viewing the strength of Villeneuve and Gyllenhall are still noticeable, while you might not know to what end. A dark mind bender that credits re-watching after research and understanding to result in a rich, well thought out thriller.

Verdict : Things are never as they seem with Villeneuve. Enemy is a film mystery that can stand tall with Prisoners and Sicario creating a trio of exceptional dark thriller. Not for everyone, but a grossly unacknowledged unique film.

Verdict : 4/5

Quote : “Chaos is order yet undeciphered.”