Hush Netflix Review

Don’t Look Now

Released : March 12th 2016

Certificate : 15

Director : Mike Flanagan

Cast : Kate Siegel, John Gallagher Jr., Michael Trucco, Samantha Sloyan, Emilia Graves

Plot : A deaf writer has moved out of the city into the woods for peace of mind. One night a masked killer shows up at her front door, and a game of cat and mouse ensues.

Mike Flanagan goes from strength to strength as a skilled upcoming horror director. Having first broken onto the scene with the critically well received Oculus, a film about a haunted mirror in 2013. Now this year he returns with two motion pictures. Firstly, a sequel to a horror flop Ouija, the sequel titled Ouija: Origin of Evil, which according to Rotten Tomatoes score was superior to Oculus. And now the straight to Netflix film Hush. One quick point to discuss, it could be a point of criticism that the horror film victimises a disability, something that other horror films of 2016 did, most notably Shut In (a film centring around a bedridden, catatonic state boy). Hush in my opinion doesn’t do so as the film is in no way negative in its use of the disability and is purely used as a character trait and a means of developing tension.

Flanagan has stood out in his short career as a fresh, and thoughtful horror director, and Hush is no exception. Likely his most thrilling film to date, the film puts a clever spin on the home invasion horror premise. The films scenes leading up to the meet of our hero and villain are mesmerizing and well thought out. The film from then on is a white knuckled thrill ride, that makes it an undiscovered gem on Netflix. While not every aspect of the film revolves around the deafness of the lead character or directly implements it in all her action against our villain, the film is still cunningly clever. The home invasion genre with a twist of the sense was a theme of popular horror films of 2016, with Don’t Breathe being another big success of the year. Having not scene Don’t Breathe, I review Hush with its own rights and merit.

The only real flaws that can be found in the film are that it doesn’t quite revolutionise the home invasion film to a huge degree, as it still follows the basic tropes and conventions. And secondly the villain played by Gallagher Jr was on and off at points. But overall this is an extremely well-crafted thriller. What are surprising aspects about the film, and the key to a good thriller is its ability to evoke real concern for the outcome. Many thrillers, especially the mainstream films of most recent years, fail to generate a real sense of urgency or genuine concern for the lead character(s). Hush does this very well. It is achieved through both Flanagan’s skill and his out of nowhere use of graphic violence that adds brilliantly to the charge of the film.

At a time when so few horror films are up to good quality, and even fewer filmmakers are taking the genre seriously, films like Hush should be celebrated. Granted this isn’t a game changer, and neither are the rest of Flanagan’s films. However, this film alike Oculus, not to spoil anything, shows Flanagan’s ability to play and toy with the narrative at hand, create good thrills without using the generic jump scares or CGI scary faces, and knows where to put the camera to place you right in the moment of the horror.

Verdict : Flanagan has made three horror films, each a success and each a good time, Hush is another superb outing

Verdict : 4/5

Quote : “I can come in anytime I want. And I can get you, anytime I want. But I’m not going to. Not until it’s time.”

 

Anomalisa DVD Review

(Adult) Toy Story

Released : March 11th 2016

Certificate : 15

Director : Charlie Kaufman, Duke Johnson

Cast : David Thewlis, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Tom Noonan

Plot : A man (Thewlis) who is depressed by the mundanity of his life, finds hope in a chance meeting with a stranger (Jason Leigh).

Famously wacky none mainstream filmmaker, Charlie Kaufman returns with Anomalisa, a film adaption of his play of the same name. Most famous for his writing ability, with a number of his films being Oscar nominated for their screenplay, including Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind and Being John Malkovich. For this film he ventures in directing as well (this being his most famous director role), along with little known film maker Duke Johnson. Anomalisa gained an Oscar nomination for Best Animated Feature Film.

Several imaginative qualities are obvious within the framework of this film. Firstly there is the stop-motion animation work, and as well as this how all but two characters, our leads, are voiced by the same actor, Tom Noonan. This latter feature is obviously a clever way to convey how our lead character, Michael, views everyone as the same and finds no variety or pleasure from his interaction with people. A Guardian article (and others) have suggested, due to this voicing effect, the films dream sequences and how the all the character are animated to look alike (apart from our leads), that Michael suffers from Fregoli delusion. This is a delusion where a person believes everyone else to actually be the same person who changes their appearance. Without further research into Kaufman response or inspiration for the film, I am unaware if this theory carries water. But alike many of the Kaufman’s films, they are so jarring and imaginative in their storytelling, that is seems wrong to attempt to narrow it down to one meaning. If Kaufman’s intention here was to convey messages about the nature of mundanity and depression, instead of the delusion, then these effects are very creative.

The script for the film is much less subtle or effective in this respect of conveying meaning. While not all of his films preach about life’s deeper meanings and the human nature, this film and Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind, do carry these. Unfortunately ‘Eternal Sunshine…’ far surpasses Anomalisa in richness of dialogue and overall script. The overall negativity and pointless conveyed in the dialogue of Michaels character with everyone else is rather ‘obvious’ and unimaginatively done. People in the hallways of the hotel and always swearing or masturbating. As well as this the dialogue of the romance that ensues between Michael and the shy self-conscious Lisa, who he falls for were lacking in panache . While realistic, the scenes weren’t half as moving or gripping as his previous work which so greatly captured people’s spirits.

As for the story as a whole, without spoilers, the film will likely leave the bulk of the audience feeling unfulfilled. Not that a film is obliged to perform this task, and critiquing of a storyline sometimes feels obtuse, due to its very subjective nature, but I too was left dissatisfied. For those who enjoy and respect ending that rebel against a conventional film ending of boy meets girl, then there may be something here for you. But for a film that examines life and human nature, it would have been nice to have an ending that attempted to answer these questions or approach them a little better.

Anomalisa is alike all of Kaufman’s films, beautifully made, with create creativity and flare. This films approach to the topic matter is a bit more generic and less aesthetically surprising than his other films. But it still packs a lot more heart and craft than many other films of last year, just not up to his regular work.

Verdict : One of Kaufmans weaker films. It’s not quite as entertaining or thought provoking as his other works, but is still a heartfelt well-made study of the human condition.

Verdict : 3/5

Quote : “At last! Another person!”

Arrival Review

Starship Bloopers

Released : November 10th 2016

Certificate : 12

Director : Denis Villeneuve

Cast : Amy Adams, Jeremy Renner, Forest Whitaker, Michael Stuhlbarg

Plot : After 12 UFO’s land across the globe, the US army recruits linguist  Louise Banks (Adams) and mathematician Ian Donnelly (Renner) to help communicate with the aliens.

From the screenwriter of the 5th Final Destination film and The Nightmare on Elm Street, ironically comes one of the smartest films of the year. Of course the aspect of the crew that got all cinema goers excited was that of the director. A director renowned for his dark thrillers which drip with brilliant cinematography and calculating presentation. Also ironically, the year the most iconic alien film has a sequel, this film takes the genre in a whole new direction and tone. As we enter the end of the year, this continues the early oscar buzz excitement as the good reviews poor in for the film.

From the screenwriter of the 5th Final Destination film and The Nightmare on Elm Street, ironically comes one of the smartest films of the year. Of course the aspect of the crew that got all cinema goers excited was that of the director. A director renowned for his dark thrillers which drip with brilliant cinematography and calculating presentation. Also ironically, there year the most iconic alien film has a sequel, this film takes the genre in a whole new direction and tone. As we enter the end of the year, this continues the early Oscar buzz excitement as the good reviews poor in for the film.

The story of the film is a brilliant one, and a very new approach to the alien genre, arcing back to Close Encounters territory. Granted only so much credit can be given to the film maker for this aspect, as it is an attempted screenplay. What was really needed to make such a story work was the hand of Villeneuve. A director who was willing to take the time with the story, its complex themes and to avoid as many conventions and clichés in order to realize such a unique approach. Fortunately, these are all features that Villeneuve has displayed throughout his whole work and performs brilliantly here. One feature that Villeneuve is so good at, is building and maintaining an atmosphere that suits the film perfectly throughout his film. The overriding themes that he conveys through the shots in this are that of tremendous spectral, and innocence. All the shot surrounding the aliens are beautiful enough and well thought out enough to make up (mostly) for the lack of ‘action’ that occurs on screen.

Aspects of the film that felt slightly disappointing was the execution of some narrative point. The film centre’s around a single question for the aliens, and thanks to Villeneuve shot that instil and sense of awe, there is the anticipation of a great poignant reveal to this question. The reveal and execution felt slightly rushed, which was surprising, since all other aspects of the film were given such good time to mature. The use of an exposition dump was slightly off. As well as this, the answer wasn’t quiet as smart as the rest of the film annoyingly, such a sense of awe that was built up played off for a rather simple concept. But these issues will be mostly overlooked for many critics and audience members as it is wrapped up in such a brilliant complex and unpredictable plot overall, that a few issues with the climatic acts won’t be much of an issue. The one narrative flaw that some audience might not forgive is that of the pacing, but for most the intellectual drama will be a good enough counterpart for the bullets.

The acting of course as always from Adams is of a very high quality, and she dealt very well under Villeneuve style of heavy reliance of close up of characters. Although it is almost accepted these days, it is worth remembering the skill require to act to nothing, as this film went through probable its share of green screen. One general consensus from many reviews is grips with the character of Jeremy Renner, and a useless of this. While this character doesn’t develop the plot particular, it brings a great level of humanity delivered very well by Renner which was need in the balancing of the tone. The tone of which is unlike any other film that has dealt with aliens, in a film that is overall one of the most unique of the year. While it contains a few flaws, and not quite as much white knuckle excitement as Villeneuve other films, Arrival and very well executed new addition to a genre and will be remembered.

Verdict : Not quite as fulfilling as his other works, due to some small issues. But Villeneuve has brought another very well acted, stunning well shot, thought-provoking film to our screens.

Verdict : 4/5

Quote : “Now that’s a proper introduction.”

I, Daniel Blake Review

The Pursuit Of Happyiness 

Released : October 21st 2016

Certificate : 15

Director : Ken Loach

Cast : Dave Johns, Hayley Squires, Natalie Ann Jamieson, Micky McGregor

Plot : Daniel Blake (Johns) struggles with the complexities and harshness of the welfare system after a major heart attack. Seemingly unable to qualify for benefits, alike single mother (Squires), together they face poverty.

Ken Loach, the quietly famous British director famous for the classic Kes, reunites with frequent collaborating writer Paul Laverty. Together their most famous work includes The Wind that Shakes the Barley, and more recently The Angles’ Share, and now I, Daniel Blake. Ken Loach in his most famous for his films about the everyday British citizen, within different stories. Often Loach’s film have a humorous edge but ultimately poetic sadness to them, the style which has made him famous. While his other films, alike with Laverty has a slight quirky edge to the story that accompanies the social commentary aspects of the film, I, Daniel Blake doesn’t contain such uniqueness or quirky edge. It is a straightforward social commentary about the poor suffering with the benefit system of Britain, told through a humours melodramatic tone and subtly directing and writing.

The first issue with I, Daniel Blake (as with the rest of Loach’s films) is that they don’t exactly enthral the average cinema goer. Loach makes slow paced subtle films that a rooted in clarity of character and dry directing. In other words, the films stay rooted in realism, and when this feature is carried to such extent such as with I, Daniel Blake, it can create issues with pacing. While the film isn’t particularly long, the very dead pan style of its storytelling, means that at some times the humours sweary nature of lead character doesn’t maintain a throughout entertaining sensation. This is where I, Daniel Blake differs from Loach’s other films, as the unusual, inventive or intense situations that the characters find themselves in is dropped, meaning that his style of filmmaking can become tedious at times.

Luckily it contains enough of the essential Loach elements to make it enjoyable. One being that Loach can find actors that aren’t mainstream and that fit characters like a glove, the two actors being Dave Johns and Hayley Squires. While the performances aren’t of the quality to make them hugely memorable, they are very enduring and what is most important about a Loach film, very realistic. With this realism means that there aren’t hugely emotional scenes that demand great floods of tears, as in mainstream Hollywood dramas, and for this reason may not seem as impressive as others. However, the two actors, Squires in particular disappears into these characters, and this joined with Loach’s directing style completely immerse you in their reality. It is likely for such reason, why the film comes across monotonous and dim, because this is their reality.

Loach’s style of directing and the overall craft of the film is very subtle, but effective in this pursuit of realism. There are many sequences where the audio is drowned out by the hustle and construction sounds going on around the characters, to help build the world of working class Britain. Similarly, Laverty script which contains little exchanges and idioms of the characters equally construct the setting of Newcastle. What is most poignant about Loach’s style, is the way he doesn’t show everything. He is a very selective director and will linger on certain shots longer than perhaps other directors would do. Many of the scenes take place in the council housing and Loach plays of this via shooting through doorways frequently to show the scene and characters. This sells the cramped and limited existence of the characters. The direction does become slightly repetitive, as the walking of characters, indoor scenes and emotive scenes are all shot in a separate way and rarely deviate. So, Loach style which is sombre enough as it is, when joined with such a bleak story does create a very dreary picture. While this is the aim of the film as it attempts to reflect the reality of these characters, it doesn’t quiet have the stirring drama and humour to heighten the film to a captivating as well as poignant drama. But there is great skill across the board to immerse the audience in this world as to convey the story and point.

Verdict : The film creates a excellent level of affinity with the characters and the world, but moving and humour elements are few and far between to make the film stand out, as realistic as it is.

Verdict : 3/5

Quote : “Run the mouse up the screen.”

Green Room DVD Review

Mein Band 

Released : May 13th 2016

Certificate : 18

Director :  Jeremy Saulnier

Cast : Anton Yelchin, Imogen Poots, Patrick Stewart, Alia Shawkat,  Joe Cole

Plot : A down on their luck punk band take a last minute gig at a neo-Nazi club. After witnessing a horrific act, the band become hostages within the green room.

After gaining festival and critical praise with violent indie thriller Blue Ruin, writer director Jeremy Saulnier returns with Green Room. Most notable in its cast is not only the heavy weight of Patrick Stewart, who embodies the leading neo-Nazi, but also the late departed Anton Yelchin, who is most famous for his role in the recent star trek films. Very similar in structure to Blue Ruin, we have characters who are quickly set up to do battle in a film which depicts a brutally violent winding road of the characters survival. This film also marks what the director calledanother film in his unofficial ‘inept protagonist trilogy’.

From this set up, of inept protagonist, confined setting of film, feature of neo-Nazi and a director who’s breakout film is a violent unusual thriller, a pretty clear picture can begin to be built as to the nature of the film. This is a white knuckled survivalist thrill ride, made in the same vain as slasher horror films as the characters get picked off one at a time for the enjoyment of the audience. Some have claimed that the film spills into the horror genre due to the extent of the violence in the film, this doesn’t seem to ring true due to the way the film is quiet self aware and sarcastic in some scenes with the topic matter. Along this vain the film is very much aware of what it is in structure, which was a wise choice from Jeremy Saulnier as it made the film a lot more entertaining, with a tone and mood which is near perfect.

There are always flaws with a film of the style, which will offend audience depending on your inclination to this type of film and willingness to suspend criticism for the sake of ‘fun’. The characters themselves are likely going to be the issue that many audience will find with the film. Despite the striking good performance from both the well known and unknown actors of the punk band, they lack audience empathy. This ties in with the concept of the inept protagonist. Blue Ruin contained equally inept characters, but was able to build a higher level of emotive connection with the protagonist that you were more invested in the story. With Green Room the punk band aren’t given a back story, nor have much likability. For some this is not an issue and can relish the thrilling aspects of the film without any connection to the characters, others will see little interest or justification for the violence inflicted on them.

Despite this flaw and other issues, Green Room delivers a great level of edge of your seat thrills and tense atmosphere that keeps you in the palm of the movies hand. This effect is achieve via a combination of the brutal violence on screen, the very high standard performances throughout and the craft of Saulnier. While Saulneir might not have as much imagination with the dialogue or story of his writing, he is able to build the tension superbly as he did before with Blue Ruin, and here the claustrophobic environment is an asset to his work. While this in essence is a film style that has been done many times before in its different guises, Saulnier attitude towards the subject matter and a real fell for the humorously dark tension builder, Green Room is a riot of a time which captures you while you’re watching.

Verdict : A thrilling fun time, which rekindles the film type of watching the characters fall one at a time in spectacular style.

Verdict : 4/5

Quote : Nazi punks! Fuck off!

Captain America : Civil War DVD Review

Avengers Angered 

Released : April 29th 2016

Certificate : 12A

Director : Joe Russo, Anthony Russo

Cast : Chris Evans, Robert Downey Jr., Sebastian Stan, Anthony Mackie, Elizabeth Olsen, Scarlett Johansson

Plot : After a mission goes wrong, the governments of the world decide that the Avengers too dangerous to not have restrictions. The political proposition that restricts their actions divides the team, while Bucky reemerges to cause additional friction.

As the Avengers world enters its final films before the climatic epic that will be Infinity Wars, Civil War stands out as both an Captain American independent film and a Avengers film. The buss for the film was monumental due to the trilogy of impressive trailers, the marketing campaign of which team (Captain America or Iron Man) you side with and the fact that the Russo brother return to direct after making Captain America : Winter Solider, what many consider one of Marvels best films. With the hindsight of this review being late, it is now evident that Civil War is one of Marvels most critical acclaimed films to date.

Aspects of the film that were rightfully praised across the board were that of the films ability to involve both in depth and emotive story lines as well as the spectacular action. Something that the Russo brother were able to bring to the second CA film, and have definitely done so a second time. It will be interesting to see whether the Russo brothers or Joss Whedon take the mast on Infinity War. Whedon wasn’t the writer for this film, as he was for the other Avengers movies. Instead this time we have Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely, who have written for all of the CA films. They deserve mention as Civil War had a near perfect balance of humor and drama that keeps the film entertaining from multiple stand points. The one liner for all the characters within the climatic airport scene, kept the film from taking itself too seriously very effectively.

Another aspect of the film that is also a stand out, and should set and example for the recent comic book universe is that of utilization of character. As DC continues to be diversity among audience despite such big characters on screen such as Suicide Squad, it seems the films need to utilize the character more effectively. Civil War does this brilliant, with a lengthy run time there is plenty of time devoted to the differing characters, which was needed since there was introduction of new characters. A common complaint in the vain of character for this film would be that of the villain, many labeling him as unnecessary and forgettable. The villain played by Daniel Brühl has a subtle nature to his performance that is likely the reason behind this criticism, where the film is filled with larger than life characters.

Issues with the film are few and far between in a very high standard Marvel outing. The films ending, avoiding spoilers, uses poetic licence to a large degree to allow for the set up of Infinity Wars. Which in a way makes the Civil War itself seem slightly rushed in its resolution to allow for a idealistic return to a ‘team’ formation for the hero’s next outing.  Some could complain about the lack of gritty nature to a film that is stage as a dramatic and daring division between one of cinemas greatest assemblies. But there are little issues that many die hard fans as well as general observers will find in this picture. With action sets and stunts that will please many cinema goer, and the emotional edge and depth to story that is unprecedented in the Avenger universe to this date, Civil War is a real game changer. It can be easily seen that Infinity War will be held to the same quality as this film, and it will have a lot to live up to. As here we have the intelligence, character drama and action quality that possibly surpasses all previous Avenger films.

Verdict : Big on the brains, action and heart, this is one of Marvels finest.

Verdict : 4/5

Quote : Can you move your seat up?

The Nice Guys Mini Review

Released : June 3rd 2016

Certificate : 15

Director : Shane Black

Cast : Ryan Gosling, Russel Crowe, Angourie Rice, Margaret Qualley, Matt Bomer

Plot : In 1977 Los Angeles a private investigator (Gosling) teams up with fist of hire enforcer (Crowe) after their paths cross due to two merging cases, the disappearance of a girl and the death of a porn star.

Shane Black, an writer director who is behind Lethal Weapon, The Long Kiss Goodnight, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang and Iron Man 3, is returning to the buddy cop structure for another period piece comedy. Adding to his list of A list actors to his film, he has opted for Ryan Gosling for the depressed, alcoholic, private detective single dad. And Russel Crowe for the aimless, struggling alcoholic, angry enforcer.

For Shane Black fans, or people who are aware of his work, it is difficult not to compare the film to his past work as a reference point for how good The Nice Guys is. Given that here the standard hasn’t lapsed as well as the formula and tone, it is largely down to personal preference which film remains as Blacks best. As The Nice Guys is another shinning example of Blacks ability to construct brilliant (and funny) set action pieces, wit and blunt humour of the script and a diluted plot that serves a chaotic backdrop of our duo.

Gosling and Crowe work brilliantly together, but given Blacks record with creating the perfect on screen duo, this is to be expected. This makes you wonder whether its down the actors chemistry, or that is just a by product of Blacks script writing process. For the duo dynamic, what might be felt for some is a slight lapse in quality from Kiss Kiss Bang Bang, due to these characters being less original than KKBB. But this isn’t down to Ryan and Russel’s effort, by any means. Neither one of them shines more than the other, as both actors approach the film with the perfect amount of character commitment and professional playfulness to bring both the verbal and non-verbal humour jumping of the screen.

Flaws with the film are limited, due to the fact that it is contains such an infectious amount of energy and wit that Black always brings.But some hypercritical could argue that it is a rehash of past buddy cop films or that down to personal taste it doesn’t hit their funny bone. This is a very niche audience thou, as The Nice Guys is a huge fan and general audience pleaser.

Verdict : A film that’s a irresistible comedic treat, with a period piece set that is a great move for Black.

Verdict : 4/5

 

Zero Dark Thirty DVD Review

US The Office

Released : January 25th 2013

Certificate : 15

Director : Kathryn Bigelow

Cast : Jessica Chastain, Jason Clarke, Jennifer Ehle, Kyle Chandler, Mark Strong, Édgar Ramírez

Plot : After 9/11, the US army and CIA launch the largest man hunt in history to find all those responsible for the deaths of 3,ooo civilians. The story follows the working of Maya (Chastain), who starts out as a CIA high achieving office clerk, but is sent to Pakistan to work  as a front line investigator.

The directing writing duo that brought the moral panic of Iraq warfare to ultra-realism level with The Hurt Locker, attempt to bring the same level of realism to another side of the conflict, the wider picture fought behind desk and in offices. Bigelow and Mark Boal take their talent to a film which unpacks on the quantity of battle/tense scenes and the solider mentality, and replaces it with the tedious and frustrating ten-year governmental viewpoint. So what could audience expect going into this, a still large presence of set piece thrills that made their previous work famous, unbiased story telling that shies away from any political messages, and a dependence of character driven drama interwoven in the true story being told. Well for ZD30 a tighter lip attitude towards the character development for sure, as this is traded in for scope of story and (almost) all acting credit and audience investment resting upon Chastain character. So for audience members who revealed in the unique and thought provoking solider character drama, that was of a quality that matched that of set piece thrills that the film provided, their might be disappointment. As quantity on this aspect of the film is traded in, for the creation of a huge scoping ‘how done it’ rather than ‘who done it’ tale.

For the overall feel vibe and story arc of the film, it does have to deal with the weight of an over two and a half run time that for the majority is set behind desks and in offices. For this reason, some audiences will have the same level of difficulty as they do with many unflinching true story films, such as Spotlight (although that film was much more character driven). Mark Boal writing demonstrates his great diversity, as previously being able to craft dialogue for small skirmish warfare, and now to encompass a decade man hunt. Due to this setting more rides on Boal then Bigelow, as the office space environment provides little breathing space for her talents. Her signature shaky camera movement and obscured camera shots added little to office staged antics, luckily she has her chance to shine in a sprinkling of set conflict sequences and handling of torture sequences. Boal keeps the film grounded in subtle, subtlety dramatized character development, specialist technical meeting dialogue, and the right amount of character conflict and emotional exchange to recreate the trademark realism that was present in The Hurt Locker with not a pitch feeling dramatics or overly emphasised. This is the talent lacking in the bio-pic and true story genre of late.

To address Bigelow addition to the film, her craft work is most noticeable present within the torture scenes, (and to avoid spoilers what will be referred to as) the Camp Chapman scene and the famous talked about final sequence of the film, which is the raid in Abbottabad. From these scenes and others Bigelow keeps audiences (as with previous work) in the palm of her hand, with any many outdoor sequences of the film keeping you edging forward with anticipation that something will go off. This effect is partly present in her previous work, where she in effect turned explosions into basically jump scares, which hit much harder than any horror genre attempt. The close to home topic and tension that is derived from this film keeps audience in an unpleasant state of fear and unease about the film, as it should do. Contrary to popular opinion of the final act of the film, it isn’t the tense’s sequence ever (due to a combination of knowing the outcome and an intent to maintain the films overall ultra-realism, which does get in the way of the thrills), but it does prove to be the best shot sequence of the film. Alike the opening of Spectre, the opening exceptionally thrilling, but was a stunning sceptical of directorial talent.

Jessica Chastain carries a large weight of the film as Jeremy Renner did in The Hurt Locker, as being both the most interesting and dominate character, with all other roles to a large degree being reactionary to her/him. This is not to say that supporting performances lack, Kyle Chandler pulls off yet another underrated performance as Chastain’s manager in the field, and Jason Clarke keeps for the most part a charismatic character grounded in the film. Mark Strong’s speech boasted in the trailers in another highlight of the supporting cast contributions also worthy of mention. But Chastain is, as she needed to be, the runaway from this film. As due to her brilliant performance, the film succeeds at its ability to make this ten-year national manhunt, be reduced to a very personal obsessive quest of one person, Chastain’s character. She was very worthy of the nomination she gained, and she likely missed out to Lawrence due to the lacking in areas of quantity of emotional outburst and uniqueness of character. As the final shot of the film fades out on Chastain’s face it perfectly encompasses the level of relief and exhaustion felt after a burning passion and obsession lasting ten years. Additionally, the performance has the great look of a genuine character development, as she become consumed by the job as the film progresses.

Zero Dark Thirty is a refreshing gritty piece of award bait, which doesn’t appeal to a wide audience. These two factors of award bait and niche appeal is most likely why it hasn’t quiet stood the test of time as far as peoples appreciation and memory for the film. What this in the end boils down to, is the weakness of the film having a large run time and a desire to enrapture realism, with only a selected few scenes to shift you forward in your seat. But for a large degree the script from Mark Boal keeps the film in a perfect blend of believable and dramatically entertaining, which pulls the film out of danger of dullness. But it can be appreciated that this feeling will not be universal, resulting in a slight Marmite film which asks its audience to observe mostly subtle (ironically for the topic matter) film, and to a degree is much alike Spotlight, ultra-realistic, with a sharp topic and stunning performances.

Verdict : 4/5

Verdict : A slow burner for sure, but has so much to offer with writing, acting and direction (in the order, first being the best). You don’t quite get the emotion for thrills of her previous work, but that is down to subject matter, not any lack of skill.

Quote : “I’m the motherfucker that found this place. Sir.”

 

 

Hail, Caesar! Review

A Serious Mannix 

Released : March 4th 2016

Certificate : 12A

Director : Ethan Cohen, Joel Cohen

Cast : Josh Brolin, George Clooney, Alden Ehrenreich, Scarlett Johansson, Channing Tatum, Ralph Fiennes

Plot : In 1950’s America, Capitol Pictures is one of the largest production companies in the world, and at the centre of its running is Eddie Mannix (Brolin). While working on the company’s biggest release of the year, Hail, Caesar! the lead actor, Baird Whitlock (Clooney) is kidnapped and held for $100,000.

Another Coen brothers come around, this time the duo share the directing load, an emerging pattern, as Ethan has been only officially credited with co-directing Inside Llewyn  Davis, A Serious Man, Burn After Reading, No Country for Old Men and The Ladykillers. Returning to lead their film is Josh Brolin and creating a hatrick for Clooney with the Coen Brothers. To use Coen terminology, Hail, Caesar! is definitely a toned down Burn After Reading as far as tone or vibe is concerned. So expect quirky humour in abundnace, as for this film the Coens have really let their hair down to fool around with their comedy still, retaining the surreal but losing the blunt violent nature they can pack. And along they way they pay homage to the 50’s cinematic scene, bursting with reference to the golden days of Hollywood that only the biggest of cinema geeks will notice all, but some are plainly there. So we interrupt this review to present the list of all reference that you can see in the trailer (to avoid spoilers), remember on what source you check these results may vary, but here are the references for those who didn’t pick up on them or are curious before seeing the film. Only the names will be given, allowing you to do your own research, and if the character’s name is the same as the real life person, they will not feature (e.g. Tilda Swinton and Josh Brolin character).

Hail, Caesar! (the fictions film within this film) is Ben-Hur. Scarlet Johansson’s character is an on screen (and possible off) impersonation of Esther Williams, with a scene from the film Million Dollar Mermaid recreated but from the view of shooting it. Tatum alike Johansson’s recreates Gene Kelly, specifically within On The Town, not as scene for scene as MDM. Ralph Fiennes plays George Cukor, who struggles with a Roy Rogers alike character played by Ehrenreich. George Clooney’s character has more debate around, but many seem to think its a summary of numerous actors of that time, but Charlton Heston and Cary Grant stand out. And the mighty capital pictures are MGM productions.

Straight away from the presence of such obscure, apart from Ben-Hur, reference’s within the film can give an insight as to the vibe of the rest of the film, which is essentially that the Coens do not care or make films for a large audience. As such the humour, and overall story line may either go straight over the heads of audience members or not be fully grounded.

As to direct the direction of the film (leaving the substance of the film for last due to its polysemic nature) is pitch perfect in accompanying the mood of each scene they are trying to achieve, making for great comedy directing that isn’t present much recently in the genre, which is the director doing hardly anything outside of relying on dialogue or on screen action codes, making directing creativeness less of a priority. It was refreshing excellent to see the Coen’s do the very opposite of this genre stagnation, as they did in Burn After Reading, however, due to the quirky nature of the humour, the directing ‘play’ that is present may be lost in audiences and possible critics disappointment as to nature of humour in comparisons to previous works. These directing techniques are in a way alike the scenes from previous films that are recreated, in the sense that they are conventionally reminiscent. Most obviously with the revealing of the villains obscured shot through a door from high angle and shadows used to blot our a character face. As well as this their own brilliant presentation of the quirky scenes, which are impeccable personified to create character driven humour. Joined with this is the entertainment recreation of obscure, all be it brilliant past film scenes.

As for the acting of the film, either by the Coen’s advice giving, or the actors own intuition, each actor presents his character with the correct degree of satire. Again to use Coen’s terminology, the character are more Fargo than No Country for Old Men, meaning that any depth or realism that the characters have is done so humorously, these are characters made to serve the vibe of the story and period place. Just as like the minor characters of Fargo all are cookie cut to help build the stereotypical polite Canadian representation. The characters of Hail, Casear! may not be quiet the comedic quality of Fargo, but there is a point where quantity overcomes quality, as the number of crazy Hollywood stooges in the film make it full enough of comically flawed characters. This helps with both the humour of the film and also for the recreation of past films. To pick out favourites would have to be Alden Ehrenreich for his portrayal of dimwitted low quality western actor in over his head in a serious drama and George Clooney for his third embodiment of a Coen comedic character which expertly captures the atmosphere that the Coens are going for, making him a truly valuable and cemented collaborator.

Overall, for the final use of Coen terminology, Hail,Caesar! is most similar to A Serious Man, in both undeniable odd nature and humour style. As A Serious Man, was a Marmite film among both critics and audiences (with some even calling ASM a modern classic) this film will likely do the same, not quiet to the same level as it lacking in the hidden meaning that ASM did. But for all the critical and high brow attention and expectation that may come with a new Coen Brothers release, this is another outing of them having silly fun, but hell it is fun.

Verdict : Its will be a hit and miss among fans of the Coens, critics and causal cinema goers alike. But the humour that is attempted to be created here is done perfectly and creatively, while many may not get all the jokes. And the reconstructions are a nice treat too.

Verdict : 4/5

Quote : “Would that it were so simple.”

Triple 9 Review

Natural Born Robbers

Released : February 19th 2016

Certificate : 15

Director : John Hillcoat

Cast : Kate Winslet, Aaron Paul, Norman Reedus, Casey Affleck, Woody Harrelson, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Anthony Mackie

Plot : A ex military crew paired with some dirty cops pull a bank robbery to gain information from a security box for the Russian mob. Forced into another job after payments withheld by the mob, the crew lead by Michael Atwood (Ejiofor) must figure out a way to rob a highly secure federal building. The crew relaises that they need a distraction, and decide on a triple 9, police code for killing a cop.

John Hillcoat returns after making moderate success with Lawless, another violent and big cast fuelled crime film. Now he takes on modern crime with one of the best cast assembles this year (due to early release) in the thriller genre, with a cat and mouse cops and robbers film about betrayal, desperateness and neighbourhood violence. Hillcoat general vibe set after Lawless was that he was a big fan of the blood and guts and had the ability to develop solid character drama to make an entertaining enough thriller, but many reviewers found that there was something holding it back narrative wise, a slight lack of originality that kept it in the realms of seen before violent cops and robber’s thrillers. Triple 9 script has some similarities to Lawless with the robbers having a strong team dynamic, but now we have goodies on the robber’s side to and a heightened dealing with morality within the story. But does Triple 9 have the suspense, thrills and acting quality able to make another modern robber squad thriller stand out alike The Town in recent years. Acting talent is certainly present within the film and the trailer alone boasted large scale uses of the city (no quiet at Heat level) there is promise.

Firstly, the films story will be one that was bound to come under fire from highbrow critics due to obvious decisions within the narrative. There are cheap shots that can be made at obvious features, such as the racial profiling that occurs in the film, with great amount of crime and hatred for the police residing within the Mexicans depicted in the film. There is the lack of female representation that is of a positive light, either sexualised or negative characters. But more than many others are the teasing nature of which it deals with the violence in the film, having clear reference to violence and crimes effect on a bigger scale than just the cops and robbers. For example, there is the child and his uncle (Harrelson) playing with a toy gun, and the brief scene showing parallel action between the Russian mob mother and child reading a book and the police mother and child reading together, while the father prepares his gun for work out of sight of the child. This final point teases the idea that the film will address the violence occurring in a profound or conclusive way, but the film never does, and in the minds of many critics this means it can’t justify its use.

Directorial work from Hillcoat had one opening issue, the film opens with a big bank robbery which is polluted by the presence of some credits on screen, distracting from a poignant bit of thrilling, reduced from the moment. From an overview of Hillcoat’s work it is much like the writing of the film, as in it doesn’t give you much extra in the way of poignant shoot choice or particular inventiveness, but this doesn’t mean that his work doesn’t function. The majority of the film could fit into this pattern of giving you high quality rehash of past crime thrillers conventions, with little added to it to make it more memorable, but that doesn’t make it thrilling while it last, simple doesn’t get it into any halls of fame. Following this line of argument Hillcoat does prove himself as before capable to use a combination of brutal violence and tense construct to keep you enthralled in the scenes. The actions sequences are more frequent and better constructed than in his previous work, as he deals with a script dealing with less character driven drama. The ending act, as it should be in a film of this type is particularly well built together for genuine adrenalin.

For the performances to build the film, there is a diversity in quality of talent. Winslet plays a rather two dimensional villains, but perhaps the dialogue of a Russian mobster didn’t have the design of character development. Paul plays as always with great conviction and realism, unfortunately there are striking similarities between this role and his most famous. The same to an extent can be said for Harrelson role, and while such a character with charisma and sarcasm may not be taken overly seriously, it still is achieved with great talent, with one of the most captivating performances of the film. Ejiofor being to many the heavy weight on the set still having the aura of 12 Years a Slave lingering about him, in this less serious role he plays the head of the robber gang, much alike its disciplining father, who also happens to be desperately attempting to claim a life back with his own son from the Russian mob. Unfortunately, he doesn’t spread his wings as much as his best work, nor is he expected to for this type of film, with a driven more by the interaction of the characters than any specific set piece of acting, which the actors achieve to keeping the films world believable and engaging, rather than create memorable performances.

The standards of Hillcoat second outing as a director create a film with standards to matching quality of his first outing, but maybe Lawless wins due to the added entertainment of period piece setting. Much of the same pros and cons come with Triple 9 as Lawless, which can be summarise into the fact that there is high quality enjoyment here, but to pack such a big cast into a famous genre there is always the hope that a new classic will be born. Let it not be forgotten the huge amounts of skill involved to create a new gem within an old genre, it is not an everyday occurrence. So with Triple 9 do not expect to be blown away, but you have a skilful rehash of conventions and codes from the greats, in particular it took its inspiration from The French Connection and Heat claims Hillcoat. Well it’s definitely more Heat than French Connection, but its lacking the directorial and acting excellence to place it in the same league as its inspiration. It’s got great action, and surprisingly hooking story, adequate acting and satisfactory directing to generate a fast burner full of twists and turns and bullets, but it’s over in a flash.

Verdict : Falling just short of the over the top fun of Lawless, Triple 9 has a the same mood and ingredients. Definitely more thrilling that Hillcoats previous work, but the thrills and the mostly unpredictable character interaction does quiet pack enough punch for an as memorable experience as Lawless. Lacking in originality within story and execution, meaning people will be quick to critic its violent, political incorrect nature, unfairly so.

Verdict : 3/5

Quote : “Out monster the monster.”