It (2017) Review

The Goonies on Elm Street

Released : September 8th 2017

Certificate : 15

Director : Andrés Muschietti

Cast : Jaeden Lieberher, Finn Wolfhard, Sophia Lillis, Jack Dylan Grazer, Wyatt Oleff, Chosen Jacobs,  Bill Skarsgård

Plot : Set in the 1980’s in a little town called Derry, a group of six children, who refer to themselves as ‘The Losers’ Club’, are terrorised by a shape-shifting monster called Pennywise ‘The Dancing Clown.

In keeping with the legend of It, twenty seven years on from the original mini-series, we have the return of The Losers’ Club and Pennywise. Directed by Andrés Muschietti whose only previous experience is the moderate successful horror flick Mama, the story of Stephen Kings It has been redone and updated. This film tells the story of what is commonly referred to as Chapter 1, while the book doesn’t make such a clean distinction, in which the characters face Pennywise for the first time as children. An actor yet to become as well-known as his brothers and father, Bill Skarsgård, plays the evil clown.

As scary as the clown might seem on paper and how horrific the story sounds, this film is far more a horror-adventure rather than a straight up horror. The quest that the children go on to defeat the demon is much more alike The Goonies and Super 8 than any horror flick. The film bleeds the nostalgia for the other 80’s set children adventures, much in the same vain as Stranger Things. This atmosphere and the coming of age aspect of the story brings real warmth to a film that holds no punches when it comes to the darker monster elements. The opening scene of the film is of course the iconic scene from the book and miniseries of Pennywise meeting Georgie while he races his paper boat. From this opening scene it is instantly clear that this is a more brutal and faithful adaption of the source material than the miniseries. Audience that were hoping for clever, suspenseful and inventive scares may be disappointed by the blunt and unrelenting use of ghost and ghouls in this film.

The abundance of monsters is in-keeping with Andrés Muschietti previous film Mama. The horror sequences become so frequent that at times they become slightly trivial, but after a point the quality of the scares and the thrilling pace they add to the film wins you over. With a run time of two hours and fifteen minute’s there is barely a moment to breathe, giving the film a brilliantly relentless pace. Certain set horror pieces, such as a confrontation with Pennywise halfway through, is visually brilliant and really is the stuff of high quality creature-feature work. The CGI that is worked into and around Pennywise is handled very well to create a clown that looks just real enough. But what shines through is how Muschietti deals with the other half of the tale, surrounding the kid’s drama and their development which is the real success of the film.

The cast are across the board good with the standouts of The Losers’ Club being lead Jaeden Lieberher, who is fast becoming a child star, and Stranger Things star Finn Wolfhard who really elevates the film with his comedic talent. As for Bill Skarsgård work, it is as good if not better than Tim Curry’s work with the character. While Curry’s performance was more calm and collected, ironically, Skarsgard makes the character noticeable more manic. The vocals in particular give the character a more unhinged and insane vibe, making him fair less comical and ironic than Curry’s rendition. This is matched well with the CGI decision to have his eyes just off kilter from one another.

It is a million miles better than the miniseries and falls among the better Stephen King adaptions. While the horror aspects are more thrilling and exciting than they are actually unsettling, there are plenty of moments to gasp at. What makes It one of the stronger Stephen King adaptions is that it’s as much about the characters as it is about the monsters. Effective in many areas, from laughter, excitement and character development, this is the better side of mainstream horror films.

Verdict : Both The Losers’ Club and Pennywise are brilliantly brought to life in this fast paced horror adventure which is big on characters and scares.

Verdict : 4/5

Quote : “If you’ll come with me, you’ll float too.”

Logan Lucky Review

Back To Basics For Soderbergh

Released : August 25th 2017

Certificate : 12A

Director : Steven Soderbergh

Cast : Channing Tatum, Adam Driver, Daniel Craig, Riley Keough

Plot : Two veteran brothers living in West Virginia, who are locally known to be cursed, fall on hard times. They decided to rob the Charlotte Motor Speedway in North Carolina.

SPOILER WARNING – Review contains allusions to the ending of the film.

After stating four years ago upon the release of Side Effects that he would be retiring from film-making due to the ‘horrific’ way the industry treats directors, Soderbergh returns with another heist comedy. Other complaints that the director had about the industry revolved around how commercially driven the industry has become and how this effected creative freedom. Knowing these facts when watching the film, changes the experience. The way two outsiders try to take on the big corporation, elements of the ending, and the overall quirky creative nature of the film, all makes sense given the directors stated attitudes.

The review tag line which has been most widely circulated is ‘its Coen’s meets Oceans’, and atmospherically it is clear to see why. If a direct film comparison could be made, it would be Barton Fink, due to the way both films are statements about the issues of film making, although Barton Fink does so much more explicitly. Logan Lucky does it as follows. The film isn’t very marketable on paper, the protagonists are unusual and outsiders, the humour isn’t mainstream and is often subtle, and the ending of the film has a definite statement about large corporations and their morality. These features make total sense when you consider Soderbergh complaints about the industry, that it’s become too mainstream, money obsessed, and lacking creativity. So, it appears he made a film that addressed these issues in a very subtle way. To push back in a small way against the film industry, he refuses to use conventional heroic handsome main characters, he doesn’t stay to the ‘accepted’ style of modern comedy, and he ends the film with a middle finger to corporations.

On top of this, the film is distributed by Soderbergh own private company (ensuring creative freedom) and the writer behind the film is a Rebecca Blunt, who is widely believed to be a pseudonym. Enough on the underlying messages of the film, does it function as an entertaining comedy heist. Absolutely. Whoever wrote the film, the script is brilliant. Combining character driven humour and situational comedy and topping it off with a huge amount of deep South American caricatures. Making this a clever and quirky comedy. This style won’t suit all mainstream audiences, as it isn’t as obvious and loud as other comedies out now, such as The Hitman’s Bodyguard. However, there’s definitely enough good laughs here for it to find an audience (or even become a cult hit). As for flaws in the script, the dramatic and emotional tones that come in towards the end aren’t very impactful. Also the overall structure and path of the film isn’t surprising and does stick very much to the Oceans formula.

As for the cast, all actors are relishing the roles very much. Many of the characters are larger than life, and many are clear caricatures. Due to the writing, Adam Driver and Daniel Craig will be the roles remembered from this film, as they are simply given more humour dialogue than Channing Tatum. Having said that, both Driver and Craig are brilliant in this film, being able to be believably portray their eccentric mannerisms and ticks which helps the humour land. These features make this one of the most quotable films recently, for all the right reasons. Seth MacFarlane accent and character can be forgiven. There is also the welcome addition of supporting roles from Hilary Swank and Sebastian Stan.

There’s plenty to really love here. While the film does follow the old Oceans formula very much, it is self-aware in this manner, with a standout line from a reporter in the film being ‘their calling it Oceans 7/11’. With great characters and great laughs this film will have you smiling on the way out of the theatre. Hopefully the success of this film will convince Soderbergh to put off that retirement a little longer.

Verdict : Despite Kermode saying the film is just high quality throw away fun, there are signs here that suggest a deeper meaning about the film industry. A great return for Soderbergh.

Verdict : 4/5

Quote : ‘Did you just say cauliflower to me?’

 

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.”

 

Silence Review

The Last Samaritan

Released : January 1st 2017

Certificate : 15

Director : Martin Scorsese

Cast : Andrew Garfield, Adam Driver, Yōsuke Kubozuka, Tadanobu Asano, Issey Ogata, Liam Neeson

Plot : Two Jesuit priests travel to Japan to find their mentor who apparently has renounced his faith after persecution.

Scorsese follows is most humorous and ludicrous films with his long-desired project Silence, a film that he has desired to make for thirty years now. This being his third film that deals with faith, he re-joins with frequent collaborator Michael Ballhaus and relative newcomer Rodrigo Prieto, both cinematographers, to ensure that if nothing else this biblical epic is one of the best-looking films of the award season. And speaking of awards season, Andrew Garfield stars in Silence, making him a lead role in two of this year’s award tipped films.

Silence is a true epic, in both runtime, semantic scope and technical mastery of its creation. To deal with the second feature, the film obvious deals with the deeper questions of God’s silence, what is means to betray him and general religious philosophy. What was a surprise, was the character drama on show here. While it was to be expected that Garfield and Driver’s character carry the weight of the drama via their character arcs, the supporting casts performance and their scene with our two leads were outstanding. The film contains an abundance of brilliantly scripted set character interaction of brilliant quality. These scenes added much to the film as they developed the character of the oppressed and the oppressors of Japan at the time. This gave a great level of humanity to all the characters allowing for a story much less black and white then; Christianity is goodness and all else is wrong.

Dealing with Scorsese work, for those who appreciate the subtle methods of direction that convey meaning, this is the wrong film. As Scorsese techniques and bold and striking when telling this tale. Initial high bird’s eye view shots create the sense of a God like over watch, and the wide-angle shots of Japan show the immense magnitude of our lead character’s task. Not that these or any other of the shot choices within the film are bad, On the contrary the delivered the story excellently, in the third act a reliance on POV shots from Garfield’s character really build the atmosphere. However, for such as intruding topic and story it was just missing the presentational edge that other Scorsese films had. But when you’re dealing with Scorsese there is always a certain level of excellence, the opening scene one of the most strikingly well shot scenes openings of recent memory.

The opening scene also shows off some of the acting from the well-known trio of actors that star in the film. With Neeson having largely retreated into action roles, it is easy to forget his skill, and he’s actualisation of grief within this film is so real. Grief being a key emotion that all three actors have to deal with, and Garfield does so excellently. Garfield being an actor that can manipulate his voice very well to convey emotions, as for his eyes, which convey so much. Apart from a single over the top scene (on both Garfield and Scorsese part) he is working at the top of his game, and his character tackles with a high magnitude of complex emotions than many other awards contenders.

Silence is not a film that is ‘enjoyed’, due to the gruelling emotional weight, thought provoking nature and graphic scenes. Yet in the same vein of 12 Years a Slave, it is a film that conveys great talent both behind and in front of the camera. Other similarities include character drama that is both intelligent and realistic, and manages to make the audience think.

Verdict : Scorsese may be very forward in how he tells this tale, but that’s a small issue with what is probably the best religious drama of recent years.

Verdict : 4/5

Quote : “I pray but I am lost. Am I just praying to silence?”

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.”

Re-Animator DVD Review

The Evil Undead

Released : May 24th 1985

Certificate : 18

Director : Stuart Gordon

Cast : Jeffrey Combs, Barbara Crampton, Bruce Abbott

Plot : A medical student (Abbott) takes in a new room mate who has just moved to study medicine alongside him, and continue his secret work on his death defying serum.

In the 80’s, there were milestones of horror films made, and the genre in itself evolving. With the new practical effects available, there was the ability to make some hilariously violent films, on a shoe string budget. Re-animator, was alike The Evil Dead movies, one of these stand outs of the 80’s. For all manner of reasons you have some of most iconic horror films ever made, such as The Shinning, Poltergeist, The Thing and An American Werewolf in London. Stuart Gordon, made his one hit wonder film here based loosely on the writings of infamous early literature writer H.P Lovecraft.

As with some of the horror films that were made during this time, they became famous for their practical effects and gore, rather than for their craft of cinema. The first Evil Dead film introduced this style to the decade, and Re-animator raised the bar. So as with many gory horrors of the time, the makeup department surpass the importance of the writing and acting of the film by many a mile. With acting that would rival Halloween in its infamous quality, Re-animator is able to bring laughs even without the gore. As the acting alone, with the leading performance of Jeffrey Combs, bring the film well into the realm of so bad its brilliant. And this quality is head across the board, with all but one stars being aptly awful. Whether the acting choices of the film are intentional or not doesn’t really matter, as the spectacle is still as entertaining whichever is true.

And the serial nature of the plot is to match. The film has gaping plot holes that you could walk through, cliches that match the dialogue, and due to the budget the film has about 6 settings for the entire film. The film is 1 hour and 44 mins long and is a combination of the over the top gory violence, poor acting and outright jaw dropping terrible features all around. The vibe of the film is perfectly captured by its original tag line, “He has a good head on his shoulders… and another one on the table”. As what this film is infamous for is that of its villain that carries his own head around for the majority of the film. As for flaws for the film that actually matter, they revolve around the highlight of the film, which is the special effects. For some audience it would be acceptable to gain very little pleasure from this film. For each year the practical effects become more and more dated, and there are plenty of other terrible horror films with a better level of gore. Hence the original shock factor that made the film famous disappears, so does maybe its laughability. For some might not find the dated nature of the practical effects as hilariously over the top as others.

Re-animator is a little know gem, as it deserves nothing else than that (it was lucky to snag a mention in the ‘stoned’ dialogue of American Beauty). But while of the majority of today’s horror film turn out quality just a low, unintentionally, with the promise of genuine scares, this film is a refreshing awful look at the early days of the genre. While it isn’t quiet on the level of Evil Dead 2, it did come before that film, and its style and structure may have well influenced ED2. A film that you watch for the lack of quality across the board and for the special effects, a brilliant comedy horror cult film.

Verdict : A key film in the genre of; it’s so bad and over the top, that its quiet brilliant.

Verdict : 4/5

Quote : “I was busy pushing bodies around as you well know and what would a note say, Dan? “Cat dead, details later”?”

Modern Horror Series : It Follows

It’s Behind You

Released : February 27th 2015

Certificate : 15

Director : David Robert Mitchell

Cast : Maika Monroe, Daniel Zovatto, Keir Gilchrist, Jake Weary, Lili Sepe, Olivia Luccardi

Plot : After an innocent sexual encounter, teenager Jay (Monroe) is told by her partner that he has passed on to her an odd curse, in which she will be followed by an entity.

2014 was a big year for modern horror, with three standouts gaining big critical (although not box office) success. Those being, A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night, It Follows and The Babadook. It is rare, given the amount that fly under the radar, for a horror film to be praised by critics, and each of these films was for very different reasons. It Follows got noticed for both its indie vibe as well as its retro feel and setting, with homage paid to both the set design of the classic 1970’s slasher horror film as well as the style of filming. Directed and written by David Robert Mitchell (a filmmaker famous for little else) made a unique film, not only for the reasons listed, but also for the ‘monster’ of the film as well as the imagery that is used.

It Follow is full of imagery and style the reference many classic films, Halloween being a standout. While the directing is unique from Mitchell, the music score, the 70’s setting, the blonde and other aspects all reminisce of the classic horror film. From just this alone, it becomes clear that some a lot of thought has gone into the film from Mitchell’s end. Just as Carpenter in Halloween introduced the use of in depth and out of depth and movement in the corner of the frame into the horror genre, Mitchell plays with it both in his directing as well as pure nature of his monster (an anonymous being that audiences scan the frame to spot in scenes). The way the film has a close nit set of friends who are young and deal with the issue also brings in elements of many 70’s and 80’s classics. The imagery that Mitchell uses as well, although may be obvious and clear in meaning, are enjoyable to have present as it is rare that a director in this genre takes the time with such qualities. What all this amounts to, and is clear from the very opening sequence of the film, is that Mitchell is very skilled director who has thought out this little project of his very well.

Due to such skill, It Follows was able to create genuine scares without the use of much blood or a monster as such. This is a very rare feature of horror films, where the way in which a scene is presented, rather than what is being presented create more of the scares in the film. It was a quality achieved in Halloween, as it was just a man in a mask, and is again done so here, as it just a person following you. So above all else, It Follows was elevated to the level of prestige that it was due to its directing. As to the storyline, which the imagery suggests, there is a theme of innocence, and the loss of it that come with growing older. While the film doesn’t attempt to make a bold point about this topic, in horror films this is something that is repeated. In the slasher films revolving around teenagers, the sexually active ones are killed off first, and It Follows seems to play off this convention as its main theme.

It Follows isn’t a horror film for everyone for the following reasons. Not every horror film fan will appreciate the directional choices such as the imagery and the intertextuality that takes place. Also the story structure, which is basic on dialogue and characters, and could be labelled as repetitive at times as that characters continuously run away from ‘the following’, may result in a bore for some. But for people who appreciate the artistic craft and execution over a flasher ‘fun’ blood feast, they will have a very special time.

Verdict : A very unique horror film which has a great level of freshness to both its story and directing, providing genuine scares and a great atmosphere throughout.

Verdict : 4/5

Quote : “It could look like someone you know or it could be a stranger in a crowd. Whatever helps it get close to you.”

The Hustler DVD Review

Pool Hand Luke

Released : October 27th 1961

Certificate : 15

Director : Robert Rossen

Cast : Paul Newman, Jackie Gleason, Piper Laurie, George C Scott, Myron McCormick

Plot : The story of  ‘Fast’ Eddie Felsen (Newman), a top of his game pool hustler who’s been making good money on the road. But when he challenges Minnesota Fats (Gleason), the rumoured best pool player in the country, and meets a shy girl called Sarah, things get difficult.

 

The Hustler is another ‘classic’ to be made out of a Paul Newman lead. The film has big respect amongst filmmakers, enough that Martin Scorsese directed a sequel to the film called The Colour of Money, with Newman returning to the role of Fast Eddie. It gained one Oscar for cinematography, and six additional nominations that included all of the four main actors for their roles as well as best picture. While Newman in his earlier career had films much more noted than this, this was one of his very earliest, coming before Cool Hand Luck and Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.

From the general synopsis of the film you’d expect to see a drama based on a series of dramatic pools games, the film devoting much time to the drama of different games in isolation as he Eddie works his way to the top. While the film does contain this, there is a more prevalent storyline that occupies the majority of screen time. This is the story of Eddie’s relationship with Sarah which takes an unvarnished look at alcoholism, loneliness and depression. So for all the charm and charisma of Newman as an actor, the taste to this film may be surprising. For the romantic relationship of these two characters, the writing is realistic in the way that it is economic and understated. The script doesn’t contain clichés (for the time it was made) and doesn’t over-dramatize the topic matter dealt with. The result of which are characters that you may not ‘like’ or approve of, but this is a result of writing that is not hyperbole and is true to the characters (a line doesn’t feel out of place or made for memorabilia value).

For the acting across the board it ticks all of the boxes that are needed for great drama. The lead from Newman is as brilliant as ever, although it does fall into vibe of the rest of his characters in a career that’s slightly type cast. But the character development that his role goes through and that he is able to realize is superb, to really convey a character that is a changed man by the end of the story. The supporting performances are a great match to Newman as well. Gleason performance who plays Minnesota Fats, a confident and collected pool player who has been the best for years, is very entertainingly realized, but with a slightly rushed character arc. C Scott, who plays the manager of Fats, a rich but determined businessman, is the biggest standout next to Newman who grounds a performance with a gripping arc, despite being borderline over the top in some scenes.

Piper Laurie’s performance may not be as acclaimed, due to the characters weak cautious nature, which at times become tedious. But despite this Laurie very well captures a deflated character with little enthusiasm, a hard character to get behind but a well-acted on none the less. So The Hustler isn’t the engrossing sports drama in the way that many would expect, with an abundance of gripping pool room game scenes with poignant dialogue. Instead it is engrossing due to its flawed and ‘damaged goods’ characters which have brilliant arcs (which for their time would have been much more original than today) and performances that make it a standout character study piece.

Verdict : A sports drama that would seem dated made today likely, with pacing that will drag for some audiences. The performances and the script elevate the film beyond these flaws, in a slow burning melancholy drama.

Verdict : 4/5

Quote : You have the best excuse in the world for losing; no trouble losing when you got a good excuse.

 

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?