'Trance'
2012 was certainly Danny Boyle's year, but not for directing a film, he was put in charge of artistic direction of the London Olympic opening ceremony, and to great fanfare it was heralded as a monstrous success. He captured the essence of Britain in a traditional form, and a modern day Mobile phone, Tweet obsessed Britain. In between doing this Boyle had been deeply involved in his next movie, all filmed on location in London. One would think, could he have too much on his plate?
Art Auctioneer Simon (James McAvoy) is an inside man part of a heist of a priceless piece of Art, but when everything seems to go to plan, the painting seems to be lost, and Simon from a large blow to the head, can't remember. He seeks a hypnotherapist's help to help him and his criminal partners find it.
I quite frankly enjoyed this film, it's quite a mind twister sometimes, which leaves you thinking, are you in Simon's dreams or is this reality? But nevertheless it's a very well thought out story, also when you add Boyle's direction it can only be a winner. It's all about exploration of the mind, of it's weaknesses, which is quite an interesting subject. It certainly pack's a punch, that includes some quite violent scenes, with added bit of gore. Don't let it put you off, because it seems quite minimal.
The three main players James McAvoy, Vincent Cassell and Rosario Dawson all deliver good performances. All gel very well together. But easily Dawson is the standout as Elizabeth, she is such an underrated actress.
The soundtrack which is mostly composed by a Boyle favorite, one half of the Dance duo Underworld, and it gives it that typical feel to a Boyle movie. Sets the mood of the film is quite a brilliant way.
It feels like after all the Olympic official stuff, Danny is finally letting his hair down, so to speak. In his way making a nitty gritty heist mystery film, because that is essentially what it is. If you see a case for more money to be invested into British cinema, I would argue with this.
4/5
Sunday 31 March 2013
Friday 25 January 2013
Blazing Bloody Saddles
'Django Unchained'
Every few years Quentin Tarantino releases a movie, and it always becomes a big event, because nobody quite does it like he does. His unique way of writing and directing has made him some ways the middle finger to the conventional way of making a film. A man who is always keen try his hand at different genres of movie, takes on the Western, but only in the extreme kind of way, only he knows how to.
Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz) is a dentist turned bounty hunter, buys the freedom of slave Django (Jamie Foxx) in exchange for the help of hunting down three brothers who the good Doctor is trying to track, that only Django knows what they look like. Realizing Django has a knack for the killing business, Schultz trains him as an apprentice, and agrees to track down his wife, that leads them to the evil plantation owner Calvin Candie (Leonardo Dicaprio).
Sometimes when you see a film you can tell straight away who's work it is, and this is truly a trademark Tatantino creation. Wonderful dialogue, bringing the best out of his actors. Character building is so key, in creating a great movie, and he does it so well in this.
It can be said that the man who steals the show, is again Christoph Waltz, who's just full of charm, and just does it with ease quite frankly. Surly a another best supporting actor Oscar on it's way. Young Leo is fantastic, and full of sheer evil, as the ruthless plantation owner. I tip my cowboy hat to a simply so funny as an older man.
It is quite long, which is justified, for a well written complexed story. There is enough to keep you up straight in the sometime uncomfortable cinema seats.
Well I'm going to be bold and say this in my view is on par of brilliance of Pulp Fiction. It comes up and slaps you in the face, and makes you take notice. So go and enjoy this as I did.
5/5
Every few years Quentin Tarantino releases a movie, and it always becomes a big event, because nobody quite does it like he does. His unique way of writing and directing has made him some ways the middle finger to the conventional way of making a film. A man who is always keen try his hand at different genres of movie, takes on the Western, but only in the extreme kind of way, only he knows how to.
Dr. King Schultz (Christoph Waltz) is a dentist turned bounty hunter, buys the freedom of slave Django (Jamie Foxx) in exchange for the help of hunting down three brothers who the good Doctor is trying to track, that only Django knows what they look like. Realizing Django has a knack for the killing business, Schultz trains him as an apprentice, and agrees to track down his wife, that leads them to the evil plantation owner Calvin Candie (Leonardo Dicaprio).
Sometimes when you see a film you can tell straight away who's work it is, and this is truly a trademark Tatantino creation. Wonderful dialogue, bringing the best out of his actors. Character building is so key, in creating a great movie, and he does it so well in this.
It can be said that the man who steals the show, is again Christoph Waltz, who's just full of charm, and just does it with ease quite frankly. Surly a another best supporting actor Oscar on it's way. Young Leo is fantastic, and full of sheer evil, as the ruthless plantation owner. I tip my cowboy hat to a simply so funny as an older man.
It is quite long, which is justified, for a well written complexed story. There is enough to keep you up straight in the sometime uncomfortable cinema seats.
Well I'm going to be bold and say this in my view is on par of brilliance of Pulp Fiction. It comes up and slaps you in the face, and makes you take notice. So go and enjoy this as I did.
5/5
Sunday 13 January 2013
'He Only Stole A Loaf Of Bread'
'Les Miserables'
Right, Let me get this straight, I am not a big fan of musicals at all. I have had no desire to go and see a show in London. Going to see this movie, I decided to keep an open mind, as I did quite like Tim Burton's film version of "Sweeney Todd". Tom Hooper, still really quite fresh of the massive success of "The King's Speech", was the man to bring Les Mis to the big screen. It very much seems to be the right move for the man.
Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman) is released from prison, but finds life on the outside quite tough, so he breaks his parole to keep get his life moving again. For almost a decade he hunted down by policeman Javert (Russell Crowe). In the mean time he promises to care for a former worker in his factory Fantine's (Anne Hathaway) daughter. All in the backdrop of post revolutionary France. The motions run extremely high..
Where do I start? Well there are some amazing performances here. In a movie that is almost all singing, and live singing, that must have been a massive task in it self. I truly tip my beret to them (see what I did there, I do crack myself up sometimes, with my second rate gags)! The most standout does really go to Anne Hathaway who creates one, or even the best scene of this monster of a film, when he bellows out the famous "I dreamed a dream", with such passion, and added tears. I had a quick look around in the cinema and saw a few glassy eyes. I would not be shocked if she cleaned up on the award circuit. Jackman is no stranger to a musical, so he holds up quite well, and is generally a good actor in my view, there is more to him then wolverine. Now, maybe the one elephant in the room, what lots may address, Mr. Russell Crowe, he has not got the best voice in the world, but he does try his hardest to give a performance, and you can't knock that really.
I really like Tom Hooper's style of directing, full of close ups, and emotion packed in. It's hard to believe this is a man who started off on kids drama "Byker Grove", which I even remember watching. Boy, does he knows how to grip an audience.
Les Mis, as it is known for short, truly is a force to be reckoned with. I enjoyed highly. Hooper surly has scored his hat trick of box office smashes now. Cue the awards.
5/5
Right, Let me get this straight, I am not a big fan of musicals at all. I have had no desire to go and see a show in London. Going to see this movie, I decided to keep an open mind, as I did quite like Tim Burton's film version of "Sweeney Todd". Tom Hooper, still really quite fresh of the massive success of "The King's Speech", was the man to bring Les Mis to the big screen. It very much seems to be the right move for the man.
Jean Valjean (Hugh Jackman) is released from prison, but finds life on the outside quite tough, so he breaks his parole to keep get his life moving again. For almost a decade he hunted down by policeman Javert (Russell Crowe). In the mean time he promises to care for a former worker in his factory Fantine's (Anne Hathaway) daughter. All in the backdrop of post revolutionary France. The motions run extremely high..
Where do I start? Well there are some amazing performances here. In a movie that is almost all singing, and live singing, that must have been a massive task in it self. I truly tip my beret to them (see what I did there, I do crack myself up sometimes, with my second rate gags)! The most standout does really go to Anne Hathaway who creates one, or even the best scene of this monster of a film, when he bellows out the famous "I dreamed a dream", with such passion, and added tears. I had a quick look around in the cinema and saw a few glassy eyes. I would not be shocked if she cleaned up on the award circuit. Jackman is no stranger to a musical, so he holds up quite well, and is generally a good actor in my view, there is more to him then wolverine. Now, maybe the one elephant in the room, what lots may address, Mr. Russell Crowe, he has not got the best voice in the world, but he does try his hardest to give a performance, and you can't knock that really.
I really like Tom Hooper's style of directing, full of close ups, and emotion packed in. It's hard to believe this is a man who started off on kids drama "Byker Grove", which I even remember watching. Boy, does he knows how to grip an audience.
Les Mis, as it is known for short, truly is a force to be reckoned with. I enjoyed highly. Hooper surly has scored his hat trick of box office smashes now. Cue the awards.
5/5
Sunday 21 October 2012
Rawr-ing Good Times.
'Madagascar 3: Europe's Most Wanted'
I was quite excited to hear of a Madagascar 3, as I very much loved the first two, was quite a surprise hit as animation films can find the box office quite a rough place if not received very well. But Dreamworks from time to time brings out some gem's of family films. But with sequels, let me bring the case of the Shrek film's forward. 'Shrek' and 'Shrek 2' was both brilliant, but the further two Shrek's the jokes seemed to fizzle out. Which was a shame, with Madagascar 3, this isn't the case.
We Join the gang where they left off in the second film, In Africa, wanting to return back home to New York City Zoo on a third attempt. So Alex (Ben Stiller), Marty (Chris Rock), Melman (David Schwimmer) and Gloria (Jada Pinkett Smith) set off on another big adventure to find there way back home, with the help of a traveling circus. On the way they meet new friends, and new enemies, who will stop at nothing to hunt them down.
With the Madagascar films, you just can't help but smile all the way through them, and this the third installment, is no different. The story is well crafted, with new characters added to the mixture, keeps it quite fresh, and an easy watch. Some beautiful visual jokes laced throughout, is a very nice touch.
The added additions to the voice talent includes actors of the moment such as 'Breaking Bad's' Bryan Cranston and Jessica Chantain who are both brilliant. But Martin Short as Stefano, the Italian circus sea lion is fantastic and very very funny. Old favorites return such as King Julian and the Penguins, who sometimes I felt are the gel what makes these films really work.
There is really nothing I can criticize about this. It should be a happy end to the franchise, it would ruin it maybe if they carried on with them. But something in the back of my mind wants to know what happens to them next.
A very colorful event, that carries brilliantly all the way through. Take the whole family to see this, doesn't matter if you have not seen the first two films. It's a whole lot of fun, that will make smile from cheek to cheek.
4.5 out of 5
I was quite excited to hear of a Madagascar 3, as I very much loved the first two, was quite a surprise hit as animation films can find the box office quite a rough place if not received very well. But Dreamworks from time to time brings out some gem's of family films. But with sequels, let me bring the case of the Shrek film's forward. 'Shrek' and 'Shrek 2' was both brilliant, but the further two Shrek's the jokes seemed to fizzle out. Which was a shame, with Madagascar 3, this isn't the case.
We Join the gang where they left off in the second film, In Africa, wanting to return back home to New York City Zoo on a third attempt. So Alex (Ben Stiller), Marty (Chris Rock), Melman (David Schwimmer) and Gloria (Jada Pinkett Smith) set off on another big adventure to find there way back home, with the help of a traveling circus. On the way they meet new friends, and new enemies, who will stop at nothing to hunt them down.
With the Madagascar films, you just can't help but smile all the way through them, and this the third installment, is no different. The story is well crafted, with new characters added to the mixture, keeps it quite fresh, and an easy watch. Some beautiful visual jokes laced throughout, is a very nice touch.
The added additions to the voice talent includes actors of the moment such as 'Breaking Bad's' Bryan Cranston and Jessica Chantain who are both brilliant. But Martin Short as Stefano, the Italian circus sea lion is fantastic and very very funny. Old favorites return such as King Julian and the Penguins, who sometimes I felt are the gel what makes these films really work.
There is really nothing I can criticize about this. It should be a happy end to the franchise, it would ruin it maybe if they carried on with them. But something in the back of my mind wants to know what happens to them next.
A very colorful event, that carries brilliantly all the way through. Take the whole family to see this, doesn't matter if you have not seen the first two films. It's a whole lot of fun, that will make smile from cheek to cheek.
4.5 out of 5
Friday 20 July 2012
Risen To The Occasion. *Spoiler Free*
'The Dark Knight Rises'
After the long, massive build up, we are here to possibly one of the biggest movies of all time. The 3rd and final installment of Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy. The sheer monumental scale of this occasion is incredible. When the first of the series hit 'Batman Begins', it was like 'wow, this is different', and faded away memories of Arnie spewing poor one liners as Mr. Freeze. Then it was time for the 'The Dark Knight', which with all the circumstances around it with the untimely death of Heath Ledger, turned out to be an absolute classic, and I don't use those words lightly. What Ledger did leave us with was, his finest performance, as the Joker, and possibly the best 'baddie' ever. Nolan proved himself a master film maker, and the film world was humbled to him.
As for this review I have decided not to talk plot or what happens, except, we find a broken man in Bruce Wanye (Christian Bale), 8 years later down the line of 'The Dark Knight'. But with a new threat in Gothem City in the sinister Bane (Tom Hardy). Will the Batman come out of retirement? Even though we have all seen the adverts, with him in, So we kind of guess he will....That's all I am saying.
Big question, does this live up to the hype? Yes. Nolan, once again has created something chocked full of anarchy and emotion to the fullest. Chris and David S. Goyer has created a very complexed story, that hits you with twists and turns at all corners. With a bit of a slow build up, this is totally justified for what you will experience. Visually, it looks as good as the other two films.
Hurrah, finally Christian Bale seems to be one of the standouts, with someone who, I can be a bit of a harsh critic on, he does a fine job, where the main focus point is his struggles of being Batman and Bruce Wayne. Tom Hardy as Bane, is one massive beast of a man, and was casted right for the role, this time Bane says just more then two words. Anne Hathaway is fantastic as Cat burglar Selina Kyle. Ladies you can keep your 'Fifty Shades Of Grey', we can have our Catwomen. She Brings the sex appeal. Of course the backing cast of acting royalty, Caine, Freeman and Oldman, never disappoint. With added new addition of Joseph Gordon Levitt, just strengthens it.
I will admit 'The Dark Knight' just pips this, for one single reason, Heath Ledger as the Joker. But other then that, it's stands right up next to it. Some people will probably get put off the length of the film, but as I said, it's worth it.
Nolan has worked his magic again, and pulled an ace out of the bag. With great performances and a story with bite. It would make a lot of directors scared to even attempt to do a superhero movie.
5 out of 5
After the long, massive build up, we are here to possibly one of the biggest movies of all time. The 3rd and final installment of Christopher Nolan's Batman trilogy. The sheer monumental scale of this occasion is incredible. When the first of the series hit 'Batman Begins', it was like 'wow, this is different', and faded away memories of Arnie spewing poor one liners as Mr. Freeze. Then it was time for the 'The Dark Knight', which with all the circumstances around it with the untimely death of Heath Ledger, turned out to be an absolute classic, and I don't use those words lightly. What Ledger did leave us with was, his finest performance, as the Joker, and possibly the best 'baddie' ever. Nolan proved himself a master film maker, and the film world was humbled to him.
As for this review I have decided not to talk plot or what happens, except, we find a broken man in Bruce Wanye (Christian Bale), 8 years later down the line of 'The Dark Knight'. But with a new threat in Gothem City in the sinister Bane (Tom Hardy). Will the Batman come out of retirement? Even though we have all seen the adverts, with him in, So we kind of guess he will....That's all I am saying.
Big question, does this live up to the hype? Yes. Nolan, once again has created something chocked full of anarchy and emotion to the fullest. Chris and David S. Goyer has created a very complexed story, that hits you with twists and turns at all corners. With a bit of a slow build up, this is totally justified for what you will experience. Visually, it looks as good as the other two films.
Hurrah, finally Christian Bale seems to be one of the standouts, with someone who, I can be a bit of a harsh critic on, he does a fine job, where the main focus point is his struggles of being Batman and Bruce Wayne. Tom Hardy as Bane, is one massive beast of a man, and was casted right for the role, this time Bane says just more then two words. Anne Hathaway is fantastic as Cat burglar Selina Kyle. Ladies you can keep your 'Fifty Shades Of Grey', we can have our Catwomen. She Brings the sex appeal. Of course the backing cast of acting royalty, Caine, Freeman and Oldman, never disappoint. With added new addition of Joseph Gordon Levitt, just strengthens it.
I will admit 'The Dark Knight' just pips this, for one single reason, Heath Ledger as the Joker. But other then that, it's stands right up next to it. Some people will probably get put off the length of the film, but as I said, it's worth it.
Nolan has worked his magic again, and pulled an ace out of the bag. With great performances and a story with bite. It would make a lot of directors scared to even attempt to do a superhero movie.
5 out of 5
Monday 16 July 2012
Half Spider, Half Man, All Amazing.
'The Amazing Spider-Man'
'Too soon, too soon', we all cried. Sam Raimi's Spider-man trilogy was a massive success, and apart from a dodgy 3rd installment, it was a brilliant franchise. Now, a mere 6 years down the line, have a reboot of our favourite comic book spider. Whole new cast, new team behind it and a totally different view of how young Peter Parker became Spider-Man. Taking its name from the original comic, 'The Amazing Spider-Man', may mean, 'Our film will be Amazing, unlike you're one'. I don't think so, I just think that maybe it's a statement of trying to stay true to the comic. Does it? I think so.
Young Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) is a clever high school loser, who lives with his Uncle Ben and Aunt May, after his parents disapear. Unknown why they leave him, he finds clues which lead him down the path to the front door of Dr. Curt Connors (Rhys Ifans), who was his fathers Scientist partner. Mention must also go to the lovely Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone) who appears the main love interest in this installment.
What I really liked about this 're-imagining' of Spider - Man, is that is actually a completly different story, but with some continuity. Peter's transformation does not occur rapidly, infact the build up is lengthy. Peter Parker also succeeds as one of the coolest losers in a movie......ever, especially when compared to the very uncool Toby McGuire. These strong performances from Garfield and Stone give the film plenty of sexiness and coolness.
The story is well linked throughout, with emotive screenplay and witty one liners, that made me chuckle. Another element that earned my respect, was it could have gone very much down the cliche path at one point, but thankfully it averts this pitfall.
On a more technical note, I saw this in 3D and although I have not been a big advocate of Holywoods latest trend, I didn't get a headache, so it was fine and easy to watch. The Lizard reeks of being too CGI though, which was the only little disappointing part of the film.
An additional two films have already been announced, and this is none too surprising. I am hooked, I already want to see where it goes and the direction they take the franchise. Garfield and Stone are quite simply the two shining stars, they are what makes it 'Amazing'.
Go see it.
4 out of 5
Thursday 7 June 2012
Space Quest(ions)
'Prometheus'
Finally, It is here, Ridley Scott's return to the Sci-fi genre, where he made his name, with classics such as 'Alien' and 'Blade Runner'. 30 years later, a well overdue return with a film that explores, which has been described as the DNA of 'Alien'. So we can basically call it a prequel. Excited yet? Well, if not keep reading.
Dr. Shaw (Noomi Rapace) and crew uncover clues on Earth, in form of ancient tablets, that hopefully would lead them to find out the biggest question of all, how mankind was created? Unfortunately they find more then they bargain for.
When the opening scenes of beautiful landscape, I knew this was going to be one of the most stylish movies I have ever seen. I wasn't disappointed. Ridley has never let anyone down on creating brilliant visuals. With a wonderful score to accompany. A feast for eyes and ears.
Micheal Fassbender as the android David is superb, and really does make this film his. Surly one of the best actors around at the moment. Decent performances from Idris Elba and Charlize Theron are also noted.
The story, I found is actually quite interesting and kept my attention, but proposes more questions then answers, but I think Sir Ridley wanted to do that.
It seemed maybe a little bit too tame, where as it could have unleashed more suspense moments, and that is coming from someone who is not a fan of horror/suspense movies. Generally it felt like it held back a bit to appeal to a wider audience. The script could have also had a little bit more attention on.
The lead Noomi Rapace's performance was not the best I've seen, gave the character the most annoying presence in the film. Also seeing Guy Pearce as an old man, just doesn't really work and not convincing.
This is a great achievement by a director who quite plainly is one of the most visionary men is cinema of all time. This could very well split the audience, but it is worth well seeing for the visuals and performance of Fassbender. But just comes short of being one of the great. A great film up for debate with your friends. Go see it.
3.5 out of 5
Finally, It is here, Ridley Scott's return to the Sci-fi genre, where he made his name, with classics such as 'Alien' and 'Blade Runner'. 30 years later, a well overdue return with a film that explores, which has been described as the DNA of 'Alien'. So we can basically call it a prequel. Excited yet? Well, if not keep reading.
Dr. Shaw (Noomi Rapace) and crew uncover clues on Earth, in form of ancient tablets, that hopefully would lead them to find out the biggest question of all, how mankind was created? Unfortunately they find more then they bargain for.
When the opening scenes of beautiful landscape, I knew this was going to be one of the most stylish movies I have ever seen. I wasn't disappointed. Ridley has never let anyone down on creating brilliant visuals. With a wonderful score to accompany. A feast for eyes and ears.
Micheal Fassbender as the android David is superb, and really does make this film his. Surly one of the best actors around at the moment. Decent performances from Idris Elba and Charlize Theron are also noted.
The story, I found is actually quite interesting and kept my attention, but proposes more questions then answers, but I think Sir Ridley wanted to do that.
It seemed maybe a little bit too tame, where as it could have unleashed more suspense moments, and that is coming from someone who is not a fan of horror/suspense movies. Generally it felt like it held back a bit to appeal to a wider audience. The script could have also had a little bit more attention on.
The lead Noomi Rapace's performance was not the best I've seen, gave the character the most annoying presence in the film. Also seeing Guy Pearce as an old man, just doesn't really work and not convincing.
This is a great achievement by a director who quite plainly is one of the most visionary men is cinema of all time. This could very well split the audience, but it is worth well seeing for the visuals and performance of Fassbender. But just comes short of being one of the great. A great film up for debate with your friends. Go see it.
3.5 out of 5
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)