I Used to be a Wolf...

...But I'm alright now-ooooo!

Following on from my previous review of a film which promised much but failed to deliver, here's a film which is the complete opposite. 

That's not to say The Wolf of Wall Street didn't receive lots of critical acclaim and , more importantly, the public's acclaim, because it did. What I mean is, for me, I didn't feel the lure of a movie about the stock market. I know nothing about stocks and shares, or even if they're the same thing. I own a few but my knowledge is minimal - as is my interest.

I like some DiCaprio films but not others. I didn't like The Beach, but thought Inception was amazing, for example. So I was completely unsure about The Wolf. 

Friends at work and customers of my wife had said it was brilliant. We had to give to give it a go. It wasn't until the film had started we realised it was almost 3 hours long!

We needn't have worried. The pace of the film is, mostly, so fast we didn't notice. Sure, there are a couple of lags at various points, but DiCaprio just owns the screen. He's sharp and there are some hilarious moments. 

Margo Robbie, his wife in the film, is simply stunning. She's come a long way from her stint in the Australian soap Neighbours, a show which also launched Kylie, Guy Pierce and Alan Dale, who's appreares in everything from Lost to Indiana Jones to, more recently, Captain America the Winter Soldier.  Margo and the rest of the cast (Jonah Hill, Matthew McConaughey and so on) are all excellent and this is a film that excuses class and a wit so sharp it could cut itself. 

That this is a true story, more or less, is amazing. For a man in the street such as I, to even imagine the amounts of money thrown around here beggars belief.

All in all, this film is definitely one to watch. I'll reserve judgement on such things in the future! 

Oh watch out for the part after he passes out making a call. SO funny.

A well deserved 8/10

Starred Down!

This blog post was originally going to be a rant, but I’ve changed my mind today.  The rant is now hanging in the air, like the blue smoke of a cigarette, waiting to descend and choke someone.

It can linger a little longer.

Instead, we can go for something a touch lighter.  A review, and then maybe something extra if I have time.

Well, I say ‘lighter’.  Neither the subject matter of the film nor my opinion of it are light, but at least it’s not a rant.

You know how some films have masses of amazing reviews, with stars adorning the posters and critics raving, but the film itself doesn’t live up to the hype?  Of course you do.  It happens numerous times.  Well, Starred Up is one of those movies, I’m afraid.

I’d not heard of this film prior to seeing it.  My wife had seen a trailer on television and wanted to see it.  I’ve never been a fan of ‘hooligan’ films, such as Green Street etc., and Starred Up seemed to be one, so it really didn’t appeal.  This wasn’t because there was going to be no spaceship, alien or hobbit in sight – I do like a lot of films that are not fantastical in any way.  They simply don’t do anything for me.

But, my wife fancied it and it meant we could have a ‘date night’, and I love the cinema anyway, so I said go for it.  And we went for it.

Before we left home, I watched the trailer to have an idea what I was letting myself in for.  I wouldn’t normally do this, but as this film was something new, I wanted to have a look-see.  I admit, after watching the trailer, I, too, thought it might be good.

The cinema wasn’t that full, but there was a decent amount of people there without it feeling either empty or claustrophobic.  We settled down and I was looking forward to the show.

Well.  I’m not going to go into a long commentary on the finer points of prison life or the treatment of prisoners.  I’m not going to dwell on too much really.

I didn't like it. 

The acting was ok.  Good, in fact, mostly. It just didn't seem to go very far.  Not a lot seemed to happen, apart from an extensive use if a certain four letter swear word beginning with C and ending in T.

We only became interested when the interaction between the film's main character and his father kicked off - ten minutes before the end!

It was a disappointment. I wouldn't go as far as those behind us who said the film was another four letter word beginning with S and ending, again, with T, but it wasn't nearly as good as all those stars suggested. 

Starred Up should be starred down so I'm giving it 3/10.  You might enjoy it. 

I didn't. 

As I have a two year old wanting to play doctor with me as the patient, I don't have time to add something else as I said I might. I'll be back, though - as long as she says I'm well enough. 

I stayed till the Ender, but only just...

A short while ago, I had a stay in hospital due to a sinus operation I was having. I had the opportunity, whilst there, to watch a couple of films.  There was no way I was going to sleep for my two night stint, so having the chance to catch up on some movies I'd been wanting to watch wsa ideal. 

One such film was Ender's Game starring Harrison Ford. 

Now, I admit to being a fan of Mr. Ford. He's made some bloody good stuff. From Indiana Jones and Star Wars to Frantic and The Fugitive. I've like many, many of his films.

Unfortunately, there's often a piecevofbpoo mixed in with the nuggets. A 'bum-nugget' if you will.

Ender's Game is Harrison Ford's bum-nugget. 

Now I love science fiction films. If you read this blog you know that. I'm a huge fan, so I had high hopes for this.  The trailer looked good, the effects seemed excellent. 

Yes. Well. 

The trailer does look good. The effects are great. It's a pity the film isn't. 

I haven't read the book, so I can't compare. I have it on my ereader and have yet to decide if the movie has put me off. 

I thought the story was ok. Interesting premise, but, in the film version at least, I felt the plot and character development were lacking. I felt very little for the bit taken from his home to lead a galactic war. Ford seemed to be awkward with his character and lines. And the bully came out of nowhere with no real motives apart from simply being an arse and wasn't missed when gone.

I carried on watching until the end, but that was only because I didn't want to watch another episode of the NCIS marathon which seemed to be going on through the night.

Ender's Game, for me, had less meat than a wet lettuce.  And the cast were less animated than those stumbling through the Walking Dead. 

3 stars. 

The Lone Ranger - Has Silver Tarnished?

I don't care, usually, if a film has been slated by critics.  In some cases - too many sometimes -  the slating is deserved, but there are plenty of times I really enjoy a film that has been pretty much derided.

 

The Lone Ranger is one of these.

 

I like to turn my brain off, as I've mentioned previously, and enjoy the ride.  I don't try to work out plot lines (I didn't see the ending in either Sixth Sense or The Others coming, and didn't want to) and I don't mind if there's no deep, meaningful message - or even if there is.  I take a film on face value.

 

Even when that face looks like it might be covered in mud and bird poo, eh Mr. Depp?

 

I used to love the Lone Ranger as a child.  I'd avidly watch that and Champion the Wonder Horse on a Saturday Morning (I think!).  I wanted to be him.  I wanted a horse like Silver.  I'd sit on my dog and tell it to Hi-Ho while it squirmed and tried to escape.  The theme tune, dear ol' William Tell, was a favourite that has easily been recognised ever since.

 

I first saw the trailer for this film many months ago at the cinema.  I can't remember which film it was. Prometheus, perhaps?  Batman?  It was definitely before Man of Steel (great film).  Either way, I was excited.  I didn't realise, at first, who was playing Tonto - he just looked somehow familiar.  Then I twigged and was even more excited.

 

It seemed like an age before the film came out.  Others, trailered much more recently, had been and gone and still the Lone Ranger was nowhere in sight.

 

Then...

 

So what did I think?  Well.  Depp plays Depp like only Depp can, we all know that.  But, he's good at it.  Whether he's Captain Sparrow, Sweeney Todd or Edward Scissorhands, he does it well.  Granted, when he was in 21 Jump Street and 'being introduced' in Elm street things were different, but now he's found himself and he's so easily recognised.  These films made millions for good reasons, and one of those is Johnny Depp.

 

I have to admit that I've not seen much of anything Armie Hammer has previously starred in, apart from Reaper, a series I loved so can't particularly comment on his overall abilities, but he does a decent job here and he and Depp work well together

 

Directed by Gor Verbinski, who brought us the Pirates films, the inventive Mousehunt, The Ring and even Rango, the Lone Ranger is escapist fun.  Someone told me they didn't know if it was meant to be a comedy or a drama.  Personally, I don't think it's particularly meant to be either, specifically.  It has elements of both, just like many other films.  It's humorous rather than laugh out loud funny with a fair share of tense moments too.  I don't believe it's trying to be anything other than itself, an update of a classic, much loved series.

 

There are thrills and spills and even Silver has a comedic side.  Who knew trains could be so exciting, too?  It's a good, old fashioned romp and it doesn't take itself too seriously, so why should we?

Oh, and one of the best aspects?  We have the good ol' theme tune.  Yup, William Tell is overturing to his heart’s content.  Gotta love that!

 

My rating, as I mentioned on the R.I.P.D.review, is 9/10.  I enjoyed it, a lot.  I hope you do too.

R.I.P.D. - Dead or Alive?

R.I.P.D. is a film where it's not so much 'drunk and disorderly' as 'dead and disorderly'!

 

I saw the first 30 seconds or so of this movie, and I was hooked.  A massively obese creature comes smashing through a door accompanied by a voiceover by Ryan Reynolds, the star of the show.  Moments later a car crashes into Mr Reynolds (is that a bad thing?), leaving him unhurt and able to carry on chasing the strange behemoth.

 

Yes, I knew I wanted to watch it.  It was my sort of thing.  Humour, effects and weird creatures.  The creature, not Ryan Reynolds.

 

Did it continue to keep its claws in me?

 

Mostly.

 

The effects in this film were, on the whole, pretty good.  There were the odd points were the CGI was a bit too CGI but, mostly, they fitted well.  Kevin Bacon with a split open head was cool.  The acting... well, a bit over the top, but it's that sort of film.  The plot?  More of that in a mo.

 

The R.I.P.D. is the Rest In Peace Department.  They keep the Earth free of the scum of the Afterlife.  Yes, I'm paraphrasing one of my favourite movies, Men in Black.  With good reason.

 

R.I.P.D. is, basically, MIB with dead people.  But I liked that idea.  The funnel to Judgment.  The Steely Dan playing, just because (not unlike the lift muzak from MIB).  The way rookie and jaded cops appeared to us mortals.  Neat touches.  I did expect to see Rip Torn's Z welcoming Reynolds to the fold as he walked into their headquarters, at one point.

A couple of bits were explained whilst they were happening, which was somewhat off-putting, such as who the criminal Reynolds and Bacon were pursuing was and why.  Surely he didn't need to tell his colleagues over the radio?  No, he was telling us.  Similarly, when the gold is stolen (trying to keep any spoilers to a minimum here folks) - the device was explained as it was being used.  Just throw it in, eh?

 

But these things aside, R.I.P.D. entertained.  It was worth watching.  A different take on MIB.  It had some decent ideas mixed in with the action and effects and some of the 'been-done-before' set pieces.

 

I wish Jeff Bridges (this film's Tommy Lee Jones) would have taken the marbles out of his mouth, though.  It was sometimes difficult to understand what he was saying!

I've been thinking of giving films a rating in these reviews.  So here goes (catching up):

 

Oz - The Great and Powerful: 7/10

Star Trek Into Darkness: 8.5/10

Iron Man 3: 9/10

Olympus Has Fallen: 7/10

Pacific Rim: 8/10

The Wolverine (review not done yet): 8/10

Lone Ranger (again, review not done yet): 9/10

 

R.I.P.D: 8/10.  It was a good watch, for me.  Some things could have been done better and some had been done before, but I still enjoyed myself.  And that's what matters.

Olympus Has Fallen - A Quickie Review

Olympus Has Fallen has a mighty cast, including of Gerard Butler, Aaron Eckhart, Morgan Freeman, Angela Bassett.

 

It’s also a formulaic action thriller which brings nothing new to the genre, but is still a good blast.  You have the shamed ex-security guard, a foreign intrusion (of the White House), and the old mate-cum-traitor.  The plot, in various forms, has been mixed together hundreds of times in the past.

 

Still, I enjoyed it.  It’s a film where – to be honest – the fact that you’ve seen it so many times previously (you’ve taken down the baddies in the darkened corridors and managed to get messages out and been injured but soldiered on) doesn’t matter.  It’s an action flick.  It’s Bruce Willis and Denzel and a multitude of others all rolled into one.  Good guy against bad guys.  Evil takes a bashing and our hero saves the day.

 

The thing about these sort of films is you know how it will end, and you know pretty much how it will get there, but that’s fine.  You want to come out with a smile at the end, knowing all’s well and our hero won – as (usually) he is bound to do.

 

And I did.  I smiled at the end.  I didn’t feel amazed, but I didn’t feel I’d wasted my time watching it.  I was asked today if I thought it was worth seeing.  I do.  Don’t expect too much and you won’t be disappointed.

Pacific Grim...?

Guillermo Del Toro is a talented writer and amazing director. He is, there's no two ways about it.  From his earlier outings with Roald Dahl's The Witches through Mimic, Hellboy and the wonderful Pan's Labyrinth, he has repeatedly produced films full of originality and brilliance. 

But every bright light has its dark days. 

Now Pacific Rim is one film I've been waiting for. There's a good few blockbusters this year that I've looked forward to. Star Trek, Iron Man 3, The Wolverine. I've yet to see the latter but loves the first two, as you can see from my reviews on this blog.

Pacific Rim was one more. An immense film with an innovative storyline. Let down, however, by predictability. If you've seen this and live it, as 72% of you do according to IMDB, then forgive my personal opinion, but there were so many stereotypes here.

Manly names like Chuck and Hercules. The Russians were straight out of an 80s movie. The scientists were obviously kooky. The egotistical tough guy and his dad. The distant, troubled chief officer. When he gave his big speech, I expected him to tell us "Today is the day we celebrate our independence!"

I won't deny this was an epic film with impressive, action filled, set pieces. I won't deny that I even enjoyed it, but I generally do with these films, including the obvious after credits sequence. I turn my brain off and enjoy the ride.

The problem was, this ride was almost pre-cached on Google Maps.

Oblivion or Oblivious? A review...

Oblivion or Oblivious?

 

Well, the former is verging on the latter, it has to be said...

 

I'm a big lover of science fiction, in its many forms.  As a child I avidly read Asimov, Clarke and many more.  I bought the first issue of 2000AD, the comic which introduced us to Judge Dredd.  I'm sure it had a plastic spinning disc with three arms in the centre stuck to the front as a free gift...  I once had a sew on arm patch from an Apollo mission and a poster for Revenge of the Jedi.

 

That's right...  I said 'Revenge'.

 

As a movie addict, I devour the films.  Whether it's 2001: A Space Odyssey,Star Wars, the X-Men films (I used to read their comics too), Event Horizon, Black Hole, I, Robot and more, I'd rush to watch and thoroughly enjoy being taken away to times and realities far from my own.

 

I'm quite partial to most Tom Cruise films too.  Action and adventure, thrills and spills, they all entice me.  I wasn't over keen on the last Mission Impossible film, however.  Great ideas and stunts, but should the gadgets go wrong?  I don't think so.  I love Simon Pegg, and he was great as the franchise's 'Q' character, but those gloves, the mask creator doodad and so on.  Part of the essence of MI was the spectacular inventions as well as the non-stop action.

Cruise was good in Collateral and I thought inspired in Rock of Ages.  Rain Man is a classic (though Dustin Hoffman steals the film).

 

2015, the Year of the Blockbuster brings us another outing from the Mission Impossible stable, but it has to go up against new iterations of Independence Day, Star Wars, Terminator, Pirates of the Caribbean, The Avengers, Finding Dory (Nemo), Fantastic Four, Jurassic Park, James Bond, Avatar, Hunger Games, Alvin & the Chipmunks (?!) and Inferno (Dan Brown).  There's also slated a Warcraft film, Assassin's Creed, another Kung Fu Panda, the Penguins of Madagascar and possibly even a Prometheus 2!

 

And breathe.

 

Oh, and prepare my tent for camping out at the Parkway (my local cinema in Cleethorpes - great place!)

 

So.  I had high hopes, as Kodaline might say, of Oblivion.  It's a bit of a surprise that I hadn't found myself watching it long before now, but life waits for no film, hence I didn't.  So there.  Last night I had chance of a quiet moment or two and decided, finally, to go for a bit of a Cruise.

 

It started out slow.  Probably, I thought, building the tension.  Waiting for the huge climax.  Interspersing the film with pathos and then flipping into explosions and stunts and breathlessness.

 

After a while of not a lot happening, I interrupted my viewing for 20 minutes of the 30 Day Shred (day 4).   I was certainly more breathless from this than anything Oblivion had thrown at me thus far.  I then returned to the movie hoping things would pick up.

 

They did, but they also didn't.  I won't give anything away about the plot (I had my fingers burned when I accidentally let slip a very important fact regarding the wonderful Judi Dench's brilliant M portrayal in Skyfall - oops), but then, there wasn't much of one to give away.

 

The various set pieces, for me, weren't big enough.  They didn't draw out the tension and I couldn't find myself particularly feeling for the characters.  I didn't fear the Predator lookey-like Scavs.  Olga Kurylenko is decidedly lovely, though, but her performance was a touch wooden.  I was disappointed with Morgan Freeman - something I could never imagine myself saying.  Shawshank is one of my all time favourites.  I thought he was a fab God in the Almighty films.  I even liked him in Dreamcatcher.  Unfortunately, his brief appearance in this left me cold.  It was too predictable.  It had been done too many times before.

 

And we knew, didn't we, he'd go for that gun turret?

 

There were many things that could have been built on, the events in the Radiation Zone for one.  I thought many of the ideas were good, but none of this film was particularly new.  And Independence Day 2 is coming out in a couple of years, please don't steal ideas from the first and then do them so blandly!

 

I could go on, but this film did it for me (went on).  It's a shame.  The cast was good.  The ideas were there, but they weren't developed.

 

It was fine for a bit of entertainment, but just a bit.  At the end, I asked myself if I'd enjoyed it, but couldn't really answer.  I didn't NOT enjoy it, but that's not the same thing.

 

The shower afterwards and a mind spinning through various aspects of Visual basic code I was trying to figure out helped me ease into sleep.

 

Oblivion could almost have done that itself.

Oz: Great and Powerful?

Oz: the Great and Powerful.

But is he?

Well, yes and no...

Disney make some amazing films, that can't be denied. Unfortunately, that can also be their undoing. They coat a particular brand of gloss over their productions that is wonderful when it shines, but is disappointing when it doesn't. With Oz, the shine is definitely there, but in parts, that's the problem.

I loved the black and white introduction. The girl Oz is 'sweet' on mentions that a man who's surname is Gale has asked her to marry him. I thought that was a nice touch. An interesting link to the classic original. I wonder, however, what Disney will do if they feel obliged to produce a sequel to this prequel. Any such film must still be a prequel to the first film (which is, I suppose, now a sequel?) as it would genuinely be a bad move to actually remake the Wizard of Oz.

With a distinct lack of ideas, so many films are being remade - Total Recall, Fright Night, Evil Dead and many more - but there are those films that simply MUST be left alone. The Wizard of Oz is one such movie. Make a sequel if you will (as has been done - Oz, Return to Oz, The Wiz, The Witches of Oz (!)) but don't touch the original.

Please.

When Walt Disney was alive, I believe he refused to make a sequel. Now he's no longer with us, it seems most Disney films will have a number 2 or more at some point. In some cases, these are good. In others, not so. The Lion King is one of my favourite animated films. Up there with Finding Nemo ("just keep swimming!"). I was disappointed by the second one, but thought the third was a unique take on sequels. It worked, and was very funny.

But what will they do with Oz: The Great and Powerful? They've set the scene, leading into the original nicely. The Gale name is there, linking Dorothy and the Wizard. There's the green Wicked Witch (I thought the transformation here was a little weak, but it does have to cater for the younger audience). And the reason for the smoke and mirrors is established too. As such, there's the potential for a second film to be squeezed in, potentially just because it has the Oz name. Not necessarily a good idea.

Anywho, back to the film.

Black and white. I thought this was a fitting tribute to the first film. Plus, when Oz arrived in... erm... Oz, the contrast between the monochrome and the stunning colour was amazing. One issue with black and white films nowadays is that they look like a colour film with the colour removed. The definition is still there. It doesn't look like a traditional 'black and white' movie. A little ageing effect here would have, I think, added. Some imperfections to enhance the perfection.

Still, the transition from dirty old Kansas to beautiful Oz was seamless and Sam Raimi (who I'm a fan of anyway) has helped make the world a much bigger place than it ever was before. As Oz floats along a river to musical plants and river fairies, you're transported to a wonderful land brought to impressive life. I saw the film in 2D - which would help keep the colour vivid - but there were definitely some parts which were included for the 3D viewers. A fall down a waterfall was effective in 2D, so would have turned stomachs in 3!

There was humour mixed nicely in with the shocks and surprises. Finlay, the flying monkey, and his liking of bananas. A Chinatown made from real china pottery. The flying baboon that suddenly appeared, teeth bared (which made me wonder why more wasn't put into the transformation of Theodora - even Roald Dahl's 'The Witches' adaptation had something shown).

Sometimes the actors appeared a little uncomfortable in their roles, apart from Zach Braff who seemed perfectly at home as the monkey (lol). The 'Bully' cry of the Tinkers and the 'Not now' fanfare of Nuck felt forced, and the baboons gaining on them in the mist looked scribbled and not actually doing anything (and the fake running of Gelinda?) but these were fairly minor things in retrospect, considering .

So, Oz: The Great and Powerful. Was he?

Well... Majestic, I think so. Visually impressive, mostly, yes. A nice lead in to the original? Pretty much. It had some excellent parts, some good parts and some ok parts. It had a couple of not so good parts too.

But, did I enjoy it? Yes I did. 'Nuff said.