John Wick (2014) was a hard act to follow. An action film at its finest, the first entry in the series showed audiences across the world that you don’t need grime on the lens and shaky cam to make an action scene. Clean shots, interesting settings and, above all, beautifully choreographed fight sequences are what made John Wick fantastic, and they’re what make its sequel just as good, but not quite better.
John Wick: Chapter 2 (2017) follows John as, after the events of the first film, he attempts to return to his previous retired life, only to be dragged back into the mysterious assassin underworld by an old acquaintance.
Chapter 2 ups the ante with huge fight scenes, dynamic settings and very nearly kills John Wick so many times that I have no idea how he will survive the inevitable sequel. Perhaps he won’t; that would be interesting.
Keanu Reeves proves himself a master of action films once again.
While not quite as lacking in the narrative department as the first film, John Wick: Chapter 2 does little to push the story along other than give John more people to kill. Many might say this is what holds the film, and its predecessor, back from being excellent but I disagree. If you want slow, go watch There Will Be Blood (2007).
However, if you want simple, stark cinematography and fight choreography that feels more like ballet than people shooting lots of other people, then this is the film for you. These are films that know what they do well, and they focus on it. To the point that it’s almost exhausting. In fact, there is so much action packed into John Wick: Chapter 2 that it’s almost a detriment, as the film reaches the point of struggling to find new and interesting ways for John Wick to kill more and more people.
There is more substance to this film, however, and the curtain is pulled back on more of the shadowy underworld of assassins we glimpsed in the first film, with its gold coin currency and secret hotels around the globe. While this doesn’t really add much to the film except filler between excellent fight after excellent fight, it is an interesting world and one I hope to see expanded further in the eventual sequel.
John Wick: Chapter 2 is as much of a thrill ride as the first film and, though it doesn’t quite match up to the relentless brutality of John Wick, it adds enough into the franchise to make it a worthwhile addition and has me excited for a third instalment.
When Rings (2017) opened with a standalone scene on an airplane completely unrelated to the rest of the plot, I had a bad feeling. Unfortunately that feeling came true and the film proceeded to try a dozen different ideas without fulfilling any but the most mediocre.
Rings is the third film in the American series which started with The Ring (2002), based on the Japanese Ringu (1998). Rings is the story of a girl who becomes worried about her suddenly distant boyfriend and head to his college to find out why, only to become tangled up in a cursed video which kills you after seven days.
For all its flaws, Rings does try to expand on the plot of the previous two films, exploring the background of the antagonist and fleshing out the lore of the story. It even introduces new and interesting concepts that work well in a more contemporary environment, like copying video files instead of VHS tapes and an underground research club at a university formed by a professor who is obsessed with the video’s connection to the afterlife through Samara, the terrifying ghost that kills you after seven days.
Hello blue filter, old friend, you’ve come to ruin more films for me.
The film’s biggest problem is that it never fully explores some of its best options. The relationship between the two protagonists is shoved aside to focus on the ‘plot’, and the boyfriend becomes two-dimensional very quickly. The sleazy professor who cares more for his research than his students is discarded for little reason and the underground research club, which I thought was a fantastic idea, is thrown to the winds in favour of going into the countryside to research Samara’s backstory.
There are some solid performances but these are too infrequent to put a dent in the film’s determination to ruin itself. Johnny Galecki (of Big Bang Theory fame) is great as the standoffish professor and Vincent D’Onofrio delivers the best role in the film, but neither are used well enough to make much of a difference.
Rare instances of good practical effects and interesting settings fail to hold up immersion-breakingly bad CGI, poor writing and lack of consistency. Rings managed to grind to a halt with an ending somehow worse than the rest of the film, and I found myself more than ready to leave the cinema. If you find yourself wanting to head out and see Rings, I suggest you find a way to stream the original instead.
It’s not often I find myself, as the credits roll, wondering why I never saw a film when it was released. Whiplash (2014) falls harder under that category than anything I have seen before. A relentless torment of emotion and jazz, this is a film that will light you up from head to toe and make you want to run out of whatever room you’re viewing it in and pursue your passions.
Whiplash is the story of a music student, played by Miles Teller, who catches the eye of a renowned teacher (J.K Simmons) with a reputation for his brutal and anxiety-inducing teaching methods.
The story follows the relationship between the two as the student, Andrew, puts his everything into his drumming and his teacher Fletcher pushes him to the limits, quite literally drawing blood and sweat more than once. Not a film for the faint-hearted, I found myself wondering at times how Andrew could pick up him drumsticks, let alone play each set with blistered and bleeding hands.
J.K Simmons is a marvel in Whiplash, a true drill sergeant of a musician
It’s this drive and intensity that fuels the plot of the film, pulling the audience behind the protagonist as he desperately tries to make something of himself. It’s a raw emotional power that is handled without any elegance or filter. Rarely letting up from start to finish, if you’re not wired by the end of Whiplash then I have no idea what you’re made of.
Everything in Whiplash is built to serve the almighty message of Andrew’s drive for musical greatness, and this is perhaps the films only weakness. Not much of a weakness, all told. Whiplash is original, unrelenting and intense from start to finish.
La La Land is the story of two ambitious young people in Los Angeles, a classic premise as far as cinema is concerned. The film follows Mia (Emma Stone), an aspiring actress working as a barista, as she meets and begins a relationship with Sebastian (Ryan Gosling), a jazz pianist who wants more than anything to open his own jazz club. John Legend plays a supporting role as Keith, though surprisingly adds little musically, aside from one modern jazz performance.
Split into four seasonal-themed acts as the film progresses through the stages of Mia and Sebastian’s relationship, the audience is bounced from set piece to set piece, each as unique and original as the last, though they draw inspiration heavily from classic cinema and theatre.
And I really do mean bounce. This is a film that doesn’t let up; it allows for quiet, still moments but for the most part relies on a constantly moving camera and physical theatre. Cinematography is a highlight for La La Land, with moments that made my jaw drop thanks to stunning colour and framing. The audience is truly taken for a ride, and each setting and backdrop is meticulously vibrant and full.
The relationship between the two main characters feels refreshingly real and grounded.
Primarily, La La Land is a musical and, while I didn’t find myself coming out of the cinema with a tune stuck in my head, each number was exquisitely orchestrated and layered with emotional weight. From a starlit walk along a road overlooking the city, with a surprising tap dancing routine, to an intimate serenade at the piano in the living room, each song welcomes you into the moment to share an emotional journey with the two lead characters.
La La Land is one of the best films I have seen in a long time, one that utterly swept me off my feet with its emotional weight and beauty. Along with a soundtrack that I will happily listen to on its own, and gorgeous scene after gorgeous scene, this is a must-see.
SPOILERS – While I normally avoid spoilers during a review, this is an exception because I want to explore the film a little more thoroughly than I normally would.
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story is a prequel to the original Star Wars trilogy, taking place shortly before A New Hope, when a plot is hatched to steal the Death Star plans that Princess Leia receives in the opening of the original film.
Despite being announced as a standalone Star Wars film, Rogue One feels as connected to the series as The Force Awakens, and it was definitely meant to be that way, considering just how tightly it ties into the beginning of A New Hope.
Rogue One was originally sold to us as a war film, and this got a lot of people very excited, myself included. Sure, we’ve had a lot of Star Wars but none of the films have much war, at least not in the way that Saving Private Ryan or Platoon do, or any other gritty, unrelenting war film that may spring to mind. Rogue One is this. Relentless from start to finish, it’s a film about facing the all-encompassing might of the Empire with little but grit and determination to help you come out on top. If managing to send a pic-heavy text message before being obliterated by a nuke counts as ‘on top’.
Which brings us to my favourite part of Rogue One. Everyone dies. The film doesn’t do war with a pinch of salt, this is a suicide mission which actually means suicide mission and I did not see it coming. Rogue One simultaneously fixed Star Wars‘ problems and then erased itself to keep the continuity without feeling forced. This can get a bit emotionally heavy-handed at times, but it feels right. Star Wars has always been a bit cheesy, and so it feels like the right tone even in the grittiest moments.
Donnie Yen delivers a great performance, making this my favourite character of the entire film, and there are a lot.
Alongside being a proper war film, what Rogue One does best is be a Star Wars film. At some points, I felt a literal pang of nostalgia for the original trilogy. From the red and gold leaders calling out radio signals from oddly shadowed cockpits, to the most ominous and terrifying Darth Vader scenes in the entire series, this film nailed the feel of Star Wars more than the entire prequel trilogy combined, and I won’t be able to watch the original three films from now on without loading this up first.
This is particularly so because the film fixes possibly the biggest problem of the original trilogy (aside from Chewbacca not getting a medal); the flaw in the Death Star. The theme of defiance against an overwhelming threat is woven throughout Rogue One, and this is the crescendo as well as answering a long-unanswered question.
Now we’ve mentioned him, let’s talk about Darth Vader. Aside from a single bizarre pun in one scene, Vader is horrifying. All suspense and quiet rage, he commands each scene he is in with brutal presence. Most notably a scene toward the end where he boards an Alliance ship and mercilessly cuts down rebel after rebel to get to the Death Star plans. Luckily, he doesn’t make it and we get to see a surprisingly well-rendered CGI scene of Princess Leia receiving the Death Star plans to calm us down a bit. This CGI, while not bad, pales in comparison to that of Peter Cushing, who plays Grand Moff Tarkin or would have done if he hadn’t died in 1994.
Rogue One is stunning throughout, but the Death Star has never looked better.
Visually, this is probably the best Star Wars film so far. From visceral battle scenes that stun you with fast-paced but clearly shot combat to wide-ranging shots of planets full of detail, you definitely can’t look away. There’s a little too much going on at times in Rogue One, as we jump between locations what feels like every few minutes, but each one looks stunning and different.
The character design is equally interesting and, while it can be pretty hit and miss, most of the new characters introduced in Rogue One are good. The brooding and angst-filled Jyn Erso is a character we can get behind as she wrestles with the ‘right thing to do’ throughout, while I absolutely loved the blind almost-Jedi Chirrut Îmwe, which Donnie Yen delivers a standout performance for. However, Forrest Whitaker as Saw Gerrera is a bit too over-the-top and I definitely could have done without sitting through Rogue One‘s Jar Jar, the sarcastic ex-Imperial droid K-2SO. For the most part though, every character is compelling, old and new.
While The Force Awakens appeared to want to copy A New Hope to pander to fans of the series, Rogue One is a love note to those same fans. The film has references and ties to the entire series woven throughout without forsaking an original plot with new and interesting characters that genuinely add something to a series that so many people aren’t sure can be added to. It gives me genuine hope for the future of Star Wars films.
In Doctor Strange (2016), the titular Stephen Strange is a neurosurgeon at the top of his field who, after losing the use of his hands in a car accident, travels the world to find a cure. After discovering a potential mystical solution, he is drawn into a weird and wonderful world of magic.
What sounds like a fairly typical fantasy story on the outside is supported by the efforts of decades of Doctor Strange comics in going beyond the normal and getting as weird as possible. While the film does tend to rely on story tropes Marvel Cinematic Universe fans are used to, it also provides plenty of the strange, with stunning psychedelic special effects sequences that make this one film you have to see in 3D.
Beyond the effects, the film looks great throughout. Costumes and settings are a joy to behold, and the characters spend little time in the boring old real world without Inception-esque reality-bending effects filling the screen.
At its core, Doctor Strange is a film about selfishness and redemption. Nothing new, but it’s pulled off fairly well. Benedict Cumberbatch is a perfect fit as Stephen Strange, even if his accent does waver a bit at the start of the film. There is enough character development to keep viewers invested but ultimately the message of selflessness doesn’t carry as much weight as may have been intended by the time the credits roll.
Look at this nonsense. Beautiful.
While the visual effects do make this film a joy to watch, it can’t quite cover up some of the flaws. Predictable plot and weak pacing are disappointing, and there’s very little satisfaction from Strange’s journey to master magician. Despite toting a hard-working attitude and sticking his nose into books, he appears to glide through the studies with ease and come out the other side in no time at all. Not only that, but immediately has little trouble going toe to toe with the film’s main villain, Mads Mikkelsen, who is built up as an imposing and dangerous figure but fares poorly against Strange throughout the story.
Thankfully, the film does not take itself too seriously and it’s easy to sit back and just enjoy this film. Aside from being a visual treat, Doctor Strange continues the trend of immensely funny Marvel films, delivering some great dialogue throughout as well as some slapstick comedy that had the audience in my cinema laughing out loud. I spent most of the film with a smile on my face for one reason or another, and that can be just as valuable as a deep, beautifully constructed plot.
All in all, Doctor Strange is far from a perfect film but I will be recommending that everyone sees it. From the beautiful special effects moments to the great comedy timing, this is a fun film from start to finish and I look forward to seeing more of Strange in future Marvel instalments.
There’s a certain expectation in my mind when I see Tim Burton’s name attached to a film, especially in the capacity of director. Some of his work includes films that I consider all-time favourites, such as Beetlejuice (1988) or Corpse Bride (2005). Miss Peregine’s Home for Peculiar Children is, unfortunately, as disappointing in that regard as it is difficult to repeatedly say in a conversation.
While the world of the film is wildly interesting, the plot and characters are far from it. I enjoyed seeing the ‘peculiar’ children’s abilities and how they would use them in various situations as much as the good use of time manipulation. If I didn’t know that this was all built by the author of the book the film is based on, Ransom Riggs, I would assume Burton wrote it himself. It’s a quirky, whimsical and thoroughly odd world that deserved a better film.
Asa Butterfield, who I hugely enjoyed in Ender’s Game (2013), delivers a bland and unremarkable performance. While this is in part to blame on the boring character, who I assume the audience is supposed to project themselves onto, Butterfield’s acting falls apart from the get go. There are some compelling scenes later on, and he seems to do well with lots of other things happening, but in dialogue-heavy parts of the film, it’s a strain to sit through.
Eva Green is great in this film, but unfortunately can’t support a weak protagonist.
Other characters are not able to hold up the film in this regard, but do deliver better performances. Eva Green is one, in the role of the titular Miss Peregrine, she is enjoyable to watch from start to finish. Similarly, Samuel L. Jackson makes a great villain, and does the kooky bad guy job well. Chris O’Dowd is amusing to watch as always as the father of the protagonist, with a strong American accent and compelling realism. Additionally, I was surprised by the addition of Dame Judi Dench, and even more shocked by how little time she gets to do anything of note, particularly in a film that could have used some more strong acting.
I found myself bored plenty of times throughout the film, but was glad to see the weird and wonderful ways in which the film uses the children’s powers to spice things up. Whether it’s displacing water out of a sunken ship with control over air, or reanimating an army of comical skeletons to battle enemies, the film makes creative use of its quirkiness even when the plot is dull or predictable.
Miss Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar Children has a great world full of interesting characters and powers ripe for a quirky, off the rails adventure but instead settles for a plot you can see coming two steps ahead from start to finish. A good one for young teens, but despairingly boring for anyone much older.
The Deepwater Horizon explosion was a sudden and dramatic incident which preceded the worst environmental disaster in US history. When I first heard about this film, I was irritated by the idea of trivialising such a tragedy by trying to make it into an exciting action film. I was very wrong.
This is a deadly serious, tragic film about real people struggling to survive an epic disaster that took the lives of 11 people. Deepwater Horizon does not shy away from pointing fingers, specifically at BP, but it manages not to make it annoying until the epilogue and it seems justified considering the part that BP and the other companies involved played in allowing this tragedy to occur.
Thankfully, it doesn’t do this by giving us over the top characters but real, skilled people just trying to do their job properly and live their lives. Mark Wahlberg is great in the lead, a grounded intelligent man who is level-headed under pressure, he comes across as the everyday hero throughout this film and it never really strays into the unbelievable, though there are moments of this at times with other characters.
Grounded, real characters are what make this film more than just a visually stunning disaster flick.
The rest of the cast is similarly excellent, with Kurt Russell and John Malkovich also delivering strong performances. Dylan O’Brien (who you may recognise from the Maze Runner films) is surprisingly great and, while he doesn’t get too many chances to shine, he shows some strong acting skills that will have me keeping an eye out for him in future films.
Far and above, Deepwater Horizon‘s greatest strength is its visuals. Once the shit hits the fan, this film becomes stunning. Wide shots of the oil rig are shocking as it is engulfed in fire and explosions rock parts of the structure. There are parts of the film where shaky cam is used a little too liberally but there are plenty of beautiful static shots to make up for that.
Likewise, sound plays a great part in helping you feel how catastrophic this event was, as actors are thrown about by explosions and fight their way through choking clouds of burning smoke, you can really get into the raw action of the scenes.
This intensity is quickly becoming a speciality for Peter Berg, who previously directed the excellent Lone Survivor (2013). While Deepwater Horizon takes a well-earned, but heavy-handed chunk of time to drop the blame on BP, and honour the people who died in the tragedy, it is visually spectacular and gripping throughout.
The Girl on the Train surprised me. Without any prior knowledge, save for a few poorly edited trailers, I expected to sit through a mediocre thriller and what I actually got was a deeply tragic character-driven story. The Girl on the Train is full of broken people, each with their own damaged past and mistakes and problems and emotions, and it knows how to show you. It does sometimes push too hard, putting too much effort into making you feel a certain way or showing you unnecessary backstory that, while heavily emotional and beautifully shot, doesn’t add much except more emotional weight to a story that weighed a ton already.
The main cast in this film deliver good performances for the most part, and Emily Blunt is fantastic in the role of Rachel, the titular girl on the train. A truly broken person, wallowing in her own self-destruction and sorrow, Emily Blunt makes Rachel pitiful a times, despicable at others and there are moments when I genuinely felt uncomfortable watching her. The focus on developing Rachel’s character, however, leaves very little time for the rest of the cast and some of the other characters have a tendency to be a bit two-dimensional.
Aside from the music, Emily Blunt is the strongest aspect of The Girl on the Train.
The Girl on the Train leaps about with its story, jumping back and forth through time and between characters, for the most part fluidly. You rarely feel lost but the pacing does get a little chaotic from time to time even though this is likely done to mirror the rickety state of Rachel’s mind as she stumbles toward a conclusion about what’s really going on. And that is the crux of this film, as it is a film with a twist and, while it does make clear efforts to lead you toward a conclusion alongside Rachel in the second half of the film, you may find yourself putting the pieces together well before the finale. I was left feeling as though it could have gotten there a little smoother, and without some of the unnecessary melodrama and poetic moments, but it does get there in the end.
I enjoyed The Girl on the Train and, while it has a strong tendency to get caught up in itself, becoming pretentious or distracted with unnecessary flashbacks and plot development, it does a good job of showing how bleak and tragic life can be, and I walked out of the cinema emotionally affected.
Tom Cruise is in his element in Jack Reacher: Never Go Back. A well-paced action film that knows exactly what it is, Never Go Back is thoroughly enjoyable but doesn’t quite live up to the relentless forward momentum of the previous film. Based on a long running book series known for being formulaic, this film surprised me by not just resting on the laurels of the first. While it doesn’t do anything spectacular or new, it manages to switch things up enough to keep fans of the first film more than interested, and ticks all the right boxes for any lover of the action genre.
This is not a character-driven film, but the acting is solid throughout and there is enough plot and character development to keep you more or less invested in the lead characters and their relationships, though a bland villain does little to help this along. One of the main villains barely makes an appearance throughout and the other could be a cardboard cutout with a gun for all it would help, he doesn’t even have a name!
Cobie Smulders delivers a strong performance alongside Cruise.
Tom Cruise maintains his characteristic intensity but the stoicism of the character allows for little else. If anything, he is less intense and less brutal than in the previous instalment, which is somewhat of a disappointment but may be down the addition of new protagonists for this outing. Cobie Smulders (of Avengers fame) and Danika Yarosh (who you may know from Heroes: Reborn) join Tom Cruise in a departure from the lone wolf aspect of the first film. This works fairly well, with some easy exposition and nice character development moments helping to flesh out the film somewhat, but unfortunately seems to cause the film to lose the unrelenting brutality that made me love the original, as it pushes too hard to emotionally affect the audience at times.
Director Edward Zwick is possibly the biggest letdown of the film. For someone whose previous work includes Blood Diamond and The Last Samurai, a generic action flick is the least of what we should be expecting. This is far from a bad film, it’s a solid action film that many people will enjoy but, with a strong cast and a director capable of beautiful action sequences blended with real character-driven stories, Jack Reacher: Never Go Back ultimately falls short of what I was hoping for.
John Wick (2014) was a hard act to follow. An action film at its finest, the first entry in the series showed audiences across the world that you don’t need grime on the lens and shaky cam to make an action scene. Clean shots, interesting settings and, above all, beautifully choreographed fight sequences are what made John Wick fantastic, and they’re what make its sequel just as good, but not quite better.
Tom Hogarth 