Month: May 2015

Starring: Dwayne Johnson (Fast and Furious 7), Carla Gugino (Spy Kids), Alexandra Daddario (True Detective), Ioan Gruffudd (Forever), Hugo Johnstone-Burt, Art Parkinson (Game of Thrones), Paul Giamatti (Sideways)

Director: Brady Peyton (Journey 2: The Mysterious Island)

Writer: Carlton Cuse (Bates Motel)

Runtime: 1 hour 54 minutes

Release Date: 28 May (UK), 29 May (US)

Disaster movies are a bit of a conundrum. They present devastation on massive scales, events where the world we know is destroyed in the most jaw-dropping of ways, but rarely do we care about the people inside these disasters; it becomes all about the spectacle rather than character. It’s a problem that’s plagued the genre since its inception, and that same exact problem is why San Andreas, as much as it tries and as large as it is, can’t muster anything more than a mildly above average response.

San Andreas often feels like a throwback to the disaster movies of the 1990s like Volcano or Armageddon (which in themselves were throwbacks to the disaster movies of the 1970s like The Towering Inferno and, oddly enough, Earthquake). In that sense, the movie can be enjoyed on the same level as those previous works: mindless popcorn entertainment with loud noises and spectacular special effects. The level of carnage on display here could place San Andreas among the most destruction-heavy films in film history; just when you think it can’t top itself, the film finds a way to get that much more ridiculous. However, in the decades since this genre began, no one has seemed to be able to come up with a different story for a disaster movie. This is where San Andreas mainly stumbles: as spectacular as the set pieces are, the plot connecting them is bland and clichéd. Tropes like the estranged wife, the jerky new boyfriend, a tragic back-story involving the loss of a family member, the scientist who saw it all coming, and countless others litter the film and are all played straight with no attempt to subvert or change them. This makes the plot beats incredibly easy to predict and removes a lot of the tension, which is especially bad when our characters are in a constant state of extreme peril. The sheer spectacle of the film and its intense but brisk pace do help keep the story moving forward, and I can’t say I was ever bored, but in the end the banality of the script is too much even with the audacious amounts of desolation erupting on screen.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Dwayne Johnson isn’t the greatest of actors, but he’s got more charm than almost all of them. The role of Ray Gaines doesn’t have too much meat on the page, but Johnson injects enough of his own personality into the role to remain a likeable lead. However, that same charisma does backfire on him occasionally, as I found it hard to believe he was a sad and tormented figure trying to get over the loss of his youngest daughter when he’s constantly cracking wry one-liners. Carla Gugino doesn’t add much to the proceedings as Johnson’s ex-wife; other than one moment at the end, she doesn’t do anything major to effect the plot and is essentially just a tenuous tag-along for the ride; you could replace her with a lamp and it wouldn’t change much. On the other hand, Alexandra Daddario’s Blake is self-sufficient, proactive, and is constantly willing to make sacrifices for others; sure, she does need saving herself a few times and most of her skills come down to “my dad taught me about this”, but it’s nice to see a damsel who fights distress rather than succumb to it whilst waiting for rescue. Hugo Johnstone-Burt (or, as I shall refer to him from now on, Baby Hugh Grant) and Art Parkinson could easily have been annoying side characters too, but they also get their moments to shine and Parkinson especially has several cute moments of comic relief sprinkled throughout. Ioan Gruffudd gets the real short end of the stick as the typical asshole boyfriend character, especially since the early scenes painted him with more sympathy that suggested he may avoid this stereotype, but eventually they take the lazy route and then don’t do much with him afterwards; at least he gets a satisfying comeuppance. Paul Giamatti plays the Jeff Goldblum-esque scientist role, but he ultimately feels superfluous other than to add some expository mumbo-jumbo to set up the next evolution of the destruction. The rest of the cast is pretty forgettable other than some odd cameos: Arrow’s Colton Haynes shows up during the opening sequence before being promptly forgotten about, and then Kylie Minogue shows up for about a minute before being promptly booted out; seriously, why was she even in this movie?

As I’ve said, San Andreas is clearly a film where all effort has gone into showing the disaster itself, and on this level it doesn’t disappoint. The visual effects aren’t jaw dropping, but they are certainly convincing enough to suck you into the near-constant obliteration of buildings and streets. It’s not all just watching people hide under tables and jump over cracks: there’s a helicopter rescue in a canyon, several narrow escapes through collapsing buildings, aerial crashes, parachuting and even a massive tidal wave to mix up the action. All of it is filmed and edited simply but coherently; there is a fair bit of shaky-cam to augment the earthquakes, but it never becomes a crutch to cover up bad filmmaking. The sound design is just as vital to the experience as the visuals are here, with thunderous crashes and booms layered on top of the annihilation, and the film’s score is unremarkable but serviceable in keeping the action pumping.

San Andreas is entertaining on a simplest of levels but doesn’t make much effort beyond that. There is certainly fun to be had watching California get wrecked on a scale that even Roland Emmerich would blush at but, much like the state itself, it’s built on unstable ground that could crack at any moment. The pure size of it may make it just barely worth seeing in a theatre, but only if you don’t have access to a halfway decent TV and sound system. It’s more of a Saturday night, stay-in-and-eat-pizza type of movie, and even then you might end up watching one of its many contemporaries instead and not notice the difference.

FINAL VERDICT: 6/10

Starring: Melissa McCarthy (The Heat), Jason Statham (Crank), Rose Byrne (X-Men: First Class), Miranda Hart (Miranda), Allison Janney (Juno), Bobby Cannavale (Blue Jasmine), Peter Serafinowicz (Shaun of the Dead), Jude Law (Sherlock Holmes)

Writer/Director: Paul Feig (Bridesmaids)

Runtime: 2 hours

Release Date: 5 June (US, UK)

I have very mixed feelings about Melissa McCarthy. Sometimes she can be hilarious (Bridesmaids), other times she’s simply tolerable (The Heat), but a lot of the time she’s painfully obnoxious (Identity Thief). Considering a scattershot track record like that, it’s hard for me to go into a movie like Spy with any preconceived notions; it could honestly go either way. Thankfully, Spy goes the right way and delivers a safe but still hilarious action-comedy ride.

Spoofs of the James Bond formula have been around as long as the franchise itself, and from its globe-trotting plot to its opening title sequence, Spy makes no bones about the field it is playing in. The story is pretty generic all around and, save for one well-played plot twist, is also incredibly predictable. But telling a thrilling narrative is clearly not Spy’s main goal. Its goal is to make you laugh, and on that level it succeeds admirably. The plot is mainly an excuse to throw Susan Cooper (McCarthy) into 007-style situations and see what happens, and though some more original narrative ideas could have spiced things up, what they have is perfectly serviceable. The humour is hardly ever insightful or deep, but the laughs come consistently hard and fast, keeping a smile on your face throughout and making the somewhat bloated two-hour runtime fly by.

A big reason why I don’t always like Melissa McCarthy is because the characters she usually plays are loud, brash and don’t know when to shut up. Gratefully, this isn’t the case with Susan Cooper, who’s more sensitive and insecure than her usual characters. She’s clearly a genuinely nice person, and her fits of rage and abuse feel more like a reaction to the situation she’s in rather than a core part of her personality. Instead of her usual abrasive shtick, McCarthy feels a lot more restrained here and that’s for the better, making those moments where she does burst into a flurry of insults that much funnier. Backing her up is a strong supporting cast of actors both comedic and dramatic, and all of them are more than up to the task. Rose Byrne balances threatening and funny very well as main villain Raina, with her condescending comments on McCarthy’s character and a running gag where she forgets people’s names being highlights. Like McCarthy, Miranda Hart sometimes feels like she’s relying on her usual persona but the movie uses her just enough before she gets grading. Jude Law gets the chance he never got to play a 007-style character and he works perfectly in his small but pivotal role, whilst Peter Serafinowicz’s Aldo is amusing if a little one-note at times. The real standout, however, is Jason Statham’s Rick Ford. Playing an exaggerated version of his usual action star image, Statham steals every scene he’s in with his terrifically deadpan performance that turns him from one of the toughest actors of our age into a guaranteed hilarious punchline. He unfortunately feels underutilised, as he drops out of the movie on several occasions (between this and Fast and Furious 7, Statham’s been doing that a lot lately), but that only makes those times when he is on screen that much more golden.

Whilst Paul Feig is clearly a good director of actors and knows how to wring a good verbal joke out, he could stand to put the same amount of effort into the visuals. Spy is certainly the most action-heavy of his films so far but, though the fight choreography is well-handled on both an action and a comedy level, the cinematography and editing feels a little flat during those same scenes. Other than some fun use of slow motion, the film lacks a strong visual identity; it has that same generic feel that a lot of comedies have these days and I’m getting kind of sick of it. Considering Feig’s next project is the Ghostbusters reboot, where design and style matters just as much as the jokes, I certainly think he could stand to get a bit more visually creative when it comes to his directing.

Spy is hardly a game changer for the spy comedy subgenre, but it’s a fun and amusing time nonetheless. If you’re a fan of McCarthy and Feig’s previous films, then you’re probably going to like this one too. It’s not quite in the same league as Bridesmaids, but I’d say it’s a lot better than The Heat. If you’re in the mood for a laugh, it’s certainly worth checking out for Jason Statham’s performance alone; he really is that good and it makes me want to see him do more comedies in the future.

FINAL VERDICT: 7.5/10

Starring: Britt Robertson (The Longest Ride), George Clooney (The Descendants), Raffey Cassidy (Snow White and the Hunstman), Hugh Laurie (House)

Director: Brad Bird (The Incredibles)

Writers: Damon Lindelof (Prometheus) and Brad Bird

Runtime: 2 hours 10 minutes

Release Date: 22 May (US, UK)

It may be the popular thing to say, but it’s true: Brad Bird is kind of a genius. All of his movies so far have been nothing less than excellent, combining imagination, wit and heart in equal measure to make classic films that stand the test of time and will do for generations to come. After years of working in animation, Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol served as a great testing ground for Bird in the world of live action, and now he’s ready to take on something a little more daring. Tomorrowland (slapped with the subtitle A World Beyond here in the UK for nonsense copyright reasons) has had a lot of build-up through Bird’s name value and an effectively conservative marketing campaign, so expectations are high; after all, Bird turned down Star Wars for this. Whilst I am glad to report that Tomorrowland does hold up Bird’s impeccable track record and you should most certainly go see it, it’s nigh impossible to live up to such lofty ambitions.

The story of Tomorrowland is a simple but imaginative story, one that evokes that magical sense of wonder found in the early works of Steven Spielberg. The plot does follow a lot of conventions (protagonist picked from obscurity and told they are the super-special saviour of the world, anyone?), but this familiarity plays into the retro feel of the movie and ultimately uses these devices to say something different and relevant. It’s a fun ride for sure full of interesting characters and creative set pieces, but Tomorrowland is mostly a film about ideas, and those ideas are definitely worth considering. Though it is a film inspired by the past and about the possibilities of the future, it is ultimately a film about our present, what’s wrong with it, and what we need to do to fix it. The film touches on the subjects of optimism vs. pessimism, the degradation of our world, and society’s growing disinterest in the possibilities of progress; having the dissolution of the NASA space program play into the plot is certainly no coincidence. It’s this honest but hopeful and determined look at our world that really makes Tomorrowland click, but I’d be lying if I said the film didn’t have problems. The main culprit is the film’s first ten minutes which, whilst helping set up the world and some key characters, does feel tacked on and sets a bad first impression; you could cut it out and work some of the more important details into the story later, and the film would be far better for it. Once the ball does get rolling on the main plot, the movie improves immensely but other issues do occasionally rear their heads. The dialogue can become very exposition-heavy during the quieter scenes, the pacing and structure feels a little off-balance at certain points, and though the withholding of certain information makes sense from the perspective of the audience in regards to creating mystery and suspense, in context you sometimes question why they’re holding back this important information other than “because the plot says so.”

Though the marketing would have you believe George Clooney is the star of this movie, Tomorrowland ultimately belongs to Britt Robertson’s Casey Newton. Acerbic and stubborn but full of positivity and with a passion for creativity, the character of Casey is a wonderfully charming and relatable protagonist and Robertson carries the character and the movie effortlessly; her performance is a joy from start to finish. The character of Frank Walker is essentially Clooney playing a broken version of himself: charming and witty, but with a tired, defeatist edge. Contrasted against Robertson’s unflinching optimism, this already makes for a fun on-screen combo. But throw Raffey Cassidy’s Athena into the mix also, and the fun only increases; I can’t say much without spoiling, but Cassidy’s performance is perfectly attuned and heartfelt, and her character is the source of some of the film’s best action and comedy. Hugh Laurie feels disappointingly underutilised as Nix (not counting the prologue, he’s not introduced until the third act), but he makes the most of his limited screen time, especially in a speech near the end that essentially sums up why the world is screwed. The rest of the cast is mostly inconsequential, but there are some worth mentioning; Kathryn Hahn and Keegan-Michael Key have a lot of fun with their brief roles, whilst it’s also nice to see Looper’s Pierce Gangon is still getting some work.

In both The Iron Giant and The Incredibles, Brad Bird proved he had a penchant for retro and that rings as true as ever in Tomorrowland. Everything about the sets, props and costumes feels ripped straight from the pages of a 1950s sci-fi comic strip, but all of it is done in a way without feeling cheesy or childish. There are a lot of fun ideas on display in regards to the sci-fi technology, creating for some inventive action beats that play around with these toys. A brief skirmish in a geek store is a particular highlight not just for action, but it’s also a visual and auditory delight thanks to all the Easter eggs thrown into the scene; be sure to keep a close eye on those store shelves. The cinematography is crisp and vivid with strong colours, bright lighting and clean camera operation, and Michael Giacchino’s score is uplifting and well attuned to the film’s buoyant disposition.

Tomorrowland is a really, really good movie, and for most movies that would be enough. But Tomorrowland is so close to perfection it can practically taste it, but it falls just short of becoming an instant masterpiece, and that’s enough to make it feel a little disappointing. The intriguing premise, the strong performances, the ingenious visuals and, most of all, the fascinating ideas about society and progress are all excellent, but it doesn’t quite hit it home the way a lot of Brad Bird’s other films have done so effortlessly. Whether it was studio interference or the script being taken out of the oven too early, Tomorrowland’s issues certainly seem fixable and I wish these kinks in the narrative had been ironed out before cameras started rolling. Don’t get me wrong, I still think it’s a film most certainly worth seeing and it does nothing to dissuade my feelings about Bird’s reputation as a filmmaker, but it really is that damn close to being something extraordinary and doesn’t quite make it.

FINAL VERDICT: 8.5/10

Starring: Tom Hardy (Locke), Charlize Theron (Monster), Nicholas Hoult (X-Men: Days of Future Past), Hugh Keays-Byrne (Mad Max), Zoe Kravitz (Divergent), Rosie Huntington-Whitely (Transformers: Dark of the Moon)

Director: George Miller (Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior)

Writers: George Miller and Brendan McCarthy and Nick Lathouris

Runtime: 2 hours

Release Date: 14 May (UK), 15 May (US)

In what is possibly the biggest gap between instalments of a franchise, it’s been thirty years since Mad Max last rode across the wasteland in Beyond Thunderdome, but whilst original star Mel Gibson may now have retired the role, director of the original trilogy George Miller is still holding on at the grand age of 70. Miller has actually been planning Fury Road for over a decade now, with various false starts over the years and, even after getting the ball rolling (shooting began in 2012), some reshoots and a long post-production process have further delayed its release. But now Max is finally back, and goddamn was it bloody worth the wait. Mad Max: Fury Road has more of a premise than a cohesive narrative, and what’s there is mainly to set up a series of action sequences. On first examination, this seems like a really bad idea but, much like the ragged machines the people of the wasteland drive, it works beyond all reasonable expectations. Once the wheels literally get rolling and things start going boom, everything clicks into place and the patchwork nature of the story becomes incredibly cohesive and durable. The pacing is expertly handled, weaving from set piece to set piece with just enough breathing space in-between the carnage. Though dialogue is sparse, Fury Road’s flawless handling of visual storytelling gets across everything you need with just raw emotions and reactions; you don’t need to be told what’s happening is crazy, it’s plainly obvious. The film hits every note possible, creating a film that is thrilling, funny, thought provoking, and even heart wrenching. No joke, I was close to tears near the end of this film, and any film that manages that is clearly doing its job at maximum efficiency.

Though Gibson’s portrayal of Max will probably still be the de facto face of the character for generations to come, Tom Hardy’s interpretation certainly lives up to the legend. Much like his predecessor, Hardy’s Max is a man of few words and defines himself instead with his tough but fair attitude. His tragic back-story is only hinted at, the only real point where knowledge of the previous films may be helpful, but that only adds to the mystique of the character. But in many ways, the film doesn’t actually belong to Max himself. That honour falls to Charlize Theron’s Imperator Furiosa, and she knocks it out of the park. Furiosa’s past is equally vague and her dialogue clipped, but again we get more than enough just from Theron’s pitch-perfect performance. She commands the screen with nothing more than a determined glare and a badass prosthetic arm, and for stretches of the film you’ll forget that Max is even there…and that’s not a bad thing. Furiosa’s posse of runaway breeders (yes, that’s what they’re called in the movie) are just defined enough by distinct looks, personality and crazy names (one of them is called The Splendid Angharad. ‘Nuff said.), and the gang of gun-toting grannies they meet up with later are equally fun characters. In the midst of all the explosions and testosterone, Fury Road has a surprisingly strong feminist message. At its core, it’s a story about a group of women who are tired of being treated as objects and decide to fight back against their oppressors, and Max just happens to be along for the ride. Nicholas Hoult’s Nux adds a surprising amount of heart to the film, mainly because he goes through the biggest arc over the course of the story. Starting out as a devout worshipper of antagonist Immortan Joe (Keays-Bryne), his development from there is surprisingly touching and you’ll be rooting for the skull-faced nutter by the end. Immortan Joe himself is as ridiculous a villain as you’d expect from a Mad Max film; though not quite as memorable as the likes of Lord Humungous or Master Blaster, he is a vile and threatening foe with a cool look and an awesome voice, and that’s all you really need.

As mentioned before, most of the attention has been paid on the spectacle of the film and it’s a risk that pays off with interest. There is not a single frame in Fury Road that is dull, no matter the situation. When cars aren’t flipping and guns aren’t firing, there’s always something to look at: the beautifully pristine desert landscape, the intricacies of the production and costume design, the gorgeous use of colour, or even just an interesting camera move or angle. DOP John Seale’s work here is just phenomenal, a true gem in his already long and stellar career, and it certainly puts the camerawork on almost all blockbusters to shame. Along with the cinematography, the editing is excellently attuned, cutting to increase impact but also allowing shots to hold when needed, as well as great use of both slow motion and sped-up footage. The score by Junkie XL is a monster befitting of this movie, combining metal, rock, electronic and orchestral music to craft a soundscape that accentuates the action unfolding onscreen, rounding out this impeccably crafted piece of movie magic.

Mad Max: Fury Road is an adrenaline shot of filmmaking from start to finish. Its unorthodox approach to storytelling eschews traditional structure and pacing to craft a tale in a new and exciting way, relying on pure imagery to convey its bombastic narrative. The characters are drawn with broad but striking strokes, and you’ll be strongly connected to them despite most of them barely uttering a word. The action sequences are some of the best in recent cinema history, avoiding all the clichés and failures of the genre to create a rollercoaster experience both in terms of thrills and emotion. It’s like an insane 80’s B-movie, but one made with thought, effort, and enough of a budget to match its deranged aspirations. After it was all over, all I wanted to do was turn back around and experience it again. I cannot recommend this movie enough, so get out to your local cinema and support this movie with your hard-earned cash. It doesn’t just deserve your time. It demands it.

FINAL VERDICT: 10/10!