Month: September 2015

Starring: Matt Damon (The Bourne Ultimatum), Jessica Chastain (Interstellar), Jeff Daniels (Looper), Chiwetel Eijiofor (12 Years a Slave), Kristen Wiig (Bridesmaids), Sean Bean (Game of Thrones), Kate Mara (House of Cards), Michael Pena (Ant-Man), Sebastian Stan (Captain America: The Winter Soldier), Askel Hennie (Headhunters), Donald Glover (Community), Benedict Wong (Prometheus), Mackenzie Davis (Halt and Catch Fire)

Director: Ridley Scott (Blade Runner)

Writer: Drew Goddard (The Cabin in the Woods)

Runtime: 2 hours 21 minutes

Release Date: 30 September (UK), 2 October (US)

At some point in all our childhoods, we wanted to be an astronaut. I think there’s just something about it that attracts our young minds’ thirst for adventure and discovery. But quite quickly, most of us realise how difficult and potentially dangerous the job is and we move on to more achievable goals. The Martian is a film about an astronaut put in the most difficult of situations and powers on against all probability, and it serves as a powerful message about perseverance and fortitude in the face of depressing odds. It also proves that maths can solve anything and that listening to nothing but ABBA for four years has its toll on your soul.

The Martian wastes no time on set-up and throws the audience straight into the meat of the story. It’s a slightly jarring experience at first, but the film does a great job of getting you up to speed on the fly and it saves on a lot of potentially pointless exposition. What then follows is one of the most brisk and deliberately paced films with a two-hour plus runtime I’ve ever seen. It achieves that perfect balance of filling the movie with a lot of fun details and humorous asides, but not a single piece of the film feels pointless. It’s the very definition of efficient storytelling, and Drew Goddard’s screenplay does a wonderful job of making all the science jargon light and digestible. The film also balances its various tones excellently, taking the situation seriously when required but always making sure to constantly inject fun and wit. This playful attitude is ultimately what makes the story far more relatable and touching than films like, say, 2001 or Interstellar. Instead of trying to show off how smart it is and confuse you, it presents itself as approachable and welcomes you to its concepts, creating for one of the most human hard sci-fi films since Moon. It’s also a welcome departure from the norm for Ridley Scott, who’s dour over-seriousness has made his last few pictures a bore; I had practically given up on the man after travesties like The Counsellor and Exodus: Gods and Kings, but this proves he may still have some creativity left in him.

Matt Damon is shouldered with holding most of the movie on his own, and he does a superb job of it. His performance as Mark Watney is savvy and clever, but he also hits all of the emotional beats with just the right amount of solemnity and delivers a truly moving performance; it certainly ranks amongst his best work. One of Ridley Scott’s other problems with his recent films is that he hires loads of great acting talent and then wastes them in barren roles. Whilst The Martian certainly remains Damon’s movie, the supporting cast is uniformly great and, whilst we don’t get to know most of them in detail, everyone is given just enough room to breath. Just to name a few, Jeff Daniels is one of the major standouts as a character that would usually be the de facto villain in a lesser movie, but by playing it as a reluctant realist rather than a pessimistic cad we remain sympathetic to his point-of-view. Sean Bean is excellent in his first meaty role in a long time where he feels important and doesn’t die, and it’s also great to see Kristen Wiig make a transition into more serious fare (though I couldn’t help but feel she was basically playing a more grounded version of her character from Knocked Up). Special mention must also go to Donald Glover for his small but pivotal and hilarious role; for Community fans like myself, it’s basically like watching Troy pretend to be Abed.

Even though Scott’s recent films have been lacklustre he’s never lost his knack for technical excellence, and with The Martian as evidence he clearly still has it. The film is gloriously shot by Darius Wolski with grand landscape shots of Mars, and the fusion between practical and CG effects is on par with Gravity in terms of photorealism. The production design balances that fine line between realistic and cool, whilst the music features both a haunting but triumphant score from Harry Gregson-Williams and a strong selection of disco classics to get on Damon’s nerves. My only real problem with the film is how it uses on-screen cards to introduce most of its characters; not only is this a big pet peeve of mine, here it feels wholly unnecessary as the script and direction make it very clear who everyone is and what their role is without the need for cards.

The Martian is a pleasant and heartwarming surprise as both a science-fiction film and a Ridley Scott film; it’s easily his best work in at least a decade. It’s rare to see a film of this ilk that has such an affinity for both realism and fun, proving that making a human story lies on filling it with all emotions rather treating everything with a removed sense of seriousness. It’s this emotional core that makes it a film that will work for all audiences, even if you have little interest in sci-fi, and I highly recommend you do venture out an experience it for yourself.

FINAL VERDICT: 9.5/10

 

FINAL VERDICT: 9.5/10

Starring: Emily Blunt (Edge of Tomorrow), Benicio Del Toro (Guardians of the Galaxy), Josh Brolin (No Country for Old Men), Victor Garber (Titanic), Daniel Kaluuya (Kick-Ass 2), Jon Bernthal (Fury)

Director: Denis Villeneuve (Prisoners)

Writer: Taylor Sheridan

Runtime: 2 hours 1 minute

Release Date: 18 September (US), 8 October (UK)

I’m not usually into films on the dark side, but Denis Villeneuve knows how to hit that spot just right for me. His films, such as Prisoners and Enemy, delve into some pretty nasty subjects and have very pessimistic views of the world, but they never go far enough to become depressing or uncomfortable. Sicario follows this trend and, whilst not Villeneuve’s best work, it’s still a fantastic piece of cinema that you should definitely check out.

Sicario doesn’t spoon feed you its plot, leaving a lot of scenes out of context and generally keeping the audience in the same state-of-mind as protagonist Kate Macer (Blunt). It does have the side effect of making the story a little hard to follow in the first two acts, but as revelations are made the various bits and pieces fit together to create a strong whole in retrospect. But plot isn’t Sicario’s main focus anyway; it’s all about character and environment. The film’s pacing and suspense is excellently tuned, slowly ramping up tension and anxiety before exploding into brief bursts of violent action. A lot of this is thanks to the sparse dialogue, letting the visuals and sound effects carry the suspense, but when the talking does start the writing is surprisingly witty and biting; there are plenty of laughs to be had, but most of them will be nervous ones. Sicario has a very bleak outlook on justice, essentially being a story about warring corruption on both sides of the law, but it thankfully never beats you over the head with it. It’s a very morally grey film with no real winners or losers, but despite this it remains a satisfying and deeply rewarding watch. Just don’t go in expecting to have a lot of fun.

Villeneuve really knows how to get the best out of his actors, and here he’s assembled a quality cast to work with, especially the three leads. Emily Blunt further demonstrates her incredible range as the by-the-book agent Kate, remaining a tough and capable character but not one who’s averse to looking scared or intimidated. Blunt gets across a lot with very little dialogue, letting her expressive face do most of the work, and it’s a performance that ranks among with her best. Josh Brolin’s Matt is certainly a welcome presence, mixing laid-back jokiness and stern brutality to create a character that can shift from friendly to threatening without so much as blinking; he’s almost like “what if The Dude was a government dick?” But it’s Benicio Del Toro’s Alejandro who’s the really eye-catching character. Essentially taking over the movie for a good chunk of the third act, Del Toro’s raspy voice and cold demeanour help create a character who is threatening in mere presence without being cartoonish; you know he’s up to something, you just don’t quite know what. His relationship with Blunt is interesting and layered, with neither ever fully trusting the other, and their final scene together is so simple but done to perfection.

Sicario is one of the most gorgeously grimy films I’ve ever seen, and that’s mainly thanks to the cinematography of the great Roger Deakins. The film’s settings of US border states and Mexico are dirty and barren, but Deakins shoots the film in such a way to somehow make it look appealing. The aerial photography is especially good, with impressive shots of landscapes made to seem haunting, and the film also manages to accomplish the task of shooting an action sequence mostly in night vision and not make it look incomprehensible. Johan Johanssen’s chilling score is also thoroughly excellent, further adding to the film’s palpable tension, as well as some effectively brutal sound design.

Like Villeneuve’s other works, Sicario is not a fun time at the movies but it is an engaging one. It’s a thoroughly rough experience, but never so much that it becomes melancholic, and its brutal impact and style makes the anxiety-ridden ride more than worth it. It’s a must watch for Blunt and Del Toro’s performances alone, but Villeneuve’s sure-handed direction ultimately makes him the real star of the show and I can’t wait to see what he can do with a property like Blade Runner as his project after next.

FINAL VERDICT: 9/10

 

FINAL VERDICT: 9/10

Starring: Jason Clarke (Zero Dark Thirty), Josh Brolin (No Country for Old Men), John Hawkes (The Sessions), Emily Watson (War Horse), Keira Knightley (The Imitation Game), Michael Kelly (Chronicle), Elizabeth Debicki (The Man from U.N.C.L.E.), Robin Wright (House of Cards), Sam Worthington (Avatar), Jake Gyllenhaal (Nightcrawler)

Director: Baltasar Kormakur (2 Guns)

Writers: William Nicholson (Gladiator) and Simon Beaufoy (Slumdog Millionaire)

Runtime: 2 hours 1 minute

Release Date: 18 September (US, UK)

For all the disaster movies that Hollywood churns out, rarely do we get one based on a real event; for every The Impossible, there’s about a dozen of 2012 or San Andreas. Everest is that rare exception, depicting the events of the 1996 Mount Everest disaster that claimed the lives of 12 people; the highest death record in an Everest climbing season until very recently. On paper it sounds like a story worthy of cinematic depiction, and whilst Everest is certainly a visual treat worth seeing on the big screen, it’s not going to be remembered as a classic of the genre.

The highlight of any disaster film is the event itself, but the build-up is just as if not more important. However, Everest perhaps takes too much time getting to the point, as the film is already halfway done before sh*t starts to hit the fan. The first half is mainly spent on character, but there’s so many of them that only a few get defined personalities, and even then their traits and goals are quite simple. As a result, a good chunk of the film is just spent watching these people climb up a mountain and just waiting for things to go wrong; there are a few difficulties on the way up, but nothing truly jeopardising. Luckily, things pick up considerably once the storm hits and then the film’s tension couldn’t be any tighter. This portion of the film is especially well directed, as it never feels the need to oversell the drama and lets the action convey the tragedy. It’s some intense nail-biting stuff, and the emotion of the situation thankfully makes up for the previous lack of character investment. But then just as the film hits peak magnitude, it then decides to call it quits. It’s not a sudden or unsatisfying ending, but pacing-wise it felt like it missed a beat. Everest overall feels uneven, and perhaps tightening up the ascent and focusing more on the actual tragedy would have made the narrative flow better.

Everest is jam-packed with stars and, though they fight for space a lot, everyone puts their all into it. Jason Clarke is a strong actor who’s gotten very few chances to lead, and here in the role of Rob Hall he proves he is more than capable of doing so. Though Hall is mainly motivated purely by enthusiasm, that passion makes him a likable figure and when things go awry Clarke really sells the pain and desperation of the situation. John Brolin is also excellent in his role as the absent-minded but stubborn Beck, and the ever-underappreciated John Hawkes delivers another stellar performance as the recklessly determined Doug. Keira Knightley sits out the action as Hall’s wife Jan but she still manages to hold a lot of the event’s drama single-handedly over the phone; her conversations with Clarke are a big emotional bright spot. Everyone else does fine jobs, but there are just too many characters and not enough time. With respect to the real people, it definitely couldn’t have hurt to mash a few characters together to alleviate the numbers; for example, Emily Watson and Elizabeh Debicki are both great in their parts, but there’s no real reason they need to be two separate people. Jake Gyllenhaal is great as always, but his rivalry with Clarke feels undercooked and he ultimately doesn’t play too much into the main drama, whilst Sam Worthington spends half his time in what might as well be a completely different movie before finally showing up to help and then not doing anything particularly noteworthy.

If nothing else, Everest is a beautiful film to look at. Salvatore Totino’s cinematography captures beautiful landscapes of Himalayas but also uses the camerawork to heighten the tension; any shot that shows off scale or a steep drop really makes the danger clear, especially in IMAX. The effort gone into practically shooting this as much as possible is extremely admirable and adds to the authenticity, but occasionally it’s noticeable when they’re on a soundstage rather than the side of a mountain. Dario Marianelli’s score is suitably epic, reminiscent of the scores of the late James Horner, but the real auditory joy is the film’s sound design. The noises of wind, crumbling snow and avalanches is just as engrossing as the visuals, and the film knows when to cut the music and let that atmosphere carry the drama.

Everest is an engrossing cinema experience when it focuses on the intensity and drama of this real-life disaster, but its ultimate downfall is its unmanageable scope. The story spends too much time on getting up the mountain that it cuts into the better part of the film before politely but abruptly ending; it’s like a friend who’s taken way too long telling the unnecessary details of a story, and then wraps it up once he’s realised he’s out of time. If you want to see it, definitely see it whilst it’s still in theatres; similar to Gravity, it probably just won’t play as well at home.

FINAL VERDICT: 7/10

Starring: Dylan O’Brien (The Internship), Kaya Scodelario (Moon), Thomas Brodie-Sangster (About a Boy), Aidan Gillen (Game of Thrones), Giancarlo Esposito (Breaking Bad), Ki Hong Lee (Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt), Rosa Salazar (Insurgent), Patricia Clarkson (Easy A)

Director: Wes Ball (The Maze Runner)

Writer: T.S. Nowlin (The Maze Runner)

Runtime: 2 hours 11 minutes

Release Date: 10 September (UK), 18 September (US)

Of all the YA novel adaptations, The Maze Runner was far from the worst but it wasn’t any good either. It had an intriguing premise, but its approach to storytelling was so preposterous and full of teasing that it made Damon Lindelof’s writing seem straightforward. It was a film that basically felt like just a set-up for a sequel, and now we have one in the form of The Scorch Trials. Whilst it’s a marked improvement over its predecessor, it’s only better in that it has gone from stupid to generic.

Picking up right where the first film left off, The Scorch Trials answers some of the questions raised in the original but leaves other to continue alluding. Thankfully it doesn’t dwell on its mystery as much this time, instead becoming more focused on a simple action-adventure “go from A to B to C” plot. Whilst this does make the story less aggravating to pick apart, it now leaves even less impact. For the most part, The Scorch Trials is an incredibly predictable movie because it relies too much on tropes and borrows too many ideas from other films. The first act set in a military base/research facility is near identical to the first half of Michael Bay’s The Island, and then the film introduces zombies but has absolutely no new ideas about what to do with them. The story is basically just a flimsy thread linking together a series of action sequences, and what isn’t action is just characters explaining the plot to each other; the bland and predictable dialogue doesn’t help much either. However, the film’s third act is surprisingly strong thanks to a decent character twist and a considerable raising of the stakes. Sure, it does end up raising even more questions, but at least the film gives a stronger idea of what the next film is going to be.

Another big flaw with the first Maze Runner were the incredibly bland characters, and that’s still a major downfall of The Scorch Trials. Dylan O’Brien’s Thomas is still an incredibly bland Mary Sue figure; we’re constantly told how important and special he is, yet he has no discernable characteristics other than being the hero. Kaya Scodelario is again given nothing to do as token girl Teresa but provide vague hints to Thomas about their past, but the indication that she’ll become more important next time is at least alleviating. Thomas’ other friends feel even drier than they did the first time around, essentially being relegated to his cheering squad, so much so that I forgot why some of them were even there; they dedicate this huge scene to one side character’s death, and he was so generic and unimportant that it wasn’t until checking IMDb that I realised he’d been in the first movie the whole time. In terms of new blood, there are some bright spots. Giancarlo Esposito and Rosa Salazar are welcome additions with a lot of potential, but the film doesn’t give Esposito much to other than again further advance the plot. There are even more recognisable faces here this time around like Barry Pepper, Lilli Taylor, Nathalie Emmanuel and Alan Tudyk, but a lot of them feel like either throwaways or people they hired now just because they’ll become important later. Unfortunately, the main sour spot is Aidan Gillen as the film’s new antagonist Janson. Gillen gives a fine enough performance, but the character is such an obvious Evil McVillainbad from the start and yet they keep trying to hide it during the first act. Casting directors, please remember The Ben Kingsley Principle in future: if you want to keep the identity of the villain a secret, don’t hire an actor well known for playing a villain!

The Scorch Trials is a visually well-crafted film but, like elements of the plot, that’s mainly because they’ve borrowed ideas from other works, especially video games. The film’s production design and creature effects feel directly ripped from The Last of Us, whilst the visual of cities drenched in sand kept bringing to mind Spec Ops: The Line. There’s a lot of action in this instalment and, whilst most of it is well shot and choreographed, the lack of character investment takes away a lot of the tension. The CGI work is decent throughout, but it does feel overused; there’s a bit where they render a rat digitally to do something they probably just could have trained a real rat to do.

Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials isn’t the frustrating experience that its predecessor was, but it doesn’t do much to elevate the franchise. Instead of trying to fix its problems, it merely ignores them and focuses instead on non-stop action scenes. Like the first film, it too often feels like they’re making up the story as they go, but instead of constantly throwing illogical twists at the audience they just give us yet another chase sequence. It’s overall a more tolerable experience than The Maze Runner, but I don’t think anyone unconvinced by the first film will suddenly become invested after watching the follow-up. The third film, The Death Cure, is already confirmed, so now all we can do is hope they don’t make the stupid decision to split it into two films.

FINAL VERDICT: 5/10

Starring: Tom Hardy (Inception), Emily Browning (Sucker Punch), David Thewlis (Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban), Christopher Eccleston (Thor: The dark World), Taron Egerton (Kingsman: The Secret Service), Chazz Palminteri (The Usual Suspects), Paul Bettany (Avengers: Age of Ultron)

Writer/Director: Brian Helgeland (Payback)

Runtime: 2 hours 11 minutes

Release Date: 9 September (UK), 2 October (US)

The Kray Twins’ story may have already been adapted to film in 1990’s The Krays starring Gary and Martin Kemp as the gangster brothers, but theirs is a story worthy of a modern telling. If nothing else, it’s a chance for Tom Hardy to take on another challenge all great actors crave for: to play two characters simultaneously. And whilst Legend is certainly a great addition to the showreel for Hardy, as a film it’s a little uneven.

Focused on the Krays’ lives during Reginald Kray’s (Hardy) relationship with Frances Shea (Browning, who also acts as narrator), the film covers the essentials of their rise and fall as well as their troubled relationship. When focused on this key bond, Legend shines as an engaging character piece about brotherhood and unconditional love. This is helped greatly by the biting dialogue and strong tension, allowing for scenes that can quickly go from funny to violent and back again without at all feeling jarring. There are plenty of scenes on their own that are really strong pieces of work, especially any scene that resorts to the brutal, but unfortunately as a whole the film doesn’t quite add up. It feels structurally imbalanced, with a first half that feels too fast and brushes over plot developments through narration and a second half that drags to an anti-climactic finish. For a film that crosses the two-hour mark, the film is just too dense and could have used a little reorganisation of priorities and maybe a trim as well.

Tom Hardy is one of the best actors working today not to have an Oscar nomination, and his performances in Legend are certainly at least worth considering for the honour. Hardy does a great job of making both Ronald and Reginald distinctive characters with different speech patterns and facial expressions, making them easy to tell apart even without Ronald’s glasses. He plays off himself so well that it’s easy to forget it’s all an illusion, especially when the twins engage in fisticuffs with each other. A cast of strong supporting players surrounds Hardy and Hardy, though it’s a shame so many of them are underutilised. Christopher Eccleston’s Scotland Yard investigator feels like an important character who keeps being treated like a side note, whilst Chazz Palminteri and Paul Bettany are great in their roles but only get two or three short scenes each. Taron Egerton is also great as one of Ronald’s boy toys, but he’s mostly relegated to comic relief asides. However the real down note is Frances as played by Emily Browning, an actress I have never particularly rated. Her character is already too much of a cipher on paper until the third act, but Browning’s monotone voice and inanimate doll-eyed face don’t help matters at all; the fact she’s also narrating the entire story in that same monotone voice isn’t a plus either.

For all its problems, you cannot fault Legend’s technical package. The film looks authentically 60s British thanks to strong production design and costumes. Dick Pope’s cinematography is excellent, making especially good use of long takes in a manner similar to Goodfellas. Carter Burwell’s score is period perfect, playing like a mix of classic gangster and James Bond, and the soundtrack choices are also well selected.

Legend reminded me a lot of American Hustle: lots of strong elements together in one movie, but it never all quite sticks together. It’s certainly worth a watch of Hardy’s performances alone, but those expecting something on par with the gangster films of Martin Scorsese or Guy Ritchie will probably be disappointed.

FINAL VERDICT: 7/10

Starring: Olivia DeJonge (The Sisterhood of Night), Ed Oxenbould (Alexander and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Day), Deanna Dunagan (Running Scared), Peter McRobbie (Lincoln), Kathryn Hahn (Tomorrowland)

Writer/Director: M. Night Shyamalan (The Sixth Sense)

Runtime: 1 hour 34 minutes

Release Date: 9 September (UK), 11 September (US)

It seems like the world has given up on M. Night Shyamalan. After showing so much promise with his early work like The Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, his career has just been on a gradual downward slope since then (OK, to be fair, After Earth was better than The Last Airbender, but after that there is no way but up). But in a thankfully surprising turn, Shyamalan has taken a moment to reflect and done something he should have done a long time ago: go back to basics. Rather than attempt another big budget disaster, he has instead teamed up with Blumhouse to create The Visit, a found footage horror/thriller. Not exactly a revolutionary idea, but it’s exactly the kind of simple project that Shyamalan needs to rehabilitate himself and, in a twist worthy of the man himself, The Visit turns out to actually be a pretty decent movie.

The Visit is fairly light on story, mainly being a set-up for a series of escalating creepy scenes, but there’s just enough plot to remain engaging and the more relaxed structure fits the documentary-style approach. Apart from the occasional false scare the movie doesn’t waste time, and is very snappily paced with just the right amount of slower moments to build suspense and character. But what’s most surprising about The Visit is its self-aware tone; unlike The Happening, Shyamalan’s actually trying to be funny on purpose this time. There is a surprising amount of humour in the film and, whilst some of it comes off as a bit forced and awkward, it’s refreshing to see a horror movie with some lighter elements. The part of this that works best is how Becca (DeJonge) draws attention to the filmmaking techniques she’s utilising; the film even includes some intentional mistakes like Becca having to remind her brother (Oxenbould) not to look into the camera or restarting an interview question. It adds some authenticity to the film as a mockumentary, and at times it almost feels like Shyamalan is making fun of himself. Like a lot of Shyamalan films, there is a twist in the third act and, though not completely original and conceivably predictable, it does at least make sense and add up with the rest of the movie.

Actors often struggle in Shyamalan films due to his occasionally stilted dialogue and odd directional choices, but thankfully all off-kilter performances here are intentional. Olivia DeJonge and Ed Oxenbould make a believable brother-sister team and their clashing personalities provide some relief from the more eerie moments. They even get their own mini-arcs in the story, though they do feel a little underdeveloped; Oxenbould’s germophobia is only brought up twice before he has to confront it, and him getting over it happens off screen. Deanna Dunagan and Peter McRobbie aren’t exactly subtle in their creepiness, but they’re just normal enough at points to make you wonder exactly what is wrong with then and they both get their more emotional moments; the scenes where DeJonge interviews Dunagan are especially well executed. Kathryn Hahn’s role is small but integral, using her comedic chops to add further levity to her scenes, but also providing strong dramatic work especially in her bookending scenes with DeJonge.

Found footage is a worn-out and thankfully dying gimmick at this point (even Paranormal Activity is finally calling it quits next month), and that’s mainly because most films that use it are doing it not for creative reasons but simply to save costs and cover up incompetence. Whilst I’m sure budget reasons were part of it, The Visit’s approach to the method not only makes sense within the story but is also executed with effort. By writing Becca as an aspiring filmmaker, the cinematography’s cinematic framing gives it a more polished feel without losing authenticity, balancing that fine line between looking too professional and too lazy. Other than the opening and closing credits, it’s a movie that believably could have been made by this teenage girl (in a good way), resulting in some of the best use of found footage since Chronicle.

The Visit isn’t on par with Shyamalan’s early work nor does it excuse his recent atrocities, but going from dreadful to pretty good is still an enormous leap to accomplish. It’s a surprising film on many other levels, from its tongue-in-cheek tone to its effective use of the found footage format, and proves that a filmmaker whose fallen from grace as much as Shyamalan can bounce back if given the chance. I wouldn’t say the man is back, but he’s certainly on his way there.

FINAL VERDICT: 7.5/10

 

FINAL VERDICT: 7.5/10

Starring: Thomas Mann (Project X), RJ Cyler, Olivia Cooke (Ouija), Nick Offerman (Parks and Recreation), Connie Britton (American Ultra), Molly Shannon (Analyse This), Katherine C. Hughes (Men, Women & Children), Jon Bernthal (The Wolf of Wall Street)

Director: Alfonso Gomez-Rejon (The Town That Dreaded Sundown)

Writer: Jesse Andrews

Runtime: 1 hour 45 minutes

Release Date: 12 June (US), 4 September (UK)

Me and Earl and the Dying Girl is so simple that it’s actually hard to describe without sounding like I’m struggling for words (because I kind of am). That has nothing to do with the quality of the film which, to quickly get it out of the way, is absolutely wonderful. What I mean is that it’s hard to explain how such an unassuming little indie flick can actually seem much more than that when everything I come up with to explain why it’s so good in this opening statement just makes it seem like an unassuming little indie flick. I feel like I should just stop there and tell you to go watch it, but I’ve already started writing so I might as well at least try.

If I wanted to unimaginatively narrow in explaining what Me and Earl and the Dying Girl is, I’d say it’s The Fault in Our Stars mixed with Be Kind Rewind. It’s an inadequate description that makes it seem unoriginal, but the main point being that it’s like those movies but better than both of them combined. I like The Fault in Our Stars, but as much as the movie wants to convince you it’s totally sincere there are parts that come off as totally saccharine (I’m looking at you, Augustus “Quirky Cute Mr. Perfect” Waters). Here, there isn’t a speck of sappiness or fantasy. It’s harsh reality, but not one without joy and hope. There’s an air of typical indie movie quirk to the whole thing, but none of it ever feels like an affectation to make the movie look more hip. It’s a movie about making movies that constantly references classic movies, but it never feels the need to be too clever or pretentious about it (maybe because the characters themselves know that their movies suck). It’s not really just a film about friendship or death, but a perfect summation of the mentality of a high schooler, flaws and all. In that regard, it reminded me of a lot of John Hughes’ work (especially The Breakfast Club), but it never ever feels like a pale imitation of his formula like so many other teen movies are.

What really sells Me and Earl and the Dying Girl are the fantastic performances from the entire cast, especially the three main leads. Like the story, these characters are seemingly average on the surface but reveal far deeper layers underneath; they’re stock movie characters, yes, but ones that feel like they could exist in our world. Thomas Mann has been around for a while but he’s never gotten a chance to dig his teeth into a role until now. His role as Greg seems like the typical high school outcast on the surface, but ultimately he’s a far more complex individual than that; he can be weird, even outright despicable from a certain point of view, but it never fails to keep him sympathetic. RJ Cyler’s Earl at first looks like he’s just going to be the funny sidekick, but his friendship with Greg is a fascinating subject that even they don’t fully comprehend and the way the film explores what friendship truly is is where the real heart of story comes from. Olivia Cooke is a stunning revelation as Rachel, the eponymous dying girl herself. She’s melancholy and bitter, but never in a way that feels spiteful; she’s just a girl going through an understandably traumatic experience that no one else she knows truly understands. Her and Mann’s chemistry is simply captivating in its sincere awkwardness, and the fact they never go down the romantic route (which the film constantly reminds us it will not do) is nonetheless refreshing. Nick Offerman is still the monotone ball of humour that he usually is and his role as Mann’s bizarre stay-at-home dad fits nicely in with his filmography, and Connie Britton as his mother is nagging and overly concerned in all the right ways. Molly Shannon’s performance as Cooke’s wino mother feels a little obvious a characterisation, but again they never go too far with it; a scene where Mann interviews her for a movie he’s making is really quite touching. Jon Bernthal’s small role as a high school history teacher is a surprisingly good change of pace from his usual persona, and holy sh*t when did Bobb’e J. Thompson suddenly get so big?

If that fact that this movie is so good that I can barely comprehend why I loved it so much doesn’t give you any indication of my opinion, then clearly either this review is far more rambling, incoherent and repetitive than I thought or you didn’t even bother to read it. Despite being cobbled together from so many familiar pieces, Me and Earl and the Dying Girl feels wholly unique and is one of the best movies of the year. It’s deceptively simple, and that’s maybe why I’m having such a hard time telling you why it’s so amazing. Maybe I’m just so attached to it because I see so much of myself in it, but I believe lots and lots of people are going to find something they can relate to here. This is probably a weird description, but the best way I can sum it up is that it’s a movie that feels real whilst never forgetting that it’s a movie. Does that make sense to anyone other than me? Ah f*ck it, just go watch the movie yourself and hopefully you’ll get what I’m talking about.

FINAL VERDICT: 10/10!

Starring: Jesse Eisenberg (The Social Network), Kristen Stewart (Snow White & The Huntsman), Topher Grace (Spider-Man 3), Connie Britton (Nashville), Walton Goggins (Predators), John Leguizamo (Romeo + Juliet), Tony Hale (Arrested Development)

Director: Nima Nourizadeh (Project X)

Writer: Max Landis (Chronicle)

Runtime: 1 hour 35 minutes

Release Date: 21 August (US), 4 September (UK)

American Ultra itself isn’t too dissimilar to its protagonist: it has the ability to do some incredible things, but it’s hampered by how incoherent it is. It’s a film that’s trying to straddle multiple lines at once and fails to balance on any of them, resulting a film that could have been great if it just went that extra mile and dared to be different.

The “sleeper agent” story is well-trodden ground with great examples like The Bourne Identity and The Long Kiss Goodnight, so American Ultra already has a lot going against it from the start. Though the approach of telling the story with a confused stoner as the badass killer is novel, the film doesn’t take much advantage of this new angle other than having Jesse Eisenberg being bemused by his actions and spouting a typically awkward quip after each kill. The story plays out as you’d expect with no real surprises (even the moments that are supposed to be surprises), leading to a sequel hook for a movie that sounds far better than the one we actually got. The film is efficiently short but still drags in the first half, the action scenes are far too brief and don’t go anywhere near as wacky as they could, and other than the occasional funny line most of the humour falls flat. However, the main problem American Ultra has is that it just can’t decide on a tone. The film flits from goofy stoner comedy to tense thriller to wacky shoot ‘em up from scene to scene, and none of these different facets are strong enough on their own to be entertaining. If the film had just been straight-up ridiculous entertainment from beginning to end, I would be far more forgiving of the film’s more generic aspects, but American Ultra just doesn’t have the guts to go full bananas.

Jesse Eisenberg and Kristen Stewart played off each other very well in the underrated Adventureland, and that chemistry still works here for the most part, but the material just isn’t as strong. Their early scenes as a bizarre but cute couple feel genuine and sweet, Stewart especially shining with her usual brand of awkward but somehow absorbing charm, but when the plot actually kicks in their relationship becomes less and less compelling. This especially becomes clear during a mid-plot reveal that splits them apart, and it comes off just as contrived and annoying as when they pull this trick in every bad romantic comedy ever; if they just calmed down and talked like sensible people, then there wouldn’t be a problem (then again, they’re not exactly normal people). Topher Grace comes off as far too goofy and inept to be a credible villain, Connie Britton’s character kind of becomes superfluous after kickstarting the plot, and the film just doesn’t have much to do for the rest of its decent supporting cast; why even hire Tony Hale if he’s not going to do anything funny?

Despite being sold as such, American Ultra is surprisingly light on action for an action-comedy and what’s there isn’t that interesting. Though a lot of the methods of killing are done with unconventional things like spoons and frying pans, none of it is done with much flair or excitement. The way the action is shot is also peculiar. Despite most of it being filmed from a good distance and edited smoothly, it’s still shot with a bunch of superfluous shakycam that only distracts from the action; it’s a pointless stylistic choice, especially when it’s clearly not even needed to cover up anything. The whole movie just has a cheap, slapdash look to it; other than a visually unique trip to John Leguizamo’s UV-lit drug den, most scenes take place in barren-looking buildings and streets that could use a few more decorations or an extra or two.

On the outside, American Ultra looks like a wacky mash-up with unique ideas, but underneath it doesn’t actually have anything new to say; it is the cinematic equivalent of a hipster. Though Eisenberg and Stewart’s on-screen dynamic is mostly compelling and it does have flashes of brilliance, the film just plays it far too safe and always takes the easy road instead of embracing the lunacy. In a year where batsh*t insane action films like Mad Max: Fury Road and Kingsman: The Secret Service exist, even taking American Ultra’s more modest ambitions into account it still comes up short.

FINAL VERDICT: 5/10

 

FINAL VERDICT: 5/10