Starring: Ty Burrell (Dawn of the Dead), Max Charles (The Amazing Spider-Man), Ariel Winter (Kiss Kiss Bang Bang), Allison Janney (American Beauty), Stanley Tucci (The Hunger Games)
Director: Rob Minkoff (The Lion King)
Writer: Craig Wright (Lost)
Runtime: 1 hour 32 minutes
Release Date: 7 February (UK), 7 March (US)
I’m not sure how many kids today (or many adults for that matter) remember Mr. Peabody & Sherman, the main characters from Rocky and Bullwinkle segment Peabody’s Improbable History. Except maybe that time they showed up on an episode of The Simpsons (“Quiet, you!”). But Dreamworks SKG have decided to create an animated adventure about the dog and his boy travelling through time for educational purposes, so here we are.
Mr. Peabody & Sherman has a lot of the tropes of your standard kids’ film. It’s got bright colours, fast animation, pop culture references, toilet humour, you know the drill. But luckily, this isn’t one of those films that completely rely on the clichés. There is a decent story here, one that is somewhat hackneyed at points, but it’s got a good heart and does get across a genuine message about parenting. The humour works for the most part as well. It maybe relies on a few too many puns, but even their overuse and lameness is pointed out. But when the jokes hit, they really hit. During the entertaining climax where all these historical figures end up in the same place, there are some really funny moments (even though many of them will go over the kids’ heads). The film also doesn’t ignore the original show’s purpose of being educational, providing some basic but fun information about the historical periods they visit without bogging the fun down (on a side note, I find it funny that the depiction of the siege of Troy here is probably more accurate than it was portrayed in the movie Troy). It’s really great when a film doesn’t pander to kids and actually teaches them something, and Mr. Peabody & Sherman does it better than most. My main problem with the film is the villain. I hate it when villains are just mean for no real reason other than the plot says so and have nothing outside of that, and the character of Mrs. Grunion (Allison Janney) is just that. She isn’t even allowed to be funny; I’m okay with a one-note bad guy if they are at least humorous in some way. But nope. She just goes about being evil because we need some kind of threat to Peabody and Sherman’s relationship because the plot says so. It didn’t need to be done this way, and every time Grunion showed up I just groaned.
Other than the humour and the history, a big reason the film works is because of the strong voice cast. Ty Burrell does a good job as Mr. Peabody, playing the genius dog that could be best summed up as a combination of Sherlock Holmes and Buckaroo Banzai. Max Charles is endearing and sweet as the somewhat dopey Sherman; it’s rare that a child actor gets to be in an animated movie when they could easily hire an adult, but Charles sounds professional enough that it seems genuine. The way he and Peabody play off each other works really well, especially considering their voices were probably recorded far apart. Ariel Winter’s Penny could have easily been a clichéd know-it-all bully, but the film is luckily smarter than that. The burgeoning relationship between her and Sherman works and luckily they don’t go too far with it. The rest of the voice cast is fun as well. Stephen Colbert and Leslie Mann are entertaining as Penny’s parents, Stanley Tucci is having fun as usual playing Leonardo Da Vinci, and then there’s the old reliable Patrick Warburton as Agamemnon. Come on, when is Warburton not worth a laugh? Even Allison Janney looks like she’s trying, but ultimately it’s the script that fails her.
Dreamworks SKG’s animation has always had a much more cartoony feel to it that its contemporaries, but for this type of film it works. It’s not exactly jaw dropping, but there’s certainly nothing to complain about. The major standouts in the animation are an early escape scene during a visit to the French Revolution, and an action beat during the Troy segment that amusingly riffs on 300. All the characters look well designed and are very expressive, helping the comedy stay amusing. The musical score by Danny Elfman isn’t exactly memorable but it certainly helps keep things flowing.
Mr. Peabody & Sherman is an entertaining animated film that does just what it needs to. It’s got a good heart, a great cast, and throws in some history lessons to sweeten the deal. It’s not a groundbreaking piece of work worthy of high praise but if the kids want to see it, you could do a lot worse than this.
Starring: Oscar Isaac (Drive), Carey Mulligan (The Great Gatsby), John Goodman (Argo), Garrett Hedlund (Tron: Legacy), Justin Timberlake (The Social Network)
Writers/Directors: Joel & Ethan Coen (Fargo)
Runtime: 1 hour 44 minutes
Release Date: 6 December (US), 24 January (UK)
The Coen Brothers are very unique filmmakers. Often imitated but never duplicated, their films stand against the usual conventions of cinema but, through some strange magic, almost always come through looking great. But like many, they aren’t perfect and can fumble the ball. Is Inside Lleywn Davis another one of their classics, or should this be filed with such missteps as the remake of The Ladykillers?
Inside Lleywn Davis, like many Coen Brothers films, isn’t particularly focused on plot. Instead, it is about character, particularly our titular one. The week or so we spend in the life of Lleywn Davis (Isaac) isn’t particularly eventful; you could almost imagine he goes through this same cycle over and over again, and the film somewhat suggests that with the symmetrical structure it has. But again like most Coen Brothers films, the film remains interesting because of all the colourful characters and situations he finds himself in. It is ultimately a film about much life can suck when you try to follow a dream, enough to the point it can make that dream seem undesirable, yet the path remains inescapable. It’s a depressing but humble message; one that shows you the problems of this lifestyle but never outright tells you it isn’t worth it.
Oscar Isaac has been lurking around in supporting roles for several years now, always delivering a great performance even when stuck with sub-par material. Finally given a chance in the spotlight, he doesn’t disappoint. Llewyn Davis isn’t the most likable of characters, often completely unlikable, but Isaac’s performance keeps you on his side. He is a fallible man; one whose poor life isn’t completely his fault but he doesn’t do much to help. He remains sympathetic enough to be interesting, but flawed enough to not be boring. The rest of the cast is sporadic in appearance, even when played by recognisable faces, but all deliver the goods. Carey Mulligan gets to play outside her usual wheelhouse and astounds with a performance full of vitriol and expletives. John Goodman has a small role that is provides some of that trademark Coen humour, and its always nice to see that F. Murray Abraham still exists. Garret Hedlund gets across a lot whilst doing very little; his stoic role as Goodman’s valet is often humorous because of how little he does. Justin Timberlake isn’t in too much of the movie, but when he’s there he does well. I think Timberlake is actually much better when playing a supporting role, and considering how his last few attempts at being a leading man played out, I think he should stick to being a second banana.
Usual Coen Brothers DOP Roger Deakins was too busy filming Skyfall when this film was made, but regardless Inside Llewyn Davis looks beautiful. The way the film captures winter is just astounding; you can feel the cold breezing onto you as you watch. As a film about music, you’d hope that the film delivers some good songs and luckily it does. Isaac does all his own singing here, and he’s adept enough at it that it comes across as believable. The songs themselves are catchy in that country music way, though they do clog together in the mind afterwards. As Davis himself quips: “If it was never new, and it never gets old, then it’s a folk song”.
Inside Lleywn Davis isn’t one of the Coen Brothers best, but it is far from their worst. It features all of their trademarks and remains an interesting ride throughout, though it doesn’t quite rank up there with the classics like The Big Lebowski or O Brother, Where Art Thou?. But considering how large a collection of films they’ve made, it must be getting pretty hard for them to top themselves every time. I hope they keep on filming, for whatever strange method they use to make their films, it works.
Starring: Aaron Eckhart (The Dark Knight), Bill Nighy (About Time), Yvonne Strahovski (Mass Effect 2), Miranda Otto (The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers), Jai Courtney (A Good Day to Die Hard)
Writer/Director: Stuart Beattie (Collateral)
Runtime: 1 hour 33 minutes
Release Date: 24 January (US), 29 January (UK)
With all the repurposing of vampire and werewolf stories in Hollywood, it’s about time that Frankenstein’s Monster got some time to shine. And who more appropriate to bring him back to the forefront than some of the team that brought you the Underworld movies. If it wasn’t already clear to you, I, Frankenstein is not high art. But is this good trash or bad trash?
For a film as ridiculous as this, it’s surprising that it actually is quite reverent to the original Mary Shelley story. But after a brief prologue recapping the classic tale, the film follows the path of outlandishness and never returns. This is by no means is a bad thing; I’m perfectly fine with the idea of putting The Monster (or Adam, as he’s referred to in the picture) in the midst of a sci-fi action film, even one as absurd as this. The problems are much more deeply laden. Firstly, the film’s logic is vague and inconsistent. For example: Adam gets told off by the gargoyles for killing a demon in an alleyway, saying that he’s being reckless and that their struggle should be kept secret. Yet minutes later, the gargoyles and demons engage in a huge battle with hundreds of combatants jumping and flying about in the streets of…whatever city the story takes place in (I guess somewhere in Europe, but they never really establish it and no one speaks with a European accent). Yeah, I’d hardly call their methods discrete. The film pulls stuff like this constantly and it’s hard to believe in what’s going on if the logic of the story doesn’t make sense. Which leads into the film’s main problem: it takes itself way too seriously. I don’t expect it to be taken as a farce, as many of these types of films (such as Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter) are amusing because they take themselves seriously. But there’s treating a ridiculous story seriously, and then there’s believing that a ridiculous story is serious, and I, Frankenstein falls into the latter category. Even the smallest amount of acknowledgement into how stupid this is isn’t made, even when there were plenty of opportunities to do so. Take the character of Dr. Wade (Strahovski): when Adam reveals himself to her or tells her of this secret war between gargoyles and demons, there are ample windows where they could have thrown in some self-deprecating acknowledgement of how crazy it all sounds. But nope, everything is taken with a stone face. This seriousness has the effect of making the film dull and causes the pacing to drag. If no one in the film is having fun, why should we?
Aaron Eckhart is a fine actor, and why on earth he chose this picture is a puzzle I can’t solve. But to his credit, he’s trying. He takes this preposterous script and he sells you on it. He’s hardly a charming protagonist, but where the script fails Eckhart manages to hold it up. But I swear, Adam jumps through so much glass in this movie that he often more resembles the Kool-Aid Man than Frankenstein’s Monster. Everyone else though just looks lost. Mirando Otto and Jai Courtney are decent actors, but here their seriousness and intensity make it look more like they’re in some mediocre Shakespeare production. Yvonne Strahovski is stuck in a seriously underwritten part, and her relationship with Adam is dry and unclear; are they supposed to have some kind of intimate relationship? Bill Nighy seems to be the only one who knows what kind of film he’s in and delivers the same amount of ham you’d find in the Underworld films he was in. Speaking of Underworld, Kevin Grevioux has a small role here, and goddamn is his voice deep. He makes James Earl Jones sound like Mickey Mouse.
In this genre, the visuals and action have to carry a lot. And whilst I’m deeply grateful that this isn’t another shaky-cam fest, the action scenes aren’t that impressive. Most of them are a CG extravaganza of gargoyles flying around and demons exploding into flames, and the few that aren’t are run-of-the-mill. The CG itself can look decent enough from a distance, but when viewed up close looks more like something from a video game, and not a particularly good one. The production design is pretty weak, especially the design of Adam himself. There are so many things they could have done to make The Monster look unique, but here it’s just Aaron Eckhart with a bunch of scars. Really imaginative work there, people.
I, Frankenstein isn’t the train wreck that it’s 5% on Rotten Tomatoes suggests. It’s bad, but not awful. The potential for a goofy but fun movie is hidden somewhere in here, but the lack of logic, hammy acting and lacklustre design and effects leave you with a movie that won’t frustrate you but won’t entertain you much either. Perhaps next year’s version of the story brought to us by Paul McGuigan and Max Landis will present a much more entertaining Frankenstein tale.
Starring: Chris Pine (Star Trek Into Darkness), Kevin Costner (Man of Steel), Kenneth Branagh (Valkyrie), Keira Knightley (Pirates of the Carribean)
Director: Kenneth Branagh (Thor)
Writer: Adam Cozad and David Koepp (Spider-Man)
Runtime: 1 hour 45 minutes
Release Date: 17 January (US), 24 January (UK)
Hollywood certainly has an obsession with branding these days and, whilst it is starting to get annoying, I get why they’re doing it. Studios want to make films with preset fanbases so they don’t have to spend valuable marketing money telling you who someone is. I’m not too familiar with the character of Jack Ryan (I’ve seen The Hunt for Red October and nothing else), but from that little experience I can say that Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit does seem like an example of this trend: stamping a recognisable name on an otherwise basic genre flick in the hopes of attracting a bit more attention. And considering this was based on a script that originally had nothing to do with the late Tom Clancy’s work, that assessment comes fairly close.
Shadow Recruit isn’t based on any of the Jack Ryan novels, instead acting as a Casino Royale-style origin story for the character. The casting of Chris Pine alone should tell you this is a modern update with no connections to the efforts of Alec Baldwin, Harrison Ford or Ben Affleck. The attempts at modernisation seem somewhat trite; the film opens on Ryan as a college student watching 9/11 on the news, and this is what inspires him on his path that leads him to becoming a CIA agent. What should come off as character development and motivation just seems laughably jingoistic. When the film finally gets to the main plot, it’s pretty disappointing. I know at this point doing the whole “take over the world” plan is cliché, but seriously? Playing with stocks? That’s your big evil scheme? I know that it’s going to lead to riots and economic collapse, but on paper it doesn’t sound that threatening. And from there we get your standard brawls, car chases, staring at screens intently whilst waiting for stuff to download, etcetera. There’s some interesting moments, like when Ryan and Cathy (Knightley) have to act like a troubled couple in order to distract Cheverin (Branagh), but for the most part it’s pretty paint-by-numbers.
Pine is a perfectly fine actor; he’s hasn’t done anything that really wows me, but I’ve yet to see him be terrible. And here…he’s OK. He does what the script says believably, and near the end he does show more signs of intelligence that remind me of Baldwin’s portrayal of the character, but for the most part he’s your standard hero. The rest of the main cast is impressive and provide serviceable work, but the main problem I found is that none of them had particularly great chemistry with Pine. Costner is your typical no-nonsense handler who occasionally gets in on the action, but the attempts to create a connection between him and Pine fall flat. Branagh seems to be more playing a villain out of a James Bond or Die Hard flick, and whilst he does that well, him and Pine’s few moments of “witty banter” are lifeless. Keira Knightley, struggling through her role with an off-puttingly fake American accent, gets the closest to connecting with Pine but I feel it was the script that was failing them more than their acting skills.
When it comes to this sort of picture, you’ve got to at least nail the action scenes and provide at least one setpiece moment. Unfortunately, Shadow Recruit really fumbles the ball here. Not only are all the action scenes pretty standard, the poor cinematography and editing ruin what remains. How many times do we have to say this before filmmakers get it? Shooting action scenes really close up and then over-editing them into frames of WTF doesn’t make your action scene intense, it just makes it incoherent; not every filmmaker can be Paul Greengrass. A particularly egregious example of this comes early on in a helicopter crash that is so choppy that I swear you could add random irrelevant images in between the frames and it would make about as much sense. It’s not quite Armageddon bad, but it comes close. Branagh has proved he can handle action reasonably well enough with the first Thor movie, so why he went for this overused, incoherent style is baffling.
I wouldn’t call Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit a bad film. It’s just not special in any way. The story isn’t that engaging, the characters underdeveloped, the action scenes muddled. It all feels less like a film and more like a product; a generic store-brand version of a movie you can get for much better quality if you look a bit harder. It isn’t annoying or terrible or even insulting. It’s just bland, bland, bland.
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio (Inception), Jonah Hill (This Is the End), Margot Robbie (About Time), Kyle Chandler (Super 8), Matthew McConaughey (Mud)
Director: Martin Scorsese (The Departed)
Writer: Terence Winter (Boardwalk Empire)
Runtime: 3 hours
Release Date: 25 December (US), 17 January (UK)
Money is a potent object. And with money often follows power. And that power then leads to more money. And so and so forth. The Wolf of Wall Street is an examination of how that vicious cycle can create both incredible highs and life-wrecking lows. It’s a film that follows a trail of excess that flows so far it runs up the walls, and every time you don’t think it can get any crazier, it does.
The Wolf of Wall Street is, more than anything, a character study. It is about Jordan Belfort (DiCaprio), and his life is certainly one rousing story full of sex, drugs and the stock market. In many ways, it is your typical rise and fall tale: man comes in with a plan, revolutionises the system, becomes filthy rich, abuses the power that comes with that, comes out poorer but wiser. But like all great tales, it’s more about the journey than the destination, and Belfort’s journey takes some wonderful detours into depravity. This film is 3 hours long, and nothing you’ve seen in the trailers can prepare you for how jam packed this movie is. Every single line is sharp and witty, and every single one is delivered in the perfect way to maximise the drama or comedy of any given moment. For the most part, it works beautifully. All I can really say negatively about it is that there’s often too much. Don’t get me wrong, every scene is memorable and every line of dialogue is golden, but there is so much material bursting out the seams here that it causes the film to bloat unnecessarily at moments. It’s hard to think that an even longer version of this movie actually exists. And for any of those people complaining about “these people are terrible and we shouldn’t be glorifying them”, get your facts straight. This isn’t a movie you should live your life by. It’s a movie that shows how crazy life can get, and paints its characters as amoral, often ridiculously so, characters. Much like 2013’s other true-life tale of debauchery gone wrong Pain & Gain, you’re supposed to laugh at these guys, not with them.
Leonardo DiCaprio has come along way since being the pretty boy from Titanic, and in recent years has become a truly brilliant actor. His performance as Belfort is one of his best, one full of exuberance, energy and lunacy. You may not like this guy, but you certainly have to respect him. As usual, Scorsese has assembled a cast bursting with talent whether in small or big parts and every one of them does well. Jonah Hill as Belfort’s right-hand man Donnie is entertaining at every second, utilising his years of comedy experience to create one sick son of a b*tch. Margot Robbie is a revelation as Belfort’s femme fatale of a wife, who is just one of the hundreds of women in this film who bare all but she’s got the acting chops to back it up as well. Matthew McConaughey, Jon Favreau, Rob Reiner, Jon Bernthal, Jean Dujardin, Joanna Lumley, Ethan Suplee; this list goes on. I do not have time to go through everyone in this humongous cast, so I’ll just sum it up by saying everyone knocks it out of the park.
The cinematography on display is gorgeous, full of sweeping shots that just emphasise that lavish nature of the picture. The choreography and scale is truly shown off in several scenes, such as a yacht in one hell of a sh*tstorm or a scene on a plane that redefines the standards at The Mile High Club. The editing is perfectly paced but not always precise continuity wise; a quirk I keep noticing in editor Thelma Schoonmaker’s work. The soundtrack is full of period hits from the late 80’s/early 90’s, and every song is perfectly chosen for each moment.
Martin Scorsese is a master of cinema, and every time he decides to make a movie people pay attention. And with every movie, he reminds you why he is a master. The Wolf of Wall Street is another example of his greatness. It may cover some ground the director covered in Goodfellas or Casino, but nothing in those pictures can match up to the mania on display here. It deserves every piece of awards buzz it’s been getting and provides more memorable scenes and quotes to add to any cinephile’s lexicon than I can count. It’s certainly a long haul, but you’ll be glad you were along for the ride.
Starring: Chiwtel Ejiofor (Serenity), Michael Fassbender (X-Men: First Class), Benedict Cumberbatch (Star Trek Into Darkness), Lupita Nyong’o, Paul Dano (Prisoners), Brad Pitt (Moneyball)
Director: Steve McQueen (Shame)
Writer: John Ridley (Three Kings)
Runtime: 2 hours 14 minutes
Release Date: 18 October (US), 10 January (UK)
The subject of slavery is always a touchy one. It’s hard to believe that such atrocious acts were committed, and not that far in the past either. Films that touch on slavery aren’t exactly rare, but 12 Years a Slave really does stand out from the pack because it comes from (surprisingly rare) perspective of a slave; one who really existed, and one whose tale is truly unjust. Writing this review is very tricky: not just because it touches on sensitive subject matter, but because it is very hard to put to words what this movie did to me. I’ll do my best but, if it isn’t clear to you by the end of this article, I’ll just state the fact of the matter now: 12 Years a Slave is a masterpiece.
As said before, this is based on a true story; how much embellishment this story has had in its translation to cinema is unknown to me, but from the looks of it I’d say very little. The story of Solomon Northup (Ejiofor) is a true tragedy from beginning to end; he is as sympathetic as you can get, and what this man endures and sees is nothing short of horrifying. If you’re looking for an uplifting tale that balances the misdeeds with plenty of silver linings, you are looking in the wrong place; The Help this ain’t. It is pretty much just watching this man’s struggle through its downs and not-quite-as-downs, and it is just fascinating to behold. That is, when you can bare to watch it. So many scenes are incredibly difficult to watch for a variety of obvious reasons, and those squeamish amongst you will certainly feel the terror. I don’t know what much else to say. It is just one of those films you need to see for yourself to truly understand. If I had any complaints, I’d say the flow of time is a bit unclear and the resolution is a bit quick, but nothing else. And those few complaints quickly get washed away in a sea of magnificence.
12 Years a Slave boasts one of the most impressive casts I’ve seen in a while, and there is not a single weak performance amongst them. Ejiofor is an actor whose been popping up for quite a while now doing excellent work whether in serious drama or fantastical blockbuster (heck, he was the only thing that made 2012 watchable), and it’s about time he got to headline a film. And boy is it one mighty performance. This is a role that is sure to make Ejiofor a major league player in Hollywood for some time to come, and deservedly so. Every inch of his performance is oozing with despair and torment; you can just feel how much this man wants out of this situation and you will feel everything he feels. But everyone else puts in their A game as well, whether they play fellow slaves or the most detestable human beings imaginable. Michael Fassbender truly transforms into an utter monster here as he relentlessly torments and provokes his “property”, and his wife (Sarah Paulson) is just as cruel in a much more cold and vindictive way. On the other end of the spectrum, Lupita Nyong’o is a revelation as the constantly abused Patsey who often outshines Ejiofor on the emotional spectrum, and I’m sure she too will find a lot of work after this. Even the smallest of roles are filled by top shelf actors: Benedict Cumberbatch, Paul Dano, Brad Pitt, Paul Giamatti, Scoot McNairy and Quvenzhane Wallis to name a few. All of them are in the movie for very limited periods, and in that amount of time all of them put in as much effort as they would if they were the star. Never have I seen such an impeccable cast in a motion picture, and I applaud them all for their efforts.
Steve McQueen (for the last time, not THAT one) has a background in art, and that really does show in his work. He is a particular fan of long continuous takes and, whether moving or static, he and cinematographer Sean Bobbitt have crafted one beautiful looking piece of cinema. Every shot looks finely crafted and the infrequency of edits adds to the sombre nature of the piece. The production design and costumes are fantastic, and the make-up work done to make all these slaves look beaten and abused is incredibly well done. Hans Zimmer provides a riveting score as always, but I didn’t always appreciate it. This is a film that works best when quiet and moody, and I sometimes felt his compositions felt a little too bombastic; as if we needed a reminder that this film is serious business. That and I felt the score sounded too similar to some of his other work (I swear, half the time I just thought he reused the score of Inception).
12 Years a Slave is one of the few films this year that nearly moved me to tears. I left the screening of this totally overwhelmed, thinking about what I had just witnessed. It is possibly the most beautifully tragic films I have ever seen, it is sure to win some major awards, and is a big contender for my favourite film of 2013. It is certainly a film that I highly recommend you see, but go in knowing that you will most likely come out of it seriously depressed.
Starring: Christian Bale (The Dark Knight), Amy Adams (The Master), Bradley Cooper (The Hangover), Jeremy Renner (The Hurt Locker), Jennifer Lawrence (The Hunger Games)
Director: David O. Russell (Silver Linings Playbook)
Writers: Eric Warren Singer (The International) and David O. Russell
Runtime: 2 hours 18 minutes
Release Date: 13 December (US), 1 January (UK)
One running theme found in several 2013 releases is the theme of excess. Michael Bay’s Pain & Gain and Martin Scorsese’s The Wolf of Wall Street (which I have yet to see but will soon) both touch on this, as does today’s subject American Hustle. All of these films are also based on true events, all of them follow characters that aren’t exactly the most pleasant of people, and all of them are made by well-established filmmakers with very unique sensibilities. So the question is: does American Hustle rise or fall?
Whilst plot does play a role in American Hustle, I don’t feel like it’s the main priority of the filmmakers. It is a film much more focused on its characters and its themes; the main one of which being the idea of identity. All of the main characters in the picture don’t exactly like who they are and the state of their lives, and through the course of the film they all strive to be someone they are not to either positive and negative consequences. And when the film does let these characters fly and express themselves, this is where the film does shine. Russell is really great at getting performances out of his actors, and that combined with the script and the cast does create some truly wonderful moments. The problem I found though is that, whilst these moments are well done and give some good insight into the nature of these somewhat unhinged people, it does tend to distract from the story. The film’s pacing drags constantly, causing the film’s long runtime to feel really noticeable. The film also seems uncertain who’s our main character and whom we’re supposed to be rooting for. The film utilises narration from multiple characters (something Pain & Gain did to much better effect) and, whilst again providing a good look into these peoples’ psyches, it makes it hard to pin whose story this is. I’m hard pressed to figure out what they could’ve cut to keep things moving because there is some really good stuff in here, but the film could have done with a good trim. It is a prime example of having too much of a good thing and how that eventually damages the quality of a film.
Russell has assembled a mighty fine cast and all of them elevate the film’s caliber. Bale once again proves how much he’s willing to torture his physique in order to inhabit a character, and his portrayal of Irving Rosenfeld stands up as one of his best. Bradley Cooper commits as well, providing a whole different kind of crazy that balances well with Bale. Jeremy Renner’s turn as the sympathetic nice guy caught up in this mess is great, as is Louis C.K.’s role as Cooper’s FBI overseer; anytime him and Cooper share a scene it is golden. But it’s the women of American Hustle that steal the show. Amy Adams’ performance is easily one of her finest, a character who most well defines the film’s fixation on identity crisis. The way she flits between emotions, accents, the men in her life; it all adds up to create probably the most interesting character in the movie. And then there’s Jennifer Lawrence. Do I even need to tell you that she’s awesome? She is somewhat repeating her shtick from Silver Linings Playbook, but with enough of a twist that it remains fresh. Much like Bale, you will find yourself annoyed with her but you’ll want to keep coming back for more.
The film captures that 1970’s aesthetic perfectly, but unlike many other films it never really glorifies the era; quite the opposite in fact. Whilst the production design and costumes all look authentic, they do have a certain grotesque quality to them that I’m pretty certain is intentional. On the plus side of it, the costumes provide plenty of opportunities for Amy Adams side-boob. The cinematography certainly feels authentically 70’s, but Russell continues to use the “zoom quickly on people’s faces” trick from Silver Linings Playbook that I found both distracting then and distracting now; do I need to made the Wayne’s World joke again? The soundtrack to the film is also very enjoyable; a scene where Lawrence sings along to Paul McCartney’s “Live and Let Die” is a particularly enjoyable musical moment.
American Hustle has all the trappings of a great movie: it’s got a wonderful cast, a talented director, provoking themes and strong production values. But for some reason this stew doesn’t come together well. It’s a film full of great moments that don’t feel structurally sound together. It feels like Russell got so lost in how fascinating these characters are that he forgot about the story. In many cases, a film can ride off the strength of the characters when the story is weak, but I don’t think the story here is weak but merely underused. The Golden Globes has had trouble figuring out if this was a drama or a comedy, and now I can see why: it’s a bit of a mess when you really think about it. American Hustle is certainly a picture where the whole is certainly worth much less than the sum of its parts.
A very different breed of vampire film, this stylish picture from Neil Jordan is bolstered by wonderful visuals and strong central performances from Saorise Ronan and Gemma Arterton. However, the slow pace, odd structure and a weak performance from Caleb Landry Jones do bog it down. If you’re looking for something a bit different, Byzantium may have something interesting for you but you’ll have to dig through some muck to find it. 6.5/10
Fast & Furious 6
The Fast & The Furious franchise keeps on driving forward in what is probably the best of the series. Sure, it’s dumb and juvenile in many facets but at this point I think everyone involved is aware; the fact that they still take it so seriously only adds to the goofy fun of it. The ludicrous car stunts are still fun to watch, bolstered by some fun hand-to-hand fight sequences to mix things up. Top it all off with a great post-credits sequence, and now I’m actually looking forward to the next one. How that happens now after the tragic passing of Paul Walker is still up in the air as I write this, but I’m sure that eventually we’ll see Toretto and his boys drive very fast and furiously again. 7/10
The Host
I somehow managed to avoid seeing the entirety of any Twilight movie, but after watching The Host I can somewhat sympathize now. I have to be honest here: if you get right down to some of the core ideas of this movie, there is some potential for something good here. But the film completely drops every ball it possibly could. The film is dull and slow, nothing happens during the entire second act, the dialog is laughable, and the ending is the most contrived and utterly anti-climactic thing ever; apparently Stephanie Meyer has no concept of consequence or loss. The film only manages to avoid being utterly awful thanks to those aforementioned germs of interesting ideas and Saorise Ronan at least trying to rise above the awful material given to her. 3.5/10
After Earth
Considering how much of a punch line he has become, I find it baffling that M. Night Shymalan still finds work. Now he continues his extended career suicide with After Earth: quite possibly the most boring and tedious sci-fi movie ever made. Will Smith continues his quest to force his son Jaden down our throats, never realizing that the boy just can’t carry a movie. Jaden Smith is boring, whiny and has none of his father’s charisma. Then again, based on Will’s performance in this movie, you wouldn’t think he had any either; he spends most of the movie sat in a chair speaking in monotone whilst barely ever showing any signs of emotion. On top of all that, the story is bland and formulaic, the production design is lazy, the effects are unpolished, and it is just…so…BORING! At least something like Battlefield Earth is unintentionally hilarious; After Earth doesn’t even have the dignity to be laughably bad. It’s just bad. Please, just don’t watch this. 2/10
The Lone Ranger
Don’t let the terrible box office performance and lackluster reviews fool you. The Lone Ranger is a surprisingly decent movie, and one that has gotten a lot of undeserved flack. It definitely is problematic: the film is far too long, the second act meanders and kills the pacing, and I don’t see how this cost $200 million. But there is plenty to enjoy here too. Armie Hammer and Johnny Depp have good chemistry as The Lone Ranger and Tonto, the cinematography and production design is elaborate and stunning, and the action scenes are a lot of fun especially the creative climax. It is certainly a much better film than any of Bruckheimer’s other recent attempts to start a new franchise at Disney, and it’s a shame that this is the one that bombed the most stupendously. It certainly isn’t perfect, but give The Lone Ranger a chance if you’re in the mood for some old-fashioned western adventure fun. 7/10
Epic
You’d think that after the amount of flack Avatar took for being unoriginal would quell people from making “human finds themselves in magical forest world where they must defend the natives” films for some time, but here’s another one. The plot of Epic is predictable to a fault; there is nothing here that’s going to surprise you. But everything else in the film somewhat manages to save it. Some of the voice acting is pretty good, particularly from Colin Farrell, Chris O’Dowd and Aziz Ansari, but others such as Beyonce and Pitbull don’t fare so well. The main saving grace is the animation and design of the world, which makes for a very pretty animated film. It’s just a pity that the amount of effort that went into creating the look of the film didn’t go into the screenplay. Epic does contain enough enjoyable elements to stave off boredom, but there is much more original fare out this year for the kids to enjoy. 6/10
The Croods
When The Croods started up, I wasn’t enjoying it so much. It just didn’t seem that new to me and not much was keeping me interested. But, once the plot gets moving and the world opens up, suddenly the film improves dramatically. This is one imaginative movie on a design scale, with lots of bright colours and diverse locales. The animation quality is superb with quick cartoon-like movements, often reminding me of the work of Brad Bird. But, unlike Epic, the story and characters manage to match the quality of everything else. The main reason the movie works for me is the character of Grug, voiced with much gusto by the always-fascinating Nicolas Cage. He starts out as your average stick-in-the-mud, but the way his character develops creates moments of both comedy and eventually drama. If you’re kids are in need of some entertainment and have already seen both Monsters University and Frozen, The Croods is definitely not a bad choice. 7.5/10
Pain & Gain
I never thought I’d actually say this, but I have to admit it: Michael Bay actually made a genuinely good movie. I’m as shocked as you are, but it’s true. At least for me; I can totally understand if someone hates this movie, as it certainly isn’t for everyone. But if you want a dark comedy with no boundaries, Pain & Gain is one you need to watch. Based on true events, this is a film that lets Bay’s sensibilities run wild and fill the movie with all the excess you’d expect from one of his productions. But for this kind of movie, it works due to the insanity of everything else. Mark Wahlberg, Dwayne Johnson and Anthony Mackie put in some of their best work playing some of the dumbest characters in cinema history, and watching them hatch this ludicrous scheme and somehow make it work is so funny but also so heinous that it makes for many moments of awkward laughter. The main reason this works, and something that I think so many critics of the picture didn’t catch onto, is that we aren’t supposed to like these characters; we’re laughing at them, not with them. The film is full of characters that are evil, stupid, or both; the only likable character is Ed Harris, and he doesn’t even show up till the one-hour mark. But that’s the entire point of the film, and in the end everyone gets what he or she deserves. That’s not to say the film is perfect. Like many Bay films, it’s far too long and could have used some trimming. The second half of the film drags and isn’t as fun as the first half, and eventually some of the Bay-isms start to wear thin. But for the most part, this is one big guilty pleasure of a picture. This is certainly a Marmite film (Bay even says as much in the special features), and in this case I love it. It’s just a pity that Bay is next trudging back to make another Transformers movie instead of making more pictures in this realm. 8/10
Well, 2013 is almost gone and it’s around this time of year many critics round up their favourite films of the year. But many of 2013’s movies have yet to release here in the UK. Films like The Wolf of Wall Street, 12 Years a Slave and Her are all films I really need to see before making a proper conclusion on this year, and as such I won’t be doing a summation of 2013 until I have seen as much as I can. So before that, let’s take a look at the year ahead.
Two points I want to make here. One: these release dates are subject to change, so some may get pushed back to 2015 and muck up the list (one of the films on this list was on my most anticipated of 2013, so go figure). Two: this is NOT me predicting what I think will be my favourites by the end of 2014. This is a list of films that I’m really excited for or just interested to see. So without further ado…
20. RoboCop
Paul Verhoeven’s original RoboCop is one of my all time favourite movies. It’s full of glorious ultra-violence and memorable quotes, but it is also a brilliant satire of 1980’s culture. Many would call attempting to remake this film blasphemous. I would say that if done it would really need to do something special. From what I’ve seen from all the promotional material, I’m not fully convinced yet. But regardless, I want to see what they can do with it. It’s got an impressive cast and a talented director, but I’m still worried that this could be another cash-in. Let’s hope I’d buy it for more than a dollar.
19. Gone Girl
Seven. Fight Club. The Social Network. David Fincher is a force to be reckoned with, and I’m hoping that his next effort can match up to the rest of his impressive filmography. It’s got a very odd cast, with heavyweights like Ben Affleck and Rosamund Pike teamed up with more left-of-field choices like…Neil Patrick Harris and Tyler Perry?! Huh. But you put Fincher’s name on it, and I’m certain me and many other film fans are guaranteed to be there.
18. A Million Ways to Die in the West
Family Guy creator Seth MacFarlane made an impressive feature debut in 2012 with Ted. And before he goes to tackle the sequel, his sophomore effort is…a western comedy? Considering the recent box office failures of westerns like Cowboys & Aliens and The Lone Ranger, it’s a pretty ballsy move. I can’t make much of a statement on it considering nothing from the film has been shown, but if it can match MacFarlane’s other efforts it should be worth a few laughs.
17. Transcendence
Christopher Nolan’s long-time cinematographer Wally Pfister is making his directorial debut with this sci-fi thriller, and judging from the trailer it looks pretty interesting. It certainly has a lot of elements from previous works in the genre; hopefully it can give it a new enough spin on these ideas. It’s also nice to see Johnny Depp in a movie and not have him play a flamboyant bumbler.
16. Edge of Tomorrow
Tom Cruise’s recent filmography has been pretty strong with films like Mission: Impossible – Ghost Protocol and Jack Reacher, so hopefully his new sci-fi action film can keep up this streak. It’s got an interesting premise, a decent cast, and some cool looking designs and action beats. Plus, anything involving mech suits AND time travel immediately gains some badass points.
15. The Monuments Men
George Clooney’s latest directorial effort was unfortunately delayed, causing it to miss out on the Oscar race. Regardless, this looks to be one to watch. Clooney’s Confessions of a Dangerous Mind and The Ides of March are both excellent films (let’s just ignore Leatherheads, shall we?) and this one certainly has a lot of the same elements. With good mixture of drama and comedy, an excellent cast and shinging light on an area of WWII rarely seen, I think this one could be another winner.
14. 22 Jump Street
21 Jump Street was a big surprise for me. It was full of hilarity and gave me a whole new perspective on the acting skills of Channing Tatum. Now he and Jonah Hill are back for a new adventure, and I’m looking forward to see what mayhem they cause this time. The trailer does paint a picture of it just being a rehash but, considering the very self-aware nature of the first film, I’m guessing this uneasy sense of familiarity is all part of the joke. And this won’t be the last time you see directing partners Phil Lord & Chris Miller on this list…
13. How to Train Your Dragon 2
The original How to Train Your Dragon is arguably Dreamworks SKG’s best film, and certainly helped create a new image for them. But can they strike lightning twice? Hopefully, they can. I’m not exactly sure if I was really asking for a sequel, but in a world where Cars and Madagascar can somehow generate sequels, I guess the further adventures of Hiccup and Toothless sounds much more appealing.
12. Sin City: A Dame to Kill For
This film has been in development hell for nearly a decade now, and was among my most anticipated films of 2013. But once again it was delayed, and hopefully for the last time. Featuring both old and new faces, I’m very much interested to delve into the gutters of Basin City again to see what tales will unfold. Knowing Frank Miller’s work, I’m guessing it will involve a lot of violence, constant inner monologues and a plethora of scantily clad women. Let’s just hope this one doesn’t end up on my most anticipated of 2015 list.
11. Big Hero 6
Walt Disney Pictures is finally taking advantage of the fact they own Marvel Comics and adapting one of their works into their next animated classic. And they’ve chosen a comic book so obscure that even I’ve never heard of it. But from looking into it, it certainly looks like it has some potential. It’s got an interesting world and characters, and combining Disney magic with the might of Marvel certainly sounds like something I’d want to see.
10. Captain America: The Winter Soldier
Sticking with Marvel, their first picture this year sees the return of the star-spangled man with a plan. The Russo Brothers, mainly known for comedy, could be Marvel’s oddest choice of directors yet but the trailer paints a very different picture. The Winter Solider storyline is a perfect choice for adaptation, and the film certainly looks like it’s another win for the True Believers.
9. The Hobbit: There and Back Again
The Desolation of Smaug gave The Hobbit franchise a well-deserved kick up the backside, and now I’m very excited to see how they wrap it all up. Peter Jackson has left very little material from the book left for adaptation, suggesting that we’re going to get even more original content. As long as it’s interesting, engaging stuff and not a load of padding, then that’s fine with me. The Return of the King is my favourite of The Lord of the Rings trilogy, so I’m hoping this final chapter can match the epicness of that franchise’s finale.
8. Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
Rise of the Planet of the Apes was a major surprise in 2011, instantly reinvigorating the franchise and making everyone forget about that Mark Wahlberg movie. It’s a shame that Rupert Wyatt decided not to return, but Cloverfield director Matt Reeves certainly looks like he’s picking up the material well. This looks like a much darker film with a post-apocalyptic vibe, and I’m very interested to see how close to the original Planet of the Apes this tale will reach.
7. The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 1
The Hunger Games was a pretty good movie with a fair few issues. But, much like The Desolation of Smaug, Catching Fire was a massive improvement of its predecessor in every facet and I’m now majorly invested in where the story of Katniss Everdeen is going. Once again, we’ve got one book being split into two movies and, having not read the book, I’m not sure if this is a good idea. But anyway, considering how Catching Fire felt very much like The Empire Strikes Back, let’s see if the Mockingjay films can be at least as good as Return of the Jedi.
6. Interstellar
Get ready, fanboys: Christopher Nolan is making another movie. What’s it about? I don’t know; something about black holes. The film is so shrouded in secrecy that the trailer is basically pointless, but that’s what to expect from the man who brought you Inception. The Dark Knight Rises was somewhat of a disappointment for me, so let’s hope Nolan can redeem himself with this picture.
5. The Lego Movie
Here’s that other Phil Lord & Chris Miller film, and here they’re making a movie out of one of the most beloved toys of all time. Literally. Their zany sense of humour looks like a perfect fit for this picture, creating what looks like a film made in a nerd’s wet dream. It’s got an awesome cast. It’s got awesome looking animation. And it’s got the goddamn Batman! What more do you want?
4. The Amazing Spider-Man 2
I still stand by it: The Amazing Spider-Man was a damn good movie. It’s certainly not perfect, but what’s good about it is so, so good. Now that they’ve got that pesky origin business out of the way, we can finally get on to some new territory. The multiple villains are a little worrying (it didn’t work very well last time they tried that), but the film certainly looks like it captures the essence of the wall crawler with some cool acrobatic feats of derring-do. Excelsior!
3. Godzilla
The King of the Monsters has been reborn, now Matthew Broderick-free! Gareth Edwards take on the classic monster certainly looks to be one hell of a ride. Naturally, the filmmakers are holding a lot close to the chest, but what they’ve shown so far has got me hooked. Let’s just hope that if Godzilla gets taken out this time, it’s by another monster and not teeny fighter jets.
2. Guardians of the Galaxy
I started reading some Guardians comics recently, and man will it make a good movie. Madman James Gunn directing a film that features Chris Pratt, a talking racoon and a sentient tree as main characters? You had me at “James Gunn”. I’ve yet to see a lick of footage from this picture, but I don’t need to say anything else. I know I’m there on day one.
1. X-Men: Days of Future Past
A few years ago, I was thinking to myself: “What X-Men storyline would I like to see made into a movie?” The answer to my own question: Days of Future Past. And now they’ve done it, and it looks like it could be an event movie that rivals The Avengers in the sheer amount of fan service. Adapting a storyline best summed up as “X-Men meets The Terminator?” Good start. Bringing back series veteran Bryan Singer to the director’s chair? Sweet. Combining cast members of the original trilogy and X-Men: First Class? Fangasmically stupendous! The only way this movie could sound even more awesome if it somehow led into a movie where they fight Apocalypse or…oh wait, they are doing that! If this movie is anything less than spectacular, I’m going to be seriously disappointed. I know I shouldn’t get myself too hyped up, but this movie sounds way too awesome to not be awesome.
And that’s the list. Now just let me catch up on everything and I’ll soon be back with my Best and Worst of 2013!
Starring: Will Ferrell (Megamind), Christina Applegate (Hall Pass), Paul Rudd (This is 40), Steve Carell (The 40 Year Old Virgin), David Koechner (Get Smart), Meagan Good (Brick), Dylan Baker (Spider-Man 2), James Marsden (Enchanted)
Director: Adam McKay (The Other Guys)
Writers: Will Ferrell & Adam McKay
Runtime: 1 hour 59 minutes
Release Date: 18 December (US, UK)
Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy was an instant cult classic when it was released nearly ten years ago, instantly spawning many quotes that have become internet memes and printed on T-shirts across the land (heck, I’m wearing one of those shirts right now!). Whilst I initially found it a little too goofy and meandering to find it as incredible as everyone else said, it certainly did grow on me with repeat viewings. And now, after much demand, the sequel has arrived. Comedy sequels are always the hardest to pull off; the sequels to The Hangover have proved how badly they can fail. So does Anchorman 2 stay classy, or has it taken a detour to Whore Island?
The structure of Will Ferrell comedies is so predictable at this point that you can basically just switch around a few details and the rest writes itself or, more likely, just gets made up on set. Anchorman 2 certainly does not stray too far from this blueprint. It’s your basic rags-to-riches story, but with even more rags and riches. It’s predictable, it’s cheesy, it’s full of plot conveniences and deus ex machinas, but I think that’s kind of the point. I think Ferrell and McKay know how ridiculous this all is, and the rudimentary nature of the plot only adds to strange comedic vibe. But for a film that is pretty simple-minded, it does surprisingly have some decent social commentary regarding the state of TV news. 24 hour news networks, stories being pulled due to ulterior agendas, moronic reports on superfluous subjects to distract from real problems: these are all subjects that are lampooned by the film and effectively so. Again, it clearly shows the makers of the film are smarter than you’d think. But c’mon? We all know why we’re really here: we want to laugh, and Anchorman 2 certainly delivers there. Sure, I don’t think the film is as quotable as the first film but it is just as bizarre. There are plenty of call-back moments to the first film to mixed affect; some feel a little forced, but others are just brilliant or even more so; the new Battle Royale between the different news stations is just packed full of ridiculousness and celebrity cameos, and is the real highlight of the film. Some of the new stuff is great too, such as Brick’s (Carell) burgeoning relationship with a similarly befuddled Kristen Wiig. But unfortunately, the film doesn’t always hit home runs. Certain gags are played out for too long, others just aren’t very funny to begin with, and the film really takes a nose dive around the end of the second act and doesn’t recover until that aforementioned battle scene. At just under two hours, there’s a fair amount of dead meat that could have been cut and it really would have made the film much less stagnant at points. But the good certainly outweighs the bad and the film is much better than you’d expect from a comedy sequel.
Ron Burgundy is Ferrell’s most iconic role, and he slips back into that suit and well-groomed moustache as if he never left. Him and the rest of the cast are clearly having a ball going OTT, and Ferrell’s enthusiasm and charm keep a hold of you. The rest of the news team don’t get quite as much to do. Carell’s Brick gets his own aforementioned subplot and he steals almost every scene he is in, but Rudd and Koechner are mainly pushed to the sideline without that much to do in the grand scheme of things. Applegate is similarly pushed aside for much of the running time, but does make a welcome return towards the end and still packs in just enough gags. The new cast members provide some fun too; Meagan Good is sassily entertaining, Dylan Baker is nearly unrecognisable, and James Marsden plays a good jackass. But there were two main weaknesses in the cast. Firstly, Josh Lawson’s “villain” is weak. Whilst touching on the ulterior motives of the news is interesting, it never gets much focus and is wrapped up so quickly, therefore making Lawson’s character seem somewhat pointless. And then there’s Judah Nelson as Burgundy’s son Walter. I just didn’t get what was up with this kid’s line delivery; it felt robotic and odd, and I couldn’t figure out if that was supposed to be that way. Intentional or not, I just didn’t like this kid or his performance.
Do I really have to talk about the technical aspects of the film? It’s a standard comedy; who really cares about cinematography or production design when it comes to this sort of stuff? All I really have to say is that the 80’s soundtrack is pretty sweet and the van crash scene has some pretty impressive effects. That’s not to say anything bad of the film; it’s just clearly not the main crux of the production.
Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues does exactly what the title says: it’s more of what you loved about the first movie. It’s just as random and inconsistent as the first film, but I’d be lying if I didn’t say I laughed consistently throughout. Fans of the original should be pleased, and those who didn’t like the first one won’t find anything better here. I’d say it’s about as good as the first one, and one of the few comedy sequels that is worth watching. Anchorman 2: it works 60% of the time, but not every time.
Alternative Lens 