In Memoriam: John Hurt (1940-2017)

Prolific actor Sir John Hurt has passed away after a long battle with cancer. He was 77. He had a long career and appeared in a huge number of acclaimed roles that garnered him countless awards and nominations both in Britain and America. Hurt will be remembered by people of all ages as he starred in such a wide variety of films.

Hurt first gained recognition for his role of Richard Rich in A Man For All Seasons in 1966, but it wasn't until his 1978 that he got his breakthrough in Midnight Express, a role which won him a Golden Globe, a BAFTA and an Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor. A year later, he appeared in Ridley Scott's Alien as the creature's first victim in a very memorable scene. Other film roles include 1984, The Elephant Man, V for Vendetta, Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy and the Harry Potter films.

Hurt's career and life will be remembered as one of the greats of modern times. RIP.

Trailers Week 134: 29/01/17

King Arthur: Legend of the Sword

Now is the sword he pulls from the stone the same as the one he got from the lake. The guys from Monty Python definitely got it right when they said that royal succession shouldn't be dictated by some watery tart. Jude Law does make one hell of a villain though.

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2

Remember when I said a couple of weeks ago that Japanese trailers look so much more epic, I guess that's only if it has the cool Japanese voiceover guy.

T2: Trainspotting

And also putting subtitles on a trailer we've already seen before isn't a new trailer. It's especially bad when they misspell Ewan McGregor's Mark as Mike.

In Dubious Battle

James Franco's adaptation of John Steinbeck's novel about striking apple pickers has more big name actors that you can shake a stick at.

My Cousin Rachel

I'm okay with there being a proliferation of movies being set in Victorian England. What I'm not okay with is Chris Isaak's "Wicked Game" being slowed down for this trailer. If anything, you'd use "Baby Did a Bad Bad Thing".

Brimstone

A western where a righteous preacher goes savage on the townfolk for their sins? Think of all that old west whoring, drinking and cussing. That's a lot of sins.

Lowriders

This young kid goes against his family tradition of being into lowriders to be a street artist. But man, por que no los dos?

Moonlight

Barry Jenkin’s coming-of-age drama Moonlight may struggle to win over audiences that feed-off the latest high-concept blockbuster, but this composed and affecting three-part story brings a sorely-needed intimacy and contemplation back to the cinema.

Growing up in a world that he doesn’t understand and that doesn’t understand him, Chiron (Alex Hibbert), nicknamed “Little”, struggles to come to terms with his Mum’s drug-addiction, his troubles at school, and his sexuality. Docile in physical size and personality, Chiron’s only companions are his school friend Kevin (Jaden Piner), a kind-spirited drug-dealer he befriends, Juan (Mahershala Ali), and Juan’s affectionate girlfriend, Teresa (Janelle Monáe). These relations help define Chiron as he slowly tries to breaks free of his skin as a teenager (played by Ashton Sanders) and as an adult (played by Trevante Rhodes), in each act he’s very much a minor evolution of his former self, at his core he’s still “Little”.

Moonlight stems from a small drama school project by American playwright Tarell Alvin McCraney, In Moonlight Black Boys Look Blue, and Barry Jenkin’s manages to sustain the collected, deeply personal and reflective elements of the piece which ultimately define the film itself. As I said before, this will not appeal to the low attention-span audiences that only attend the modern blockbuster, but they’re not the sort of people who would willingly see Moonlight.

The more refined three-chapter structure of Jenkin’s script perhaps addresses the concerns of the few detractors to Richard Linklater’s Boyhood and its (in-effect) 12-part story - but whilst it might be the most comparable contemporary film to Moonlight, they are not one in the same. Where Boyhood aimed to be smooth in transition, Moonlight makes a point to divide Chiron’s deeply-personal odyssey into three distinct short-stories. These contained periods each define and build upon the whole of the man, and as the film cuts to black you feel not as if you’ve followed a boy growing up, but more as if you’ve been privileged to witness the determinate moments in the building of a character.

Neither strategy is better or worse, they’re both simply designed to serve the needs of their story. Boyhood’s Mason has an arguably normal (for a white family) set of circumstances growing up that the free-roaming structure celebrates. Chiron’s life is anything but normal in comparison to Mason, and the challenges he faces are immense, hence each new chapter is a reactionary reflection of the last and an indictment of representational issues in the film making community.

Each of these three periods emerges through the extraordinary performances of the Chiron actors. Hibbert’s “Little” is uncertain, shy and confused. Sanders’ Chiron is dejected, independent and desperately reaching out for an understanding. Rhodes’ “Black” is informed, sentimental and as equally uncertain as his young self. One character, three actors, three dominant portrayals. Then in support you have a similar situation with Kevin, one of Naomie Harris’s best performances, and Mahershala Ali s the knavish yet fostering Juan.

Much like its structure, Moonlight is at its most poignant and honest across a few moments where the dialogue drops and Nicholas Britell’s score comes in, teaming up with James Laxton’s breathtaking cinematography to beckon the audience into the most intimate moments of Chiron’s episodic pilgrimage of self. It’s the superb acting, writing and structure that build Chiron into a tour de force of empathy, but it’s these scattered moments of directorial finesse that allow us to truly understand him.

Lion

Up and coming directors can only hope for a powerful story to tell through their directorial debut, but Garth Davis was one of those lucky few, transposing Saroo Brierley’s incredible story A Long Way Home into his first film, Lion.

Saroo (Sunny Pawar) is a young but precocious and adventurous child who looks up to his older brother Guddu (Abhisek Bharate). Saroo wants to work the night shifts with Guddu so he can contribute more to his family, and Guddu reluctantly lets him come along. By the time they’ve reached the train station, Saroo is exhausted and falling asleep. Guddu asks him to wait whilst he tries to find work, but Guddu doesn’t return. 

Searching the nearby trains for his brother, Saroo falls asleep again and wakes up on the travelling, empty train, many miles from wherever his home is. Lost in a faraway city and unable to point the authorities to his local town, Saroo is soon adopted by an Australian couple, Sue (Nicole Kidman) and John (David Wenham). Twenty years later Saroo (Dev Patel) wants to find his family, and one of his University friends tells him about a new program, Google Earth, that might be able to help him in his search.

The biographical films that soar during Oscars season are a bit hit and miss, often too concerned with glorifying a historical personality than telling a unique, incredible story, but that’s certainly not the case with Lion. Told in a linear style - not regularly seen in the modern era of flashback obsessives - we pick up Saroo’s story just before his separation from his family and his devastating experience as a homeless sojourner. The human cost of overpopulation and a very different parental culture becomes evident when he has to spend the night sleeping with other displaced children on sheets of cardboard in the Calcutta train station and narrowly avoids abduction. A sobering passage of the film - underscored by the message of Lion’s final titled card, over 80,000 children go missing in India each year - This first half of Lion is defined by the tragic, Dickensian performance of young Sunny Pawar. Truly if ever there was a child actor deserving of an Academy Award nomination, Sunny is the one.

Saroo’s troubles take a different turn when he’s adopted by a loving Australian couple who he meets in Hobart. Before long we’ve jumped forward twenty years and the now grown-up Saroo finds himself opening up old wounds as he begins his search for his family. The film slows in pace but it’s certainly not the dramatic bottleneck that some critics claim. In many ways the second half of Lion is just as painfully engaging as the first, and if anything the conclusion could have done with more time and space to complete the story without the hint of emotional overreach that somewhat emerges. Otherwise, Lion manages its pace and linear technique in a thorough and satisfying way.

Whilst it’s difficult to meet the challenge that Pawar’s performance sets in the first half, Dev Patel still delivers what might be his best performance to date, and Kidman, who has struggled to match the quality of some of her earlier Roles in recent years, puts all of that behind her with a very strong portrayal as the patiently nurturing Sue. Rooney Mara plays Saroo’s gentle and tolerant girlfriend, Lucy, and continues to firmly cement her position as an awards season regular, whilst David Wenham does what he can with his relatively little screen time. Apart from a slightly jarring wrap-up song from Sia, the gentle and contemplative soundtrack works with the often stunning visuals to bring all of these elements together into a film worthy of its story and of the international audience attention its receiving. 

Lion could have so easily fallen into the bottomless pit of cliched Oscar-bait that we have to suffer through each year, but its writing is so engaging, its performances so enticing, and it's directing so delicate that it certainly does justice to Saroo's riveting odyssey.

Trailers Week 133: 22/01/17

Logan

I like to imagine that this movie takes place in world where the X-Men are fictional characters and Wolverine is the only real mutant. Mini Wolverine too, I guess.

Power Rangers

They could probably make a Power Rangers movie where they don't need the gritty explanation for how they became who they are. People would still go and see it.

The Lost City of Z

I feel like this movies exists so that kids like me who grew up watching Indiana Jones can point to real life treasure hunters and still think they can do it.

Collide

I don't care about the romance, I only want to know why Nicholas Hoult and Felicity Jones both have American accents.

Colossal

Waking up to discover that you were in control of a giant monster on the other side of the world would be kind of cool.

I Am Michael

Gus Van Sant and James Franco team back up to make a controversial flick about a guy who thinks the Bible cured his gayness. How about he just realises he's bisexual.

xXx: The Return of Xander Cage

After leaving this movie, my seventeen year old cousin told me that he had lost all respect for Vin Diesel. That got me thinking. The Iron Giant came out before he was born, Pitch Black came out the year he was born and The Fast and the Furious didn't come out much later after that (side note: that first F&F movie is the only one I like because my school camp didn't have any other movies to show us). So why did my cousin have any respect for him in the first place? Maybe Groot, I guess. Hopefully you can tell from this opening paragraph that I don't have much to say about this movie, so it's going to be a fun review for all of us.

Former government operative and extreme sport enthusiast Xander Cage (Vin Diesel) is coaxed out of retirement in order to hunt down a terrorist named Xiang (Donnie Yen) who has stolen a device that can bring satellites crashing down to the Earth. But shock horror, Xiang is actually part of the same xXx program and Xander's boss Jane Marke (Toni Collette) is the bad guy. There you go, you've just been informed of the world's most basic and predictable action movie ever. Helping Xander is the most standard group of buddies ever. Standard except for one DJ who he keeps around for the good times.

The action in this movie is the most logical thing happening. That's weird to say considering the movie starts with Diesel skiing down a gravelly hill in move that makes me question whether they understand how skis or gravel works. But then again this is the movie that has dirt bikes that whip down rivers and under waves (all in the same chase mind you). Because this is a movie that is appealing only to teenage boys, there are a lot of gratuitous girls in bikini shots, as well as a scene in which Diesel is the 'victim' of a female gangbang (I actually feel disgusted that I wrote that sentence, let alone watched it in a movie). The movie tries to even out this disgrace by adding two female action heroes, which doesn't work. Before you all go "Ruby Rose is my kween, she slays in OITNB, what are you talking about?", I have to remind you that I grew up with her being presenter on the Australian version of MTV and nothing will ever get that out of my head. In addition to all this weird portrayal of women where they're not sure if they should degrade them or make them strong, Nina Dobrev plays the cringiest character ever, someone who is geeky and shy, but unafraid of telling Xander Cage she likes rough sex and flirting with Ruby Rose. Again, this is obviously the very warped fantasy of what a woman should be like.

The moment well-respected martial artist Donnie Yen realised he needs a new agent

This movie does give me a chance to educate you a little about the industry though; namely the relationship between Hollywood and China. This year it is expected that Chinese ticket sales will surpass those of America for the first time in history. Because of this, Hollywood studios want to capitalise on that untapped market by getting their movies shown in China. Now the Chinese government only lets in a limited number of decadent Western films a year (and boy is this one decadent) and to make those chances higher, a studio can co-produce with a Chinese company. In order to do that, the filmmakers have to agree to fill a certain number of lead roles with Chinese actors. (I know that this is a deeply complex issue and I'd suggest checking out this video by Vox). What does all this have to do with our horrible movie. Well, it explains the inclusion of Chinese actors Tony Jaa, Donnie Yen and Kris Wu and also why this movie will probably do so well in that market.

xXx is an extremely subpar action movie. I know that sometimes I come of as someone who doesn't respect the genre, but I do enjoy it and know when something is trying. There was no effort whatsoever here. Gone are the extreme sports that I'm guessing the x's stand for and are replaced by a lot of standing around with arms spread wide open. And remember those character title cards that everyone thought were pointless in Suicide Squad, get ready for a lot of those.

Collateral Beauty

Collateral Beauty is the sort of film that requires a more in depth review to explain just how appalling it really is. This review contains spoilers.

Are you one of the poor souls that went to see the infamous Movie 43? A film with an incredible array of stars, magnificently poor writing and a horrendous sense of direction that left everybody wondering how it was ever funded. Collateral Beauty has been similarly shot down by reviewers, and whilst the obvious comparisons to the aforementioned disaster might be unfitting, the minor glimpses of potential are far overshadowed by the fact that Collateral Beauty gets worse and worse at every turn.

Howard Inlet (Will Smith) is a successful advertising executive who falls apart after the harrowing death of his six-year-old daughter. Depressed, contemplating death, and worst of all, under performing at work, Howard’s concerned “friends” (Edward Norton, Kate Winslet, Michael Peña) worry in supposed equal measure for Howard’s mental state, and the state of their own professional futures. The trio hire an investigator, Sally Price (Ann Dowd) to acquire evidence that would allow them to take control of the company from Howard (with his best interests in mind of course), and they soon find out that he is writing letters to Love, Death and Time – three constructs that he once used in his advertising work and is now blaming for the death of his daughter. With all obvious options ignored, Howard’s “friends” hire three actors (Helen Mirren, Keira Knightley and Jacob Latimore) to each approach him pretending to be one of the constructs, hoping that he will have a public outburst whilst their PI is filming so that they can then - after digitally removing the actors - show it to the board to prove that Howard is unfit to run the company.

*Oh the humanity*

Written by Allan Loeb (Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps, 21) and directed by David Frankel (The Devil Wears Prada, Marley & Me), Collateral Beauty had enough capability behind it to produce at least a half-decent film, but somewhere between the ethically-barren plotline and the kindergarten dialogue, the film collapses into a hilarious smoldering pile of Hollywood farce. The story in full is as unbelievable as it is in summary - a gently sickening ride through saccharine and syrupy messages, superficial plot twists and an array of A-listers trying to act their way out of one of the worst dramatic scripts in recent memory. One horrendous issue is the dialogue, which is more literary abomination than uplifting quotage - when you have Dame Helen Mirren spitting out lines like “Nothing is ever really dead if you look at it right” surely it must be obvious that you’ve created a steaming pile of script.

Putting aside the fact that none of the characters other than Howard are even remotely able to draw empathy from the audience because of their involvement in the repulsive scheme, we also have to sit through the hilariously-poor establishing of these token issues that each of them are struggling with. Norton’s Whit is drifting further apart from his daughter, Winslet’s Claire is running out of time to have a child, and Peña’s Simon is dying - we’re all dying Simon, but you decided to die an arsehole, so I don’t care. The acting is mediocre across the board, particularly when you consider the talent on screen, but the material is so atrociously bad that there’s hardly room for improvement. Will Smith’s is the only half-decent performance, but that’s mainly because he doesn’t have to talk.

There’s a swath of other annoying issues throughout like the fact that the investigator is “secretly” filming in the background with her phone in portrait mode, but when they show the footage to the board it’s in landscape and clearly shot with a cinema camera, or the hilariously stupid idea that they could simply digitally remove the actors without an expensive composite artist. Then when they show it to the board they acknowledge the fact that they’ve hired the actors anyway. What was the actual point of it then? I could go on, if not for the inevitable brain hemorrhage that analysing this excrement would give me.

Somewhere deep in the heart of this film there was a tinge of potential, completely lost in the overblown lunacy of this attempted storytelling. In the end though, watching Collateral Beauty is a bit like pondering how quickly your life is flying by, your crippling debt, the irreparable damage we’ve done to the environment, total nuclear annihilation, the futility of existence, the end of time, a Trump presidency; the more you think about it, the worse it gets.

Jackie

The assassination of John F. Kennedy is one of the most well-known events of modern history. When most people consider the aftermath of his untimely death, attention is usually drawn to Lee Harvey Oswald and his subsequent murder, and light is rarely shone on the intimate details of his family and widow. Jackie delves deeply into a previously shallow part of this time in history, and stands as a powerful and sombre biopic about a grieving widow struggling in the public eye.

Following her husband's assassination, Jackie Kennedy (Natalie Portman) is left to try and hold together her life in a time of despair and confusion. Jackie explores the former First Lady's immense loss and different stages and experiences of grief, as it darts between her time in office before the assassination, the event itself, the immediate aftermath and an intimate interview a week onwards. Between arranging her late husband's funeral and explaining to her children why daddy isn't coming home, all while being berated with advice and consolations from advisors, this film follows the titular Jackie in a truly sad and tumultuous time.

In a film named after a character, there is no doubt going to be a massive focus on the actor or actress playing them. In the case of Jackie, Natalie Portman is tasked with exploring the complicated emotions associated with grief and loss. From struggling to remain composed and poised in the public eye, to frantically breaking down and sobbing in private, Natalie Portman greatly achieves this much needed range and carries the character throughout the entire film. Rarely can the facial expressions, dialogue and reactions of a single character render an entire theatre gobsmacked, but Natalie Portman absolutely does so in her performance as the former First Lady. This isn't even considering her imitation of Jackie Kennedy's signature accent (which she totally pulls off, by the way).

The entire film is wholesomely engaging and awe-inspiring. With a fragmented story darting back and forth between various events both before and after JFK's assassination, the audience is kept on their toes and engaged with what is unfolding. While the movie and Jackie's intimate interview (which serves as a base-line for the film's narrative) are based on a real interview conducted a week after her husband's death, we cannot be sure that all the intimate details of the story are true. This being said, even if Jackie's actions in the movie are stretched slightly beyond the truth, no doubt the grief and sadness emanated throughout them are accurate, and seeing these emotions displayed so beautifully on the big screen really hits home. Accompanied with a sombre and simple orchestral soundtrack, the mellow tone of the movie is really driven into the audience to great effect.

This movie carries great parallels between beauty and pain, from constantly contrasting Jackie's life before and after the assassination, to her comparison of her husband's time in office to a real-life Camelot. Through this same vein, Jackie is a great example of a movie which finds beauty in sadness, and is wholeheartedly engaging the whole way through. If you are prone to cry, bring some tissues, and prepare yourself for a performance that will no doubt snag a Best Actress Oscar nomination for Natalie Portman.

Trailers Week 132: 15/01/17

Baywatch (NSFW)

The idea of lifeguards overstepping their bounds is pretty funny. I'm surprised that the TV show wasn't a comedy either. I guess it's because David Hasselhoff has only become a joke in recent in recent years.

CHIPs

While we're on the topic of TV shows being made into movies, I doubt anyone who will see this even knows what CHiPs was. Why is Michael Peña always being dragged into these buddy cop movies. Where's the trust that he can carry a drama on his own.

Sleepless (NSFW)

From dumb cops to vengeful ones. This looks pretty terrible but at least it's original.

Gold (NSFW)

I'm not sure if Matthew McConaughey's character was crazy before he got the gold or if the money he got as a result made him crazy. Or maybe McConaughey is just crazy himself.

Kong: Skull Island

I don't normally cover Asian trailers for Hollywood blockbusters, but something about this Japanese trailer just made me super excited for this movie in a different way.

Sleight

Because gangs from South Central just need that one token magician these days.

Cars 3

I don't know why I'm so obsessed with this since I haven't even seen one of the Cars movies.

The Edge of Seventeen

My first review of 2017! I can’t believe that the first week of this year has already flown by. I’ll admit I was a bit hesitant to see this movie, only because I’m not always the biggest fan of coming of age or romance films. But as my close friend is really into films like this and I’ve made her sit through countless horror/thriller films I figured I owed her one. So here we go.

Set in American suburbia, The Edge of Seventeen revolves around the life of Nadine (Hailee Steinfeld), a high school student who has felt as though she was an outcast her entire life, owing to her unorthodox and sometimes brash personality. Dodging awkward advances from her classmate Erwin (Hayden Szeto) and secretly crushing on school bad boy Nick (Alexander Calvert), her only saving grace is her best and only friend Krista (Haley Lu Richardson), who she met in primary school. Things begin to get complicated when, after a party night at her house, Nadine awakes to find Krista in bed with her older brother Darien (Blake Jenner), whom she has always felt inferior to because of his popularity and charm. Feeling as though she is going to lose her best friend to her brother as well as the burden of her overprotective and misunderstanding mother, Nadine begins to confide in her high school teacher Mr. Bruner (Woody Harrelson). As her life slowly begins to unravel, Nadine begins to wonder: can anything in life really be perfect, or will high school never end?

The positives: Above all else, the acting in this movie is one of its biggest selling points. Standouts have definitely got to be Woody Harrelson as the sarcastic teacher who really gives zero shits (but c’mon, we all saw that coming from the trailer) and Hayden Szeto who brings the perfect amount of awkward and charming to the character of Erwin. Hailee Stienfelds’ Nadine was also a really refreshing twist on the coming of age protagonist, moving away from the usual passive and introverted main character to someone who is overdramatic, selfish and frankly, a loudmouth, having spent her life in her brother’s shadow. But in terms of the story, one of the best running themes in this film has to be the reminder that not everything is always what it seems, and that life can throw things at you without warning. The storyline was interesting and made me care about the characters and their relationships to one another, so I can definitely say the movie was genuinely entertaining.

The negatives: I wish I could say that this movie hit the nail on the head in its entirety, but once again pacing begins to have a really big impact on this film. The amount of different locations, different plot points and character development happening at the same time make it begin to feel a bit crowded after a while. As an audience member I felt at times that certain parts of the story deserved more attention. As well as this, a lot of people have been comparing this film to ones such as Clueless (1995) and Mean Girls (2004): this is nowhere near that territory in my opinion. If you were into films such as The Perks of Being a Wallflower (2012), The Breakfast Club (1985) and Sisterhood of the Travelling Pants (2005) (and I may have revealed just how old I am with that last one) this will be for you. But be warned, while this film has a feel good vibe at the end, it’s not always as chipper as the trailers might like you to think, so if you’re gonna take your 10 year old to see it, maybe think again?

In the end, this film is fun, relatable and will definitely become a classic. Its witty writing and entertaining plot will make it worth your money if you’re into these kind of films, and also remind you of the times when you were young and stupid and made mistakes that seemed as though they’d last a lifetime (if you’re old like me that is). Although its not perfect, its certainly worth a watch.

Trailers Week 131: 08/01/17

Child's Play

When your trailer stresses that it's an all new movie, but only has footage from older movies in the franchise, that might be a small cause for concern. And besides, I had no idea they still made Chucky movies, let alone seven of them.

Cars 3

Speaking of concern, that first trailer for Cars 3 was kinda promising with it's darker and grittier look, but now this looks like a return to the old style. I'd hardly class this as a trailer when you're only introducing some new characters.

Fifty Shades Darker

Enough of the kids stuff, lets watch a trailer for some super uncomfortable 'adult' entertainment. This just looks like an annoying self repeating cycle.

The Space Between Us

Now for some teen romance, but with a lot less sex. There's too much to say about this. That kid's heart is obviously going to be fine, because despite the change in gravity, love beats everything. Except maybe cardiac arrest.

All Nighter

And finally a reason for guys to be scared off/not get to close to their girlfriend's fathers.

Passengers

Morten Tyldum’s last film The Imitation Game was a serious Oscars contender at the time, which makes it all the more weirder that his latest film Passengers seems to be stuck in Limbo - with not enough action and excitement to be a popcorn thriller and too-poor a story to be a quality drama-romance.

The colonial seeding-ship Avalon is transporting 5,000 colonists to the planet Homestead II, a 120 year journey that has the entire crew in long-term hibernation pods. After some strange happenings on the ship, two passengers are awoken 90 years early, seemingly due to pod-malfunctions. Mechanical engineer Jim Preston (Chris Pratt) and writer Aurora Lane (Jennifer Lawrence) find themselves alone on the ship, their only other mildly charismatic company the android bartender Arthur (Michael Sheen) and no way to go back to sleep in the Hibernation pods.

Passengers does seem genuinely confused about what it should be. Its opening act starts off as you might expect a classic sci-fi blockbuster of yesteryear to begin, establishing the confines of the location and building a sense of isolation. It uses montages effectively and manages to keep the foot on the pedal, but after a key decision made by one of the characters - something pretty unethical that should have help contour their character development, but is shrugged off by the film soon after - Passengers starts to go downhill fast. It becomes surprisingly slow and bland, and beyond the first act there are no real twists and turns in the story as you might have expected had you seen the trailer. The agonisingly average story just can’t deliver on the hype Passengers tried to build through an intense marketing campaign.

With obvious homages to several Kubrick films and a smattering of others, Passengers doesn’t really have a personality of its own, and whilst Pratt and Lawrence should be able to deliver oodles of chemistry on-screen, the second-rate screenplay drags their performances down immensely. There were also a handful of blatant overacting moments from Lawrence, whilst Pratt is much more timid (see: boring) than in his usual roles, although you can tell that they’re trying to do their best with the mediocre material they’re given. Indeed, the most frustrating thing about Passengers is that you can tell there could be a really dynamic, well-acted romance in there somewhere - a sort of Lost in Translation in Space - if it just stopped trying to add in all the hallmark sci-fi elements that it doesn’t have the complexity to pull off.

If Passengers does have one redeeming feature, it would be its visual composition. As glossy and beautiful as you would expect a $110 million film to look, it manages to keep a leash on its many CGI elements which blend in near-seamlessly with the live action work. Whilst it doesn’t have a unique style, it does at least manage to suspend disbelief when it comes to location, a challenge that many far higher profile films often fail. The helical design of the Avalon ship is surprisingly cool and is integrated into the action in a reasonably satisfying way. Though ultimately these attributes can’t undo the damage of a poorly written story - or even justify going to see the film - they were at least present when the rest of film collapsed on itself.

Passengers has an interesting enough premise, and could have been a lot better even with subtle tweaks to the order of the story, but ultimately it's let down by an uninspiring screenplay and dull-as-dishwater characters.

Assassin's Creed

Video game movies get a bit of bad wrap. It is incredibly hard to capture the essence of what makes the medium great (the active participation) and transfer that to cinema (a passive experience). When I first heard about this movie based on a semi-historical game series, and how it would take place in the world of the games, not just follow the story, I was hopeful. But once again, there is a failure to realise what makes this particular game series so popular.

Callum Lynch (Michael Fassbender) is a troubled man. He saw his mother be murdered by his father in Mexico and, after a life of crime, finds himself being executed for murder. After 'dying', he is subsequently revived by a shadowy organisation called Abstergo, who are doing experiments with genetic memories (the idea that the memories of our ancestors are locked in our very DNA). Abstergo has tracked Callum's DNA back to the Spanish Inquisition, where his ancestor Aguilar (also Fassbender) was a member of an ancient order called the Assassins. Sophia Rikkin (Marion Cotillard) is in charge of the experiments and puts Callum inside an 'Animus', a device that allows users to relive the memories mentioned before as though they were really there. It turns out though, Abstergo is really a front for a group called the Templars, the historic enemy of the Assassins.

This movie is complete chaos. The only reason I was able to write half of that plot outline was because I have played the games. The story is a real confusing mess, as the audience is thrust into the film with a tiny little historical background to the two warring factions and their goals, but none of the technology that dominates the film. And that leads to one of the big problems of the film. The games on which it is based are split between a modern and historical storyline. This is not an even split however, as the majority of the time is spent in that historical setting (be it the Crusades or Colonial America), with the development of the modern storyline and characters taking a back seat (granted these add up over the span of five games and isn't something you do with a movie). But for this, there is an attempt at an even balance, although it tips toward the modern setting, with the only reason I can see being that it would be harder to make a historical action movie. Now I will say one thing I really appreciated about the sequences set during the Spanish Inquisition, is that they went all in and had everyone speaking Spanish. Too often Hollywood movies would just go for the easy English option.

Up top, I should say that the action is very nicely choreographed and the stunt performers worked extremely well. The only problem was that you couldn't see it. Now, the Jason Bourne series is known for very rapid handheld 'shakycam' shots that a lot of people don't like. It's a different stage of the movie making process that's at fault here though. This time it's the editing. Some of the action shots were so quick I couldn't keep up. At one stage a bad guy had a horse on a roof and I didn't even know how he even got there. It's no secret that Michael Fassbender doesn't like doing press interviews or promotional work for his films, but I've never seen him look so bored while in a film. In a lot of the scenes he has a rather pained look on his face as though he has no idea what's going on and I can't really fault him for that. Marion Cotillard looked equally confused, but probably at the fact that her role was so underwritten. The remaining veteran actors in the cast (Jeremy Irons, Brendan Gleeson and Charlotte Rampling) are wasted as background filler and I had no idea what Michael K. Williams was doing in the plot at all.

This movie will turn you off if you're a hardcore fan or someone just wandering in from the street. I know it might be easy to point a finger at me and say that I overanalyse movies, but I truly came at this one wanting it to be good. Sadly, it missed out on being a solid action movie, despite the high amount of action.

Marisa's Top 5 of 2016

Looks like another year is over (and thank god, seriously I’ve never been happier to see a year go) and looking back, although we were served a few stinkers (several of which I had the unfortunate pleasure to actually pay to see) the amount of standouts this year were definitely worthy of a list. Now I know that this list is gonna omit some of last years biggest hits (films like Hacksaw Ridge and The Witch for example) but that’s really because these films are going to be getting a whole heap of recognition during awards season anyway. Instead, my top 5 are less about the films that critics raved about and more about the underdogs of 2016. These are the films I felt were worth the money I payed to see them, surprised me in some way and that I honestly enjoyed as an everyday screengoer, rather than someone who spends half her life drooling over shot compositions. So without further ado, here are my top 5 films of 2016.

1. Zootopia

What a surprise hit this one was, and for a good reason. Many people going into this film were expecting a cute movie that could entertain the kids for a while, which the film did provide. However, the way that the film cleverly added elements of social commentary and managed to discuss the world today in a way that a) made it interesting and b) easy for children to understand really impressed me. I think its important that films are able to talk about relevant topics in ways that are not always gritty true to life epics about the world ending, so Zootopia is definitely one that I highly recommend.

2. Deadpool

Where do I even begin to explain my love for this movie? Being one of the first movies I saw this year, it was great to kick off the cinema season on such a high note. This film really impressed me as it brought to life one of my favourite anti-heroes in a way that I felt really honoured the character: the fourth wall breaks, the r-rated jokes and the realisation that although he’s kind of a dick, Deadpool has heart. I think this film made me happiest above all else because it was obvious that the creators, producers and actors were all really passionate about this film and clearly wanted it to pay tribute to the all the fans who love this character, something that often gets lost in the money grabbing blockbuster machine that Hollywood often is. Was it perfect? No. Was it still a great time? Absolutely.

3. The Conjuring 2

So maybe its because I’m a big horror fan. Maybe it’s because I really enjoyed a refreshing take on ‘real life’ horror that didn’t involve the word ‘paranormal’ or ‘activity’ (cough). But when your best friend (who hates horror movies) says she enjoyed the movie, you know its worth something. The truth of the matter is that the cleverness of the storytelling and editing really impressed me. Of course, you have to suspend your disbelief in parts, but that nun gave me nightmares and pretty sure it scared the living daylights out of most other people who went to see this movie. Nuff said.

4. Suicide Squad

What? How? A film that was served all shitty reviews and was basically seen to be a flop? On a top five list? Yeah I know it’s a little unorthodox, but to be honest I thought that people were a bit harsh on the Squad (see my original review for more details). I really enjoyed this film because it proved to me that the DC universe does know how to have fun, even if it took an unbelievable amount of effort to get them there, and it still wasn’t exactly stellar. The good news is that DC is learning, and as a person who grew up with Batman and the gang as her first superheros, this film really holds a special place in my heart.

5. Now You See Me 2

You know that old saying that the sequel is never as good as the original? I was lucky enough to find out that it doesn’t apply to every sequel twice this year, first with The Conjuring 2 and second with this film. Now You See Me 2 reminded me that films are first and foremost about enjoyment, something that can often get lost in the dark and gruelling films that are always hits at the box office. This film handled the exit of Isla Fisher well, and brought forward a fun and exciting cast as well as a plot that kept viewers on their toes. I had missed the days of viewing films with wonder rather than with critique, so this film held a nice reminder that being excited by films is what its all about.

Well, that’s it! Another year of great films over. Here’s hoping that this year’s cinema selection is just as exciting as the last.