Adam's Thoughts - Rogue One

Check out Ed's full review of Rogue One: A Star Wars Story by clicking here!

The hardest part about judging a movie like Rogue One comes with considering it's context and purpose as a film. Is it meant to be considering fully as its own piece of work, or simply just as an addition to the Star Wars cinematic universe? This experience of entering into a predetermined story is especially jarring for someone like me who is not the biggest fanatic of the Star Wars franchise, but in the end Rogue One can still be seen as a bit of fun in addition to fulfilling its quota of fan service.

Story-wise, this movie was somewhat backed into a corner, in terms of telling a story with a predetermined outcome. Some 40 years later, and a story introduced in the original Star Wars (Episode IV: A New Hope) makes it onto the big screen in its own feature length film. That alone is a remarkable feat, and shows how powerful the franchise really is. Despite this already established story arc, Rogue One still manages to feel like the plot could go in any direction - a sign of a truly exciting narrative. A point is eventually reached where the audience remembers that this story already has an ending, but this doesn't take away from the viewing experience at all.

In a story that has to be told only in this movie alone (no trilogy for this one), it is understandable that the character building of some supporting characters might be a bit lackluster. This is especially disappointing, however, when considering the amount of unnecessary and somewhat forced comedic additions early in the movie. It's fine for even the most serious of movies to have comedic value in them, but when they are forced and in place of detailed character development, it is hard not to question their relevance. In the end, the characters realistically just fit into the cliche of the rag-tag group of outsiders going against the 'big guy', with most of them being token racial characters from different parts of the world (when I'd assume these countries don't even exist in Star Wars).

Lastly, while the fan service was necessary and ultimately pretty well balanced, I can't help but envision some wasted potential in the 'big moments' of Rogue One. Without going into spoilers, the movie maybe could have been more reserved with their limited space in terms of big reveals. While ultimately this would have led to less fan service, it could have been better fan service. In the end, however, this is just nitpicking at what was ultimately an enjoyable flick and a comfortable addition to the Star Wars movies. I can only hope that their future 'story' movies continue to feel like this one, and less like unnecessary money grabs.

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story

The Disney-era of Star Wars is well and truly underway following the success of last year’s The Force Awakens, and it continues this year with Gareth Edward’s Rogue One: A Star Wars Story, the first in an anthology of spin-offs that focus on background events and origin stories in the rapidly expanding filmic universe.

Jyn Erso (Felicity Jones) is separated from her father Galen (Mads Mikkelsen) at an early age when he is taken by Imperial military officer Orson Krennic (Ben Mendelsohn). She finds help from Saw Gerrera (Forrest Whitaker) and manages to stay out of Imperial sights. Years later, the Empire is building a new superweapon, the Death Star, and Jyn is recruited by the Rebel Alliance to join a team who are out to find the design blueprints of the weapon.

As the first major theatrical spin-off of the series, Rogue One is arguably the most hyped about movie of the year. Billed by many as a war-film of sorts, it’s a direction we haven’t seen the series go in before, and strikes a very different tone to The Force Awakens or indeed any of the others. Where space opera sized characters, love-triangles, story twists and endless metaphors about family have dominated previously, Rogue One focuses-down to the nitty-gritty land skirmishes, insane aerial battles and internal politics of the Rebellion that work behind the scenes in the main saga.

Rogue One is in essence the opening crawl of A New Hope, at least that’s what it is intended to be. At the forefront we have the story of Jyn Erso and the team that steal the design schematics of the Death Star. There’s a lot of back-story and character development that falls flat here, primarily because the film moves so quickly that it gets caught up in the rush and the characters don’t have time to breathe. Where these crucial character moments are expedited through the hyperbolic nature of the core films, this instalment aims for more subtlety in style and direction, thus it really can’t hope to build well-rounded characters in the time given and material covered.

Whilst it’s over two hours in length, Rogue One still manages to pack more than its fair share of content into the running time. If we’re not constantly planet hopping, we’re filling in canonic plot holes with new context. If you boil it right down, you could argue the whole film exists to explain the Death Star’s crucial design flaw. Slotted-in at the tail end of the nineteen year timeline-gap between Revenge of the Sith and A New Hope, the film feels too grand in scale for a contained spin-off, and in many ways there’s not enough meat in the plot to sustain the construct of such a huge summer blockbuster.

Jones manages to do a lot with Jyn when the film slows down enough to give her the opportunity, though at times she gets lost amongst the frantic action and the various other ensemble members vying for the audience's attention. Luna’s Andor has charisma, but like Ahmed’s Bodhi is inclined to blend into the background too much for a core supporting character. Yen and Wen’s characters are the unlikely buddy-sidekicks of the film who work efficiently as a fighting unit, and Alan Tudyk’s K-2SO whilst sometimes a little too forced, is one hell of an upgrade from C-3PO. Forest Whitaker and Mads Mikkelsen are both not given nearly enough screen time, and finally we have Ben Mendelsohn who is really just the archetype evil villain.

Rogue One however does look beautiful and takes advantage of well designed sets and practical effects almost as effectively as The Force Awakens. There’s X-Wings, Y-Wings and TIE-Fighters galore, as well as various Imperial Walkers on the ground, and plenty of idiotic-as-ever Stormtroopers to be mown-down. There are a few moments of fan service just as in last year's instalment, although not as numerous, and the main sequences are tied together with a fantastic score by Michael Giacchino that weaves in just the right amount of Williams’ iconic soundtrack. One of the biggest issues with the film is *possible spoilers* the  use of CGI to bring a character back from the original films (and effectively the actor back from the dead) who I didn’t really think needed to be in the film at all.

Rogue One feels like a slightly-unnecessary, heavily bloated chapter in the greater Star Wars universe that doesn’t do enough with its characters. However it does manage to differentiate itself from the main saga, and has been made with enough love and devotion to the canon to make it worthwhile viewing for Star Wars fans.

Jason Bourne

The last movie in this series The Bourne Legacy was considered to be a disappointment by some fans due to the fact that despite his name being in the title, the movie distinctly lacked everyone's favourite amnesiac super weapon. There's no such confusion with this movie however, as you can't name it Jason Bourne and not have Matt Damon front and centre. This return to the character we know and love is all well and good, but it still follows the exact same formula that we saw in the original three movies.

Jason Bourne (Damon) has finally recovered from his amnesia, but is trying to live a quiet life under the radar. He is forced out of hiding however, after his old ally Nicky Parsons (Julia Stiles) has hacked into the CIA database, taking files about all the black op programs that the Agency has run in the past and ones they will run in the future. A team is assembled to hunt for Parsons and, by association, Bourne and is led by Heather Lee (Alicia Vikander), a young agent working in the Cyber Ops Division. She is overseen by the new Agency head Robert Dewey (Tommy Lee Jones), who is keen to protect his new Iron Hand program, even if that means sending an assassin (Vincent Cassel) to kill indiscriminately.

This is the first film in the series in which Tony Gilroy has not been involved in the writing process, but unless you know what to look for, the story doesn't seem like it has changed much. It does take into account the new world in which we live and while Bourne isn't trying to expose anything, he does get caught up in a new program which involves tracking everyone's social media posts and looks at the argument of giving up privacy for security. This storyline does take a back seat and while it is interesting, there isn't a lot of time given to it.

The action is everything we've come to expect in a Paul Greengrass movie. Lots of short choppy hand to hand combat, something that Bourne is an expert with. However, some shots of the action felt a bit off. There is a scene where Bourne falls off a rooftop and is aided with some CGI. This feels really out of place in a movie series that is reliant on all the action being done for real. The car chase at the end of the movie went way over the top too, for the level of plausibility we've come to expect. While the movie does talk about emergent technologies that can help in the intelligence field, the ones they take for granted seem extremely advanced. It's not that easy to gain access to a Berlin CCTV system from all the way in the US, but this movie shows us that anything is possible if you tap at a keyboard.

The characters were interesting enough for me, but again they were following in the footsteps of the same characters we've seen before. Control room woman backed by shady older man in charge of ruthless agent who tries to stop Bourne. While Vikander and Jones played their parts well, it just seemed like a paint by numbers. I will say however that Vincent Cassel was a standout as the ruthless assassin, but only because he seems like he does that as a side job (that or the professional thief that he was in Ocean's Twelve). I will say that Riz Ahmed was a standout in this movie, not just because his character was new or topical, but because he was very believable as the tech company head that he was playing.

So, is Jason Bourne worth seeing? I know that I have just gone on and on about how it's the same movie we've seen before, but it's still very good. The action sequences are beautifully choreographed (yes, they can be even when the camera is bouncing around) and the spy stuff feels genuine enough. It's a great two hours to sit down and try to make sense of the story (it's not that confusing) as Bourne retraces yet more steps to discover more of his past.

Nightcrawler

"You filmed him die."
"It's my job. I like to say that if you see me you're having the worse day of your life."

Jake Gyllenhaal is gaunt, verging on skeletal, wide-eyed, spewing entrepreneurial rhetoric, and is yet wholly terrifying as Louis Bloom, a man desperate enough to do anything to be successful in the orange and yellow-hued streets of night-time Los Angeles. Nightcrawler is the directorial debut of screen-writer Dan Gilroy (The Fall, Real Steel and Two For the Money) that also stars Riz Ahmed, Bill Paxton and Gilroy's real-life wife, Rene Russo who all become a part of Lou's small corner of the underworld of night-time news journalism.

The film opens on a series of establishing shots of Los Angeles at night, awash with colour, where life and noise is ever-present off-screen, and the thrumming score is barely audible. The film then settles on Bloom, a man desperate enough to steal and sell almost anything he can, yet has such a vocal and principled perspective of hard-work that is strangely hypnotic. A perpetually rejected and alone Bloom happens upon a car accident and is swept up with the audacity and energy of Bill Paxton's Joe Loder. Loder is a nightcrawler, a freelance videographer who exuberantly films the crash, intending to sell it to the highest-bidding news outlet and affirms Blooms curiousity with the simple motto "If it bleeds, it leads." Spurred by the potential of this business, Blooms purchases a camera, hires the desperate and homeless Rick (Riz Ahmed of Four Lions) and endeavours to capture the most graphic footage first, and sell it to news director Nina (Russo), with whom he soon finds a kindred spirit.

Louis Bloom neatly joins the ever-growing ranks of cinemas great, nightmarish protagonists such as Travis Bickle and Patrick Bateman with his disassociation from other people and apparent lack of scruples, morals and humanity. Gyllenhaal apparently shed 20 pounds to sell Bloom as a "hungry coyote", and perfectly melts into the wide-eyed unblinking stare of the character. His performance is absolute, the hand movements and gestures, the walk, even the tone that he delivers his rhetoric, Gyllenhaal delivers it all perfectly, and the darker moments of Bloom, when his rage, his hatred and even his manipulative spirit come to the surface, Gyllenhaal never shies away or takes a bite out of the scenery. Riz Ahmed as Rick is the conscience of Bloom, downtrodden, quiet, unsure and desperate, and played tragically well. And Russo as Nina, who maintains this fast-talking facade of authority, when she's often in over her head, is also great. There are several scenes where each of these supports are alone with Bloom, where the scope and reality of his manipulation, his determined rhetoric, and even the threat of what he is capable of, can create awkward comedy and spine-chilling horror. These scenes become long and uncomfortable, but in the best possible way, as the audience is trapped in a car or a booth with this dangerous nightcrawler, as he advances or threatens, unblinking, unflinching, uncompromising, undeterred.

Nightcrawler is filmed with the intent to sell the character of LA. The broad wash of colours, the grainy tone of the film, the neighbourhoods both rich and poor, and especially the encounters in emergency situations, where police, firemen, ambulance crews, onlookers and the news media all collide in moments of high tension and emotion. The use of close-ups and lighting is brilliant, changing perceptions and capturing minute details.. The score meanders from dark drones and percussion, to almost Disney levels of light, inquisitive orchestration, even in moments of heightened violence or danger, perhaps to reflect the mindset of Bloom in these moments, but nonetheless being distracting. But as fascinating as these methods of film-making are, they are dominated by the performances.

Overall, Nightcrawler is a dark, character-driven commentary on the mindset of news media and the entrepreneurial spirit. It is a film laden with rich, detailed and measured performances within a plot that does not twist and turn, but slowly drags the audience into places they'll wish they'd never ventured. The score at times disassociates and detracts from the content on-screen, but is otherwise brooding and dangerous. A brilliant film that lives up to the hype surrounding it and is worthy of the praise, and a watch.