NormanCroucher Reviews

The Cloverfield Paradox (2018)

The 'Cloverfield' multi-verse reaches peak levels of stupid

[5/10 · 8 February 2018]

Another installment in the uneven anthology series that started with Godzilla via found footage, then continued with a Hitchcockian subterranean nightmare, and now dovetails into an 'Alien' clone that tries to tie all these (clearly) disparate movies into one universe. And this is the fundamental flaw of 'The Cloverfield Paradox', it never feels like its own story, merely just a retcon intended to open up the franchise to more installments with the brand name attached.

I think everyone can admit that the cast for this film is absolutely stunning. You have several hot property Oscar-caliber stars with some sought-after character actors to back them up... and Chris O'Dowd. What exactly attracted names like Gugu Mbatha-Raw, David Oyelowo and Daniel Brühl to this project (other than money) is so far beyond my comprehension that we could in fact be living in our own Cloverfield parallel universe. Their characters are either walking plot ciphers or basic horror movie fodder with no discernible differences between them other than their nationalities and simplistic emotional pallets (i.e. anger or fear). The script from 'Paranormal Activity' creator Oren Uziel could easily be a 20 year old first time screenwriter's attempt at knocking out a sci-fi thriller and has the dialogue to match. To be fair to Uziel, he does have the daunting task of trying to both expand upon and tie together all these different films, but winds up throwing in everything but the kitchen sink. There are too many ideas flying around that do not hold together cohesively enough to work, or even make sense, when all we needed was just a simple story with a clear and defined trajectory - the one trait the previous films shared in common the most.

Furthermore, the production looks disappointingly cheap. Compare the stagey production design to that of Danny Boyle's tremendous 'Sunshine' and this suddenly begins to look like a Syfy Channel original. I can totally understand how this bypassed cinemas and went straight to Netflix because had I been the distributor (in this case Paramount), I'd have taken one look at the final cut and cringed with embarrassment (and possibly died from shame). Perhaps director Julius Onah is going for that sci-fi B-feature feeling, in which case the film is a complete success because it most certainly is B-grade. It's just a shame it takes down an A-list cast with it. That's not to say that the film is not enjoyable on these terms because it most certainly is - if you like monster movies and 'Alien' rip-offs - but you have to buy into the core concept of what JJ Abrams and co are trying to do, which is to cynically reverse engineer a mythology based on a 10 year old found footage monster flick so they can launch the 'Cloverfield' multi-verse.

The thing is, 'Cloverfield' was nothing more than a viral marketing campaign in search of a better movie, while '10 Cloverfield Lane' was a really good thriller that would have been better served as a standalone story. So 'The Cloverfield Paradox' was somewhat doomed to fail in many ways. That said, there is enough fun to be had with the increasingly bonkers plot and spotting all the ham-fisted attempts at mythology building to almost make it a guilty pleasure. Almost.

Bright (I) (2017)

Great premise squandered by pedestrian execution

[5/10 · 23 December 2017]

Director David Ayer smashes together the vérité-style grit of his cop drama 'End of Watch' with the effects laden decadence of his more recent directorial effort 'Suicide Squad'. The premise of 'Bright' makes for a really cool pitch - imagine a cop movie set in a world where magic, orcs and elves exist alongside humans in everyday life. This should have been a lot of fun to watch but Ayer and screenwriter Max Landis get too bogged down in trying to turn an inspired but silly story into a heavy-handed allegory for racism and prejudice.

Will Smith blows back onto the screen with a performance that helps to remind us that he was once the biggest movie star in the world and, while his box office wattage has most definitely diminished in the intervening years, he proves that he can still hold a picture together with his charismatic screen presence. Perhaps his most impressive feat in 'Bright' is taking Landis' ham-fisted attempts at gritty street dialogue and managing to sell it with an energy and conviction that it probably didn't deserve. He has sturdy back-up in the form of a completely unrecognizable Joel Edgerton as his orc cop partner, who continues to choose interesting and diverse roles to test out his thesping chops. These guys manage to build a semi-convincing bromance in spite of the screenplay's familiar take on the mismatched cop dynamic that sees Smith hate his partner from the outset only to grow to care for him over the course of the film's play (bonding through all the shootouts and chases with stock buddy-com banter). These two actors do their best and acquit themselves well, although the rest of the cast seem to veer between stilted or embarrassed, never knowing which genre tone they should be playing up to more.

And the tonality of the piece is what creates much of 'Bright's' disconnect. Its sociopolitical ambitions are loftier than its actual subject matter and these two conflicting tones - popcorn fantasy cop thriller versus self-serious contemporary racial allegory - don't quite mesh. One assumes that the orcs are supposed to be representative of the black community, with some scenes depicting them being beaten by cops or cussed out and marginalized because of how they look, and while this concept worked really well in 1988's similarly rendered 'Alien Nation', it often rings hollow here because Ayer and Landis mix their metaphors far too often and their overall message is muddy as a result. Perhaps they meant the orcs to merely represent the "other", in which case they probably should have avoided using every ghetto racial stereotype in the book when it came to their background players.

There is something shockingly cheap and stagey about the production too. Considering the $90 million budget and the scope of the story it feels very small. That epic, sprawling world you might be hoping for never truly pops off the screen and that is a real shame because the potential here was pretty high. That is not to say that the film is without any pleasures. Once the MacGuffin of the magic wand kick starts the action, we are treated to some finely staged set-pieces that blend bullets and magic to relatively entertaining effect and a steady momentum begins to build as our heroes face down all kinds of foes, both supernatural and human. It's like Harry Potter replaced Ethan Hawke's character in 'Training Day' and it is hard to deny the charm of that.

'Bright' succeeds on occasion when trying to blend its two disparate genres and you can sometimes glimpse what might have been had Landis simply sold the idea and let a more capable screenwriter pen the actual script - David Ayer would have been a top choice! Maybe then Ayer could have passed over the directing reigns to someone with a bigger appetite for fantasy and a more audacious vision (Guillermo del Toro or Peter Jackson come to mind). But that is what could have been. We have to focus on what is, and 'Bright' is merely a pedestrian film and a colossal wasted opportunity.

Hangman (II) (2017)

Ludicrous VOD serial killer thriller takes Al Pacino down with it

[3/10 · 3 December 2017]

Perhaps Al Pacino should have called it a day at the turn of the millennium and taken early retirement because his career post-2002 has been a downward spiral ever since. 'Hangman' brings to mind another serial killer thriller of Pacino's called 'Righteous Kill' from 2008, where he reunited with fellow acting titan Robert De Niro, and in which both legends got taken down by a ripe script and suspect editing.

In a plot ripped straight outta the 1990s, Pacino plays a retired detective brought in to help Karl Urban's haunted-by-his-past cop to catch a serial killer who hangs his victims as part of an elaborately constructed real life game of hangman. The killer taunts his pursuers with absurd clues while possessing an uncanny ability to know every move they are going to make right down to when they will arrive at crime scenes. It is utterly ludicrous but familiar for the genre. The same kind of criticisms could be leveled at David Fincher's 'Se7en'. The serial killer's master plan in that film relies on the single hope that the cops investigating the case are smart enough to notice all of his abstract clues while managing to make connections between the victims and figuring things out at the exact right time. But because 'Se7en' was so well done, its deeply contrived plot endured against any real scrutiny. 'Hangman', on the other hand, earns no such free pass because it is just risible nonsense.

The film certainly benefits from having someone like Pacino loan out his screen presence, even if it feels like he is simply on paycheck autopilot. Urban, as Pacino's fellow detective, fairs less better and, let's be honest, is hardly a match for his seasoned co-star when it comes to performance (then again who is?). Urban is not a particularly compelling actor to watch anyway, unless he's impersonating DeForest Kelley or covering his face with a Judge's helmet, while Brittany Snow is way out of her league but, in her defence, she is saddled with an entirely implausible access-all- areas journalist character who wanders into active crime scenes with the lead detectives and helps to solve clues and race to save victims-to-be. I ask you: is there a police force anywhere in the world that would allow such a scenario to take place? This is a heavy reflection of just how contrived and lazy the plotting is. And then there is the woeful finale where the killer monologues some motivation for all the murders and you realise just how nonsensical his master plan has been.

These problems with the film do not end with the listless performances and the botched hatchet-job of a script. They are in fact exacerbated by the rather leaden and unimaginative direction by Johnny Martin (now there's a name you can trust!), who stages his scenes without any panache or style, while his set-pieces feel perfunctory and uninvolving. What could have possibly been an enjoyable but throwaway 'serial killer with a gimmick' story loses any sense of its momentum or impact because the presentation is so dull. Not that any semi- competent director could have rescued this from the bargain bin it was born in.

Pacino deserves better material. We've seen this guy conquer this genre plenty of times before in excellent movies like 'Sea of Love' and 'Insomnia', and the fact that he has been relegated to starring in this down market VOD feature is the most insulting part of the whole viewing experience. 'Hangman' sometimes verges on the unwatchable, and Pacino, as a talent, has been anything but.

Wind River (2017)

Allegorical mystery thriller makes for a haunting experience

[8/10 · 1 November 2017]

Screenwriter Taylor Sheridan's directorial debut is a rather bleak affair that mixes murder mystery with the modern day western, set in a frozen landscape where cowboys and indians still roam, only now as long-forgotten ghosts. And the war between them still rages on.

Jeremy Renner and Elizabeth Olsen enjoy a naturalistic and believable dynamic together, perhaps thanks to their previous working collaborations, and the usual mismatched partners at odds clichés are immediately done away with by establishing both characters as professional, capable and cooperative. While this is a refreshing spin on a familiar trope, their relationship does lack a degree of conflict and drama. Renner's tracker has a sad backstory so he's all good for character depth, but Olsen's FBI agent is pretty much a mystery. We never learn much about her as a person or her past, which is a shame because she is utterly compelling in the role, projecting equal parts vulnerability and intensity. The whole cast feels authentic and natural and helps to really sell this world of an Indian reservation buried in ice and blood. Perhaps more time could have been spent exploring these people in greater depth. I would have gladly watched an extra 10-15 minutes of this story, just to get to know everyone better and feel more invested in them.

What is most commendable about Sheridan's muscular plotting is that it feels like a genuine investigation unfolding. There is nothing staged or contrived about it, even when we get a sharp stab of action. He also engineers a very slick third act reveal and transition to help us better understand events in context without the need for someone to monologue out some exposition of the hows, whys and whos. Once we finally get a clearer (and highly disturbing) picture of what happened, the metaphor that Sheridan's narrative is trying to embody becomes apparent and that the young woman's death at the start is analogous to the rape and murder of an entire culture, left to drown in its own blood in the middle of nowhere. With films about the Native American experience (and modern America's historical guilt complex), the solution to the case was perhaps an obvious and inevitable revelation, but still effective as allegory. For me, it is a message that would have been rendered far more powerful had Renner's character been written to be an actual Native American, something I suspect that Sheridan may have originally intended.

'Wind River' matches the unforgiving weather it portrays, much in the same way the atmospherics in Denis Villeneuve's tonally similar 'Prisoners' reflected the mindset of its characters and themes of its story. The beautiful snowy landscapes and crisp cinematography really help to sell this desolate frontier feeling, while the haunting score evokes an air of foreboding as well as a sense of loss. There are some minor gripes here but this is strong and solid storytelling that marks a promising debut for Sheridan in the director's chair.

Wheelman (2017)

Thriller that cannot surpass the limitations of its premise

[6/10 · 30 October 2017]

95% of the film takes place inside a single car and sees grizzled character actor Frank Grillo take point as the titular wheelman. If you saw Tom Hardy in the one-man-driving-in-a-car drama 'Locke', then just imagine that experience with added car chases. Sure, Grillo is no Hardy, but he's a capable and charismatic actor who projects a high level of intensity and holds the screen with relative ease. The concept of telling a generic crime story entirely from within the inside of a car is what makes this feel a little bit different from the norm, but it also means that the film is limited in terms of what it can actually accomplish as an action thriller. All in all, 'Wheelman' is a well made but pretty unremarkable film, although first time writer/director Jeremy Rush may prove one to watch in future.

Baby Driver (2017)

Bland and generic heist film with nice visual tics

[3/10 · 30 October 2017]

Edgar Wright riffs on Nicolas Winding Refn's 'Drive' but packages it for teenage audiences who like things to happen faster and with less logic. Once you scratch beneath the shiny surface of 'Baby Driver', what you are likely to find is a totally unremarkable (sometimes nonsensical) story elevated by its director's hyper-energetic visuals and an all-star cast.

It was probably a mistake to throw the young (and rather charisma- free) Ansel Elgort up against such a strong ensemble of far more experienced and talented veterans like Kevin Spacey and Jamie Foxx. These guys are all on their A-game here, even if their characters have walked straight out of the storage warehouse for Heist Crew Members For Hire. Elgort is, frankly, a bore to watch on screen which is made worse by the fact that he is playing a man of few words. Lily James, as his love interest, is equally as dull. In that respect, they are a match made in dreary young actor heaven. Almost all of their scenes together are a slog, not to mention that their romance is totally unconvincing, and that is a fundamental problem because their love story should be the emotional throughline of the piece, helping to raise the stakes and anchor our sympathies. It is a failure of both the bland lead casting and unimaginative writing.

The soundtrack choices and Wright's trademark visual tics help to boost the momentum of individual scenes and set-pieces, but Wright cannot disguise the lack of invention elsewhere in his storytelling, no matter how convoluted and haphazard the plotting gets. This is so generic and familiar at almost every stage that nothing comes as a surprise and only minor quirks in character behaviour and dialogue set it apart. Haunted hero with a tragic past? Check. One last job? Check. Heist goes wrong? Check. Macho bravado creates conflict within the crew? Check. Hero's helpless love interest threatened? Check. It is a smorgasbord of crime film clichés and tropes, without much attempts at subversion. Even the car chases look pretty standard in a time when franchises like 'Fast & Furious' have already cranked things up to Spinal Tap-levels of 11.

This is the very definition of style over substance and its complete lack of originality and reliance on the oldest clichés in the book make it an overall disappointment. One could argue that 'Baby Driver' is a celebration of cinematic crime stories, from 'The Driver' to 'Point Break', and if that is indeed the case, then I'm sorry to say that Edgar's party sucks.

Brawl in Cell Block 99 (2017)

Hit-and-miss throwback to 1970s exploitation thrillers

[5/10 · 29 October 2017]

A rather odd exploitation-style throwback that places Vince Vaughn in a dramatic lead role, something we rarely see the man do these days, for this character-driven crime thriller that unfolds without much energy or urgency.

Vaughn plays a contradiction of a main character, who is at once extremely violent yet morally principled, full of brutality and rage yet somehow intelligent and reasonable, and therefore his character's motivations often feel woolly and confusing. Vaughn makes an honourable attempt to breathe life into this guy but the problems really stem from the moral ambivalence within the screenplay itself. He is neither a hero nor an anti-hero, sometimes barely even qualifying as a protagonist, but he remains our guide on this violent journey into jailhouse hell where he must beat his way through some tough-as- nails prisoners to save his pregnant wife on the outside. There is plenty of grit and snarl once he enters prison and starts breaking skulls (literally), but I found myself so removed from the experience and the characters that I kept asking myself the question: 'Why do I care about any of this?'

Writer/director S. Craig Zahler employs the same tricks he used in 'Bone Tomahawk' by presenting a simplistic plot populated by man's man characters, told at a methodical (almost casual) pace and punctuated by some shocking moments of brutality. It's a formula that mostly worked for Zahler's aforementioned horror western, but is less successful here. You can tell he is deeply in love with Walter Hill movies, with men trying to out-tough one another while spitting back some salty dialogue, but Hill's movies often had a matter-of-fact intensity to them that Zahler cannot quite manifest here. There is a detached and lifeless quality to his film and it has no real dramatic thrust behind it, even when Vaughn's brawler has a genuine reason to fight and the audience has a genuine reason to root for him. We just amble from scene to scene without much emotional connection to anyone or anything, watching the very well choreographed violence breakout in repetitive cycles until there is some kind of closure and the whole thing ends.

'Brawl in Cell Block 99' is a watchable curiosity and provides some baseline fighting action which may be thrilling enough for some people. Vaughn does his best to escape his wise ass comedian typecasting but the material offers him very little opportunity to flex those somewhat flaccid dramatic muscles. He does however demonstrate how well he can take a punch and stomp on people's heads.

Spider-Man: Homecoming (2017)

A lighthearted take on a well worn costumed superhero

[6/10 · 28 October 2017]

This is the third incarnation of Spider-Man in the past 15 years, so it was always going to be an uphill battle to make it fresh and exciting to audiences. Quite wisely, director Jon Watts plays 'Spider-Man: Homecoming' for laughs and scales down the world-ending threats to craft a more intimate and quirky comic book adventure with street- level stakes. Thanks to the lightness of tone and the quirk of the characters, the film mostly succeeds, even if the plot never rises above the mildly diverting.

Tom Holland is the most believable and endearing Peter Parker yet - perhaps because he doesn't look like a 30 year old man playing at being a high schooler. Holland brings a wide-eyed charm and enthusiasm to the role and is instantly likable as both the bumbling geeky student and his bumbling heroic alter ego. The whole endeavor hinges on Holland being able to pull off the character and he acquits himself well, ably supported by a commendably diverse and zany supporting cast. Meanwhile, Michael Keaton returns to the superhero fold, aping both his Oscar-nominated turn in 'Birdman' as well as winking back to his days in the batsuit. His villainous plans aren't particularly interesting or all that menacing but his backstory as a peeved off blue collar worker (shown in a prologue at the start) helps to ground him in some kind of reality, as opposed to the usual Marvel villains who tend to be bog standard power-hungry megalomaniacs.

Set-piece-wise, 'Homecoming' takes a page out of 'Iron Man's' comic book and keeps the threats scaled down and pretty simple, making for a pleasant diversion from all the endless CGI spectacle and destruction porn audiences have sadly become accustomed to, even if the climax itself cannot quite resist overdosing on the VFX budget. Also helping to inject a fresh shot of energy into (what was becoming) a stale cinematic superhero is the way in which both the screenplay and performances embrace the true-to-life tropes and behaviours of modern teenagers - the socially awkward banter; the pop cultural savvy; the obsession with technology and gadgets; the infuriating desire to fit in and be liked, etc. The way in which the characters engage with the story and each other feels reasonably accurate to the perspective actual teenagers might take if a hero like this really existed, at least without it feeling artificial or needing to fall back on those hoary old Hollywood high school clichés.

The problems of the film mostly lie within its underwhelming plot, enlivened only by the wink-and-you'll-miss-them gags and the sheer eccentricity of the characters. The strengths of this reboot lie within the way the tale is told rather than the tale itself. In terms of those inevitable comparisons with its former incarnations, 'Homecoming' comfortably beats the dreadful Andrew Garfield-era reboots but falls a few steps short of being as entertaining as Sam Raimi's first two 'Spider-Man' outings, which offered up a different style of quirkiness but ultimately felt more cinematic than Watts' version.

This new street-level Spidey proves that there is still life left in the character yet, but because it embraces irreverence and comedy so well, there is a definite lack of tension and the experience feels a tad insubstantial as a consequence. Whether or not it can survive the common Marvel problem of crappy second installments (Iron Man, Thor, Avengers and Guardians all suffered from diminishing returns) remains to be seen. But if anyone can break the curse, it's the socially awkward guy in the red and blue spandex.

The Blackcoat's Daughter (I) (2015)

This atmospheric and interesting chiller is not for everyone

[6/10 · 28 October 2017]

Also known as 'February'.

This slow burn psychological horror film does not reveal itself right away. It splinters its narrative between a pair of young women left behind at their catholic boarding school during a winter break and a potentially unstable woman who has been picked up by good samaritans while drifting through a nearby town. How these plot fragments fit together is left as a mystery for quite some time, compelling the audience to follow this cryptic road map that has no clear direction at the journey's inception. It is part of what makes the experience so unnerving in a way. You know something awful is lurking at the end destination, you're just not sure what.

As a result of this ambiguity, 'The Blackcoat's Daughter' will not be for everyone. For the majority of the runtime, there is nothing overtly happening beyond some eerie atmospherics and strange incidents and conversations that point to a larger game at play, while writer/director Oz Perkins makes effective use of sound design and an ominous synth score to underwrite the unsettling mood of the piece. This is his directorial debut and he shows an unfettered confidence in spinning and weaving together the threads of his spider's web, which you'll still be untangling once it's all over. It is an impressive and assured calling card from a first-time filmmaker whom we can expect more interesting projects from in the future, though I don't imagine his output will draw in large audiences.

The cast is pretty solid, with Emma Roberts playing aloof and brittle throughout, while Lucy Boynton and Kiernan Shipka generate some efficacious tension during the school scenes, but it is perhaps the quiet intensity of James Remar that keeps the experience spicy. Whenever he is on screen you are never entirely sure if he is a creepy threat or merely a somber but sincere man. It's one of the best performances he has given in a long time and adds to the overall mystery of the plot. However, since none of the character motivations are ever made completely clear, it makes it difficult to invest in anyone because there is a nagging suspicion that the rug is going to be pulled out from beneath us with any one of them at any given time. Without a clear protagonist with a clear goal or arc, we are left to observe events rather than participate in them.

Then there is the question of substance. What does this whole story add up to once we reach the end? Perkins seems more concerned with trading in shock value and brutal violence with his third act than he is with revelation. If you're going to tell a psychological horror story then you need to be exploring something deeper than surface textures and terrors. You need to embrace metaphor and subtext, and ultimately impart a deeper meaning, whether that be about grief or religion or sexuality or fear, or whatever the case may be. I am not quite sure we get that substance here, but sometimes the most disturbing and effective horror films know how to generate an atmosphere of foreboding and evoke a palpable sense of dread, and 'The Blackcoat's Daughter' succeeds in that respect.

For those who like their horror more immediate and visceral, this film will be a tough and frustrating slog until the last 20 minutes, but for those who prefer chills over thrills, this might be a spider web worth getting caught in and untangling.

Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

That rarest of beasts - a superior sequel

[9/10 · 23 October 2017]

Ridley Scott's 'Blade Runner' is a much beloved cult classic that I've never particularly warmed to. I have embarked upon many rewatches over the years in the hopes of finally 'getting it', but its plodding pace and dreary characters always defy my desire to positively reassess it. Yes, it is a beautiful looking film with rich themes and ideas, and an intensely rendered climax, but it all rings rather hollow as a viewing experience. 'Blade Runner' clearly suffered from a string of production problems and on-set tensions, so much so the director never quite felt he got it right and continued to tinker with it years after its release. As a non-Blade Runner enthusiast, I approached its sequel with zero expectations and found that it far surpasses the muddled ambitions and achievements of the original.

Director Denis Villeneuve architects some of the most visually stunning images I have seen from a director currently working today and absolutely equals the beauty of Scott's original. From his rich compositions of the dystopian vistas to his blocking and framing of individual scenes between his actors, every shot is like a living and breathing painting. The fully realised imagery is hypnotic in its gaze and tactile in its design, while any traces of the surely Oscar- worthy VFX get lost in the haze of Roger Deakins' exquisite cinematography. This is pure cinematic spectacle that needs to be seen on the biggest screen possible with the best sound system available to do justice to the incredible sound design and Vangelis- inspired score.

Of course, '2049' is not only about the kind of high brow artistry that makes film buffs blush. The material wants to be more accessible to a broader audience and, without pandering or dumbing down, allows room for some bone-cracking confrontations that make you feel every impact. The violence here hurts, much in the way Rutger Hauer's Roy Batty made it hurt for Harrison Ford's Rick Deckard last time around. With that noted, it's important to recognise that this is not a blockbuster of set-pieces. All the action is an organic extension of the story and never feels contrived, with the slight exception of the climax where the grandiose plot basically apexes with a slugfest between diametrically opposed replicants. It is well done and viscerally thrilling but feels frustratingly routine for a film that has been, until that point, anything but.

In terms of story, '2049' makes the right call in not trying to replicate the narrative beats of its former, and instead presents a new story with its own central mysteries and original characters that work on their own terms, while retaining the thematic essence of both Philip K Dick's source and its subsequent 1982 adaptation. We also get a genuine detective story this time, which requires its protagonist to engage in some actual detective work - following leads, gathering clues, figuring out what the hell is going on - and it takes its sweet time to do so without ever dragging its heels. One of the other improvements '2049' makes upon its source material is the generation of a more compelling emotional story, both in terms of Ryan Gosling's romantic sub-plot with Ana de Armas' holographic girlfriend (which provides one of the most striking and remarkable love scenes in recent memory) and the haunting echoes of Ford's bygone relationship with Sean Young's replicant Rachel.

Another element that just clicks is the casting. Gosling uses the quiet steely charisma he demonstrated in 'Drive' and imbues his protagonist with an intensity and laser focus that has just the right hints of humanity and existential angst so that we buy him as both a compliant replicant who hunts his own kind and as an android on the verge of emotional and metaphysical revelation. As for the original Blade Runner himself, craggy old Ford, it is a pleasure to see him acting like he actually cares about his material again. He delivers one of his most nuanced and layered performances in years and shows a range and depth that his 1982 performance lacked almost entirely. Maybe it's because he actually wanted to be there this time. Although I would seriously question Ford getting second billing after Gosling, considering 75% of the film takes place in his absence. When he does finally pop up it is (thankfully) not just in some glorified cameo appearance but as a key player in the story's denouement and ending.

There is so much to admire about 'Blade Runner 2049' and on so many levels - epic in its scope; underscored by a thoughtful, intelligent script, which is told in a steady and methodical way; and brought to life with breathtaking beauty. Perhaps the most impressive thing about '2049' is that it exists at all. I have no qualms about saying that it is one of the best sequels ever made.

Maze Runner: The Scorch Trials (2015)

Enjoyable YA adventure that throws in everything but the kitchen sink

[6/10 · 22 October 2017]

'The Maze Runner' was a surprisingly entertaining young adult adventure with a disappointingly lame conclusion. After a good 100 minutes of finely staged set-pieces and well constructed intrigue and mystery, we were given some clunky exposition to explain what the whole story had been about in the most melodramatic and abrupt way possible in order to set-up a sequel. And this sequel, for all intents and purposes, may as well be from a different genre and film series altogether. It is so bizarrely different to its predecessor that it takes a while to reacquaint yourself with the characters and the convoluted situation the find themselves in (thanks largely to Part 1's ridiculous explanation for the maze). It's all to do with *groan* a virus that turns people into mutant zombie thingys.

However, once 'The Scorch Trials' gets moving it proves itself to be just as relentlessly enjoyable as the original, sans awful ending, injecting a high-energy enthusiasm into its inventive action sequences which sees it through some problems, of which there are plenty. Part 2 is extremely weak on characterisations, relying on an audience's knowledge of the characters from a previous outing to fill in the blanks, but there wasn't much to the fresh faced cast the first time around anyway, beyond some basic personality traits and physical attributes. And then there's the plot, or lack thereof. This is essentially just one long chase across a desert with some occasional pit-stops made to help save the SFX and stunt teams some money. But the set-pieces are so well executed that whenever a plot threatens to rear its troublesome head you're almost relieved to see it smacked right back down in its place beneath all the running, jumping and escaping. This is not a franchise that does very well with plot. It does, however, do action rather well.

In the seemingly endless onslaught of YA adaptations for the big screen, this is above average for the genre and stands as a fairly solid romp that chucks in just about every post-apocalyptic cliché there is, but does so with great enthusiasm and energy. It's hard to dislike a film that efficiently hits its targets, even if they are hit at extremely close range. And this time, the ending isn't abysmal.

Logan (2017)

Uncompromising comic book neo-western packs a punch

[7/10 · 22 October 2017]

This down-and-dirty 'X-Men' spin-off takes its cues from classic westerns, specifically 'Unforgiven', and presents a compelling and surprisingly emotional take on cinematic comic book characters who had started to feel somewhat worn out. Ironically, this final chapter of the old guard rejuvenates what had become a stale and predictable franchise.

Hugh Jackman reprises his animalistic icon and the role now fits him like a well-worn boxing glove, only this time he imbues Wolverine with such a sense of irreparable brokenness and emotional gravitas that it ranks as one of his finest performances to date. Patrick Stewart also shows us some of his best work as an ailing Charles Xavier, no longer the stable source of wisdom and serenity, but instead a fragile old man suffering through an illness of the mind that has robbed him of his dignity. If you strip away the fantasy then this is about two ageing men – one a fallen war hero turned washed-up alcoholic and the other a former community leader turned lonely, Alzheimer's-ridden geriatric. Together, Jackman and Stewart make for the most compelling and unexpectedly touching double act. They turn a comic book western into something of a fragile buddy movie cum pseudo father/son story and their chemistry makes the film work.

There are issues with 'Logan' that stop it from realising its full potential though. The first hour is almost without fault: it's affecting and tense, full of pain and anger and grit and snarl, punctuated by salty dialogue, soulful performances, and bloody, brutal action set-pieces that pull no punches. However, as we switch gears into the third act, things begin to fall back on formula, especially once we meet the 'big bad' of the piece and lose an old friend in the process. The film loses something as a story after that and devolves into more standard comic book action adventure fare, particularly with its woodland-set climax that looks closer in spirit to the ramped-up silliness of 'X-Men Origins: Wolverine' than the dusty, dirty western-inspired imagery of the previous 100 minutes.

But I won't get too bogged down in the negative because there is much to celebrate here. This is really brilliant stuff, commendable for the risks it takes, more so because it is produced by a candy floss factory of blockbuster entertainment that usually assembly lines its products to be sweet and light. And there ain't no candy to be found with this flick. It's bloody, it's brutal and it's emotional. It's everything you could want from a mature comic book film really. 'Logan' engages with its key theme of growing old both in tender and tough ways, so much so that you forget you're watching an 'X-Men' film half of the time, while director James Mangold finally fulfils the promise he once showed (20 odd years ago no less) with his own magnum opus and neo-western 'Cop Land'. Even with my reservations about the last 30 mins, 'Logan' is still a magnificently made, uncompromising superhero film that has absolutely no interest in being a superhero film.

Gone Girl (2014)

Cold and methodical thriller that goes on too long

[6/10 · 22 October 2017]

Not having read the book, I experienced 'Gone Girl' cold. And that's pretty much how it left me come the end – cold. Perhaps that was the point but I suspect the ambitions of the film were aiming higher than simply provoking indifference. David Fincher has always been an expressive visual artist, painting sumptuous and richly textured images for us to be enveloped by, but what many of his film experiences lack is heart.

Ben Affleck and Rosamund Pike give it a good go though, playing a rather unlikable pair that become even more unlikable as the story unfolds. Affleck plays it nice but icy and Pike plays tightly coiled angst, and their relationship retains the interest namely because of the machinations and turns of the plot. It's a good mystery that takes its time to simmer before boiling over a little too much in the final third but it has a couple of devilishly good twists that flip the narrative on its head and play with your perceptions/expectations in extremely interesting ways.

However, take away Fincher's visual craftsmanship and you're left with a rather stretched and staggered plot that wobbles under the weight of its own running time. Why so long? I suspect the only real answer to that question is – Gillian Flynn, who adapted her own book and was perhaps a tad overly precious in translating her material to the screen. The result is a bum-numbing 150 mins for a story that only really deserves approximately 110-120 max. This is a thriller after all, not a socio-political epic. Its ending is also so contrived and inexplicable it fails to deliver the sucker punch promised from its first two acts - an ending which I imagine played much better in the book.

'Gone Girl' has aspirations of something greater, asking to be taken seriously as an exploration on the nature of the media, celebrity and gender politics but it never really rises above the pot-boiler intrigue of its original source material.

Get Out (I) (2017)

Sinister satire loses its way in the third act

[6/10 · 22 October 2017]

An offbeat horror film and satirical social commentary about race in America where the upper middle class liberals are the creepy villains and their political correctness is actually an overcompensation to mask the disturbing prejudices that lurk beneath. The film takes a detour from the conventional formula of the paranoid community-conspiracy thriller, but it's ultimately just an update on 'The Stepford Wives' with a racial twist.

This is an assured debut from comedian Jordan Peele, helped by an acutely OTT Hitchcockian score and some winning performances, with particular noteworthy turns from Bradley Whitford, who is perfectly cast as the overeager and sinister father, and Daniel Kaluuya, who balances that 'meet the parents' awkward politeness with a jagged edge of paranoia. There are many squirm in your seat moments - some of which are just the scenes where the thinly-veiled animosity and racial subtext bubble beneath the surface of the dialogue - and the unsettling atmosphere of the piece keeps you digesting in the dark underbelly of rich white suburbia right alongside Kaluuya's protagonist.

Peele manages to keep the story taut for the first hour, with heightened moments of almost comical tension, leaving the viewer unsure as to when things will spill over into pure horror, which it inevitably does. And once all the cards are put on the table much of the tension deflates and the situations become more arch and silly, from the weak comic relief sidekick subplot to the unnecessary expository villainy. All subtly and nuance is suddenly jettisoned at the tap of a teaspoon and Peele lowers the bar by over-explaining everything to his audience, perhaps the only real sign of his inexperience as a cinematic storyteller.

The other major problem with the film is that it's too predictable in terms of its plot to fulfill the thriller criteria of shock and surprise. There is never much doubt as to what is really happening and that takes away from the experience somewhat, but 'Get Out' is still a nerve-jangling tale for about an hour and change even though the third act is pure hokum. The best way to look at this is as a very twisted 'Guess Who's Coming to Dinner?' for millennials.

Circle (II) (2015)

Ingenious indie gem gives us a crash course in human nature

[7/10 · 22 October 2017]

An extremely effective low-budget antidote to all the leviathan- sized sci-fi movies out there. This places 50 people in a circle and asks of them: who deserves to live and who deserves to die? Such a premise is so simple, it's almost revolutionary.

This is a story of morality and how human beings deal with the imminent threat of dying, and it explores the diverse range of reactions, emotions and manipulations that exist on the spectrum. From desperation to condemnation, prejudice to privilege, hysteria to acceptance; there's an honesty at work in how the characters deal with their predicament and choices, and it's often an ugly truth to accept. To the credit of the writing/directing team Aaron Hann and Mario Miscione, they never shy away from showing just how petty and selfish the human race can be.

The performances are mostly excellent across a cast of predominantly unknown faces and the script manages to keep up the pace and tension without ever slipping too far into contrivance. Usually the danger of films like this (set in a single location) is that they tend to suffer from either bad production values or run out of ideas towards the third act. Thankfully, 'Circle' embraces its beautifully minimalist style for the better and stays true to its premise right through until the very (bitter) end.

Green Room (2015)

Down and dirty indie thriller has visceral thrills but lacks heart

[6/10 · 22 October 2017]

'Green Room' matches the intensity and grimness of writer/director Jeremy Saulnier's breakout effort 'Blue Ruin', but lacks the soul that made that film so haunting and tragically poetic.

It stars the late Anton Yelchin in another low key, naturalistic performance alongside a cast of young character actors who really sell the authenticity of this world. It's grimy and dirty and frightening, and that's even before the violent mayhem starts. The atmosphere is dripping with bad vibes and simmering with an undercurrent of violence, and this feeling is mostly thanks to a convincing cast and some tautly engineered direction. Perhaps the biggest surprise of the cast is Patrick Stewart as the neo-nazi establishment owner who coldly calculates the demise of our main characters. Once you get past the fact that it is Sir Patrick (The Sci-fi Nerd King) breaking some bad, he really is quite chilling to watch.

The film has several disturbingly violent sequences that escalate with each new confrontation until a fairly scattershot climax and it mostly makes for a tense watch. However, because the characters aren't explored in any significant way it supplies us with only superficial thrills via the visceral nature of the violence depicted and the fact that we naturally prefer that the underwritten heavy metal rockers win out over the underwritten nutball Nazis who are trying to slay them. It's ultimately just a dirty indie remake of John Carpenter's 'Assault on Precinct 13', but it does a good job of living up to its heritage.

Hell or High Water (II) (2016)

Well made and acted neo-western lacks emotional impact

[6/10 · 22 October 2017]

David Mackenzie's neo-western is a eulogy on the death of the American west and the last of the cowboys. There is a wistful mood and a mournful tone, with a sense of loss at the heart of the piece, and in many ways the film is all about loss - the loss of family, the loss of time, the loss of money, the loss of dignity. It's a remarkably understated crime thriller that uses the architecture of the old cat-and-mouse chase formula to sketch a surprisingly realistic picture of criminality and desperation.

A lot of this film's success can be credited to both Taylor Sheridan's lean but muscular screenplay and the wonderful cast of character actors performing his matter-of-fact dialogue. Chris Pine escapes the bland movie star folly of his career thus far and completely disappears under the skin of a wounded farmboy-turned- man-of-the-house, providing the pathos and heart to the story, while on screen brother Ben Foster's fraught energy provides the conflict and volatility. And then there is the ever dependable Jeff Bridges who mumbles and grumbles his way through a performance that feels completely authentic and effortless as he doggedly pursues the brothers while looking every inch the aged cowboy. It's a shame then that his character wasn't given more meat to his bones because, regardless of Bridges' low-key brilliance, the cop-in-pursuit subplot is where the movie is fundamentally lacking. At no point do our sympathies diverge away from the outlaw brothers to the Sheriff, unlike in Michael Mann's 'Heat' where both cop and robber were portrayed in equally sympathetic and interesting ways. Therefore, there is very little conflict within us come the inevitable showdown(s) between them and that robs us of experiencing the full breath of dramatic tension and emotional impact in the third act.

There is still much to like in this film, even with a somewhat insubstantial subplot. To think that a simple story about cops and robbers can still work so well in these post-modern audience aware times is actually a testament to its level of craft and execution. I thought everything about the sub-genre had been pretty much exhausted, but 'Hell or High Water' proves, much like Bridges' grizzled performance, that there is life left in this old dog yet.

Wonder Woman (2017)

Unexceptional superhero adventure elevated due to its gender politics

[5/10 · 22 October 2017]

A mainstream blockbuster fronted by a female superhero has long been overdue. You can count on one hand the amount of women-led comic book movies, so this was both an important and necessary project to see come to life. And it arrives at a politically and culturally divisive time, which I suspect played a large part in its thunderous praise and success, because this is totally unremarkable superhero fare. Pedestrian at best, risible at worst.

The problems begin with Gal Gadot in the title role. She certainly looks the part and is at her best when playing up the fish-out-of- water comedy (which is surprisingly prevalent throughout) but she comes off as wooden and stilted in the more dramatic scenes and makes for a super bland super-protagonist. Her uneven, clumsy performance is occasionally salvaged by the eclectic supporting cast around her, from Robin Wright's steely warrior mentor (who would have been a great Wonder Woman herself in the 1990s) to Chris Pine's love interest (who essentially just replicates the charming rogue he plays in everything).

As the late Roger Ebert once said, a film is only ever as good as its villains, and by that measure 'Wonder Woman' falls well short. Danny Huston has absolutely nothing to do as a generic evil German General who makes the Nazis in 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' look three dimensional, while David Thewlis as the surprise villain at the end feels like a personality-free version of Tom Hiddleston's Loki character from the 'Thor' movies, which is fitting considering 'Wonder Woman' is a mishmash of the plot elements from Marvel's first installments of 'Thor' and 'Captain America'.

Director Patty Jenkins achieves the right visual aesthetic for the material, presenting vibrant colours for the fantasy realms of Wonder Woman's Amazonian home, and washed-out muted blues and greys for the grit and grime of the real world at war. Some of the imagery she architects looks as beautiful as a Renaissance-era work of art, but her absolute insistence on over-stylizing her generic action sequences soon wears thin. Whenever someone jumps, flips or runs, we instantly slide into slow motion to emphasize EVERY. SINGLE. MOVEMENT. and it often breaks the momentum of the action itself. It's almost like Jenkins didn't realise that the bullet-time effects from 'The Matrix' are no longer fashionable to imitate. In the years to come, the action set-pieces and shockingly ropy CGI effects will be the first thing to date.

With that said, 'Wonder Woman' has a good heart, much like its main character, and it is impossible to dislike entirely. Jenkins ensures that the story never takes itself too seriously, peppering the voyage with plenty of jokes and culture clash gags along the way, and while the plot is ripped straight from the pages of the superhero origin story playbook and plods along with no real sense of propulsion, it surpasses the turgid misfires of its DC universe siblings 'Man of Steel' and 'Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice'.

If nothing else, 'Wonder Woman' has proved one thing for sure; women can be just as capable and competent at making generic and uninspired blockbuster balderdash as the men.

War for the Planet of the Apes (2017)

Those damn dirty apes have pulled off a great trilogy

[7/10 · 9 October 2017]

The new 'Planet of the Apes' franchise has been an unexpected and surprising success, easily equaling the quality of its iconic ancestral lineage, or even arguably surpassing it. 'Dawn of the Planet of the Apes' was always going to be a tough act to follow but thankfully 'War' bucks the trilogy trend of the third film often being a lesser installment. It's not as well executed or as well structured as 'Dawn', but it's an excellent film nonetheless and builds upon an already rich mythology that offers up an elaborate explanation as to how Charlton Heston came back from space to find himself on a damn monkey planet.

Matt Reeves returns for directing duties and recaptures the same foreboding and tension he evoked the last time around. This is a very downbeat and bleak movie, so much so I actually had to remind myself that this is a summer blockbuster produced and released by 20th Century Fox. It's incredible to think that something as dark as this can still sneak under the wire and into the mainstream, and we should all be thankful of that fact. Andy Serkis has graduated across the series from being the plot device of 'Rise', to the dual protagonist of 'Dawn', to the full-on lead character of 'War', and his motion captured performance is truly remarkable. You can even tell it's his face at certain points - a sneer here, a frown there - and I fully believe this performance should qualify him for an Academy Award nomination for Lead Actor. He's the crown jewel of this franchise and he leads the charge from beginning to end this time around. I also have to make room for Steve Zahn's performance as a newly introduced ape, who is about the closest thing to a comic relief this film gets and his comic timing and tender eccentricity allows some breathing room between all the doom and gloom. The crowning achievement of this trilogy is its ability to seamlessly blend technological craft with human artistry. I have always favoured practical effects over CGI, but my god, even I can't deny just how magnificent the visual effects are. This is as close to photo- real you will see.

The title of the film is somewhat of a mislead since it's a much smaller and more intimate story this time around, and I feel there was more of an epic war taking place in 'Dawn'. This is much more of a revenge tale, framed through the eyes of our protagonist Caesar, who we have seen grow up and mature into a leader across the two previous films, which lends a greater sense of dimension and complexity to his character. Watching him and his clan strike back against the remnants of the human race becomes an interesting exercise for us. As human beings we are naturally predisposed to the survival of our species, even in fiction, and usually films set in a post-apocalyptic world tend to lean heavily towards that as the goal. The 'Apes' films ask us to do something else - they ask us to root AGAINST the human race, and that does create a conflict within us as viewers. Not all humans are bad, and we know where this story is taking us once you factor in 'Planet of the Apes' 1968, yet at the same time these apes are every bit as complex and fallible and heroic and dangerous as we are. They have an equal right to live and build a future together. And while this film definitely comes down on the side of the apes, unlike 'Dawn' which showed the failings of both sides to make peace, it is a strange experience rooting for them to win this time around since there are no real human allies like James Franco or Jason Clarke's characters. In any other film, the apes would be the villains and Woody Harrelson's Colonel character makes a good case as to why he sees it that way, even though the filmmakers jettison his humanity in order to paint him as a more out-and-out villain. After all, we, the audience, have to be on side come the finale, especially come the arrival of an unexpected deus ex machina.

This has been an intelligent and emotionally and morally complex series of films that have raised interesting questions about animal rights, speciesism, societal hierarchies, leadership and subservience, communication, conflict and peace. They are not simply mindless sci- fi movies cashing in on an existing property. Both of the previous films have been deeply thoughtful explorations of those aforementioned themes and ideas. So I am very pleased to report that 'War for the Planet of the Apes' proudly carries that torch all the way through to its beautifully biblical final moments.

Don't Think Twice (2016)

The truth hurts

[7/10 · 9 October 2017]

A mumblecore-style comedy drama about dealing with the success of your peers while you struggle on. This is a distinctly thirtysomething dilemma, where your youth is already lagging behind you but you haven't quite given up on trying to attain the ideal life you want for yourself.

As with any kind of mumblecore movie - where the focus is on characters interacting in seemingly improvised scenes and creating natural conversational rhythms - it has a triviality to the whole experience as it tries to mine something profound from relatively insubstantial material. Yet somehow, 'Don't Think Twice' does resonate beyond its small cinematic ambitions because all the characters of the improv acting troupe are likable people and feel real in all of their insecurities and eccentricities, while also maintaining a funny and believable group dynamic. This is a character piece made up of selected moments with a thin but defined plot taking us through the various assortment of situations.

Writer/director Mike Birbiglia has clearly allowed for his own cast to improvise through many of the scenes. Usually, films that are made up of scenes where actors go off-book to create their own moments end up feel meandering and indulgent - yes Paul Feig and Judd Apatow I'm talking about you two cufflinks - but due to the subject matter at play, it not only makes complete sense for this particular film but it also helps to make Birbiglia's disjointed drop-in/drop-out narrative-style all the more involving.

It's a must-see for anyone who works in the arts, in whatever capacity, but it might also appeal to anyone who has ever seen fracture lines appear in their friendship groups as a result of growing up and growing apart. There's an insightful honesty at play here and when it's not plucking on those painful chords of truth, it's just a charming and absorbing story about friendship, failure and success.

It Comes at Night (2017)

The film's title is misleading...

[6/10 · 9 October 2017]

An intimate and reasonably involving thriller that isn't about what its misleading title and marketing campaign imply it to be about. This is a somewhat derivative tale about a 'viral outbreak' that we have seen in various forms throughout the years and it treads familiar ground by exploring genre-standard notions of paranoia and survival.

What 'It Comes At Night' manages to do better than most films of its ilk is to maintain an unsettling atmosphere of foreboding pretty much from the word go and all the way through to its rather shocking climatic moments, which is genuinely palm sweating stuff. This is thanks largely to a degree of mystery and ambiguity surrounding the context of the 'outbreak' and its origins. Not knowing what exactly is happening, or why, helps to distinguish the piece from other films with similarly small scale gritty takes on the end of the world. Writer/director Trey Edward Shults makes good use of his arena and isolated woodland location, managing to evoke a palpable sense of unease while showcasing his skills in building tension. It's a shame the screenwriter side of his brain couldn't match the precision and originality of his promising directorial talents.

The biggest draw of the film is Joel Edgerton. He turns in another one of his put-upon everyman characters - something he has become an expert in portraying - and the intensity of his performance keeps the disappointingly pedestrian story alive. The rest of the cast lack his fervent energy and their characters feel flat by comparison, but that is mostly due to how they have been written. Consequentially, it is difficult to fully invest in their plight and fight to survive. You don't want anything bad to happen to them but you're not desperately rooting for them to live happily ever after either. Perhaps Shults wanted everyone to feel as real as possible to reflect his matter-of-fact presentation style, as if we were watching a slice of post-apocalyptic life, but some more personality and definition to the characters would have gone a long way.

All in all, this is a well made 'infection' thriller with a compelling lead performance by Edgerton, plus a good level of suspense and mystery, but it falls short of being something truly special on the account of its uninspired story and listless characters.

The Mummy (2017)

A Dark Universe of monsters... and Tom Cruise

[4/10 · 9 October 2017]

The mission statement: The Dark Universe will rise from the Universal Pictures vaults to reclaim the horror genre and create an epic shared universe of mythic movie monsters who will eventually come together in an Avengers-style series of adventures that can fill the multiplexes for the next decade. The launch of this series will begin with an updating on 'The Mummy', featuring strong world building, scary creatures and effects, tense set-pieces and a creative mythology that can be explored across a dozen more movies. The result: A generic Tom Cruise action adventure with a mummy in it.

The moment Tom Cruise signed onto this project, it was in trouble. You can't tell a truly compelling story based on The Mummy mythos if you have to service a huge movie star's ego at the same time. While I give Cruise credit for trying to do something different here, he is totally and utterly miscast in a 'selfish but charming rogue' role clearly written and intended for someone 25-20 years his junior. At one point Russell Crowe's equally miscast Dr. Jekyll calls him 'a young man' and, as good as Cruise looks for his age, it makes you roll your eyes. Cruise is doing his usual thing here: running, jumping, fighting, dating women half his age, shooting guns, and then running some more. The film bends and twists itself to appease the action hero clause in his contract and that undermines any sense of genuine horror or tension that may have emerged.

It's not all Cruise's fault though. 'The Mummy' looks and feels distinctly set-bound, whether it's the underground tombs of Iraq or the narrow backstreets of London, and that is a real crime considering how much money was invested into the production. Unless the film is on location somewhere, almost everything looks like a set. I'd like to think that this stagey aesthetic was an attempt to callback to the classic horror films of yesteryear but I fear not. The artifice of the piece is always apparent and perhaps that is primarily a consequence of director Alex Kurtzman's inexperience behind the camera, or maybe it is more symptomatic of the designed- by-committee script. It's a generic A to B blueprint of what an action blockbuster should be, no doubt a result of all the different screenwriters brought on to service its creaky and familiar plot. It tries to use recognisable tropes and scenes from other horror stories to make you think that it's still staying true to its monsterific roots - it's the Dark Universe after all, not the Dark Superhero Universe - but something more akin to a superhero origin story is what this whole thing ultimately amounts too. We can't have Tom Cruise being an everyman horror movie character now can we?

All that said, as generic and bland as this whole thing plays, it's not all that bad. There are some well staged set-pieces, namely the zero gravity sequence on the plane which was milked for every last dollar in the trailers, some fairly involving running around above and beneath London, and the promise of the other monsters to come. In that respect, the film does provide a reasonably solid enough foundation to build a universe on with the world of Henry Jekyll's monster hunters showing early signs of promise perhaps. I like the idea behind it all, but it just got buried in the avalanche of Tom Cruise.

The Dark Universe didn't need to be a blockbuster franchise at all; Universal could have produced these films for $15-20 million each, released a new one every Halloween for four or five years and built- up to a bigger budgeted Avengers-style ensemble where the characters finally come together for some monster mayhem. That way, Universal would have saved themselves a lot of money and a lot of box office and critical disappointment. Something tells me that, in the years to come, this will become a textbook case on how 'too many cooks' can spoil the blockbuster broth.

The Wailing (2016)

A film for those who like their horror films abstract

[7/10 · 9 October 2017]

'The Wailing' takes you by the hand and leads you deep into the woods. This is a South Korean horror film that doesn't actually reveal that it is a horror film until it is deep into the wilderness of its story. It melds folklore, cultural superstitions and religious mythology to explore themes of faith and fear, and how ultimate evil can be seen as something akin to a virus that infects and consumes, before moving onto the next host.

This is a deeply fascinating mood piece that recalls the brooding atmosphere of Bong Joon-ho's 'Memories of Murder' and the enigmatic mysteries of Michael Haneke's 'Hidden', with spectacular scenery as the backdrop to some gruesome goings-on. What starts off like a pretty standard procedural investigative thriller goes through a remarkable metamorphosis across its (fairly lengthy) runtime. In a nutshell: A bumbling but endearing small town cop begins investigating a series of crimes that point to some kind of homicidal hysteria sweeping through his community, and all roads lead to a mysterious stranger who has taken up residence in the local woodlands. That's all you need to know going in and, to be honest, that's all you really know for sure coming out. The story winds its way through to some pretty unexpected and unsettling places, but spends its first half hour setting-up the foundations of an intriguing mystery while also being surprisingly funny, and it is this quirky humour that lulls the viewer into a false sense of security as a result. The comedy soon dies out and the disquiet sets in, plus the authentic performances from the cast keep it all grounded and lend the whole experience a reality, no matter how bizarre events get.

There are answers in the film as to what is happening, why it is happening and who is orchestrating things and to what end, but the film has been intentionally designed to obfuscate any sense of certainty. Even when things are being explained, nothing is explained. Even when it feels like we are witnessing revelation, nothing is revealed. Writer/director Na Hong-jin wants us to work hard in order to drink from the well of deeper meaning. He is indeed exploring the notions of evil as a disease, superstition as a science, and faith as simple perception. In fact, he makes the supernatural somewhat prosaic, which calls into question how we are viewing events and how much of it is real, how much of it is magic, and how much is simply allegory and metaphor for the filmmaker's own spiritual discourse. Either way, whatever it all means, Na Hong-jin expertly unravels the tale at a methodical pace, like bait danging on a hook in the water until we bite and he reels us in with expert timing. But, much like a fish literally out of water, it's a bewildering and confounding experience at the end of the line. I am uncertain if the confusion is partly a symptom of the somewhat muddled plotting or if the ambiguity was perhaps an afterthought (the film apparently was in the editing room for a year and intentionally cut out some context), but it doesn't really matter all that much since the overall experience is so spellbinding.

The closing moments, as with many scenes in the film, are both despairingly fatalistic and thought-provoking, and I guarantee almost anyone who watches it will jump on Google at their earliest convenience and type in: 'The Wailing explained'. You'll find theories, ideas, interviews and reviews on there, and gorging yourself on the thoughts of others might help edify your mind, but nothing will comfort your soul once you've looked into the eyes of the devil.

The Girl with All the Gifts (2016)

Film adaptation lacks teeth

[5/10 · 9 October 2017]

This pseudo-zombie story has a lot going for it - namely Glenn Close - but it is ultimately let down by some sloppy writing and characters who continually make the most idiotic decisions in order to engineer some suspense. It's an age old problem with horror films, where people say and do inexplicable things for the horror to actually happen, and 'The Girl With All the Gifts' fails to buck the trend.

With echoes of '28 Days Later...' and 'Children of Men', the film gets off to a good start by establishing a strange dystopian future where children are imprisoned for mysterious reasons by the army so scientists can use them for seemingly 'nefarious' purposes. Director Colm McCarthy brings a certain atmospheric style to the visuals and modulates the somber tone of the piece rather well, underscored by the hauntingly offbeat music score, but his staging of the zombie attack sequences do not deliver on the requisite intensity one would expect and demand from the genre. In fact, some of the sequences and zombie (over)acting comes off as pretty laughable. Even if McCarthy did manage to get the 'scary bits' right, he simply cannot transcend the contrived and derivative material he is working from.

Mike Carey adapts his own novel for the screen and seems to have excised a lot of the context and detail from his story in order to meet the strict runtime rule of 120 minutes or less, truncating his narrative and sacrificing character development in the process. The core group of characters fighting their way across this post- apocalyptic landscape never truly connect in an emotionally palpable way and therefore we don't fully invest or buy into their respective relationships, especially the supposed bond between Gemma Arterton's teacher and Sennia Nanua's 'infected' pupil, which is never developed beyond a few brief scenes at the start. And that's a major problem considering 'The Girl With All the Gifts' is trying to be a character-driven horror thriller. It gives a good cast very little to play with beyond some perfunctory conflicts and emotional beats. However, there are two standouts. The first is newcomer Nanua as the titular character who manages to find both the human pathos and animalistic hunger in a rather complicated role for her age, while the aforementioned Glenn Close simply steals every scene she is in and is a joy to watch as she fires on all cylinders like the acting freight train she is.

On a technical level, plenty here works, it's just that the screenplay doesn't do justice to the level of the craft working in service of it. By the end, you don't really care if the human race survives because the ambassadors we are following are so colossally stupid in their decision-making that you feel okay with natural selection taking its course and putting us out of our collective misery.

What Happened to Monday (2017)

Noomi Rapace shines in this surprisingly good Netflix movie

[7/10 · 10 September 2017]

Once you get past the unappealingly dreadful title and convoluted set-up, this sci-fi thriller is a surprisingly absorbing watch, anchored by the undeniable talents of Noomi Rapace, who plays seven identical sisters sharing one identity.

We are reaching a point in the sci-fi genre where dystopian futures are all starting to look alike and the tropes are becoming rather tiresome. Overpopulated and overbuilt cityscapes? Check. Oppressive totalitarian government? Check. Police state armies indiscriminately murdering the underclasses? Check. It's all become par for the course and 'What Happened to Monday?' goes through the motions of establishing the same old world we've seen explored dozens of times before. What gives this film the edge is its concept of having seven identical sisters holed up in an apartment trying to maintain the illusion to the outside world that they are one person, with only one of them able to go out at any one time. This brings an interesting set of new ideas to the table, allowing room for some creative scenarios involving the sisters alternating in both their collective and individual (mis)adventures.

The reason this film works at all has everything to do with Rapace. She manages to take seven roles and make each one distinct from the other and, while she is assisted by hairstyle and costume, it's an impressive acting feat. The best scenes are watching her play the varying assortment of characters in one room in seamlessly blended group conversations (kudos to the VFX team too). She is truly excellent here and deserves recognition for her multi-faceted accomplishment. Rapace also knows how to get down and dirty with the physical action sequences (which are well choreographed and staged), feeding her intensity into the overall thrust of the narrative. You also have seasoned stars such as Willem Dafoe and Glenn Close for support, both bringing some weight and shade to their generic roles of the mentor and the megalomaniac, respectively.

The film raises some interesting questions about overpopulation and the idea of a 'one child per family' system, and manages to scratch the surface of its themes on identity and assimilation, but the script isn't really interested in getting too cerebral or provocative with its subject matter. It simply wants to tell an exciting story about seven sisters trying to survive in a 'no sibling' state. And director Tommy Wirkola delivers on that simple ambition with some inventive high energy set-pieces and surprisingly brutal violence, never shying away from the grisly details, even if he can't quite make the film look as big or as epic as its more expensive dystopian blockbuster kin.

'What Happened to Monday?' is a nice surprise and you should see it for Rapace if nothing else. That lady deserves to get more high profile work.