Interstellar

One of my great annoyances when it comes to film criticism, on all levels, is that often a film will be judged not on how good it is or the film itself, but by how close it came to what that specific viewer wanted from the film. So when a film turns out to be different from what they had built up in their mind and the ideas they had fallen in love with, they reject the film, with conclusions ranging from four letter expletives to well written essays.

This was an idea that came to me as I read a number of reviews of Christopher Nolan's most recent film Interstellar (after the film obviously) as half the reviews seem to reject the film adopting for a more emotionally driven, rather than plot driven direction, unlike his previous films where the plot is often more intricate and central focus of the film.

I'll be sparing with plot details and try to avoid any spoilers.

Set in a relatively close future, speaking in science-fiction terms, the earth is quickly becoming uninhabitable, so mankind looks to the stars for salvation. Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) is asked to be one of a small team to go out into space in search of a new home. It’s a very basic summary I know, but I really want as many of you to experience this film fresh.

The main character throughout Interstellar is Cooper, a man who, as you can tell from the mission he is given, is forced to leave his family behind so that he can save all of humanity. A necessary choice, but for a father, a heart wrenching one. It is this guilt mixed with a determination to get home that is constant drive for Cooper, a man prepared to do anything, to get back to Earth. Some of Cooper’s best moments are the simplest ones, often a scene with his daughter Murphy (Mackenzie Foy) or one where he is by himself. A moment where he watches videos sent from Earth by his children is as heartbreaking for him as it is for the audience, where Cooper is questioning whether coming here will ever be worth the price it has cost him and his family personally.

When it was announced that Wally Pfister would be moving from being Nolan's regular director of photography and becoming a director in his own right, I wondered just who would ever be capable of filling that spot at the camera. But not surprisingly Hoyte van Hoytema does a frankly stunning job here, bringing to life every environment and new world we set down on or drive across.

The IMAX sequences really come into stand out on Cooper’s farm and the ice planet (both of which are in the trailer). Both are filled with these beautiful sweeping vistas, with the characters barely anything more than a dot.

The moments in space of the Endurance and Rangers (spacecraft within the film) are jaw dropping. Yes they all computer generated, but it just looks so good that for just a second you can imagine that this is as close to the real thing as we will ever get.

Interstellar does take advantage of a number of science fiction tropes. One which I am glad they did was in their use of robots and how they envisioned them looking. Moving away from the Alien and Star Trek approach of synthetic humans or artificial persons, here they are presented as two monoliths capable of altering their shape to meet the task required from them. One of them, thanks to an adjustable humour setting, gets some of the best lines and jokes that make reference to sci-fi classics, including 2001. Achieved through a mix of practical and computer effects, the robots TARS and CASE, are one of the films great successes.

One common complaint that is often levelled against Christopher Nolan is that his films are cold and emotionless. This is a grand statement based on little factual proof, especially when you consider his previous films. A scene that debunks this rumour and springs to mind is where Leonard in Memento created a lie for himself whereby he thinks his wife is still there, even if it only fools him for a second. Or Alfred’s apology in the Wayne cemetery at the end of The Dark Knight Rises. If these moments didn't get to you, then maybe the problem isn't with the films.

Interstellar goes in the completely opposite direction to Nolan’s previous work, at times forgoing plot, or at least leaving it in the background, as the focus stays on the relationship between Cooper and Murphy. This is the key relationship in the film. This relationship is the film’s engine not its plot.

Whether you go along with the power that the pull of love has, a key idea within the film, is up to you. It will divide, and will probably be the major reason for someones opinion on the film. For me, the reason for Cooper’s drive is understandable, his mission into space is a means to end and a grand sacrifice on his part. To keep his family safe is all that matters to him. That link he has back to Earth, the thing that is pulling him home is something that we have all experienced, just not on quite as grand a scale.

Exposition, as an unproduced screenwriter, is something that at times,  you just have to do. You need the audience to know something and more than likely a few of your characters, so you try and dress it up, but it's still just a case of getting the information to them in as quick a time.

Now with Interstellar, there is a bit of exposition, not nearly as much as some reviews would have you believe, but when you are dealing with complex ideas, it's just best to rip the plaster off as quick as you can and get it over with.

During the final act of the film, Cooper makes a discovery (I'll be vague) and then begins to suggest who made it, now whether you believe what he says is really up to you. Cooper, has no way of backing it up, it's a good theory, but no way of proving it. This is something that harks back to an early conversation with Murphy.

How you approach the ending and overall message of the film, will for me have a big bearing on your opinion of the film. Whether you believe it is the truth, or just a wild theory to help understand where he is.

Hans Zimmer and Christopher Nolan have worked together on the majority of the director’s films now, starting with Batman Begins (where they were joined by James Newton Howard, also on The Dark Knight) and, barring The Prestige, all the way through to Interstellar. Here, we get a really interesting and at times perplexing score. As always with Zimmer, he isn't afraid to go big. And big they go, especially during the film’s high tension moments, we get a deep booming organ-esque sound, mixed in with some unsettling melody, that continues to ratchet up the tension still further. When it comes to the really small moments though, Zimmer dials it down and strips away the grandeur, giving us simple pieces that put the focus on the actors and the moments between them.

Nolan and his co-writer Jonathan Nolan have clearly been influenced and drawn from a real mix of films and real world events. A lot of these have been referenced by them in interviews (easily found on the internet). 2001 is an obvious one, not least because of Interstellar's finale, which certainly nods to the end of 2001, but it goes in a different direction with it. But where 2001 focused on humanity as a whole largely, spanning millions of years, Interstellar instead chooses to use the galaxy as a backdrop for the sacrifices a father and his family has to make.

The work of David Lean, in general his epics such as Lawrence Of Arabia, Doctor Zhivago and more closely The Bridge Over The River Kwai, seems to have been an influence, especially on the narrative side. Kwai, in particular, where the plot starts off in one location, the prison camp, before switching to the effort to blow the bridge. A very stripped down narrative that lets its ideas come to the fore. Also, the sweeping landscapes of the farm and the planets in Interstellar, both on the ground and in space are shots worthy of any Lean film.

As with any Christopher Nolan film, the cast is packed with big names and award winners, some occupying only small three or four scene parts. One uncredited big time actor shows up for twenty sequences in the film that comes out of nowhere and really takes the film up a notch. Jessica Chastain, stuck on earth and working with Michael Caine's Dr Brand, is brilliant as she struggles with the seeminlgy endless cycle of failure when it comes to one vital part of the plan to save humanity. It's hard to go into anymore details about Chastain’s performance without giving much away, but her performance in the second half of the film comes at the right time to give us some perspective about just how bad Earth has become. Other stand outs are John Lithgow, as Cooper’s father in law, who is a man at times left to look after his dead daughter’s (we learn this in the third or fourth scene of the film) children, but also encourages his son-in-law to keep repopulating the planet.

Interstellar is a film filled with so many ideas and great performances that it needs all of its near three hour run time to give you everything you need. At times it may baffle you, especially during its final thirty minutes, but it is a film unlike anything you will see for a while. It reaches far and trusts that you go with it.

It may not be Christopher Nolan's best film, but when a film is this good, that kind of comparison seems utterly redundant.

Director: Christopher Nolan

Writers: Jonathan Nolan and Christopher Nolan

Gone Girl

When thinking about reviewing Gone Girl and where I drew line for spoilers became a challenge, as it does with every review. Defining spoiler is a tricky business. While some would consider even the slightest detail a spoiler, a viewpoint I myself skew towards, I have tried to avoid anything that may give away the film’s great moments. So with that anything that is included in this review is either general knowledge, or are hinted at in the trailers.

Gone Girl largely follows Nick Dunne (Ben Affleck) in the days and weeks following his wife Amy’s disappearance. At first, sympathy is universal, but as suspicion and doubts begin to surface, a lot driven by media speculation, Nick then has to begin to defend himself as the world begins to watch him as much as they follow the search for Amy.

David Fincher is a director whose next film is often preceded by a great deal of anticipation and expectation, when you consider his previous work it is completely understandable. He has delivered at least three masterpieces, Seven, Zodiac and The Social Network, although there are some who would argue that that particular group should be bigger.

His work often has a very cynical and dark look on life, focusing largely on flawed and broken people struggling through life, put under the microscope during the film for us to look at study and hold a mirror up to ourselves. Gone Girl, is no different, Fincher and writer Gillian Flynn, really focus in on the media and their every growing witch hunt of Nick, as they do follow Nick through his behaviour and actions, some questionable, following Amy’s disappearance.

As the central character, Nick, Ben Affleck has to take us through a whole range of emotions in quick succession as his life unravels within a matter of days. He is likeable and charming, at first, no doubt deliberately to both get us on his side, but also to sow some seeds of doubt in the audience’s minds, so that when the witch hunt begins, we begin to think that maybe he could have done it. Without, giving anything away, it is in the second half of the film where Affleck really gives us Nick’s interesting moments, straining to keep it together as everything goes from bad to worse and life falls apart in front of him.

Rosamund Pike is in the film quite a bit, that shouldn’t be surprising to anyone, but a lot of her role is told through flashbacks of the early days of her relationship with Nick, where she plays Amy as the cool New York girl that is everything that Nick wants. But the character and Pike’s performance really comes into its own in the darker moments of the story, as the toll of moving back to Nick’s hometown begins to strain their marriage. She’s dangerous, unpredictable and meticulous, with some of her actions putting her on a par with a character like Hannibal Lector or John Doe from Seven.

Since Fincher began collaborating with Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross, the sound of his films for me has been one of the great attractions of going to see them in the cinema. Their versions of The Immigrant Song and In The Hall of the Mountain King have been real attention grabbers. In Gone Girl, they hold back a little more, using the music to really build tension throughout. The last twenty minutes is a master class in doing this, it sounds like a very simple piece, but it is the subtle repetition that gradually increases the tension to an almost unbearable level.

Ross and Reznor’s stand out moment comes with an act of genuinely shocking violence, matching quick cuts with terrifying swells of sound, the scene and music left me in a state of shock for a few minutes afterwards. It was a perfect moment, of every single aspect of the film making process coming together to create an unforgettable moment.

Gender roles and expectations are a big part of Gone Girl, early on Nick receives endless the support and sympathy of everyone. But when that first shadow of doubt and suspicion begins to gather over him, his world changes. Talk show hosts condemn him for his unproven actions, stupid neighbours are believed above the people that know him, their wild actions taken by people as hard truth. One underlying question that I felt the film was asking was, if the roles had been reversed, would the media have gone after Amy as quickly or as ferociously.

The film is definitely damning of the media’s approach to these situations, sensationalising facts and drawing conclusions based on little real facts. The saddest part of this is just how accurate it is to events we see unfold once or twice year. The strength of the criticism by Flynn and Fincher is that they rarely put a comedic or overt satirical spin on it, they play it dead straight and get strong results.

Gone Girl, for me is another great film from Fincher. It’s a pacey and beautifully plotted labyrinthine puzzle of film that will no doubt offer more on each subsequent viewings.

If you can, go and see this in the cinema on a big screen and take in a film crafted by some of the best the industry can offer.

Just make sure you avoid spoilers.

Director: David Fincher

Writer: Gillian Flynn (Novel and Screenplay)

The Lego Movie

It's safe to say that films based on toys, video games and even most cartoons, fail to live up to the hype from the fans or the potential of some of these vivid creations. Usually they end up with Razzies and become the butt of many jokes. Even the rare exceptions, like the Transformers series became overblown and focused more on cramming as much of the toy and carton canon in as possible. So when a film based on Lego was announced, it would be a lie to say I was eagerly awaiting it.

The plot of The Lego Movie is pretty straight forward, so it’s all the secrets I’ll try and keep out of this review. A dull every man called Emmett accidentally stumbles across an artefact that will help to stop Lord Business from using a WMD (in Lego terms) on the Lego world.

Honestly, how this plot was pitched I will never know, but it's a simple set up and plot that allows the film makers to add ideas and depth to the world and message they are trying to get across.

One of the biggest reasons that this film works so well is Chris Pratt as Emmett. Brilliantly written and superbly performed, his growth throughout the story and his reluctance to be a real hero and embrace what he is capable of is one of the most well developed and executed transformations you will see this year. Where Pratt excels and Emmett comes to life, is in the deadpan, 100% serious moments of mistimed honesty or his belief in one particular furniture-related idea. It's his go to idea and he believes in it as much as any hero will ever believe in any quest or mission you will witness.

The supporting cast here really build up the world and enhance the humour, especially as we move from world to world. The repressed happy land you see is a stroke of master world building (in both ways). But it's hard to argue past Batman, or this version of him, as the films main film stealer. He's a bit of douche throughout, he knows how good he is and plays it up. His self-written, self centred death metal song is side-splittingly funny and his run in with some Star Wars Lego is a moment I recall again and again whenever this film is brought up. He may not be the film’s main character or even its hero, but the film is all the better for it.

But there are so many great supporting characters that it would be almost impossible to mention them all and give them the respect and attention they need, from Liam Neeson’s Bad Cop (and Good Cop) to Will Ferrell’s Lord Business, a man surrounded by such incompetence you almost feel sorry for him.

The humour with The Lego Movie covers pretty much all the bases, from sarcastic, physical, to sight gags and the very risque. There is hardly a joke that lands flat, even the ones that are repeated, to brilliant effect, still land even though we know exactly what is coming even if it has gotten bigger or more elaborate. 

Like Toy Story 3 this is a film that may look like a children’s film on the outside, but there is so much here for everyone and while it doesn't touch on as many of the real world issues as Toy Story 3 did, it's driving message that anyone is capable of creating something great is one of the most important messages a film, or any kind of story can tell.

Directors: Phil Lord and Christopher Miller

Writers: Phil Lord (Story and Screenplay), Christopher Miller (Story and Screenplay, Dan Hageman (Story) and Kevin Hageman (Story).

Out Of The Furnace

Out Of The Furnace tells the story of two brothers Russell (Christian Bale) and Rodney (Casey Affleck) Baze, one a hard working, salt of the earth furnace worker and the other a US serviceman spiraling out of control, following numerous tours in the Middle East.

Russell tries, as he seemingly always has, to look after Rodney, even at the risk of his own life, something that shows up regularly throughout the film.

Christian Bale, as with all of his roles, bring an authenticity to his portrayal of Russell. He never tries to inject him unrealistic intelligence or bravery. This is a hard working family man, who is looking out for his brother. He does what he thinks is best, even when at times we know it's the wrong thing to do. He is blinded by his desperation to help Rodney and the consequences of his actions just aren't at the front of his mind. A decision he makes towards the end of the film involving a phone call is the best example of Russell being too desperate to think of what could happen, or who could be be harmed as a result of his choice.

Russell is probably one of Bale's straightest characters. He is stoic and a genuinely good man. He treats people, I imagine, how he wants to be treated and the best work from the character comes when Russell pushes himself out of his comfort zone or has to push back against his normal behaviour, to be violent or go against and question the police.

Out of the Furnace is a film that definitely focuses more on its characters than it does its plot, which could be one reason for it's pretty stellar cast of character actors.

Willem Dafoe and Forest Whitaker are two that stand out in small but important roles. However, I would have liked to have gotten more plot, especially about the hill people and their own little world. A bit of mystique is great, but when it has that much potential, explore it more. Show us the difference in the two worlds.

Running at just under two hours, which for me flew by, I would have liked to have had more plot and seen or learnt more about Rodney and his time with the Army. There is a small prison section that occurs whilst Rodney is on tour, for me this would have been a a prime place to have expanded, maybe even bringing in the hill people as well, so we have three threads going at once. The characters and performances are easily the films biggest strength, it would have just been nice to have seen them do more.

As mentioned already, the cast is head and shoulders the best thing about this film and Bale goes a great job of leading them, but the supporting cast definitely shouldn't be overlooked, they all have the same amount of screen time and do much more than just fill out the world and give Russell people to interact with. They create a history and bring it to everything they do, they are a part of this world and belong to it, and at no point did I find any character forced or overblown.

Harrelson’s DeGroat is a great villain, a force of nature who lives by his own rules and governs the hills with an iron fist and is completely unafraid of any man. But I wanted more of him. Mystery is good, but when you have such an oddball character who is unafraid to do anything, then give us more of him. It certainly worked in No Country For Old Men.

One of the criticisms I have seen of the film the amount of references to other films, classics at that. The final shot, which clearly pays homage to The Godfather series, is probably the most notable. Although there are bits and pieces, such as narrative tricks or general look and tone that recall films such as Silence of the Lambs or The Deer Hunter, none of which are hard to spot, so maybe that is why the point has been raised so much.

The final shot is the only one that stood out, purely because of its length and the numerous other ways it could have been done. Move the camera, or the character away from the window and director Scott Cooper may have achieved the same meaning to the shot/scene, but without such an obvious of a comparison.

The other nod is a narrative trick similar to climax of Silence of the Lambs, but for me this is not something that is unique to one film. Lambs arguably pulls it off better, as it has a real sting with who is at the door when Bill opens, whereas in Furnace, you already know where the character is when you begin to put together the locations and timeframe. Used later in the film, it may have worked better.

I really looked forward to Out of the Furnace and I wasn't let down, if anything I wanted more from it, to spend more time there, to explore the world and build and bigger plot for all these great characters to interact in. There can't be many better comments about a film than seeing it and wanting more.

The one homage it could have paid to The Godfather or The Deer Hunter, is that it didn't was in this regard.

Director: Scott Cooper

Writers: Scott Cooper and Brad Ingelsby

The Raid 2

Spoilers for The Raid are contained in this review.

With a new member of the family having recently arrived, the chances of getting out to the cinema will be greatly lessened, so I will be looking back on the new releases, but on DVD/Blu-ray (or any of the other countless ways now available), so they'll just be a few months late.
Gareth Evans' first film in the series was one of the best action films of the last ten years, it achieved exactly what it set out to do. Create a fast paced action film, the kind of which that are becoming quite rare, plus it's final fight is one of the most tense finales to any film I have seen. All of the carnage and twists had built to a point where you, maybe without realising it, invested in these characters and wanted to see them make it out alive.

The Raid 2 picks up roughly two hours after the end of its predecessor, Rama and the other survivors are talking to a police officer whose job is to investigate corruption within the force, seeing what Rama has achieved, he quickly offers him a place on the team. At the same time, we see another act of violence that will force the family man in Rama's hand.

Iko Uwais, the man who plays Rama, is given a lot more to do in this film with his character. In the first film, we see a very (very, very) capable police officer, especially in moments of extreme pressure, who goes into a fortress like drug den to bring his brother home. But here, having gone undercover, there is a weight placed on his shoulders as he does things that he can't possibly be completely okay with, but has to focus on the endgame. One scene with his new boss, with two prostitutes, really shows the guilt and uneasiness he has with this assignment and lengths he will push himself to succeed. 

The quotes pasted all over the marketing for this film regarding its action left it with quite a considerable level of expectation, especially considering what the first film had delivered and some of the set pieces we have seen in recent years. Thankfully, it lives up to the hype in the action category, here Evans and his army of trained martial artists get to go big. The two stand out sequences of the film come towards the end of the film. The first a car chase, although that is being unfair, it's a car chase, a gun fight and four man brawl (in one car) all at the same time. The second, as with the first film, is the finale fight of the film, it's gruelling, painful and beautifully choreographed. A bench mark for future one on ones.

The film is an 18 and justifiably so. Whilst watching this, you will see people demean and humiliate others in the cruelest ways and also some of the most brutal and vicious murders committed to film (or digital as is the case with The Raid 2). It is not for the faint of heart, but nor does it linger on the aftermath. What it does show though is the damage and effectiveness of hand to hand combat and refreshingly moves away from an over reliance on gunfights and overblown CGI created chaos.

Like all good sequels, The Raid 2 takes everything from the first film, makes it bigger and fills out the world in which these characters are living in. Obivously, when a film is set entirely within a tower block, there is only so much you can learn of the outside world. But through quick lines of dialogue and the reactions of characters, we are given just enough to be able to imagine the world outside. But here, we get it all, we find out just how corrupt the whole city is and to a certain degree how futile the original films operation was.

An undoubted improvement on the first film, despite a slightly padded out middle hour that at times seems to be circling action sequences, but one that when it gets into its last forty five minutes is one of the best action films you will ever see.

Director: Gareth Evans
Writer: Gareth Evans 

Guardians of the Galaxy

Some have called Guardians of the Galaxy a real risk for Marvel, arguably the biggest they have taken since they released Iron Man back in 2008. But for me, as DC guy, this has been the Marvel film that I’ve been looking forward to the most, more so than any other Phase Two film (the films after The Avengers that will build into The Avengers: Age of Ultron), purely because they were trying something new and they had complete faith in what they were doing and in these characters.

With the success and good will that Marvel currently has going, they have chosen to the right time to introduce the more galactic element of their cinematic universe, something that is going to play into their long term plans, especially when you consider the growing presence of Thanos. Even if dragging his big moment out could risk him looking borderline incompetent after a couple of his emissaries have been defeated by the heroes.

So the basic idea of GOTG is of a group of five loveable losers, including a talking tree and gun toting Raccoon, who come together, at first for individual gain and then to save a planet from a warlord (probably the easiest way to describe him). It's safe to say that the film is more interested in character than plot and by going with a relatively straight forward story, it really allows the characters to shine.

The stand out characters in GOTG are Peter Quill aka Starlord (Chris Pratt), Groot (voiced by Vin Diesel) and Rocket (voiced by Bradley Cooper). Starlord, he'd prefer it if I called him that, is the main character and our "in" for this story and it's through him that we have the characters and worlds explained to us. Starlord comes across as an arrogant Han Solo mixed with Uncharted's Nathan Drake. He's charismatic, funny and doesn’t always know when he to be serious (a scene with Ronan towards the end is bizarre to say the least, but fits the character perfectly).

Rocket and Groot, possibly the oddest couple you'll come across, start off as a kind of comic relief. However, this quickly evolves into a much more complicated and emotional relationship. Rocket constantly derides his wooden companion, making fun of him and telling him what to do. Rocket is also very much about self preservation and improving his financial situation. Groot, is the friendly and loyal partner, who really wants nothing more than to please Rocket and get him to like him. All of this feeds into the climax and arguably the films most emotional moment.

It isn't all good though, as per usual, Marvel have struggled to really give us a stand out villain, here it is Lee Pace, as Ronan the Accusor, who is given little to do and as a result has little impact on the film. Barely accomplishing anything within the film, apparently he's feared throughout the galaxy. I just wish I knew why. The problem with Marvels villains in this series, bar Loki who occupies a grey area, is something they need to start addressing in their future films. They do the right thing by giving the majority of the films attention to the hero(es), but sometimes we want to see the other side. Give us a villain with some depth who has a cause we can at least understand.

Visually, this film is stunning, Every sweeping shot of a planet is picturesque and every building teaming with life and detail. The highlights for me were the prison sequence and The Collectors offices. Each one comes across as a lived in place with its own history that adds to characters that inhabit them.

The models of Groot and Rocket are impressive, Rocket is arguably the better of the two as we have probably all seen a raccoon, albeit not a talking one and as a result any shot of Rocket is a real triumph.

As with The Winter Soldier earlier in the year, GOTG has two good acts and one weak one. Whereas The Winter Soldier had a final act that didn't really live up to the standards of the first two, in GOTG, it is the middle that lags. The section in Knowhere (a kind of space port, with a unique location) is sluggish. Like the characters we are just waiting for something to happen and bar a great monologue from Rocket, it is largely forgettable. The spacecraft dog fight was fairly pedestrian and actually took me out of the film. But the end of GOTG could be the best finish to any Marvel film released so far, because I was actually invested in some of the heroes, a genuine first for me in the Marvel cinematic universe.

This was the Marvel film that I have been looking forward to for a long time and was one of the top three films I was anticipating this summer and thankfully it held up to what I was expecting. Creating a new storyline/series within the Marvel universe a long the way.

An fun and enjoyable sci-fi adventure for everyone.

Director: James Gunn

Writers: James Gunn and Nicole Perlman. Dan Abnett (comic book) and Andy Lanning (comic book)

How To Train Your Dragon 2

Warning: This review contains spoilers.

The follow review was written by Kate Knight.
I had thoroughly enjoyed the first How to Train Your Dragon so I was excited to learn that Dreamworks had made a sequel.  Having said that though, it was with a slight sense of trepidation that I went into the screening of the second instalment, I mean, I've been burned by sequels before and I wasn't quite sure where the writers were going to take the key characters.

As per the first movie, the plot centres around young Viking, Hiccup (voiced by Jay Baruchel) and his dragon, Toothless.

Whilst exploring the world surrounding their home, they come across Hiccup's long lost, free spirit mother, Valka (Cate Blanchett) living in what can best be described as a refuge for dragons.  She is fierce in her protection of the dragons and Hiccup now starts to understand where his adventerous spirit and affinity for dragons comes from.

Hiccup and Toothless' adventures exploring lead them to encounter an old foe of Hiccup's father, Chief Stoick (Gerard Butler), Drago (Djimon Hounsou) whose aim is to enslave dragons and control them.

The plot works well and the story flows nicely through the film.  The ending could be seen as somewhat predictable but when it comes to animation that is primarily designed to please a younger audience, there aren't many places a writer can go.

Having said that though, there were a few moments where I was gripped to my seat, anxious about my personal favourite, Toothless the Dragon.

As with any animated film, it it hard to make any comment other than a neutral comment about performances as so much of the performance is in the animation itself.  My only comment would therefore be that each character was matched well with his/her voice artist.

The set pieces where the audience follows various characters riding their dragons are impressively animated.  I saw this film in 2D and I can imagine that in 3D these scenes were equally impressive.

As I have said before, at times the plot did feel somewhat formulaic and the ending became predictable about 30 minutes from the end, which, as an adult audience member, is always frustrating.

I enjoyed the film for what it is and can imagine younger audiences really enjoying it.  I would be surprised if they brought another How to out though.  As it's based on series of books and it will no doubt do very well at the box office, another instalment is no doubt in the works. But hopefully, they the next instalment will bring more to the table.

Director: Dean DeBlois
Writer: Dean Blois (screenplay) and Cressida Cowell (novels).

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

Spoilers for both Rise of the Planet of the Apes and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes are included in this review.

Reboots are now often met with dismissive comments and decidedly low expectations, the amount decreasing and increasing depending on the property or films it is kicking to the curb, or slate it is wiping clean. Not many franchises have been rebooted twice though, only the Batman film series springs to mind immediately when considering the big properties. But now, the Planet of the Apes series has joined that pantheon of beloved series that people just want to keep on having a crack at.

The original Charlton Heston starring series, which began with the classic Planet of the Apes and then spawned 4 films and I think a TV series, was then rebooted by Tim Burton and giving us a version of the story that certainly divided opinion and delivered one of the most bizarre endings in a main stream film. Then in 2011, Rise of the Planet of the Apes, a film that nobody really wanted, proved to be a runaway success, putting the focus as much as on the people as on the apes, Caesar in particular and giving us a scenario that fits with how we could probably see our world turning into a ravaged mess, ruled by apes.

The basic plot for Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (I'll refer to it just as Dawn from here on in), is one of two mirroring communities, the apes who are going from strength to strength, presided over by Caesar and the humans, a rapidly weakening outpost in San Francisco, which desperately need to find a new power source as the run down the last of the resources.

Carrying on from Rise, the central protagonist of Dawn is Caesar, an ape who was experimented on and as a result his mental capacity was increased exponentially. Portrayed through motion capture by Andy Serkis and a team of effects artists, we get an even more nuanced and weighty performance. The emotions are real, we see the fatigue and cost of his position at the top of the ape society. He understands that he can't afford to look weak, but also has to risk his status by making difficult decisions that the other apes may not understand.

His past is unique amongst the apes, he doesn't see the humans as being inherently evil, no doubt due to his largely positive experiences during Rise. This comes up against the viciously treated Koba, who is quick to judge the humans and considering his past, it is entirely understandable.

While my knowledge of Shakespeare is by no means vast, the few I have read, came across here as a clear influence. Koba, played superbly by Toby Kebbel, feels like a character worthy of sharing company with Iago or Claudius. The story, specifically the apes, has a grand feel to it, a story of tragedy. We all know something is going to go bad, it's just a case of watching it unfold in devastating beauty.

One thing that may catch out some people is that the human stories and characters take a back seat to the ape storyline and characters. Considering the quality of the actors involved it does come as a bit of shame that someone like Gary Oldman is only given a small supporting role, especially given his prominence within the community, so much that his part in the climax feels a little underdeveloped considering the magnitude of what he is trying to do.

But by no means are they two dimensional characters, Jason Clarke's Malcolm, whose family and storyline mirrors Caesar's own. Malcolm's struggle is to try and ensure his family's survival by convincing the apes to let them work in their territory and control the rampant hatred for apes amongst his team. His relationship is one of the high points of the high film and is hopefully something that will build into the rest of the franchise.

The best franchises all feature an element of natural escalation, something goes wrong, it gets worse and that it gets even worse and then just maybe you get a glimmer of hope at the end. Dawn does this really well and it hints at what is to come next is brilliant. So much so that all the characters don't even seem to try and fight the inevitable outcome. War.

One of the great triumphs of modern blockbuster filmmaking and undoubtedly the highlight of this year's summer movie schedule.

Director: Matt Reeves

Writers: Mark Bomback and Rick Jaffa & Amanda Silver and Pierre Boule (novel).

Edge of Tomorrow

I’ll be honest when I first saw the trailer for the Edge of Tomorrow, there was nothing that really reached out and grabbed me. It looked visually interesting, but the way the story was introduced, really didn’t give you anything particularly interesting.  The main plot point of the film is omitted, not in itself a bad thing, but without it, the trailer made the film look like a standard military sci-fi invasion film.

The basic plot of Edge of Tomorrow at first follows William Cage (Cruise) a PR man who has helped to sign up hundreds of thousands of men and women for a kind of D-Day style beach landing. Unbeknownst to him, he is going to the beach as well, to fight with the people he convinced to go there.

The landing goes terribly, thousands are killed, but by killing one of the aliens and being drenched in its blood, Cage inherits its species’ ability to control time and is taken back twenty four hours. Every time he is sent to the beach, he dies. Every time he dies, he wakes up twenty-four hours earlier.

This is a relatively new kind of role for Cruise, here he is definitely a man who is so far out of his depth, for the first half an hour, he looks completely lost and is just meat to get torn up and sent back. His confidence and charm does return towards the end of the film though, as his skills increase. It is in the first half of the film that his best work is done, he is vulnerable, scared and desperate to somehow get rid of this mind destroying curse.

Without going into spoilers, the beach landing is one of the most intense and visceral big budget action sequences in years. It would be a horrific place to be, and the carnage and loss of lives certainly reached my expectations for what a conflict like that would look like.

The film in general has a washed out look, akin to Saving Private Ryan, even though the similarities are few and far between. What it brings to the film is a tone of fatalism, there is very little to be joyous about or even much call for hope, especially for our two heroes.

Emily Blunt’s performance as war hero Rita, is probably one of the best performances by anyone in a blockbuster, having to pile on the mental strain that she has already undergone to get where she is, whilst also being an effective warrior, but above all else, a believable character. Something that big budget films often push to the side with female characters, instead choosing to put all the emotional weight behind the male characters. Here though, Blunt holds her own as she fights the urge to allow Cage to get to know her, through each time reset, knowing how difficult it can be to watch the same people die again and again.

The film at times does, through its time travel premise, touch on elements of fate and how predetermined everything is. With each beach landing, everything is precisely as it was the time before, there is no variation, but what Cage and Rita do, learning as they go. But a bigger indicator on this films idea of fate comes later on, near the climax of the film, which mimics events that happen on each beach landing, where the helicopter (a loose term for what it is) is hit by anti-air defences, the same happens later and in a similar way, events play out in a smaller, but near identical way on the ground.  This suggests that, in this world, no matter where this particular battle takes place for Cage and Rita, events and moments will repeat themselves.

Edge of Tomorrow is a prime example of a good film being derailed by a pretty sub-par trailer.

The best big sci-fi film of the year so far and with more wit and brains than you would probably think it had.

Director: Doug Liman

Writers: Christopher McQuarrie (screenplay) and Jez Butterworth (screenplay) & John-Henry Butterworth (screenplay) and Hiroshi Sakurazaka (novel).

X-Men: Days of Future Past

Contains spoilers for X-Men: The Last Stand.

Note before: I am yet to see The Wolverine.

The X-Men franchise (including the Wolverine films) is now seven films long, the longest running continuous comic book world. But with that there have been several up and downs, X3 andWolverine: Origins were the undoubted low points, whereas X2 is considered one of the genre's best.

Following on from the enjoyable First Class, but wary of being burned before, I went into Days of Future Past with fairly average expectations. The cast was superb, arguably one of the best ever assembled in the genre, but still there was a nagging feeling about what could go wrong.

The set up for DOFP starts in the far future, where mutants have been hunted and almost completely wiped out, only a few remain, pursued by an army of Sentinels (robots that can adapt to any mutants powers).

 

Professor X (Sir Patrick Stewart) comes up with an idea to send himself back to when the Sentinels were first conceived and to change the past. But unable to go himself as the journey would kill him, Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) who can regenerate and heal quickly, offers to go and is charged with altering the future by changing the events in 1973.

As I touched on earlier, the cast for this is filled with some of the best out there. But as with all of team X-Men films, a few characters are given precedence over the others and their decisions and arc is the main journey the film takes. In this the journey that is the most interesting and affects the story the most is Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) a shape shifter, who can mimic anyone and who also happens to be a highly trained assassin. It is, or was, her decisions in the past that are crucial ones to altering the future.

Michael Fassbender and James McAvoy, Magneto and Professor X respectively, continue to give us interesting interpretations of the characters played by Sir Ian McKellen and Stewart. But far from making them just younger clones of these characters, we are given almost completely different people, although McAvoy’s portrayal is somewhat closer to his older partner's than Fassbender. Fassbender gives us an angrier and possibly, a more short sighted version than McKellen, but what the two men do together, is hint at the journey that Magneto has in front of him.

As with all time travel films there is an inherent risk of a plot developing so big that if it’s focused on, it could tear the whole plot apart. However, that is never really a big problem with the DOFP, as it doesn’t give the audience the chance to dwell on it to much, and by just sending back the consciousness of Wolverine, it restricts and puts up barriers for Wolverine to overcome.

But perhaps the biggest problems for the story was the glossing over, or maybe I just missed it, but the apparent ressurrection of Professor X, who died at the end of X3, but if this, at the start follows on from that world, as the deaths of other X-Men in that film are mentioned, then surely Professor X should still be dead, or at least inhabiting the body he transferred into.

If anyone can answer this I would greatly appreciate it.

As well as this film is directed by Bryan Singer, it is certainly a return to form for him. This film is a triumph for the writers, mainly screenwriter Simon Kinberg, who seems to be in charge of X-Men franchise when it comes to telling its stories. While the past certainly takes precedence of the future time line, he always manages to keep us aware of the stakes in both worlds and has linking events to really cement their connectivity.

Arguably the best X-Men film since X2, this is a much needed return to form for the franchise, which is set to go into full on disaster mode with the already announced X-Men: Apocalypse coming in two years.

Yes the continuity between the series is hanging by a thread, but it is such a mess that you really just have to go with it. But I’ll let it all go if we get a Mystique spin-off.

Director: Bryan Singer

Writers: Simon Kinberg (story and screenplay), Jane Goldman (story) and Matthew Vaughn (story.