Passengers Movie Review

Released: 21st December 2016

Length: 116 Minutes

Certificate: 12A

Director: Morten Tyldum

Starring: Chris Pratt, Jennifer Lawrence, Laurence Fishburne and Michael Sheen

With two big names at its centre, Passengers aims to close out 2016 with a contained, solitary trip through the cosmos. It’s been subjected to quite the marketing blitz but the film simply can’t make a lasting impression.

Passengers takes place aboard the Avalon, a ship travelling towards an idealistic new home on the colony of Homestead II. For no apparent reason, engineer Jim Preston (Chris Pratt) awakens from hyper sleep, finding himself the only passenger on the vessel to do so. He discovers that he woke up ninety years too soon, condemned to a lonely life before the ship reaches its destination. With only a suave android bartender (Michael Sheen) for company and his options running out, he makes the extremely dubious decision to wake up a woman named Aurora, all the while running a lie that her pod also malfunctioned. The film is made up of three separate which have their own individual problems. First there’s the opening which sees Jim on his own, trapped on an empty ship with no means of refreezing himself or reaching the crew for help. Unfortunately, it doesn’t explore that isolation very effectively, opting to use basic details to show the passage of time rather than allowing Pratt to flex his acting ability. The second part is a love story between Jim and Aurora; it takes up a good chunk of the film and really wants the audience to believe that it is genuine, but because the morals are skewed, it’s almost impossible to take seriously, not to mention the fact that Passengers never explores the nasty undertones of selfishness and lust. The final act is much like a disaster film in which a crisis aboard the Avalon must be resolved; it’s here that a new character (Played by Laurence Fishburne) is suddenly introduced and things hastily wrap up without pulling the audience into the mystery of why it all happened. When the three acts are put together, the plot of Passengers becomes rushed and messy, never finding a moment to make its setting and characters work together properly.

Sadly, the characters don’t fare much better. Chris Pratt, despite being planted in isolation at the film’s outset, feels flat here; even his scenes with the other characters feel quite restrained, never rising to the kind of intensity that would grip the situation. Jennifer Lawrence fares a lot better, with her two major realisations being good moments that play to her strengths as an actress. Despite this, both main leads also have very basic characteristics. We know that Jim is an engineer and Aurora is a writer and journalist but they never really get developed beyond those bases. Michael Sheen is a rather basic commentator on the action and as for Lawrence Fishburne, his screen time is horribly limited by plot contrivance, marking the second time since 2010’s Predators where a potentially interesting role for him has been snubbed by limited material. Passengers mostly falls into the camp of the more mindless blockbusters, not bothering to give its talented cast a solid script to work with.

Much like many sci-fi flicks, Passengers is a looker but on this occasion strong special effects can’t really make up for a broken story. It’s not a complete lack of effort here; the backdrops are suitably stunning, though these are often used in many of its contemporaries. Ambient music pieces do well enough at selling the vast celestial setting and the ship itself gives way to a fair few long shots to show off its scale. Unfortunately, a twisting ship design is where much of the originality ends; Passengers borrows more than its fair share of tropes from several contemporaries including the likes of 2001: A Space Odyssey, Sunshine, Prometheus and Gravity to name a few. Despite its well-produced special effects, this hodgepodge of different components brands Passengers as a rather derivative title, one which loses much of the impact it could have had.

Passengers is a massively disjointed production which doesn’t do enough to set itself apart from other major sci-fi films. Its one big idea is built on something so morally bankrupt that it creates a massive disconnect with everything that goes on. Some spurts of good acting from Lawrence and a heap of special effects do hold it up slightly but it remains a mostly misguided, unremarkable outing.

Rating: 2/5 Stars (Disappointing)

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story Movie Review

Released: 15th December 2016 (UK)

Length: 133 Minutes

Certificate: 12A

Director: Gareth Edwards

Starring: Felicity Jones, Diego Luna, Mads Mikkelsen, Ben Mendelsohn, Alan Tudyk, Riz Ahmed, Donnie Yen, Jiang Wen and Forrest Whitaker

As the first spin-off entry in the Star Wars Universe, Rogue One can be described as a war film set in the popular sci-fi fable. Out to carve its own slot in the story, the film continues the engagement launched by its bigger cinematic brother last year.

Rogue One: A Star Wars story tells the tale of how the infamous death star plans were stolen by the rebellion. It takes place from the perspective of Jin Erso (Felicity Jones), daughter of Galen (Mads Mikkelsen) one of the strongest minds behind the Empire’s super-weapon. After being broken loose from an Imperial prison, Jin and a motley crew of daring soldiers embark on a dangerous mission to uncover her father’s whereabouts. The film maintains a tried and true planet-hopping formula, alternating between action and character drama but also mixes in a sense of militarism. In any war, the battle lines are ever changing and Rogue One is the first Star Wars film to delve deeper into the rebellion’s morals, pulling them away from the heroic, all-good persona they had before; this opens the plot to a few more twists and turns as it rushes along. Another thing the story does extremely well is continuity; several key ties to episodes three and four alongside resolutions to specific plot points come to fruition in Rogue One; the legendary Darth Vader (Again voiced by James Earl Jones) also makes a brief comeback but his moments feel incredibly sinister, making the black-suited Sith lord a destructive force once again. Rogue One sees fit to keep its action moving, concentrating on the team at its centre and this was the right direction to take.

The characters in Rogue One stand at a lesser position to their main episodic counterparts but there are still several key highlights. Felicity Jones really does carry much of the narrative; through most of the film, she is portrayed as very hardened, mostly out for her own ends but the bond with her equally well written father causes a more emotive side to creep in and this in turn fuels a change in her mindset. A sizeable cast does have its drawbacks however; aside from the simple yet wildly witty droid K-2SO (Alan Tudyk), many of the side characters go by underdeveloped; Rebel Intelligence Officer Cassian Andor’s (Diego Luna) motives are questionable but that’s where the depth ends and Riz Ahmed’s defection from the empire is never really brought up once the action heats up. The team’s chemistry, especially towards the film’s end, works extremely well but we don’t learn very much about their backstories which would have made things that much more interesting.  Of all the characters, it’s Forrest Whitaker’s battle-weary Saw Gerrera who ends up the most underused, a shame considering the meticulous costume work and his past in the Clone Wars which could have been expanded upon further. Taking on the mantel of main antagonist once again, the Empire is personified by Orson Krennic (Ben Mendelsohn), a man whose ambitions and position come before his own men; another simple yet effective character.

The darker tone that hangs over Rogue One is personified in many ways; the overall colour aesthetic is far more saturated, a look matched by the planets visited across the plot. A rain-soaked Empire facility hidden within a cliff range is especially atmospheric and it imbues Rogue One with a dose of grit that hasn’t been seen in Star Wars since 2005’s Revenge of the Sith. Some digital imagery is used to recreate characters from the original trilogy with convincing results but for the most part, it’s used to give off a massive sense of scale. The film’s place in the war genre gives way to some highly intense action sequences which all have a shifting variety to them. Donnie Yen’s force-fuelled martial arts are well choreographed but it’s the last act that really cements the film as a worthy addition to the franchise. The final battle of Rogue One is incredible, with a humongous battle taking place on the beaches of a washed-up planet and the capital ships orbiting above it; as the two forces clash, the camerawork provides a stunning view of the action, while deftly cutting back and forth between its two halves without a moment to breath. The music also lends a powerful impact to the action, the sense of wonder rightfully relegated for a more serious affair.

Simultaneously a great spin-off, great war film and great contribution to the Star Wars canon, Rogue One strikes out in a different direction, providing a steady foundation to bridge the gap between the original and prequel trilogies. Not every member of the cast is memorable but it nevertheless succeeds at meeting expectations.

Rating: 4/5 Stars (Great)

Black Mirror Episode Idea: "The One"

Synopsis

A man and a woman have shared the same workplace in a high-tech office space for some time and he has developed very strong feelings for her, having been on many social outings with just the two of them together. He tells the woman how he feels but despite all his efforts and time spent, the woman rejects his advances, saying that she only wants to be friends. The man cannot accept that; fighting back his emotions, he bids her farewell and returns to his apartment, slumping to the floor in tears. For him she was “the one”, a woman who he feels is perfect for him in every way imaginable. From here a chronic obsession begins as the man endlessly looks over older pictures of him and the woman on his phone at night, the times they spent together and endlessly ponders over what could have been. He tries the occasional online dating service but because he still thinks about “the one”, the man quickly becomes disconnected. Eventually the woman forms a relationship with another man and the central character falls into despair, refusing to move on from the rejection. He even grows callous towards some of his friends over their efforts to cheer him up.

The man soon wanders into a bar alone to drink away his sorrows and in a chance meeting, he comes across a rather conspicuous individual who notices his sombre mood and takes him to the side. The stranger is a member of a secretive society that offers cloning of particular individuals for a high price. He offers a more engaging, albeit illegal alternative to the cheap sex robots that have flooded the markets for hopeless romantics. The man is convinced to go through with it and he goes about collecting samples of the woman’s DNA at social gatherings, most notably her hair. This quickly devolves into stalking but the man is so desperate at this point that he can no longer see the difference. All the while, the original woman is unaware of the man’s motives, believing that he has simply accepted her choice.

A clone of the woman is grown and her mind is carefully tailored to believe that she is romantically involved with the central character, while also having an easy-going lifestyle working at home. The man is overjoyed to have the woman he always wanted and at first it works out well; they live together, sleep together and do everything a happy couple would. But it doesn’t last; eventually the clone’s free will takes hold; she wishes to change her look and style as time goes on but the man starts to be controlling. The obsession with making the clone look, dress and act exactly like the original woman starts to take its toll and the clone begins to suspect that she may not be all she seems. She randomly looks over the man’s social network photos one day and is shocked to discover a woman that looks exactly like her. The times where the man goes out to an undisclosed location (To visit the original woman and see how the clone compares) certainly aren’t helping either.

After around a year and a half, the clone finally meets her template; the original woman confronts the man but in a violent rage he demands that both of them keep his dealings a secret. The original woman wishes to avoid a major fight and says that she never wants to see the man again as he pulls the clone out of her apartment. The clone becomes miserable after the incident and soon another problem arises; she begins to suffer from Werner’s syndrome, an on-set of premature aging. The man reaches out to the stranger to find some kind of solution, only to be told that the aging process is a rare and unintended side effect which cannot be stopped. At this point the man becomes hysterical, once again unable to deal with the facts in front of him. He violently beats the clone and this draws the attention of the neighbours who call the police. The man is arrested and the authorities eventually learn of the cloning process and sentence him to prison, the case gaining massive media coverage in the process.

The man is eventually released but the clone has passed away and the original woman, not to mention everyone he knew, wants nothing to do with him. The man ends up back where he started in the bar; once again mourning the loss of “the one”, only this time we see he has a police tag on his leg, forever branding him as a violent offender who is shunned by all of society.

Themes

Obsession and control: “The One” is very much like Alfred Hitchcock’s Vertigo in this regard. The man becomes so obsessed with the clone that he wishes to control everything about it to resemble the original woman he loved. This deludes him into thinking he never failed with her and the overall theme builds throughout the episode. At first the audience is sympathetic with him over the rejection but then comes to loath him over the distances he will go to satisfy himself.

Secret thoughts and hidden motives: The difference between what people say and do in front of others and what gets bottled up in the mind can result in some sinister consequences. When away from the clone, the man acts just as he did before the rejection with the original woman, a fronted persona to hide his internal jealousy and later to conceal his controlling ways at home. All through the episode the man is riddled with paranoia because of his thoughts and not sharing them with others; first from the woman’s rejection and then from the possibility of others finding out about the clone he created.

Lust, selfishness and jealousy: These careless emotions prove to be a highly controlling factor for the man; his initial jealousy of the woman’s new relationship causes him to spend almost all his income on creating a clone in the perfect image of the original woman. Just as he wishes to control the clone, so too is he influenced by selfish desires. These thoughts are entirely internal, tying in with the previous theme of secrets.

Denial and an inability to accept things: Some individuals can end up shaping and moulding their entire lives around a single person without living for themselves first. Others refuse to move on from a particularly difficult rejection. “The One” aims to show the darker side of constantly looking to the past instead of moving forwards. Denial itself can also drastically alter a person’s mannerisms, making them callous to others. The episode shows this gradual process as the man spirals downwards.

Other notes

• “The One” could be considered a reversal of “Be Right Back”; but rather than doing something out of grief and missing a lover, the man creates the clone purely out of selfish desire.

• The episode would be based in a more realistic setting, rather than the hyper-future portrayed in “Nosedive” and “Fifteen Million Merits”.

• When looking at speculative fiction, there is already word of so-called “sex robots” being produced to pleasure individuals. Would loneliness cause individuals to take even more drastic measures when they suffer rejection? The entrance of cloning into the proceedings questions this.

Black Mirror Series Review (Seasons 1-3)

Released: 4th December 2011 (First Season)

Created by: Charlie Brooker

Number of Episodes: 12

Where to watch: Netflix (UK and United States)

Starring: Different actors and actresses each episode

Black Mirror is an anomaly of today’s television; a sci-fi series with a somewhat realistic focus and little in the way of continuity; yet it can stand among the most impactful and well-written shows of this decade. Why? Because of the harsh and unforgiving topics at its centre.

Taking place across a variety of settings, each episode in Black Mirror is a very different story but they touch upon our obsession with technology and where it could take us, occasionally for good but very much for ill. Without spoiling anything here, each episode will feature a wild situation that both the main character and we are unable to comprehend and as it goes on we venture on that journey of discovery, learning of how technology has taken control of people’s lives. Often there’s a major twist or horrifying realisation, a final hammering down of a relentlessly unsettling message. The show’s satire is shown by taking our common obsessions and taking them to the extreme; our unabashed addiction to talent shows is one major thread. However, a vacuum of empathy, ethics and consideration is by far its biggest and strongest component; what do we do when technology controls us, switching us off to sensitive situations? It’s this captivating factor that constantly sparks the audience’s interest with every story told and may well make you think twice about how much you use your own tech. By keeping and maintaining this focus, Black Mirror offers something that few other shows can match, a hard-hitting dose of relatability.

There’s a wide collection of actors and actresses in Black Mirror and each one of them transplants themselves fully into the episodes which remain relatively contained, focusing on a few major characters to great effect. Some of the sheer intensity put on by the cast is staggeringly well-realised, pulling the audience into every episode; the emotions on display are fantastically successful at creating a hard-hitting punch that reinforces the magnitude of the situations they are trapped in. What’s also superb about Black Mirror is the way in which it layers references to history, culture and other facets of our times to paint an incredibly engaging viewpoint. The infamous Moors Murders (Which took place in the sixties in the UK) and several gaming quotes are two such examples; it creates the intoxicating illusion, particularly in the episodes set in the present, that the events in Black Mirror could well be happening in our own societies. The series deals with some adult aspects of the human condition as well including sexuality and violence but it takes care to never become too explicit with them, allowing its powerful themes to resonate with the audience without issue.

Black Mirror is simply one of the most ingenious modern shows ever created; asking all kinds of intriguing questions and delving into some truly disturbing places. For all its anthology driven setups, Charlie Brooker and his team have created something profoundly relevant to our modern technologically driven lives and because of this it’s something that absolutely no one should miss.

Rating 5/5 Stars (Exceptional)

The Walking Dead's march to mediocrity: My thoughts

The Walking Dead has been around for a while but now seven seasons in, I just can’t follow the series anymore because of its tired, formulaic focus and slow pacing. What was once a gritty, darkly foreboding show has taken a turn for the mundane. Why is the show so vastly disappointing nowadays? I’ll try to elaborate here; be warned as there are some light spoilers for several seasons.

I’ve watched TWD since the beginning and the first season was incredibly well produced; this mostly came down to the show running talents of Frank Darabont (Who also had a hand in The Shawshank Redemption). From season 4 onwards though, things have been on a downward trajectory. We’ve reached the mid-season finale for season 7 and only three of the eight episodes have been genuinely engaging; the pilot for its sheer brutal shock-factor, the exploration of the saviour’s hideout with Daryl as their prisoner and some aspects of the mid-season finale with Negan’s rage being unleashed. However, brutality and gore can only get you so far and these moments can’t make up for why I just don’t find the series all that enjoyable anymore…

1. The momentum the series had has vanished

TWD has some strong moments but the way these are layered together is currently having some problems compared with previous seasons. Season 1 was constantly moving forwards and it had the advantage of being set at the beginning at the outbreak. Seasons 3 and 4 were quite good too, paired up by a great villain at its centre in the form of David Morrissey’s Governor. But once they left the prison at the mid-season finale, the same formula has been used repeatedly; the characters go to a location, it gets destroyed in some way, a new villain comes along and the process repeats. The problems in the painfully dragged out season 2 are now creeping into 7; AMC’s insistence on stretching every season out to sixteen episodes is taking a toll on the series. The new settlements such as the Hilltop and the Kingdom are stretched out across entire episodes, their long dialogue sessions slowing the pace to a crawl. Telltale’s episodic Walking Dead series has done a much better job with pacing; every episode in that game series feels important. With the upcoming season 3, I may well turn to that instead of returning to the TV series when it continues next year.

   

2. The characters aren’t progressing nearly as much as they used to

The performances in TWD are still relatively good, especially from Andrew Lincoln, Norman Reedus and newcomer Jeffery Dean Morgan, but the material they’re working with has become so by-the-numbers that there’s almost a disconnect with the characters now. We know that Rick is the leader and that he’s being tested but that’s it; there’s no further development to his character, no real changes made to vary up the overall plot. For the most part, the characters stay where they are and when they do move it feels very contrived. Rick's violent outburst towards the end of season 5 was incredibly abrupt but the biggest offender of this is Carol who underwent a nervous breakdown at the end of season 6 for some unexplained reason. Other characters are quickly killed off before they can make a real impact and because they’re grouped under “expendable”, many of the fatalities also seem rushed. If you’re not intrigued by the character arcs, then that really takes a lot of the wind out of the sails; instead you’re just waiting around for the next shocking moment, which come with such irregular abandon.

3. Much of the series is now too reliant on teasers and “fake-out” moments

Much like other popular series, The Walking Dead mixes in a twist or two to keep us guessing, but the impact of these has been drastically reduced over the seasons. The last time I was genuinely shocked by the series was in the episode “Thank you” when Steven Yuen’s Glenn Rhee falls off a dumpster to his presumed death. The series then saw fit to bring him back a couple of episodes later, having crawled under the dumpster to escape the zombie horde. With this cheap move, Glenn’s gruesome demise at the hands of Negan didn’t have the impact it should have for me.

When you cut the audience off with Negan murdering a character just to get people back for the next season, it’s a sure sign that your series is running out of steam. Season 7 has a similar problem in that it’s making the audience sit through many dull, uneventful episodes with the thin promise of all-out war with Negan’s saviours. “It’ll be the most action-packed thing ever, we promise!”; it’s all build-up without substance and the bigger moments are starting to ring hollow. The only thing the series can do to keep things from going completely stale is to keep on introducing more sadistic villains, but where can they go after Negan?

     

4. It’s no longer a cohesive series; instead it’s an endless “money train” for AMC

The biggest reason of all though is the company behind it, one which seems intent on stringing audiences along for a few select moments; combine AMC (who has full ownership of The Walking Dead series) with the continuing comics from Robert Kirkman and you have a series that could go on and on, wearing out its welcome in no time flat. TWD is easily AMC’s most successful series and despite the lowered ratings, they’re sure to keep pushing out season after season with the same formula. The defence of the show being an adaptation won’t work under scrutiny as the show has taken many steps outside of the source material over the years. But rather than having just a few missteps (Looking at you Dorne from Game of Thrones!), The Walking Dead doesn’t manage to weave its own interesting narratives from the original cloth; the same formula just keeps going with little in the way of variation. Despite a limited zombie apocalypse setting, this is by far the biggest reason why I won’t be watching the series anymore. Will they keep the series going the same monotonous way as they have over the past two years? No thanks...

(Images used for the purposes of review and criticism under fair use)

Allied Movie Review

Released: November 25th 2016 (UK)

Length: 124 Minutes

Certificate: 15

Director: Robert Zemeckis

Starring: Brad Pitt, Marion Cotillard, Jared Harris, Matthew Goode, Lizzy Caplan and Anton Lesser

Allied is the latest effort from director Robert Zemeckis and the third major outing in a World War II setting for Brad Pitt. Some are comparing it to other sweeping war epics, but when taken on its own accord, it’s a genuinely engaging tale of detached actors in a world conflict.

During World War Two, Canadian Intelligence Officer Max Vatan (Brad Pitt) is deployed into Casablanca, partnering up with French resistance fighter Marianne Beausejour (Marion Cotillard). What starts as a professional partnership turns into a serious relationship for the two and their missions together prove to be quite successful. But after two years of happy marriage, Max is told by British Intelligence that his wife may be a German spy; torn between love and duty, his suspicions and desperation to find out the truth grow with every passing day and the pressure placed by command. The opening act is very slow, taking a fair bit of inspiration from the 1942’s Casablanca; it’s a carefully played act by both as they work towards infiltrating a key Nazi party. From here the plot moves to a more subdued tone as Vatan tracks down clues that could reveal the true nature of his wife. While the first half seeks to build the characters, the second half builds an intriguing rabbit hole that follows through all the way to the end. The transition between the two halves feels a bit rushed as though and this keeps the narrative of plot from reaching its full potential as sweeping epic.

Allied stands as very atypical of its genre and this shows through its performances. A very small set of restrained emotions is put on display by Pitt and Cotillard, tying in with both the time period and their personas. Both main actors play off each other well, Pitt with a smooth mannerism and Cotillard with a subtle seductiveness capture a key shift; one where duty turns to romance which in turn, fuels Vatan’s disbelief later down the road. When it does reach this point, Pitt does a great job of conveying the stress his character feels, with the understanding that he will be ordered to kill Marianne if she is discovered to be a spy. Allied doesn’t reach the lofty heights of its filmmaking inspirations but it nevertheless compels the audience to follow them and see where their strong bond will go. However, many of the side characters, especially Max’s comrades in the forces are introduced incredibly abruptly and don’t carry much weight in the plot. Despite an effort towards authenticity, the focus can feel one-sided, most notably in the film’s final act.

The presentation in Allied has been injected with a fair amount of artistry, especially in the way it was shot. CGI is kept to a minimum, used to emphasise the destruction brought by The Blitz in London; the atmosphere in these scenes is particularly foreboding, the flashing sparks of anti-aircraft fire raining overhead, emphasising how close the war is to the main characters. The action sequences themselves go by very quickly, but they still manage to deliver a strong punch by highlighting the well-trained efficiency of the two main characters. Many background shots are used to give off subtle hints about the setting, whether it’s couples bonding in a Moroccan café or partying Nazi forces outside a window; occasionally these shots shift their focus onto the central characters, smoothly blurring out the external action to the two main characters. There’s a sizeable amount of symbolism to be found as well; one intimate moment in a car in the middle of a sandstorm is a metaphor for the character’s occupations; their individual personas shielding them from the chaotic frontlines of World War Two. Another close-up of Pitt’s character as he walks down a corridor, his face shifting between light and dark indicates his pondering over the film’s central revelation. It’s tied off by a heartfelt main theme that carries the more emotional moments effortlessly.

Allied boasts a brilliant filmmaking style and an emotive story that detaches itself from the typical battle focused fare of most major war films. A somewhat irregular shift and basic side characters are its only real shortcomings, resulting in another fine effort from a very well-established filmmaker.

Rating: 4/5 Stars (Great)

Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them Movie Review

Released: 18th November 2016 (UK and United States)

Length: 133 Minutes

Certificate: 12A

Director: David Yates

Starring: Eddie Redmayne, Katherine Waterston, Dan Fogler, Alison Sudol, Colin Farrell, Jon Voight, Ezra Miller and Ron Perlman

Five years after the original series concluded, David Yates and JK Rowling have returned one of the most popular fictional works of all time to the big screen with Fantastic Beasts and where to find them, a spin-off prequel that delivers plenty of enjoyment but sits below the older films.

Taking place in the 1920s, Fantastic Beasts follows magizoologist Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne), who arrives in New York to document and track down creatures in the city. Things get off to a tricky start as mishaps involving aspiring baker Jacob Kowalski (Dan Fogler) at a bank cause several of his creatures to be released, risking the ordinary muggle world (or no-Maj as they’re referred to in the States) finding out about magic. Newt is apprehended by demoted Auror Tina Goldstein (Katherine Waterston) and from here a darker situation unfolds as a deadly black mass threatens to consume everything in the bustling settlement. The film certainly doesn’t stray far from its predecessors; it moves along at a suitable pace, giving plenty of wonder, light-hearted comedy and rapid action sequences. It doesn’t come without some speed bumps though; the final act is quite predictable, once again falling into the same cliché of a monster about to destroy the city. There are also several scenes that don’t really contribute anything to the overall plot and many of the themes touched upon end up feeling superficial at best. The most glaring of these is the Magical Congress of the United States, an equivalent to the Ministry of Magic in previous films, which has a minimalistic role; playing this off with the political undertones from Jon Voight’s role as the father of a US Senator could have provided much more depth. Considering the film’s efforts to set up a new universe across the pond from Hogwarts, this is quite the missed opportunity.

All four central characters in Fantastic Beasts are very well-realised, with subtle, yet intriguing hints pertaining to their pasts that occasionally creep into the narrative. Redmayne plays Newt incredibly well; there’s an intense curiosity about him that wraps the audience up into his work, particularly in a scene concerning the inside of his briefcase. Kowalski is always capably amusing as he discovers the wizarding world and the opposite approach taken with Goldstein and her ditsy sister Queenie (Alison Sudol) is worked to solid effect. However, problems creep their way into the side characters. Colin Farrell (as high ranking Auror Percival Graves), Carmen Ejogo (as the Magical Congress President) and Jon Voight go by underused and so too do many of the non-majis outside of Kowalski. The villains are incredibly weak too with relatively basic characteristics that fail to add to the film’s setting; in the film’s opening moments we learn that a dark wizard known as Grindlewald is on the loose, but his build-up just can’t manage to instil a foreboding presence in the audience. It’s something else that the film is no doubt keeping back for future entries.

The new outing for the Harry Potter series continues the franchise’s proficiency in special effects; creative imagination is at an all-time high here as a variety of wacky, fascinating creatures come alive; combine this with an increased scale on magic use and you have one of the more visually extravagant films in the series to date. Buildings are trashed, sparks fly in magic duels and more sinister elements, especially in the film’s final moments, feel appropriately dangerous. Pulling and twisting through the action deftly, the camerawork is always on point while the music keeps in line with previous entries with a more delicate touch; at times, it reminded me of 2005’sThe Polar Express with its emphasis on wonder and discovery. As a period piece, Fantastic Beasts is no slouch either; detailed costume work and set design work in tandem to transport the audience into its setting, something ripe for expanding upon.

Fantastic Beasts is ultimately very well produced, marking it as an accessible prequel. You don’t need to get into the previous works to understand it and everything you loved about the original film series is still here; likeable characters, superb special effects and extensive intrigue, sprinkled with a helping of adult sensibilities. It’s burdened by a set of odd scenes, characters and themes that never quite manage to slot nicely into the overall plot; perhaps over the next four films we’ll see this rectified.

Rating: 3.5/5 Stars (Good)

Aliens Movie Review

Released: July 18th 1986

Length: 137 Minutes

Certificate: 18

Director: James Cameron

Starring: Sigourney Weaver, Michael Bein, Carrie Henn, Lance Henriksen, Paul Reiser, Bill Paxton, Jenette Goldstein, William Hope and Al Matthews

Ridley Scott’s chilling contribution to sci-fi horror was a massive success and word of a sequel floated around through the first half of the eighties. Coming seven years after the original film, Aliens was given the greenlight after 20^th Century Fox was impressed by a script written by James Cameron, who had achieved success with 1984’s The Terminator. Despite this time gap and a change in director, Aliens more than lived up to the 1979 classic.

Aliens continues the story of Ellen Ripley (Sigourney Weaver), the sole survivor of the Nostromo vessel who first encountered the terrifying organism. Ripley is shocked to find out that she was drifting endlessly in hyper sleep for 57 years; her daughter Amanda has died of old age and on top of that her flight license is revoked after Weyland-Yutani company executives don’t believe her story about her sinister ordeal. A full-blown settlement has been established on the planet LV-426 in Ripley’s absence but when contact is lost with the colonists, company representative Carter Burke (Paul Reiser) alongside Lieutenant Gorman (William Hope) of the colonial marines ask her to come along as an advisor. At first Ripley is incredibly hesitant but eventually agrees. The film makes use of a fantastic build-up, introducing the audience to the futuristic soldiers while also laying down hints that the cocky platoon clearly has no idea what they’re in for. A careful suspense is crafted as we’re introduced to the colony of Hadley’s Hope; there’s a serious creepiness to the place with evidence of a battle having taken place. Once the action finally roars onto the scene, it never lets up; with a feeling of impending danger, not to mention the sheer number of Aliens crawling all over the place. The final act is a thrilling dash where the central motive of the Xenomorphs is finally revealed in a suitably stomach-churning fashion. Suffice it say, there is no down-time in Aliens and the pitch-perfect pacing, combined with the unrelenting tension commands the audience’s attention all the way through.

The characters in Aliens are just as fleshed out and interesting as they were in the original and a shift in genre brings a new set of characteristics and mannerisms. Ellen Ripley begins the film suffering constant nightmares from her traumatic encounter in the first film, but as the marine operation goes from bad to worse, she’s the one who rises to the challenge, taking her fears head-on in the process. It’s one of the standout character transformations in the genre and Sigourney Weaver’s excellent performance solidifies Ripley as one of the best woman warriors in all of film. The marines are no slouch either with each having their own engaging quirks that play off each other very well; this is especially true of Private Hudson (Bill Paxton) who gets the wackiest lines and the tough-as-nails Vasquez (Jenette Goldstein). I especially enjoy the more collected mannerisms of Corporal Hicks (Michael Bein) and the calculating prowess of the android Bishop (Lance Henriksen). The young, traumatised Newt (Carrie Henn) is another great character and the bond she forms with Ripley is easily the strongest emotional anchor point of the film. Ultimately the film puts a lot of emphasis on the bonds between characters, whether it’s the camaraderie between the marines or the motherly ties between Ripley and Newt which has the audience consistently invested in their struggles.

Aliens features a flurry of excellent special effects that really make its world come alive while also working to expand on the original film’s potential. The production teams headed up by Stan Winston and the late composer James Horner really outdid themselves, resulting in an outstanding showcase of practical special effects. The sets, creatures, weapons and vehicles were all carefully hand crafted, making occasional use of miniature models and stop motion to great effect. While the foreboding rain and dark lighting are instrumental in building the atmosphere, the grotesque creatures and the filthy hives they inhabit are certainly the highlight of the sets with industrialised structures clashing against ugly organic material. The hand-crafted design of the film has ensured an iconic status, one which adds many interesting components to the film’s lore and universe while also carrying over into its Vietnam subtext. The marine’s overconfidence in their technical advantage and the way the marine dropship is modelled after the AH-1 Cobra helicopter are just two examples of this. The soundtrack to Aliens is phenomenal, delivering both a slow suspense and an explosive punch in every action sequence; without it the film would lose much of its action-packed edge.

Aliens is an absolutely superb sequel and one of the best science fiction films of the eighties; it expertly picks up what the original established, flips the switch to action and unleashes a barrage of viciously thrilling moments that will leave any audience floored, or at the very least, huddled in their seat.

Rating: 5/5 Stars

(As a side note, I was lucky enough to watch Aliens as a live performance with a full on orchestra at the Royal Albert Hall in London as part of its thirtieth anniversary. It was an immensely powerful experience with the soundtrack hammering into the audience and pulling them into the film, perhaps even more than the latest sound systems. I’d highly recommend it as the hall will be doing similar shows for other films including ET and Titanic)

Doctor Strange Movie Review

Released: 28th October 2016 (United Kingdom)

Length: 115 Minutes

Certificate: 12A

Director: Scott Derrickson

Starring: Benedict Cumberbatch, Rachel McAdams, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Benedict Wong, Mads Mikkelson and Tilda Swinton

The less well-known, but thoughtful Doctor Strange makes his debut in this latest offering from Marvel; while it isn’t such a radical departure from the norm, it is still an intriguing take on the superhero genre.

Doctor Stephen Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch) is a brilliant but egocentric neuro-surgeon who loses the use of his hands in a car accident; desperate to regain the function of his most precious assets, Strange journeys to Nepal, only to be drawn into a realm of parallel universes far beyond his comprehension. Strange marks itself as one of the more fascinating tales spun in the Marvel Cinematic Universe; as the main character delves into the realm of the mystic, the audience is taken along on that journey, making the narrative continuously engaging. The source material is very solemn and collected, creating a focus on the mind and spirit, but Doctor Strange also mixes in a modern sense of humour and just like other films in the series, it makes great use of this tone to break up the more serious moments. Doctor Strange is also incredibly smart with its blending of science and spirituality, twisting, turning and colliding both in surprising ways. On the one hand, Strange believes in the application of physical skill and mental knowledge but he then begins to understand that the mind has another facet based in careful concentration. As a result the film’s settings, plot and lore come together to form an intoxicating ride.

The characters of Doctor Strange all have plenty of dimensions to them and very well defined characteristics. Benedict Cumberbatch is brilliantly cast as the Doctor; there’s a balanced mix of humour and intellect that slots him seamlessly into the MCU. However this does come at the cost of a worthwhile backstory; it would have added more depth had we seen more detail on how he became a successful neuro-surgeon. Cumberbatch’s closest friend and colleague Christine Palmer (Rachel McAdams) is fairly downplayed and it doesn’t distract from the proceedings while still giving her a role to play. On the other side of reality, Strange’s closest ally Karl Mordo (Chiwetel Ejiofor) is built on duality; he believes in training Strange but also finds his own perspective changing as the film goes on. Benedict Wong is equally well-portrayed, his serious mannerisms bouncing off the comedic relief without ever feeling jarring.Mads Mikkelson plays main villain Kaecilius, whose backstory succeeds at deepening the lore of the mystics while also bringing a suitably threatening presence to bear. Lastly, there’s Tilda Swinton who takes on The Ancient One, one of the better mentor characters in the series so far; a collected yet committed woman who oozes just as much intrigue as the world she inhabits. The key line: “Forget everything you think you know” is a key aspect, the characters all conveying a theme of questioning things and thinking outside the box and this is a far more intelligent theme than anything the studio has done before.

Doctor Strange could well be the best looking film that Marvel has ever put out in recent years; the thoughtfulness that hangs over the film puts a new spin on the well-established trend of city destruction seen in its contemporaries. Fans of more mind-bending films will definitely be reminded of 2009’s Inception here as the environments shape-shift from one form to another with barely a moment to breathe. Add to that different dimensions and the bending of locations and you have an air of unpredictability that hooks into the action sequences. It’s an exhilarating ride that doesn’t falter for a second. Buildings fold, twist and break apart to form new structures and occasionally time itself slows or stops, allowing the audience to suspend their disbelief. The soundtrack has an air of science fiction to it, creating another elegant technical component. Doctor Strange is also one of few films that can join the likes of Avatar and How to train your Dragon with its superb use of 3D; it is used to truly make its alternate dimensions come alive and the strongest highlight of this is towards the end where a fantastic looking climax shifts in and out of reality with great precision.

The uncanny yet dazzlingly entertaining Doctor Strange is another sure-fire hit from Marvel. It takes a more calculated approach to the superhero genre and while the central character could have been introduced a bit better, the incredible special effects and fascinating narrative are more than enough to pull you into its world.

Rating: 4.5/5 Stars

Controversy Clocking Episode 8: Review copies and the manipulation of game criticism

Reviews are a major component in the gaming industry, mostly due to their ability to affect purchases and in turn make a marked impact on profits for companies. They also take far longer to consider and produce than any other piece of media due to the many components that make up a game. In this follow up to my episode on “The Finger of Suspicion and outrage over game reviews”, further measures have recently been put in place to diminish and affect the way information on the quality of games is written and delivered to the masses.

The gaming industry is a sector where developers and publishers hold all the cards when it comes to marketing and selling their products. If a reviewer calls out a company’s practices or gives a lower score, they’re added to the blacklist (Most recently with Jim Sterling being labelled a “Wild Card” reviewer by big publishers). If a game is broken on release, a version is created that presents the game as running perfectly well. If a game has microtransactions or some kind of pay-to win aspect, these components are locked off from mainstream reviewers until the game is launched. It’s all tailored towards keeping the pre-orders and profits as high as they can be while misleading the consumer based on a hype cycle that continues to be impervious to major criticism.

The latest case of developers purposely disrupting this flow of information to suit their own ends is Bethesda, who recently put out a statement saying that their review copies would be given to the press just one day before release. They already pulled a similar move with the Doom reboot earlier this year over concerns that the lukewarm reaction to the game’s multiplayer beta would impact sales. According to Bethesda’s statement, users should wait for reviews and explains that they want reviewers and consumers to get into their games at the same time. Unfortunately, in the gaming industry this is impossible; no matter how many disappointing games are released there will always be those who fall for the hype and put down their money too soon.

There’s an endless obsession with getting your hands on a game as fast as possible and playing it before everyone else. In that sense, this latest move plays on the consumer’s distaste towards the gaming media who get to play upcoming games early for free. When looking at the pre-order bonus for the upcoming Dishonored 2, players are able to get into the game a day before release if they put down their money before the official release date of November 11^th; in other words they can take on the media in a sense by having the game first and it’s this kind of pandering that will feed even more into the negative cycle of hype and pre-order culture that has dogged the industry in recent years.

By restricting its games to reviewers in this way, Bethesda’s new policy is very cowardly, showcasing a publisher that refuses to take criticism upon the launch of its products. It will affect two main groups in the following ways…

1. Reviewers both mainstream and third party: Under the policy game critics are given just one day to play the game’s modes and collect their thoughts and this is nowhere near sufficient enough to form a credible impression. There’s a tendency to gloss over specifics such as multiplayer performance, random bugs and glitches and the examination of specific modes in their entirety. There’s a pressure to slap a score on a title and put the review out more quickly to take advantage of clicks and advertisement revenue to pay the bills which will degrade the quality of game criticism as a whole.

2. The consumer: The flow of information regarding the quality of an upcoming game will be drastically cut down, making consumers far less informed and more susceptible to purchasing titles without having the proper information beforehand. The companies get your money before the reviews come out and the potential impact they could have (Based on quality information) are neutered. Therefore, publishers and developers who put out poorly made or exploitative games receive few ramifications for their unethical decisions.

As a result, Bethesda’s recent statement feels very contradictory; it’s hardly based on their so called “valuing of game reviews” and instead looks to quell negative criticism that could affect their bottom line in profits. Inaccurate and rushed game reviews have a lower chance of convincing the consumer that their game isn’t worth buying at launch. With them being such a well-known company, it’s easy to see other big name developers and publishers taking a similar step to quell any kind of criticism that could affect pre-order levels and profits right before the game releases. This controlling move from Bethesda can only serve to increase the effectiveness of misleading advertising and shoddy pre-order tactics because there will be fewer obstacles to get in their way.