Top 5 Guilty Pleasures in Film

As a reviewer of films, I like to think I’ve become more specific and refined in my criticism of the medium over the last three years on this blog. For this countdown (Which I hope to turn into a series every twenty five posts) I thought I’d take a step back; there are many films out there which were received poorly by both critics and audiences yet when you look back on personal experience of when you first watched the film, there is still a kind of mindless enjoyment to be found. The following five films all have numerous problems, but I’m still able to look past them and view them for what they are; simple entertainment.

5. The Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions (2003)

A vast majority of audiences disregard the Matrix sequels as vastly inferior to the original 1999 film and even though they both throw out both philosophical ambiguity and plot coherency in favour of pure action, they can still stand as enjoyable films to me. The action sequences (particularly the burly brawl in Reloaded and final battle in Revolutions) are still dazzling to watch, maintaining that flair that the series is known for. The overall presentation and look of the sequels are also spectacular, particularly as we see the machines and the utter destruction they cause to Zion towards the end of Revolutions. Above all else though, Reloaded and Revolutions succeed at adding to and eventually completing the story established in the original 1999 film.

4. Jurassic Park III (2001)

Jurassic Park III is constantly referred to as the weakest of the saga and the naysayers are certainly correct. The motivations for going to Isla Sorna are completely screwed up from the offset and the characters are some of the most annoying I’ve ever seen in a film (especially the grating William H. Macy and Tea Leoni). Despite all this though, the dinosaur action scenes still deliver; I’ve always enjoyed the raptor chase and the struggle with the Pteranodons in the bird cage. Perhaps the most controversial thing I can say is that I don’t mind the Spinosaurus taking out the T-Rex at the end of the first act; if anything it was a pretty intense battle, two titans of the prehistoric era going head to head. It’s also the shortest film in the series, meaning we don’t have to put up with the bad acting for too long.

3. 2012 (2009)

Yes it’s mind-numbingly stupid and the characters are incredibly stereotypical, but as pure entertainment this disaster film delivers. It’s as if Roland Emmerich decided to roll every disaster movie ever made into one gargantuan package and in this sense it really works. Running off the basic premise of the Mayans predicting the end of the world; we’re treated to meteor storms, huge earthquakes, structural collapses and raging floods all in the same film. In terms of sheer silly spectacle, 2012 is unsurpassed; it crams the whole suite of disaster tropes into one film and through some solid special effects it manages to make the race to safety surprisingly engaging if you’re willing to go along with its many wild scenarios.

2. Godzilla (1998)

The American version of Godzilla had a sizeable amount of hype attached to it and when it finally arrived there was plenty of disappointment to go around. The critics really didn’t like it and the fans were unhappy with the monster design but I just don’t feel the same way about Godzilla 1998; I first saw the film when I was about six and I really enjoyed the scene where “Zilla” first arrives in New York. It’s hopelessly derivative of other films and the acting from the human characters is pretty atrocious but that’s not really what you look for in a movie like this. It gives you some explosive action sequences and a pretty manic chase at the end, delivering that basic popcorn entertainment. Most of all though, it’s not an absolute tease like the 2014 version was; it understands that Godzilla is supposed to be the central focus whenever he’s on screen, rather than constantly cutting away to the boring humans.

1. Wild Hogs (2007)

Wild Hogs is a movie that is despised by a vast majority of critics who called it idiotic, unfunny and tired. Shockingly enough, I still get some enjoyment out of it. I saw it with family and we were laughing our heads off all the way through. If you look at it critically, there’s plenty to complain about; the film is awash with stereotypes, many of the jokes quickly wear out their welcome and the film as a whole is pretty dumb. Yet as far as harmless family comedy goes, it’s still one of the most quotable films out there. Even now whenever I see a band of hoggers heading down the motorway my little brother is always reminded of the film. That’s how funny and memorable it was for us when we first saw it; it’s the ultimate guilty pleasure for me as it stands in near complete opposition to the film’s overall consensus.

Fargo Series Review (Season 2)

Released: July 13th 2016

Created by: Noah Hawley

Number of episodes: 10

Where to watch: Netflix (UK and United States)

Starring: Patrick Wilson, Kirsten Dunst, Jesse Plemons, Jean Smart and Ted Danson

Twenty years have passed since the Coen Brothers released what some consider their best film which has recently found new life as a superbly enjoyable small screen experience. As a prequel to both the original 1996 film and season 1, the second season of Fargo hardly puts a foot wrong, providing us with another enticing blend of crime, conflict and light comedy.

It all begins (Completely at random of course) in 1979 with a couple accidentally running down a member of the ruthless Gerhardt crime family; Peggy and Ed (Played by Kirsten Dunst and Jesse Plemons respectively) take desperate measures to cover up their involvement in the crime while also pursuing their own ends of moving up in life. Meanwhile State Trooper Lou Solverson (Patrick Wilson) takes up the case, but between an approaching visit from Presidential candidate Ronald Reagan (Played effortlessly well by Bruce Campbell), multiple gang wars and an incognito hitman lurking around, the concerned copper has his work cut out for him. Once again, we have a set of varied and interesting characters caught up in a web of intrigue. While it contains several key links to the first season For the most part, season 2 of Fargo is its own story and it’s vastly unpredictable, with the warring parties taking steps to further their own ends. Motivations change, authority gets in the way and desperate measures come into force; it all comes together to create another rich narrative that’s difficult to pull away from.

Just as before, Fargo season 2 creates an intriguing collection of characters that you’ll want to stick with; Lou Solverson is a decent trooper through and through with a sense a moral responsibility to uncover the crimes, but it’s his relationships with his family and father-in-law Hank Larsson that really anchors him as the season’s central protagonist. As you learn more about his past you really do care for him and his family, just as you did with Molly and Gus Grimly in the original season. The Gerhardt’s themselves have an interesting hierarchal structure to them; on the one hand they’re increasingly violent but then you have the more considered approaches by the family’s leader Floyd (Jean Smart); the way the family members play off one another throughout the season is one of its most interesting components and despite their questionable goals, you’re still invested in what will happen to them by the end. Finally there’s the elusive hitman (Zahn McClarnon) with more than a few secrets and parallels to Billy Bob Thornton’s Lorne Malvo from the original season; another sinister character that won’t fail at casting unease on the audience.

Fargo’s presentational techniques are back in full swing for Season 2, this time adopting a more vintage style to reflect the time period; this is personified mostly by the typewriter opening credits that mark each of the ten episodes. The cinematography makes a great use of wide shots to show the scale of the setting and often times the action will split the screen into two perspectives to track the characters, keeping the visual flair high. As a period piece, Fargo also does incredibly well from a design standpoint. Costuming, scenery, a selection of classic rock, the old fashioned cars and town settings; outside of the often nasty events that transpire in the season, it’s a real treat to be transported back to the seventies.

Season 2 of Fargo really isn’t all that different from the original (outside of the time period) but it hasn’t lost one bit of what made it so deliciously captivating. Just like its predecessors it will pull you in and never let go until the final scene has concluded.

Rating: 5/5 Stars

War Dogs Movie Review

Released: August 19th 2016 (United States)

Length: 114 Minutes

Certificate: 15

Director: Todd Phillips

Starring: Jonah Hill, Miles Teller, Ana De Armas and Bradley Cooper

The trading of arms and weaponry is a considerably shady business in today’s world and the War Dogs arrives as the latest portrayal of the issue. It’s a seemingly over-the-top one sided film that ends up having a lot more to it under the surface if you look at the way it is presented.

War Dogs is loosely based on the Rolling Stone article “Arms and the dudes” by Guy Lawson and follows two fraudulent arms dealers Efraim Diveroli (Jonah Hill) and David Packouz (Miles Teller) who made it big by taking advantage of public bids on US arms and defence contracts. With sly impersonations mixed with sneaky business tactics, the two amass quite the fortunes. But for Efraim, there’s never enough money to go around and the two soon find themselves growing more and more unethical and relentless in their efforts to secure the biggest deals. As the film opens, the audience is treated to a set of statistics regarding the cost of outfitting soldiers in modern warfare, an intriguing piece of background that snags attention. From here the story unfolds over chapters as Packouz narrates the rise and eventual fall of their company AEY. The biggest component in the War Dogs lies with its contrasting tones; these are intentional in that as the story unfolds from the viewpoint of the two main characters, the audience is put into their perspective. In the eyes of Efraim and David, they’re making millions and living it up without ever having to deal with the consequences or understand the impact of their actions, so there’s a sense of glamour which hangs over their moral-free business ethics. But once it all comes unravelling and the duo gets too deeply involved, the film becomes more serious as the law begins to catch up with their deeds. The final third of the film is particularly engrossing as tempers flare and things spiral for the two main characters.

The two actors at the centre of War Dogs both keep the spotlight and both make their specific characteristics known. Efraim’s presence and self-absorbed mannerisms make up a big portion of the film; Jonah Hill plays the arrogant, self-indulged businessman with a charismatic glee, though occasionally he crosses the line into becoming annoying which distracts from the otherwise intriguing proceedings. By contrast, Teller is much more grounded as David’s family life with his girlfriend Iz (Ana de Armas) creeping into his dealings, creating a more considered element to his character. Much of the dialogue in War Dogs has an outrageous, over-the-top flair to it, emphasizing how taken aback and carefree the arms dealers are by their illegal successes; at times it reminded me of 2013’s The Wolf of Wall Street. Beneath all the partying and celebrations lie two characters that are profiting off conflict and human misery and this clashes with their own viewpoints which are consistently pushes to the forefront.

Taking place in between 2005 and 2008, War Dogs contains several mentions of the Iraq War and it creates a fairly believable picture of the business. Scenes in both the Middle East and Albania create a more solemn atmosphere of looming tension and danger, another major contrast with the environment the dealers do their business from. The music is a mixture of wild party songs that reflect the extravagance of the dealers business, adding another layer to the film’s perspective based tones. In War Dogs a straightforward filming style takes a back seat to the portrayal of real world issues and it’s definitely the right way to go, further immersing the audience in the issue at the film’s centre.

War Dogs draws you in with its narrative, subverts it with tonal shifts and creates two memorable (if mostly unlikeable) characters. It takes some consideration to understand where the film is coming from, but behind its massively controversial and troubling subject matter you’ll find an incredibly entertaining and engaging dramatization.

Rating: 4/5 Stars

Jason Bourne Movie Review

Released: July 27th 2016 (UK)

Length: 123 Minutes

Certificate: 12A

Director: Paul Greengrass

Starring: Matt Damon, Julia Stiles, Tommy Lee Jones, Alicia Vikander, Vincent Cassel and Riz Ahmed

After almost a decade of absence (and a quick side tangent in 2012 with Legacy), the Bourne franchise has returned to cinemas. More than just an extension of a trilogy, Jason Bourne proves that the series can still offer the best of the thriller genre.

Many years after the events of The Bourne Ultimatum, David Webb, aka Jason Bourne (Matt Damon) remains in hiding, often turning to bare knuckle brawls to pay the bills. After receiving a tip from fellow hacker Nicky Parsons (Julia Stiles), Bourne finds himself hunted once again, this time by CIA director Robert Dewey (Tommy Lee Jones) and his protégé Heather Lee (Alicia Vikander). From here it’s another series of globe-trotting ventures interspersed with the common intelligence briefings and flashbacks as Bourne works to uncover further secrets about his past. Conspiracies on the CIA and its practices are strewn throughout the narrative, making for another intriguing set of themes regarding ethics and operational procedures. Things don’t come without a few speed bumps however; the film moves incredibly quickly for a majority of its runtime, keeping the stakes high, but whenever a scene involving social media company Deep Dream comes in, it brings the momentum to a screeching halt. The scenes involving business exec Aaron Kalloor (Riz Ahmed) attempt to add some kind of modern context to the proceedings but instead they come off as a big distraction and really don’t contribute anything to the central plotline. There’s also a moment (which I won’t spoil) at the conclusion of a thrilling action scene in Greece that’s brushed over rather quickly with little in the way of reflection. These moments stand out because the original trilogy didn’t have to burden itself with these issues and followed through with the action and drama all the way.

The characters in Jason Bourne maintain the realistic nature of previous films and do well to fit into the plot. With the character’s tortured past pushing into the forefront, Matt Damon once again portrays the rogue spy with a brilliant sense of duality; part hardened operative and part regretful individual. It’s a very believable personal struggle, particularly with Dewey’s telling line: “You’ll never find any peace”. Dewey himself is another ruthless villain for the franchise, hell bent on concealing some dirty secrets just as his predecessors did. On the other hand Heather Lee is a young yet pragmatic member of the agency who really comes into her own as things go on; Vikander captures this change seamlessly. Despite not contributing much to the overall narrative, Riz Ahmed still gives a capable performance as the business archetype and his involvement does pick up a little towards the film’s conclusion.

Paul Greengrass returns to direct Jason Bourne and his trademark shaky, pseudo-authentic style is in full effect. The action on display here is every bit as engaging as it was in the original trilogy; furious chase sequences, brutal fight scenes and intense firefights all come together to create a white-knuckled tension that few other thrillers can claim to match. The cinematography is slickly done and the stunt work has been put together intricately; both are matched by the soundtrack, another relentless assault on the senses that takes the thrills to a higher level. Flashbacks make use of a hazy filter, again emphasising the gaps in Bourne’s memory and spurring him on to find the truth whereas other scenes, such as the one in Greece, bring in differing atmospheres through their lighting. By sticking to an established formula, Jason Bourne delivers the same concise presentation that the director gave across Supremacy and Ultimatum; it certainly won’t disappoint any fans of those entries.

Jason Bourne is for the most part, a very strong comeback for one of the best action thriller franchises in cinema. The action is fantastic and the characters are very well-portrayed; it’s just too bad that a few niggling plot elements keep it from being as intensely gratifying as Ultimatum was in 2007.

Rating: 4/5 Stars

The Shallows Movie Review

Released: 12th August 2016 (UK)

Length: 86 Minutes

Certificate: 15

Director: Jaume Collet-Serra

Starring: Blake Lively

The Shallows may be off-putting for some at first; it’s another film in a massively crowded sub-genre. Unlike all the wacky, ridiculously over-the-top parodies though, this entry in the family goes for a more serious, contained storyline and tone, placing itself above much of its contemporaries in the process.

The film is as simple as they come; it’s just the young Nancy Adams (Blake Lively) stuck on a rock with a hulking Great White Shark circling waters. What starts off as a simple day of surfing the tides in Mexico quickly turns into a perilous game of cat and mouse; can Nancy use her own ingenuity and resourcefulness to get back to shore, 200 yards away? Aside from a few details about her family, it keeps things completely straightforward and in this case our attention never drifts from the situation Nancy finds herself in. It opens with an ominous set of GoPro footage, engaging the audience straight away by giving a few morsels while leaving the full story under wraps. There’s no denying that The Shallows takes plenty of aspects from the originator of shark films. Much like in Jaws, you don’t see the animal too often which allows the tension and suspense to build fully. This tension is consistent throughout the film, even at the points where Nancy finds a reprieve on the rocks; the changing tides add another layer of desperation to the situation.

The isolated setting drastically limits the cast of The Shallows and considering how she’s the only main actress in the cast, Blake Lively turns in a great performance all around; Nancy’s outgoing personality is expected, but once she’s trapped on that rock, Lively gets across her character’s frightful predicament incredibly well. You’ll often wince as Nancy administers improvisational first aid, run afoul of some coral reefs and watch helplessly as her options narrow with the passing hours.  

The shots on display in The Shallows are seamless, making use of some great angles both over and under water that really capture the thrill of the surf. Of course this quickly transitions into the style that has become atypical of shark films. Point of view shots are the prime suspect here; they aren’t particularly original but they build the suspense well enough. The computer effects on display reflect the film’s lowered budget, though this is to the film’s detriment. The shark looks fine from a distance, but when things get close and personal, the believability drops quite a bit; this is one case where a practical model may have worked better. On the other hand, the practical make-up effects are great; there are some nasty looking injuries that press the sheer viciousness of the shark onto the viewer. What’s interesting is how the film works the make-up into the plot, making for a twisted progression as Nancy is beaten and battered by the elements as well as the deadly fish. The music is kept to a minimum, only rising to an often sinister fever pitch as the shark closes in. If you’ve seen any other shark film over the years then The Shallows will give you exactly what you expect; the film instead falls back its central performance to make an impact.

There have been way too many shark films to count in the last forty years, but The Shallows can stand among the best of them. It’s a B-Movie that manages to weave its initial inspiration into something that just about any modern viewer can enjoy. Add to that a great central performance from Blake Lively and you have an underrated thriller to close out the summer with.

Rating 4/5 Stars

Controversy Clocking Episode 7: No Man's Sky and a hype cycle gone off the rails

After almost three years of development, No Man’s Sky launched about a week ago and its overall reception has been quite mixed; the fallout from the game’s shortcomings has been all over the place and this is undoubtedly down to the title’s hype cycle. On PS4, the game is mostly functional but incredibly basic and on PC the port has been suffering from numerous technical issues. As a game, No Man’s Sky appears to be along the lines of Minecraft at a base level; it’s a survival game that focuses on the compelling nature of exploration and in this case it certainly capitalises on the popularity of the genre. But unlike Mojang’s indie smash hit, No Man’s Sky did not build and expand through a community who played the game in early access; instead it became a victim of the infamous cycle of overzealous hype and ultimate disappointment. We’ve seen this happen with other games before, but never has a specific title been built up so much before finally releasing. To give one example of how this hype grew, take a look at this issue of the UK magazine EDGE.

No Man’s Sky was the centrepiece of the magazine in September 2014 and it all started with the front cover and its three marketing buzzwords: “Epic, infinite, indie”. From that moment you’re intrigued by the game; what does it have to offer? What makes it such a highly anticipated title? As a cover game, EDGE also did an extensive feature on it including talks with the developer, building up the excitement even more, all the while having little close analysis or scrutiny of how the final game would be. Imagine this sort of coverage multiplied across numerous gaming outlets and circulation across social media. We had a game which dazzled the imagination without any kind of restraint or temperament of expectations; this is a recipe for disappointment.

The overall issue with the fanfare was that hype for No Man’s Sky was being built up exponentially before any concrete evidence was established over what the final product would be. We knew hardly anything about it and yet it was being held up as one of the biggest games of all time. On top of this, few media outlets attempted to find answers and Hello Games (particularly game director Sean Murray) seemed rather deflective of any specific questions. Sony also contributed to this cycle, touting the game as a key acquisition and one which would be a great showcase for the PlayStation 4. In the eyes of game developers and publishers, building up the hype is desirable; they want to build that excitement as much as humanly possible in the hope that consumers will run out and buy the game upon release. It’s convenient for them, but not much for the common consumer who builds up such lofty expectations for a single title.

Disappointment is the first reaction to an overhyped title when it finally arrives but unfortunately this has also resulted in some pretty nasty behaviour. Fanboyism reaches its most toxic levels when the people behind the abuse are in denial; it happened when the PlayStation 3 was struggling in its first two years and it also happened recently with DC’s cinematic universe taking a beating from film critics. With great hype comes a set of individuals so religiously devoted, near evangelic to a piece of media that they would relentlessly attack and abuse others online. There have been tales of abusive comments on both sides of the game and even a few instances of sites being taken down via DDOS (Denial of service) attacks, most notably Jim Sterling’s for his review of the game.

By July 2016 No Man’s Sky was sitting at the top of pre-order charts in the United States with 243,835 purchases in total according to VGChartz; it would stay there for another month before eventually releasing in August. This quickly eclipsed the sales of Hello Game’s previous title Joe Danger and its expansions. Yet again this comes back to the notion that pre-ordering games is a risky proposition, even more so for a game that many of us knew hardly anything about. Optimistically, No Man’s Sky could be a turning point, the moment where the gaming community turns against the notion of hype culture and tempers its expectations in the future. Hype and excitement building are part of any major piece of media, often more so for video games but it’s also important to have a constructive discussion, question a game before it arrives and most importantly, don’t get swept up in the excitement too much.

Suicide Squad Movie Review

Released: August 5th 2016 (Worldwide)

Length: 123 Minutes

Certificate: 15

Director: David Ayer

Starring: Will Smith, Margot Robbie, Viola Davis, Jared Leto, Joel Kinnaman, Jai Courtney, Jay Hernandez, Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje, Karen Fukuhara and Cara Delevingne

Suicide Squad is the third main entry in DC’s cinematic universe and the first to feature mostly villains in the starring roles. The pressure is on for the film to deliver but reactionary measures have left it far from the wacky, creative ride we were all expecting.

In the aftermath of Batman v Superman, Intelligence operative Amada Waller (Viola Davis) devises a clever (or foolish) plan for a defence contingency; bringing together several unsavoury characters to form a disposable team. This group initially includes the marksman Deadshot (Will Smith), deranged Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie), Captain Boomerang (Jai Courtney), Diablo (Jay Hernandez) and the scaly Killer Croc (Adewale  Akinnuoye-Agbaje). After a few uncooperative events the team is eventually brought together to take on an ancient threat in Midway City which is out of the government’s control. It’s a relief to see a single central plot in Suicide Squad; the first and second acts are straightforward and understandable, occasionally dipping into flashbacks as we’re introduced to the characters. While the plot is certainly easier to follow, the pacing still needs a lot of fine-tuning; it’s clear that Suicide Squad was trimmed quite a bit before general consumption. The film’s central antagonist (which I won’t spoil here) appears out of nowhere without any kind of build-up or development. The final act doesn’t really flow; instead it shuffles from one action scene to another, dropping to an unnecessary pause before the final battle. Refusing to bounce between two or three different plotlines is a welcome improvement but Suicide Squad finds trouble when it comes to keeping the audience fully invested.

There are many different characters in Suicide Squad but the film doesn’t really use this to its advantage. Will Smith turns in a pretty good performance and Viola Davis is suitably ruthless but by far the best actor here is Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn who absolutely nails the crazy, happy-go-lucky villain. Sadly just about every other character is incredibly underdeveloped and never receives their moment to gel with the group. Case and point; there’s one character who is put down only one scene after he’s introduced. The leader of the group, Rick Flag (Joel Kinnaman) is little more than a simplistic military grunt, his personal ties to the antagonist being impossible to sympathise with. Courtney (who isn’t really too bad here), Hernandez, Adewale and the others can never capitalise on the individual personalities of their characters and their backstories are all hastily thrown at the screen before the action takes over. All being told there just isn’t enough chemistry between the characters to make them feel like a team we would root for; most of the time you see them breaking off into pairs rather than getting to know everyone equally and this really hampers the film’s goal as an ensemble production. Then there’s Jared Leto’s Joker, who pretty much crashes out of the movie before he has the chance to make his presence felt; many of his scenes were cut before release and it’s a huge shame that he didn’t get to share his crime boss styled interpretation fully.

Much like the films that came before it, Suicide Squad boasts a suite of capable special effects that mostly rely on computer imagery. The destruction of Midway City is always on display, highlighting the power of the antagonist and the action is perfectly viewable, despite being fairly pedestrian. Make-up work is also a strong point here with Joker, Harley Quinn, Diablo and Killer Croc all being very detailed (if only their on-screen chemistry was better!). The soundtrack for Suicide Squad is rather puzzling though; it features a list of lively tracks, but the film seems to mistake this choice for an instantly light-hearted tone. With the script and characters often falling well short of the comedic relief promised, it feels as if the songs were shoehorned in as a cheap method to lighten the mood. The overall style of the presentation is mixed too; a strange collection of strobe effects (probably intended to highlight the unhinged nature of the characters) mixed with a plain filter makes the look of Suicide Squad quite inconsistent at times. The colourful credit sequences that mark the beginning and end of the film are a sign of lost potential, a promise that Suicide Squad fails to fulfil, despite its eye-catching special effects.

If you were looking for some sort of redemption for DC’s rocky cinematic roadmap then Suicide Squad is not it. Despite having a more focused plot and a few decent characters, the film still ends up feeling incredibly rushed and messy as a result of some studio interference. For all the emphasis placed on big selling points (especially the new Joker and a more light-hearted tone), the film is very disappointing. Check out the film for Deadshot and Harley Quinn if you enjoy them as characters but other than that it’s not really worth watching.

Rating: 2/5 Stars