I begrudgingly accepted, late one night after a few glasses of wine, that 50 Shades of Grey would be a film that I'd eventually see. So accompanied by my understanding and equally as intoxicated boyfriend, we picked up some tickets and headed into the cinema. Thankfully, the film has been out for a while now and the room was close to empty. However, it still had the 50 Shades target audience - one man sitting sheepishly by himself, two middle aged women giggling and a couple of scattered couples, each trying not to give off the vibe that they were the one who suggested the film.
The film was as creepy and as uncomfortable as the media storm surrounding it had suggested. I tried hard to take the film at face value and to ignore the hoards of people opposing the abusive nature of the relationship - but I couldn't. It is undeniable that the films leads (Christian and Anastasia played by Jamie Dornan and Dakota Johnson) are uncomfortable with each other. Their chemistry is non-existent and their attraction to each other seems forced. I understand that they are acting - but aren't we not supposed to notice that? On top of this, the supporting actors and actresses were equally as awkward on screen. I was surprised at how small Rita Ora's role was and how little we got to see her considering she garnered a lot of attention for grabbing the role.
Whilst watching the film, I felt constantly reminded of the story's roots. Twilight. For those who don't know by now, 50 Shades of Grey started out as dirty Twilight fan fiction. This translated well on screen. The films are undoubtedly linked through poor acting, direction and over all atmosphere. 50 Shades tried desperately to be dark and brooding but ended up feeling uncomfortable. There is simply no other word for how this movie makes you feel - uncomfortable. Perhaps if I hadn't read articles discussing the problematic nature of this film or if I hadn't loathed the book, I could have enjoyed myself. But as the film progressed, I found myself laughing and recoiling. In particular the scene just before the films end, where Christian whips Anastasia was difficult to watch.
This brings me to another of the films bad decisions. The ending was a cliffhanger. A concept I understand and can appreciate when executed correctly. However, 50 Shades ending was a clear set up for the following films and has resulted in the first film being unable to stand on its own. Even with films such as Twilight, that from the very beginning had sequels lined up, each film (minus perhaps the two part Breaking Dawn disaster) can stand on it's own if need be. Each story is roughly summed up so audiences aren't left completely frustrated (I'm looking at you Pretty Little Liars!). This particular film is left open with several unanswered, important questions.
The film gives off the impression that it was made in a rush and was not thoroughly thought through. This is yet another example of producers cashing in on a best seller without realising that the story is sub-par. I will not make the same mistake again and will not be seeing the second film.
I wouldn't say that this film was a disappointment, mainly because I had no preexisting ideals about it, but I also wouldn't say it blew me away in the way that it has for others. In a year that feels somewhat dedicated to biopics, Foxcatcher gets lost in a sea of better scripts. Clever prosthetics and an interesting character cannot transform an average film into an award winner. And whilst there was the potential for this film to exceed expectations, the focus seemed to be concentrated primarily on depicting struggle without explanation.
The plot is centred around relationships first and foremost. And of the relationships within the film, the most interesting one is between John du Pont and his mother. It's clear that they have a strained relationship but as the film develops we see the impact this has had on John which gives some insight into his bizarre character. Striving for affection and approval, he begins to search for acceptance outside of his Mother's approved activities which leads him to the world of wrestling and to Dave and Mark Schultz. The Olympic gold medalist brothers are invited to train and coach as part of du Pont's Team Foxcatcher whilst living on his grounds. In the beginning Mark is excited and happy to be with du Pont and respects him and his desire for 'All American' success. But as time passes and this desire for success exceeds his desire to comfort and support Mark, Schultz begins to resent him. And once Dave finally agrees to join the Foxcatcher team, Mark begins struggling with much bigger problems than rejection.
Based on real people, I had assumed there would have been a deeper exploration into the thought processes of each character. I felt that the film missed an opportunity to explore the lives of truly interesting and disturbed people. For example, John du Pont was notoriously paranoid and erratic yet the film only brushed upon the surface of his personality, basically suggesting that his actions nearer the end of the film were solely down to the treatment he had received from his mother during his childhood. Whereas, it was much more likely that John had bigger mental issues than Foxcatcher depicted. Equally as disappointing was the lack of attention on Mark's mental deterioration. The film could have explored the effects of olympic training on the mind or even explored his drug use on a more detailed level.
Foxcatcher could have given itself a better chance had it been released later in the year instead of around award season with several other, well written biopics. The trailer had me thinking the film was more than a surface investigation of the life of two wrestlers and their eccentric, rich friend but sadly this was all that it was. It was interesting but not interesting enough.
Premièring at the 2014 Toronto Film Festival Still Alice, starring Julianne Moore, Alec Baldwin and Kristen Stewart amongst others, explores the heartbreaking effects of Alzheimers and the effects it can have on everyday life. Based on the book of the same name by Lisa Genova, the film attempts to show the somewhat frightening effects that the disease can have and how isolated it can make you feel. The story was compelling and sensitively handled with moments of realisation about a disease we still know so little about. Having said that, the film makes a few wrong turns and edges into slightly manipulative grounds during particular scenes.
Obviously the question on everyone's lips was: is the acting Oscar worthy? Honestly, whilst Moore was spectacular in the role and provided an otherwise ordinary character with extraordinary depth, I'm unsure that an Oscar was well deserved. She's an actress who has simply got better with age and it's because of this that I believe her best work is yet to come. Whilst the internet may care more about Leonardo Dicaprio's lack of Oscar wins, it's surprising that many forget Julianne Moore when both have been on our screens prolifically since the 1990's. Personally, I would have liked to see her first Oscar come from a film than was slightly less manipulative of its audience.
Drama's are supposed to be heart wrenching and thought provoking, and is a genre above all others when it comes to evoking emotional responses from audiences. However, when dealing with a subject as sensitive as Alzheimers, film makers choices are even more important. Scenes over produced with the inclusion of soppy love songs or melodramatic music can sometimes cheapen the film's overall aesthetic. When combined with the already dramatic action on screen, adding music that sounds like it was written by a hoard of depressed teenagers can sort of ruin an otherwise poignant moment. I find this to be as cheap and annoying as a poorly used voice over to show emotional growth - which was also included in Still Alice.
Other than the win for Best Actress, Still Alice is unlikely to garner many more accolades. Whilst it was an interesting film, it was nothing special in a year of fantastic film contenders. With several films focusing on real people, I'll be interested to see if this film will break through or not. I was however, wonderfully surprised by the supporting characters. Many have noted Kristen Stewart's surprising efforts. She was her usual brooding self but doesn't allow Moore to outshine her in their shared scenes. She was suited to her role and I didn't find myself wishing she wasn't in the film - so she must have done something right!
The films plot deals with a realistic approach to Alzheimers. It shows how the disease is ultimately a decay of memory. And how, from this, individuals find themselves confused and disorientated. I enjoyed the use of Alice's occupation. As a professor of language, and a valued one at that, the film offers a glimpse of how the disease can completely shatter someone's ability to form a cohesive thought. I've had a family member die from Dementia related illness, which is similar but separate to Alzheimers. Both deal with the slow decline of mental ability. Because of this, the film resonated with me more than I think it would have had I not experienced the disease in my family.
Ultimately, I think the film is an interesting piece of work to study in relation to mental illness and its depiction on screen. Other than that, the film is tense to watch and not typically 'enjoyable'.
One of the best parts about living in today's society is the advanced graphics and animation featured in film. One of the most exciting animations to come out of 2014 was Big Hero 6 based on the comic series of the same name by Man of Action Entertainment. As a Disney production, the film was highly anticipated by myself and the masses. With there distinctive aesthetic, Disney animations continue to better themselves with each film produced.
The film opens in San Fransokyo, a futuristic city of advanced electronics with a heavy Japanese influence. We meet Hiro, an aspiring Robot Fighter, despite the activity being illegal, and his older brother Tadashi. In an attempt to persuade his younger brother to use his excellent intelligence in a more productive way, he takes Hiro to his University. It's here that Hiro meets his brothers friends and decides to enrol. During a tech conference, Hiro's brother is killed whist trying to save his professor and mentor Callaghan. Hiro, stricken by grief misses his classes at university but finds comfort in Baymax - a robot created by his brother to provide health care. The film explores Hiro's journey with grief and a heartfelt friendship between boy and robot. It's revealed that Callaghan is still alive and has a personal vendetta against a large robotics corporation leader, Alistair Krei of Krei Tech, whom he feels is behind the death of his daughter. Blaming him for his brothers death, Hiro attempts to use Baymax to kill the professor before being stopped at the last minute by Honey. Callaghan reveals his plan to use Hiro's micro robots to kill the Krei Tech President. Hiro and friends find themselves on a mission to protect Krei from Callaghan and to honour Tadashi's memory by providing care to those in San Fransokyo.
_poster_003.jpg)
The plot is simple yet touching which is necessary in films ultimately designed for children. There are several laugh out loud moments with Baymax and Hiro as they get to know each other. Including a prolonged scene involving Baymax deflating and a roll of sellotape. I particularly enjoyed the way in which this film explored grief. Whilst it's not uncommon for the death of a loved one to feature in a Disney production, it was interesting to see a character seek revenge and experience anger in the way that Hiro does as he tries to kill Callaghan. This shows an extreme version of very real emotions that can be felt after someone dies. And although this is resolved and Hiro decides to bring Callaghan to justice rather than killing him, it was an interesting scene in showing the complexities of the character.
The superhero element of the film was unexpected. Up until the half way point of this film, I thought that this would be entirely technical and would show the team bringing down their enemy with robots instead of taking him down themselves dressed in technologically advanced super suits. But it was sweet. It was reminiscent of childhood play when friends would get together and become superheroes for the day. This is what I imagine children are thinking when they don their home made superhero costumes and venture out into the backyard.
My final thoughts on this film are as follows: sweet, well executed and deep upon further inspection.
This film is just over two hours of tense military action with Bradley Cooper at the wheel. Based on Chris Kyle's autobiography, American Sniper follows the life of Kyle as he struggles to maintain his role as a father and husband whilst on tour of duty in Iraq. He becomes notorious for his sniping skills and throws himself into his military life, leaving his growing family to fend for themselves. The film takes an interesting look at the effect of military life on those left at home and resonates deeper than many war films because the story and characters are rooted in truth. The journey is touching at parts and is a seemingly honest interpretation of patriotism. And although I've never been completely comfortable with the idea of war and military invasions of middle eastern countries, I find these sorts of films fascinating to watch.
Bradley Cooper was a fantastic choice to play the lead and carried the film from the outset. There were no small surprise cameos which allowed for the films focus to be purely on the plot rather than big names to draw in audiences. Cooper and Sienna Miller, who plays his wife, were big enough themselves and I'm sure many people will flock to the cinema to see Cooper's new bulkier physique. Other notable names who made an appearance were Kyle Gallner, Eric Close and Jonathan Groff. It's rare these days that a cast works so fluidly together but that is certainly the case with American Sniper. In a strange way, the actors never distracted from the action on screen, which can so often happen in large blockbuster films. One thing I did notice was how different Sienna Miller looks in this film. I've never payed much attention to her but I'm pretty sure her face has changed. It could just as easily be age as anything else but I couldn't help but notice something was off. Needless to say, she's still beautiful.
Directed by Clint Eastwood, I think American Sniper will be a popular war films for years to come. It's heartbreaking at times but displays bold attempts of bravery and sheer determination from the American military. The most interesting choice on behalf of the film makers was the length of the scenes involving Kyle's family as the film progressed. I felt this showed how his priorities were changing and was a visual representation of how consuming war can be both mentally and physically. That's not to say that Kyle didn't love his family but instead I'm implying that as he spent more time involved in the military it started to play a larger role in his life and was no longer limited to the 6 months, 12 months or 24 months spent in the enemy's backyard. But the most heartbreaking moment of the film was the closing statement before the credits followed by actual footage and photographs of the real Chris Kyle. Kyle was killed by a veteran he was trying to help. It must have been devastating for his family and the film pays tribute in these closing scenes, showing how much of a hero the real Kyle was.
The last war film I enjoyed as much as American Sniper was Zero Dark Thirty in 2013 and I highly recommend both to anyone with a fascination with modern adaptation of true events. My next step now will likely be to research the real Chris Kyle to see how accurate the film truly is. There is no denying that the character is interesting, I'm just hoping the real deal had just as much to offer.
The Theory of Everything was as captivating and intriguing as the critics and audiences had boasted it was. The film focuses on the relationship between Jane Wilde Hawking and Stephen Hawking, Stephen's diagnosis and his work in physics. Premièring last September at the Toronto Film Festival, the film has continued to garner attention from the masses and from award boards. With it's UK release earlier this month, many have flocked to the cinema to learn more about the infamous Hawking and to understand more about a man who has taught us so much about the world we live in.
The film is heartbreaking from the outset. We all know the condition Hawking is in now, so when our first encounter of him in the film is of a happy and mobile young man, it can be difficult to watch knowing the eventual outcome. Watching a disease completely envelope someone is tough but thankfully, the film had some well timed moments of comic relief. Even once the marriage between Hawking and his wife dissolves, the film remains uplifting. Trying simply to mirror the strength and determination of Hawking to not let his disease over come him. One interesting element was the involvement of Hawking himself in the film. In order to achieve a more realistic electronic voice for actor Eddie Redmayne, Hawking's own electronic voice is used. This was a nice touch and showed the support the film had from its subject but was also likely a relief for Redmayne as it was one thing he wouldn't have to worry about perfecting.
The acting could not have been easy. Whilst it's always difficult trying to embody the character of someone real, it's arguably much harder to portray someone as famous and respected as Stephen Hawking. Redmayne did, however, do a wonderful job of showing his characters struggle with movement and speech without looking gimmicky or exaggerated. Whilst Redmayne is certainly growing in popularity, I think it was important not to clog this film with famous actors and actresses. The story needed a cast that were humble and down to earth otherwise the characters, who themselves seem 'real' and homely would have been lost in a sea of Hollywood egos.
What was interesting to me was the way the film depicts extramarital affairs. Both Hawking and his wife experience romance, lust and desire out-with their relationship with each other. Perhaps it was because the film completely engaged with me and I was lost in their world and their struggles, but I didn't feel like either affair was deplorable. I completely empathised with Jane and how hard her life must have been taking care of the man she loved as he deteriorated before her. Stephen was understanding of the fact that his wife needed help in more areas than one and once he got to know Jonathan he saw a man that could make her happy. It was bitter sweet to see their relationship end although, it seems that that's what they needed to progress in their lives individually.
As for the films ending... I thought closing such a poignant and thought-provoking film with Hawking and Wilde gazing upon their children was wonderful. It showed how despite having a life seemingly focused purely on science, Stephen was and is able to appreciate his children and the family he created. The scene lingered which allowed it to seep in properly and have the desired effect. I left the cinema in awe of a man who continues to challenge himself and the doctors who originally estimated only 2 years. How wonderful and challenging it must be to have a brain as quick and as inquisitive as his and not be able to use every fibre of your being to explore it.
This widely anticipated film was not on my list of must-sees for 2015. But with the media storm surrounding it, I decided to sit down with a glass of wine and watch from the comfort of my own home as James Franco and Seth Rogen taunt and humiliate one of the worlds most immature yet hostile leaders.
Rogen and Franco have made a name for themselves in contemporary Hollywood comedy films, in particular, by appealing to young teenagers and stoners. Having said that, I know this film will be seen and likely enjoyed by the masses and probably by some critics. So for what seems like the millionth time, I'm writing from my own personal point of view. A view that may not be agreed with but is valid nonetheless. Back to the actors! I've enjoyed their work individually but somehow, when they team up I find myself curling into a ball of cringe and wishing I hadn't started watching in the first place. The comedy is simple at best and franc-ly (see what I did there...) whatever acting skills the two possess separately are flushed down the toilet when they appear together.
The film in question garnered months of publicity following a hack on Sony by what many would believe was the North Korean government - despite several computer hacking specialists claiming that this is unlikely. This then led to an announcement that The Interview would not be shown in traditional theatres but instead would have an online release. Personally, I opted to view the film on youtube. It's hard to believe that this was not an elaborate marketing scheme to release an average and underwhelming film to a blockbuster sized audience. The most surprising element was the inclusion of several celebrities and 'serious' actors, most likely vying to break into the younger audiences and to revive careers in this 'huge hit'. Forgive me but each time a new familiar face popped up, I found myself asking 'aren't you better than this?' - obviously not!
The film is filled to the brim with stereotypes and easy gags produced solely for three minutes of entertainment that will be forgotten by the end of the film. Less than 30 minutes into the film, we are treated to our first drug induced party scene. Admittedly only a short clip, this sort of scene has become a staple in Rogen/Franco films. Everyone loves an alcohol fuelled party set to electronic music, right? Slow-mo walking, raging fight scenes and a little bit of nudity combined with innuendos, crude language and stupidity - that is the essence of The Interview. And the forced love story between Aaron (Seth Rogen) and Sook (Diana Bang) was a prime example of filler content. At nearly two and a half hours, it's a real waste of time.
I haven't even brushed upon the plot of the film yet. James Franco is Dave Skylark, a popular television chat show host and Seth Rogen is Aaron Rapoport his producer. After a series of bizarre scenes including a gay Eminem and a bald Rob Lowe, Skylark discovers an article stating the show is a favourite of North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un. After another series of unnecessary events, producer Aaron flies to China and sets up the interview with Sook, one of Kim Jong-Un's attractive henchwomen. As the rest of the entertainment world comments on the legitimacy of the interview, the CIA contact the pair of idiots, for lack of a better word, and instruct them to kill the leader. Once in Korea, they meet the leader and engage in several comical adventures together.
Spoilers coming up...
Kim Jong-Un charms Dave (Franco) and as a result, the TV host gets rid of one of the important strips of poison that would be used to kill the leader and even stops his partner Aaron (Rogen) from completing the assassinating with the final strip. But of course, this problem is resolved in true Hollywood style with the best friends reuniting, with the help of the attractive female side kick Sook, to kill the leader with a tank.
This films only redeeming quality is it's power to potentially humiliate an awful dictator. But other than that, The Interview was too long for what it was and contributes nothing to society. Some people who are uneducated on the situation in North Korea will watch this film and not quite understand the extremity of the cause and plight of the people living there. I certainly hope that this film, if anything, makes audiences google North Korea and find out what is actually happening.
