Guardians Of The Galaxy (3D / first-pass / SPOILER-FREE)
Cert: 12A / 121 mins / Dir. James Gunn
"You realise, of course"
I said to Mrs Blackout in the packed Odeon at Leicester Sq, London, "that there's no way this film can possibly live up to the expectations I'm holding it to." After a second's thought, she agreed with me that this probably would be the case. A few minutes later, the house lights went down, the film began and Marvel proved us both wrong…
So as predicted, if Thor: The Dark World was a bit 'out there' for the more civilian cinema audiences with its mythical maguffins and parallel dimension jumping, by comparison Guardians Of The Galaxy makes that film look like an insurance seminar. After a brief (and surprisingly weighty) opening scene where the only anomaly is the orange foam pads of Peter Quill's headphones, the film gears straight into a sensorially stunning spectacle, with everything turned up to ten, all of the time (except for the volume in the Odeon, which was turned up to eleven for some reason. To the point where the dialogue in some places was drowned out by anything else which was happening. I can't wait to see the film again at a decent volume so that I can appreciate the script fully).
Considering that 2012's Avengers Assemble was able to go all-out on the action because viewers were already familiar with (or had at least met) the central characters, it's no mean feat that GotG manages the same consistent level of adrenaline and excitement with an array of shiny newbies. Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Bradley Cooper, Dave Bautista and Vin Diesel click together perfectly as the film's heroic ensemble, and while the trailers have indicated that the film was going to contain Pratt's Star-Lord goofing around, the humour's distributed fairly evenly throughout the cast. It's certainly the funniest Marvel movie to date (although this isn't unwelcome after the po-faced Dark World and Winter Soldier), yet it manages to keep the audience laughing without turning into a comedy movie. The only member of The Guardians who isn't consistently funny seems to be Saldana's assassin, Gamora, and even then she gets to deliver the film's best line (no spoilers, you'll know it when you hear it).
Outside the central quintet, a large and varied supporting cast ensure there's never a dull moment. Karen Gillan demonstrates her post-Who big screen credentials once again, and feels slightly underused as Nebula, while Lee Pace is positively fascinating as Ronan The Accuser when he gets the chance to show the role off. Glenn Close, John C Reilly and Peter Serafinowicz pop up at various intervals to play themselves (it seems) as members of the Nova Corps, Michael Rooker has been hired to play Michael Rooker (although that's no bad thing) and naturally there's a nod to our Stan.
GotG's links to previous Marvel Cinematic Universe entries aren't as prominent as you might expect, although they're there for anyone with a working knowledge of the canon so far. On a more technical level, this is the first film in the timeline since Avengers to have the title-card at the front end, and the print we saw didn't have a post-credits scene, although I'm hoping that was trimmed for the press-screening I was at, just to get the audience to go and see the movie again on general release. There's certainly a conspicuous gap which could be filled by adding one. I'm also conflicted at this point about the pop-soundtrack which is used in the film; I couldn't work out if the filmmakers are over-egging that particular pudding, or if it was just the volume that the whole thing was playing at. Another watch (or two) will tell.
It's all far too much to take in on a first sitting of course, and there are too many named-characters for the film's run-time to evenly introduce. When the bursts of exposition arrive, they come thick and fast, but thankfully the plot itself takes the passenger seat next to the rip-roaring flow of the movie. This is a Summer Blockbuster™, through and through, and I can't tell you enough how awesome it is to see an audience actually applauding at the end credits. That takes me back.
Big, loud and ridiculously entertaining, Guardians Of The Galaxy is a comic-book-movie which excels at silliness, yet never becomes a cartoon*1. Director and co-writer James Gunn has brought the fun back into the MCU, and this is the second film of the year to find a tear of genuine unabashed joy rolling down my cheek as the end-credits kicked in.
If you love Marvel, this is the movie you've been waiting for.
Yep.
Yep.
Yep.
Cinema..
Yep.
Yep.
I didn't hear one this time round, but as I said the sound was ridiculous, so there's every chance there is.
*1 Not that I have anything against cartoons, but you know what I mean.
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
I'm going to try my best to convey my reservations about Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes, whilst still recommending that you go and watch it. You'll understand my reticence shortly. The thing is, I was ready to see this at the weekend. Cineworld had their Secret Screening set up for the Tuesday beforehand, and in all honesty even I wouldn't have put money on a national advance screening being of a film that was due to open less than 48 hours later. Well played, World of Cine, well played…
+ + + + +
So, as much as I enjoyed DotPotA (and I did enjoy it), I have to say that its hamstrung by some of its most central aspects. You might not think that 130 minutes of watching two societies simultaneously fall victim to prejudice, in-fighing, scapegoating and general xenophobia is going to be a fun ride for a Summer Blockbuster Movie™. And you'd be right; it's not. It makes for an absolutely compelling watch, but it's not what could be described as fun. The few touching moments of bonding and affection from the film's predecessor are nowhere to be found, since even the quieter scenes between Caesar and his simian family are marred with the furrowed brow of impending war.
Matters aren't helped any by some pretty awful casting for the human characters. Jason Clarke pulls the right faces at the right times, but really isn't a strong enough actor to lead a film like this, whereas Kerry Russell has never been great (imho, obvs) and to make matters worse is saddled with the role of The Woman One Who Is Also Handily A Nurse™. Last but by no means least is Gary Oldman, who seems to have landed Distinguished Actor Hired For Smaller Part To Bring A Bit Of Gravitas To The Whole Thing™, presumably because Morgan Freeman wasn't available at the time.
Believe me when I say that every human in the film is out-acted by CGI apes, and that's not a term I use flippantly; the collaboration between the mo-cap actors and the digital artists who've brought their performances to life is nothing short of astounding, and fully deserving of awards I suspect they'll go on to win. To the point where I wish there had been fewer humans in the film, frankly. Andy Serkis is, as you can probably imagine, worth the price of admission alone. Although you could quite easily knock a couple of quid off that price by seeing the 2D version. The stereoscopy is there, but even the frames where things are thrown directly at the camera are underwhelming. Removing the need for 3D glasses may well be the only way to brighten up this film.
As far as allegory and subtext goes, DotPotA is hardly delicate, but from a story point-of-view it's exactly what's needed. If you enjoyed Rise Of… you'll get a lot out of this, and if you didn't then you're not likely to be seeing it anyway, right?
As a regular movie, Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes is clunky and contrived, its reliance on spelled-out metaphor only relieved by its outstanding effects work. As a Planet Of The Apes movie, however, the film is a thing of quite savage beauty, fitting seamlessly into the narrative gap and detailing all the things we want to see, how we want to see them. As a very casual fan of the franchise, both of these facets were at the forefront of my mind throughout the run-time; thankfully the second one more than makes up for the first.
And I do recommend that you see it.
Pretty much.
It was more of a sustained wince, but in a good way.
With in the Planet Of The Apes spectrum, it certainly does.
Cinema if you like 'em big and loud, but don't bother with the 3D.
I won't.
As much as I enjoyed it, probably not for some time.
Pretty certain there is, yes; when one of the humans is trying to crawl under a car to safety and is dragged away before he can make it.
Shouldn't 'Dawn Of…' been the title of the previous movie and 'Rise Of…' been assigned to this one? Wouldn't that make more sense, chronologically and narratively?
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
Boyhood Cert: 15 / 166 mins / Dir. Richard Linklater
There's a scene in the latter part of this film where a surly teenager's photography tutor is haranguing him about the need to keep pushing, keep trying, and be the best he can with his talents. "Any dipshit can take pictures, Mason. Art… that's special.". Despite having been in pretty much that exact position during my college years, that's not why the scene stood out to me…
Much has already been said (not least by the trailers and publicity material), about Boyhood's unique selling point, ie its 12-year production, which instantly raised a question in my mind: Yeah, but is it any good, though? After all, it's one thing to have a grand, sprawling vision of how you're going to make a movie, but what's going to be in it?
I can't lie to you, I found Richard Linklater's Boyhood to be boring. Sweet in places, amusing in others, but overbearingly boring. The casting of Patricia Arquette and Ethan Hawke didn't inspire confidence in me from the start, and the trailers seemed oddly self-congratulatory, but I'm willing to give most films a go and I'm aware that it's being praised almost everywhere else.
It's an interesting concept of course, that in making the film, the actors were subject to massive gaps in between shoots, so that the eighteen year old Ellar Coltrane probably thinks of his early scenes in the film about as accurately as any of us would in real life. There are rarely significant breaks between these segments however, and in reality, the viewer is told time has passed by the family sporting new haircuts, and is left to fill in the blanks as Mason and his mother mope around a different kitchen, talking about nothing. Much like Hawke's estranged father, we keep dropping in to see the kids and try not to be too awkward about finding out what's going on (here's a clue: it's nothing).
Pretty much half of the world's population has been, is, or will be an adolescent boy. That doesn't make it interesting; quite the opposite, in fact. When a gentleman in the row in front of me breached the Code Of Conduct by checking his phone at around the 'graffiti tag' scene, rather than being outraged, I was more intent on having a look to see what the time was. I must confess that my heart sank when I realised there was still over an hour to go. SPOILERS:Mason is young at the start of the film; he is older at the end of the film; his childhood and teenage years are largely as melodramatic yet uninteresting as yours were; then it ends. The only real upside is that if you need to nip off to the loo during this marathon of domesticity, you won't miss anything.
Linklater's reliance on the 12-year gimmick has resulted in three hours of self-indulgent navel gazing where the craft clearly seemed more important than the final product. Like sitting politely through someone else's home movies, the novelty wears off when you realise the screenplay is focusing on how trivial 'real' life is compared to the movies. Essentially a fictionalised version of the '7 Up' series, marking the passage of time with a succession of games consoles, Harry Potter books and mobile phones, there are a few touching moments but nowhere near enough to justify the runtime.
Although even I'll admit that giving a fifteen year-old a Bible and a shotgun for his birthday is pretty funny.
"Any dipshit can take pictures, Mason. Art… that's special"
Well, quite.
Well, the trailer loves itself and shows nothing remarkable happening at all. So, yes.
Nowhere near.
Oh, almost certainly, it just doesn't push my buttons.
DVD, tops.
I will a bit, but I'd be delighted if you explained to me why you disagree.
Nope.
There ain't.
Hey, why not tell me how I've missed the point?
Have I missed the point?
What's the point?
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
Ponderous without being self-indulgent, quirky without being twee, Felix Herngren assembles a centenarian and an expanding array of waifs and strays, gangsters, neo-n*zi bikers, plus an elephant. By the time you bolt on a solid mcguffin in the shape of a suitcase full of cash, it's like an episode of Last Of The Summer Wine written and directed by Guy Ritchie.
Never less than smile-inducingly enjoyable, Robert Gustafsson's Allan ably narrates the way through this English/Swedish mishap fable. The narrative following the case containing the SEK50m (that's fifty million Swedish krona, which I thought would look better abbreviated, then instantly doubted once it was typed, although not to the point where I'd replace it and remove the need for this parenthesis) leads off on a series of flashbacks in which Allan tells us of his childhood, adolescence and ultimately his role as a munitions expert and key-player in more than a few of the twentieth century's primary military events.
The pacing between the two strands is a little uneven however, almost as if the film can't decide which one it should be dedicating its time to, which is a shame as they're each compelling, individually. The film which this results in often feels like Forrest Gump With Dynamite.
The crucial element of the outlandish screenplay is its humour, which can often be derailed in foreign language*2 films by subtitles removing (or at least crucially altering) the timing. Thankfully, the similarity in vocal-tone between the languages, along with the fact that the majority of the jokes are dry deadpan, means that it translates very well for an English-speaking audience (although the woman two rows behind me seemed to be finding it far funnier than I suspect even the writers intended. Fair play).
Herngren's supporting cast all do him credit, although it feels like Alan 'Brick-Top' Ford is a little out of place; especially as he's playing the same shouty-gangster we've seen work so well elsewhere. After Cockneys vs Zombies, it appears that Ford has finally parked up in typecasting Hell…
What 'The Hundred-Year-Old Man' lacks in narrative direction, it makes up for in curiosity, floating between intriguing and delightful.
Worth watching if you've ever wanted to see an elephant kill a skinhead by sitting on his head.
That's what you'll get, yes.
Mostly.
Well, judging by the Wiki entry for the book (which I haven't read, admittedly) it's been heavily trimmed in places, so I'm not altogether sure. It's certainly 'good', but I suspect the book will be better.
Flicks if you can, but you won't lose much by watching it on DVD.
I won't.
I will, but not for a while.
There BLOODY WELL IS, as well. When Allan's breaking out of the Gulag camp..
Does the young-look of Allain remind you of Stellan Skarsgård? Is it just me? Am I being inadvertently racist for even mentioning that?
*1 The poster says "Climbed Out Of The Window", but the film's title-card says "Climbed Out The Window". Whatever.
*2 I know how snobbish (and/or reverse-snobbish) that sounds if you haven't seen the film. The narration takes place in English, but the present-day 'action' in Swedish, and this is where the bulk of the comedy lies. It works well, trust me.
DISCLAIMERS:
• ^^^ That's dry, British humour, and most likely sarcasm or facetiousness.
• Yen's blog contains harsh language and even harsher notions of propriety. Reader discretion is advised.
• This is a personal blog. The views and opinions expressed here represent my own thoughts (at the time of writing) and not those of the people, institutions or organisations that I may or may not be related with unless stated explicitly.
