Spectre (NO PLOT-SPOILERS)
Cert: 12A / 148 mins / Dir. Sam Mendes / Trailer
Right, I'll keep this short. Just got in from seeing Bond 24*1 and wanted to review it while it's fresh. Unfortunately, I can't talk about any of what's on my mind without wading into spoiler-territory. Hit me up in this thread on the Facebook page if you want to paddle in those waters. In the meanwhile…
Yes, the much-anticipated Spectre finally hits our screens three years after Skyfall, headed once again by director Sam Mendes and starring Daniel Craig as everyone's favourite craggy-faced governmental hit-man. As Mendes' second Bond-outing and Craig's fourth, expectations are running understandably high, especially as the story follows the ongoing thread surrounding MI5 and its place in the global security chain. But chess-metaphors abound as shadowy forces move behind the scenes, and James Bond discovers his nemesis.
To be honest, it's an odd fish of a movie which has been undermined by its own hype. Thoroughly acceptable (indeed fantastic in many places), but capable of much more depth which it squanders lieu of car/boat/plane chases and a largely unconvincing central relationship between Bond and Dr Madeleine Swann (and that's largely down to her under-developed character). Monica Bellucci is underused, Dave Bautista is underused, and although Christoph Waltz gets his moment in the spotlight, he's seriously underused. All of this wouldn't be a problem if there was more going on at the Bond-end of things, but compared to his shellshocked, self-doubting character in Skyfall, James is running on autopilot a little here.
But it's still one hell of an autopilot, of course. Ben Whishaw's Q is a welcome low-key touch to the film, as it Ralph Fiennes' M (as he deftly steals some of the best lines). The film's about half an hour too long, the script is occasionally over-written, as is the action, yet all of this isn't a drawback. In fact, it's not really until you get outside of the cinema that you start thinking about all the things you didn't get.
But enough of my moaning. Spectre is very, very good at being a James Bond film, and that's what's important. Of course it could be more, and many might feel it should be more. But let's not over-analyse what is a proudly mainstream action-thriller and a British institution in its own right.
…right?
It is, but probably just the once.
Well obviously you're going to buy it; it has to go with the others, doesn't it?
Sadly not.
I think Spectre achieves what Spectre sets out to do, but that's not what Skyfall had lined up for it.
Not particularly.
There isn't.
The latest Bond installment features Mr Mark Preston as an un-named Spectre-agent, who also appears as an un-named Stormtrooper in Star Wars: The Force Awakens, and as an un-named stormtrooper (presumably a different one) in Star Wars: Rogue One.
It may be an 'extra' role, but fair fucking play to the guy :)
*1 Sounds like the world's most exciting news-channel; it's actually just real-time footage of glue drying. Sorry.
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.
And so, it was after a 10 minute break following part one that the lights dimmed in Oxford's Magdalen Street Odeon and Back To The Future Part II began. And that was only the second time I've seen this movie in a cinema, stat-fans.
Although they're still generally regarded as a part of the whole, both the second and third installments of Robert Zemeckis' time-travelling trilogy come in for a fair amount of stick, especially from people who loved the first film, bizarrely. My own peers are split between disliking two and three (although I don't think I know anyone who dislikes them both). Me? Yeah, I love 'em. Okay, not as much as I love BTTF, but that's in no way the fault of the films; things were just different by the time 1989 came along.
Yet as much as I enjoy BTTF2, even I have to admit that the essential spark which made 1985's film such a hit isn't quite there. The writing is far more plot-based this time around, with the intricacies of time-travel taking centre stage. The audience knows the mechanics of the film's causality by now, so rather than coasting along to deliver another box-ticking adventure, the screenplay doubles back on itself and interacts with its predecessor. The fact that Doc Brown literally draws on a blackboard to explain the story to Marty and the audience, yet never comes off as patronising, is an astounding feat of film-making. But what the film gains in narrative complexity, it seems to lose in warmth. The story isn't humourless at all, but the scripted gags seem to fall flatter than last time around, and it lacks the spontaneity and wit of the original.
Another hurdle the film can't quite clear is the absence of Crispin Glover as George McFly, following failed negotiations to secure his return. Re-used footage from Back To The Future and a remarkably capable body/rear double just about plug the hole, but it means his character can't contribute anything new, despite his presence. And while I'm on the subject, Thomas F. Wilson is fantastic as the three ages of Biff Tannen, but overacts to pantomime levels in this film, which is why so much of the humour feels forced. And while I'm on the subject of being on the subject, if Claudia Wells' Jennifer Parker had been given more screentime in the first film, would she have been as annoying as Elisabeth Shue's version from the second one?
Most peculiarly, the woman sat in the row behind Mrs Blackout and I did find the film laugh-out-loud funny, which is great. Her audible amusement was frequent and vocal (throughout this and the previous BTTF, in fact). However, she kept laughing when there weren't any jokes happening on screen, then after a while I noticed that she was laughing a short time before a scripted or visual gag. To the point where I began to think she had her own time-machine and was watching the film 45 seconds in the future…
Oh, and a question for you: In the first movie where Marvin Berry And The Starlighters are playing Earth Angel, the song ends on this orchestral flourish as George and Lorraine kiss and the timeline is set right. Now as there's clearly no string-section on the stage, I'd just assumed this was where the in-movie playlist and Alan Silvestri's score combined for cinematic effect. But in BTTF2 when Marty ends up at the 'Fish Under The Sea; dance again hiding under a table, Earth Angel is playing and ends on this sweep again - even though the focus isn't on George and Lorraine this time around. There's not really any need for the romantic crescendo to the song as the McFly-parents plot point is secondary in the revisited scene. A cynic might even suggest that it was dropped in like that as the sound editor didn't want to remaster the band's performance without the bolstered ending.
So, since the 'full' version of Earth Angel is used as background (being given the same narrative status as a song the characters would hear on the radio), where's the bloody orchestra, hmm?
Well I think so, your mileage will vary ;)
You can't buy the first one without buying the trilogy (and rightly so) so you should already have it, hmm?
Not particularly, sadly.
It does; whether you like that or not.
Not as long as you can justify your insane beliefs.
There ain't.
BttF2's visual effects supervisor was Mr Ken Ralston, who also provided visual and optical effects for the original Star Wars trilogy.
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.
Well, if I can't enjoy one of my favourite trilogies in my favourite cinema, I suppose I'll just have to watch two-thirds of it in one which is 'alright, I suppose'. And that's not to be too harsh on one of Oxford's two Odeons, but as Magdalen Street's Screen 1 is converted from a theatre, the ceiling is way too high, meaning the sound bounces around everywhere. That's not really their fault, of course, but when both films begin with the sound half a second out of sync? That is. Added to that is the fact that the other Odeon (less than five minutes walk away) was also showing the exact same double-bill half an hour later, so there were less than 40 people in this massive room. It wasn't my intention to start this review on a downer, but the venue robbed the atmosphere of the night, somewhat.
Never mind, though. October 21st, 2015 was Future Day, and the assembled faithful had braved the elements to celebrate 66% of Robert Zemeckis' timeless trilogy. In exactly the same way as the Star Wars and Indiana Jones movies, I can't disengage and watch Back To The Future objectively. I've seen it too many times and in various states of sobriety; it's become a part of me, and I wrote a piece in 2011 about why it means so much to me. I still stand by everything I said, there.
That said, Back To The Future is one of those wonderful films which just keeps on giving; whether it's a previously un-noticed visual reference to other parts of the trilogy, or a recurring theme which finally clicks into place when you weren't looking for it.
Future Day was no different, and tonight I noticed two things for the first time…
One: How come two of my three favourite trilogies have inadvertent incest*1 in them? In Back To The Future, Lorraine kisses her son Marty in the car outside the Fish Under The Sea dance; and in The Empire Strikes Back, Leia plants one on Luke - the full awkwardness of which wouldn't be felt until the Ewok-village conversation in Jedi. I suppose I should be relieved that Last Crusade doesn't feature a comedy-aside where Indy ends up bumming his dad…
Two: I know it's a time-travel film, but what's going on with the passage-of-time (not to mention the weather) when Marty arrives in 1955?
And if that's the level of nit-picking I indulge in with a film I love, you can imagine how lesser fime-travel movies fare...
Anyway, I've been to see Back To The Future in the cinema, and I grinned like an idiot throughout the whole damn thing. If only my past self could have imagined that on Future Day, he'd go to watch BTTF in a cinema, and see trailers for the new Bond and Star Wars films beforehand! What a time to be alive…
Well, I've got it in the house - in several formats - and I still did, so…
You should already have it.
If you haven't, I'm not sure if we can be friends any more.
That's a tricky one. They're certainly the casts' most iconic performances.
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
Didn't hear one.
Well, other than the clanging great Darth Vader reference and the film's effects being done by ILM, one of the film's exec-producers is long-time Lucas/Spielberg cohort Kathleen Kennedy, who now runs Lucasfilm of course.
*1 Well, it's not incest-incest, but you know what I mean. It's a bit odd. And it's inadvertent on the part of the character themselves but not on the writers, which is more what I'm getting at.
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.
Ah, the misty mornings and muted sunsets of October can mean only one thing: we're in that hinterland between the blockbusters of the Summer months and the family crowd-pleasers of Christmas. It's a time when the studios can present the smaller, more quirky films to a mainstream audience, which would be drowned out of the market at a busier time of year. It's also the point in the release-calendar when those same studios can quietly release the other movies; the ones which aren't on the A-board, but which were deemed 'easy money'. Those costly and time-intensive projects which seemed like a pretty good idea on paper, but ran out of steam once it was too late to halt their production. The B-listers, the bandwagon-jumpers, the flicks which, in an entertainment industry which was actually trying, would be consigned to the straight-to-video pile.
October is the cinematic graveyard-shift.
And how apt that this October sees the arrival of a film which should, by rights, have been sealed in a lead-lined film canister and buried in an unmarked pit. The Last Witch Hunter lumbers from its non-specific-dark-ages opening scene into modern-day New York, whereby it tries to appropriate a sort of Underworld / Army Of Darkness vibe, but with the style and wit of neither. Ably assisting Kaulder (Vin Diesel) in his poorly explained sorceress-dicing quest are Chloe (Rose Leslie, who acts completely as if the part was meant for Emma Stone, but the budget wouldn't stretch to her), Dolan 37th (Elijah Wood, whose money from Lord Of The Rings appears to have finally dried up), and Dolan 36th (none other than Sir Michael Caine, who brings The Gravitas™ to the film in a voice which sounds genuinely embarrassed to be reciting such a hackneyed script).
And you know your screenplay is in real trouble when Caine is called upon to narrate the exposition that you couldn't be bothered to write into the dialogue. And it's a voiceover which is completely abandoned after that scene, once Sir Michael is wheeled to the back of the set and propped up for the rest of the film, save for occasional scenes of advice and moral support. Sort of like a very crap version of Batman's butler, in fact.
"Why do we fall, Bruce?" "Er, so we can use our minimum appearance fee to buy another villa, I imagine Alfred?"
Elsewhere we have sporadic moments of humour which attempt to ride on a wave of goodwill that the film can't muster, and some thoroughly non-explained premises, such as a) A memory simulator/re-enactment sequence with the warning 'if you die in the memory, you die in here, too'. But if you're re-living your own memory, why would you die in it since you're alive to be experiencing it for a second time? And b)Chloe explaining to Kaulder that she can't use her supernatural power to help him, despite Chloe having used that same power to help Kaulder precisely two scenes earlier. The movie is littered with throwaway ideas that it has neither the time nor inclination to explain properly.
But it's not just the acting and the script which are holding the film down; the abundance of effects-work does its share of that, too. The mid-range CGI is by no means awful, but it's over-used to the point where a fully animated film would have been more convincing, somehow. Although the film's worst enemy could actually be its 12A certificate, meaning that a potentially adrenaline-fuelled action/horror movie can never really rise above something which is suitable for kids*1.
The film's not crap enough to be actively hateful, but it's certainly crap enough to be nowhere near acceptable. There is the germ of a workable idea in The Last Witch Hunter, but poor casting and an incoherent screenplay make this little more than a Greatest Hits reel of all the movies and TV shows you're already bored with. It's the cinematic equivalent of a drunk who keeps forgetting the story he's telling, while his increasingly distracted audience try and work out what the hell he's going on about.
The fact that these four posters all exist in the same marketing campaign suggests that not even the studio themselves are sure what to do with it…
The best line comes from Kaulder himself: "You know what I'm afraid of? Nothing. It's boring, really", in which Diesel sums things up in three short sentences*2.
Summit/E-One have called their film The Last Witch Hunter.
I think it's only fair that we hold them to that descriptor…
No, it isn't.
Do not pay money to watch this film.
Do. Not.
This is a low ebb, even for the likes of Caine and Diesel who'll usually go to the opening of a fridge if there's money involved.
I'm not even entirely sure what it sets out to do, and the answer is still no.
Take it to the comments and see…
Not that I heard, although the screaming in my own head which my brain generated to drown out the film's dialogue, also camouflaged most of everything else. Although still not well enough.
The Last Witch Hunter features a brief appearance from Rena Owen, aka the Kaminoan, Taun We from Attack of the Clones.
** Well, on a technical level, at least. On an artistic one, it's not really suitable for anyone.
*1 Which is the preferred method for Diesel, to be fair.
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.
