#MarchMovieMadness. If you wanted to put a label on it (and if you're me, you do), that'd be about right in pretty much every sense. It's what happens when you get into the third week of the month and realise you've "only" been to the flicks three times. It's what happens when you have way too much time on your hands (this isn't my job, remember; I'm an office-drone for forty hours a week). It's what happens when you then watch thirteen movies in eleven days, all at the cinema. Considering I'd predicted the review-schedule would slow down this year, well let's just say it hasn't. At all. If they show the films, I will watch the films, that's how that works.
And I only mention this because it's reminiscent of the chain of events which essentially started this blog in the first place. In March 2009 I set myself the target of watching (and crucially, reviewing) a different movie over twelve consecutive days. A mixture of cinema and home screenings, it seemed a fairly arduous committment at the time. Ah, what an amateur. Co-incidentally, it was the same month of 2013 when #MarchMovieMadness saw me be able to mirror the programme, but this time managing to catch a dozen films in the cinema, sequentially.
So as luck would have it (because when it comes to studio distribution patterns, luck plays a greater part than the alignment of the stars), March 2016 has seen me slot in thirteen threatrically-screened movies over eleven days. It's a higher hit-rate than 2013 certainly, but not quite as mathematically pleasing, obviously. And I'd have gone for the full twelve, but a) I don't really like repeating movies within the run (although I had seen one of them previously), and b) I really need to flush the batteries before I take in Dawn of Justice again.
So here's a quick roundup of the things which have been in my eyes over the last week and a half…
This month's cinema viewing has been a mixed bag (as it should be), so if you don't mind, I'll go for a lie down, now…
And all of this was made possible with Cineworld's Unlimited Card. Other cinema-subscription services are available, but only very recently. And they cost more and don't offer the same discounts and benefits. Well done, guys ;)
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.
It's the 28th of March, and we in the UK have just performed the bi-annual ritual of padding around the house looking for wall-clocks, thermostats and microwaves to change the time on, as we stride into British Summer Time. And it might not be a massive coincidence that this week sees the Monday-release*1 of Olympic biopic Eddie the Eagle, because this is a film you can set your watch by...
Every single frame has been labouredly engineered for maximum cloying effect, with director Dexter Fletcher and producer Matthew Vaughn poring over the British Underdog Movie Handbook until the pages started to wear through. The titular Edwards' humble beginnings, his supportive parents, and never-say-die attitude are absolutely textbook, as is the pantomime-like performance of the sneering detractors and contemporaries that surround him at every turn*2, the mechanical structure of the once-failed-mentor archetype and the film score which tells you Exactly What To Think All Of The Time. Eddie The Eagle also uses the musically-backed-training-montage like it invented the damned thing. And then Christopher Walken turns up and plays Christopher Walken™.
The fact that this film is based around true events actually (or should actually) gives it less of an excuse to follow the tried and tested formula, as it feels like it's somehow not trying hard enough by relying on a structure we're all familiar with anyway. But on it ploughs, the phrase "Feel-good crowd-pleaser" seemingly red-stamped over every page of the script. Even if you know nothing about the history of Britain's favourite underdog, this film holds absolutely no surprises.
It's also really fucking good.
Much like its subject and the aspects of his situation he can't control, the film has its own inherent obstacles that have to be conquered before it can win the hearts of the audience. And much like its subject, the film succeeds on charm, rather than outright ability. You can be every bit as cynical and jaded as I was walking into this movie, but if Eddie's final 90m jump at the 1988 Winter Olympics doesn't have goosebumps on your neck and a tear in your eye, you're probably some kind of robot.
And it's all down to Taron Egerton in the title-role, with an insanely likeable performance that never gives in to mawkishness even when the rest of the movie does. To capture the raw essence of optimism, his is the hardest job in the film; and he's the one that does the best because of it. Hugh Jackman is amusing and reliable as his trainer, Bronson Peary (but as noted above, has little to bring to an already-clichéd role), and Eddie's parents played by Jo Hartley and Ceith Allen are great support, the surrogate-audience within the film willing Eddie to triumph. But the film really works because of Egerton's performance, and would be a dud without him.
Sure, Eddie The Eagle will be lauded by the kind of outlets you wouldn't normally take serious recommendations from*3, and will be a mainstay in the 'Ideas for Mother's Day' POS displays for years to come. But you owe it to yourself to see it just once. And those first-person-perspective ski-jumps look phenomenal on a big screen, so now's your chance...
Any British Underdog Movie™ of the 1990s.
The film deserves your support at the box-office, yes.
Against my expectations, and against its own obstacles, yes.
Dexter Fletcher is the man who directed Sunshine On Leith".
I'll just leave that there.
Nah.
Nah.
Level 2: Taron Egerton was in that Kingsman: The Secret Service along with Mark 'Skywalker' Hamill and Sam 'Windu' Jackson.
*1 A phenomenon we're seeing more and more of, lately. Traditionally, new movies would come out on a Friday, maybe a Thursday. Occasionally we'd even get a Wednesday release, but this was seen as a transparent ploy to extend the film's precious opening weekend takings, as anything before the end of the first Sunday counts toward that total. Are Monday releases just the studios' way of saying "fuck it, we'll have the week's worth"? Because once everyone starts doing that, the comparative figures will mean nothing again (although it's debatable if they mean anything to anyone outside of the accounting departments anyway). If only there was a collective push at making movies as artistically and aesthetically competitive, but hey.
*2 Really though, I know the role description is "Snooty and Dismissive Head of Olympic Selection Committee", but Tim McInnerny should be ashamed of his performance in this film, playing the part on 11 when it only needs 8. Mark Benton and Jim Broadbent are only a short way behind him, but are at least absolved by having fewer lines on-screen...
*2 And I self-deprecatingly include World Of Blackout in that spectrum. What's that? I'm doing a great job here and you value and respect my opinions even if you don't always agree with them? Oh, be quiet you lot, saying those things...
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, this is an odd fish. A family adventure film that uses a 21st century space-race as an allegory for the 1960s space race? It must have been a tough pitch, but it just about works. Given the main narrative being 12yr old Mike being launched into space with his friend Amy and estranged grandfather Frank following a botched sabotage attempt at NASA, the film borrows liberally from both Space Camp and Space Cowboys. That said, there are more than a few nods to Back To The Future in there, too. Let's just say that this film is very pop-culturally aware.
The real problems lie in the simplistic screenplay and heavy-handed script*1. Its heart is firmly in the right place, but lacks that spark of greatness. If this was Disney or DreamWorks, it'd be immediately badged as filler. That it's not scores the movie a pass, yet it still needs to work on its own terms (obviously). There are plenty of 'nice' moments, but surprisingly few laughs (although the Kubrick gag in the faked moon-landing sequence made me chuckle).
It's got to be said that for an 'independent' production, Capture The Flag looks great. Although the character-design leaves a lot to be desired, the animation itself is fantastic. Unfortunately, it's fantastic to the point where you can see that the mouth-movements for the Spanish-language original don't quite sync with the English-dubbed voice-track added for the international release. Not that it's by any means a deal-breaker, but it seems a shame. Speaking of which, it's also slightly embarrassing that a film which clearly loves the historical aspects of space exploration needs to have such a blatant disregard for science in order to make the story work. If you have inquisitive kids, prepare for lots of questions you won't be able to answer without basically trashing the film.
Charming yet bland in equal measure, Capture The Flag is a perfectly acceptable time-passer for your younglings, although it's doubtful that the older members of the audience will get much out of it.
Most middle-of-the-road animated kids' films, to be fair.
Nope, this is a rainy afternoon on the sofa.
It does, but only because it's not trying too hard.
Can't really say as I haven't seen any of Gato's other films, I'm afraid.
Nope.
Didn't hear one, no.
Level 2: The English-language version of the movie features the voice of Lorraine Pilkington, who appeared in 2006's After Thomas, as did Kate 'SW:TFA First Order Officer whose name I can't seem to find at this precise moment' Fleetwood.
*1 The Facebook and Twitter references seem to have been inserted by someone who's familiar with neither. Although I suppose we should be thankful there are no nods to MySpace in the script?
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.
Because the received wisdom is that when you release a big movie for the boys, you need to put something on for the girls to watch, too. The girls who don't want to watch Henry Cavill's torso I suppose, but hey, we could easily have gotten Tina Fey shrieking through some Universal-spawned neon nightmare instead, so this film's already at least one point ahead ;)
Yes, the Portokalos family are back, louder and more intrusive than ever, as Nia and Ian's daughter Paris reaches college-age, and Nia's parents find out they were never legally married fifty years ago. So warm-hearted bickering all round, then...
As the writer producer and headlining star, Nia Vardalos' observational family material is very good (as in the first film), but the overall structure is more shambolic here than I think anyone intended. While there's a far more solid storyline this time around, procedings are still hampered by sub-plots treated as muttered asides. Set eighteen-or-so years after My Big Fat Greek Wedding, Toula and Ian are apparently in some mid-life rut according to the script, but this only illustrated by characters periodically mentioning it, rather than - y'know - acting. Toula's dad's 50-year grudge with his brother in Greece is mentioned in one scene, then resolved in less than a minute, three scenes later. Toula's cousin Angelo is revealed as gay in one scene, then his anxieties about coming out to traditionalist family are brushed away in less than a minute the next time it's referenced.
Now it'll come as no great surprise for you to learn that I didn't watch the first movie's spin-off sitcom, so I don't know if any of these more throwaway moments are tying up loose ends from that (although it's thirteen years old now and there were only seven episodes, so I'd be surprised if that's the case). This really feels like a bunch of TV episodes condensed down into a movie, and with only an hour and a half, things get slightly cluttered, and not in a 'crazy' way.
But ultimately MBFGW2 is a bit fluffy, a lot undemanding and refreshingly non-cynical without resorting to tweeness. The film spends a lot of time coasting on charm, but there are plenty of wry smiles, quite a few chuckles and a couple of good guffaws*.
The film's not going to push any boundaries or redefine the genre, but it's very comfortable in its own skin, which helps a lot. But a sequel this chronologically separated from its forebear shouldn't feel so much like filler…
Well y'know. The first one.
It won't really add any extra layer to the experience.
MBFGW2 sets its sights relatively low, so yes.
Not really.
Not really.
Not at all.
Level 2: John Corbett (yes, Ronnie's son) appeared in 2008's Street Kings, as did Mr Forest Whitaker who should be turning up somewhere in Star Wars: Rogue One later this year.
*1 Mind you, Mrs Blackout and myself were lucky enough to be seated directly in front of patrons who had evidently never seen a comedy so utterly hilarious before. Seriously, it was like being sat in a room with two haunted laugh-bags. Sometimes this would be at one of the jokes, at others it was just at one of the characters walking through a doorway (no, really). The funnier the joke, the more terrified the rest of the audience was.
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, that's a change of gear. Or rather, Dawn Of Justice is a change into several gears, all at once, for two and a half hours. Riding the cinematic clutch towards the Justice League, DC bring us a whole bunch of ideas and origins, all crammed into one 150 minute rollercoaster. And before I get properly started, I'll add here that the film kept me entertained throughout. Okay, it also kept me bemused and thematically motion-sick from time to time, but on the whole I enjoyed it*1.
The main stumbling block is that the story's trying to be in too many places at once and ends up flitting all over the place, even once the main plot-thread has kicked in. In trying to set up Batman, Superman's story falters and Wonder Woman's falls at just about every hurdle (and we all know Batman, of course, just not this Batman. Even if he's remarkably similar to Batman). Structurally, the film's a mess, and I don't know if that's down to re-shoots, re-writes or just taking two potentially great movies and cramming them into one which is less so. The film either needs to be much shorter or about 45 minutes longer, either would ease the strain.
There are also a few directorial issues that didn't seem to happen in the previous film. Laurence Fishburne is over-acting a cartoon version of the newspaper editor he played perfectly sensibly three years ago; Jeremy Irons forces himself to grimace through a wisecracking version of Alfred The Butler which suits neither the actor nor the character; and I've no idea why Jesse Eisenberg seems to think that the best portrayal of Lex Luthor would be channelling Jim Carrey's Riddler into the role, but Snyder appears to have agreed and has just let him get on with it, anyway*2.
Between the hyperactive story-threading, the shoe-horning of other DC properties and Bruce Wayne's anxiety daydreams, there's far too much going on here. Dawn Of Justice is not a great film, although there are great things within it. It's really a good second-draft which needs tightening up and trimming down.
Perhaps most ironically, DC have brought us a film which doesn't really do justice to the Superman we know, and certainly doesn't do justice to the Batman we don't.
Okay, it may not be Zack Snyder's Watchmen, but at least it's not Zack Snyder's Sucker Punch. We should all be grateful for that, if nothing else...
All of the superhero movies at once, I think.
Go big or go home.
Sadly, I don't think it does.
And it does pain me to say that, even as a Marvel fanboy.
Not nearly.
Not at all.
There only bloody IS, yes!
Level 2: This film's got Scoot McNairy in it, and he was in Killing Them Softly with Ben Mendelsohn, who'll be in Star Wars: Rogue One later this year. Actually they were in Black Sea together as well, which is why my brain struggles to separate them since those films were where I saw both of them for the first time. Even though there's like this ten year age difference between them.
Anyway yeah, that. Look, I've been awake for 22 hours as I write this and I'm still too buzzed to sleep...
*1 I pretty much have to say this because I'm going to go on and pick it apart. But ultimately, it's a film I'll gladly watch again, even if that's just in prep for the sequel. I can see why the critics are mauling it, and as much fun as I had, I'd be hard pressed to actually disagree, put it that way.
*2 Oh, and further to Superman having My Two Robin Hood Dads, it turns out that Batman's parents are Maggie out of the Walking Dead and The Comedian out of Watchmen. Which explains a lot, when you think about it…
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.
