Star Wars: The Rise Of Skywalker (ninth-pass)
Cert: 12A / 142 mins / Dir. J.J. Abrams / Trailer Previous reviews:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8
Okay, just a quick jaunt this late in The Rise Of Skywalker's cinematic run to lay some appreciation out for the magnificent Anthony Daniels, the man behind (inside) the golden droid that is See-Threepio.
The character (indeed, the actor) had little more than an incidental role in The Force Awakens and The Rise Of Skywalker, lighting up each of his scenes but coming off as feeling a little shortchanged given the character's previous importance. Daniels has been in this from the very start, of course, braving the heat of the Tunisian sun for Tatooine back in '75. The movies may be labelled The Skywalker Saga, but C-3PO essentially is Star Wars. Certainly a core part of what makes it special.
His was the first line of dialogue in the (release order) story, and Threepio reprises those four words as his last in Episode IX. Okay, this isn't as cool as the circularity of Revenge Of The Sith's Tantive IV callback, but given that LFL later decided the Episode III blockade runner was in fact The Sundered Heart instead, that particular Easter egg has already been retconned into insignificance*1.
But C-3PO turns out to be the most pivotal droid in The Rise Of Skywalker, even upstaging BB-8 in his usefulness (quite the achievement in this trilogy). What's more, he gets many of the film's funniest lines and corny as they may be, the droid's humour is always on-brand*2. He has an endearing lack of self-awareness for one with so much external knowledge, which speaks to anyone who's ever tried to fit in despite being a smartarse.
Threepio's screen-time is still relatively short in Episode IX of course, but the droid that shines twice as bright translates half as long. There'll be more adventures with goldenrod in one form or another, as hinted at by Daniels himself recently. Part of Star Wars' specific charm is its non-linear approach to storytelling across different media, and there's only one guy who can do the voice, the movement, the essence.
So.
Where the hell is my 3¾" red-eyed C-3PO, Hasbro?
The Star Wars.
Obvs.
Obvs.
That one's up for debate, but probably not.
Try me.
Not that I can tell.
Level 0: It is Star Wars.
...but if you wanted to go around the houses with it, The Rise Of Skywalker stars Anthony Daniels, who was in the 'Best Years Of Your Death' episode of Randall & Hopkirk (Deceased) with Tom Baker, one of the many Doctors in 2013's 'Day Of The Doctor' special of Doctor Who next to David Tennant, who appears in Good Omens alongside Daniel Mays, who was in The Infiltrator which also featured Jason Isaacs from A Cure For Wellness, a film that had Celia Imrie in it from out of 1990's The World Of Eddie Weary which also starred... Anthony Daniels.
*2 Hey, I'm a massive fan of Attack Of The Clones and even I can't forgive the "this is such a drag" line. Not least because the "I'm quite beside myself" is superb. [ BACK ]
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, that's better. As is usual, the second viewing of a new Star Wars movie allows for a step back, looking at the bigger picture without fixating on the plot as it unfolds. And I'm very happy to say that The Rise Of Skywalker flows far more smoothly when you know where the river is headed. You can put down the map and enjoy the scenery, so to speak. Too many metaphors for a single paragraph. Not sorry.
REVELATIONS Make no mistake, there is still a lot of story-admin going on here, and yet somehow not enough. That's coupled with a smattering of unnecessary explanations as a sort of scriptwriter's garnish. Huge revelations are dropped into the dialogue with the same dramatic inference as a Rebel technician pointing out that the toner cartridge needs changing, and they're usually accepted in the same straightforward fashion.
We (by which I mean Fandom™) have spent the last four years asking questions, be it where do things come from or where did they disappear to. Star Wars movies have never been about massive ungainly bouts of backstory*1, but we hadn't stopped to think that when our answers did arrive, they'd do so with no further explanation or qualification. More fodder for the novels and comics, and that's fine.
JOB But ultimately there are two films here. There's the Abrams-esque rollicking adventure, in which our planet-hopping heroes solve puzzles, locate artefacts and blast their way out of tight corners. Then there's the more Johnson-esque ponderous study of duty, destiny and the resurgence of the Sith. And while these are both definitely Star Wars™, they don't meet in the middle because even 142 minutes isn't enough time to properly do both ideas justice.
Think of how unbalanced Return Of The Jedi is. All of the interesting stuff happens aboard the second Death Star, with the space and ground battles providing breathing-room for the heavyweight force of wills. But as much fun as the Jabba's palace adventure is*2, when you've seen RotJ a few times it starts to get in the way, knowing there's more important business to be taken care of. One of the hills The Rise Of Skywalker has to climb is that this mismatch is apparent from the beginning, so the viewer quickly has to decide which of the two films they're in the mood for. Most of us want both, but that won't come until later viewings, when it's all bedded in.
BAG We want instant gratification from Star Wars, but that's rarely how the series operates. The first 1977 flick did it, and to a certain degree The Force Awakens was probably closest to replicating that feel-good blast, but even that later work was subject to a quick reappraisal when it became apparent how structurally similar it is to A New Hope and The Phantom Menace.
You want the same movie experience from each new release? Fast & Furious is right there. You want to love Star Wars? I'm afraid it might be a little more work than just sitting down in front of it.
I have spoken.
The Star Wars.
Obvs.
Obvs.
For some it will be high on the CV, yes.
Yup.
Okay, I think there's one when REDACTED falls into the REDACTED at REDACTED.
Need to investigate this, though.
Level 0: It is Star Wars.
...but if you wanted to go around the houses with it, The Rise Of Skywalker stars Carrie Fisher of course, who was in 2009's Fanboys along with Ray Park, who performed voicework for the motion-comic of Spartacus: Blood And Sand next to Jaime King, who rocked up in last year's Ocean's Eight alongside Richard Armitage from The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, a movie which also featured Kiran Shah, who was in 2011's Your Highness with Justin Theroux, who also had a role in Charlie's Angels: Full Throttle next to the one and only Carrie Fisher...
*1 Although many would argue that Episodes I-III fit squarely into this bracket; naturally, I'd disagree. [ BACK ]
*2 And as much as even I have grumbled about Snoke buying the farm halfway through the trilogy, let's not forget that the iconic Jabba The Hutt wasn't originally introduced until 13 minutes into the third Star Wars movie, and 25 minutes later he's a smouldering mess of barbecued blubber. That's it. That's Jabba. [ BACK ]
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 seems like we've waited most of the year for a break in the downpour of superhero tentpole-movies. So, before the autumnal clouds gather for Thor and the Justice League, Lionsgate have taken the opportunity to get the unmasked Deadpool and Nick Fury sent to Coventry*1 for a road-trip in The Hitman's Bodyguard, the kind of movie which would usually land in March or October, were it not for the names on the poster...
Michael Bryce (Ryan Reynolds) is a down-at-heel close-protection bodyguard, tasked to safeguard professional assassin Darius Kincaid (Samuel L. Jackson) on his journey to the International Court of Justice in The Hague to testify against despotic war criminal Vladislav Dukhovich (Gary Oldman). The underhand and frighteningly-connected Dukhovich has strike-teams out to silence the sole witness before he can arrive, but Bryce and Kincaid have their own intertwined history, and the road-trip will be anything but straightforward for this odd-couple! [ Do you see? One of them is an expert at killing people, whilst the other specialises in keeping them alive. It is this central disparity which creates unavoidable friction between the lead characters, and from whence the thrills and indeed humour will arise. Salma Hayek also stars as Kincaid's wife Sonia who swears a lot and who is in prison, and can therefore have her segments produced entirely separately. ]
At least I imagine that's how the pitch went. What we actually get here is a lighthearted generic action movie interspersed with scenes of Reynolds and Jackson's semi-improvised bickering in a car. Which is fine. The Hitman's Bodyguard feels for all the world like a Gerard Butler schedule-filler*2 that struck gold when the casting director was able to call in a couple of favours. The screenplay is efficient enough, if largely unimaginative, and leaves you with the impression that the 'comedy' aspect was tacked on in the third-draft once the lead performers had been confirmed. Reynolds and Jackson are great of course, but there's little here that they haven't done elsewhere, and to greater effect. Despite the best work of writer Tom O'Connor*3 and multiple narrative-assisting flashbacks, the audience never forgets that they're watching the actors, not the characters.
Likewise, Gary Oldman is basically fine as an Eastern-European warlord who mostly sits in a courtroom arrogantly protesting that he has no charge to answer, although he's not doing anything that a hundred other character actors could have brought in at less than half the price. Salma Hayek, as noted above, swears for comic effect at regular intervals. And she's good at it, but y'know. It seems like director Patrick ('Expendables 3') Hughes doesn't really know what he wants to do with his players so he's just letting them autopilot*4, and handing the day's footage to the editors. To be fair, that strategy could have backfired far worse than it did here.
The film's action set-pieces are on-par for the genre with some fantastic stunt-work, but using a hyper-shaky cam that's designed to disguise the lack of movement in a frame, and the kind of CGI explosions which make you realise how much of the budget went on the casting.
Overall, it feels like everyone had an absolute blast making this movie, which is rarely the sign of a focused piece of work. This is no exception.
The Hitman's Bodyguard is eminently forgettable and more than a little uneven, although it's distracting fun for the duration of the run-time at least. But when it comes to the standout actioner of the Summer-season with an A-list cast, gleefully stylish violence and a jukebox soundtrack, that crown belongs to the Atomic Blonde...
If you liked what Ryan Reynolds was doing in Deadpool*5, what Sam Jackson was doing in Die Hard With A Vengeance and what the story was doing in From Paris With Love or Olympus Has Fallen, you'll get a lot out of The Hitman's Bodyguard.
Not while Charlize Theron's kicking arses in the screen next door..
Not as much as director Patrick Hughes would perhaps like to think, but just enough to warrant the budget being funnelled directly into the casting department, yes..
*4 Not the requirements of the directorial role of course, but I suppose this was never going to be 'an auteur's movie'. [ BACK ]
*5 Also if you like Deadpool's thing of taking an iconic 80s ballad and framing it in an ironic way against a background of carnage. This film does that. Twice. [ BACK ]
*6 Oh, and while I'm on, despite what the film says there's no Dover-to-Amsterdam ferry. It's geographically unfeasible; the Amsterdam ferries leave from Newcastle. The ferries from Dover sail to Calais or Dunkirk, where you'd drive up through France to Holland. And sure, those of you who haven't seen the film may be wondering 'well how do you know that's what they don't do?' which would be a fair question except that 'Amsterdam' is on the ferry in huge letters. Okay, this isn't as whopping a transgression as the last Transformers film, but I didn't want to go the whole review not mentioning it. [ BACK ]
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.
Dom Hemingway Cert: 15 / 94 mins / Dir. Richard Shepard
Now here's an odd beast. It feels like it sits somewhere between The Bank Job and Bronson, with the grimy, untrustworthy London of the former populated by the cartoonish wideboys of the latter. Jude Law gives a magnificent performance as the eponymous safe-cracker, steering the role carefully between likeable rogue and self-obsessed scumbag, making sure he lands squarely on neither. The comedic moments he shares with Richard E Grant's Dickie are among the film's finest and most confident (Grant is also marvellous, if completely underused after the first act).
The film is split into chapters, clearly marked with a title-card between each, and once the thread with European crime-lord Mr Fontain (a delightfully barking Demian Bichir) comes to its end, so does the story's coherence. Everything after 'the crash' feels like it's freewheeling; earnestly played, but ultimately aimless (much like Hemingway's character, to be fair). As each segment ends, it feels slightly incomplete, and you know the final reel is going to have to pull something pretty special out of the bag to cap things off neatly. And ultimately, it doesn't.
But for all my over-analysing, it's still a very enjoyable movie when it's working, and I foresee it being a regular Saturay-nighter in years to come. Add beer and friends for best results.
Dom Hemingway is full of great performances looking for a strong screenplay to inhabit. The core idea is there, and so's all the talent to make it happen. It just feels like an outline of what a cracking Brit-flick should be…
Largely.
In the opening act, yes; but less as it went on.
I'm not sure. I don't think so.
It's good, but the DVD should do you.
No.
I will.
There isn't.
The film felt (to me) like it was missing the archetypal London kingpin (Gambon in Layer Cake, Moriarty in Lock, Stock); who would you cast in this to complement Jude Law and Richard E Grant, without upstaging them?
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.
Okay, just a quick jaunt this late in The Rise Of Skywalker's cinematic run to lay some appreciation out for the magnificent Anthony Daniels, the man behind (inside) the golden droid that is See-Threepio.
