Review: Oppenheimer

Oppenheimer
(Spoilers)
Cert: 15 / 180 mins / Dir. Christopher Nolan / Trailer

Oppenheimer is a three hour, period-set film about nascent nuclear weaponry from a provenly competent storyteller which somehow features neither a young Emmet Brown sitting in a physics lesson nor Indiana Jones in a fridge.

Christopher Nolan is a fucking coward*¹.

*¹ Okay, I'll keep this as brief as I can. The note about Doctors Brown and Jones is obviously a joke. The score is not. I did not enjoy Oppenheimer. Then again, I genuinely believe that it's a film not created for enjoyment in any traditional sense, quite a demanding piece to watch and unsatisfying by narrative necessity. We should certainly expect no less a challenge from Christopher Nolan though, just as we wouldn't want him to be anything other than himself as a filmmaker. I suppose.

Playing with non-linear storytelling once again, Oppenheimer is framed as two separate interviews with associated sets of intertwining and converging flashbacks, each spanning the same twenty-or-so years from different points of view, where the guy we're supposed to be rooting for is demonstrated as being a dysfunctional, womanising moral-vacuum who's figured out how to most efficiently carry out genocide before the nazis and complains non-stop about this before, during and after the fact. Leaving a spray of failed personal and professional relationships in his wake, we see Oppo systematically piss off just about everybody in his life and then act surprised when they take against him...

Of course, this wouldn't be a Christopher Nolan movie without mumbled, unintelligible dialogue from the most important characters, battling here against Ludwig Göransson's piercing, intrusive score in a sound-mix that was finalised while somebody was hoovering. All of this has the pacing and delivery of high-drama, but with the implication of a storyline rather than the exposition of one. I know Nolan doesn't like to spoon-feed his audience, but Oppenheimer doesn't even have cutlery on the table.

You see, despite the device itself having a supporting role on the film's poster, this movie is not actually about Da Bomb. This is just as well, because shortly into the first act Nolan realises he can't narratively simplify for the audience either quantum physics nor the workings of an atom bomb, so quickly stops trying. What the movie actually is, is three clinical hours of dislikeable characters doing unpleasant but necessary admin and then everyone being unable to cope with the fall-out (literal, as well as metaphorical) of that, interspersed with the micro-management of international and domestic U.S. politics of the 1930s, 40s and 50s. So I was hardly expecting Terminator 2, but this is lots (lots) of middle-aged white guys in suits sitting around withholding information and showing they really can't be trusted (I go to the cinema to get away from that), leaving the cinema audience with quite frankly nobody to root for. Other than the demonstrable sociopath the film is named after. I suppose.

In terms of moral debate, Oppenheimer occupies the same shelf as Eye In The Sky and Red Joan, where hand-wringing and thousand-yard stares nudge aside the brutal practicalities of Not Losing A War. I never thought I'd watch a movie where Matt Damon plays the most rounded and sympathetic character, but here we are.

While the two timeline strands are clearly delineated by the use of colour, the content in each rarely seems complementary or interactive enough to warrant the effort. Like several of the director's recent pieces, the presentation seems needlessly fiddly yet is perhaps the only thing saving a story which would otherwise be grindingly linear. But without a solid grounding in the U.S. politics surrounding the Second World War, it all comes out as a mess anyway. It certainly feels like there's a price of entry here that's separate from the one printed on the ticket...

Biggest bugbear: We know that test-bomb's not going to destroy the world, lads; we're all here in 2023 watching the film and we'd probably have heard about that before now.

Second biggest bugbear: So what are these clandestine, closed-room hearings for, exactly? What are the nefarious powers in faceless American government trying to do to Mr Oppenheimer, who single-handedly won all of that very specific part of the late-war for them? Are the Suits trying to have him silenced? Discredited? Ruined? Killed, even? No, they're trying to remove his security-clearance. They want his badge back, that's all. They don't want the guy swanning around the lab like he owns the place ten years after he built them a super-bomb and has done nothing since but wear out the buttons on the highly-subsidised coffee machine. Just have a bit of dignity and retire, Oppo. Jeez...

Oh and bonus points to Kenneth Branagh, failing to control an accent in a built-up screenplay. Again. Proof positive that our celebrated auteur director was either distracted on-set, or deaf.

In short (and I'll bet you wish you hadn't clicked into this footnote now), Chris Nolan has not made a genuinely great film since Inception. There, I said 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.

Review: Avengers - Infinity War (third-pass)

Avengers: Infinity War (2D / third-pass / SPOILERS)
Cert: 12A / 149 mins / Dir. Joe Russo & Anthony Russo / Trailer



Well, I didn't think I'd be making comparative references against the third Avengers get-together until at least this time next year, but a conversation at the weekend raised the point that for the more, ahem, civilian viewer, there are two superhero movies out at the moment. Inevitably, some casual cinema-goers are going to be standing in the foyer deciding which one they want to watch*¹.

Because for a lot of people, the choice will be between a pair of Marvel flicks starring a partially-CGI'd Josh Brolin as a bad-ass with a time-slider*². But that's not really an accurate comparison, is it? Or is it? Infinity War and Deadpool 2 are very different products, albeit for partly the same audience*³. The merc-with-the=mouth has come armed with the fuckbombs, but it's Earth's Mightiest Heroes who carry the weightier story.

And yet in the weeks since my first two passes, I'd forgotten how funny Infinity War is, especially given its consistently escalating death-toll. Although obviously it's very different from that other movie, tonally. Avengers' humour is very much the Private Eye to Deadpool's Viz. Both are great institutions which can't replace each other, and don't try.

So, watching Infinity War again after a few weeks, I'm pretty much of the opinion that any deaths which occurred before the Infinity Gauntlet was fully operational (only four, remember) will be permanent. The amount of build-up, screen-time or dramatic weight allocated to each one seems fairly irreversible, and the film's legacy would be cheapened if these characters managed to find themselves magically resurrected by the end of Avengers 4. 

Conversely, the casting-losses which occur once Thanos snaps his fingers (the other twelve*⁴) are, to put it mildly, suspiciously rapid given their narrative stature. The heroes that flutter out of existence leave behind an intriguingly-thinned (and deliberately 'classic') team for next May's concluding chapter, but the ultimate resolution lies in the knowledge that Spider-Man 2, Black Panther 2 and Guardians 3 have already been commissioned.

But hey, I've previously joined the chorus bemoaning Marvel's reluctance to apply a little consequence to their continuity, and it's still by no means certain who will survive into Phase 4. At a rate of three cinematic entries a year, the MCU is now dense enough to give classic heroes the rest they've earned, while still maintaining forward momentum. Maybe, as a man from another galaxy once said, "it's time to let old things die".

Because we all know this isn't the end of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. It's not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning...*⁵

Avengers films.



it is.



It is.



2019 will tell, I guess.



Not likely, since you'll love it as well. Right?.



There is, layered in when Ebony Maw goes for a space-walk.



Level 1: Mace Windu is in this.





*¹ And of course that's perhaps not the way things should work. But let's not forget I sat in a Saturday night screening of A Ghost Story and watched people walk out mid-way, almost certain that they'd made their choice on a whim since Annabelle: Creation was playing two screens down and was likely the choice on the other side of their coin. Not all moviegoers are as disciplined or as informed as us, dear reader. And that's why I'm here; to help. Or maybe to lecture. Either/or. Okay, it's probably the second one. ^{[ BACK ]}

*² Okay, Thanos-related plot question. When Thor is on the Milano, he tells the Guardians that Thanos "stole the stone and slaughtered half my people". So... where are the survivors, exactly? Because everyone on-screen looked pretty much floaty-in-space-dead to me, the Asgardian ship looked completely mullered, and the Guardians of The Galaxy (the only responders to the distress-call) didn't pick up anyone else from the wreckage.
It had previously struck me that there's not much of a big deal made of Thor being the last Asgardian now, especially as the whole point of Ragnarok was that the refugees fleeing the planet were the symbol of endurance and hope. But yeah, maybe half of that film's survivors are pootling off on the B-Ark somewhere, right? ^{[ BACK ]}

*³ For the record, there are currently Deadpool 2 cup-toppers on sale in the foyer. I expect that for the 12A certificate hero-flicks aimed at family audiences, but this is a hard 15. T-shirts absolutely, popcorn buckets at a push, but cup-toppers? Maybe it's meant to be ironic. Although I'm pretty sure the money that Fox are making from the products looks the same either way...
^{[ BACK ]}

*⁴ Yes, of course I made a list. And no, I'm not going to reproduce it here. I know I marked the review 'spoilers' but I'm not a complete animal... ^{[ BACK ]}

*⁵ Yeah, I went there. I'll be wearing a plastic Union Jack bowler hat and writing angry letters to local newspapers, next. ^{[ 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.

Review: Spider-Man - Homecoming (second-pass)

Spider-Man: Homecoming (IMAX 3D / second-pass / SPOILERS)
Cert: 12A / 133 mins / Dir. Jon Watts / Trailer



So I went to see Spider-Man again, at London's Leicester Square IMAX*¹, this time. And while the film obviously no longer held the element of pleasant surprise for me, I loved it every bit as much. More in some places. There won't be any wanging-great plot spoilers in this piece, but I'll be coasting over some of the events and characters which do and don't appear, hence the spoiler-warning.

[ On a side-note that I may as well slip in here, I loved that before the movie there was an ad for Dell gaming-computers using modified footage from the film. And in that sequence in the movie, you notice that the laptop Peter actually uses in class has the logo obscured. His friend Ned later uses a machine with Dell branding on it, though. Now, given that the current rights-owners to Spidey are the same people who'll work photo-realistic tech-appearances into an animated feature, I think someone in the Sony Brand Placement department is currently furious about the 'deal' that's been struck with Marvel. And I couldn't be happier at that thought. ]

So when I left the cinema after watching Homecoming for the first time, I felt something which hadn't come over me for quite a while. Excitement. Not the anticipation and intrigue I get before a movie, but the feeling that a huge door has been kicked open and now anything is possible. The endings of Doctor Strange and Guardians of The Galaxy Vol. 2 were satisfying, but this was a buzz I haven't had since the closing moments of Amazing Spider-Man 2 (ironically enough), or Iron Man 3. It was that feeling of wanting to go right back in and watch it again. Immediately. And a few days later when I left the IMAX auditorium*²? There it was again. Outstanding stuff.

At that final shot (of the main film), where Peter Parker has returned home and found the real reward of his labours awaiting him? That look on his face of triumph, humility and acceptance, all at once? The camera panning slowly to the figure behind him, slightly out of focus, and that final line of dialogue? The first tim I saw that, I grinned like an idiot; the second, I had tears in my eyes. At Peter's side, we've taken our first step into a larger world.

The first distinction which makes the film work in a crowded marketplace is that while it's a reboot, it's not an origin-story. Thankfully. Either Marvel are confident in their target audience's familiarity with this flagship super-hero by now*³, or even they don't think they'll get away with telling a variation of the same story for the third time in fifteen years. Narratively, this gives the film a wider scope than many of the series' standalone movies featuring a 'new' hero.

It's also important to note that the new movie isn't 'classic comic' Spider-Man, either in tone or execution, but that's always been the way of the MCU. To take the core traits of the characters and reinvigorate them to fit a new, larger story. Homecoming does this even better than most in the series - Holland is his own version of the web-slinger, but still intrinsically the Parker/Spider-Man we expect. In terms of bringing a character we know into a story we don't and having them interact with the continuity, this is MCU at its absolute finest*⁴.

Instead we get relatively subtle (if still incredibly direct) cues from the script as to what's brought Parker to our attention this time: He was bitten by a spider (which is now dead), and Aunt May has had a tough old time of things lately (presumably because Uncle Ben is sitting on a cloud somewhere, next to a spider). Peter's climbing and acrobatic skills are inherent to him, he builds his own web-shooters, and everything else comes courtesy of the Stark-engineered suit. But the writers (and even I'm embarrassed to say that there are six of them on this project) don't feel the need to dot-every-i and cross-every-t, just yet. Familiar names like Mary-Jane Watson, J. Jonah Jameson and Gwen Stacy haven't been shoehorned into the story. Just yet. This is MCU Spider-Man, more concerned with its wider tableaux*⁵ than providing a fan-service checklist of Greatest Hits references*⁶. Although on a nemesis-level, with Vulture well and truly established, we get Shocker and Scorpion bookmarked in the continuity for future rumbling, as well as a few other character-seeds sewn into the bargain.

But Homecoming isn't just an advert for the next film in the series. The story develops and grows Parker's character rather than just setting it up for something else. Indeed, by the way this chapter is wrapped up (and the credits-stings in particular), you get the feeling that while Marvel are more than happy with the integration between rights-holders, Sony are playing things like they're not sure what happens next. Stark's line about Toomes' crew being 'below the Avengers pay-grade' would seem to imply that Spidey's solo adventures could be Sony-only ventures. Nothing is ruled out, but neither is it writ in stone. The question is, do Sony get to carry on using the Tom Holland Spider-Man in their own standalone movies if they don't include any other MCU trademarks? And the next question is, would we want them to? The Venom movie might go some way to answering those, but according to Marvel producer Kevin Feige, our friendly-neighbourhood web-slinger won't be present for that one. Which feels a bit like making a Joker flick that doesn't also feature Batman; possible, but weird.

And how long will Spidey be around in the MCU timeline? This film doesn't commit to inducting him into the permanent line-up of Earth's Mightiest Heroes, but nor does it write him out of the future, either short or long term. Any future MCU-appearances (even a flash of the suit or mention of a character-name, presumably), will require the ongoing agreement between Marvel Studios and Sony which is currently in place*⁷ (although Deadpool managed to squeak round this with its heli-carrier appearance), so in for a penny in for a pound, right?

We should anticipate significant spider-presence for the foreseeable future, I think.
In the meanwhile, I'm off to see Homecoming again…

MCU-stuff. Spidey-stuff.



Yes.



Yes.



Best? Difficult to say. Not least because the groundwork has been laid for it to get even better.



I shall look sternly over my spectacles and ask you to explain yourself.



Still not sure. Thought I heard one in the ferry-scene first time round, but didn't hear it at all this time.



Level 1: Pre Vizsla's in this.





*¹ Despite that particular cinema having a constant schedule of films to show in the format, this has been the first movie outside of Star Wars which I've seen (indeed wanted to see) in IMAX. ^{[ BACK ]}

*² The IMAX experience was amazing again, as I expected (indeed, that's why I went). It's so good to see the (almost) ghost-less 3D in its intended colour-range. The big one at Cineworld's Leicester Square is the best screen for audio/visual reproduction, but with some of the worst leg-room I've ever experienced. I'm 5'11", that's not exactly lanky, and even I was getting knee-cramp by the 45 minute mark. ^{[ BACK ]}

*³ It should be noted that 2008's The Incredible Hulk played much the same hand, leaving the heavy-lifting of historic exposition largely to the viewer's memory of Bill Bixby, and of the 2003 cinematic offering from Ang Lee. ^{[ BACK ]}

*⁴ Although obviously, The First Avenger is still the greatest Marvel Cinematic Universe movie. Don't bother disagreeing, I will fight you on this. ^{[ BACK ]}

*⁵ It's arguable of course that the original comic Spidey was in the wider Marvel universe to begin with, and the stories still had room to fit those names into their roll-call... ^{[ BACK ]}

*⁶ And that's not to put down Marc Webb's Amazing Spider-Man flicks at all, it's just clear that there was going to have to be a significant style change when Parker stepped into the MCU. ^{[ BACK ]}

*⁷ Although speaking of cross-promotion: during a chase-scene, Peter Parker - who says in the film that he's aged 15 so was born around 2002 - points out that Ferris Bueller's Day Off is "a great movie". That would be the Ferris Bueller's Day Off which was released in 1986, sixteen years before he was born. Yet in Captain America: Civil War, Parker refers to The Empire Strikes Back as "that really old movie", despite it only being six years older than Bueller. The hell, Parker? (although the vintage Kenner X-Wing which hangs in Peter's room could well be an allusion to this apparent anomaly). ^{[ 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.

Review: Spider-Man - Homecoming (first-pass / spoiler-free)

Spider-Man: Homecoming (3D / first-pass / SPOILER-FREE)
Cert: 12A / 133 mins / Dir. Jon Watts / Trailer


So, no double-bill, no midnight-screening, no cup-toppers or popcorn bucket tie-in merch? This is a suspiciously low-key release from Marvel Studios, particularly considering the friendly neighbourhood webslinger is practically royalty as far as their back-catalogue goes. Did Marvel/Sony perhaps become wary of audience reboot-fatigue? Did they even think were sitting on their first dud? Had the studios viewed the final edits after committing to a release date and wished they could quietly slip the film out to minimise the reputational damage?

6:27pm on the 5th July was to be the moment of truth.

And I say all this as someone who was, if not outright cautious, definitely reserved in my excitement about the project, despite being a fervent armirer of Marvel Studios' output. The Marvel Cinematic Universe is the natural home for Spider-Man of course, but since Sony currently own the film-rights to the character and his immediate co-stars (it's a long story), the cross-functional team-up felt to me a little like an abandonment of an already blossoming franchise. The re-cast Peter Parker took his first steps into Marvel's larger sandpit in last year's Civil War, and while he was a perfectly acceptable addition, there wasn't really enough screentime there for me to be relieved by that point.

But Spider-Man: Homecoming is nothing short of outstanding. Perfect MCU.

The first act feels a little uneven, like breaking in a new pair of shoes. The film opens with the Sony ident and a muted reworking of the Marvel-fanfare playing under it*¹; but then we get the Marvel Studios ident in due course, this time with a more familiar accompaniment. And all throughout the first third of the film - despite a liberal dosing of MCU continuity tie-in - this feels very much like a Sony Spider-Man™ flick. And there's nothing wrong with that, but it's not really why the audience are sitting watching. Once key characters and plot-points are established, the film almost instantly feels like part of the wider Marvel universe. It has the wit, humour and heart of the best of Iron Man and Guardians of the Galaxy. And unlike Parker's debut movie appearance last year, there are relatively few established characters on-hand to wave hello to the audience. Homecoming marks its territory quietly and effectively.

And it's not blatant-reboot territory, either. Peter's actual origin story is hinted at but left largely off to one side, and there are a couple of very deft visual homages to both the Tobey Maguire and Andrew Garfield movies*². Nothing glaring, they're just there at the right moment. This retooling of the hero isn't as faithful to the spirit of the comics as Sony's 2014 outing, but it's the version of Spidey which the MCU needs. Tom Holland is fantastic as both Parker and Spider-Man, still coming to terms with his powers and his new suit. Opposite him, Michael Keaton is perfectly cast as his nemesis - one of the few MCU villains who has actual character from the beginning. The supporting characters are admittedly less fleshed-out, then again it's not their story (oh and Marvel: "chunky Asian comedy sidekick" worked well with Benedict Wong in Doctor Strange, and Jacob Batalon pulls it off in fine style here, but enough now, yeah?).

Despite the assured success of this particular studio cross-over, I can't see the X-Men making the transition to the MCU any time soon. Deadpool on the other hand, will probably be the subject of some frantic Hollywood phone conversations in the very near future*³.

But it's still sinking in at the moment. I'm sure I'll have more to say after I've watched it again. Soon. In the meanwhile, go and see this film.

The title has it dead-on: Spidey's home…

And the business-end:

• Is there a Wilhelm Scream? I think so.
• Is there a Stan Lee cameo? Yes.
• Is there a mid-credits scene? Yes.
• Is there a post-credits scene? Yes.

Tonally, the film's very Iron Man, and not just because there's fair amount of Tony Stark in it.



Yes.



More than.



It's a high-watermark for the central cast, for sure.



Depends why, but probably.



Pretty sure I heard one in 'the ferry scene'.
A second-pass should confirm either way.



Level 1: As well as some on-screen Lego Death Star and vintage Kenner X-Wing love, the young-and-upcoming Lando Calrissian is in this.





*¹ Michael Giacchino's back on scoring-duties, and while he works in themes and motifs from previous Marvel composers (namely Jackman, Tyler, Elfman), there's a notable amount of Rogue One's styling in there as well. I swear it's like he has to have two projects on at the same time… ^{[ BACK ]}

*² There's also a superb callback/reference to The First Avenger, but this spoiler-free review prevents me from going any further. I grinned like an idiot, anyway. And fair play to them for inserting that jibe about an invisible jet, coming a month after Wonder Woman's big-screen debut… ^{[ BACK ]}

*³ We've also not yet gotten full confirmation if the recently announced Venom project starring Tom Hardy will take place in the MCU or Sony's own Sinister Six timeline. Personally I'm hoping for the latter because as much as I loved Homecoming, I want to see Andrew Garfield back in the suit at some point, too. ^{[ 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.

Review: Captain America - Civil War (first-pass)

Captain America: Civil War (3D / first-pass / SPOILER-FREE)
Cert: 12A / 147 mins / Dir. Joe Russo & Anthony Russo / Trailer



Okay folks, first-pass rules apply. I'll be keeping this brief because a) it's late (actually early) and I have to be up in the morning but still want to commit my thoughts to the aether before grabbing not-enough-sleep, and b) as is so often the case with the Marvel Cinematic Universe, this movie is far too much to take in on the first go; not least because Civil War is two and a half hours of superhero goodness with basically no downtime. Although this review is free of spoilers, it does assume you've watched the trailers and know at least who is going to be in the movie.

So, with Joe and Anthony Russo back on directing duty, it's safe to say that this is a spiritual successor to The Winter Soldier as well as a chronological one. Furrowed brows and earnest exhortations are the order of the day once more, and the occasional quips that surface through the script might ease the tension, but they certainly don't break it. The larger thread about the Infinity Stones takes a back seat as the world's governments become increasingly nervous as to the accountability of the Avengers. This film manages to be a direct sequel to both TWS and Age of Ultron at the same time. Steve Rogers' ongoing quest to redeem Bucky continues, but characters introduced in the last movie(s) also come into play. And there are also the new faces, of course.

Young Mr Parker makes his MCU debut here, and while his introduction feels a little offbeat, he soon fits in like a natural once things heat up. Of course the character is in very safe hands, and I'm feeling a lot more assured about his Homecoming standalone. We also meet T'Challa for the first time in Civil War, in a more subtle callback to Age of Ultron's Vibranium subplot. As his super-alter-ego isn't quite as mainstream as Parker's, T'Challa's backstory feels a little more crammed. He pans out well, and if the intention is to pique the audience's interest (rather than just not having enough time to get to know him), then it succeeds admirably.

On more familiar territory, it's great to see War Machine back in the thick of it, and Ant-Man is a welcome (if seriously under-used) inclusion. William Hurt's (ex-general, now Secretary of State) Thaddeus Ross makes a relatively low-key return, and a couple of 'slightly-more-incidental' players from Winter Soldier are given a bit more fleshing out. But if Civil War has a major stumbling block, it's just too many characters. In its defence, at least all those characters are pulling in the same direction, but this really feels like a cinematic geek soap-opera. Any viewers new to the franchise (and statistically, there will be some) will have no idea what's going on, such is the narrative price of entry.

One for the fans? Absolutely. But Civil War is a fantastic ongoing installment in its own right, rather than just an extended trailer for the next movie. The actions in this film have consequences which will be felt throughout the MCU, which is precisely how it should be...

The business-end:

• Is there a Wilhelm Scream? See below.
• Is there a Stan Lee cameo? Yes.
• Is there a mid-credits scene? Yes.
• Is there a post-credits scene? Yes.



…previous Captain America films?



For maximum effect, absolutely.



It does.



The Russo brothers can be proud, as can the expansive cast.



No, because I know that this won't be the carefree movie a lot of audiences want.



…I didn't hear one. Although sleep-deprivation could have been kicking in by that point. If you caught one in there, let me know.



Level 2: …I think this is the first MCU movie to not have a member of the Star Wars cast on-screen, somewhere. Plenty of behind-the-scenes folks, but let's level-2 it by going for Don Cheadle, reprising his role as War Machine here, and he turned up very recently in Miles Ahead alongside Ewan 'Kenobi' McGregor.







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.

Review: Chef

Chef (PLOT SPOILERS)
Cert: 15 / 112 mins / Dir. Jon Favreau




Firstly, here are the two new additions to the movie-goer's list of advice, rules and etiquette…

1) Don't go to the cinema straight from work without eating to watch a film which - even to a card-carrying non-foodie like me - contains some admittedly awesome looking sandwiches.

2) If you do have to go to the cinema straight from work without eating to watch a film which contains some admittedly awesome looking sandwiches, try not to sit directly behind the guy with the worst B.O. in living memory, who for some reason places his drink of the floor in the aisle rather than in the cupholder provided, so who spends the film continually reaching down to his side and wafting his essence in a five-foot radius.

Because watching the first one whilst smelling the second makes for a very unsettling two hours.

So, beneath the surface (and really not that far beneath) of Jon Favreau's quirky indie-adventure Chef is a heartfelt, if slightly petulant, swipe at movie critics and even at criticism itself. In fact, it wouldn't be entirely unfair to say that the film barely bothers with this artifice at all, since it deals so directly with the creative parallels between culinary and cinematographic expression, that it may as well just be about a stroppy movie director.

But y'know, if you were going to write, direct and star in a film where the hero throws his toys out of the pram after what in reality is an everyday occurrence, and is then basically adored and supported by all the other characters for the rest of the running time (including his original detractor, embarrassingly), would you really leave in all those ad-libbed exchanges with awkward pauses, not knowing when to cut to another scene, and with you and the stars of Iron Man 2 talking over each other? Because quite frankly, it seems that rather than scolding the critics, Chef just hands them more ammunition.

The annoying part is that the story about the disgruntled sandwich maker, Carl, bonding with his son Percy over the course of the Summer works really well, with Favreau and Emjay Anthony sharing a great chemistry. But that pan's left on the back burner and only stirred occasionally while the main course has no real progression. Carl quits his job to do something more stripped-down and real, then he goes and does it. That's it. There's no third-act obstacle or reveal, everything just goes smoothly and everyone tells him how great he is. Then Oliver Platt's critic, Ramsey Michel turns up to offer Carl a metaphorical hand-job, whereby Favreau's self-penned character shows he has the courage of his convictions by immediately going into business with him. The end.

But the absolute worst moment comes at the end of the film, where we see Jon Favreau smiling, teary-eyed, at a greatest-hits compilation montage of scenes from his own film which we're still watching. And if you think I'm being hard on it, you should read Michael Legge's summary, because while I didn't actively dislike Chef, I also can't disagree with a single word Michael's written, either.

Mr Favreau, if you want to send a snarky fuck-you to the people who've trashed your earlier work, please do it by simply making better films. And I say that as someone who loved Iron Man 2.

Despite its pretensions at both ends of the scale, this film isn't soul food; it's a quick sandwich grabbed from M&S on your way through town. If you thoroughly enjoyed Begin Again, Chef is aimed directly at you.

On the surface, the film features a gourmet chef trying to convince the world that there's spiritual value in fast food. And handily, that's also what the film is about, too.

Almost exactly, yes.



I smirked, but nowhere near enough.



Almost exactly, yes.



Whatever.



I will a bit. Not much, but a bit.



Unlikely.



There is not.

During the scenes set in Little Havana and South Beach in Miami, was I the only Scarface-obsessed viewer waiting for it all to kick the fuck off?

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.