And the award for Clearly Having The Most Fun on a Film Set goes to... Mr Sharlto Copley. Yes, although we see the events of Hardcore Henry through the eponymous protagonist's first-person vision, the most frequently recurring character (whose face we see) is that of Copley's Jimmy, the companion, guide and co-player to Henry's super-soldier cyborg-self. Without wanting to delve to deeply into why, Copley gets a succession of costumes and mannerisms to play with*1 whilst delivering the lion's share of the exposition. Not that there's a massive deal to exposit...
Taking the First Person Shooter format as its starting point and doing very little to move much further, Hardcore Henry is a film presented entirely from Henry's point-of-view. It also utilises standard game mechanics such as the player initially orienting themselves in a lab through a brief introductory scene, the companion/guide as above, a series of escalating missions and weaponry and of course The End Boss, Akan (all scenery thoroughly chewed courtesy of Danila Kozlovsky). Sprinkle in Haley Bennett's love-interest/macguffin, Estelle and a smattering of flashbacks featuring Tim Roth as Henry's father, and there's your film. Just add pyrotechnics and blood to fill the gaps.
Now although it certainly won't be to everyone's tastes (and nor should it be), it's a bold experiment and one which can be classed as successful. Although crucially, Hardcore Henry is a great film of a game that wouldn't be particularly good. The best film-adaptations certainly appear to be ones of games that don't actually exist; HH bolsters that theory. But frankly it's the sort of game you'd have powered through in a single afternoon in the mid 1990s, then not thought about again.
The storyline itself is a little patchy (go to the dot on the map; shoot people; rinse/repeat), as is the Eclectic™ soundtrack. And there are a few jump-cuts (particularly in the chase-sequences) which make things more disorienting than they really should be. If you're seeing this in the cinema you'll want to sit middle-to-back, as motion-sickness could well be a problem the closer to the screen you are.
Outside of the storytelling technique itself, the film is mostly immense fun, although it occasionally cruises over the line of good-taste unnecessarily. Then again, it does a lot of things unnecessarily. Gleefully violent and at times horrendously misogynistic, the film embraces the best and worst excesses of the industry which inspired it. It's not that Hardcore Henry is trying to offend you, but it really doesn't give a fuck if it does, either.
If you've ever enjoyed an FPS game, you should have some fun with Hardcore Henry. If you haven't, you probably won't; it's that simple.
Edge of Tomorrow, Crank.
A big screen will heighten the adrenaline, but it'll also heighten the shaky-cam.
Not always, but mostly.
As Naishuller's first full feature, it's an impressive start, but he'll have to move onwards and upwards from here.
Nope.
There is.
And it's glorious.
Level 2: Hardcore Henry stars Sharlto Copely, who was in The A-Team alongside Liam 'Qui-Gonn' Neeson.
*1 Although not really 'accents', as each of his personas adopts a London-based tone. Sharlto's normally on shaky ground with any accent other than his native South African and Hardcore Henry is no exception. But, he's having such a blast with the role than even I didn't mind his occasional slip-ups. And that says a lot (as regular readers can well imagine).
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.
Selma Cert: 12A / 128 mins / Dir. Ava DuVernay / Trailer
And there was me thinking all the Important™ films were done for the year. This relatively late entry to the Films You Really Should See Before All The Explosions-and-Superhero-Movies Start category centres around the voting-rights marches from Selma, Alabama to Montgomery, led by Martin Luther King Jr. The film opens in 1964 with King being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, yet still being strung along on civil-rights issues by the then-president Johnson.
Although it rarely pushes the boundaries of its 12A certificate, Selma isn't always an easy-watch (and nor is it meant to be). A lot of the racial tension in the first act feels slightly melodramatic (not unlike The Butler*1, with whom it shares four cast members, oddly), until you almost instantly remember that while the film isn't a documentary, the events in it were documented and did happen.
There's a definite feeling that at times Selma is only presenting one aspect of a much larger story (which it is, by its own admission, but even so…), and that a viewer will get more from the film if they already know all the details anyway. Scripted exposition helps set the timeline, but I didn't feel fully immersed until the final act. Overall, the whole thing seems to work better as a historical document than a work presenting any new insight into political ideals. Then again, how much of a fresh take is really needed when the principles of the story are so apparent?
David Oyelowo's performance is absolutely astounding as Martin Luther King, to the point where you forget you're watching an actor (similar to Meryl Streep in The Iron Lady). The supporting cast is also incredibly strong and has a heavy Brit-presence (Ejogo, Roth, Wilkinson in addition to Oyelowo) considering all the characters are American. Although it has to be said that Tom Wilkinson's performance as President Lyndon Johnson is better than his accent. Speaking of whom, it interested me to note that Johnson is explicitly shown as 'doing the right thing' because of its perceived effect on his legacy, rather than steadfastly believing in it. I'm afraid my US history isn't much of anything, so if any readers could let me know whether this is an accurate assessment, that'd be lovely, thanks.
Elsewhere, Oprah Winfrey is always just Oprah Winfrey before any character she plays. And while the set and wardrobe departments all give an outstanding display of 1965, Common looks so out of place it's almost like he's stepped out of a time-machine, somehow. But we also get some beautiful moments of clean, atmospheric photography from lens-chief Bradford Young, that I wished had continued for longer.
But aside from my snarky criticisms and wanting to be spoon-fed history, Selmais a very good film, and you really should see it.
It is, although catch it while you can since it doesn't seem to have that wide of a release from where I'm sitting.
Probably a renter. As great as it is, it's debatable how often you'll watch it.
For Oyelowo, certainly.
It does, but nothing more than that.
Maybe a little.
There isn't.
David Oyelowo is the voice of Agent Kallus in Star Wars Rebels.
*1 Sorry, that should be Lee Daniels' The Butler. Sorry, Lee. Sorry. That's World Of Blackout's 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.
Like one of those abstract perfume ads you get on TV around Christmas-time, but stretched out to 100 agonising minutes, and without the concerted effort of at least trying to sell you something at the end. Nicole Kidman does a fantastic job of neither looking nor sounding like Grace Kelly, and although I didn't know the woman personally, I'd also put a few quid on the princess of Monaco not regularly ghosting around her Mediterranean palace, rambling on with glassy eyes and an accent stuck on shop demonstration mode.
Oliver Dahan's Grace Of Monaco is a tale of commitment and regret, set against a backdrop of diplomacy and political intrigue, told by someone who can't seem to convey the first two and isn't particularly interested in the latter. The sets look convincing enough, but it's not always easy to appreciate them, what with some of the most baffling camerawork I've ever witnessed choosing instead to fill the entire frame with the top-half of Kidman's face for minutes on end. ("Look, that's acting that! You can see it in her eyes! Well, you can't really see anything except her eyes, but I'm sure it'll have the same effect.")
Directionless to the point of incoherence, Grace Of Monaco isn't even hammy enough to be enjoyed on an ironic level; it's just boring. I would suggest that someone from YRF Entertainment gets on the blower to Google as soon as possible, to make enquiries about exercising the film's right to be forgotten.
I wish I could forget it that easily.
Go away.
No, seriously.
Why are you asking me this?
What do you want from me?
I can't get over it, all the time you won't let it go.
Seriously considering electroconvulsive therapy in a bid to shift this.
No. No there isn't. Now drop it.
…I got nothin'.
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.
Pulp Fiction Cert: 18 / 148 mins / Dir. Quentin Tarantino
I'm not sure what's more terrifying in 2014. The fact that Ghostbusters is thirty this year, or that when I saw Pulp Fiction, Ghostbusters was only ten. Damn, I'm old.
Despite the fine works which came before and after the 1994 classic, Pulp Fiction will doubtlessly be the film for which Quentin Tarantino is ultimately remembered; the zenith of his writing and directing career. With its non-linear timeline and a string of interweaving narratives which, in isolation, appear to be about 'not that much', it should be the least accessible of QT's works and yet the opposite has proved true. As much about the discipline of film-making as that of storytelling, Pulp Fiction has become a timeless classic (with the possible exception of some high-waisted jeans and a mobile phone with a pull-out aerial).
The script is dripping with sass and minutiae, in a way which even QT himself hasn't quite been able to replicate since, and that's not to mention the slew of über-hip gangster movies its international success inspired for years to follow. With very few exceptions, everyone in the cast acts their trousers off here, and despite belonging firmly to Sam Jackson, PF is a real team effort.
It's not often I get on my high-horse, but Pulp Fiction is a modern masterpiece.
If you haven't seen it, investigate at your earliest opportunity; if you don't like it, come back here. We'll talk.
Oh, and you know what's in the case, right..?
Well, that trailer's slightly more kitsch than the film itself, but yes.
Yep.
Yep.
If you get the chance to see Pulp Fiction at the flicks, do it; that's what it was made for.
I'd never noticed before how much damage Vincent does to his car when he crashes it outside Lance's house (and, indeed, the damage to Lance's house). How the hell does he drive that back to the Wallace residence?
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.
The Liability Cert: 15 / 86 mins / Dir. Craig Viveiros
From an intriguing trailer comes a mixed bag of a film about a good-for-nothing layabout (Jack O'Connell's Adam) who gets mixed up with a hitman (Tim Roth's Roy), and unwittingly becomes his apprentice. The scene above is a perfect snapshot of the chemistry between O'Connell and Roth, and they make the film a pleasure to watch. That said, it's odd that O'Connell plays essentially the same persona as he did in Tower Block, and yet I couldn't stand that character. Ah, well.
While Peter Mullan puts in an effortlessly great turn as Adam's stepfather, the rest of the cast feel like they're capable of more but aren't getting the chance to have their turn. There's the core of a great thriller here, but it feels neglected as the relationship between Adam and Roy is carefully dissected. By the time it's all wrapped up, it's happened a little too quickly, leaving too many loose ends as the credits roll. As interesting and well-shot as it is (the grey skies of the North East of England set a beautiful muted tone for the film), it feels like a missed opportunity.
The film about a killer wanting to retire, and a hapless kid wanting to succeed him is a good one. The film about regret, revenge and human-trafficking is barely hinted at, and gets lost behind extended scenes of dark-humour.
Still, at least it's not Kill List.
It sums up the relationship between O'Connell and Roth's characters. So, yes.
Mostly.
I think so.
There's no rush, you can wait for this to be on the free channels.
No.
Probably.
No.
Is Peter Mullan as quietly-terrifying in real life as I imagine he is? Y'know, I think he'd be friendly and that, it's just that you wouldn't be able to relax when he was in the room.
Comments box. Let me know? Cheers.
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 'catch-up' review. I watched this film at home, not at the cinema. I saw the trailer for this at the cinema, and I would have seen the film there too, but they didn't/couldn't show it. So now iTunes, Amazon, Netflix and Blockbuster get to reap the rewards of my local's advance-advertising, and I'm sure they're delighted. Now you may say "oh come on, they can't show everything down there", and that would be a valid point if they didn't do things like running Taken 2 for six weeks. Was it that successful? No, I don't think so. Twilight? Batman? Les Mes? Sure, go for it; if they're pulling the punters in then keep making that money. But Taken 2? I ask you. Anyway, this is essentially a DVD review, but still of a new(ish) film. There. I'm glad that's sorted.
• 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.
