Change Your Image
Benkenobi510
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
The Hateful Eight (2015)
The Hateful Eight
I have to admit it, I have been a Tarantino sceptic in recent years. His bombastic style in the style of the exploitation cinema he obviously adores, is something I find irritating, especially when his more recent scripts contain hallmarks of his earlier screenplays, such as the opening to inglorious *ahem*. It gives me great pleasure to say that his latest offering is his best yet.
Tarantino is much more restrained here, giving us much more subtle dialogue and storytelling abilities. All of the characters from Kurt Russell's denim faced John Ruth to six horse Judy and every one In between, Tarantino has written every character as a fully formed human, for a change.
My reservations are few. Firstly, I thought there were some moments which went slightly overboard such as Kurt Russell vomiting everywhere and Jackson's diatribe to Smithers. I know the latter is supposed to be exaggerated in order to enrage the General and whether that event actually happened or not, but I thought It was slightly too gratuitous. Also, Channing Tatums cameo was a little confused. If he was down below the whole time, why didn't he act sooner when tensions were high? These are ultimately nitpicks because the tone of The Hateful Eight is spot on.
But most of all, I think this is a return to form for Tarantino. Kill Bill through to Django had characters being killed off, left right and centre and I didn't care for their demise, which isn't good. But in this, Literally every character's death made me either sad or uncomfortable in some way. In particular, the 'Charlie' character. He hides in the back when the others get killed by the gang. When Madsen's character (Joe Gage) finds him, his desperate pleas are strangely touching. The music and editing of that scene in particular are very well done.
A part of me thinks the improvement in quality is because of the infamous script leak. I've read that particular draft and it wasn't as good as the finished product. If it hadn't been leaked, would that have been the film that got made? Did the leak force Quentin to get more creative? It certainly makes me wonder. It makes me wonder 'I wish they leaked Kill Bill'.
Black Mass (2015)
Black Mass
There's no doubt that Johnny Depp's career has had several ups and downs. For every 'Edward Scissorhands' or 'Ed Wood', there's a 'The Tourist' or 'Mortdecai. 'Black Mass' falls somewhere between the two, Depp is fantastic but the film itself, drags.
Depp plays Whitey Bulger, a Boston gangster with a psychotic edge, who aligns himself with childhood friend and FBI agent, John Connolly, played by Joel Edgerton. It's almost a cliché to say that a performance is 'trans-formative' but it does apply to Depp in this film. Much like Steve Carrell in 'Foxcatcher', you look past the make up and see a truly nuanced performance that is surprisingly subtle at times, if not ludicrously OTT as well. Joel Edgerton's performance is likely to not get as much awards attention as Depp's, but he deserves to. One scene in particular which show's his range is where he has to bluff his way through a conversation with his boss about the FBI's involvement with Bulger. His demeanor goes from showboating jerk to sniveling loser in seconds. A man whose power only extends to a certain degree and no more.
The dark atmosphere and weather of South Boston gives the film a grey-ish tint to it. This reflects the dark subject matter as well as the spiraling mood of Bulger and the people he is connected to. However, it also gives the film a very boring 'look'. The cinematography is not particularly engaging nor beautiful either.
All of the criticisms are mostly nitpicks because the biggest issue with the film is that it is all too familiar. Shades of The Sopranos here (Family and home life juxtaposed with violence etc.), hints of Goodfellas there (Links with the FBI, "How am I funny") which gives the vibe of a boring college gangster slideshow and/or quiz of 'Guess the gangster film!'. For a casual viewer, it could be effective. But sometimes, it's a little too lazy on standard gangster film traits.
What elevates a crime film from ordinary to brilliant, is the layers and subtext attached to it. The Godfather is great because it juggles a man's blood thirsty ambitions with his family life. Heat is great because it examines the relationship between the cop and criminal. Black Mass features Johnny Depp kicking someone's head in, and that's about it. But boy does he do some good kicking!
Sicario (2015)
Sicario
Lord Pretentious himself, Peter Greenaway, has often spoken of how cinema has always declined in quality, especially in recent years. "Cinema is dead" etc. This is undoubtedly unfair, despite today's climate of saturation, because a fine example of cinema being well and truly alive in 2015 is this, Sicario.
Sicario follows a basic structure and one that is very familiar in Storyteller. A young whippersnapper in the FBI (Emily Blunt) is asked to join a group of under the radar operatives to get to the heart of the drug cartel in Mexico. The film has a very dark tone, presenting itself in a gritty, often horrific, crime thriller. Despite it's realism, it never resorts to hand held camera or shaky cam. The gun battles and set pieces are shot beautifully and with nail biting authenticity. Whether or not this kind of dubious stuff actually happens is irrelevant because first and foremost, the characters are believable and engaging. Josh Brolin and Emily Blunt are great but it's Benicio Del Toro who truly steals the show as a shady character who links are unknown. The film ultimately rests on his shoulders as his arc is the most complex and he pulls it off with ease.
The Director of Photography on this picture is Roger Deakins. At times, he makes the film look like a David Attenbourgh documentary with the plains of Arizona and Mexico and at other times, like a Michael Mann film. The way the cities show sparkle in both day and night are fantastically done.
Sicario is not an easy film to watch, some of the most simple actions are the most heart wrenching. Denis Villeneuve proves that by putting the characters in uncompromising situations, it will affect their lives forever and thus, the audience. Simplicity is the key to brilliance, after all.
The Martian (2015)
The Martian
Ridley Scott is one of the greatest directors of his generation, often elevating a bland script to something far better if it were in the hands of a lesser filmmaker. While this is Scott's best film since Kingdom of Heaven, it is severely flawed none-the-less.
The true highlight of the film is the visual aesthetic. Mars looks great and remarkably not like the Jordan desert, where it was filmed. But it's not the David Lean-esque look of mars which is the most impressive, it's the scenes down on earth which are more majestic. Any director can make Mars look cinematic, but the harder task is to make a group of people talking in a room look cinematic. And Scott succeeds at this immensely. Each scene is staged in a unique way, which is interesting to look at. You understand the relationships and thoughts of the characters simply by the way the camera is positioned.
The performances are also good. Regular comedy performers Kristen Wiig and Jeff Daniels give wonderfully restrained performances and Matt Damon grabs your attention simply by planting potatoes. No one truly stood out though as an attention grabber which is nice to see, but ultimately unrewarding and sometimes bland.
The screenplay is honestly dull. While there is a good amount of humour added, the majority of it is complex science jargon which is engaging to listen to and hard to understand or care for. The number one priority for a screenwriter is to humanize the characters. The science exposition gets in the way for that to happen so there aren't that many characters you can relate to. The film never truly gets deep with it's struggle to get Mark Watney back home, probably because it is painfully obvious that he will.
The Martian is not a bad film but sometimes you think it could have been better, had the screenplay been better. Despite that, it is refreshing to see a sci-fi film that doesn't have the mind-boggling pretentiousness of something like 'Interstellar'.
The Fountain (2006)
The Fountain
Darren Aronofsky is a director perhaps best known for his films which deal with a dark subject matter. Weather it be Drug addiction in 'Requiem for a dream' or the impossible pursuit for perfection in 'Black Swan', he doesn't shy away from tackling these subject matters head on, in a gritty, yet visually stunning way. It is a shame to say that when he deals with various themes of 'Loosing a loved one', 'Spiritualism' and 'The desire of ever lasting life', is done in the most frothy and pretentious way possible.
It's not that the film isn't gorgeous to look at, which it is. The visuals were mostly done through man-made techniques, which in a world of constant CGI, is nice to see. Tom, the space traveller's sphere and the tree of life, is a wonder to behold. But ultimately, this does not amount to much if, the characters are as flat as Thales' belief of the shape of the earth.
Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weisz, two actors who are generally fine, have zero chemistry. Ultimately, the beautiful visuals are futile if the characters aren't believable, which they are not. Because then there isn't an emotional backbone to the narrative. The overuse of Taoist, Hindu and Jewish symbolism is a bit too much. Why have multiple sources for the imagery? Is it to say that life is full of all these faiths and it represents life? I don't know and frankly don't care, which is the main problem.
When somebody explains a different viewpoint of a film and makes you think about it in a different way, it can improve the experience. Several people have given their two cents worth of this film to me, and my reaction remains unchanged. Meh. So we all die in the end? Wow, I never knew that. Next, you'll be telling me the sky is blue. Simply because a film is loaded with hidden messages and symbols, doesn't make it any more deep than one which shows it in an obvious way.
Melody Time (1948)
Melody Time
When you think of classic Disney films, this is perhaps one that does not come to mind. Melody Time is essentially a series of shorts put together to make up a narrative feature. As you might expect, it is a hit and miss show. It's not that it's bad per-se, it's just that when the company that made this, also made Fantasia, Beauty and the Beast and Pinocchio, you can see why it doesn't hold up.
As usual, the animation is superb. Animation wise, there is nothing to fault. At times, it feels like visual poetry. But sometimes, the content falls short of what could be an interesting film. The good includes 'The Legend of Johnny Appleseed', a gorgeous look at one of America's first pioneers, and 'Pecos Bill', a country and western jamboree about an impossibly adventurous cowboy. Both of these segments remind us that Disney is at their shorts best, when they are focused on folkloric tales. See Icabod and Mr Toad for further proof.
However, it's not all fun and games. One segment, 'Little Toot' was so abysmal that it made me yearning for the blandness of the kids TV show, 'Tugs'. And 'Blame it on the Samba', featuring the most irritating Disney character ever committed to celluloid, The Aracuan Bird. There also seems to be this constant idea in the segment which says that the Samba music is impossible not to dance to. I know a lot has changed since 1948, but did I miss a meeting where it was agreed that this music was supposed to be intoxicating? The other segments full under the radar. 'Trees' in particular felt only about 1 minute long, which is a shame because the animation in the that is the best of the film.
The original title of Melody Time was 'All is Fun'. After seeing the film, you can see why they changed the title. But it doesn't mean there is no fun to be had along the way.