marcus-blakelock's Reviews

Legend (I) (2015)

7/10

18 September 2015

I'll kick this off by saying that when I walked into the cinema it was to see two things:

The gimmick of Tom Hardy playing two separate characters

A new gangster/mob movie to add to the many great epics (Godfather, Good fellas etcetera)

And honestly this movie is in no way shape or form terrible, but with that criteria in mind it let me down a little.

Having said that I'll start with the positives:

HARDY HARDY HARDY! His portrayal of Reg Kray is a good performance but the humour and darkness that comes with playing Ronnie is what elevates this movie from every tragic plot ever to a solid romp.

Supporting cast - David Thewlis is great, Taron Edgerton is unrecognisable from Kings man and Paul Bettany may only be in 2 scenes but those scenes were probably, aside from Hardy's, the best in the film.

Now for the downsides:

This film is a third gangster film, and two thirds romance. You know how in Good fellas they kept the distinction between Henry and Karen a separate but pivotal plot point to everything else that went on? In this one the relationship is the main focal point. And it isn't even that the chemistry is bad, it's just that it's very repetitive - they're fighting, they've made up, they're fighting again - when in reality I just wanted more Ronnie Kray scenes.

There is no centrepiece to the film. There are a few decent scenes but nothing which screams iconic.

Christopher Eccleston, in my opinion, has been underutilised again! It happened in Thor the dark world, and it happened in this - the dude is a great actor and he was cast as "Evil antagonist with small back story" in Thor," and "Generic policeman wanting to get his man" in this.

In the end ladies and gents if you just want to be entertained for 2 hours with some solid acting give this film your attention purely for Hardy's performance. If you want to spend your money on the new big gangster movie, save your cash for when it comes out on DVD or TV.

6 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Guardians of the Galaxy (2014)

9/10

I was smiling almost all the way through

31 July 2014

Expectations: surpassed - and they were pretty damn high to begin with.

Excitement: met - after watching the teasers, the clips, and after Captain America the Winter soldier I was crossing my fingers Marvel were on a roll.

Face: still trying to recover - you know when you go to the cinema to see a comedy ( a film designed to make you laugh ) and you feel like an idiot for paying for the ticket as you were forcing most of the laughter in the company of your friends? This is a film that it's genuinely easy to laugh about:

The humour is so subtle because the characters are so subtle - they're not too animated, they're not too stereotypical and they are NOT what we've come to expect from traditional superheroes and THAT'S WHY THIS FILM WORKS SO WELL! Regardless if you're a Marvel fan or simply a fan of movies in general this is an experience you will welcome as it's new and refreshing to a sci-fi genre which really needed something new and refreshing and with great performances, stunning visuals and a barrel of laughs mixed with the right amount of action this was a real treat to watch.

Thank you Marvel Studios.

361 out of 565 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Captain Phillips (2013)

8/10

Pretty Damn Good

10 October 2013

It's fair to say that the movies which have been walking away with Box Office numbers this year have been either big superhero movies or big sci-fi movies. If you're wondering whether or not you should go and see this film because it looks like something a little different DO IT! This is a film, regardless if you already know the story, which delivers excellent acting, excellent moments of tension and excellent use of emotion which ,when you leave the theatre, won't be difficult to feel at all. Now if you're still considering whether or not you should go and see this film, let's address the rumours you might have already heard: 1.There's been a lot of talk about Tom Hanks potentially claiming another Oscar - yes he simply HAS to be up for contention after this. True in the first half of the film he doesn't necessarily have to be all out emotional, but he does enough so that when we reach the second half and ultimately the final act, we are in as much shock and awe as the character of Richard Phillips through watching his performance. 2. A few people have said "too much Tom Hanks." There's two sides to this: Obviously he's going to be in the story a lot because he is the star BUT he doesn't give the only good performance here; the Somali pirates are truly terrifying, not just because of what they are but because their characters have a lot of uncertainty making them very unpredictable. 3. Some people are saying it's overrated and we've seen it all before. I'm not claiming its the greatest movie ever made, but what I am saying is its definitely worth a look. So if you're worried about wasting some cash don't be, it's definitely a film you won't regret paying for.

195 out of 256 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)

7/10

Whatever I was expecting it wasn't this!

25 May 2013

Oh my goodness I'm actually in shock. JJ Abrams has created not a just a Star Trek film but a true standalone film as well. I should probably add that his description is coming from a STAR WARS fan and so yes this may well be illegal but I actually enjoyed this film a lot! The first movie was entertaining and all, but it fell slightly short with regard to the action and the story and so we all came away from it saying "great" but not remembering it. This film still managed to retain the original highlights of the first which we all loved - the acting, the humour and the special effects but added a real feeling o heart to the proceedings which cam from a number of factors:

Firstly the acting: Chris Pine was good in the first one but I felt he was trying a little too hard to go from zero-hero. In this one it's easy to identify he's found his character, it feels a lot more relatable and emotional. Zachary Quinto, delivered an awesome performance - which even draws a tear from some at one scene which I won't spoil for the benefit of any who haven't seen the film. Everyone upped their game but none more so than Simon Pegg - who's definitely taken the time to refine his Scottish accent but also his character as Scotty has a more predominant role in this story. But the stand out performance HAS to go to Mr Benedict Cumberbatch: he created a performance in which the audience could, in a way, feel sorry for him at one point - yet still manages but to be incredibly menacing with a villain who people want to see take on Kirk and Spock.

The action is on a much larger scale with the battles in space but also on the ground - it's fair to say that the final fight in particular is reminiscent of the scene in attack of the clones when Anakin jumps between speeders, but it a lot more effective as we as the audience feel a lot more involved with that fight due to the raw emotion from the actors and the brilliant fight choreography.

The script has been written so much better, so there are a lot less cheesy lines and a lot more decent ones.

The only reason as to why this movie got a 9 out of 10 is because for me some characters were lost in terms of why they were there in this movie - Zoe Saldana is a great actress yet, as in the case of the first one, I simply didn't understand why she was there. The same can be said of Karl Urban's McCoy - a character who I'd previously liked in the first one but who struggles to shine in this one other than perhaps the last few scenes.

Overall however even if you're no Trekkie - GO AND SEE THIS FILM, it's definitely worth it! And if this is a preview of things to come regarding Star Wars I can say we're in for a treat from Mr Abrams!

3 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Iron Man Three (2013)

7/10

The truth about Iron man 3 (which hasn't been overcomplicated by comic fans)

6 May 2013

Warning: Spoilers

Right then, let me make one thing clear for people who haven't seen the film first - this is a good film. Fair enough there are a few plot holes but to people saying it's the worst marvel movie ever (which has been based mainly on the mandarin) let's list some crap films:

1. Spiderman 3

2. X-men the last stand

3. Fantastic four rise of the silver surfer

If you can honestly say Iron man 3 is even close to how bad these three were you're very wrong. To those who haven't seen the film here's what's in store for you:

The Good:

RDJ awesome as ever - but more importantly with better character development which makes you believe heroes aren't always able to cope with all their inner demons. Next; a story which strips down the armour and investigates what really makes Tony Stark. Great action sequences proving you don't need the avengers to bring out the best in Stark's technological abilities.

The Bad:

I think they probably could've used war machine more.

There's no real explanation as to what the bad guy's power actually is.

The ending leaves a lot of questions which didn't necessarily have to be introduced.

And (don't worry I'm getting onto the Mandarin) Guy Pearce is a great actor; however he delivers a performance which is kind of a bit too evil which leaves no real room for character development.

OK then: The Mandarin - don't read any further for spoilers.

I agree they could've used and actor which the calibre of Ben Kingsley a bit better rather than making him out to be a sham. I agree that the extremis was a bit strange in terms of how it affected ironman's suits (could argue it's a totally different suit which is the reason why its so badly affected) BUT: you can't base the entire movie on the technicality that A. Killian and the mandarin are 2 different people and B. The iron patriot was Norman Osborn.

This is a film ADAPTATION. It doesn't have to be word perfect to it's origins. Take a look at game of thrones - best, most talked about show at the moment which isn't afraid to bend the material ever so slightly to produce a good product.

This was an iron man movie, an iron man movie which was SOOOO MUCH BETTER THAN IRON MAN 2!

Good Action. Good story. Good hero, with the promise he'll be coming back as well.

I don't regret buying my ticket at all.

1 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Oblivion (I) (2013)

3/10

Oh dear Mr Cruise...

15 April 2013

Warning: Spoilers

So let me start of by saying Tom Cruise, Morgan Freeman and Nikolaj Coaster-Waldau are all actors I love seeing on screen. So when I look back on this movie I genuinely cannot tell as to why these three agreed to sign up to this pile of crap.

If you haven't seen this film yet and don't really know if you should or not - I'm going to make it easy for you: DON'T, like really don't - because afterwards in the car home you will be picking plot holes out with ease. The only people I'd recommend it to are die hard fans of Tom Cruise, and by that I mean REAL DIE HARD FANS because you're gonna need a bit more than loyalty to stomach the cheesy lines, obvious script and really bad flaws in this film. I wouldn't even say go see it if you're a fan of Morgan Freeman considering in this "masterpiece" he's in it for about 15 minutes. IF YOU DON'T WANT ANY SPOILERS DON'T READ FROM THIS POINT ONWARDS: So everyone let me draw your attention to the holes in this story:

1. Perhaps the biggest hole I've see in a pretty long time; The whole story revolves around this recording which has been beamed down to Earth and contains the original message of Tom Cruise's last mission into space... again let me say this part in particular "HAS BEEN BEAMED DOWN TO EARTH." So would anyone like to tell me why, when Tom listens to the recording, can he still hear himself and his co-pilot within the ship AFTER its been beamed to Earth... oh dear.

2. Futuristic robots are chasing Tom, and are being held back by extremely powerful lasers - which seemingly have no effect whatsoever, yet when Tom fires one bullet from his pistol it dies.

3. Tom and his co-pilot are living life in their futuristic house, swimming in their pool which can see underneath their futuristic house - yet NEVER do they think "hmmm we've lived here for 5 years and have never checked the basement, maybe there's something down there?"

4. Why can intelligent machines from the future pick up respiratory patters to tell if someone is lying, and detect all types of organisms, yet cannot distinguish between a man and a woman? Also they have incredible scanners which can up anything small and vaporise it - yet when hiding behind a waterfall these scanners apparently don't work anymore.

5. These bad robots, who also pretty much dominate the planet and can see everything from drones and from space, forbid any type of plant surviving - yet they cant see a massive expanse of rain forest plonked right in the middle of the planet?

6. Oh and apparently advanced robots can now be repaired with chewing gum.

To be honest those 6 are enough to say this movie was bad but there are also countless more which I can't even be bothered to talk about (E.G. how long does it take for a woman to die after she has been shot in the stomach, and is losing a lot of blood? Because now it seems like the amount of time it would take to start a spaceship, fly it a few hundred miles, grab some medical equipment, have a fight with a clone of yourself and then fly it back.

I gave this 3 out of 10 because of the 3 things which earned it: OK special effects, Morgan Freeman's voice and the "scav" helmets which made me laugh quite a lot in the cinema, even though they weren't supposed to.

14 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

marcus-blakelock

Reviews

Tell Your Friends

Recently Viewed