Do Trailers Ruin Movies?

Over the last few months, I have been actively avoiding any movie trailers or clips for the upcoming Star Wars: The Last Jedi, in an attempt to avoid spoilers. I won’t be seeing it until Christmas Eve, per family tradition, so I try to avoid as much info as possible until I finally get to view it on the big screen. That all blew out the window when I went to see Thor: Ragnarok and it was too inconvenient for me to leave the theater when a Star Wars trailer began, so I just sucked it up and allowed myself to be dazzled.

Though the trailer hinted at some things, made some allusions, and showed what are sure to be key moments, it didn’t reveal anything groundbreaking or show anything too spoilerific. It created intrigue without making anything too obvious, and made me all the more excited to see the film later this month. That is what a trailer should do; it should generate interest and lure audiences without blowing all the important info or all the humor in a 2 minute teaser. You shouldn’t be able to guess the entire plot of a film from a trailer, unless it’s a series you are already familiar with or you’ve read the book an upcoming movie is based on.

On the other hand, I recently saw the first trailer for the upcoming Downsizing, starring Matt Damon, and was instantly compelled to see it. The trailer presented a unique and interesting plot, showed some humor, and offered images and clips that made me wonder how characters got into a certain situation or what would happen next. And then the second trailer came along tacked onto Murder on the Orient Express, and it totally gives away what I perceived to be a pretty major plot point, which was not presented in the initial trailer. It dampened my enthusiasm a bit, as it allowed more pieces of the plot to fall into place, and chased away some of the allure. I’ll still see it when it comes out, but I was bummed to have something spoiled in the trailer that I wish I could have seen for the first time during the film itself. The same thing happened with the second Spider-Man: Homecoming trailer. Watching it, I felt like I could predict the entire movie, and I ended up being pretty close, though, thankfully, it was still a great film and I was not disappointed. Films can often fall into the trap of having too many trailers, as well, and I hold the belief that a film only needs 2 trailers max, and 1 will typically suffice. If I’m not drawn in by the first trailer, I probably won’t be swayed by another.

Trailers can be deceptive, as well – they can show a snapshot that is nothing like the completed picture, and effectively “trick” viewers, for the better or the worse. Trailers for Zack Snyder’s films are some of the best out there – I can still imagine just about every frame of the brilliant Watchmen trailer in my head, almost a decade later – but his films tend to have a polarizing reaction. Regardless, the trailers make you want to see his movies. 2012’s Brave offered a trailer that made the movie seem like it would follow a certain narrative, but it went off in a direction that my best friend and I totally didn’t see coming, and it was a pleasant surprise.

Trailers also make me not want to see movies, sometimes. I’m a big fan of the original Jumanji, and was skeptical of the remake/sequel, but when I saw the first trailer, I was tentatively hooked. There were some decent jokes and it looked like, if not a direct successor, a spiritual successor to the original. Since the first time I saw the trailer, I have  now seen it 5 or 6 times, and the second trailer 3 times. I’m kind of burned out on it, at this point, and I can probably quote the entire thing. “I’m an overweight middle-aged man!” “We’re in other people’s bodies!” “I’m missing the top two feet of my body!” Again, if the reviews are okay, I’ll probably still make the effort to see it, but I’m now worried that the funniest moments are all in the trailer, as is often the case. I’ve got The Greatest Showman, TLJ, and a few others to see before it, and it I must suffer through the trailer again, I might shelve my Jumanji plans until it’s available for streaming. Oversaturation can, unintentionally, kill the interest in a movie instead of building it up. I felt the same about last year’s lackluster Warcraft film. I saw the trailer every time I saw an IMAX film for months, and all it did was make me not want to see the movie. I actually did leave a theater after the Warcraft trailer began for what must have been the 10th time, and that remains the only time I have ever left a theater during the previews. I LOVE previews, but I hated that trailer, though Transformers: The Last Knight sure gave it a run for its money this past year. If I so much as see an Autobot onscreen, it is an insta-groan.

So that creates a question; do trailers ruin movies? After all, the big wigs behind a film’s production have no idea how many times you are going to be forced to see a trailer. They just want to put butts in seats. But they do have control over how much info goes into a trailer, and it’s a fine line; give too much away and risk scaring people off, or don’t offer up enough and fail to hook viewers. Avoid trailers, and you might fall behind on what movies are coming out, unless you monitor them religiously (as I do). I may love previews, and eagerly anticipate trailers for films and film series that I’m a fan of, but nothing ruins a movie for me like a trailer rife with spoilers.

 

~~~~~

If you’re in need of a new read, check out my YA novel, I’m With You! The ebook is only $1.99 or (£1.55) and paperback is $9.99 (£7.99) on Amazon Amazon UK.  Paperback is also $9.99 on BN.com.

Advertisements

Film Review: Justice League (2017)

Dir. Zack Snyder / Joss Whedon (uncredited)
Starring: Ben Affleck, Gal Gadot, Ezra Miller, Ray Fisher, Jason Momoa, Henry Cavill, Diane Lane, Amy Adams, Jeremy Irons, J.K. Simmons, and Ciaran Hinds.
Rating: PG-13
Runtime: 2hr
Spoiler level: MAJOR.

***I AM NOT HOLDING BACK, THIS ENTIRE REVIEW WILL CONTAIN SPOILERS. SO HERE IS YOUR WARNING; MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD!***

This review will be a bit more rant-y and personal opinion based, so the thoughts expressed might contain some bias.

MV5BYWVhZjZkYTItOGIwYS00NmRkLWJlYjctMWM0ZjFmMDU4ZjEzXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMTMxODk2OTU@._V1_UX182_CR0,0,182,268_AL_Coming on the heels of 2016’s Batman V Superman and Superman’s demise, Justice League follows Batman (Affleck) and Wonder Woman (Gadot) as they attempt to recruit new heroes and “unite the league” against the threat of Steppenwolf and his parademons. Though they attempt to convince Aquaman (Momoa), The Flash (Miller), and Cyborg (Fisher) to go all in and save the world, simply coming together might not be enough to prevent the doom of the planet.

As a big JL and general DC fan, I’ll start with what I liked, then go into a bit more detail. I will say, though, that I did enjoy the film, and I think it is a better film than the RT score would indicate. No matter what the reviews say, it is worth seeing, especially because the divisive reception makes it all the more important for people/fans to forge their own opinions about it before taking someone else’s interpretation as law.

*Ezra Miller’s version of Barry Allen / The Flash. He injected some much-needed comedy and I enjoyed his running scenes.
*The new cast-members are all great, as are the returning cast.
*The humor in general was a VAST improvement over previous films. Aquaman sitting on Wonder Woman’s lasso was especially hilarious.
* Seeing the team together, onscreen, and with such an amazing cast, is a big thrill, and they have a great team vibe.
*Hearkening back to the “Lois is the key!” Flash scene from BVS. I’m pretty sure that’s what was implied, anyway.
* Green Lantern Corps Easter Egg!
*Themiscyra.
*Both post-credits scenes. I am sooooo ready for Deathstroke.

I think it is important for me to admit that Zack Snyder is one of my favorite directors due to his incredible vision, his great passion for his projects, and the fact that he always seems to want to do justice to the material he is adapting while also inserting his own ideas. His visual style is absolutely stunning, he knows how to frame a shot, and I always enjoy the color choices for his films. Though he does over-rely on slo-mo, his style is incredibly distinct, so it’s also clear (to me, at least) that both Whedon and Snyder had a hand in the final result of this film, and the contrast in style led to a disjointed tone throughout. The scenes between the two directorial styles weren’t seamless, and if two folks are going to be behind the camera, it shouldn’t feel like there are differing visions grappling for screen time. That said, I completely understand and support Snyder’s decision to leave the project, and I have nothing but respect for him for doing so, but it does make me wonder what a total Snyder film would have looked like. I think, watching the finished project, that it’s pretty obvious that there were issues during post-production and after the re-shoots. The CGI is just one example –  I’m usually pretty forgiving, but it’s jarring in some scenes.

Fortunately, Whedon inserted some much-needed humor into the film, which helped lift the grim tone of its predecessors and present more lighthearted, enjoyable moments into what has been a fairly bleak series thus far. Humor, and coherency, are the two things the DCEU films seem to be lacking the most (with the exception of WW) and while JL picks up some laughs, the plot is still thin. Also, the dialogue in general comes off as so clunky to me a lot of the time; I had the same issue with BVS. A lot of “comic-booky” dialogue does not sound good when voiced aloud, even though it is passable in speech bubbles on a page. Some of the one-liners in this film are a total “cheese-fest” and made me think, “Oh…. no.”

I’ll also admit, as blasphemous as it is, that I am one of the folks who prefers Snyder/Cavill’s portrayal of Superman. I like the dark tone, the disconnect/conflict with humanity, and the fact that he doesn’t always pull punches. I enjoyed Man of Steel quite a lot (except the final fight with Zod was WAY too long) though I wish he’d had more screen time in BVS. But in JL, the only Superman scene that stood out to me was after his reawakening, when he forgot who he was and attacked the JL members. That was excellent. But the CGI mouth was atrocious, and it was present in nearly all of his scenes, which means that most, if not all, of his spoken scenes were from re-shoots. Most of his dialogue (especially in the field with Lois) was cringey and uninspired, and very different from his previous appearances. I did like him coming in to save the day at the end, as predicable as it was, and enjoyed his new rapport with The Flash, but could have done without the “I’m a big fan of justice” bit. It’s like Superman came back to life with a sudden 180-turn in sense of humor and demeanor, and although he might be more like how Superman is “supposed to be,” he doesn’t feel like the version from this universe, and the change is too abrupt. I’m okay with the changes in general, and I look forward to future Superman appearances to see where his character goes, but I think it comes off as a total upheaval instead of a gradual shift. Then again, he probably should have had another solo film before all of this, to allow his personality to develop more, and shoving his resurrection into a 2 hour movie made it feel rushed and lacking in emotional depth.

This is also one of few Snyder films that I think would have benefited majorly from about 20 extra minutes, at least. Back when BVS came out and viewers got their first glimpse of Wonder Woman, her brief appearance did an excellent job of setting up and building interest in her solo film, which went on to be both a critical and commercial success. Unfortunately, JL introduces three new characters, and that feeling of “gosh, I can’t wait to see more of *character*!” is also colored with a feeling of “I wish we’d seen more of ‘so-and-so’ before this.” While I’m excited for Aquaman next year, and am doubly excited for a Flash solo outing after Miller’s stellar portrayal, I think Cyborg’s development suffered from being crammed into a movie with 2 other newbies. Ray Fisher was great as Victor, but trying to shove three new characters with elaborate backstories into a 2 hour film does not work and did Cyborg no favors. Aquaman also suffered a bit – the Atlantis reveal is kind of underwhelming, and Aquaman has few opportunities to really show off his water-based skills. Ultimately, it leaves more unanswered questions and rushed exposition instead of creating intrigue, which is a shame because although the glimpses we got of these new additions were good, they were not fulfilling. I almost wish we’d gotten at least a couple more of the solo movies out before this, so the exposition and setup could have been trimmed down for this film, as audiences would already be more familiar with these characters. The only character who really didn’t need a solo film prior to JL is Batman, and I think Affleck has performed the role extremely well thus far. Apparently the strict time restriction is due to studio interference, and this time around, I genuinely believe it was a misstep. However, a 2-hour runtime would have likely worked had we been introduced to all (or most) of the major players before this film. Also, some big names (J.K. Simmons as Commissioner Gordon, Amy Adams as Lois Lane, Diane Lane as Martha Kent, Jeremy Irons as Alfred) are given virtually NOTHING to do but be around for a couple of scenes, and it’s a damn shame. In trying to do too much on restricted time, the film ended up doing too little.

Though I’ve seen a lot of criticism levied at the villain, I didn’t mind Steppenwolf that much. Critics and reviews made him out to be the worst CBM villain of all time, and he certainly wasn’t great, but I’d rank him above a few of Marvel’s more forgettable villains. Justin Hammer, anyone? Malekith? Ultron? CGI dodginess aside, Steppenwolf, his massive hammer/axe, and his dramatic monologues were par for the course, and no worse than the underdeveloped baddies from other films. However, I do love Ciaran Hinds, so maybe that’s my bias speaking.

In additional terms of directing, I’m not sure who we have to thank for the upskirt shots of Wonder Woman (I have my theories), but they were about 10000% unnecessary, considering her outfit is plenty short already. An absolute disservice to the character and her solo film. On the other hand, I don’t think the Amazon midriff outfits were nearly as bad as social media made them out to be, though the way they were shot was pretty pervy. Several had armor similar to their attire in WW, though the more revealing versions are definitely deserving of some side-eye. You could play devil’s advocate and say that Momoa as Aquaman fought Steppenwolf shirtless, which is equally as impractical. I, for one, was certainly looking forward to shirtless Momoa, and was not disappointed.

Unfortunately, the first phase of the rushed DCEU has tried too hard to keep up with Marvel instead of establishing itself as it’s own universe and has fallen short of the finish line. Though I enjoyed several moments of Justice League, the disappointing aspects ultimately left this viewer with a longing for “what could have been,” though a flicker of optimism remains for the future of the franchise. If you want these films to succeed, go and give JL a shot in theaters – it has a lot of box office ground to make up. I do have faith that the DCEU can turn it around, and I’m still “all in” if it means we get to see these compelling heroes onscreen for future movies. I just hope that the ensuing installments can do these characters and their evolving personalities the justice they deserve with more well-developed plots and compelling narratives.

 

Overall Rating: 7/10

Five Memorable Film-Going Experiences

Sometimes, it’s not the film itself that makes a film-going experience memorable… sometimes, it’s the circumstances surrounding it. And I’ve had a handful of these experiences during my years as a film “buff”…

1.) Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows pt. 2 (2011)
I made it to the front page of the paper for this one, so it’s probably going to be on the most memorable list for a while. My group of friends and I had to line up for this one four hours ahead of time, since this was before the launch of the assigned seating era. One friend dressed as Bellatrix, my best friend made Potter Puppet Pals masks for us to wear, I wore my “Particularly Good Finder” homemade shirt (Hufflepuffs represent!) and we re-enacted the “Mysterious Ticking Noise” while waiting behind the stantions. Needless to say, we were the most spirited and entertaining group in line, which is why a reporter took our picture to platdter on the front page the following day. This film was the end of an era for Potterheads everywhere, and even though I had to be at work at 7AM the morning after, I wouldn’t have changed a moment of that night.

2.) Percy Jackson and the Olympians: The Sea of Monsters (2013)
I did not like this film (though I loved the books) but had a rip-snorting good time watching this movie because my best friend and I were completely alone in the theater, so we were free to be as obnoxious as we wanted and we took total advantage of it. We loudly called out the inaccuracies, speculated on the plot changes, and made jokes throughout the entire thing, so even though the film wasn’t  quite up to snuff, it was a great and memorable film-going experience for the sheer enjoy-ability of it all.

3.) The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
TDKR was the final movie I saw as a midnight premiere, before my local theater started doing showings earlier on the night before a film’s release. The Dark Knight actually sparked my love for film, and I was eager to see a conclusion to the Bale/Nolan trilogy. The theater was mobbed, because this was also in the days before assigned seating so you couldn’t roll up to the show five minutes ahead of time and get a primo spot, plus this was the first and only time I ever had to park in the upper parking lot of the theater. Anticipation was thick in the air as folks lined up and waited outside the individual theaters, and I remember getting into my seat in between my mom and my best friend and tapping my foot on the floor, waiting for the film to start. This experience was most memorable because it gave a definitive ending to the film series that sparked my love and appreciation for film. Aaaand I sobbed like an infant at the end.

4.) Iron Man (2008)
Way back before the MCU was as huge as it is now, I had absolutely 0% interest in seeing Iron Man. My dad and I eventually struck a deal; he would go and see The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian with me, if I would go to see Iron Man with him. And the arrangement worked out quite well for both of us! My dad actually enjoyed Prince Caspian, with it’s chatty badgers, triumphant music, and rightful heirs ascending the throne, and I fell in love with superheroes and garnered an appreciation for the then-fledgling MCU, which continues to this day. I remember sitting in that theater, watching RDJ sell the role of Tony Stark like he was born to play it, and being absolutely blown away. There hasn’t been a Narnia movie since 2010, but 10 years later, my dad and I still see almost every Marvel movie together, and I have a 2008 bargain to thank for that.

5.) Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) (2014)
I wish I could say this experience was memorable for a good reason, but actually, this post is ending on a sour note. After studying film in college and expanding my cinematic horizons, my mom and I made the trek across town to see Birdman after we heard a bit of Oscar buzz about it. In total, when the film began, there were five people in the theater… by the end, there were three. And I’m pretty certain only two of us were awake. I totally get why folks didn’t like this film, and I love “average joe” films just as much as the next film-goer, but it’s still a huge bummer when more “artsy” films don’t get recognized by general audiences. In Birdman, the cinematography was gorgeous (I mean, that tracking shot in the beginning is a stunner) and the acting was phenomenal, yet still, two folks walked out midway through. And the film won Best Picture.

Film Review: Thor: Ragnarok (2017)

Dir. Taika Waititi
Starring: Chris Hemsworth, Jeff Goldblum, Tom Hiddleston, Cate Blanchett, Tessa Thompson, Mark Ruffalo, Anthony Hopkins, Karl Urban, and Idris Elba
Rating: PG-13
Runtime: 2hr10m
Spoiler level: Light, some mention of plot points but no end spoilers.

Of all the MCU major Avenger film trilogies, I have generally considered the Thor films to be the weakest, so I went into the third installment, Thor: Ragnarok, with tempered expectations. Two hours later, I came out of the theater with sore cheeks from laughing so hard and my expectations thoroughly blown away, as if by the sheer force of Hela’s wrath, Hulk’s incredible smash, or Thor’s lightning prowess.

MV5BMjMyNDkzMzI1OF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwODcxODg5MjI@._V1_UY1200_CR90,0,630,1200_AL_.jpgThor: Ragnarok follows the titular hero (Hemsworth) as he strives to free Asgard from the chaotic rule of his previously exiled elder sister, Hela, Goddess of Death (Blanchett). In an effort to prevent Ragnarok, Thor must endure capture by an outcast Valkyrie (Thompson), forced combat with the Hulk (Ruffalo), continuing sibling strife with adopted brother Loki (Hiddleston), and the loss of his beloved Mjolnir.

I’ve always thought that, when in the presence of the other Avengers, Thor’s character tends to get overshadowed, but Hemsworth nailed it in his third solo outing and has officially proven that Thor can hold his own against the likes of Iron Man and Captain America. He rocked the heroic moments and his humor was on point – Thor’s otherwordly humor has always been a highlight of his character, and it’s dialed up to ten for this film with hilarious results. The “Get help” bit had me laughing so hard I was afraid the woman behind me was going to ask me to get a grip. Hemsworth’s chemistry with Hiddleston as Loki is also stellar, and Hiddleston continues to ooze both charm and deception in what is likely his last outing as the semi-sympathetic villain, and stands as possibly the most well-developed menace of the entire MCU. Blanchett is delightful as the near-unstoppable Hela, and shows what might have happened had Galadriel become a queen as great and terrible as the dawn. Ruffalo returns as Bruce Banner/the Hulk, and his rapport with Hemsworth is a highlight along with Hulk’s overall development, as he now carries conversations and doesn’t devolve into smash mode on a constant basis. The introduction of Valkyrie is a pleasant one, as her complex history and abilities as a fighter prove her to be an excellent ally for the Asgardian hero. Hopkins also briefly returns as Odin, and though his appearance is short, it makes an impression. Idris Elba as Heimdall and Karl Urban as Hela’s conflicted henchman Skurge are both great in supporting roles. And how could I leave out Jeff Goldbum, as Grandmaster? All I can say is… he’s Jeff Goldblum. And it’s fantastic.

The cameos are enjoyable, with a peek at one of 2016’s breakout heroes Doctor Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch) and three surprise cameos (I won’t spoil them) during an early scene on Asgard. It’s a “Is that really __________?” moment, thrice over, and done very well. Sad we didn’t get to see Sif this time around, but honestly, the film is enjoyable enough that I didn’t even feel her absence, and I didn’t feel the loss of Jane Foster one bit (I do love Natalie Portman though, for the record, and Jamie Alexander as well). I didn’t even miss Thor’s hair! Additionally, the music is great, the colors are fun and bright, which creates a much more visually-pleasing aesthetic than some of the previous films, which have a darker, more serious atmosphere.

The strength of this film is easily the humor and more lighthearted nature, as the film-makers perhaps looked to the success of Guardians of the Galaxy for what tone and direction to take, and it certainly pays off. I laughed out loud several times, and just started giggling again thinking of a particular joke. Though, that’s not to say that the action doesn’t deliver, because it does; the battles are all vivid and engrossing and none of the action sequences feel dragged out or too long. The overall pacing is done well, and though it seems as though the plot starts to meander a bit in the middle, the jokes and the character interactions keep it from feeling drawn out, and the final battle does not feel rushed and crammed into the end. The narrative is balanced between action with dire consequences, focus on the lead character and his inner conflict, and all of the external conflicts going on at the same time, with Hela’s wrath being unleashed upon Asgard, the Grandmaster’s gladiatorial games, and Thor’s efforts to wrangle a new team to assist him with saving the realm(s). With so many players on the field and such a stacked cast, it would be so easy for this film to devolve into a muddles mess with several personalities vying for screen time, but each plot point gets a decent amount of attention and no character feels like they got left to the wayside. And, though it might just be my inability to pay attention to detail, I didn’t really predict how the final conflict was going to play out, and there were enough surprises throughout the film to keep me on the edge of my seat.

After the lackluster Thor: The Dark World, I wasn’t looking forward to Ragnarok as much I was some of the other MCU installments, but the third Thor outing definitely stands as one of the best, might be a top contender for the funniest, and has made me even more excited to see our favorite golden-haired Asgardian prince in action during Infinity War next year.

Overall Rating: 9/10

Five “Anytime” Films

Everyone has at least one “anytime” movie – a movie that, while scrolling through the channels on a rainy Saturday, you can tune into no matter how many times you have seen it, and still enjoy it. And here are a handful of my favorite “anytime” movies!

1.) Jumanji (1995)
Whenever this film comes into conversation, my first comment is always, “I f*cking LOVE Jumanji.” Unless there are children around, of course. Then I just say, “I LOVE Jumanji.” And it’s true – the film about a jungle-themed board-game come to life to terrorize a small New England town is one of my all-time faves, and also one of my most personally-treasured Robin Williams performances. Sure, the effects are super dated by today’s standards which causes a bit of a kink in the immersion factor, but I adore the story and the characters/performances so much that I watch it any time it’s on TV. The trailer for the sequel/remake coming out next month actually made me laugh, so I might end up seeing it, but I don’t think it will ever triumph over the original. And though I’ve seen it several times, I never put together that Jonathan Hyde plays both Van Pelt (the hunter) and the dad until very recently.

2.) The Princess Diaries (2001)
I saw this movie in theaters when it first came out and instantly fell in love with it. Though I love nearly all of her performances, I think Mia Thermopolis will always be my favorite Anne Hathaway role, as she was just so convincing and relatable as the awkward girl turned unexpected princess. I think I’ve seen this movie well over a dozen times and I still enjoy it 100% each viewing. The Hathaway/Andrews chemistry is unreal and my favorite scene is toward the end, when grandmother and granddaughter enter the ballroom together. I also have this film to thank for introducing me to Meg Cabot, one of my all-time favorite authors!

3.) Remember the Titans (2000)
I first saw this film in school (junior high, I think, though I can’t for the life of me remember what class) and it resonated with me in a way I didn’t expect. I even went out and bought the DVD not long after and used to watch it on a portable DVD player during every long car drive. The true story of a recently desegregated football team during the 70’s features an important message and I haven’t gotten tired of it after multiple viewings. Plus, the music is stellar, and the acting is great!

4.) The Mummy (1999)
I know this isn’t widely regarded as a “great” film, but boy is it entertaining! The effects are dated and it doesn’t do anything groundbreaking plot-wise, but it’s a fun romp in the sand with decent humor and action, and I absolutely love Brendan Fraser. The scene where he screams back at Imhotep makes me laugh every single time I see it. Besides, it might not be a masterpiece, but at least it isn’t trying to be; and it’s still better than the 2017 remake/reboot. And the super-fast scarabs still scare me! I also bonded with my study abroad friends from college over this film after we spotted John Hannah (who plays Jonathan) at a cafe near our university one morning.

5.) Spirited Away (2001)
The first time I saw this film, I was so spellbound I watched it two times in one day. Miyazaki is a master storyteller and Studio Ghibli’s animation is always enchanting, but I think Spirited Away is the one Ghibli film that has the highest “re-watchability” factor. I can jump into the film at any moment – whether it be after Chihiro’s parents have been turned into pigs, or when she’s helping a contaminated river spirit – and watch it through to the end, and still enjoy it just as much. Chihiro’s journey in the spirit world is a timeless one, and the magic of the film does not get old upon multiple watches.

~~~~~

If you’re in need of a new read, check out my YA novel, I’m With You! The ebook is only $1.99 or (£1.55) and paperback is $9.99 (£7.99) on Amazon Amazon UK.  Paperback is also $9.99 on BN.com.

 

Film Review: Dunkirk (2017)

Dir: Chris Nolan
Starring: Mark Rylance, Cillian Murphy, Tom Hardy, Kenneth Branagh, Fionn Whitehead, James D’Arcy, Harry Styles, etc.
Rating: PG-13
Runtime: 1hr 47min
Spoiler Level: Light

A lot of the early buzz about the latest WWII drama Dunkirk has called it Christopher Nolan’s best film to date. Considering he’s the man who brought us both critically-acclaimed Inception (2010) and widely-lauded The Dark Knight (2008), that’s a statement that isn’t to be taken lightly. Now that I’ve seen it, I have one thing to say about the monumental praise this film’s gotten thus far; it is 100% deserved, and Dunkirk may well be Nolan’s best so far.

Dunkirk_Film_poster.jpgBased on true events, Dunkirk presents three different timelines (land, sea, and air) within a non-linear narrative that chronicles the journeys of various characters – from struggling soldiers to stalwart civilians – during the evacuation of Dunkirk in 1940.

Story-wise, I didn’t find the three different timelines too difficult to follow – it was compelling to see land, air, and sea diverge from and intersect with one another. The timelines are a bit disjointed, and it might take a bit to get used to the switching between perspectives (at one point it’s day, then night, then day again, though less than 24 hours have passed) but the narrative is consistently captivating, and as the timelines merge, it’s intriguing to see how certain characters meet and interact with one another.

The entire cast is strong; newcomer Fionn Whitehead delivers a mesmerizing performance as an Army private desperately trying to survive a relentless wave of peril, Tom Hardy, a Royal Airforce Pilot, evokes powerful emotion even while most of his face is concealed, and Mark Rylance is solid as a civilian mariner heading to Dunkirk to try and save some of the stranded soldiers. No one really stood head or shoulders above the rest, but in that same vein, I don’t think there was a weak link among the cast. Performances all around were impressive, especially considering the sparse dialogue, as great acting speaks much louder when there are no words at all. The narrative is carried by everyone, and even though about 90% of the character’s names don’t get spoken onscreen, it’s easy to get invested.

And for those of you wondering, Harry Styles is fine in it – definitely holds his own against the talented veterans. From what I’ve seen browsing around the internet, I imagine a significant chunk of this film’s box office will come from 1D fangirls, because anytime I’ve looked up anything about this film I have to slog through pages upon pages of Harry Styles swooning before getting anything of use, and there were as many middle-aged history professor type men in the theater last night as there were middle-school and high-school 1D fangirls. That’s not a criticism, though; it was actually awesome to see the IMAX theater in my local cinema close to full for a film that isn’t from Marvel. But I find the voracious media attention Styles has received simply for being in a popular boy band prior to this film is unfortunate because Dunkirk is an ensemble effort, and the other actors all deserve just as much, if not more, attention and praise for their performance.

Visually, the film is absolutely stunning – that’s an odd thing to say about a war film, I suppose, but the cinematography (per usual for Nolan) is gorgeous and the film is beautifully shot and edited. Dunkirk is also Nolan’s tightest film to date, as it offers nothing in excess; it’s clean and concise, presenting a well-balanced narrative and a clear picture without delving too deep or dragging too long. Sure, the film doesn’t show too much in the way of blood or gore, but it also didn’t need crimson spills in the sea or severed limbs splayed around craters to convey the horror and cost of conflict, nor does the lack of blood and guts glorify the idea of war in any way. The unseen enemy threat closing in, the stark faces of fear, a foot sticking out from a sandy grave, and the dead bodies floating in with the tide, are all images that stand out long after the credits have rolled.

The music (by Hans Zimmer) and the sound weave together to enhance the intense, knuckle-biting atmosphere. The scream of sirens, the whine of engines, the creak of sinking ships, the wails of dying men, the boom of torpedoes and crash of bombs and the ticking of precious time running out – and at times, silence – all serve to make the events of the film more visceral, more engrossing. The sound of bullets made me jump out of my seat on more than one occasion and honestly, I was so stressed out and tense throughout this film that I forgot to eat my Reeses Pieces. (I’m eating them now, don’t worry).

If it is possible for you to see this film in IMAX, you MUST do so – it’s worth splurging for the price of the ticket. The sound is incredible (VERY loud, but not deafening) and the sweeping shots of the beach and the sea and the dogfights in the air are best seen on a massive screen. My only quibble with the IMAX experience was the dialogue, as it was difficult to discern at times. It didn’t detract too much, since the gist of the narrative is easy to follow, but there were times that I genuinely had no idea what the characters were saying and wish I could have picked it up better. This might be different for the standard version, as it usually is.

I don’t know if this is Nolan’s best, but it is certainly a contender for the spot, and well worth seeing for fans of Nolan and war cinema alike. A sprawling film with a strangely intimate feel, Dunkirk shares bleakness and hope in equal measure, and though countless war films have been made, especially about WWII, there are still so many stories to be told, and Nolan’s put a unique stamp on this one. There’s not much bravado, virtually no soap-boxing, no victory-touting, no medals doled out, and the film doesn’t offer a lot of chit-chat about the horrors and toll of war; it simply shows it, along with the dedication and perseverance of the soldiers who yearn for home, and the civilians striving to get them there. It’s not as gory as Saving Private Ryan or as in-depth as Band of Brothers, but it certainly deserves a place among the memorable high-tier war films.

Overall Rating: 9/10

Film Review: Beatriz at Dinner (2017)

Dir: Miguel Arteta
Starring: Salma Hayek, John Lithgow, Connie Britton, Chloe Sevigny, etc.
Runtime: 1hr 23min
Rating: R
Spoiler Level: Super lite

After viewing this film, I’ll say one thing for certain; I am so glad that I was not invited to this dinner.

Beatriz_at_Dinner.jpgBeatriz at Dinner follows the titular character, an employee/massage therapist at a cancer treatment center, who ends up staying for dinner at a client’s house when her car fails to start. Beatriz attempts to navigate the evening while reflecting on her personal circumstances and how they compare and collide with the wealthy lives she is surrounded by, ultimately creating tension between her and powerful businessman Doug Strutt.

The film follows a relatively simple premise, and is buoyed by the stellar performances from the cast. Hayek is brilliant as Beatriz, the central character, and capably delivers a range of tangible emotion, from quiet, tempered despair, to deeply-rooted resentment, to cautious hope for the future. Lithgow is irritatingly good as Doug Strutt; I love Lithgow, but definitely felt that he needed a good punch in the face for this role. Britton, Sevigny, Amy Landecker, Jay Duplass, and David Warshofsky all play their parts as poised, simpering, shallow, occasionally frustrating, and yet multi-layered members of this dinner party. Each character could easily be a real person and each actor delivers a convincing and thought-provoking  performance with complexities that make it difficult to really hate any of them, with perhaps the exception of Lithgow. Everybody knows somebody like each of the dinner guests, and that is the strength of the film; it is a believable tale, with believable people and a relevant message. Even the “bad guy” isn’t just a standard corporate suit caricature; he’s got layers, like an onion. But the film is mostly carried by Hayek; the camera follows her every move, analyzes every tiny facial expression, and navigates her story, though it never really delves deep enough into her psyche to give us a clear picture of Beatriz’s motivations or the underlying reasons for her conflict with Strutt. There are clues left, and theories that can be woven together to make some semblance of an answer, but much of Beatriz’s psyche remains a mystery, even as the film draws to a close.

Since the film takes place predominately over the course of a single dinner, the pacing is a bit slow, but there is enough happening that the progression does not feel like a tedious drag. The tone is fairly balanced, and the dialogue is believable; I feel like I’ve heard people having similar conversations and discussing similar topics, but the writing did not feel tired or overdone. The tension in the film is also palpable; as the dinner drifts into different topics and controversial statements, the awkwardness and discomfort is real. There were several parts that made me squirm in my seat, as the discomfort was practically radiating from the screen. It’s a film that creates a very definitive mood, and it succeeds in it’s ability to generate a realistic atmosphere and emulate situations and characters that could very well exist in the world today, and probably do.

Unfortunately, the film’s efforts at subtlety occasionally miss the mark and fall more ham-fisted than is intended, or fly too far beneath the radar to be thoroughly detected. Overall, the film utilizes a commentary that is easily applicable to the world today and features an extremely prevalent message about society/money/greed, and for the most part, it comes across beautifully, but there are moments where the film picks up steam only to abruptly lose momentum and grow aimless. The end also left me with more questions than answers, and though I think films that stir up questions and make the viewer wonder are often a good thing, Beatriz at Dinner raises a few too many ambiguities and the conclusion comes across as “unresolved.” However, for the performances and the commentary alone, the film is definitely worth checking out, though lingering mysteries and dangling threads might leave you more frustrated than appeased. But if you’re looking for an action-based thriller with a quick pace, then this dinner party isn’t for you.

Overall rating: 8/10