film review

Magic Mike XXL

Posted on by Charlotte_Sometimes

Are you ready for ‘one last ride’..?

In 2012 Magic Mike was something of a surprise hit. Channing Tatum (playing our eponymous hero) used his pre-Hollywood experience as a ‘male entertainer’ (the apparently preferred term to strippers) to produce a movie which reflected both the sexiness and seediness of the industry. It also inspired millions of women to re-listen to ‘It’s Raining Men’ and be unable to separate it from Tatum’s… athletic… and memorable choreography. Earning $167 million at the box office, on only a $7 million budget, it’s unsurprising that we return back to Mike’s world of male entertainers. This time it’s XXL, and in this case size really does matter…

Magic Mike ended with Mike throwing in the thong and retiring, giving up the ‘glamour’  of the industry to fulfill his dream of setting up his own company (designing and customizing carpentry, obviously!) He also gave up all the perks of the job (money, drugs and lots of women) to settle down with one girl. The sequel starts three years into his retirement, his business is going as well as could be expected in this economic climate, yet Mike’s life is not particularly…well magical. So when he gets a phone call from his old crew, offering him the chance for ‘one last ride’ and reunite for a final performance at a stripping convention (sidebar – I have no idea if this is a real thing, but I intend to find out and attend if so…but I digress!) It’s an opportunity he accepts readily, after a nostalgia- inducing dance to ‘Pony’ whilst weltering one evening (what is it about Hollywood attempting to sexualise weltering?!?) The film follows the crew as they travel to the convention, following the typical journey narrative. Things go wrong on the way, the characters experience self-reflection and make a show-stopping final performance. Yet it’s still a cracking female entertainer of a film.

Whilst the first film was enjoyable enough it tried to hard to be more than it was. It tried to be an expose of the seedy underbelly of stripping, a reflection of broken dreams and addictions. The sequel has clearly learnt from this mistake, replacing the po-faced storytelling with fun. So. Much. Fun.

What is really enjoyable about this film, and what makes it not necessarily extraordinary  but at least note-worthy, is fact it accurately portrays and liberates female desire. The choreography is designed with female engagement in mind, the male entertainers want to please and excite women. They enjoy it. And unlike many recent Hollywood films, there is no grey area here about consent – the consent of both men and women is given and celebrated.  The men dance for crowds made up of all shapes, sizes and ages – there are no restrictions here. All women are beautiful and deserve to experience desire and be desired themselves. In fact many of the scenes explicitly state this (in a way that is almost Corny but manged not to cross the line) told through mini-story arcs where the men help the women (yeah, here’s that line) embrace themselves and their worth. The cloying nature of this is minimised with the presence of some strong and fierce female characters – Jada Pinkett Smith and Elizabeth Banks steal every scene they are in.

The soundtrack is also electric – this time round it will be impossible to separate Backstreet Boys ‘I want it that way’ and NIN’s ‘Closer’ from Joe Manganiello’s (Big Dick Ritchie’s) *inspiring* routines. This film is well worth seeing, ideally with a group of friends or a cinema screen filled with admiring women. Never has a cinema been filled with estrogen on this scale, or as many appreciative cackles…

Ant-Man

Posted on by Charlotte_Sometimes

An elegANTly told origin story

In 1962 Ant-Man made his comic book introduction – a brilliant scientist who invented a substance which allowed him to shrink size. Specifically to size of Ant (get it?!?) Along with his girlfriend, known as Wasp, they became a crime fighting duo who utilised their ability to shrink to the sizes of insects. In 1963 they were established as founding members of that little known superhero team, the Avengers. The chances are that this is all new information to you, for Ant-Man as a comic book series was not particularly popular. In fact he was not successful enough to even warrant his own series until relatively recently, mainly making appearances in ensembles as opposed to solo adventures.  The first you probably knew of Ant-Man was when the promo campaign started for this movie. You probably snorted, scoffed on your popcorn and sniggered at the ridiculousness thinking, ‘First Ironman, then Star-Lord now…Ant-Man!?!’  You may have laughed at one or two of the gags in the trailer and remained uncertain about the film. Don’t be fooled by his name, for in his cinematic debut Ant-Man confounds all expectations and proves that size is not everything. He may be small but this movie is gigantic in scope, laughs and pathos. In what could be viewed as its most outlandish adaptation yet, Marvel studios have created its most human movie yet.

Scott Lang (Paul Rudd) is a thief who has just been realised from a three year prison sentence. Struggling to find employment due to his checkered past and consequently unable to pay child support for his daughter he is a man desperate for a second chance at life. This is when Hank Pym (Michael Douglas) enters his life, a biophysicist who left the laboratory he founded under less than friendly-circumstances. Hank discovered a set of subatomic particles that made it possible to transform to the size of an ant, which his board members wanted to use for less than altruistic purposes. This, along with the mysterious disappearance of his wife, led to his estrangement from his daughter Hope (Evangeline Lily) Years after his quitting Pym technologies Hank needs Scott’s ‘unique set of skills’ to prevent his former-protégée turned possible evil genius Darren Cross (Corey Stoll) from using Hank’s research to create America’s next military weapon.  Scott must learn to use the ants, his own inner strength and skill-set, to plot the ultimate heist to save the earth.

This narrative is typical origin-movie stuff – a hero is given a call to arms, has an assistant who provides him with the help he needs and must defeat a villain who poses a mass threat – and in this manner may be Marvel’s most conventional narrative yet but it is also its most sublime. The sequences where Scott is ant-sized are superb, harking back to 50s sci-fi b-movies but with far better SFX. This is one of the few films that is released in 3d and is really worth watching in 3d. The humour along the journey is well-pitched and at times provides proper belly-laughs. If you found Avengers: Age of Ultron to be too dour then Ant-Man is your antidote. Paul Rudd’s Scott is pitched in the same manner as Chris Pratt’s Star Lord in Guardians of The Galaxy – the most unlikely of heroes can still be noble of heart and funny of tongue. A few of the quips made get lost in the action, but this is just a reason to re-watch the film. Although Edgar Wright left the film prior to filming, there are a few Wright touches here. Scott’s best friend Luis (Micheal Pena) is a scene-stealer and his flash-back narratives are told in Hot Fuzz stylee-editing to great effect.

Whilst the film is not perfect, with slightly too much of its running time spent on exposition and a few obvious twists, it is still an entertaining thrill-ride which suggests fantastic things to come. It’s an immensely likeable film with an equally likeable hero, proving that good things can come in small packages.

Jurassic World

Posted on by Charlotte_Sometimes

The park has grown into a world – but bigger doesn’t always mean better.

jpIt’s been twenty-two years since Jurassic Park came out. (At this point I’ll pause for a second to let that sink in/ get over the shock/let you sit down if you are standing!) Few blockbusters have the same amount of loyalty or produce the same levels of nostalgia from its fans or have so many iconic moments. From that music, to the shot of the water vibrating in a glass building to the introduction of the T-Rex, the raptors in the kitchen and the wonder that is Jeff Goldblum. As a consequence the makers of Jurassic World had a difficult task – to pay homage to the origins whilst also developing without being accused of trying to reinvent the wheel. In some ways they are successful, aspects of this film are incredibly entertaining and equal the original. On the other hand, some aspects are jumbled, flawed and disappointing.

The film reflects real-time, set 22 years after Jurassic Park was forced to close. Jurassic World is one of the world’s most popular theme parks – just as one would take their family to Disneyland they live in a world where it’s normal to go somewhere to see dinosaurs. In fact, it has become so normal that operations manger Claire Dearing (Bryce Dallas Howard) has been put in charge by the park owner to oversee the upcoming new exhibit. It’s a breed of dinosaur that has never been seen before – literally as it didn’t exist before. The ‘Indominous Rex’ is a product of genetic modification – a hybrid of different species. Although her nephews are currently spending a week at the Jurassic World – who arrived with the intent of spending time with her – she has been unable to do because of this indomitable project. Her nephews go off exploring the theme park with her assistant for company, whilst Claire deals with issues regards the new beast. She is forced to turn to Owen Grady (Chris Pratt, playing an oh-so-common ex-military/ leading velociraptor expert and trainer) for help. If you haven’t guess what happens next (SPOILER ALERT) it escapes. How will Claire and Owen prevent the treat of a beast that has never existed before? A breed whose genetic origins are being withheld from them? What will happen to Claire’s nephews? Will Owen and Claire have an inevitable romance? Will these film avoid obvious character types?

I’ll only provide an answer to the last of those questions – no. Whilst no-one would turn to Jurassic World or it’s predecessors looking for realism, it would be nice to have an action-adventure movie in which the events do not overshadow the characters. In fact, can you imagine a world where a 3D movie action-adventure has 3D characters? Jurassic World is not that kind of world. The dinosaurs are given more developed characters than the humans. In Jurassic World we have:

– Owen Grady, the bad-ass bloke who has no time for society’s bullshit or human being’s bullshit. He wants to live in peace and hang out with his raptor buds alpha-style. He is an attractive man, and knows it. He uses humour to defuse awkward situations or to make his point. (Think Indiana Jones, with less charm.)

– Claire Dearing, the work-obsessive who cares more about her work than family. She is deemed cold and calculating when compared to the male hero. All she cares about is money, order and routine. Luckily the events of the film will show her that this is wrong, and will fix her evil corporate ways. She is living proof that it is impossible to be successful and also care about other people. Runs around in heels. (Think every stereotype of working women that exists in film)

– Zach Mitchell, the older of Claire’s nephews, thinks he is a ladies-man. Stares at lots of young women because he is a ladies man. Turns out that this is all a front to hide his caring-side, and he actually does love his little brother.

– Gray Mitchell, Zach’s younger brother. Shown to have obsessive tendencies through his encyclopaedic knowledge of dinosaurs.

– Vic Hoskins, a man who wants to use Owen’s raptors for evil. Does evil-ish things.

Without any interesting heroes to really root for, the film falls slightly flat, and we end up feeling more sympathy for the dinosaurs. Yes, there are some fantastic set-pieces – some sequences are genuinely frightening and rival the original film. Yes, there are some lovely and subtle tributes to the original film. Yes, it is rather entertaining and somewhat worthy of awe. But it is a film which seems so uncertain of itself with some cheesiness worthy of Skarknado. It simultaneously pokes fun at action movie tropes but then utilises others, with a side order of predictability. All of this results in a vanilla-bland popcorn movie.

Moomins on the Riviera

Posted on by Charlotte_Sometimes

Is it Moomin’ marvellous? Well, yes and no…

Going into this film with no context of The Moomins is inadvisable. In fact, I would probably recommend this film only to big fans of the Moomins (shout out to Carrie ‘Cookie’ Turner-Gould and Matthew at this point!) Unfortunately, I am not a big fan of the Moomins. Although I have vague memories of the cartoon series, of strange hippo-looking creatures going on adventures, I do not really remember enough of the series to confirm that this film is merely a continuation onto the big screen. And I really did not remember The Moomins being so… strange…

The film opens with Snuffkin (yes I have got tabs open of Google and IMDB to help with this review!) strolling across Moomin Valley.In fact the entire opening sequence (3-5 mins) is of Snuffkin on his journey, of what and who he sees along the way. It is in this aspect the film really excels – the artwork and colouring is truly extraordinary. Every single frame could be printed off and used as artwork. The hand-drawn animation is truly glorious to watch on the big screen, and sets up a would could be described as a whimsical and quaint tone for the rest of the film. Or you could describe it as tedious. But I digress…

Finally, Snuffkin arrives at his journey. At the point the party (literally) gets started. Moominpappa makes a speech about how at this present moment he would not want to be anywhere else. He then plays a bit with fire then the party is over. Then we cut to the next day and a pirate ship is the distance (there is no transition or explanation, which may divide audiences) It starts to sink and the pirates escape – leaving behind their prisoners, Little My and her sister, who are tied up. They have also abandoned two treasures chests – one filled with gold and the other, seeds. The Moomins go to scavenge, accidentially rescuing the hostages in the process. The pirates come to collect their treasure chest from the Moomin family – who chose to collect books, fireworks and seeds instead. The pirates leave. The next day, whilst relaxing in the garden, they decide to go to the Riveria. They go to the Riveria. Various adventures happen. They go home.

And that is it in terms of the plot. It is incredibly simplistic and that both works, yet also doesn’t. Yes, it is a kids film but that doesn’t mean it has to be so simple or almost lackadaisical. Also, if this really is a kids film, I’m not so sure they would understand that many of the jokes or nuances. In fact the entire sequence in the Riveria is essentially a satire of a Monte Carlo- esque resort: about how ‘appearances can be deceptive’, to ‘be careful what you wish for’ and how ‘the grass isn’t greener on the other side’. Snorkmaiden is wooed by a charming celebrity man/dog/thing, who rivals Moomin in her afffections. It takes a fencing duel for her to realise the error of her ways. One character, the Marquis Mongaga, in fact personifies woes of consumerism completely. He spends most of the film charmed by the misadventures of Moominpappa (adventures I can only presume are recounted events from the comic strips?) until he feels bold enough to confess- he would give it all up to be a poor, struggling artist. Needless to say, he isn’t really suited to the lifestyle he has glamourised.  In this sense the film is quite clever, gently poking fun at bohemia and culture with some rather sharp gags. But this is done in a manner far too episodic for it to actually flow as a film.

This film, perhaps like marmite, will divide audiences totally. One side will leave the cinema describing it with adjectives including, ‘wistful’, ‘gentle’, ‘charming’, ‘mischievous’, ‘heartwarming’ and ‘eccentric’.

The other side will leave asking, ‘What did I just see..?’