The Amazing Spider-Man 2 – Review

Although there was a tidal wave of criticism hurled against it, I really enjoyed The Amazing Spider-Man. I was quite sceptical when I first heard that Sony was swiftly rebooting Spider-Man after parting ways with Sam Raimi, but I also knew that Peter Parker’s world was in need of modern reinvigoration. While it wasn’t perfect, I felt that Marc Webb delivered an extremely satisfying reboot with The Amazing Spider-Man.

Now New York’s red and blue web-crawler is back in The Amazing Spider-Man 2. Once again under the helm of Marc Webb, the film stars Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Jamie Foxx, Dane DeHaan, Sally Field, and Paul Giamatti. The film follows Peter Parker as he faces the new threat posed by the villainous Electro, and chronicles his struggles to balance out his newfound responsibilities with his personal life.

I’ve always had a soft spot for Spider-Man. Despite my admiration for the recent Batman films and most of the finely crafted Marvel cinematic universe, I’ve never liked a hero quite as much as I like Spider-Man. That being said, after walking out of The Amazing Spider-Man 2 I couldn’t help but feel that Sony had undone nearly everything they got right with the first film.

At first, the introduction of Max Dillon and his transformation into Electro looked like it would take the franchise in an exciting direction, one that would differentiate it from the Spider-Man films of the past. While this move did steer The Amazing Spider-Man 2 into some new territory, Electro was never given enough depth to make him a truly compelling villain.

The screenplay written by Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci gave Max Dillon a barebones, clichéd and downright stale origin story that failed to give his motives any depth or complexity. Maybe this complaint comes down to me being used to other major villains in comic book films having well-established motives, but I feel their actions shouldn’t just boil down to blind, childish hatred.

Beyond the introduction of Electro, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 mostly flip-flopped between rehashing plotlines from previous films, and taking far too much time to set up future installments in the franchise. I really liked the casting of Dane DeHaan as Harry Osborn, but he wasn’t really given anything interesting to do. Aside from the pivotal role Harry played in the final act of the film, Kurtzman and Orci simply retreaded over material that had already been covered in Sam Raimi’s trilogy, and did so in a far weaker fashion.

Similar to what happened in Iron Man 2, Kurtzman and Orci also planted the seeds for future installments in The Amazing Spider-Man franchise. I have no problems with this when it is done correctly, but it didn’t work in this film. By going out of their way to signpost the emergence of future villains and the trajectories of certain characters, Kurtzman and Orci failed to create a cohesive narrative.

Thankfully the chemistry between Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone was still intact, and continued to flourish in this film. Both actors once again delivered strong performances as Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy. Marc Webb continued to show his skill in directing these actors in a variety of situations. Although other aspects of the film were in shambles, Marc Webb absolutely succeeded in conveying the intimate moments Peter Parker shared with his loved ones. On top of the engrossing scenes between Garfield and Stone, Webb also created a lot of heartfelt moments with Sally Field and her performance as Aunt May. Through his precise and intimate direction with these actors, Webb cemented the weight of Peter Parker’s responsibilities and his need to protect those dearest to him.

Unfortunately the other performances in the film didn’t stand out quite as much. As the lead villain, Jamie Foxx’s portrayal of Electro left much to be desired. While Jamie Foxx gave the character a degree of personality and presence on screen, the lacklustre screenplay held his performance back and made Electro feel very one-dimensional. On a similar note, Dane DeHaan felt completely wasted. DeHaan’s scenes with Andrew Garfield were great and captured the enduring friendship between Peter and Harry, but these scenes were few and far between. DeHaan was disappointingly relegated to simply brooding relentlessly, before hastily transforming into the Green Goblin.

Outside of the performances, Marc Webb showed his growing skill in directing Spider-Man during large action sequences. Spider-Man’s movements were appropriately fluid and free flowing, with Webb’s camerawork capturing this in a way that never got cluttered or hard to watch. Aside from some odd musical choices during these sections of the film, the only major problem I had with the action sequences was that they were relatively short, and consequently felt very underwhelming.

As much as it pains me to write this, The Amazing Spider-Man 2 is a mess of a film. Although Marc Webb once again nailed the central dynamic between Peter Parker and Gwen Stacy, the rest of the film didn’t come together cohesively. This is largely due to the lackluster screenplay, which sacrificed a strong plot in favor of needlessly setting up future installments in the franchise. Marc Webb was able to demonstrate his growing skills in directing action sequences, but his work was undone by the assortment of weak villains that populated the film. There were some genuinely enjoyable moments in The Amazing Spider-Man 2, but Sony’s indulgence ultimately made the film a bloated disappointment.

12 Years a Slave – Review

I’ve seen a lot of films that have left me rattled and scathed, but very few have impacted me the way 12 Years a Slave did. With his brutally authentic examination of American slavery, Steve McQueen has crafted a film that brought me to tears as I wept inside and out for Solomon Northup, and the horrifying set of circumstances he was thrust into.

Starring Chiwetel Ejiofor, Michael Fassbender, and Lupita Nyongo’o, 12 Years a Slave tells the true story of Solomon Northup, a free black man who lived in New York with his family in 1841. After going on a trip with potential employers to Washington, Northup was unknowingly kidnapped and sold into the cruel and barbaric world of slavery.

If you’ve read anything about the trials and tribulations of Solomon Northup, then you know exactly what you’re in for. While other films like Django Unchained have treated the subject of slavery in a more exploitative fashion, screenwriter John Ridley handled Solomon’s story with care and integrity. No corners were cut adapting Solomon’s hand-written memoirs into an eye-opening film experience. The screenplay was suitably bleak, and spared no expense painting a very complete picture of how cruel and twisted slavery was.

As someone who is no stranger to tackling confronting issues, Steve McQueen once again demonstrated why he is such a tremendously skilled and thoughtful director. McQueen’s direction was calculated and precise. Shots of the American countryside were beautiful. Intimate moments of brutality were shot in a way that made them both hypnotically unnerving and captivating. McQueen didn’t simply present a vivid depiction of Solomon’s time as a slave. He sucked me into the experience through his skillful camerawork, making me feel everything Solomon went through firsthand.

McQueen’s directorial prowess continued to shine through the long, unbroken takes that have become a signature trademark of his filmography. These sequences were never used just for the sake of artistry or self-indulgence. McQueen only used long takes when they were absolutely necessary, and only to make a clear point. The unblinking imagery of people getting strung up like pieces of meat, and men brutalizing their slaves in agonizing detail solidified Steve McQueen’s examination of slavery and depravity.

Throughout all of the hopelessness and savagery depicted in 12 Years a Slave, the film never lost sight of Solomon’s hope and determination. From the very second he was introduced on screen, Solomon was established as a deeply sympathetic protagonist. John Ridley’s screenplay captured the traumatic transition Solomon was subjected to, and the growth he had to go through to adapt and survive.

As the beating heart and soul of 12 Years a Slave, Chiwetel Ejiofor poured everything he had into his gripping portrayal of Solomon Northup. With his use of very specific body language and facial expressions, Ejiofor conveyed the raw emotions brought forth by McQueen’s intimate, unflinching direction. Ejiofor made me feel the suffering Solomon persevered through, and the ways that these horrifying experiences shaped him into a different person.

Lupita Nyongo’o similarly delivered a heart wrenching performance as Patsey, another slave that suffered alongside Solomon at the hands of Edwin Epps. Building upon what he did with Solomon, McQueen thoughtfully used Patsey as a conduit to further reinforce the harsh realities of slavery. Nyongo’o masterfully embodied MQueen’s vision, and her performance highlighted how slaves were callously stripped of their basic human rights.

No great story would be complete without a terrifying antagonist. With his portrayal of savage slave owner Edwin Epps, Michael Fassbender delivered the best performance of his career so far. Although Epps was an undeniably horrible person, Fassbender’s portrayal of a man intoxicated with his own power was mesmerizing. Fassbender shrouded himself in the cruelty that drove Epps, and made it painfully clear just how unpredictable he was. Both manically unhinged and unnervingly calm, the looming presence of Fassbender’s performance was felt throughout the entire film, even when he wasn’t present on screen.

Despite the high praise I’m giving 12 Years a Slave, there were some niggling problems in the film that I couldn’t overlook. While this never detracted from my enjoyment of the film, the passage of time wasn’t addressed in much depth. Solomon’s grueling odyssey never quite felt like it lasted 12 years.

Outside of this, my only real complaint is about Hans Zimmer’s score. There’s no denying that Zimmer has produced some fantastic musical scores over his career. Unfortunately, I felt that his work on 12 Years a Slave was quite unsatisfactory. Although it was by no means terrible, Zimmer’s score just felt like one long, drawn out retread of his work in The Thin Red Line. There were a few scenes where his score managed to make an impact, but it ultimately just felt a bit lazy and derivative.

With 12 Years a Slave, Steve McQueen has created an uncompromising, and illuminating examination of American slavery. The sharp direction, thoughtful screenplay, and harrowing performances all combined to produce a film experience that I won’t forget for a long time.

Robocop – Review

It just wouldn’t be a new year in filmmaking without another hastily made remake from a studio trying to cash in on a well-known brand. I’m all for these types of films when they are treated with care, and some of them have been successful. Unfortunately, the 2014 remake of Robocop didn’t feel justified at all.

Directed by Jose Padilha, Robocop stars Joel Kinnaman, Abbie Cornish, Gary Oldman, and Michael Keaton. Set in 2028, the film is centred on Alex Murphy, a Detroit police detective. After he is critically injured, Murphy’s life is saved when he is given an experimental robotic body, becoming the spearhead of a new era in law enforcement.

Skepticism lingered in my mind before I saw Robocop. With all of the recent advances in technology, there was so much material that the creators of this film could use to make it fresh and interesting. If handled correctly, I knew the film could potentially stand on its own two feet, instead of relying on the same story from the 1987 original.

While the film had potential to be great, it never rose above mediocrity. This was largely because of the unremarkable story told. Some new elements were added to Robocop, separating it from the 1987 original to some degree. I enjoyed watching how the film examined the media, and all of the corporate spin and marketing utilised by the greedy conglomerate, OmniCorp.  It was also somewhat interesting to see how the film depicted the ways that robots could be utilised in wars fought abroad.

Sadly, these elements of Robocop weren’t explored in much depth. The rest of the story was wafer thin, boiling down to a boring police drama that devolved into a clichéd, half-assed fight against corporate corruption. Joshua Zetumer’s screenplay followed the blueprint of the original, but it failed to build upon it in any meaningful way. The poor pacing only worsened the mediocre and predictable plot. This lack of innovation or creative care highlighted how Robocop was made purely to cash in on the namesake of the original.

The performances were consistent with the story and extended the tediousness even further. Although there were a few moments where Joel Kinnaman managed to make me feel sorry for Murphy, his performance felt very wooden and one dimensional for the most part. Abbie Cornish was also completely wasted. I could tell that she tried to work with the material, but the minimal screen time she had stopped her amounting to anything noteworthy.

The rest of the star-studded cast was also completely underwhelming. Gary Oldman was fine as the kind doctor in charge of Murphy’s rehabilitation, but his performance lacked any real effort and felt very phoned in. Michael Keaton was downright bad as Raymond Sellars, the evil CEO of OmniCorp. None of the satirical edge from the original was present, and Keaton’s performance was exaggerated to the point that he became bland self-parody of himself.

As I sat in the theatre and realised what I had gotten myself into, I clung to a slither of hope that the action would be fun to watch. Unfortunately, my hopes were crushed. The action sequences were painfully tame, and lacked the punch of the original. These sequences were filmed poorly, oozing with an abundance of quick shots and obscene camera angles. An excessive reliance on CGI only made the action even more incomprehensible. Towards the climax there was one battle that was handled quite competently, but it wasn’t enough to make me forgive the rest of the atrocious action.

I did not enjoy the time I spent watching Robocop. Although it never ventured into territory that was offensively bad, there are very few positive things that can be written about the film. As far as remakes go, Robocop is about as uncreative and unwarranted as they get.

The Wolf of Wall Street – Review

Indulgence and excess have always been interesting themes to explore in filmmaking. Whether it’s the hardnosed approach taken by Oliver Stone in Wall Street, or the more extravagant approach employed by Baz Luhrmann in The Great Gatsby, these themes always provide compelling insight into the ugly nature of human greed. With The Wolf of Wall Street, Martin Scorsese explores this subject matter in an expansive, vibrant, and bitingly satirical fashion.

Featuring an ensemble cast led by Leonardo DiCaprio, Jonah Hill, Margot Robbie, Kyle Chandler, and Matthew McConaughey, The Wolf of Wall Street is a satirical black comedy based on the life of former stockbroker Jordan Belfort. The film chronicles the illustrious and extravagant career of Belfort, as he establishes a successful Wall Street brokerage firm engaging in acts of corruption and fraud.

With his usual attention to detail, Scorsese created a compelling and hugely entertaining tale of greed. Scorsese and writer Terrence Winter left no stone unturned as they explored every inch of Belfort’s life. It was interesting watching Belfort take his first steps into Wall Street, lay the foundations for his successful brokerage firm, and lose his innocence descending into corruption and fraud. The film painted a very complete picture of the stockbroker’s life. While Belfort was by no means honourable or redeemable, Winter crafted an engaging examination of a man with no limits.

An integral part of what made this character study so fascinating was the comedy of the film. No expense was spared capturing Belfort’s indulgent escapades. With colossal house parties, office antics involving chimps and midgets, and marching bands full of women wearing nothing but underwear, Scorsese created a visually stimulating journey into the unhinged lives of Belfort and his colleagues.

Scorsese’s colorful direction worked in unison with Winter’s humorous and satirical writing. The witty screenplay glistened with a deluge of interesting characters that were sucked into Belfort’s world of corruption and indulgence. Unfortunately, this screenplay was not without its faults. A lot of Belfort’s fraudulent activities were glossed over and never explained in great depth. The more dramatic elements of the film didn’t always mix with the overabundance of humour, which made The Wolf of Wall Street feel a bit tonally inconsistent.

One thing that certainly wasn’t inconsistent was Leonardo DiCaprio, who poured everything into his portrayal of Jordan Belfort. DiCaprio not only conveyed how undeniably despicable the stockbroker was, but he also made the character interesting and engaging. Whether he was describing the various ‘phases’ of his drug-fueled antics, or delivering rousing speeches to his colleagues, I never grew tired watching DiCaprio’s performance. Despite the somewhat inconsistent tone of the film, DiCaprio delivered a strong portrayal of a man who ultimately became a victim of his own greed.

The rest of the star-studded cast also delivered great portrayals of the people embroiled in Belfort’s affairs. While I don’t think his performance was Oscar-worthy, Jonah Hill produced a satisfying performance as one of Belfort’s closest associates, Donny. Similarly, Margot Robbie also delivered a good performance as Belfort’s wife, Naomi. Even though he wasn’t on screen for long, Matthew McConaughey’s performance as the charismatic stockbroker Mark Hanna was unforgettable.

Amongst this supporting cast, Kyle Chandler shared some very memorable moments with Leonardo DiCaprio. With his portrayal of FBI agent Patrick Denham, Chandler created a great adversary for the stockbroker. DiCaprio and Chandler really fleshed out the relationship between Belfort and Denham. The first meeting between the characters onboard Belfort’s mammoth yacht stood out as one of the strongest moments in the film. Their calm conversation was ripe with veiled threats and animosity that created a tense conflict, providing insight into these characters and their conflicting ideals.

Even with these great performances, The Wolf of Wall Street was peppered with problems extending beyond the inconsistencies of the screenplay. For a film satirising excess and indulgence, The Wolf of Wall Street was in serious need of tighter editing. I don’t have a problem with long films when the length is justified, but I felt Scorsese indulged a little too much with The Wolf of Wall Street. Many scenes went on for far too long and could have been cut down to improve the overall pacing of the film. This would have created a tighter film with more of a tonal balance.

The Wolf of Wall Street was a wonderfully entertaining rollercoaster ride into the life of Jordan Belfort. While the film was a bit too long and suffered from some writing inconsistencies, it was still an incredibly enjoyable experience. Martin Scorsese transformed Terrence Winter’s satirical screenplay into a vivid and fittingly explicit examination of Jordan Belfort’s life as a stockbroker. The impressive cast led by Leonardo DiCaprio reinforced this vision, illustrating the costs and repercussions of insatiable greed.

Her – Review

Originality is becoming a scarce commodity in the realm of filmmaking. With the endless sequels and unnecessary remakes now flooding cinema screens simply to rake in cash, unique pieces of filmmaking are becoming much harder to find. When I first heard about Her, I was intrigued. While other films have explored the relationships between humans and artificial intelligence, I was eager to see Spike Jonze handle this subject matter when he was in charge of both writing and directing.

Set in a crisp, futuristic vision of Los Angeles, Her is a science fiction romantic drama starring Joaquin Phoenix, Scarlett Johansson, Amy Adams, and Rooney Mara. The film is centred on the lonely and detached Theodore Twombly, a gifted writer struggling to deal with the fact that he and his wife have separated. The film follows Theo as he develops a romantic relationship with his computer operating system, an artificial intelligence program named Samantha.

I never expected a film like this to work. From the brief exposure I had to the film, Her looked like it could easily become a weird and overly quirky mess. Thankfully, Spike Jonze proved me wrong, crafting one of the most original and creative films I have seen in years. A meticulous attention to detail was given to every aspect of Her. The sharp dialogue, interesting characters and striking aesthetic qualities of the film came together beautifully.

Despite the barriers existing between the two, Jonze made Theo and Samantha’s relationship feel real and completely captivating. From the moment they were introduced to each other, their relationship evolved in a very natural fashion. Like any serious relationship, Theo and Samantha went through their fair share of ups and downs as their affection for each other blossomed.

While he could have gone overboard in his depiction of this very unconventional romance, Jonze stripped it down to its bare roots. Theo and Samantha’s relationship wasn’t bogged down by any of the distractions and trappings frequently found in the science fiction genre. Jonze kept the sole focus on the raw emotional side the relationship, and this was what made Theo and Samantha so mesmerising to watch.

With the weight of the film placed firmly on his shoulders, Joaquin Phoenix delivered a fantastic central performance as Theo. He injected a broad range of emotions into the role, making the troubled writer a very interesting and sympathetic character. Everything from the way Phoenix talked, his mannerisms, facial expressions and postures all expressed the complicated nature of Theo. A haunting sense of loneliness lingered over Theo, one that would not have existed without Phoenix’s performance.

Completing this unique romance was Scarlett Johansson as the voice of Samantha. Through vocal work alone, Johansson not only made Samantha alluring and interesting, but she also humanised the character. As the artificial intelligence program evolved over the course of the film, Johansson convincingly illustrated Samantha’s deepening drive to learn new things, and her growing attachment to Theo.

Although their chemistry was rooted in vocal interactions, the performances from Phoenix and Johansson continued to mature through their onscreen dynamic. The combination of Phoenix’s physicality and Johansson’s impeccable voice work made the relationship feel real and full of emotion. Another side of Theo was awakened as he and Samantha enjoyed the high points of their relationship, dealing with the challenges encountered along the way. Phoenix lit Theo up with newfound happiness and anguish that was only matched by the emotional growth Johansson conveyed in Samantha.

An engrossing setting supported the relationship between Theo and Samantha that lay at the heart of the film. All of the costume and set designs were given a beautiful, futuristic look that still felt grounded within the realm of possibility. This produced a convincing glimpse into the path that our society is beginning to follow. Much of this futuristic vision is left unclear, with Jonze providing just the right amount of information. Some people may find this irritating, but my imagination ran wild thinking about all the ambiguous aspects of this interesting setting.

This setting allowed Spike Jonze to explore a variety of themes and current issues. Her tackled the issues of media consumption and our growing reliance on technology in a resonant and satirical manner. While Theo and Samantha were the focus of the film, Jonze used their relationship to highlight how technology has, in many ways, become an extension of ourselves. Moreover, Jonze also examined how technology can stand in the way of human interaction, and affect the way we relate to those around us.

Her is a film that I will remember for a long time. With his thoughtful and original screenplay, Spike Jonze constructed an emotional and engaging film about what the future might hold. The strong performances from Joaquin Phoenix and Scarlett Johansson brought Jonze’s vision to life, producing a mesmerising film about love, relationships, and the future.

Saving Mr. Banks – Review

I love it when a film can educate me, giving me a new perspective on something I previously did not know. I love it even more when a film achieves this in a way that is entertaining and absorbing. The process surrounding the adaptation of Mary Poppins to cinema screens was one that I did not know about, nor think there was enough of a story to center an entire film around. Because of this, I was quite interested in seeing Saving Mr. Banks and learning about the creation of the iconic Disney film. 

Directed by John Lee Hancock, Saving Mr. Banks stars Emma Thompson as the author of Mary Poppins, P.L. Travers, and Tom Hanks as Walt Disney. The film examines the lengthy process that brought Mary Poppins to life on the silver screen, and the heavy involvement Travers had in the project. Saving Mr. Banks also explores the early childhood of Travers, and the way her upbringing influenced the creation of Mary Poppins. 

John Lee Hancock handled these interwoven storylines very skillfully. Sections of the film exploring the tumultuous process of Walt Disney negotiating with P.L. Travers were injected with humor and heartfelt drama. The creative processes that shaped the musical and aesthetic qualities of Mary Poppins were riveting, full of whimsical interactions between the characters as they strived to breathe life into the project. 

These parts of the film were complemented by the storyline focused on the early childhood of P.L. Travers. These sections of Saving Mr. Banks provided compelling insight into many aspects of Travers’ childhood as it became more and more fractured. A number of serious issues were raised throughout these sequences, and they were handled in a mature manner. Aside from some sudden and awkward transitions, the two sides of the film worked hand in hand. The plot threads weaved into each other in a way that fleshed out Travers as she reflected on her troubled childhood. 

This layered story wouldn’t have been as successful without the strong performances from the cast. As P.L. Travers, Emma Thompson embodied the pushy and sporadic personality of the author. Thompson filled every scene with smart and quirky humor, bringing the creation of Mary Poppins to life in an entertaining fashion. Thompson also captured the fragile and damaged side of Travers, showing how the author’s upbringing impacted her. This well-rounded performance from Emma Thompson provided significant insight into the undying loyalty Travers held for Mary Poppins. 

While it is questionable if his portrayal was completely accurate, Tom Hanks delivered a fine performance as Walt Disney. In his signature style, Hanks made Disney a humble, charismatic, and very likeable character. With their portrayals of characters from very different worlds, Thompson and Hanks created a great dynamic between Travers and Disney that evolved over the course of the film. 

Alongside the two leads, Saving Mr. Banks was filled with memorable performances from the rest of the cast. Colin Farrell and Ruth Wilson both did superb jobs portraying the loving parents of P.L. Travers. Farrell and Wilson brought scenes of the author’s tragic childhood to life with emotional depth and maturity. Bradley Whitford, Jason Schwartzman, and B.J. Novac were all great as the creative team in charge of developing Marry Poppins into a feature film. Rounding out this cast was Paul Giamatti, who managed to squeeze a tremendous amount of character depth out of his limited supporting role. 

Saving Mr. Banks may not set any new standards for filmmaking; but it did tell an informative and engaging story. While the film was somewhat conventional at times, and I’m sure it wasn’t completely accurate, it was an enjoyable ride. With its informative story and well-developed characters, Saving Mr. Banks gave me a new perspective on an old Disney classic. 

The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug – Review

If there were ever a film series to benefit from technology enhancing the scope and quality of the world being depicted on screen, it would have to be Peter Jackson’s grand exploration of Middle-earth. Even though there was a lot of negative feedback over Peter Jackson filming The Hobbit trilogy in 48 frames per second, I really enjoyed the added depth and quality this style of filmmaking produced. While I definitely had problems with The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, the film made Middle-earth a much more vibrant and lively setting to explore. I was disappointed to learn The Desolation of Smaug wasn’t given a wider release in 48 frames like its predecessor. Although the screening I attended was only shown in 24 frames, I was eager to watch Peter Jackson breath life into J.R.R. Tolkien’s Middle-earth once again.

Picking up where the first film left off, The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug follows Bilbo Baggins as he journeys across Middle-earth with Gandalf and the company of dwarves led by Thorin Oakenshield. Journeying closer towards the Lonely Mountain, the company encounters a variety of allies and enemies in their quest to retake the dwarven homeland from the clutches of the villainous dragon, Smaug. Much like I felt after the first film, although The Desolation of Smaug contained a lot of great performances and some very thrilling moments, it was ultimately let down by the same problems that plagued its predecessor.

Clocking in at a substantial running time of 161 minutes, the film was filled with a variety of characters. Martin Freeman again made Bilbo engaging, conveying how much he has grown over the course of his travels. Ian McKellen and Richard Armitage also delivered fine work as Gandalf and Thorin, and the dwarven band Bilbo journeys with were a delight to watch.

Amongst the many characters populating the film, Benedict Cumberbatch delivered a magnificent and imposing portrayal of the fiendish Smaug. Through his impressive voice work and motion capture, Cumberbatch conveyed the inherently greedy and wicked personality of the gigantic dragon. Moreover, Cumberbatch perfectly captured the calculating and ruthlessly intelligent side of Smaug, creating a hugely entertaining villain.

While it is pretty much a given at this point, Peter Jackson directed The Desolation of Smaug with his signature attention to detail. Every aspect of Tolkien’s sprawling Middle-earth felt fully realised through the expansive cinematography, intricate set designs, and succinct action sequences of the film. The final section of the film where Bilbo and the dwarves enter the Lonely Mountain and confront Smaug was undoubtedly the highlight of this entry in the series, showing just how skilled Peter Jackson has become in his directing. Every element of this sequence came together perfectly. The menacing discussion Smaug had with Bilbo evolved into a concise, thrilling battle between the monstrous dragon and the determined band of dwarves. Benedict Cumberbatch’s commanding voice work combined effortlessly with the detailed design of Smaug, igniting the screen with real presence and terror.

Although these aspects of the film were indeed quite strong, The Desolation of Smaug suffered from the same bloating that was also evident in its predecessor.The film contained an extensive collection of characters, with Luke Evans and Evangeline Lilly making their debuts as Bard and Tauriel. Orlando Bloom and Lee Pace also marked their return to the series as their elven personas, Legolas and Thranduil. As nice as it was to see such a diverse group of supporting characters, the film never succeeded in making them all that interesting.

The ill-conceived love triangle centered on Evangeline Lilly’s character was the most glaring example of this. The entire subplot felt incredibly forced and never delivered a satisfying payoff. This sense of insignificance extended to most of the additional supporting characters, who were never given the depth they needed to become engaging. Aside from some very over the top performances, I do concede that most of the actors in these roles delivered serviceable work. Having read the source material, I know that some of these characters have important places in the overall narrative. Nonetheless, these characters were so uninteresting and incremental that I couldn’t help but feel they added very little to the film.

Alongside this overabundance of needless supporting characters, there were many parts of The Desolation of Smaug that felt padded out simply for the sake of extending J.R.R. Tolkien’s source material into another trilogy instead of a standalone film. Although the sequences following Gandalf investigating the Necromancer were reasonably interesting, they could have been cut out entirely to create a tighter and more focused film. On a similar note, the subplot involving the orcs hunting down Thorin and his companions felt just as unnecessary as it did in the previous film.

Even some sections of the film adapted directly from Tolkien’s novel were needlessly expanded upon. The most blatant instance of this was the entire portion of the film spent in Laketown. Instead of being a brief stop for Bilbo and the dwarves, the parts of the film spent in Laketown quickly devolved into a jumbled mess full of over the top caricatures and gratuitous action sequences. Contributions to the plot were minor throughout these sections of the film, shifting the focus away from the genuinely interesting material that could have been explored. While he directed many sequences with thought and creativity, it was perplexing to see Peter Jackson, who also co-wrote the screenplay, handle these other sections of the film so negligently.

Although it was burdened with crippling problems, The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug still provided another vivid journey into Middle-earth. The journey of Bilbo and the dwarves was thrilling, thanks to the breathtaking final act of the film where the band of travelers faced off against the Smaug. Despite the towering achievement of bringing this dragon to life so spectacularly, The Desolation of Smaug was a minefield laden with uninteresting ancillary characters and needless subplots. There was a great film somewhere in The Desolation of Smaug, but it was buried under so much unnecessary material that it was lost.

2013: Film in Review

2013 was a very good year for films, but at first there weren’t many releases that impressed me. Most of the big budget, blockbuster sequels that populated 2013 were quite disappointing. Iron Man 3 and Start Trek Into Darkness both turned out to be massive duds, and Thor: The Dark World wasn’t much better. While many of the major releases were disappointments, I did enjoy some of them. The standout would have to be Catching Fire, which was full of great performances and impressive direction from Francis Lawrence.

Yet when I look back on 2013, it was the smaller and more intimate films that really stole the year for me. Like countless years before, 2013 once again proved that a massive budget doesn’t always produce a fantastic film. Talented directors including Denis Villeneuve, Thomas Vinterberg, Nicholas Winding Refn, and David O. Russell all crafted engrossing films that dealt with everything from social ostracism, the search for missing children, cold-blooded revenge, and learning to cope with mental illness. Furthermore, director Alfonso Cuaron not only demonstrated how a sizable budget could be properly utilised, but he also highlighted the technical prowess involved in filmmaking with Gravity.

Although 2013 was filled with an abundance of fantastic films, there were countless others that were anything but good. On top of the aforementioned disappointments of 2013, this year produced a lot of bad films. Sloppy animated features such as Despicable Me 2 left me irritated, and even though Roland Emmerich’s latest action film was a bit of a guilty pleasure, White House Down was still riddled with many problems that made it undeniably bad. In a very surprising turn, Neill Blomkamp created a very run of the mill, uninteresting, and pretty terrible science fiction film with his latest directorial effort, Elysium.

As bad and disappointing as some films in 2013 were, the majority of them weren’t bad to the point that I was actually offended. While this may seem a bit unprofessional, I didn’t make it my mission to seek out and watch the worst films of the year. I just don’t have the time, or the money, to go out and watch all of these films. I go into the cinema to have an enjoyable experience, because I love film. That being said, there was one film this year that did catch me completely off guard and manage to offend me to the point that I thought my head would explode. However, to save this post from becoming a 5000 word rant on why I wholeheartedly despised this particular film, I’ll save it for the list.

Moving on, I will now present what I believe are the best and worst films of 2013. Unlike many other lists that may put these films into a specific numerical order, I’m going to list them with no reigning hierarchy. I loved (or hated) all of these films and didn’t want them competing with each other.

 

 

Best Films of 2013

 

Silver Linings Playbook

This was one of the first films I saw in 2013, and I couldn’t have asked for a better way to begin the year. While it could have simply been another formulaic romantic comedy, David O. Russell brought Silver Linings Playbook to life with a real amount of depth through his witty screenplay and skillful direction. Packed with a variety of self-destructive characters and great performances from a skilled group of actors, the film tackled the issue of mental illness in a raw, considerate, and heartwarming fashion. Although it did become somewhat conventional in the final act, I adored Silver Linings Playbook and its story about overcoming obstacles and making the most out of life.

The Hunt

 

With his latest directorial effort, Thomas Vinterberg crafted what is undoubtedly one of the most confronting and unsettling films I watched in 2013. Exploring the controversial issue of child abuse, the film treated this delicate subject matter with a strong level of care and brutal authenticity. Carried by a heartbreaking central performance from Mads Mikkelsen, The Hunt boldly examines the effects of unfounded accusations and malicious rumors. The combination of Mikkelsen’s performance and Vinterberg’s uncompromising direction produced an engrossing, eye-opening film experience that will stick with me for a very long time.

Gravity

Gravity was a thrilling 90-minute adrenaline ride that kept me glued to my seat, watching what unfolded on the cinema screen in absolute awe. From its masterful opening this film grabbed hold of me and didn’t let go until its spectacular conclusion. Through his technical precision and meticulous attention to detail, director Alfonso Cuaron created a simple yet elegant story of survival in the isolated environment of space.

Prisoners

I’ve always loved a good mystery. With Prisoners, director Denis Villeneuve constructed a disturbing and ever-deepening mystery that I was completely engrossed in. Focusing on the search for two missing children, this film was suitably bleak in its exploration of the lengths people will go to uncover the truth. Featuring complex lead performances from Jake Gyllenhaal and Hugh Jackman, Prisoners kept me fully invested in unraveling the mystery that lay at the heart of the film.

Captain Phillips

Paul Greengrass constructed another tense, authentic, and insightful film with Captain Phillips. Although the middle section of the film is drawn out a bit too much, the style of filmmaking utilised by Greengrass made me feel the full weight of the hostage situation being depicted. The strong performances from Tom Hanks and Barkhad Abdi only added to this, capturing the psychological and emotional consequences of these situations. This blend of realism and emotion made Captain Phillips a very tense and thrilling film.

 

Worst Film of 2013

Kick-Ass 2

That’s right, this is the only film on my list for the worst of 2013. Although I had to sit through numerous films this year that I either did not like or walked out of feeling sorely disappointed, none of them offended me like Kick-Ass 2 did. Kick-Ass 2 is nothing but a dark and depraved film that insulted me on every level through its immature reliance on excessive violence and potty-mouthed humor. I would rather gouge my own eyes out than watch this pathetic excuse of a film again.

Honourable Mention

Only God Forgives

I feel that my list wouldn’t be complete without reflecting on Nicholas Winding Refn’s latest journey with Ryan Gosling into the world of hyper violence. The experience of watching Only God Forgives at the Sydney Film Festival was very unique, as I had never really seen groups of people walk out of a film before. This is a very polarizing film, and one that has continued to lurk around in the back of my mind since I watched it. While my initial review of Only God Forgives was quite positive, I have thought about the film many times since then. Every time I dwell on this film my thoughts change, constantly going back and forth. Sometimes I find myself liking the film more than I previously did, while at other times I have questioned why I liked the film at all. I’ve often found myself going over different interpretations of the film, getting new meaning out of it. This is a beautiful, violent, and supremely dark film. Because of the way Only God Forgives has stuck with me over the course of 2013, it would be a disservice not to honour this film with a spot on my list.

 

As a final note, I’d just like to say thank you to everyone who has viewed my blog and read my reviews.

American Hustle – Review

I really admire directors who experiment in their filmmaking and don’t settle within the confines of a specific genre for too long. It shows that they’re willing to move in new directions and learn new things along the way, even if it means risking failure. Above all else, it proves they are versatile. David O. Russell stands amongst the many film directors working today who have demonstrated this flexibility over their expansive careers. He has shown this versatility through his work on a range of projects that includes dramas, comedies, and everything in between.

Commanding an ensemble cast, David O. Russell returns to cinema screens with his latest film, American Hustle. Equal parts comedy and crime drama, American Hustle is loosely based on the Abscam sting operation run by the FBI during the late 1970s and early 1980s. Starring Christian Bale, Amy Adams, Bradley Cooper, and Jennifer Lawrence, the film follows lucrative con artists Irving Rosenfeld and Sydney Prosser. After they are caught ripping off a client, the erratic and unpredictable FBI agent Richie DiMaso drags Irving and Sydney into an increasingly dangerous FBI operation aimed at stamping out political corruption.

With a cast this great and a story that I was ready to sink my teeth into, it was almost impossible for American Hustle to be anything but a success. After loving the way that David O. Russell handled Silver Linings Playbook, I was really looking forward to this film. Although I have niggling problems with the film, American Hustle was a delightful way to end the year. Alongside his co-writer Eric Warren Singer, O. Russell crafts a witty and well thought out screenplay that is full of colorful criminals, fast-talking politicians, and unstable individuals. With such a rich and diverse cast of characters, the humor of the film really shines. Whether these characters were arguing over a microwave, discussing the intricacies of the operation, or battling with their superiors, O. Russell makes the humor of the film witty and bitingly sharp. Yet even with all of this focus on humor, American Hustle is laced with many strong dramatic elements. Many of the characters are clear-cut criminals, and the film doesn’t stray away from showing both the weight and consequences of their duplicitous actions. These consequences were expressed very clearly by Jeremy Renner and Jennifer Lawrence’s respective portrayals of Carmine Polito and Rosalyn Rosenfeld, with these characters feeling very much like the victims of the film.

David O. Russell once again shows that he is very capable of commanding an ensemble cast in American Hustle. Christian Bale brings complete dedication to his performance, achieving a chameleon-like transformation into the silver-tongued con artist Irving Rosenfeld. Bale embodies his character, and this isn’t just because he put on an excessive amount of weight for the role. All of his actions and small mannerisms capture the smooth talking, calculating nature of Irving. Beyond this, Bale also illustrates the character’s vulnerable side, which becomes increasingly present when Irving is thrust into situations where he feels out of his depth.

Similarly, Amy Adams did a great job with her portrayal of Irving’s partner in crime, Sydney Prosser. The scene that introduces Sydney is absolutely perfect, appearing in an utterly alluring yet mysterious fashion. These qualities grew to define the character over the course of the film, with the performance from Amy Adams making Sydney very compelling. Adams really brought the dubious and manipulative nature of Sydney to life, with her true intentions constantly appearing to change.

In addition to the two leads, Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence also produce fantastic performances. As the volatile FBI agent Richie DiMaso, Bradley Cooper continues to demonstrate the range that he is capable of. Wilder than the curled hairs on his head, Cooper makes DiMaso both lively and terrifying. Scenes where DiMaso interacts with his FBI colleagues brim with humor and really stand out, showing just how unhinged this character is. While she may not be in very many scenes, Jennifer Lawrence makes the most out of every single frame she is in. As Irving’s estranged wife Rosalyn, Lawrence beautifully captures the bitter, crazed, and damaged qualities of her character. She’s mesmerizing to watch, and although she doesn’t share as much screen time as the other characters, I wouldn’t be surprised if she nabbed another Oscar nomination for her performance.

Although I really enjoyed the performances from this talented group of actors and the interesting story that is told, I have to admit that I found the mix of comedy and drama to be a bit perplexing at times. While this blending of genres worked well when it was used to explore damaged characters such as Rosalyn or innocent individuals like Carmine Polito, it wasn’t completely successful. I found that these genres undermined each other a lot of the time, producing a film that goes through a bit of an identity crisis. The humor of the film really shines, but some of the more dramatic elements didn’t carry the weight they were intended to. Scenes involving the emergence of life-threatening situations just felt out of place when compared to the humorous nature of other sections of the film. While this problem only arose briefly, it did take me out of the film.

David O. Russell once again shows how much of a talented writer and director he is with American Hustle. Although the mix of comedy and drama doesn’t quite work in some situations, American Hustle is a hilariously enjoyable film that is full of strong performances from a very talented group of actors.

The Hunt – Review

White lies and unsubstantiated rumors can have powerful, far-reaching consequences. This is the crux of the 2012 film The Hunt, written and directed by Thomas Vinterberg. Starring Mads Mikkelsen as Lucas, The Hunt is set in a close-knit Danish community where Lucas works as a kindergarten teacher. Lucas’s peaceful world is turned upside down when he is falsely accused of sexually assaulting a young girl, becoming the subject of extreme persecution from the entire community.

Vinterberg’s previous experience working on films that deal with similarly provoking themes is extremely evident in his handling of The Hunt. The gravity of the accusations against Lucas and the damaging repercussions that they have on him are captured perfectly. A great sense of intimacy is injected into the film, keeping it uncompromisingly personal in the way it tells the story of Lucas’s very public persecution. Every detail of The Hunt is handled with care and finesse. Vinterberg and his co-writer Tobias Lindholm craft a story so brutally authentic in its depiction of this very unsettling scenario that the film remains compulsively watchable from its serene opening through to its unforgettable conclusion.

Mads Mikkelsen’s portrayal of Lucas stands as the centerpiece of The Hunt. In the hands of an actor with less range, this performance could have significantly undermined the overall effectiveness of the film. I was pleased this wasn’t the case with Mikkelsen’s portrayal of Lucas. Mads Mikkelsen has grown to become one of my favorite actors working today, and his performance in The Hunt only reinforced my opinion. He really captured the kindhearted, innocent personality of Lucas, an ordinary citizen just going about his day. Mikkelsen brings this to life through Lucas’s strong bond with his teenage son, and his interactions with friends and relatives. From the moment he came on screen, Mikkelsen made Lucas an absolutely compelling and tragic protagonist.

Mikkelsen not only embodied the genuine innocence of Lucas, he also perfectly conveyed the severe trauma and psychological anguish the character experiences over the course of the film. Scenes depicting Lucas’s interactions with members of the community are heart wrenching to watch, involving cruel acts of violence and public persecution. Mikkelsen handles all of these scenes effortlessly, illustrating the complete breakdown of Lucas’s normal life. Vinterberg and Mikkelsen fully realise the consequences of the accusations against Lucas, showing his heartbreaking deterioration into a broken and bitter shadow of his former self. Performances from the supporting actors only added to this, building upon Vinterberg’s vivid depiction of this harrowing scenario and the way it affects the community.

The haunting themes and complex performances of the film are all wrapped up in some memorable cinematography. Vinterberg utilises simple camera work to effectively capture the quiet and close knit nature of the community that Lucas resides in. Simple shots of Lucas hunting deer are given a natural and tranquil beauty. Scenes depicting Lucas’s misery are filmed in an intimate way that highlights the deeply personal and confronting nature of his ordeal. This impressive camera work also reinforced many of the underlying themes in The Hunt. Vinterberg expertly juxtaposes scenes of Lucas hunting in order to emphasize the ramifications of his persecution, showing how the hunter becoming the hunted.

The Hunt delivers a frighteningly authentic examination into the ways that lies can spin out of control and severely impact people’s lives. By exploring the difficult issue of child abuse, the film certainly isn’t easy viewing. Although it may have been hard to watch at times, Thomas Vinterberg’s treatment of this subject matter with so much care and accuracy kept me completely captivated. The towering performance from Mads Mikkelsen only added to this, creating a powerful film that deals with some very serious issues.