Doctor Strange

Tags

Ant-Man, Batman, Batman Begins, Benedict Cumberbatch, Bruce Wayne, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Cinema, Doctor Strange, Film, Film Review, Guardians of the Galaxy, Inception, Iron Man, Josh Brolin, Mads Mikkelsen, Marvel, Marvel Cinematic Universe, MCU, Movie, Movie Review, Rachel McAdams, Robert Downey Jr, Superhero, Superhero Movie, Thanos, The Avengers, Tony Stark

via comicbook.com

“Doctor Strange” went completely under my radar prior to release. I knew that it was in production and I was aware that Benedict Cumberbatch had been cast as the titular character, but apart from that I hadn’t heard much about it. Imagine my surprise then when I saw the trailer for the first time last Monday and realised that it would be hitting screens in less than a week. From a marketing perspective this could be construed as a criticism, but for me it was actually quite refreshing and enhanced the experience overall.

I knew nothing about Doctor Strange prior to watching this movie, so each plot point came as a surprise. I didn’t know about his backstory, his personality, or the powers that he had access to, and I also didn’t know anything about the villain that he’d be battling. This made the film much more compelling for me than it might’ve been had I been previously acquainted with the character, as I experienced Doctor Strange’s discoveries as he made them rather than pre-empting them in advance. I didn’t know what was going to happen and I didn’t have a firm enough understanding of the character to guess, so I could simply sit back and enjoy the grandiose nature of the story without needing to nit-pick its authenticity.

This meant that I could enjoy the film like everyone else because I wasn’t preoccupied with how the character was being handled – something which I can’t do when watching most other superhero films – and I could appreciate how the film was presented when reality was being bent and new abilities were being uncovered. This presentation was undoubtedly the best thing about the movie itself, as the special effects were as good as any I’ve seen before.

via uproxx.files.wordpress.com

Nonetheless, I should say that whilst the effects are amazing, the story is quite lacklustre. Doctor Strange is a cocky success story with an ego problem who has to overcome adversity in his life in the only way a comic book character can; by journeying to a foreign land and becoming a badass. This is an origin story that we’ve seen plenty of times before, and it clearly resembles Bruce Wayne’s arc in “Batman Begins”, although Doctor Strange’s personal problems are entirely his fault and his goal is much less noble.

This self-destructive aspect of the character makes the film feel derivative, as Strange resembles Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) much more than he should given that they may appear on screen together one day. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing – Stark is one of the most beloved and recognisable characters in film today – but we don’t want too many characters with similar qualities clogging up one movie universe.

On the other hand, to call this film unoriginal isn’t to say that it’s a failure – it’s quite the opposite. It takes on a story which is very much ‘out there’ and it does so with confidence, maintaining the Marvel tone whilst giving Strange’s story weight. At the same time it separates itself from everything else that Marvel is doing right now by being visually distinctive, looking more like “Inception” than an “Avengers” movie, and in my view it’s one of the most intriguing additions to the MCU to date.

via thesun.co.uk

“Guardians of the Galaxy” and “Ant-Man” were risky properties to bring to the big screen, but Marvel managed to make both of them entertaining and meaningful. They felt like they had a place in the universe and the same can be said for “Doctor Strange”. It tells an isolated story, with powers coming into play that we’ve never seen before in a Marvel film, but it still feels like a Marvel movie and I have no doubt that it’ll mesh perfectly with the ideas that are already in play in the MCU.

In my view everything is coming together in the overarching story that the studio has built, and it feels as though there will be an amazing payoff somewhere down the line. Doctor Strange will definitely play a part in this, particularly considering that Thanos’ (Josh Brolin) arrival is right around the corner.

via evil-ed.de

With all this in mind, I should mention that whilst “Doctor Strange” takes everything that’s good about Marvel’s formula, it also inherits its problems. The villain in this film is underdeveloped and used as a building block for the hero rather than as a fully-fledged character in his own right, which is a shame because an actor of Mads Mikkelsen’s calibre could’ve bucked that trend.

The secondary characters in the film aren’t afforded enough time to make an impact on the story to feel worthy of the actors playing them, which is most apparent in the case of Christine (played by Rachel McAdams). McAdams could’ve been great here if she’d been allowed to show her ability as an actress and build a rapport with Cumberbatch, but instead she was relegated to a character device to make Strange feel human. She never really felt essential to the story or to Strange, and the only thing to take away regarding her character was that she was nice. Chiwetel Ejiofor was also wasted in his role, and his character arc fell flat despite the fact that he could be important going forward.

Despite these problems, “Doctor Strange” was a cinematic experience that I’ll remember for a long time, and it did its job by establishing another major player in the MCU. The effects were incredible, comedic dialogue hit its mark, and the performances of the actors involved were good despite the fact that no one really got the chance to shine. It’s another entertaining film to add to Marvel’s library, and it will most likely start another successful franchise.

7.5/10

Advertisements

The Accountant

Tags

Anna Kendrick, Ben Affleck, Christian Wolfe, Cinema, Film, Film Review, Gavin O'Connor, J. K. Simmons, Memento, Movie, Movie Review, The Accountant, Warrior

via moviehole.net

When I saw the trailer for Gavin O’Connor’s latest film I was immediately interested; the story of an autistic accountant turned criminal was one that appealed to my sensibilities instantly, and Ben Affleck’s involvement only sweetened the deal. Say what you will about Affleck but recently his performances have been stellar, and I’m happy to say that his contribution is equally admirable here.

The structure of this film is deceptively intelligent, as pieces of information are revealed at perfect moments so that they enrich the experience without necessarily appearing as twists. The story unfolds in such a way that your perception of certain characters are challenged constantly, particularly when considering Chris (Ben Affleck) who comes across as a villain initially but slowly becomes likeable as you spend more time with him.

clairestbearestreviews.files.wordpress.com

This isn’t to say that “The Accountant” is a film in the vein of say “Memento” where its structure is its main gimmick; rather, it feels quite traditional as everything is tied together in a neat but meaningful way. Every aspect of the story is connected to another aspect, and everything presented is needed either for the development of the characters or to make the story worthwhile. This can at times feel slightly too easy from a writing perspective, as the narrative is wrapped up in a neat little bow even though this isn’t really how life works, but there are certain times when movies should feel larger than life and I think that this is one of those instances.

The main draw of this film is probably to watch Affleck playing such an eccentric character, so it was pleasing for me that his lead performance lived up to expectations. He captured the essence of the character and delivered his lines appropriately at all times, making Chris endearing despite the fact that he does deplorable things. His character is a man of few words, blunt and disinterested in other people’s problems, and this is something which Affleck portrayed with ease.

Affleck showed excellent comedic timing and delivered dialogue in a deadpan style that made lines which could’ve been silly both believable and amusing. This is something that I haven’t seen from Affleck before, and it isn’t something that I’d have put on his résumé prior to watching this film. Affleck is also capable of conveying warmth despite the awkward nature of his character, and at certain times he looks as though he’s internally aching to grab hold of Dana (Anna Kendrick) despite the fact that he’s sitting as stiff as a board. At the same time he looks as though he’d jump back like a startled spider should she actually get up and touch him, thus conveying the conflict that his character is feeling without needing to express anything verbally.

via blackfilm.com

Overall, I’d say that “The Accountant” is an entertaining and well-made film in every area with nothing sticking out as an obvious criticism. I’ve seen plenty of problems articulated online, but in my opinion most of them can be boiled down to personal preference. That isn’t to say that this film is flawless – it isn’t – but personally I don’t mind a bit of exposition if it serves a purpose, and I also don’t mind when aspects of a story feel farfetched if they serve the film and make it more entertaining.

If I had to pick one thing to criticise about this film it would be that sometimes the way that aspects of the story come together feels too convenient, but oftentimes this is part of what makes that story compelling. The way that seemingly trivial parts of the story ended up being crucial and the way that characters appeared to be separate but ended up being intertwined made the story feel worthwhile, and ultimately I think that’s what made the movie work as a whole.

via variety.com

“The Accountant” is funny, action-packed, interesting, and absorbing, and I would recommend it to anyone as one of the best movies of the year so far. It doesn’t do anything particularly earthshattering, but it boasts strong performances and its structure and clarity make it better than the sum of its parts.

8.5/10

Fifa 17

Tags

Alex Hunter, Angry Birds, Be A Pro, Bournemouth, Candy Crush, EA, EA Sports, Eden Hazard, Fifa, Fifa 17, Fifa Ultimate Team, Football, Game, Game Review, Games, Gaming, James Rodriguez, Konami, Marco Reus, Martial, PES, PES 2017, Pro Evo, Pro Evolution Soccer, Pro Evolution Soccer 2017, Sport, Sport Games, The Journey, Ultimate Team

 

via sftcdn.net

“Fifa 17” is a frustrating game. The first time you play it it feels completely alien – it doesn’t feel responsive and the systems in place feel clumsy. Passes go array, shots fly wide, and you can’t win a header to save your life. However, once you become accustomed to the way that the game plays you will find it more entertaining, even if your ability to adapt to its quirks doesn’t necessarily paper over the cracks. There are too many inputs to hide the fact that the game’s design is shoddy, which is epitomised by the awful addition of a new physical play system, but if you stick with the game it does eventually become palatable.

The most talked about addition to this year’s game is The Journey, which basically acts as a polished Be A Pro mode. I have to say that this is the best thing that EA have added to their game in a long time, even if it isn’t perfect, and I liked it a lot for what it was worth.

via data2.origin.com

The dialogue in The Journey verged on ridiculous and the options you were able to choose between in interviews and interactions were both limited and unclear, but playing as an established character makes your performances feel important and creates a degree of emotional investment. This enhances the gameplay for the better whilst playing as Alex Hunter because you concentrate on decision making and play more precisely, but it also makes the game’s shortcomings even more apparent, because when passes map to the wrong teammates or dribbling is too rigid you feel like you’re being penalised by the game for something that isn’t your fault.

This occurs often when playing The Journey. The game constantly punishes you for its own shortcomings, and more often than not you’ll find yourself making an intelligent run or asking for a simple pass into your feet only for a teammate to give away the ball, and then to compound your frustration when your teammate makes a mistake it will be you who gets scolded for asking for the ball in the first place! You’ll also have goals taken away from your name due to a slight deflection from a defender, and assists abolished because someone stole the ball from you rather than you actually pressing A to pass the ball on, which makes your efforts to get into good positions feel futile. All of these idiotic gameplay features make what should be a great mode something much less than it could’ve been, and they leave you feeling annoyed far more often than you should when engaging in a leisure activity.

via joe.co.uk

Another issue with The Journey is that whilst it’s good, there isn’t a lot of content there. It masquerades as a story mode, but in actual fact the cut scenes in the game are both poorly written and few and far between. The ones that are there are repeated various times in different guises, and the way that the characters deliver dialogue makes it clear that the actors were reading lines in a studio rather than actually engaging in conversation. This is a shame because there was the opportunity to do something more with the mode; although I’m hopeful that in future they’ll perfect the formula and therefore improve their game.

This feeling of missed opportunity is furthered by the fact that The Journey only lasts for one season, and that you aren’t afforded the opportunity to carry on playing as Hunter in a normal Be A Pro season mode once the end credits roll. This was disappointing for me as I wanted to take Hunter to the top, but because I have a strange sense of humour I chose to start my journey with Bournemouth. This meant that I never had a chance of winning the league title because despite scoring 40+ goals we slumped to 14^th before I was recalled from my short-term loan.

via joe.co.uk

Moving on from The Journey; the game itself is slightly messy. It doesn’t play as well as the previous game and it isn’t as fun either, with everything feeling very rigid and forced. It isn’t a game that encourages creativity, instead it asks you to learn the issues with its design and exploit them so that the numbers at the top of the screen favour your side over the AI’s at the end of 90 minutes. This isn’t what a game should be in my view, and I worry that EA misses the point each year whilst also professing that their goal is to allow players to ‘feel the game’.

When playing “PES 2017” it’s obvious that you aren’t playing a football simulator – the tackles that you put in are more akin to assault than they are to the challenges that are permitted in the modern game – but it’s a lot of fun and it feels as though it was designed by passionate fans of the sport rather than a committee of suits trying to tick boxes. The same can’t be said for “Fifa 17”, so whilst I don’t really dislike it I do find myself stopping every now and again when I’m hit by the soullessness of its gameplay. I play it for the same reason that I play games like Candy Crush and Angry Birds – because it’s repetitive and it gives me false rewards for success, like coins in Ultimate Team or stats in The Journey.

via gamespot.com

With this in mind, I don’t want to analyse every aspect of the gameplay in “Fifa 17”. I don’t want to be excessive in comparing it to “PES 2017” either – it isn’t as good as the competition, and that’s all I need to say. It just isn’t a great game, and to be fair the franchise has been floundering for years. The Journey is the only aspect of the game that’s genuinely worth talking about, but it isn’t executed well enough to save the rest of the game from the mediocrity that its designers have condemned it to.

5.5/10

The Girl on the Train

Tags

Book, Cinema, Crime, Crime Drama, Drama, Emily Blunt, Film, Film Review, Luke Evans, Megan Hipwell, Movie, Movie Review, Murder, Mystery Novel, Novel, Paula Hawkins, The Girl on the Train, Thriller

via controllercompaniesdotcom.files.wordpress.com

Paula Hawkins’ “The Girl on the Train” was an excellent book. It had everything that a good murder mystery novel should have; complex characters, an unreliable narrator, and an array of suspects that all felt viable. It was interesting and intelligent even though the conclusion was a little lacklustre, and there was no reason that this film couldn’t replicate its success.

However, upon the film’s release I was worried by a collection of mixed reviews. Nobody went as far as to crucify the movie, but a lot of people said that it didn’t live up to expectations, with its saving grace being Emily Blunt’s lead performance. Having seen it, I can say that I agree in part. “The Girl on the Train” wasn’t as compelling on the screen as it was on the page, and this was mainly due to a lack of intrigue caused by a questionable structure, but it wasn’t a bad movie. In fact, I’d say that it was pretty good.

I enjoyed my time in the cinema and I thought that the majority of the cast did a commendable job of realising their characters as established in the book. Haley Bennett was fantastic as Megan Hipwell, perfectly embodying the character as I imagined her and also giving an emotionally charged performance, and Luke Evans was an ideal fit for Scott. Still, I had my reservations about Emily Blunt playing Rachel from the start, and I think I was right to have those doubts. She gave a powerful and committed performance, but she wasn’t the right choice for the character.

via pinimg.com

Blunt’s performance was a good one, but she turned the character into something that she wasn’t meant to be, and it didn’t work for me as a whole. This appeared to be an intentional effort to cast an actress who could make Rachel a believable suspect, but it changed the tone of the film to an almost unrecognisable degree, making it a jarring experience to begin with. As the film progressed the decision made more sense to me, and eventually I came around to the revised version of Rachel, so much so that the book version of the character left my mind and I was able to enjoy the movie. Nevertheless, I feel that changing the nature of the character represents a missed opportunity, because this film would’ve been great rather than good had it been adapted more faithfully.

To make Rachel the prime suspect for Megan’s murder the writers had to take a few liberties, omitting important aspects of the story from the book which in turn changed the characters involved. (SPOILER ALERT) In the book Scott was the most obvious candidate to have murdered Megan – he had a motive given that she was cheating on him, and he was established as a jealous and physically imposing spouse. He clearly loved Megan, but this didn’t make it any less likely for him to have killed her in a fit of passionate rage. This was only enhanced when Scott slept with Rachel just after Megan’s disappearance, an action not particularly fitting of a grieving husband.

Whether or not you read this as the act of a lonely and desperate man responding to the needs of a woman that he believed to be helping him, or that of a murderer only concerned with his own interests, was entirely up to you as the reader, which made the experience incredibly compelling.

via atrix.co.uk

Sadly, this scene didn’t appear in the film. Scott didn’t sleep with Rachel, nor did he attack her with the same viciousness that he did in the book when he finally found out that she was lying to him, so when he was proposed as the killer by Rachel it seemed entirely implausible. He didn’t feel like a murderer, if anything his actions were wholly justified by the situation that he found himself in, so it was hard to believe that anyone other than Rachel could be the killer… but at the same time you knew that she wasn’t.

There wouldn’t have been half as much hype surrounding the book if the most obvious candidate for killing Megan was in fact the killer, so anyone watching the film should’ve known that someone largely ignored committed the crime.

via businessinsider.com

Having read the book already it was pretty apparent to me who that person was; by which I mean that he stuck out like a sore thumb in the context of the film. This was a shame because in the book I didn’t figure out what was going on till very late on, even though I had ruled out all the other suspects. For some reason I hadn’t realised the clear motive that the killer had for doing what he did, even though it fit perfectly with the themes of the book and also humanised all the misdeeds of the main character, which made me appreciate the writing even more than I already had done. This same appreciation wasn’t evoked by the way that the film was written, which for me represents the biggest criticism that I can pose to “The Girl on the Train”, and also explains why I would class it as a missed opportunity even though I enjoyed it.

Ultimately, “The Girl on the Train” is decent but could’ve been exceptional. There’s nothing particularly bad about it, but given the fact that the source material was so great it’s hard not to feel like it should’ve been better. Whether or not the writers tinkered with the story or the film was altered due to editing is unclear, but this film’s structure hampered it from the start as mystery was forsaken in service of positioning Rachel as the prime suspect for Megan’s murder. I liked the film, but I loved the book, and I feel that with a few better choices this movie could’ve lived up to its potential.

7/10

War on Everyone

Tags

Alexander Skarsgard, Black Comedy, Buddy Cop, Calvary, Cinema, Comedy, Cops, Film, Film Review, John McDonagh, Michael Pena, Movie, Movie Review, True Detective, War on Everyone

via denofgeek.com

“War on Everyone” is an absurdist buddy cop comedy with action elements which boasts a rather dark sense of humour. Feeling more like a “True Detective” parody than a traditional comedy of this ilk, it moves along at a relentless pace, focusing predominantly on its two lead characters rather than its villain. There’s a lot going on and sometimes it feels as though the characters are making logical leaps that they have no right to make, but this feels deliberate for the most part, and the film is still very entertaining despite the fact that at times it can feel a little too bizarre.

Calvary. Via filmireland.net

The reason that “War on Everyone” appealed to me in the first place was that I heard it was directed by John McDonagh, the man behind 2015’s “Calvary”, a film with a lot of talking, an array of morally grey characters, and smart black comedy.

Whilst the premise behind “Calvary” doesn’t necessarily marry with the premise behind this film, I could sense similarities in tone from the trailer, and this led me to believe that seeing “War on Everyone” would be worth my time. “Calvary” is an intelligent film and it displays a genuine understanding of the human condition even though it’s a little off kilter. “War on Everyone” is much the same despite the fact that it’s a substantially sillier movie, as it’s very self-aware and consistently funny when it really shouldn’t be.

via onionstatic.com

The film doesn’t boast what I would call a clear narrative thread, and it’s also missing a traditional conclusion because when we leave the characters they aren’t really in a better position than when we met them, but the way that the dialogue is delivered makes the movie engaging throughout. Michael Peña and Alexander Skarsgård both give commanding performances and they have great chemistry on screen, so whenever they appear together you can’t help but be amused.

The type of movie that this is can probably be best summed up by the reaction of an elderly couple who left the theatre just before I did. Presumably they were perplexed because they expected to see a traditional action thriller, so when the woman asked the man what he thought of the film he shook his head tiredly, looked at her in despair, and in his most disgusted voice he exclaimed “what a load of garbage”. That’s the kind of reaction that this movie would warrant if it wasn’t mindful of its own madness, because it’s extremely weird, tackles disturbing material, and its pacing is inconsistent. However, if you know what you’re getting into then this movie is weird in the best kind of way because it’s funny, intelligent, well written, and plays on conventions for no other reason than to entertain its audience.

7.5/10

The Magnificent Seven (2016)

Tags

Chris Pratt, Cinema, Denzel Washington, Ethan Hawke, Film, Film Review, Guardians of the Galaxy, Haley Bennett, Jurassic World, Movie, Movie Review, The Magnificent 7, The Magnificent Seven, Vincent D'Onofrio, Western

via movieweb.com

“The Magnificent Seven” is a modern day Western which teeters on the edge of the line between paying homage and rehashing tired material, and as such fails to leave a meaningful impression. Whilst Chris Pratt and Denzel Washington give a fair degree of effort in service of saving this film from mediocrity, its unoriginal score and emotionally empty narrative make it difficult to enjoy. There are positive moments, and at certain points the comedy within the script finds its mark, but the main feeling you will leave the cinema with after watching this movie’s final act is one of boredom.

“The Magnificent Seven” is a remake of a 1960 film of the same name, and as such it ends up feeling like it belongs to another era. In terms of score and storytelling it’s incredibly dull and derivative; completely absent of surprise, intrigue, and perhaps most importantly excitement. Whilst it would be unfair to say that it’s an awful movie, I think it’s only right to state that I will never watch it again. It’s the perfect example of a film that’s not bad but also isn’t worth your time; the filmmaking embodiment of the word meh.

via screenrant.com

Nevertheless, there are features of “The Magnificent Seven” that work quite well, including the performances and the comedy within the script. As previously mentioned, Denzel Washington and Chris Pratt do well to come out of this film unscathed, and they make the most out of the average material that they’re given. Pratt basically plays a version of himself, or rather a version of his on-screen persona (as established in previous films like “Jurassic World” and “Guardians of the Galaxy”), but that isn’t necessarily a bad thing. His mannerisms and delivery don’t really feel as though they belong to the time period that the film is set in, and his character is underdeveloped and thus inconsistent, but he’s still an endearing, likeable protagonist.

via squarespace.com

However, other performances fall flat, particularly those of Ethan Hawke and Vincent D’Onofrio, who were both incredibly annoying whenever they were on screen. Whether or not the actors are to blame for this is another debate entirely, as it would be reasonable to suggest that they were hampered by the material they were given, but for me their performances verged on nonsensical and took me out of the experience of watching the film. This was partly intentional, as both men played characters that were intended to be quirky, but their performances coupled with the writing put them on the wrong side of laughable.

Overall, I feel that “The Magnificent Seven” crippled itself by focusing on comedy when this was directly in conflict with a narrative which at its core was about violence and revenge, and as a result watching it felt like a chore. I could go on listing its faults in excruciating detail, but I feel that to do so would be superfluous given that my position is so abundantly clear. The writing was poor, the performances were inconsistent, and the whole thing felt uninspired. It isn’t the worst film ever made – in all fairness it isn’t even close to being the worst film I’ve seen this year – but there was very little to like about it.

5/10