Figment Reviews

Monday, 9 September 2019

IT: Chapter 2 (2019) - Review

Review:

*Originally written September 9th, 2019*

The last time the latter half of the IT book was adapted for the screen it was a bit of a disaster. The 1990 miniseries/TV film starts of very strong, but once it focused on The Losers Club as adults, it loses all its momentum and falls flat in one of the most laughable and poorly executed film endings I can think of. So there was a lot of worry going into this, despite IT being quite an excellent horror film from 2 years ago that massively improved on the 1990 adaptation as it blended horror, comedy and drama in a way that led to surprising success.

Due to the success of the previous film, Chapter 2 was no doubt going to happen. This time however, it is a lot more self-indulgent and excessive. While it certainly improves in some areas of the previous film, it definitely falters and has its problems. It's not a complete mess though, as this concluding chapter of the story between The Losers Club and Pennywise is a mostly successful and satisfying finale to the series.

Picking up 27 years after they defeated Pennywise in the '80s, The Losers Club are reunited in 2016 as Pennywise returns for his annual spree of murder and mayhem as they swore an oath to destroy him if he came back. As they all return to their hometown of Derry, the group slowly get their lost traumatic memories back of their experience as they need to overcome them and put an end to psychotic clown once and for all.

What concerned me most with this sequel was its run-time. Rarely do horror films go to the lengths of nearly being 3 hours, which is the length of the entire miniseries that told both half of the books. While it certainly helped to have more time to explore The Losers Club as adults, the run-time is definitely excessive and bloated. While it does move at quite a smooth pace, you do start to feel those 170 minutes overall. With a film of this length, it could have committed to exploring the group as adults a lot more, but it really feels like a lot of this is padded out with flashbacks to them as children, which honestly just feels like a series of deleted scenes from the first added in.

The new adult Losers Club all do a great job with their roles. Bill Hader in particular is given the most personality as a grown up Richie, who was gone on to become a successful stand-up comedian. Hader is a actor who has rarely impressed me until he did the HBO show Barry, which is immensely worth seeing, but still, it amazes me he managed to outshine both James McAvoy and Jessica Chastain. Who both give strong performances, but are very much outshined by Hader.

The strongest out the cast is still easily Bill Skarsgard, who still fully commits to his horrifying role as Pennywise, mixing wonderfully over the top comedy with grotesque acts of evil seamlessly. There's very much a less is more approach with Pennywise this time around as he actually features very little in the film, which I actually preferred. Based on the success of the first film, they easily could have doubled down on Pennywise, but instead they commit to focusing more on the characters of The Losers Club, which is definitely a move that would annoy a few people, but for me, it's what I'd prefer.

While Pennywise and his presence are responsible for pretty much all the horror here, a lot of it is sadly CGI creations which look far too fake to have any kind of impact. While there is far too much CGI over practical work, there is still some monstrous creativity here as things get really, really weird. There are images I did not expect to see from a big budget studio film and I kinda applaud them for that. I don't wanna spoil anything, but you're gonna see some weird shit.

At its core though, the IT series is more about overcoming repressed trauma by tackling it head on, which is something the writing and cast manage to handle quite well. The plight of The Losers Club as they have to come to terms with the horror they had to endure as children is what makes this story interesting to me, not Pennywise going bananas and killing kids, which is fun, don't get me wrong, but seeing this characters change and grow stronger and confident as the film goes on is the appeal for me.

The actual battle between Pennywise as The Losers Club that ends the story was completely laughable and pathetic in the 1990 version and while this certainly improves on that, it still feels underwhelming. There are moments of weird and graphic imagery in the overstuffed finale, but like I said with a lot of the horror, it really was just a massively overblown mash of unconvincing CGI. I've not actually read the book, so I'm not sure how faithful it was, but they've done this battle with Pennywise twice now in similar ways, so his "True Form" really doesn't seem to be something that translates well on the screen.

Even with the disappointing finale, the actual end of the film really does wrap things up in a satisfying way, leaving everyone in a position that doesn't make me want a Chapter 3 and made me glad I went on this 5 hour journey with these characters I've really learned to like. That said, with Hollywood being the way it is, if Chapter 2 does half as well as the first one, I'm sure they'll wanna see Pennywise return in some form, in spite of the conclusive nature of this film.

I sound like I complained about this a lot, but in all honesty, I liked it quite a bit. It's flawed for sure and has its problems, but overall it's a satisfying end to this now 5 hour story between The Losers Club and Pennywise and it's a massive improvement on the 1990 adaptation thanks to the strong cast, character work, a now iconic portrayal of Pennywise and enough horrific imagery that while not always convincing, it is at the very least memorable. I feel like a broken record saying this once again this year, but IT Chapter 2 is once again a sequel that never lives up to its predecessors, yet still manages to be something worth watching.

7/10 Dans

IT: Chapter 2 is out now in cinemas in the UK. With a 4K UHD Steelbook available to pre-order from HMV
Watch the trailer below:

Sunday, 1 September 2019

Angel Has Fallen (2019) - Review

Review:

*Originally written September 1st, 2019*

Now, the Fallen series has possibly been the furthest you can get from high-art when it comes to cinema, but there's just something about this series that keeps me coming back to it. It's possibly the '90s feeling action throwback feeling that I have a soft spot for and the fact Gerard Butler's incredibly named hero "Mike Banning" is one of the most deranged and psychopathic leads I've seen from a film of this genre.

I'm genuinely amazed this franchise has now released its third and final(?) film after starting as one of the two Die Hard in the White House knock-offs of 2013. For what the previous two films have been, they were good fun, tasteless, xenophobic, racist and violent, but it felt like it knew this and ran with it. I sort of appreciate them for that, plus its rare we have these mid-range budgeted, adult action films anymore.

This time around Mike Banning is framed for an assassination attempt on the President (Now replaced by Morgan Freeman as Aaron Eckhart did not return) and must clear his name while trying to find out who really did it. It's such basic level stuff and a story we've seen countless times before. Even the Taken series used its third entry to do this very plot, but with a wife instead of president. Despite this, Angel Has Fallen still makes for a very watchable and moderately entertaining action film.

Gerard Butler attempts to add more depth to a Mike Banning that is very different from the previous two films. I assume they listened to the criticisms and attempted to add humanity to what was a previously one note sociopath. Honestly, this is not the Mike Banning who would torture people for fun and tell foreign terrorists to "Go back to Fuckheadistan". While I appreciate the more vulnerable take on Mike Banning who is feeling his age and his previous adventures are beginning to take a serious toll on his physical and mental health, it's handled about as well as you could expect from a series of this level.

The attempts at humanising Banning are surface level at best as all this is often overlooked in favour of getting to the next action scene or moving the plot forward. Now, I was never expecting some character drama looking at Mike Banning's acceptance of his own mortality, but I was at least expecting something more when they were ditching the tone of the previous films for something a bit more grim. Take Logan as a good example, the third in a trilogy where the previous two films were not so good, but then the third film delivered something much more thoughtful, but at the same time managed to be an incredible action film. That's what I feel Angel is going for, but it doesn't come close.

Despite failing to make something meaningful out of its characters, this is still a fairly brisk and watchable action film. The plot of Banning being framed is outrageously predictable and you'd have to have a very low IQ not to figure out who the real villain is a few minutes in. It's so very formulaic, but Gerard Butler actually manages to carry this, as does some solid action.

Once again changing directors with each film, Ric Roman Waugh actually does a decent job with most of the action. It's not John Wick level stuff, but it gets the job done, The violence feels punchy and brutal while there is minor moments of inspiration within the gun-play with some use of POV. It does lack in comparison to the more memorable stuff in the previous films, there's nothing close to the opening of Olympus with gunship wiping out DC or the motorbike chase from London, but like I said, it's very watchable and competent.

What's more surprising is the subplot involving Nick Nolte as Banning's ex-Vietnam vet survivalist estranged father. Nolte is clearly having a blast playing such a deranged coot of a character who pretty much steals the show with his brief scenes and even gets in on some of the action. The relationship with his father does add just amount of depth to Banning to help figure out how he became the psychotic man he's been portrayed as, but as you expect, that's handled as well as you would expect from this film. There's also a mid-credits scene between the two that is one of the most out of place, insane, unfunny and cringiest things I've seen from a film this year.

Whether or not this is the end of the adventures of Mike Banning is another question too. The advertisement and trailers did tease this was the end of this franchise, but it lacks a definitive ending. So I can expect a fourth one if this one does as well as the last two. Although in all honesty, I say keep 'em coming. It's probably a good thing, but we really don't get that many films like this anymore. Good bless Mike Banning.

There's very little else to say about Angel Has Fallen, if you're on board with this throwback series, you'll find something to enjoy in the merely acceptable finale to the trilogy, but if not, you will probably hate this as much as the other two, or maybe less, as the horrible parts of the first two are pretty much absent here. It's sad to say, but Angel Has Fallen is another underwhelming franchise film from 2019 that failed to live up to the previous entries, but at the same time is still acceptable entertainment, if entirely forgettable.

6/10 Dans

Angel Has Fallen is out now in cinemas in the UK

Follow us:
Twitter: @FigmentReviews
Instagram: @FRFigmentReviews
YouTube: Figment Reviews
Letterboxd: Dan
Facebook

Monday, 26 August 2019

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (2019) Review

Review:

*Originally written August 26th, 2019*

I thought I'd watch this at least twice before cementing my opinion on this. I've been a fan of Tarantino films growing up, mostly due to constantly watching Reservoir Dogs on DVD when I was a teenager. A new Tarantino film is always going to be a big deal and this was far and away my most anticipated film of year. I know Tarantino has had a bad rap lately, due to his constant self-indulgences in his recent films, narcissistic personality and frequent uses of a certain N word in his films.

As much as I love Tarantino and will constantly defend him in a year of cinema that has been rampant with soulless sequels and remakes for the majority of major releases, it is always so refreshing to see a film that is so obviously a director's singular vision. Sony agreed to fund this film and let Tarantino do what he wanted, for better or worse. It paid off though, as not only is Once Upon a Time in Hollywood easily one of the best films of the year, but it's also his best since Inglorious Basterds and possibly his most mature since Jackie Brown.

Hollywood contains some of the things that you should come to expect from Tarantino films by now, long scenes that really don't go anywhere, horrific violence, a twist of history and a grotesque amount of disgusting feet shots. Despite all that, this actually feels like it has a lot of substance under all the usual Tarantino flourish. If I had to criticise Tarantino for anything it's that a lot of his films lack any sort of emotional impact, they're pretty much all extremely entertaining, well written and compelling, but I rarely feel myself caring for the characters.

Thankfully that isn't the case here, as Tarantino has conjured up two of the characters he's ever written with fading western actor Rick Dalton and his trusted stuntman and friend Cliff Booth. Hollywood follows a few days in their lives and Sharon Tate leading up to the fateful night Tate was murdered by the Manson Family when she was nearly 9 months pregnant.

First of all, none of this went anywhere I expected it to go at all. In many ways this is quite plot-less, we spend time with Rick, Cliff and Sharon as they go about their day at pivotal moments in their life. Due to Tarantino's dense script, it feels like it has something to say as we see Rick try his hardest not to fade from the spotlight and suffer a few breakdowns as he realises he's not as young and famous as he used to be. One particular scene involving him and a young actress is some of Tarantino's most poignant moments he's ever had in film.

DiCaprio himself is the best he's ever been. Ranging Rick Dalton from sad, pathetic to reflective, but at the same time, easy to root for and sympathise with. His journey during the fading days of the Golden Years of Hollywood is one full of love and respect for the era, even with a few moments of altered history and a few cameos of late celebrities that are sure to divide, but for me I was more than okay with just allowing a lampooning of a late celebrity. Anyway, DiCaprio's arc ends on a surprisingly cathartic note and goes through moments of reflective sadness we rarely get from Tarantino, so it was wonderful to see.

Brad Pitt's Cliff Booth on the other hand is a whole different beast. A stuntman having trouble finding work after the rumours of him murdering his wife and getting away with it (A note that is kept purposelessly ambiguous through the film). Pitt himself is wonderful as he plays a much more quiet and less flashy role than DiCaprio that feels much more subtle and volatile. We spend a lot of time with him just either with his dog or driving around Hollywood before he gets a chance to steal the film once of the Manson Family come into play, which I'll get to.

Lastly, of the 3 arcs here Margot Robbie's Sharon Tate is certainly an interesting choice. Robbie is insanely likeable as Tate, I see what they were going for here, the last bit of innocence before the '60s ended and it mostly works. She's portrayed as just the nicest person ever with scenes of her just going to see her own films in a cinema and gouging the audiences reactions to her scenes with nothing but delight. It's genuinely sweet to watch and I love the subversion of her story building up to what happened in history, but obviously with Tarantino, it goes in a slightly different direction.

It was also lovely to see such detail and attention to the era of late '60s Hollywood. This is a beautifully shot and vibrant film making use of a wide variety of styles and camera work. Tarantino clearly loved this era of film and watching him portray this time in history only made me want to seek out more stuff from Golden Age of Hollywood. I particularly loved the scenes of Dalton's fake films and TV shows from the era, which perfectly matched the style of TV and films from the time. As you would also expect from a Tarantino film, there's a wide variety of incredible music, mostly '60s rock, which I adored, but he also reuses some scores from other films to clever effect, which I noticed the most during a very tense scene involving Booth and the Manson family.

I may as well get to to the Manson Family aspect now. A big part of the marketing was dedicated to the fact it would revolve around the night Sharon Tate was murdered, but much like with the end of Inglorious Basterds, Tarantino changes history. I won't spoil what he does, but it's just as crowd-pleasing, hilariously sadistic and demented as you could hope for. It will definitely divide audiences on whether it was in good taste or not, but for me, it was as close to pure cinema as you could get. It was a complete joy to watch.

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood probably won't change your mind on Tarantino as he indulges in the usual aspects that make him Tarantino, but for me, it was easily his most mature work in a while that spends time with its characters and takes them on a satisfying odyssey of Hollywood in the 1960s while still being as entertaining and demented as Tarantino films usually are. I'll also note that this was the quickest nearly 3 hours for me has passed in a film this year, it completely flies by. I really hope Tarantino doesn't retire after his next film (Or possibly this) because love him or hate him, he's one of the only people still delivering successful original films that have a voice amongst all the soulless live-action Disney remakes and passable Marvel films.

10/10 Dans

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is out now in cinemas in the UK with a 4K UHD Steelbook available to pre-order from HMV
Watch the trailer below:

Tuesday, 6 August 2019

Fast and Furious Presents: Hobbs and Shaw (2019) - Review

Review:

*Originally written August 5th, 2018*

2019 in cinema continues to underwhelm and disappoint. Hobbs and Shaw is both the ninth entry and first spin-off of this unlikely franchise that started as a piece of early 2000's cringe about street-racing and wanking off onto a car bonnet or something. No one would have expected this series to go as far as it has or get as big as its gotten, but then the fifth film came along and changed things. It was no longer about getting your dick hard over a bit of vibrating engine and metal, they became ludicrously dumb and entertaining action films that continued to push the boundaries of insanity with each one.

Which is why I guess I'm a little underwhelmed by this first spin-off starring Jason Statham and Dwayne Johnson as the titular Deckard Shaw and Luke Hobbs. This is a fun film, as it should be, for the most part. It just never lives up to its potential, which feels like something I've been saying far too much for films in 2019. The same Fast and Furious gonzo and insane set-pieces are still here, but it lacks the surprising heart of the main series and the ensemble cast.

Johnson and Statham no doubt have great chemistry together, which is why some of the strongest scenes from Fate of the Furious was their stuff together, so it's easy to see why they would pair these two up for their own spin-off together. It's just a shame that a lot of the jokes and banter between them feels so juvenile and lame, I was surprised at just how many dick jokes were crammed into the first half. Honestly, I was astonished, I've not heard that many references to cock and balls since the last time I saw a Seth Rogen film.

The plot they're thrown into is very by the numbers and generic. The mismatched pair have to team up despite hating each other (Didn't they get over that in the 8th film?) in order to take down Idris Elba's genocidal cyborg soldier who wants to destroy most of the population with a virus that ends up in the hands of Shaw's MI6 agent sister (Vanessa Kirby). Yeah, it's a hell of a long way from the days of undercover cops and street-racing.

When I first heard Idris Elba was playing a cyborg enhanced super-soldier called Brixton, I couldn't think of anything better. Something as nonsensical and absurd as that to push this series further and further into insanity. Sadly, he's a little underwhelming. It's not all Elba's fault though, he does a fine job with what he's given, bringing a certain menace and charisma to the role, it's just the character that's very underwritten. He has some really cool moments and his arsenal of sci-fi gadgets and physics defying motorbike is awesome, but his motivations are the same as several villains as of late - "Wipe out loads of the world's population in order to save it", it's oddly dull.

The real breakout star here was Vanessa Kirby, which I did not expect at all. She really holds her own in action scenes and looks like she has a promising career ahead of her in the genre. She even has much stronger moments and lines than either Statham and Johnson. I hope to see much more of her in this series, whether it be the main series or the inevitable sequel to Hobbs and Shaw.

With David Leitch directing, I had no worries about the action on display here, he did a wonderful job with John Wick, Atomic Blonde and Deadpool 2, so it was awesome to see him work with such a huge budget. His work is easily the strongest stuff on display here and where Hobbs and Shaw really comes alive. It's a shame all the action is spoiled in the trailers, but Leitch really does have a handle on things here. From the gravity and physics defying vehicle stunts to the surprisingly crunchy hand-to-hand stuff, it all feels very fun and creative without living up to insanity of the main series, but it's still wonderfully more crazy and over the top than most films with a budget like this would allow.

It's just a shame the downtime between the chaotic scenes of action seem to drag on so much, it has its moments and a very fun cameo, but it honestly feels about 30 minutes too long with so much that could have been cut for a much leaner and easier to watch film. Some gags and jokes drag on for so long they start to feel like a Family Guy sketch, it just goes on and on. I feel like there's a much better film few cuts away from what we got here.

Hobbs and Shaw just feels a bit too by the numbers for a series as insane and crazy as Fast and Furious. There's fun to be had with the really fun set-pieces and seeing Statham and Johnson together, but it all just feels a little underwhelming and not as fun as it could have been. Passable entertainment, but another 2019 film that didn't live up to its potential.

6/10 Dans

Watch the trailer below:

Hobbs and Shaw is out now cinemas in UK and a 4K UHD Steelbook is available to pre-order from HMV

Follow us:
Twitter: @FigmentReviews
Instagram: @FRFigmentReviews
YouTube: Figment Reviews
Letterboxd: Dan
Facebook

Saturday, 20 July 2019

The Lion King (2019) - Review

Review:

*Originally written July 20th, 2019*

The original Lion King is no doubt my favourite film Disney has ever released. I remember when this was announced I was actually quite excited for it, as I quite liked the Jungle Book remake and a couple of the others. Then something changed, maybe it was me or just the fact I just started to quickly see the rapidly declining state of cinema as these live-action Disney remakes got churned out faster and faster. I mean, this is only the third of five planned films this year alone. I lost all my will towards these after the dull Aladdin.

It turns out my fears were founded. We've dug this property out of its graved, given it a $200 million coat of paint and failed to do anything unique or interesting with it. Yes, it's competently made as it goes through a story we've seen previously beat for beat, but it never amounts to anything close to exciting or capturing the magic from Disney's long gone glory days.

It's the law of diminishing returns in full effect. I'm okay with remakes as long as you do something interesting and change it around a little. Hell, I give Tim Burton's Dumbo even more credit now for at least straying away from the original film and taking the story in a different direction. This just regurgitates a story with seen before. It lacks any sort of surprise or tries to do anything to make it worth retelling the story. It's just so lazy and cynical.

The most annoying thing is the fact it's very competently made. The CGI effects here bringing the photo-realistic animals alive are genuinely incredible and are incredible to look at. Simba as a cub is insanely cute and easy to get attached to, while Scar still has his intimidating design that makes him a great villain, but lacks Jeremy Irons sinister voice performance.

While the animals do look insanely realistic, it also works as a disservice to the story. The 2D animation of the original film made these characters very emotive and easy to care about. This "realistic" depiction has a harder job as the characters here do not emote at all. It's very strange and makes it hard to feel anything when they go through the emotional beats. They always just look like animals who's mouths move, but their faces stay the same, it's so weird and off-putting, taking me completely out the film. It's strange, as they managed to pull this off a lot better (From what I remember) with their Jungle Book remake, but 3 years on, the realism of the animation is better, but completely takes you out the performance and fails to create an emotional bond with these characters, despite the Hamlet inspired story and script unfolding more or less shot for shot.

The star studded cast are very hit and miss. There are some very inspired performances that work, like John Oliver as Zazu and Seth Rogen as Pumbaa, who were both surprising highlights for me. Everyone else though, sadly failed to leave an impact on me. It was cool to have James Earl Jones back as Mufasa, but that must have been an easy paycheck for him, just replicating his performance from 25 years ago for an each paycheck. Barely any of this cast came close to capturing the charm of the original. Shame they didn't have cameos from any of the original cast, although Matthew Broderick is probably too busy killing women in car "Incidents" (The word "Accident" would imply no one is to blame) in Ireland.

This film is going to make over $1 billion and it's inevitable. It's fine. I have no faith left in cinema anymore and these live-action remakes aren't going to stop coming, plus I'm always going to see them out of curiosity. I just feel the same about The Lion King as I have about several others. It boasts groundbreaking special effects to bring this stuff to life, but it loses the heart and soul that made the original films so wonderful. I just left this feeling cold and wishing I just watched the gorgeous 4K remaster of the original instead.

I remember when I'm going through the Disney classic animated films for the first time (Which I'm still working through), I watch them and think I can't wait to watch them again, but with all three of the live-action remakes so far this year, the last thing I've wanted to do is see them again. I have faith Disney will hopefully do something interesting once they've burned through their library of films to remake. Hell, maybe even the inevitable sequels to the live-action remakes will at least do something different with the story and take them to uncharted territory. As for now, we're just continuing to rehash old stories to depressing effect and it's a shame, as I know Disney are much better than this when they want to be.

5/10 Dans

The Lion King is out now in cinemas in the UK
Watch the trailer below:

Saturday, 6 July 2019

Spider-Man: Far From Home (2019) - Review

Review:

*Originally written July 6th, 2019*

Far From Home is probably exactly what this series needed after the massive and heavy epic that was Endgame. I wasn't sure what to expect from this, as after Marvel followed up their nearly as huge Infinity War with the massively average Ant-Man and the Wasp, I was expecting something along those lines, but this surprised me in several ways I didn't expect.

Following from the events after Endgame, humanity has pretty much recovered from everyone returning to life after Thanos' snap and things are pretty much back to normal. It does also answer some lingering questions about the implications of bringing all these people back to life when people had moved on in the mean-time. Parker returns to college and his school trip to Europe is interrupted (Obviously) by some elemental demons being hunted by Jake Gyllenhaal's Mysterio and Nick Fury looks to Spider-Man to live up to Tony Stark's name.

Far From Home manages to balance things a lot better than I'd imagine. Peter progresses a lot here as he struggles with both living up to the hero Tony Stark was and dealing with his new responsibilities while also wanting the normal life of a teenager by attending school and getting a girlfriend. The awkward John Hughes inspired teen stuff from the first film is thankfully intact, as the awkward chemistry between Peter and MJ make for some of the funniest and surprisingly sweet scenes in the film.

While there are huge CGI set-pieces, Far From Home is pretty much character focused first, which I always appreciate. We spend lots of time with Peter as he struggles with his responsibilities and it shows in Holland's ever growing performance as Spider-Man, who is just the right amount of awkward, smart-mouthed and easy to root for. At this point I'd say he's definitely surpassed Tobey Maguire in the role and easily Andrew Garfield's weird, almost special needs like Marty McFly impression he bought to the misguided Amazing Spider-Man films.

A lot of these MCU films also suffer from humour problems, but the tone works really well with these characters. It makes sense that teenage characters would take things a little less seriously and be cracking a joke every now and then, it also helps a lot of the writing seems to be a lot stronger than the usual stuff we get in these films and the hit rate is also a lot stronger. Not everything lands, but some of the funniest stuff of the whole series is in here, especially the two absolutely gold post-credit scenes. I wish the MCU would keep tone down the humour a bit and leave it to separate films like this, as hearing middle-aged men making the same quips you'd here from teenagers is one of the main reasons I find the jokes in these films so cringe, but in the context of a high-school setting, it works.

While none of the action is massively spectacular, it still has a lot of energy to it, while it sadly amounts to big CGI things hitting each other. The more interesting set-pieces are saved for Mysterio's mind tricks, which creates a sequence so zany and out-there, it was close to Doctor Strange in terms of mad imagery and it made perfect use of the character to create that scenario for Spider-Man.

Mysterio himself is a little bit of a mixed bag. Jake Gyllenhaal utterly commits to such a barmy and crazy character, bringing a lot of his usual charm and charisma to the role, he honestly steals every scene he's in, but I just wish they spent more time with his motivation, which honestly isn't the most convincing. It connects to previous MCU films in a fun way and the reveal might divide fans the same way Iron Man 3's twist did. While his motivation isn't the best, the film certainly got more interesting once his intentions are clear and leaves Gyllenhaal much more room to ham it up to incredible effect.

Far From Home is another excellent film from the MCU (Who are also 3 for 3 this year), it ups everything I loved about the first one, continues to develop Spider-Man in new and interesting ways, while delivering a screen-grabbing, but flawed villain. Looking forward to how the third film wraps up this trilogy, especially with THAT post-credit scene.

8/10 Dans

Spider-Man: Far From Home is out now in cinemas in the UK
Watch the trailer below:

Saturday, 22 June 2019

Toy Story 4 (2019) - Review

Review:

*Originally written June 22nd, 2019*

Everything about this sequel reeked of a bad idea. The idea of continuing this series after the perfect ending the third gave us was misguided and felt like nothing less than a cash-grab, then a series of underwhelming trailers prepared me for the worst. My expectations for this were at an all-time low, but that small part of me quickly gained a little bit of excitement for a new Toy Story a few days before I saw this, but like I said, my expectations were weary at best.

I was pretty astounding at how good this turned to be. They did it, those crazy sons of bitches did it. It might not reach the delirious heights of 2 and 3, but Toy Story 4 gives us an emotional, powerful ending to these characters I didn't know I needed. It's not perfect by any means, but it comes very close and feels far from the cynical cash-in I expected.

Like the previous films in this series, it has a huge focus on character over fast paced set-pieces, which is what elevates this franchise above all the over Disney/Pixar franchises for me. It's never afraid to slow things down and spend time with these characters and how they tick, what motivates them and what their purpose in life is.

It was pretty insane and surprising to me at how deep they go into the themes of existentialism. Don't get me wrong, this obviously isn't some art-house meditation on the human condition, but for a kids film, it's not afraid to go places most wouldn't even try to as these toys try to figure out what they purpose is in this world. Are they here just to bring joy to children in an endless cycle of being loved and eventually rejected or were they made sentient to follow their own path and create their own dreams.

Mainly the focus is on Woody, who's existence comes into question with the introduction of "Forky" a new toy made out of trash from their new owner Bonnie. Once Forky is made and declared a toy, he springs to life and struggles to adjust to the idea of even existing. It's kinda fascinating to me that a character made out of a plastic spork was so relatable to me. He spends the opening act believing he's trash and the only place he belongs is in a garbage bag before Woody explains to him the meaning of being a toy.

Except answering Forky's questions about their existence brings Woody's whole being into question as he struggles to move on from memories of Andy and realising his blind devotion to his new owner might not be the thing he wants the most. Along the way he's coincidentally reunited with Bo Peep after being given away between the events of the 2nd and 3rd films, dividing his motivations even more.

It all leads to a soul-crushing ending that left me far more floored than I couldn't prepared myself for. There's a few minor emotional beats throughout that I thought would be as hard as it goes, then it just pulls the rug out from under you in it's final moments. I'm really on the fence at whether this was a more powerful ending than the already beautiful finale of Toy Story 3, but in all honesty, that didn't resonate with me until rewatches. God knows how this one will effect me if it grows on me as much as that did. Hell, I'm even considering this might be my favourite film of the series in future. Time will tell. I also said this about 3, but based on this ending, I do not want another at all.

I can't believe I'm writing this sort of thing about a kids film. It's truly rare we get a film like this with such rich character arcs, motivation, depth and emotion, but Pixar just manage to pull it off again and again. On a technical level, they also manage to push the envelope. The near photo-realistic animation is a marvel to look, it's constantly gorgeous and always varies with its settings, colour palette and details. After rewatching the trilogy last week, it's insane how far the animation has come from the first, which has not aged well in terms of animation in some regards. I cannot wait to watch this in 4K when it releases.

My only real complaints here are that some of the main characters are given very little screen-time or reason to be there. While Buzz does share the most emotional scene of the film, the rest of his role is very reduced and he does very little as him and Jesse are sidelined in a side-plot focusing on them finding Woody, while characters like Rex, The Potato Heads, Slinky and more feel like nothing less than extended cameos for the most part.

While this is disappointing, it is definitely worth mentioning that the new characters are definitely worthy additions and earn their screen-time. From the new and improved Bo Peep, who is a lot better than you remember from the first two films, Keanu Reeves' scene-stealing French-Canadian motorbike stuntman "Duke Kaboom", Key and Peele's two conjoined stuffed bears and a series of really, really creepy old fashioned dolls. Everyone new leaves a very strong impression, almost making the lack of Buzz and Jesse worth it.

After a series of underwhelming franchise films so far this year, Toy Story 4 defies the odds and comes out as one of the best films I've seen so far this year. I'm not even sure if it's a coincidence that my two favourite films of the year so far have been had Keanu Reeves in it (No prizes for guessing what the other one is), but he's picking his projects pretty well these days.

Despite being completely unnecessary on paper, Toy Story 4 is a completely pleasant surprise. A funny, emotional and devastating ride that made it worth bringing back these iconic characters for one last ride. Nothing prepared me for how much I'd like this, but my love for this may continue to grow with each watch and I already can't wait to see it again.

9/10 Dans

Toy Story 4 is out now in cinemas in the UK
Watch the trailer below: