Zombieland: Double Tap (2019) film review

Year: 2019
Running Time: 99 minutes
Director: Ruben Fleischer
Writers: Dave Callaham, Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick
Producer: Gavin Polone
Cast: Woody Harrelson, Jesse Eisenberg, Emma Stone, Abigail Breslin, Zoey Deutch, Rosario Dawson, Luke Wilson, Thomas Middleditch, Avan Jogia
Zombieland: Double Tap is now in cinemas everywhere and is distributed by Sony Pictures.

Zombieland: Double Tap is exactly the type of movie needed if you, like so many others, need the right amount of silliness and apocalyptic zombie violence to get you through the annoyance of the world in the current state it is in. Never taking itself too seriously and having a clear sense of what it is, the sequel to 2009's Zombieland is a complete riot and brainless fun. Pun intended.

The horror sub-genre of zombie films has become overly saturated in recent years, and one would be forgiven for wondering why and if we really needed a sequel to Zombieland. The truth is that we never needed Double Tap and there is really no reason at all it had to be made as it doesn't offer anything new or different to either the genre or the first film. However, in the name of ridiculous and ludicrous fun, it is definitely not a crime against humanity that it exists. Zombieland: Double Tap offers up a form of violent and often random comedy with plenty of action-packed horror sequences that makes it entertaining and enjoyable.

Taking place a decade after we first met Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg), Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), Wichita (Emma Stone) and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin), the four are still surviving the zombie apocalypse and have arrived at the home to beat all homes, the White House. Their new place of residence is an amusing choice to have as in Zombieland's alternate universe (which would be our current reality), nothing happening in the White House is comical. So using this opportunity to lighten the tension felt towards American politics and turn it to laughter through this film is a blessing. The Double Tap screenplay really does not have much to offer that is different to the first film or unpredictable. It is another tale of survival in a world that has been taken over by the undead, while trying to maintain the need for regular human needs and wants and social interaction. As expected, the two often collide with each other. Breslin's Little Rock, in particular, struggles with still being the baby of the group, although she is now an adult and wants to have experiences typical to her age.

The film completely delivers on it's promise of action with various spectacular and gory forms of zombie death at the hands of Columbus, Tallahassee, Wichita, Little Rock and the fiery and heroic Nevada (Rosario Dawson). Double Tap also delivers on the promised laughs, but is still not immune to several attempted jokes falling flat, including the needless and ridiculous post-credits scene. Harrelson and Eisenberg deliver many of the laughs with their wit, as does Stone with her brand of sarcasm. While Breslin, unfortunately, struggles to keep up with the comedic ability of her co-stars with her character being completely bland and uninteresting.

Yet, it is Zoey Deutch as clueless Madison who steals the show in every scene she is in. Madison is stuck in the image of the late 2000's then Hollywood It girl, Paris Hilton, but is light years more hilarious than anything that was seen on "The Simple Life". The character is one that shouldn't work and would be painful and offensive if anyone else but Deutch had played her. Instead she adds to the hilarity and fun of the film, which is a credit to Deutch as a comedy actor.

It is true, Zombieland: Double Tap doesn't need to exist. However, a film that is as mindless as this with its thrilling action and comedy is a great thing to have exist in this world whether it is needed or not.

6.5/10

Black Panther (2018) film review

Year: 2018
Running Time: 134 minutes
Director: Ryan Coogler
Writer: Stan Lee and Jack Kirby (based on the Marvel comics by), Ryan Coogler and Joe Robert Cole (written by)
Cast: Chadwick Boseman, Michael B. Jordan, Lupita Nyong'o, Danai Gurira, Martin Freeman, Daniel Kaluuya, Letitia Wright, Winston Duke, Sterling K. Brown, Angela Bassett, Forest Whitaker, Andy Serkis

Review by Debbie Zhou

The Marvel Universe has often plodded through a predictable chain of movies, but in comes the newest addition, Black Panther – a triumphant wake-up call to the primarily white-casting of the superhero genre. It marks a step in the right direction for Marvel, right off their more playful and thoughtful efforts with ambitious filmmakers, such as Taika Waititi in 2017's Thor: Ragnorok. This time, there's a more serious approach at play, and director Ryan Coogler confidently takes the reins with a wholehearted embrace of African cultures and experiences, and empowers his protagonists with agency and a unique story.

Black Panther places T'Challa (Chadwick Boseman) as the newly-appointed King of the African nation, Wakanda, following his father's death. As King, T'Challa is given the powers of Black Panther, deriving from the alien metal vibranium. This special metal is engineered into the entire country, providing them with ultra-modern advanced technologies which enables the population to power their cities – that not even “progressive” Western first-world countries could imagine.

This is a vision of Afro-futurism in its sheer beauty. The scale of Coogler's invention onto the Marvel stage derives not only from the epic landscape and technological wonder of Wakanda, but his meticulous attention to detail. He focuses on the smallest elements which evoke a sense of identity to the Wakandan people – down to the intricacies of African dress, rituals and music (the heavily-percussive and vocal score by composer Kendrick Lemar stands out); it ultimately fuels a prideful connection to a culture that we are rarely gifted the chance of seeing on our screen in such magnitudes.

And there are some fantastically crafted sequences that come from this total encompassing image of diversity, crafted by Rachel Morrison (she is the first female Oscar-nominated cinematographer). The action sequences are shot with rapid intensity, and in particular – a casino scene stands out in its fluidity, through its use of tracking shots. Here, the female protagonists, Nikia (Lupita Nyong’o) and Okoye (Danai Gurira) , are empowered through their fierce movements – the framing and focus of the story becoming integral to fully owning their characters as T’Challa’s true allies and warriors. Shuri (Letitita Wright), T’Challa’s younger sister, is also a nice addition to his circle – whose innovation and intelligence powers the use of vibranium in astonishingly new ways.

The story's antagonist is Erik Killmonger (played by the always reliable Michael B. Jordan), although Klaw (Andy Serkis) sets the stones for the brooding villain to step his feet into Wakanda. But in this Marvel story, T’Challa’s sole dilemma is made more complex: it doesn’t derive purely from a need to defeat a villain, he also faces the challenge of living up to his Father’s legacy and questioning whether change is necessary.

Killmonger is one of the more interesting villains Marvel has created, and Coogler actively attempts to reflect the underlying social and racial problems of America through his character. By incorporating the African-American experience, there's a bitter anger that dictates Killmonger’s actions; the exclusivity of vibranium means that those marginalised in other societies cannot access it. But while the contextual settings hands him over the perfect justification for his acts, Killmonger is quickly tossed to the side as a one-note villain (a Marvel trope) in the third act – where his actions become tyrannical, and his unreasonable abuse of power makes his personality lose nuance and authenticity.

Still, with Black Panther – Coogler has presented us with a section of the Marvel universe that reduces its white characters into supporting roles and instead, elevates its black protagonists on a platform which enables them to fight for their beliefs and their cultures. And for that ground-breaking act, it is most likely the best Marvel film yet.

7/10

Dunkirk (2017) film review

Year: 2017
Running Time: 106 minutes
Writer/Director: Christopher Nolan
Cast: Kenneth Branagh, Mark Rylance, Tom Hardy, Fionn Whitehead, Cillian Murphy, James D'Arcy, Aneurin Barnard, Harry Styles, Jack Lowden, Tom Glynn-Carney, Barry Keoghan

Dunkirk will be released in Australia by Roadshow Films on July 20 and in the United States by Warner Bros Pictures on July 21. 

When it comes to his films, Christopher Nolan is no stranger to winning the approval of audience's and critics alike. Yet with Dunkirk, he takes this admiration to a whole new level.

Dunkirk is a major cinematic force with Nolan's masterful storytelling and phenomenal direction. The film is a stunning piece of art that retells a well known piece of history in an unique, intense and enthralling way. While Dunkirk is being hailed as Nolan's finest film to date, it does not need to be grouped together with his past films in order to be considered a stroke of genius.

The events which took place on the beach at Dunkirk are considered to be a miracle. The prospect of a mass evacuation of over 300000 British troops on the French beach during World War II initially seemed impossible due to the lack of resources needed for a rescue. This story has been taught in classrooms all over the world as part of WWII studies and there have been several retellings in popular culture. However, none quite like Dunkirk. 

The film is a tense and intriguing time lapse of three equally important facets of the most important day at Dunkirk- land, sea and air. Dunkirk is not a typical war narrative, as it represents just a snapshot in time and is driven entirely by the theme of survival. For the soldiers waiting on the beach, they were defenceless against the enemy. There was no way of fighting back against the bombers from the ground. The film shows the desperation of the soldiers as they fight for their life and how far people will go to stay alive. It also looks at how survival itself is heroic and is something that is to be celebrated, not scorned.

The inherent nature of films that deal with survival is that they must be suspenseful. Whether the viewer knows who will survive or not is irrelevant. Dunkirk is so intense that it often makes one forget to breathe. The film is just the perfect example of everything coming together to get the most out of it's screenplay. Nolan brings a trio of moments of warfare terror together all at once at regular intervals throughout the film to build tension to the highest level, with the help of Hans Zimmer's brilliant score and phenomenal sound editing. These scenes come with incredible sweeping shots of Dunkirk and astonishing cinematography by Hoyte Van Hoytema of land, sea and sky.

It is easy to look at the characterization in Dunkirk the way you would at other feature films, in which case it would be exceptionally weak. We come away knowing very little about each of the main characters.This would usually mean we feel no emotional connection towards anybody in the film and do not care whether they survive or not. However, the lack of identity of each of the characters serves a purpose here.

There were 400000 soldiers stranded on the beach at Dunkirk hoping for a miracle that would allow them survive and find their own way home. It didn't matter who these soldiers were at home, while they were at war they were all stripped of their identity and nameless and faceless in the eyes of the enemy. During those final days at Dunkirk, it was all about survival no matter who you were and where you were from. Most of the soldiers cast are physically alike to emphasise this point. Despite the lack of character in the film, there are some wonderful performances with Mark Rylance, Kenneth Branagh and Tom Hardy being stand-outs.

Dunkirk is stunning filmmaking. While it is confronting and incredibly intense, it is gratifyingly so thanks to Christopher Nolan's outstanding direction and creative vision.

9/10

Baby Driver (2017) film review

Year: 2017
Running Time: 112 minutes
Director/ Writer: Edgar Wright
Cast: Ansel Elgort, Kevin Spacey, Lily James, Jon Hamm, Jamie Foxx, Eiza Gonzalez, Jon Bernthal, Flea, Lanny Joon, CJ Jones

Baby Driver is now showing in cinemas everywhere and is distributed by Sony Pictures.

Edgar Wright's magnum opus, Baby Driver is the action packed cinematic dance that has shattered it's genre confines with it's creativity, originality and it's creator's obvious passion.

From the very beginning, Baby Driver is demanding of your full attention and there is nothing dissatisfying about this. The film opens with Ansel Elgort's Baby pulling his car up outside of an Atlanta bank, ready for his passengers to begin their heist. The heist soon turns into an high speed car chase as they speed away from the bank with "Bellbottoms" by The Jon Spencer Blues Explosion playing loudly. Not only is this the best opening scene you will see this year, but it sets the tone for the film perfectly and gives you a taste of what to expect.

Wright's film is the result of a long time passion project that has finally seen the light of day and is anything but self-indulgent in the way that filmmakers passion projects can often be. This action film with his unmistakable brand on comedy is by no means a traditional film. While most films have a soundtrack to accompany it, Baby Driver is a story told by means of it's soundtrack. Each scene is carefully choreographed to the song that it is accompanying and it is a joy to watch how Wright has directed these scenes, especially the "Hocus Pocus" chase scene, "Tequila" shoot-out and explosive "Brighton Rock" scene.

The visuals and cinematography are also particularly Wright-esque with close-ups on objects as they are utilised, which fits perfectly with the rhythmic feel of the film.  Baby Driver also uses these objects and the soundtrack as symbols to mix the modern with the nostalgic at various points throughout the film. As Baby listens to "Harlem Shuffle" by Bob & Earl as he gets coffee for his accomplices, the film has a particularly 1970's feel about it. Throughout the film, we see items such as a Polaroid camera and an iPod in the same scene which is a contradiction of time periods. We also see Baby listen to vinyls and tapes, but also listen to his iPod continuously. All of these images make Baby Driver into a film that will remain timeless, as it combines the old and the new rather than working with one specific time period.

While music is a major driving force (excuse the pun) behind the film, Baby Driver focuses a great deal more on character than any other of Wright's films before it. There is not one character in the film that the viewer feels they do not know at least a little about (the only exception here being Jon Bernthal's Griff). The lead character of Baby is exceptionally fleshed out, with not a doubt being left as to who he is, what his motives are and what lies behind the quiet exterior. We come to know him and experience his ordeal with him.

One of the most interesting things about the film is how unexpected character reversals take place. Baby Driver isn't completely unpredictable, but what is unpredictable is the direction certain characters take. The people you believe are going to be the villains turn out to be the good guys and the good guys turn into the bad guys. Jon Hamm's Buddy and Kevin Spacey's Doc are perfect examples of this.

Yet, perhaps the most interesting character is that of Darling, as portrayed by Eiza Gonzalez in her breakout performance. Although her exterior may be perceived by some people to be the opposite of feministic, she could well be the strongest person in the film. As well as being his wife, Darling is Buddy's femme fatale and the Bonnie to his Clyde. Not only that, but she is his strength and she keeps him grounded. There is no doubt that Buddy is a dangerous human being, but he is far less dangerous with Darling around. And if she asks him to do something, he will do it. Darling also refuses to be intimidated by anybody else, which at the end of the day has nothing to do with her husband. She's an incredibly strong character and more emotionally in control than any other character in the film. 

Baby Driver is highly entertaining and often confronting with it's insane car chase and action sequences, but it is definitely not a straight forward genre film by any means. It is an incredibly unique production that breaks down barriers and is a stunning cinematic work of art.

8.5/10

Wonder Woman (2017) film review

Year: 2017
Running Time: 141 minutes
Director: Patty Jenkins
Writers: Allan Heinberg (screenplay and story), Zack Snyder and Jason Fuchs (story), William Moulton Marston (Wonder Woman created by)
Cast: Gal Gadot, Chris Pine, David Thewlis, Robin Wright, Connie Nielsen, Danny Huston, Elena Anaya, Lucy Davis, Ewen Bremner

Wonder Woman is released in Australia on June 1 (Roadshow Films) and the United States on June 2 (Warner Bros Pictures).

Wonder Woman is being hailed as a triumph by many as it has seemingly brought the DC Universe back from the depths of critical despair it has found itself in.

However, it's success is not at all dependant on it's superiority to Man of Steel, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and Suicide Squad. Although it is not at all a stretch to say that Patty Jenkins' film has restored confidence in the Warner Bros DC Universe, nothing takes away from the fact that Wonder Woman is thrilling, smart, unexpectedly sweet and most importantly, ground-breaking.

The strength of Wonder Woman lies collectively in Patty Jenkins' flawless direction, Allan Heinberg's strong screenplay and Gal Gadot's perfect portrayal of the superhero we have all been waiting for. The intriguing origins story of Justice League member, Wonder Woman and her alter ego, Diana Prince (although it doesn't seem to be much of a secret in this film that one is the other)  brings together the settings of the idyllic island of Themyscira and the dread of World War I, as she finds her destiny and comes to understand what is worth fighting for in the world of man. While not completely airtight, Heinberg's well-written screenplay makes the story of the inspiring warrior princess compelling and intriguing.

While Wonder Woman first graced the pages of comic books back in the 1940's and was a hit on the small screen in the 1970's with Lynda Carter, finding her place in cinema has been a problematic affair. A film with Wonder Woman at the helm has been in development in one way or another since 1996 with many different directors and actors involved. It's been a long wait, but a wait that has been well worth it as Patty Jenkins is the perfect director for the film and Gal Gadot the perfect leading lady.

Jenkins direction is absolutely exquisite. However well-written Heinberg's screenplay is, there is so much that when transferred to the screen could have come across as extraordinarily cheesy and overdone, but with Jenkins' direction seems almost natural and astonishing. One example of this is the scene when Diana first becomes her superhero self as she walks in the revamped Wonder Woman suit through the trenches in slow motion. Even describing this gives the impression that it could well be painful to watch. Yet, the way Jenkin's directs this scene makes it absolutely breathtaking when combined with the haunting musical score by Rupert Gregson-Williams and stunning cinematography by Matthew Jensen. It is such an important moment in the film and it is executed to perfection.

This is only one example of how Jenkins is able to set her film apart from other films of the superhero genre. These days, superhero films are generally a showcase of mind-blowing special effects and exhibitions of how they be used to create the most spectacular action sequences. Wonder Woman isn't unlike this by any means, but what makes it's fast paced and impressive action scenes even more so is that they are spread out through the film rather than piled on top of one another like so many other films. This point of difference makes Wonder Woman taking on her enemies even more exciting to watch and as incredible as her fighting scenes are, they do not feel like an assault on your senses.

And it is not just the spectacular action that makes Jenkins and Gadot the perfect team. Together they make Wonder Woman so much more than a female superhero who can outplay any villain regardless of gender, although she is definitely this too.

When we first met Diana Prince in last year's Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, Gadot stole every scene she was in. However, the Diana from that film is a very different one than what we see here and this is a much welcomed difference.

Wonder Woman is the perfect origins story as it not only makes you understand the character more, it makes you connect with her. As Diana moves from her homeland where she is royalty and where gods were worshiped, to London and the world of man, she struggles to adapt to social etiquette. Hilarity ensues as she learns basic cultural differences and in particular, the ice cream scene is quite adorable. Her dialogue during this time could have been over-emphasised (especially considering she is a princess) and the comedy been goofy and forced. Yet, Gadot is so natural, genuine and endearing. She is not only likable, she is lovable. You truly care about her and want her to be victorious. Her reason for being a fighter and a hero is admirable and beautiful, which is something you can't normally say for superheroes in film.

Wonder Woman need not be compared to other DC films for it to be hailed as a success. It is the superhero/action film that we have been waiting for. With it's wonderful hero and brilliant direction, Woman Woman is a grand achievement in a genre where it is becoming harder to please audiences.

9/10

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales (2017) film review

Year: 2017
Running Time: 129 minutes
Directors: Joachim Ronning and Espen Sandberg
Writers: Jeff Nathanson (story and screenplay), Terry Rossio (story)
Cast: Johnny Depp, Javier Bardem, Brenton Thwaites, Kaya Scodelairo, Geoffrey Rush, David Wenham, Kavin McNally, Martin Klebba, Stephen Graham, Golshifteh Farahani, Orlando Bloom

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales is distributed by Walt Disney Pictures and will open in Australian cinemas on Thursday May 25 and in the United States on Friday May 26.

How did we ever get a fifth Pirates of the Caribbean film?

14 years after we first met Johnny Depp's eccentric buccaneer Captain Jack Sparrow in The Curse of the Black Pearl, the franchise is still plodding along with impressive box office returns, but unable to hold a candle to the original first film. The good news is that while Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales may be blatantly imperfect, it is nevertheless entertaining, enjoyable and a rewarding return to the spirit of the first film.

The Pirates of the Caribbean franchise has it's fair share of critics and those who wonder how in the world it got to a fifth film, but it's loyalists understand the fascination with the series and why Jack Sparrow continues to intrigue. One only has to look at the inspiration for the original film to understand it's staying power.

The Pirates of the Caribbean ride at California's Disneyland was opened to the public on March 18, 1967, which was 12 years after the park was opened and it was the last ride which Walt Disney himself had a hand in designing. Despite the New Orleans Square ride being one of the oldest in the theme park, it has drawn steady crowds since it's opening and is still considered by many to be  their favourite Disney attraction. The Pirates ride is by no means the best way to get your adrenalin pumping at Disneyland, but the boat ride which takes you through the wild and scandalous Audio-Animatronic world of the Caribbean never fails to delight park-goers.

The reason for the ride's ongoing success is that the concept and world of pirates has and always will excite and intrigue. Along with that unmistakable Disney magic, this is exactly why the film franchise is still going strong and attracting audiences over a decade later. In recent times, Disney are the only one's who have been able to successfully convey the dark and dangerous world of swashbuckling pirates to the big screen and combine it with the light-hearted humour and enjoyment that makes pirates simultaneously fun and thrilling. They do this so successfully that a fifth film is not surprising nor a terrible idea.

Despite the worry that the franchise was starting to tire, Dead Men Tell No Tales is the strongest in the series since the original film. Depp returns as Captain Jack Sparrow to search for Poseidon's trident with new allies, Henry Turner (Brenton Thwaites) and Carina Smyth (Kaya Scodelairo), when an old and menacing enemy, Captain Salazar (terrifyingly portrayed by Javier Bardem) reappears.

The new film is far from flawless with it's complicated story that is initially hard to follow, it's tendency to be goofy rather than funny at times and evident holes in it's screenplay (much like The Curse of The Black Pearl). However, it is nevertheless entertaining, enjoyable and painless viewing. As well as being perhaps the most visually attractive of the franchise so far with it's incredible special effects, cinematography and production design, it rewards the loyal Pirates of the Caribbean fans by building on the stories of past characters (including Orlando Bloom's Will Turner) and giving more background to others, specifically Jack Sparrow and Geoffrey Rush's Captain Barbossa.

While the resounding question is made about whether Pirates of the Caribbean is still relevant, the same is undeniably being said about Depp and his Captain Jack Sparrow. After Depp was nominated by the Academy for his portrayal of the beloved antihero in The Curse of the Black Pearl, the screenwriters for the past four films (including Dead Men Tell No Tales) have given his character many recurring quotes and eccentricities...many of which have become tiresome and lack the amusement they once did. Depp is fine in Dead Men Tell No Tales and truth be told, starts the film a great deal more irritating than he finishes it. However, the inevitable question is whether it is now time for Depp to hang up his pirate hat and say goodbye to Captain Jack Sparrow?

For many the answer would be yes...but there would almost certainly be no other pirate protagonist quite like Jack Sparrow. Love him or hate him, there is no one quite like him and it would almost be impossible to reimagine a character like him to lead future Pirates of the Caribbean films..presuming there will be more. The reason fans will be praying for me is the fact that Dead Men Tell No Tales only scratched the surface of Jack's past and there is so much still to be told.

However, one would also not be disappointed for another film if Paul McCartney was to reprise his role as Uncle Jack, as it is undoubtedly one of the best scenes of the film.

We may not have needed a new Pirates of the Caribbean film, but Dead Men Tell No Tales is a thoroughly entertaining and rewarding experience for those who have stuck around hoping that the franchise is able to return to the glory days of The Curse of the Black Pearl.

7/10

Ghost in the Shell (2017) film review

Year: 2017
Running Time: 107 minutes
Director: Rupert Sanders
Writers: Masamune Shirow (based on the comic "The Ghost in the Shell" by), Jamie Moss and William Wheeler (screenplay)
Cast: Scarlett Johansson, Pilou Asbaek, Takeshi Kitano, Juliette Binoche, Michael Carmen Pitt

Ghost in the Shell is now showing everywhere and is distributed by Paramount Pictures.

Rupert Sanders' anime to live-action redux, Ghost in the Shell takes a cinematic sci-fi concept that is rather tired and gives it yet another spin. However, with it's entrancing, spectacular visuals and cinematography, the film set's itself apart from the mould by being haunting, mesmerising and entertaining.

Yet, like several other Hollywood films this year, Ghost in the Shell has been shrouded in controversy which has inevitably hurt the film's chance of widely being accepted by fans, praised critically or receiving any spectacular box office returns.

In the not too distant future, our society has become increasingly obsessed with information sharing and as a result, terrorism has now been extended to hacking into others minds. The ultimate weapon has been created by transplanting a human brain into a cyber-enhanced body and the result is Major (Scarlett Johansson), who is the first of her kind. As a new enemy surfaces that threatens those close to Major, the ghost of who she once was in her past life starts to slip into her subconscious and leads her to question everything and everyone she trusts.

Ghost in the Shell acts as both a remake and origins story to the 1995 anime original, The Ghost in the Shell. A concept that worked so well and felt original in the mid-1990's (especially as an animation) unfortunately does not have the same impact in 2017, as we have now seen more than our fair share of Artificial Intelligence films that seek to question their ability to take on human emotions and characteristics. We could argue that if this film had been remade years ago it would have been ground-breaking and as creative as a remake could be, but it still would not have worked for avid fans of the original in regards to the casting of the likes of an actor like Scarlett Johansson.

The casting of Scarlett Johansson in the role of Major is a controversial one, but should not be used as a tool to actually review or judge the film as a whole. This topic is more one for people to discuss the issue of Hollywood white-washing. This is something that has been featured in Hollywood films for it's entire existence since the early 1900's, but in today's society it is more of an issue than it ever has been. In regards to the casting of Johansson, Michael Carmen Pitt, Juliette Binoche and Pilou Asbaek, it is not an intentional insult to Japanese actors or filmmaking. It is, however, a marketing ploy to make the film more accessible to wider audiences. Yet, with the original The Ghost in the Shell being as well known as it is, it is a useless business technique as it may well have been greater accepted by many without a Caucasian Hollywood actress in the lead.

Despite her controversial casting, Johansson is an absolute powerhouse. She has proved herself in the past few years as an outstanding action actor and her role as Major in Ghost in the Shell is physically reminiscent of that in 2014's Lucy and her Marvel persona of Natasha Romanoff/ Black Widow. It is such a shame that with the self discovery aspect to Johansson's character of Major, there is so little emotion written into the film. There is much opportunity to make the film an emotional experience and bring about a debate about the direction technology is heading, but this is left obsolete. Johansson does give a great physical performance, but the screenplay and direction don't support the level of intensity and emotion her character should have.

However, Ghost in the Shell's saving grace is in it's visual production, cinematography and incredibly haunting musical score by Lorne Balfe and Clint Mansell. The film is visually spectacular with it's amazingly detailed production design of a futuristic Tokyo and is made to be especially atmospheric with it's beautiful score accompanying it's incredible images. The cinematography by Jess Hall is also absolutely superb. It is it's outstanding visuals and special effects that make Ghost in the Shell worth watching and actually quite awe-inspiring.

Ghost in the Shell's redeeming features are in it's production, but the film as a whole lacks any emotional depth and wastes the underlying issues and acting talents of Scarlett Johansson...despite whether she was the correct casting choice or not.

6.5/10

Power Rangers (2017) film review

Year: 2017
Running Time: 124 minutes
Director: Dean Israelite
Writers: Haim Saban (based on "Power Rangers" created by), Matt Sazama, Burk Sharpless, Michele Mulroney and Kieran Mulroney (story by), John Gatins (screenplay)
Cast: Dacre Montgomery, Naomi Scott, RJ Cyler, Ludi Lin, Becky G., Bryan Cranston, Elizabeth Banks, Bill Hader (voice)

Power Rangers is now showing in the United States and Australia. Distributed by Roadshow Films in Australia.

In yet another 2017 action reboot,  the goofy and self-important Power Rangers attempts to target the teenagers of today, while at the same time unintentionally neglecting their first and loyal generation of fans.

Jason Scott (Dacre Montgomery) was always the cool kid at school, until a mindless prank ruins his future chances of doing anything incredible while he is still a senior. During his time in detention, he meets the recently outcast Kimberly (Naomi Scott) and eccentric Billy (RJ Cyler). His unlikely new friendships with these two lead the three of them to uncover the site of an ancient alien spacecraft, along with other fellow students Zack (Ludi Lin) and Trini (Becky G.). The five discover that they have been chosen to be the five Power Rangers who are to help Zordon (Bryan Cranston) protect the world from the evil Rita Repulsa (Elizabeth Banks). First, they must learn to work together to become who they are meant to be.

Power Rangers, which is based on the 1990's television show "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers", is stuck in a time-warp believing that it is still primarily targeting the same young audience that it once was. However, with taking on a project like this, director Dean Israelite and screenwriter John Gatins have an inbuilt responsibility to also cater for the faithful who were fans of "Mighty Morphin Power Rangers" in their childhood. As a result, Power Rangers works rather well as a film for teenagers with it's simplicity, basic dialogue and themes, characters and stereotypes that are relatable for the high school demographic.

However, this clear vision of the filmmakers to make a superhero film about teenagers for teenagers neglects the majority of Power Rangers audience members....those who watched, loved and were faithful to the television show a good 20 years ago. These long time fans will find the film and it's screenplay a little too basic and silly to completely enjoy. While the action sequences are impressive, there are definitely not enough of them to make the film particularly fun or entertaining to adults who are used to watching more challenging action films brought to us by Marvel and DC. However, there are still reasons to believe that this fragment of the audience has not been completely forgotten as there are a number of shout-outs to the original television series, including the famous "It's Morphin time".

What has most noticeably changed from the 1990's Power Rangers is that the 2017 Rangers are more diverse than they have ever been....and this isn't in regards to race. The filmmakers have made sure that all teenagers who feel as though they are out of place in the world feel inspired by watching Jason, Kimberly, Billy, Zack and Trini. The five rangers are all considered misfits as they do not fit in at their school and in a very The Breakfast Club-esque turn of events, are all part of their school's Saturday detention. However, despite their inability to fit in, they all do incredible things. Most notable of these new special qualities are that of Billy having ASD (Autism Spectrum Disorder) and Trini being acknowledged as queer.

While it is absolutely a step in the right direction having a teenage queer superhero, there is too little done with this to make a real impact and truly feel ground breaking. Director Isrealite told The Hollywood Reporter that he wanted the moment that Yellow Ranger Trini subtly reveals to her new friends that she is not straight to encourage teenagers to believe that "That's OK". However, there is so much more that could have been done with this scene and it's aftermath that would have made it much more of a triumph for the LGBTIQ community, especially for it's younger members. In the scene where Trini "almost" makes her confession, it is still unclear whether she has just revealed her true sexual orientation or not. Israelite says in The Hollywood Reporter article that she is still confused and questioning (as many teenagers are at that point of their life), but this part of the scene seems too vague to be considered powerful. Again, it is no doubt that Trini being acknowledged as queer is a very positive step for both the action film genre and high school sub-genre, but it was an opportunity that deserved to be made more of.

Unfortunately for Becky G.'s Trini, her character development is exceptionally weak which is a travesty considering how pivotal her role is to the film and to cinema. The same can be said for Ludi Lin's Zack, as it is Dacre Montgomery's Jason, Naomi Scott's Kimberly and RJ Cyler's Billy who certainly have more screen time and as a result, their characters are dissected a great deal more. Montgomery, Scott and Cyler all do rather well in their roles and know their characters well enough to give convincing and well-rounded performances.

Elizabeth Banks' villainous Rita Repulsa is a great disappointment. When she first arrives into the modern day, she is truly terrifying. If she had kept the same twisted, ancient features she has in her first few scenes throughout the whole film, Power Rangers would have been a great deal more thrilling. However, the longer the film goes on, the more unintentionally comical and weak her character gets with some atrocious lines of dialogue. In her final scenes, she really is nothing more than a 90's young adult television show villain and this does nothing for the film.

The masses who will be flocking to see Power Rangers for a piece of nostalgia from their childhood will be disappointed with what they see. The film and it's story have not grown up with their audience and while there is a slight element of fun in the film somewhere, it is one of the more forgettable reboots and remakes.

4/10

Kong: Skull Island (2017) film review

Year: 2017
Running Time: 118 minutes
Director: Jordan Vogt-Roberts
Writers: John Gatins (story), Dan Gilroy, Max Borenstein and Derek Connolly (screenplay)
Cast: Tom Hiddleston, Samuel L. Jackson, Brie Larson, John Goodman, Corey Hawkins, John Ortiz

Kong: Skull Island is now showing in cinemas everywhere and is distributed in Australia by Roadshow Films.

King Kong gets yet another turn on the remake wheel with Kong: Skull Island- an alternate story with astounding special effects and impressive cast who are let down by the mediocracy of it's unintentionally comedic screenplay.

Set in 1971 with a striking visual resemblance and hero-worship of Apocalypse Now, Kong: Skull Island  sees a group of scientists and soldiers make their way into uncharted territory in the South Pacific where several planes have gone missing. It does not take long for the group to realise that they have been fooled and instead sent on a deadly mission to a place where prehistoric terrors rule the roost and the giant Kong is the king.  

It is impossible to make a King Kong film in this day and age on a minimal scale. With the advances that are continuously being made in CGI in cinema, we must accept the inevitable, which is that we are going to see more and more remade action films, particularly ones involving giant monsters such as Kong and Godzilla. So it really isn't a surprise that another reimagining of King Kong has been produced whether it was actually needed or not.

Therefore, with the days of making B grade action films or monster story sequels on a shoe string budget gone, Kong: Skull Island has not surprisingly been blessed with a $185 million budget and done wonders with it. The film is a spectacular visual extravaganza which features a larger Kong than we have ever seen before and he is an extremely impressive creation. Kong's island is inhabited by a number of primeval creatures who are all lifelike and terrifying thanks to the fantastic CGI employed in this film. The action sequences which feature these monsters are especially awe-inspiring visually, yet a little lack-lustre when slotted into the story.

Visually, Kong: Skull Island is everything a blockbuster should be. It's an incredible shame that it's screenplay cannot support it's weight. Unlike it's exterior, the script is of B-grade quality. The dialogue is clunky, predictable and, for the most part, unintentionally funny, as is the case with many of the events in the film. When you are not belly laughing at the lunacy of some of the scenes in the film (such as the Skull Crawlers and the camera flash), complete boredom sets in. Unfortunately this plagues Kong: Skull Island right from the very beginning when you are hoping that things will become more exciting once they actually reach the island. But no.

The screenplay does however, pay homage to the original King Kong story with such inclusions as Kong being restrained by chains and Brie Larson's Mason Weaver being the beauty who tames the beast. Yet, this is the only similarity the female heroine shares with Fay Wray's Ann Darrow in 1933 and again when Naomi Watts played her in the Peter Jackson remake in 2005. Mason is a stronger female character than her predecessors and Larson brings to her a raw, but spellbinding quality with her natural wit and charisma. However, the film as a whole is a waste of her talents, as it is for Tom Hiddleston also. Considering Hiddleston is given top-billing, he is actually given very little to do and a terrible lack of character and character development.

And it's an action movie....needs a bit more sass, wit and entertainment...of course Samuel L. Jackson MUST be part of the cast! In recent times, Jackson has just became a caricature of himself and his mutters of "mother f**ker" and "bitch please" are so sub-standard for any film that he is in that it does not have the desired impact in Kong: Skull Island nor makes him seem as bad-ass as he once did. His performance is just so over the top Jackson-esque that it just encourages one massive eye-roll.

Despite the overwhelming temptation the filmmakers must have felt to use the CGI now available to us, Kong: Skull Island really did not need to be made and it's mediocrity says this loud and clear.

4.5/10

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016) film review

Year: 2016
Running Time: 133 minutes
Director: Gareth Edwards
Writers: John Knoll and Gary Whitta (story), Chris Weitz and Tony Gilroy (screenplay)
Cast: Felicity Jones, Mads Mikkelsen, Diego Luna, Alan Tudyk, Riz Ahmed, Ben Mendelsohn, Forest Whitaker, Donnie Yen, Wen Jiang

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story is now showing everywhere and is distributed by Walt Disney Pictures.

While Star Wars: The Force Awakens was an undeniable success, Rogue One brings forth the Star Wars film that people truly wanted to see with a brand new and original story that answers long held questions in the most spectacular and glorious of ways.

Rogue One is what Star Wars fans were eagerly anticipating when Disney announced their plans to expand the Star Wars universe. The Force Awakens was a great starting point for kicking off the new series of films, but many complained of it's lack of originality because of how much it resembled A New Hope. Gareth Edward's film really does expand the Star Wars universe by opening it up to include more than just the Skywalkers and their family tales, and the screenplay by Chris Weitz and Tony Gilroy makes the most of this freedom while also staying true and respectful to the George Lucas films.

Rogue One takes place right before 1977's Star Wars: Episode IV- A New Hope and focuses on the rebels who obtained the plans to the Death Star. Orphaned at a young age when her father, Galen (Mads Mikkelsen) is called upon to work for the Empire, Jyn (Felicity Jones) finds herself years later being recruited by the Rebellion. She discovers that her father has hidden the secret to bringing down the Empire's weapon, the Death Star in it's plans and she must lead a group of rebels into enemy territory to give them hope that the Empire and Darth Vader can be defeated.

Rogue One is a film for Star Wars lovers. It fills a great hole that was left gaping when George Lucas completed his six episodes and answers the questions you never knew you had until you watched Rogue One. Fans of the Star Wars franchise will be delighted with several Easter Eggs throughout the film and also the inclusion of unused footage from A New Hope. However, as a result, this film will mean far more and be enjoyed more by actual Star Wars fans rather than those who are indifferent. The aim of the screenplay is to primarily explain a missing piece of the Star Wars universe and to link up with A New Hope, not to tell a brand new story to appeal to an un-bias audience.

Yet, Rogue One is undeniably entertaining with it's impressive action sequences and outstanding use of CGI. The final act is particularly spectacular as well as visually stunning with a wonderful use of colour combined with high intensity action. While the large majority of the audience will know what the ending to the film will be, the journey is unpredictable and therefore, anything goes. All areas of production are, as one would expect from a Star Wars film in 2016, superb.

There has been much spoken about how the newer Star Wars films are both led by female characters and how strong the characters of Rey (portrayed by Daisy Ridley in The Force Awakens ) and Jyn Erso are. However, what is truly great about the way Star Wars has approached these characters is that they have made gender irrelevant in the creation of them. The fact that they are female in the film is not brought up at all and the respect they receive in these films are equal to that of any male counterpart. Felicity Jones is wonderful as Jyn. She brings to the character her strength as an actor and gives a heartfelt, yet stoic performance.

Ben Mendelsohn also impresses as Director Orson Krennic, but it is once again a droid who steals the show. Voiced by Alan Tudyk, K-2SO is equipped with the wittiest of lines that give the film it's comedy relief, much in the same fashion that R2-D2 and C-3PO have done in the past.

Rogue One successfully expands the Star Wars universe and is an utter treat for long time fans. It may not have the same power for those who are no overly familiar with the past films, but is still entertaining thanks to it's incredible visuals and original screenplay.

8/10

The Accountant (2016) film review

Year: 2016
Running Time: 128 minutes
Director: Gavin O'Connor
Writer: Bill Dubuque
Cast: Ben Affleck, Anna Kendrick, J.K. Simmons, John Lithgow, Jon Bernthal, Cynthia Addai-Robinson, Jeffrey Tambor

The Accountant opens in Australian cinemas on November 3 and is distributed by Roadshow Films.

There will be those who look at Gavin O'Connor's The Accountant purely as an action film and to look at the film from this perspective will mean missing what is truly special about it. Although at times the screenplay tries to be a little too clever, The Accountant has a great deal of heart accompanied by impressive action and fine performances by the cast.

Maths savante, Christian Woolf (played by Ben Affleck) may seem like a quiet, suburban financial accountant, but he really leads a double life uncooking books for some of the most dangerous people on the planet and Christian himself is no stranger to violence. His latest job finds him working for a robotics company trying to discover where there is a discrepancy of a great deal of money, but when he does discover what he was hired to find there are deadly repercussions and he and co-worker, Dana Cummings (Anna Kendrick) must move as quickly as they can so they do not become part of the rising body count.

From the outside, The Accountant looks like your typical action film with its suspense driven narrative and high paced combat scenes. If you judge the film primarily by defining it within the boundaries of this genre, it perhaps doesn't meet the expectations placed on it. However, The Accountant  is about a great deal more than just a financial accountant who leads a double life. The protagonist Christian Woolf has a high functioning form of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and the film is therefore a champion for those who live with or are affected by ASD. It is refreshing to see in cinema a film which shows that autism is not always as noticeable in people as it is widely perceived as being. The film doesn't dwell on the more predictable theme of different being special, but does show how people with the disorder who are high functioning can still live a normal life (or relatively normal in this case).

One of the common and often more noticeable features of autism is that those who are living with the disorder tend to struggle with social interaction, but what The Accountant shows is that this doesn't mean that they don't long for a relationship with someone whether it be platonic or romantic. While some may see this film as being an action film with a character who just happens to be autistic, The Accountant is essentially a film about a man with autism who, like many others in the film, is reacting to the need to keep those that he connects with safe by any means possible. It is evident that Christian still suffers from and is deeply affected by the losses of those close to him and the reason he takes to Dana Cummings so easily is because she is not deterred by his social awkwardness which many others find unsettling.

This idea of us as human beings looking for a connection and trying to understand one another resonates through the screenplay. The Accountant basically has two storylines that do not intersect with each other on screen at any one time. While Christian and Dana are running for their lives, the Treasury Department is also trying desperately to find out who The Accountant really is. This part of the screenplay involving Ray King (J.K Simmons) and Marybeth Medina (Cynthia Addai-Robinson) almost seems worthless at times and the dialogue between the two can often become a lot more complicated than it has to be, but towards the end of the film one realises that they were also there to support the ideology of everybody needing to make a connection.

Ben Affleck completely disappears into the complex character of Christian Woolf. He not only masters the features of a high functioning autistic man (including lack of eye contact and certain mannerisms) with grace and subtlety, but also is able to show the inner torment and pain his character is feeling in as little words as possible. Anna Kendrick as Dana Cummings is adorably likable and the perfect casting to play opposite Affleck's Christian and she brings a beneficial light-hearted quality to the film.

The Accountant is less about number crunching and more about human behaviour and heart. Although it does have moments where it seems a little cluttered dialogue-wise, it does wonderful things for the people in the community represented in the film.

7/10

Suicide Squad (2016) film review

Year: 2016
Running Time: 122 minutes
Director/ Writer: David Ayer
Cast: Will Smith, Margot Robbie, Jai Courtney, Jay Hernandez, Adewale Akkinuoye-Agbaje, Viola Davis, Jared Leto, Cara Delevingne, Joel Kinnaman

Suicide Squad is now showing in cinemas everywhere and is distributed by Warner Bros in the United States and Roadshow Films in Australia.

If Suicide Squad was a school student, it's report card would read "Tried really hard". This is how I want to approach the film. David Ayer's contribution to the DC universe is deeply flawed and not the follow up to Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice that it should have been, but with a little knowledge about the background of the film and what happened prior to it's release, one can see what went wrong.

The premise for Suicide Squad is so exciting, especially for those who are fans of the DC comics. Villains are called upon to do good because the way US intelligence officer, Amanda Waller (Viola Davis) see's it, no one cares if the bad guys get killed. She recruits deadly hitman Deadshot (Will Smith), crazy and loopy villainess Harley Quinn (Margot Robbie), grief-stricken Diablo (Jay Hernandez, Occa assassin Captain Boomerang (Jai Courtney) and Killer Croc ( Adewale Akinnouye-Agbaje). Waller and Rick Flag (Joel Kinnaman)lead them to battle a supernatural force from ancient times, the Enchantress (Cara Delevingne) who seems undeafeatable in her quest to take over the modern world. They must all work together to achieve the unthinkable, but nobody counted on Harley Quinn's boyfriend, the Joker (Jared Leto) interrupting the party to take his girl home.

Back in April, the news of Suicide Squad reshoots sent rumours flying that the cast and crew were back on set in an attempt to make the film more humorous and light-hearted. Director Ayer responded to this by tweeting:

David Ayer ‏@DavidAyerMovies Apr 11

#SuicideSquad “reshoots for humor” is silly. When a studio loves your movie and asks what else you want, go for it!

And his intentions were reinforced with this tweet from August 6 after his film was released with incredible ticket sales:

David Ayer ‏@DavidAyerMovies Aug 6

Thank you thank you thank you! To the folks making @SuicideSquadWB a success this weekend. It's just a fun Summer movie with a good heart.

Despite it's huge box-office figures during it's opening week, the film has been torn apart by critics. Much of the criticism is warranted, but for almost every part of the film that is criticised there is a reason why that decision was made by the makers. The finished product has come to prove that these creative decisions may not have been the right decisions as far as the critics and members of the public are concerned, but Ayer and his cast and crew evidently tried very hard to make it work and remained true to this vision.

Perhaps the biggest problem with Suicide Squad is that it is not the atmospheric, dark tale of these menacing villains that people were expecting and craving. DC films do traditionally have a dark, dramatic edge to them, especially those that exist in the world of Batman. While their fierce rival, Marvel is known for superhero films that are somewhat lighter and have a humorous edge that is expected and embraced.

David Ayer's tweets above indicate that what he was attempting was to grab a piece of what makes a Marvel film work and use it in his film. Suicide Squad makes the bad guys the good guys and seeks to humanize the villains in order to make them more relatable and likable, especially Deadshot, Harley Quinn and Diablo. It's almost an obvious storyline and concept for the film and it is here that the DC universe darkness is taken away and is replaced with empathy. With this switch, the film is automatically lightened and with that comes the reassuring freedom that it is okay to laugh and have fun with the bad guys.

Yet, it does feel as though this has been taken too far. Suicide Squad is trying so hard to make the audience have fun and you can even see how hard it is trying. If Ayer hadn't denied the rumours that reshoots had taken place to make it funnier, you could have believed them after having watched the film. However, with this information that Warner Bros gave the go-ahead for more of what Ayer wanted in the film, this is also obvious that what was wanted was as much of a heightened sense of fun for the audience as possible.

It cannot be denied even by the harshest critic that Suicide Squad does have it's moments where it is indeed fun, but in many instances they become too over the top and the amusement turns instead into a series of eye-rolls. Many of the attempts at humour are so obvious that they fall flat and some characters so stereotypical and exaggerated that they are cringe-worthy (especially Captain Boomerang, who is played by Australian Jai Courtney, but feels like a caricature of the stereotypical Australian). The soundtrack for Suicide Squad is extremely cluttered with a series of pop-rock anthems playing one after the other creating a sensory overload and annoyance with this bombardment. Such musical hits in a film should make the audience want to tap their feet and smile, not rolls their eyes and think "Not another one".

Although the screenplay does have a clear idea of where it is going and what it is saying, it is cliché and once again, far too obvious. How do you create a great villain when the whole film is about villains? Cara Delevingne does as well a job as she could with her character of Judy Moone who morphs into the Enchantress. While she is actually quite likable as Moone, Enchantress is not only a dull villain for the film, but is also an extremely overused type of enemy and is the female version of one in another superhero film from earlier this year, X-Men: Apocalypse. With such a cliché villain comes a disappointing cliché storyline and ending.

The best part about the film is undoubtedly Margot Robbie's Harley Quinn and this in itself is a reason to celebrate. This is Harley Quinn's first cinematic live-action venture and the film is undoubtedly hers. Robbie herself shines as she plays a role with a huge amount of character and all attention is on her in every scene she is in. Out of all the members of the squad, she has the most screen time and the most extensively covered backstory. This can be assumed as one of the things that Ayer decided the film needed to have more of after test-runs. Harley Quinn is the source of the large majority of laughs and really almost everything that comes out of her mouth is meant to be amusing. Luckily, she is such a great character that this isn't too much of a problem, but it is obvious that she appealed greatly to test audiences as she will larger audiences.

Along with Harley Quinn comes the Jared Leto portrayed Joker. The unfortunate thing for Leto and anybody who was ever going to sign on the play The Joker was that nothing could ever stop comparisons to Heath Ledger. Leto does what he can with the role and he does well under the circumstances. His character has the menace of Ledger's Joker, but the colour of Jack Nicholson's, which is the way he has been directed and it is just a shame that the role comes with embedded comparisons so that Leto cannot be praised in his own right.

Leto's case is not helped by the amount of editing his character has. Even before Leto confirmed that a great deal of the Joker's scenes did not appear in the final cut of the film, it is obvious. The Joker is one of the most popular villains in the DC universe and his role is edited so much that it feels as though he has only been included as he is Harley Quinn's boyfriend. According to Leto, there was enough footage shot of the Joker for he to have his own film and this is more than believable as so much is left unspoken of. Although there are no guarantees that the film would have been better with more Joker in it, it does suffer from it's obvious editing as no one should be able to acknowledge editing in the final product and this contributes to it's uneven execution and sloppy finish.

Suicide Squad tries and tries hard to be a spectacular film event. Unfortunately, the film which David Ayer wants it to be is not the film that audiences wanted it to be. Suicide Squad will owe it's staying power to the force that is Harley Quinn and falter because of it's over-exaggeration, sloppy creative choices and unwarranted editing,

4/10

The Legend of Tarzan (2016) film review

Year: 2016
Running Time: 110 minutes
Director: David Yates
Writers: Edgar Rice Burroughs (based on the 'Tarzan' stories created by), Craig Brewer and Adam Cozad (screenplay)
Cast: Alexander Skarsgard, Margot Robbie, Christoph Waltz, Samuel L. Jackson, Djimon Hounsou

The Legend of Tarzan is now showing in cinemas everywhere and is distributed in Australia by Roadshow Films.

Bringing 'Tarzan' back to the realm of live action in 2016 is not even half a bad idea. It is actually a concept that is easy to get excited about when you consider how much could be done with it. However, it takes only five minutes to realise that that is all The Legend of Tarzan is and is instead exceptionally dull, flawed and overly cliché.

In what is an attempt to be unique and original with a story that has been told many times, The Legend of Tarzan is essentially a sequel to the more traditional Tarzan tale and takes place in the years following the "Tarzan meets Jane" fiasco. Tarzan (as played by Alexander Skarsgard), now known as John Clayton, has brushed up to become quite the civilised English gentleman with his American bride, Jane (Margot Robbie) at his side. He is coaxed back to Africa under the instruction of Belgian King Leopold to see what he has done for the countey and is accompanied by both Jane and American, George Washington Williams (Samuel L. Jackson). When they arrive, they find a new enemy in Leon Rom (Christoph Waltz) who is ruthlessly ripping through tribal villages with no guilt and has his eye set firmly on Tarzan.

While it is admirable that screenwriters Craig Brewer and Adam Cozad have tried to do an original take on Tarzan, there is nothing unique in the fact that it is merely a sequel being released at a time when cinemas are literally flooded with origin stories and sequels. It has been a significant amount of time since the last live-action Tarzan film so it can be presumed that the idea for the film came from that lightbulb moment of "Imagine what we could do with that story now!"

Visually, yes. There was a lot that could be done with The Legend of Tarzan and it does not disappoint in this department. The production design is very impressive and the CGI of the African animals and scenery is superb. This is where the excitement and intrigue exists with the film as the story is hardly suspenseful nor action-packed and very predictable. Of course the argument is that Tarzan films and television shows are supposed to have an acceptable level of tackiness and are not supposed to be taken too seriously, but with anything that isn't supposed to be taken too seriously you expect a level of enjoyment and a bit of fun. The Legend of Tarzan doesn't have any of this. It is a Tarzan film that is perfect in so far as capturing the atmosphere of the Congo, but doesn't succeed in capturing the sense of adventure in the way a Tarzan adaptation should.

The Legend of Tarzan is not just a new story about Tarzan, but the revealing of Tarzan as a new man. Alexander Skarsgard's Tarzan is a lot more civilised than the jungle man of old and the animalistic side of his personality is barely existant. He is a man caught between two worlds, but in the situation he finds himself in in this film, you would expect fragments of the man he used to be to come through in his behavior. Physically is a different matter. This isn't just in relation to his physique and his unnatural male model poses that were undoubtedly the basis for him being cast in the role, but he progresses in stature from a very well-to-do man to the King of the Jungle just fine,

It is Margot Robbie's Jane who has a bigger personality than Tarzan himself and has the fire that you would hope her husband would have. As well as Robbie does do performance wise, Jane is a little too contemporary for the film's time period. She is being presented as a cross between a strong woman and a damsel in distress, but with a less than refined accent and vocabulary that was not typical of the time. The fact that in her final close up you can see that Jane has pierced ears, when ear piercing did not come into fashion until the 1920's does not help this case either.

Samuel L. Jackson adds some humour to the film in a role that is again very contemporary, but probably more accepted than Jane. His addition to the cast makes things a bit more entertaining and animated, even if his character is quite Tarantino-esque minus the swearing. Christoph Waltz is fine as the villain Leon Rom, but sadly isn't too much of a stretch from the characters he has been playing of late.

The Legend of Tarzan proves to be nothing more than an exciting idea that cannot carry the excitement through to it's execution.

4/10

Independence Day: Resurgence (2016) film review

Year: 2016
Running Time: 120 minutes
Director: Roland Emmerich
Writers: Nicolas Wright, James A. Woods, Dean Devlin, Roland Emmerich and James Vanderbilt
Cast: Jeff Goldblum, Liam Hemsworth, Bill Pullman, Jessie T. Usher, Maika Monroe, Judd Hirsch, Sela Ward, Brent Spiner, Joey King, William Fichtner, Travis Tope, Charlotte Gainsbourg

Independence Day: Resurgence is now showing in cinemas everywhere and is distributed in Australia by 20th Century Fox.

"We had twenty years to prepare. So did they"

So reads the tagline of Independence Day: Resurgence. Likewise, Roland Emmerich has had twenty years to prepare sequel to the fun, entertaining and thrilling Independence Day, but in all the excitement he has forgotten to correct what was wrong with the former. Instead, what was wrong with Independence Day is what is wrong with Independence Day: Resurgence...and that is only the beginning of it's flaws.

In an alternate world where aliens did invade Earth in 1996, 2016 looks a great deal like the futuristic world as depicted in "The Jetsons" and Disneyland's Tomorrowland. The invasion left Earth knowing a great deal more about the other life forms in our universe, but the other life forms learnt enough about our strengths and weaknesses to have another go at taking over the planet. They return to Earth with a force greater than any we have ever seen causing destruction on a grander scale than before. In other words, exactly the plot we were expecting this sequel to have. Same story, same enemies...just on a larger basis.

Independence Day: Resurgence's timing is only part of it's problem. Of course twenty years is an incredibly long time between movies and it can hardly be a surprise that ticket sales are not as spectacular as they would have liked. Independence Day fit right into 1996 when the disaster film fad was gaining momentum and an interest in the paranormal and aliens was at an all time high thanks to the hugely popular "The X Files". In 2016, the disaster film genre is tired and although there will always be an interest in whether we are alone in the universe, there is not much different that can be done with this concept in film.

Despite the screenplay being rather ridiculous at times and having some atrocious dialogue, Independence Day: Resurgence is still watchable and even surprisingly fun. It is a matter of everything being so exaggerated that makes the film actually quite funny. In reprising his role of now ex-President Thomas Whitmore, Bill Pullman gives an over-the-top patriotic speech that is supposed to be reminiscent of his infamous speech in the first film, but is almost cringe-worthy in how comical it feels. The action sequences are rather enjoyable and this is one aspect that the sequel being made in 2016 has benefit from as CGI has come a very long way since 1996.

Like it's predecessor, Roland Emmerich's second venture with this July 4 franchise doesn't have a small cast. However, one of the things that did make the first film successful was how much emotion the viewer was exposed to regardless of how many characters there were. Now it is the opposite. None of the characters have enough time to make the viewer feel anything for them, but there is undoubtedly a great deal of opportunity to make this happen with loss and love taking place all through the film.

One thing that Independence Day was criticised for (especially in Film Studies classes across the USA) was it's attitude towards women. The male characters were solely responsible for saving the world and the women either waited at home for the men to arrive or were killed off. It is as if Emmerich was aware of this criticism and really did attempt to rectify this, but with the exception of one or two characters still gets it wrong. At the beginning of the film, it looks extremely promising for women with the current President being a woman, once stripper Jasmine Hiller (Vivica A. Fox) is now in the medical profession, Patricia Whitmore (Maika Monroe) is a trained fighter pilot and one of the first people on an African base to investigate is Dr Catherine Marceaux (Charlote Gaisbourg). However, President Elizabeth Lanford and Jasmine do not reach a desirable fate, Patricia's fate is decided by a man and Dr Catherine Marceaux doesn't really do anything of any great merit in the whole film. The only female character who has any success without being supported by a man is military pilot, Rain Lao (Angelababy).

The question still hangs in the air as to why Mae Whitman, who played Patricia Whitmore as a seven year old in Independence Day was not recast in the role. Truth be told that Whitman (who is still a popular working actress) and Monroe are very different types of actresses and many are jumping to the conclusion that it was based on her looks that she was not recast. The role of Patricia Whitemore would have indeed been extremely different had Whitman been called on to reprise her role, but it would have been far more interesting if that was the case. However, Ross Bagley who played Dylan Hiller in 1996 was also not called upon to reprise his role.

The best performance in the film is by Joey King, who doesn't have anywhere near enough screen time. King plays Sam, a young girl who has had the responsibility of her three younger siblings thrust upon her since the recent disappearance of their parents. Despite her limited time in the film, she is the only one who completely captures the raw emotion of her overwhelming situation. She is struggling with the assumed death of her parents and not only taking on the parental role in her family, but becoming an adult literally overnight. She is the only character who you actually feel anything for and empathise with. Despite his dorky patriotic speech, Bill Pullman is also fine enough.

Independence Day: Resurgence is a deeply flawed film that is one of those sequels that never needed to be made. Yet, it is just the right amount of corny and impressive thrills to make it an entertaining blockbuster.

5/10