Knives Out (2019) film review

Year: 2019
Running Time: 130 minutes
Director/Writer: Rian Johnson
Cast: Daniel Craig, Chris Evans, Ana de Armas, Christopher Plummer, Jamie Lee Curtis, Toni Collette, Michael Shannon, Don Johnson, Katherine Langford, LaKeith Stanfield, Jaeden Martell, Riki Lindhome.

Knives Out is now showing in cinemas everywhere thanks to Studiocanal.

Rian Johnson's murderous affair, Knives Out is a return to the glory days of the whodunnit. With it's atmosphere of dread and intrigue combined with a spectacular cast who all deliver captivating performances, Knives Out is a reminder of how much fun cinema can really be when everything comes together with perfect timing.

Knives Out feels like Johnson's tribute to Agatha Christie's Hercule Poirot stories. In particular, the film follows the formula of Murder on The Orient Express with it's grand cast and their intriguing and colourful characters, each with a motive for committing the cruellest of crimes. The location here, which is incredibly important in such a story as it needs to have just as much character as the humans, is the exquisite, atmospheric and often quirky Massachusetts manor of bestselling author, Harlan Thrombey (Christopher Plummer). After his untimely death following his 85th birthday party, private eye Benoit Blanc (Daniel Craig) is called in to investigate his death. Even though the easiest conclusion to make about the cause of death is to rule suicide, Blanc believes that one of the family members has something to hide and that Thrombey's death is the result of creative foul play.

The film is a rare type of multi-layered mystery. It plays very much on the idea of things aren't always as they seem and even when you know that things aren't as they seem, how they aren't still remains a mystery. There is a certain level of predictability to Knives Out, but at the same time, it manages to be unpredictable from another angle.

However, it is Johnson's storytelling that is the keeps the film flowing and intrigue high despite whether it is predictable or not. The screenplay is airtight with extremely witty and entertaining dialogue. This characters are all unique and, despite the astounding situation, are relatable as far as personalities in big families go. No family gathering involving money and alcohol is ever a quiet event when there are clashing personalities the way there are in Knives Out. There is no doubt that in the film that Harlan's nurse, Marta (Ana de Armas) is perhaps the purest of souls and has the bad luck of being involved in situations beyond her control. The other characters have large personalities and have all been tainted by Harlan's money, which in turn has made them all dependant, greedy and, to an extent, bitter. Each has a motive to kill, but it is the journey of getting to know each of the characters and laughing at their qualities that makes Knives Out as fun as it is.

The stellar cast give their all when bringing these highly entertaining characters to life. Again, the film is very much like an Agatha Christie novel with Daniel Craig leading as the famous Benoit Blanc. He is indeed entertaining and full of life, but it is Ana de Armas as Marta who the film revolves around and she is such a gentle and endearing leading lady. She immediately earns the audience's love and respect, which is consistent throughout the film. Chris Evans gives new life to the stereotypical spoilt rich kid-adult as Ransom and, like any narcissistic character wishes to do, is the star of every scene he is in with his impeccable timing and enduring sarcasm. He is a fantastic presence in the film and undoubtedly an audience favourite. Michael Shannon, Jaime Lee Curtis and Toni Colette are all also extraordinary characters, who unfortunately don't receive as much screen time as the previously mentioned.

Knives Out brings back the lost art of making the murder mystery fun. With it's individual form of black comedy and host of brilliant characters, it is a film that transports you into a wild world of family turmoil that has never been so enjoyable.

8.5/10

Captain America: Civil War (2016) film review

Year: 2016
Running Time: 146 minutes
Director: Anthony Russo and Joe Russo
Writers: Mark Millar (comic), John Simon and Jack Kirby (characters), Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely (screenplay)
Cast: Chris Evans, Robert Downey Jr., Sebastian Stan, Scarlett Johansson, Anthony Mackie, Don Cheadle, Jeremy Renner, Paul Bettany, Elizabeth Olsen, Chadwick Boseman, Paul Rudd, Emily VanCamp, Tom Holland, Daniel Bruhl, Martin Freeman, William Hurt

Captain America: Civil War is now showing in cinemas everywhere and is distributed by Walt Disney Studios.

While Captain America: Civil War is a solid and entertaining latest offering from the Marvel universe, it can thank it's release date in large for it's critical and box office success.

Captain America: Civil War is more or less The Avengers 3 with the mysterious absence of The Hulk and Thor, and is not surprisingly wonderfully action-packed, but at the same time extremely busy in the way that these multi-protagonist films can be.

The Civil War in the film's title refers to the inner battle of the Avengers with one side being led by Steve Rogers/ Captain America (Chris Evans) and the other by Tony Stark/ Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.). The trouble begins when after one too many destructive battles, the Avengers are put on notice by the American government and are prohibited to partake in activities without permission. Steve Rogers as Captain America has never had this type of restraint enforced on him and does not believe that the group of superheroes should agree to this, while Tony Stark, who has distanced himself from his alter ego of late for personal reasons, believes otherwise. Things become even more complicated and heated between the two when Steve's lifelong best friend, Bucky Barnes or the Winter Soldier (Sebastian Stan) is convicted of a terrible act of terrorism, but wants to defend him. With the Avengers now being sliced into two, the biggest battle they face is against those who they has always fought alongside.

The idea behind Captain America: Civil War is one that seems to be an obvious one to bring the cinema crowds in and make large box office figures. The Avengers saw the coming together of the biggest superheroes in the Marvel universe, while in Captain America: Civil War we see them falling apart. However, this is an example of the filmmakers giving the audience what they want to see and that is the Avengers (plus some) fighting among themselves to determine who really is the most powerful superhero. If it wasn't for an enemy who involves Captain America more than the other characters, this would almost certainly be a film for the Avengers series.

So one may say that the title of the film is misleading as this is a film only about Captain America in part, but it is the perfect strategy from Marvel on the back of Warner Bros DC film, Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice. Captain America: Civil War has been marketed as Captain America v. Iron Man and the poster for it looks remarkably like that for Batman v. Superman. So this is Marvel's answer to it's rival's blockbuster and it was the perfect move to release it a month after rather than at the same time. Marvel and Disney would not have known that Batman v. Superman would be such a let down for the large majority of movie goers, but they would have been ecstatic to find out that it was. Here is the film that audiences wanted Batman v. Superman to be, the battle between two superheroes who should be friends but are at odds with one another with a good reason to be.

Captain America's screenplay is more superior than it's DC counterpart with it's twist at the end being less cringe-worthy and more clever. However, it does play victim to that of all multi-protagonist films as it is not able to cover as much from each character as it is attempting to and as a result forfeits emotion and inner turmoil.

 Despite this apparently being his film, Captain America is not fleshed out in the way he should be. After the beginning of the film when he loses the love of his life, Steve Rogers as Captain America exposes himself as a man who refuses to answer to anyone and is a born leader. These are usually admirable features in a man, but in this film he just seems selfish, disloyal and childish. His loyalty extends to only one person and not to his country and their rules, which is ironic considering he is Captain America. He goes against protocol and loses his friends in the process, therefore not showing loyalty to his team. The subplot with he and Sharon Carter (Emily VanCamp) is also extremely weak and has next to no time donated to it. Chris Evan's superhero shows no signs of remorse or inner turmoil despite the conflict and rift he has created and this is by no means Evans' fault as it is the way his character was written.

On the other hand, Tony Stark/ Iron Man is far more interesting as he is a character with greater depth. From his entrance in the film where we see a much younger Robert Downey Jr. in a flashback scene, the audience see's a man who is at war with himself and is greatly wounded by the distant and recent past. The final confrontation between himself and Captain America is emotionally charged from his side and shows how much his character has developed over the course of the Marvel films.

Scarlett Johnasson once again exhibits the strength needed to play a character like Natasha Romanoff/ Black Widow. Black Widow has always been an intriguing character who deserves her own film as she is so strong a character that she could easily carry a film by herself. On the other hand, it almost seems as though the screenwriters were unsure what to do with Elizabeth Olsen's Wanda Maximoff/ Scarlett Witch. Her character in this film would have been the perfect chance for the writers to flesh out the emotional anxiety experienced by those in the same position as the Avengers who deal with the deaths of innocents each time they go to battle. It is definitely touched upon, but not fleshed out which is how it should be if the issue is to be addressed at all.

The introduction of Tom Holland's Spider-Man or Peter Parker into the Marvel universe is one which is finely done and an excitement for what is to come is created. Holland is endearing in the way that a young superhero testing his boundaries should be and makes a solid first appearance as the superhero. Paul Rudd returns as Scott Lang AKA Ant-Man and brings back with him the his likable, every man persona which brings a lightness to the film which is needed.

Yet, one does not go to see a Marvel superhero film for it's depth and powerful emotion. The whole point of a superhero film in the eyes of most movie goers is the action, which is were the superheroes do what they do best. There is indeed a great deal of action and impressive special effects right from the beginning of the film. Yet much of the camera work which is supposed to reflect the high pace and intensity of certain scenes (in particular the opening scene), is too quick and jerky for one to be able to have a clear grasp of what is happening. The editing in these scenes is rather erratic and too fast moving, but it is acknowledged that if they weren't so high-paced the film would have been even longer than it's 146 minute run time.

Captain America: Civil War does do what so many franchise films neglect to do these days and that is to create a strong ending which signifies the beginning of something new and leaves the audience begging for more. Although far from the best Marvel film, Captain America: Civil War is an entertaining and enjoyable film with many characters to both like and dislike.

7/10

Snowpiercer (2013)

Year: 2013
Running Time: 126 minutes
Director: Joon-ho Bong
Writers: Jacques Lob, Benjamin Legrand and Jean-Marc Rochette (based on Le Transperceneige by), Joon-ho Bong and Kelly Masterton (screenplay)
Cast: Chris Evans, Jamie Bell, John Hurt, Octavia Spencer, Tilda Swinton, Ed Harris, Kang-ho Song, Ah-sung Ko, Alison Pill

There is nothing like a film which divides people's opinions by miles. Whether you take to Joon-ho Bong's first English language film, Snowpiercer or not doesn't make any difference to the fact that it is a film which inspires ongoing thought and conversation. It is an understatement to say that this film is not a film for everyone due to it's intense violence and exceptionally dark humour, but underneath that harsh exterior is a film with an original and suspenseful screenplay and incredible production design. Snowpiercer is absolutely memorable for whatever reason you allow it to be, but your negative memories may be hiding the gem it is underneath.

Set in the future when the whole world has been frozen over and much of human life destroyed with it, what is left of the human race is aboard a continuously running high-speed train named the Snowpiercer.  The train is divided into classes with the upper class at the front of the train living in luxury with all they will need and the lower classes living at the back of the train living in worse poverty than they would be living in on the outside. After two of their young children are taken, the people at the back of the train led by Curtis (Chris Evans) decide to rebel and make their way to the front of the train to confront the train's inventor and conductor, Wilford (Ed Harris). Curtis and his group embark on a journey towards the front of the train which proves to be absolutely horrific.

It cannot be stressed enough that Snowpiercer is not a film that everyone will enjoy. Snowpiercer is by no means your run of the mill action/drama film and is shocking on so many levels. The faint hearted will find the film most shocking for it's extreme violence, which is particularly brutal and graphic with the axe among the weapons of choice and amputation a chosen form of torture. The screenplay and story itself are also rather shocking for a number of reasons. With the film's Australian premiere at the Sydney Film Festival in June, festival director Nashen Moodley likened Snowpiercer to the television show, "Game of Thrones" for the reason that nobody is ever safe. It is established early on that no character is ensured safety against harm in the film. While this is a trait we have come to associate with productions such as "Game of Thrones", it is still a relatively shocking concept as traditionally lead characters in a film or television show are immune to an early death or death at all. It is very much a case of survival of the fittest and a study of the class system, which is present in society as much in the present as in the future in the film. The weak in the lower class do not have the strength to survive in the harsh conditions they are made to endure, while the weak can survive in the higher classes as they are given the resources to be able to do so.

Although post-apocalyptic films are not particularly rare in this day and age, Snowpiercer has a great deal of originality to it based on it's dark screenplay and black sense of humour. The film is incredibly suspenseful and unpredictable due to it's early reminder of the characters mortality. The oppression felt by the main characters from the back of the train resonates and the audience experiences this on an emotional level with the characters. It is not a happy film, rather an angry one laced with rebellious hope. The film does have a sense of humour which is extremely black and could be misinterpreted by some as it trying to be serious and failing miserably. When sifting through the moments in the film which are being laughed at, it seems more than likely that director Joon-ho Bong and co-writer, Kelly Masterton are purposely using over-exaggeration in order to give the film more character and that this is turn allows for a few evil giggles. However, at the end of the day, whether people find Tilda Swinton's Mason, Alison Pill's Teacher or Chris Evan's now infamous baby quote funny is completely up to the individual.

The production design of Snowpiercer is superb. The way the train was created with each carriage having a different personality is completely intriguing. With each different carriage having to be a completely different world inside the same shaped space, the designers do so well to be able to complete this. The visions of the frozen world outside the Snowpiercer are also very well done. The cinematography employed in also intriguing, in particular in the tunnel scene. Although this is also perhaps the most violent scene in the film, the way in which shadow and light are used to observe the happenings is very interesting.

Chris Evans' Crurtis leads the charge in Snowpiercer. Evans is once again able to use his action film experience and do so in style during the film, but he also gives a very raw, human performance. It perhaps isn't a performance which oozes emotion, but he shows it where it is needed. Jamie Bell, who plays Curtis' offsider, Edgar also does well as does Octavia Spencer as Tanya. The most memorable performance is Tilda Swinton as Mason. There is so much character and intrigue when it comes to Mason. We never really find out that much about her, but she is such a great and intriguing character to watch. The way in which Swinton commits everything she has in performance and body is brilliant. Alison Pill's Teacher is another memorable character. She has very little screen time and no background story, but again, brilliant to watch and a load of fun in a dark and quirky way.

Snowpiercer is a welcomed film due to it's wicked originality and unpredictability. The reasons many will dislike it will be the reasons many will love it. It is exceptionally dark in mood and humour and rebellious towards traditional rules of the action and drama genres.

7.5/10

Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014)

Year: 2014
Running Time: 136 minutes
Director: Anthony Russo and Joe Russo
Writers: Joe Simon and Jack Kirby (comic book), Ed Brubaker (concept and story), Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely (screenplay)
Cast: Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Samuel L. Jackson, Anthony Mackie, Robert Redford, Sebastian Stan, Cobie Smulders, Emily VanCamp

Every once in a while a film comes along which defies the ideology of a sequel. It's a sequel's job to try and be as good as the first, but we all know the inevitability of the pitfalls of this ambition. Captain America: The Winter Soldier is a particular rarity as it is not only a sequel which measures up to the first, but is in many ways better than the first. It has all the excitement of the modern day Marvel hero, but an added historical backstory that gives it a point of difference. There is plenty of action and a well written screenplay brought to life by convincing performances by it's impressive cast.

Steve Rogers AKA Captain America (Chris Evans) is starting to adapt to life in the present day, but still keeps one eye in a past which is hard to forget. When SHIELD is compromised, Rogers finds Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) in his apartment after he has been attacked by a mysterious enemy, who Natasha Romanoff (Scarlett Johansson) believes to be the Winter Soldier. The Winter Soldier is a ghost-like force who has been appearing in attacks since the war and has superhuman strength, much like Rogers himself. Rogers finds that he has to once again don Captain America's suit and armour and save humankind from a greater evil.

Captain America: The First Avenger and Captain America: The Winter Soldier are really two very different films. This goes without saying really as one is set in the 1940's while the other is set in present day and this means that they have two completely different atmospheres. Captain America: The First Avenger was very much a historical film and very nostalgic. It played on the reception of the 1940's superhero in society and it's nostalgia for this hero came across at times as slightly comical rather than patriotic. The newer film has a completely different feel to it. It has the historical aspect which is seen through darker lenses than it's processor, but it is also very much a present day Marvel film. Captain America: The Winter Soldier also borders on being a political thriller with the inclusion of Alexander Pierce (Robert Redford). It is a different superhero film than we are used to seeing as a result of a wonderfully written screenplay by Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely.

With the inclusion of new characters in a sequel, it is often a challenge not to make the film seem too busy and have too much going on at once, but Captain America: The Winter Soldier flows perfectly and everything and everyone included as crucial to the film as a whole. The dialogue is also very good. One of the problems of the first film was that the dialogue was very cheesy, yet not so in this film. The large majority of it is very natural and when funny, not forcefully funny or over the top.

One of the reasons one goes to see a Marvel superhero film is to watch something action packed. There is absolutely no lack of action here. The film explodes into it's first action scene within the first few minutes, and although some of the camera shots are very shaky and fast paced, they are very entertaining and extremely well choreographed. Directors, Anthony and Joe Russo relied on minimal CGI in the film so to make everything look substantially more realistic, and it absolutely does.

Chris Evans is very, very good as Steve Rogers/Captain America. As this is his third film in the role, it is obvious that he is now so comfortable in the role and has really settled into the character. He is so natural in his dialogue and exceptionally likable. Scarlett Johansson here has her second outing as Natasha Romanoff/ The Black Widow and she is another who has really settled into her role. She has the right charm for the character and although she is clearly a stunning woman, it is great to see a female action character not mention a thing about her physical appearance and rather just rely on her ability. She is also incredibly likeable and has some moments of wonderful acting. Her and Evans work very well together and have a wonderful platonic chemistry on screen. Another refreshing thing about this film is that there is no romantic chemistry between the lead male and female characters. Of course if you have seen Captain America: The First Avenger and The Avengers, you will know that Rogers' heart belongs to Peggy Carter (Hayley Atwell) and Romanoff's to Clint Barton/ Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner), but is still nice to see a film which doesn't fall into stereotypical conventions.

Samuel L. Jackson is Nick Fury and there is no way around it. He is always a terrific character on screen. Anthony Mackie is a wonderful addition to the Marvel superhero family as Sam Wilson/ Falcon. He is fun, lively and full of character. Robert Redford also does well in his role and is a particularly interesting character. Emily VanCamp's Kate/ Agent 13 doesn't have a great deal to do in the film and it would have been nice for her character to have a bit more of a role in the film as there was potential to do so.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier is completely different to it's processor and even if you didn't like the first film, there is a good chance you will prefer and enjoy the second film a great deal more.

8/10

Sydney Film Festival: The Iceman (2012)

Year: 2012
Director: Ariel Vromen
Cast: Michael Shannon, Winona Ryder, Ray Liotta, Chris Evans. David Schwimmer, James Franco, Stephen Dorff
The Iceman will be screening at the Sydney Film Festival on the 8th and 10th of June 2013.

It is hard to be a gangster film. There are so many amazing films in it's class that so much is expected of you and you have to live up to moviegoers expectations.

The Iceman isn't a bad film, but it is certainly not one of the best gangster films. Truth be told, this isn't your typical gangster film, but definitely falls into that category. It is an interesting enough watch with some good performances, but the state of the film due to bad editing choices makes it all just confusing and a bit of a mess.

The Iceman is based on the true story of Richard Kuklinski (Michael Shannon), the notorious American contract killer who is said to have killed up to 100 people. The film begins when Kuklinski meets his future wife, Deborah (Winona Ryder), who remains oblivious throughout the whole film as to what Kuklinski actually does for a living and the crimes he has committed. The film spans over the period of 22 years from the time that he first comes attracts the attention of mafia boss, Roy Demeo (Ray Liotta) to his final arrest in 1986.

Although this film is based on real events, there are many inaccuracies in the movie. This may have been done to protect the family or to liven the film up and is really not that big an issue, but it is important to remember if you are using The Iceman as a history lesson that it is only based on true events and is not actually a re-enactment of true events. The film is interesting enough and the great thing is that it does provide some suspense as to the safety of his family and of how he is going to be caught.

There is not much to be said about the cinematography and editing of this film. It's not particularly impressive visually nor is anything done to enhance the audience's senses outside the character's actions and dialogue. Director Ariel Vromen has made some bad decisions in regards to how the screenplay will be played out on screen. There are several times during the film that one scene cuts to another in a future time period and there is no indication how long has elapsed or even that any time has elapsed. This makes it very confusing for the viewer.

The other problem with the editing is that there are some scenes which don't seem exactly relevant. The scene between Kuklinski and his brother, Joey (Stephen Dorff) has some relevance to the conclusion of the film, but it feels very out of place where it is and like it has just been thrown in to any part of the film so that Vromen can say something about Joey right at the end.


Michael Shannon is very good as Richard Kuklinski. His ability to portray the sociopathic tendencies of the character is scary, but his ability to break lose and show intense emotion at the right times is brilliant. The chemistry between Shannon and Winona Ryder is very good, as is Ryder's performance. Ryder plays the mother and wife role well and is extremely likable, although you do wonder how she can't tell that she is married to a killer.

Besides Shannon and Ryder, the only other actor who creates a real impact when on screen in Chris Evans. He is extremely unrecognisable in his screen time and gives a performance like no other you have seen from him. He is actually so interesting to watch that he is almost likable, even though the acts he commits are unforgivable.

Ray Liotta is good, but it seems as though this is starting to become a semi-typical role for him so his performance is clearly not a stretch at all for him.David Schwimmer is actually quite good with the smallish role that he has and James Franco, although having little screen time as one of Kuklinski's victims, is also quite good.

It would seem that The Iceman has a lot of good, but not great performances. It also has a lot of bad decisions made in the post-production stage that have clearly impacted on the overall quality of the film and made this into a so-so event.

6/10





The 60th Sydney Film Festival will be running from the 5th-16th of June 2013. For more information, please see the official website

You may have also seen Winona Ryder in.....
Black Swan as Beth Mcintyre

You may have also seen Chris Evans in.....
The Avengers and  Captain America: The First Avenger as Captain America/ Steve Rogers

The Avengers (2012)

The Avengers

Year: 2012

Director: Joss Whedon

Cast: Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Scarlett Johansson, Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo, Samuel L. Jackson, Jeremy Renner, Tom Hiddleston

Before I begin my review….

                How cool is the idea behind The Avengers?

                It’s absolutely no wonder that the movie created so much interest and had so many fans even before it premiered. How often is it these days that you throw all these movie characters into one film? OK…yes I know. There is the horror film trend of such films as Freddy vs Jason and Alien vs Predator which has its fans and haters.  I remember when I was about 8 there was a cartoon special where all these cartoon characters were put into one show to help the fight against kids taking drugs, but these are the only instances I can think of with the throwing of characters usually not related into one show.

                But The Avengers? It is an action film fans dream! Even if you are not huge on the superhero genre, you can’t help but be interested by this prospect of placing Iron Man, Thor, Captain America and The Hulk in one film.

                And you know what one of the coolest things is? The Avengers is actually better than some of the films which are solely about its characters.  So if you didn’t like the film originally about one of these characters, it’s definitely not a sure thing that you are going to feel the same way about The Avengers. Of course having a different director is a good start for that.

                Here’s an idea. Why doesn’t someone make a film with super bitches from films all in one? I’d love to see Meryl Streep’s Miranda Priestly from The Devil Wears Prada take on Faye Dunaway’s Joan Crawford from Mommie Dearest and we would just chuck in there Bette Davis’s Baby Jane Hudson from What Ever Happened To Baby Jane?

                That will never happen…..because Davis is no longer with us, but I am sure we can think of some other movie bitches we can throw in there to watch a massive war of words cat fight on the big screen!

Review

                It’s the film superhero fans have been hanging out for and it does not disappoint.

                The Avengers is a whole lot of fun for anyone whether you are a superhero fan or not. It is a concept that could have been just a big cheese ball, but it surprisingly is not.

                For those of you who saw the 2011 Thor, you will be familiar with Loki (Tom Hiddleston), Thor’s (Chris Hemsworth) brother who has an evil streak. Loki has made his way to Earth with plans to take over the world. The ever present Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson) assembles a group of superheros consisting of Tony Stark/ Iron Man (Robert Downey Jr.), Steve Rogers/ Captain America (Chris Evans), Natasha Romanoff/ The Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) and Bruce Banner/ The Hulk ( Mark Ruffalo). It isn’t long before Thor also joins the quest on Earth to ensure his brother doesn’t destroy mankind on this planet.

                Superhero movies have a reputation of being extremely cheesy, so you could expect a film with four well known superheroes in it to be so. However, although predictable, there really isn’t much to roll your eyes at in The Avengers. This is a result of a cleverly written script by director, Joss Whedon. The script just makes the whole concept come together and achieves the optimum result. It is still a superhero action film which isn’t realistic at all, but doesn’t seem completely over the top and the way it is presented to you actually does make you believe that what you are seeing could maybe happen (even though common sense tells you it won’t).

                Another good thing about this film is that you would also expect that with so many big characters thrown into one movie it could become messy and have too much going on. Again, this is not the case. Each character holds their own and you know a bit about every character, but Whedon hasn’t written the script so that one superhero gets more screen time than another or that there are too many stories going on at once. The film sticks to its path and each character adds to outcome in their own way. It is easy to understand and not messy at all.

                The only problem one may have is that if you haven’t seen the other films which these characters are in, you may feel a bit lost. It does help to have prior knowledge of who Loki and Thor are (as not everyone studied Norse mythology at school), why Captain America is the way he is and who is Tony Stark. Otherwise the characters may be slightly lost on you.

                The script also has some very funny moments. Of course, being a superhero action film, its main focus is the special effects and action sequences. These are very impressive as one may expect and spending the extra to see The Avengers in 3D wouldn’t be a waste of money.

                The acting isn’t the main focus of the film, but there isn’t really a bad performance in the film. Robert Downey Jr. is at his witty and comedic best as Tony Stark/ Iron Man and is always great fun to watch. Mark Ruffalo is also very good as Bruce Banner/ The Hulk, giving a performance as the man who battles his inner demons, or inner big green monster.

                However, it is Tom Hiddleston who is the stand out in this film. Hiddleston is one of those actors who has been in the business for a long time, but seems like he has just come out of nowhere with how many films he has been in as of late. He does evil well and is a pleasure to watch.

                The Avengers, although having much hype, is not a let down. It is one of the best action blockbusters you will see this season and just a whole load of fun.

7.5/10

Captain America: The First Avenger

Captain America: The First Avenger

Year: 2011

Director: Joe Johnston

Cast: Chris Evans, Hugo Weaving, Tommy Lee Jones, Hayley Atwell, Stanley Tucci, Dominic Cooper

In My Own Words

                I wanted to like Captain America: The First Avenger. I really did. It was one of the films this blockbuster season that I had been really looking forward to. No one can accuse me of going into the film convinced that I was going to see something I dislike. I’m not going to say what I thought about the movie in detail here as that is what my review is for, but you can already guess what I thought of it without me saying any extra. It does not detract from my excitement about The Avengers though! I can’t help but think that it really has to be a really bad-ass villain to have any sort of battle with the five superhero’s they will be going up against. The whole concept of the Marvel superheroes joining forces in this cinematic spectacle is definitely intriguing. Who else is excited?

                There was another let down for me. I was excited about seeing British actor Natalie Dormer in a rare film appearance. I am a big fan of The Tudors in which Dormer played the ill-fated Queen of England and second wife of Henry VIII, Anne Boleyn.  Dormer played the sassy Private Lorraine in Captain America: The First Avenger who takes a strong liking to Steve. Unfortunate for me, she was in all of two scenes and on screen for no more than three minutes. Oh well, I look forward to seeing her next in W.E. where she will play Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, the Queen Mother.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review

                Captain America: The First Avenger, just to make you all confused, is the last Marvel superhero film before the superhero reunion film, The Avengers. Captain America is the First Avenger as, unlike other superhero films released in the past few years, his story belongs in the war torn 1940’s. So the big difference between this film and other action films is that it would be out of place to have amazing and spectacular special effects which we are now so used to. The action not completely absent or dull, but in order to take a step back in something in a film, something else is to be enhanced in order for it to be successful. This is where Captain America: The First Avenger completely lacks.  The action and special effects are toned down for an action film, but nothing else stands up in its place.

                Steve Rogers (Chris Evans) has always been discriminated against because of his height and size, but this has never stopped him standing up for something which he has believed in. He watches everyone around him go off to war while he has to wait at home. He is then approached by Dr. Abraham Erskine (Stanley Tucci) who offers him a chance to join in the army and take part in a project he is involved in. This project is the end of Steve’s woes and the beginning of Captain America. Steve soon finds out that he is the one who can save America from the evil Johann Schmitt (Hugo Weaving). He is the hero America has been waiting for.

                Captain America: The First Avenger had HUGE potential. As said previously, it wasn’t appropriate for a film like this to have amazing action sequences with special effects that will blow your mind and amazing high tech machinery as it is set in the 1940’s. So this should have been huge opportunity to bring a great war story into the film and make the film into something we haven’t seen in years. But alas, it wasn’t meant to be. There is a story there, just not a strong script to support it and make it engrossing. It is actually even quite boring at times when there is no action happening. It is fair enough normally that a superhero movie doesn’t have a strong story as that isn’t normally the focal point of an action film, but tone down the action and you need to turn something else up.

                One of the more entertaining moments in the film is when Steve becomes Captain America and instead of joining the men in the war fields (which you barely see anything of anyway), he becomes a comic book hero who goes on tour and features in motion pictures. It is a fun part of the film and is reminiscent of how Captain America really was perceived in the 1940’s.

                The special effects which the film does employ are also subject to some criticism. The computer generated and enhanced images look computer generated. Before Steve becomes Captain America, more often than not the visions of the character look like Chris Evans head pasted on a body, not like a smaller version of Evans as a whole. Visions of Evans running through the streets of Brooklyn just after his transformation also look computer generated. Even if the movie is set in the 1940’s, it doesn’t mean that you should take any less pride in making the special effects as realistic as possible.

                The acting is really little more than just reading their lines for the majority of the cast. Chris Evans does do a good job at leading the ensemble. Although it does feel as though he tries more when he is the smaller Steve Rogers, which would make sense because it is more just an action role once he becomes Captain America.  He was the perfect choice for the role as he is just likable in both of his personas and comes across as just a good guy.

                Hugo Weaving is a perfect villain as Johann Schmitt. He is quite terrifying at times, even before he shows his true self as Red Skull. Stanley Tucci is a treat to watch and is actually quite a fun character. Hayley Atwell does well in her role as Steve’s trusted ally and love interest, Peggy Carter. She has one in particular great, emotionally charged scene. However, we have no idea who her character is or where she has come from. Before he is transformed, Steve says “I guess I just don't why you'd wanna join the army if you're a beautiful dame. ...” Peggy doesn’t give an answer and leaves him guessing as well as us.

                As a whole, Captain America: The First Avenger isn’t the worst film of the year by all means, although it had so much potential and it could have been so much more than what it was. It is still entertaining enough and gives you your superhero fix for this half of the year.

5/10

Scott Pilgram vs The World

Scott Pilgram vs The World
Year: 2010
Director: Edgar Wright
Cast: Michael Cera, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Kieran Culkin, Anna Kendrick, Chris Evans, Jason Schwartzman

In My Own Words
What is it about these teen flicks these days? The lead characters are always the nerdy, no-hoper boy who crushes after the girl of his dreams, and they will most likely get them and also lose them in the course of the film. The guy in these teen flicks will normally be either Michael Cera or Jesse Eisenberg. The girls vary, but they are very rarely the blonde bombshells. They are normally the smart mouthed brunettes who could rip the guys apart with their wit. Think along the lines of Kat Dennings, Emma Stone or Kristen Stewart. Has it always been this way? When I think about the teen flicks that were made when I was in high school and they were more about the girl, next door pining after the stud of the school. Ah, genre trends. Got to love them!

What makes a successful genre film? I’ll tell you what does...breaking through the mould and making people who aren’t fans of that particular genre sit up and take notice. I’m not a huge fan of westerns, yet there are some westerns that I love. “Scott Pilgram vs The World” may just be one of these films. It’s got all the elements that make it fit into the teen flick genre of today, yet it breaks through to be a film that not only teenagers and young adults will enjoy. I was lucky enough to have the cinema to myself today, and I definitely did LOL (laugh out loud) unashamedly. This film is just a good comedy, whether it is aimed at a younger audience or not. It’s one that I will probably hire when it comes out on DVD because I would really like to watch it and giggle again.

These are my own words and here is my review.

Review
On the surface, “Scott Pilgram vs The World” looks just like just another teen movie. It is a teen movie, but it is not just another teen movie. “Scott Pilgrim vs The World” is perhaps the best teen flick we will see this year. It is well made, well written and very funny. Even though it is one of the better teen flicks, some older viewers will still find it a little too silly fand young for their liking. However, the silliness works and keeps the viewer interested. Scott Pilgram (Michael Cera) is a 22 year old who lives with his gay roommate, Wallace (Kieran Culkin), plays bass in his band and has caused controversy by going out with a 17 year old school girl. His life is turned upside down when he meets Ramona Flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). As soon as the two start seeing each other, Scott is faced with Ramona’s seven evil exes whom he needs to defeat in order to have a peaceful relationship with his new girl.

As one might guess, this film crosses teen comedy with the comic book genre. Don’t be fooled though, it’s not an action film. Sure there are lots of fighting scenes, but no big bang special effects. The special effects are reserved more for bringing the elements of a comic book to the big screen. The result is a film that is loads of fun to watch. “Scott Pilgram vs The World” is actually a very well made film. The cinematography is very good and the editing is superb. The musical score is also very good, supplying a strong opening and some interesting choices throughout the film which work perfectly. The choice of Toronto for the films setting is a great choice and it is definitely on show here. Edgar Wright does a great job at directing the film and his actors. The script is witty and well written. There are jokes throughout the film that are plain, simple humour without being obscene or crude. The humour is what makes this film appealing to a greater audience than that of a run of the mill teen flick. It is humour that anyone, no matter how old they are, will find funny. Watch out for the Seinfeld reference in one particular scene that will have you giggling within seconds! There are only two noticeable faults with this film. One being that at times it can be very silly, as one might guess from the title and plot outline. It can also be a little too busy at times. There is a lot going on in the film. For some people it may be a bit too much to keep up with.

Michael Cera doesn’t really bring anything different to the plate than he does in his other films. It is a role that was made for him basically. He plays the hopeless, awkward Scott Pilgram very well, but it is nothing we haven’t seen before and doesn’t make this role very special. Yet, he is still likable. Mary Elizabeth WInstead also doesn’t have a very hard role to play, but does it well enough. Both Kieran Culkin and Anna Kendrick are hilarious in this film, and provide many of the laughs throughout. Ellen Wong also deserves credit for her role as Scott’s stalker-ish ex girlfriend, Knives. She plays out the role as the young, innocent, yet slightly scary schoolgirl very well and although she is meant to be annoying, it isn’t hard to develop a soft spot for her. Each of the characters have a great deal of character and are very well constructed. The audience knows who everyone is and remembers them all as a result of strong characterization and wonderful directing.

“Scott Pilgram vs The World” is two hours worth of fun and laughter. Somewhat silly, but it is a fun silliness. There is so much in the film to keep it interesting from start to finish. Finally, a teen flick not just for teens.
8/10