Cast: Sandra Bullock, Cate Blanchett, Anne Hathaway, Helena Bonham Carter, Sarah Paulson, Rihanna, Mindy Kaling, Awkwafina, Richard Armitage, Dakota Fanning
Oceans 8 opens in Australia on June 7, 2018 and is distributed by Roadshow Films. Opening June 8, 2018 in the United States and distributed by Warner Bros.
Review by Nicki Newton-Plater
Oceans 8 is here to remind us that the female reboot is not just alive and well, but it is striving in it's perfect health.
With the male dominated Oceans trilogy having lost it's legs and tiring out over a decade ago, Gary Ross along with co-writer Olivia Milch have revived the franchise with the same thrills we found with the original, but with a little more designer chic.
Oceans 8 is joyous to watch as eight of entertainment's powerful female voices portray eight strong women who are even more interesting to watch than their male counterparts and far better dressed. The ladies team together to take on the impossible task of stealing one of the most expensive pieces of jewellery in the world during the glitz and glamour of the world famous Met Gala. The outcome of the heist may be extremely predictable and therefore not as suspenseful as it should be, but the organisation of the perfect crime is incredibly entertaining in it's fun and intelligent execution.
While Sandra Bullock's Debbie Ocean, Cate Blanchett's Lou, Anne Hathaway's Daphne Kluger and Helena Bonham Carter's Rose Weil are the characters that are the most fleshed out, each lady has their own set of unique and distinct character traits and each is celebrated. The film speaks volumes about how there isn't one right way to be a strong woman and that being strong and independent doesn't mean belittling men nor does it mean said woman has to be physically powerful. The cast is diverse and embraces the beauty in minority groups, with specific focus on those in New York City.
However much of a pun it may be, for some Oceans 8 may tend to flow a little too well with it not being overly intense or emotional. However, others may embrace this. The film is incredibly entertaining, easy to watch and enjoyable, especially with Blanchett's witty and well-timed dialogue and Hathaway's hilarious return to her comedic roots as a spoilt, pretentious socialite. It is a feast for the eyes with the outstanding costume design by Sarah Edwards of the ladies enviable wardrobes and Met Gala attire and exquisite production design by Alex DiGerlando. The recreation of the world of the prestigious Met Gala is aesthetically pleasing in every way with it's glamorous ambience, high-end fashion and overflow of A-list celebrities.
Oceans 8 is a whole load of fun and the type of reboot we crave where the filmmakers use the original as inspiration and not a chance to rehash a worn out story.
Year: 2016 Running Time: 113 minutes Director: James Bobin Writers: Lewis Carroll (books), Linda Woolverton (screenplay) Cast: Mia Wasikowska, Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham Carter, Anne Hathaway, Sacha Baron Cohen, Alan Rickman, Rhys Ifans, Timothy Spall, Matt Lucas, Lindsay Duncan, Leo Bill
Alice Through The Looking Glass is now showing in cinemas everywhere and is distributed by Walt Disney Motion Pictures
When one thinks about the thought process that must have taken place when deciding to do a sequel to the live action Alice in Wonderland, you could well imagine it would have been along the lines of
"Everyone else is doing it, why not?"
Alice Through The Looking Glass is a cross between a sequel and an en vogue origins film. Underneath it's somewhat monotonous yet very attractive abstract exterior, the film has some interesting and enjoyable character studies of those larger than life personalities made popular by Lewis Carroll in the 1800's. The Tim Burton directed 2010 film had people divided with many not enjoying the over the top spectacle created and the liberties that Disney took with the story and it's characters, while others were quite happy with the film's flamboyancy they felt it captured the true surreal nature of the original story itself.
In the second Disney live-action Alice film, James Bobin takes over the reins from Tim Burton who 's presence is still greatly felt throughout the film as he steps into the role as producer. Alice Through The Looking Glass does not have much in common with the book in which it is based on, "Through The Looking Glass and What Alice Found" by Lewis Carroll. In fact, the original Disney animated Alice in Wonderland in 1951 draws more inspiration from this book than this 2016 film does. Disney took great liberties with the 2010 film, which was not entirely a bad thing as it breathed new life into the story that has been adapted many times for film. These liberties continue into the new film which means that the only aspects of it that resemble the book are it's title and that Alice does, funnily enough, re-enter Wonderland through a looking glass.
Upon returning from her voyage as captain of the ship, the Wonder, Alice Kingsleigh (Mia Wasikowska) find herself still ridiculed for being a woman and is hardly taken seriously when trying to conduct business transactions. When she is starting to lose faith in herself and in the impossible, she is once again transported back to Wonderland through the looking glass and finds her friend, the Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp) in a terrible state. She is able to help him, but this requires going back in time and altering the past to stop Hatter falling into darkness in the future.
Once again, the great focus on the Mad Hatter in this film does feel as though the filmmakers are trying to maximise the use of Johnny Depp. This is not saying that Depp does a bad job, but it is not a particularly complicated performance either. The relationship with the Hatter that Alice has and had in the first film is far from what Lewis Carroll had in mind when he wrote the book and this is one of the things that audiences found and will find problematic. Had the Mad Hatter been played by anyone else besides Depp would his part in these two films been as large? Quite possibly not. Yet with Tim Burton at the helm in 2010 he was always the obvious choice for the role. Even without Burton, if one had to name the working actor who would make the best Hatter in a live-action Alice in Wonderland, Depp's name would have immediately sprung to mind. However, the right casting of an actor who is known for his quirky roles as one of literature's quirkiest characters still does not do much to ease the uncomfortable thought that the character was reimagined purely to suit him.
Had Alice Through The Looking Glass been purely an origins story about each of the characters and their backgrounds, it may have been a great deal more entertaining and enjoyable. The same can be said for if it was purely a sequel about what happened the next time Alice went to Wonderland. Yet it is the fact that it tries to do both of these things in one film that makes it weak as a whole. Bobin's film does try to be too many things which is where it's impact as a spectacle and as any type of emotional experience is lost. The flying back and forwards between time is not as much confusing as it is purely dizzying and irritating. However, the idea of Time being part man and part machine as portrayed by Sacha Baron Cohen is a clever one and is a great addition to the array of interesting characters that already exist in the film and makes the time travel bearable.
With the characters come many opportunities for emotion and depth, particularly with the Mad Hatter's inner torment and between sisters, the Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter) and the White Queen (Anne Hathaway). However, Depp, Carter and Hathaway do give the right amount of emotion for what is written into the story and none give a bad performance by any means, but any more tears or affection would actually seem out of place considering the lack of intensity in the film.
It is a shame because visually Alice Through The Looking Glass is extraordinary and often quite intense, particularly in the opening ocean scenes and when Alice is using the Chronosphere to transport herself back and forward through time. The production design for inside the world that is Wonderland and especially that of Time's castle is extraordinary and the use of colour is magnificent. Yet it is here in the visuals that Alice Through The Looking Glass's power is and not in the screenplay. Although screenwriter Linda Woolverton has attempted to make a film that is intended to be character driven, Bobin has neglected to take the time to allow the audience to sympathize and relate to the characters.
However, Mia Wasikowska should be complimented on her obvious growth as an actress since her breakthrough role as Alice in the 2010 film. Even from the very first scene, she is a great deal more powerful in her delivery than in Alice in Wonderlandand like all leading ladies should be, gives the best performance out of anybody in the film. One thing that both the earlier film and this one have tried to do is install a sense of independence into Alice and make her a good role model for young girls, which is something that Wasikowska has been able to accomplish.
Any type of "Alice in Wonderland" adaptation is met with a certain sense of magic and despite the weak and busy screenplay, Alice Through The Looking Glass still maintains a whimsical air.
Year: 2015 Running Time: 105 minutes Director: Kenneth Branagh Writer: Chris Weitz (screenplay) Cast: Lily James, Richard Madden, Cate Blanchett, Helena Bonham Carter, Ben Chaplin, Hayley Atwell, Derek Jacobi, Holliday Grainger, Sophie McShera, Stellan Skarsgard, Nonso Anozie
Cinderella will open on Australian cinemas on March 26 and is distributed by Walt Disney Studios. Now showing in the United States and United Kingdom.
Disney's Cinderella is a lovely, charming adaptation of the beloved children's fairy tale. Rather than follow the trend of classic stories being retold with a difference, it stays true to the original story with many references to the 1950 animated film, which is ironically refreshing. Ella (Lily James) is a beautiful girl who lives in her family's country manor with her bereaved father (Ben Chaplin) in a faraway kingdom. In his last attempt of happiness and before his last fateful trip, he remarries and leaves Ella with an unloving stepmother (Cate Blanchett) and two horrid stepsisters (Holliday Grainger and Sophie McShera). Ella experiences only heartbreak and hardships at the hands of her new family, but a chance encounter with the kingdom's Prince (Richard Madden) brings her happiness and when the ball is announced, she dreams of attending although her stepmother will do everything in her power to prevent this from happening. With the arrival of her Fairy Godmother (Helena Bonham Carter), Ella does indeed become the belle of the ball.
Cinderella is Disney doing what Disney does best, putting the magic back into a story that deserves a little pinch of fairy dust to make it sparkle in the present. Even though the film doesn't bring too much new to the story, it is quite an exquisite adaptation which works as well in live action as it did animated over 60 years ago. It is a film that will delight families and lovers of fantasy. The thing is with a film like Cinderella is that one goes into the film knowing what to expect so there is no need for disappointment in the story or for the film being what it is. It is a light, simple story with classic themes which include courage and kindness.
Kenneth Branagh's retelling of the fairy tale stays true more than anything to the original Disney film from 1950. Much of the film is as though the characters have jumped out of the animation and into live action, with many of the colour schemes of the costumes in both films mirroring each other, the animals having the same names and the Fairy Godmother's magic words being "Bibbidi-bobbidi-boo" amongst other similarities. Yet Chris Weitz's screenplay does allow for background information on the characters which gives a greater understanding as to how and why things came to be. Ella was born a beautiful girl, but the reason she has such a beautiful nature is because she has abided by her mothers dying words everyday of her life which has moulded her into the person she is. These small differences to the traditional Cinderella flesh out the story and characters in a way which enhances the screenplay and keeps the story interesting while paying tribute to those that came before it.
Visually Cinderella is every bit the magical fairy tale. The production design of every location is absolutely exquisite and every part of the kingdom from the royal castle to the town markets are wonderfully designed. The costume design is incredible, particularly Ella's ball gown which is everything you would want it to be. Sandy Powell, who has been nominated for ten and has won two Academy Awards for her incredible talent in costume design, has once again done a phenomenal job. The pivotal moment in the film when Ella is transformed from simple into her ball-ready self is awe inspiring and so beautiful visually that is can bring at tear to one's eye. The cinematography and beautiful visuals of the film work perfectly together to create that magical atmosphere which is so craved in a fairy tale remake.
In what is surely a star making role for lead Lily James, she is physically everything one would hope Cinderella to be. Her performance is fine and is clearly what has been asked of her, but her character is somewhat troublesome. Despite the explanation of why she is so carefree and happy even in the most difficult of situations, Ella can sometimes lack the human quality she would need for one to truly connect with her. This isn't to say that she does not have emotional moments in the really moving scenes, but her passive and whimsical nature is on the exaggerated side where it becomes unbelievable. True this is a fairy tale where we should be leaving our sphere of reality behind, but belief should still lie in the characters emotions.
However, James works well on screen with her co-stars, particularly Cate Blanchett and Richard Madden who both give fine performances. Blanchett does exceptionally well as the Stepmother who's character could have been well overdone and exaggerated, but is more cold and ambitious rather than truly evil. Richard Madden as the Prince is actually a wonderful surprise. Not only do he and James have wonderful chemistry, but his character is one that is truly likable and also rather deep. He and Derek Jacobi share a truly beautiful scene of a father and son understanding each other for the first time. Helena Bonham Carter is also a charming treat as the Fairy Godmother who adds comic relief to the film, as does the hilarious cameo by Rob Brydon.
Cinderella is a exceptionally beautiful and charming retelling of the timeless classic. It does not attempt to change anything about the original, but rather flesh out the humanity behind the characters and remind people why they love this fairy tale so much. It will definitely be a favourite with little girls, but has plenty that other members of the family will appreciate.
Year: 2013 Running Time: 83 minutes Director: Richard Laxton Writers: Noel Coward ( excerpts from "Private Lives), Alexander Walker (additional research from book "Elizabeth"), William Ivory Cast: Dominic West, Helen Bonham Carter
Burton and Taylor premiered on Australian television on BBC First on 3rd August 2014 and is now available in Australia from BBC /Roadshow DVD.
The Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton romance was and still is legendary for the way in which the relationship was driven by both intense passion and furiosity. Richard Laxton's made for television biopic, Burton and Taylor covers just one small period in the saga between the two stars and as a result doesn't give a complete portrait of the infamous relationship in the usual fashion. However, it does give a wonderful imprint of the undeniable chemistry between the two that was evident during and after their two marriages due to wonderful performances by both Dominic West and Helena Bonham Carter. The film is only a small snippet of a relationship that was still showing sparks after two decades, but still has quite an entertaining screenplay to keep it enjoyable and enthralling.
The year is 1983 and Richard Burton (Dominic West) and Elizabeth Taylor (Helena Bonham Carter) have been divorced for over six years when they both sign on to do the Noel Coward play, "Private Lives" on Broadway. While the two have both moved on and been married and divorced once more to other people, there is no denying that there is still a strong connection between the two which provides both comfort and inner turmoil. The run of "Private Lives" becomes tumultuous behind the scenes and although Burton and Taylor try to hold it together on stage for the public, their private life is once again open for everyone to see.
When making a film about real life events surrounding popular figures such as Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton, there is an incredible amount of pressure put on the film makers. As is demonstrated in the film, Taylor had and still has an incredibly large fan base who are exceptionally defensive of their beloved starlet. The challenge for filmmaker, Richard Laxton was always going to be how not to offend this fan base in any way and not ostracise the audience who are not watching the film for the love of Taylor. Burton and Taylor does only focus on one part of their lives, which is after their two marriages and divorces to each other. This in itself is not a cause for anyone to get upset by, but what some will find problematic is that they don't give much of a run down of the history between the two of them besides letting everyone know that they are working together again after being married twice. There is almost an assumption there that people already know who Taylor and Burton are and the basics of their history. It is a dangerous assumption to make as while this generation would know the two actors by name, they wouldn't necessarily know their history.
However, the way in which the characters of Taylor and Burton interact and the chemistry between the two says more about their history as a couple than words could. The screenplay allows for the characters to tell the story of why they fell in love and why it didn't work in such an unique and admirable way. It is such an art to be able to tell a story about the past and present at the same time without telling it in the obvious fashion. Burton and Taylor may be about two superstars of their day, but it is also a study of a relationship between two people which at it's core would be the same whether they were famous or not. The way we see Burton and Taylor interact with each other tells us how and why the two fell in love with each other, which is that the two had an obvious understanding of each other and as well as being wildly attracted to each other, they also adored each other as friends. One of the things that also worked for the Burton/ Taylor marriage was that they both (particularly Taylor) strived on drama, but this was also their undoing. While it is obvious that they enjoyed the spontaneous bickering and violent outbursts, this was also their undoing. This aspect of their relationship took too much of an emotional toll on the two of them and the marriage(s) could not survive. Taylor's substance abuse and Burton's alcoholism also played a large part in this. All this is determined just from the actions of the characters and not from what the viewer is told, which is a wonderful method of both storytelling and character development.
While many fans will notice there are a number of inaccuracies and some situations are enhanced for the sake of the film, the screenplay is really quite wonderful. The period in which the film is set is covered very well and the script rather witty and often hilarious, particularly the banter between the couple and Taylor's scatter-brained dialogue. Burton and Taylor is also quite nostalgic. As it is set in the early 1980's, the musical score and production and costume design all work well to flesh out the time period and give the film a playful feeling rather than it feeling like a rewatch of Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?
Dominic West and Helena Bonham Carter are both perfectly cast as Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor. The first scene of Burton and Taylor where the two are participating in a press conference for "Private Lives" is not a great representation of this perfect casting, but about 15 minutes into the film you are completely convinced that you are actually watching Burton and Taylor. West completely personifies Burton with his mannerism and his stance gives him the presence Burton once commanded. His final scene in the film is so beautiful and a wonderful piece of acting. Carter is a brilliant Elizabeth Taylor. Once again, she is the perfect personification of the Taylor of the 1980's physically and in the way she spoke with her British/American accent. While many would like to see more of the infamous Burton/ Taylor fights, their confrontations are really quite entertaining and powerful. The on screen chemistry between West and Carter is fantastic. They have no problems in convincing that they are two people who have known each other for decades and are unable to stop caring for each other.
Burton and Taylor is not just a film about Richard Burton and Elizabeth Taylor, it is a film about a couple who could not be without each other in their lives despite knowing they could never live with each other. A wonderful biopic which tells as much about the past as it does the present.
Year: 2013 Director: Gore Verbinski Cast: Johnny Depp, Armie Hammer, Helena Bonham Carter, Tom Wilkinson, William Fichtner, Ruth Wilson The Lone Ranger is now showing in cinemas everywhere
Not much good has been said about Disney's The Lone Ranger since it has been released.
Straight off the bat, the expectations for The Lone Ranger were always going to be incredibly high for the fact that it's production company is Walt Disney Studios. Disney are one company who are always capable of creating a classic. It is true that The Lone Ranger may not be a classic, but it is definitely not the worst movie of 2013. It is far from the best, but there is something about this bunch of silliness that does make it entertaining enough.
In 1866, a train chugs towards the future carrying lawyer, John Reid (Armie Hammer), as well as prisoners, convicted criminal, Butch Cavendish (William Fichtner) and Indian, Tonto (Johnny Depp). Cavendish escapes in what appears to be a set up, which leads to a man hunt by John's brother, Dan (James Badge Dale) and the deaths of all the search party at the hands of a traitor. In a strange turn of events, John starts working with Tonto and finds out more than he would have liked to have known about the dealings of the white people with the Indians of the land.
Based on an American legend, The Lone Ranger is all just a bit silly. It is so over the top and cliché in it's execution and there is really nothing you can take seriously about it. The romance aspect of the film adds nothing to the story and really could have been cut out of the film entirely, which would have shortened it's 149 minute running time. The idea of having an elderly Tonto tell a young boy at a San Francisco fairground the story is also completely useless and the film would have flowed a lot better if it was told in real time rather than a series of flashbacks. Therefore, it is the screenplay, written by Justin Haythe, Ted Elliot and Terry Rossio, that is one of the key factors in what fails to make this film a Disney classic. The story itself isn't too bad as it does have some unpredictable revelations, but the screenplay tries to do a little too much.
As it is promoted, The Lone Ranger is from the same people who have brought us Pirates Of The Caribbean. So what a lot of people are saying and quite rightly so is that this is a western version of Pirates Of The Caribbean. Chances are if you weren't a fan of those swash-buckling films, you won't be a fan of this film. Johnny Depp's Tonto is a native American version of Captain Jack Sparrow and the choreography of the action scenes is also very similar. The good thing is that if you are one of those people who did love the Pirates films, then you may be a fan.
However, the good news is that with all it's faults, The Lone Ranger is at least entertaining. The best part of the film is the last half an hour which is almost like a cleverly composed dance number set in the west. The musical score is almost strangely selected, but does serve its purpose by setting the scene and creating a feeling of suspense and excitement. A great film needs to be this the whole way through, but the last 30 minutes is worth watching the whole film for.
Johnny Depp has always been the actor who loves to perform "different" roles and has made different his norm. He may not be the best native American ever on screen, but he still pulls off the role believably enough. He is also, of course, entertaining as we all know Depp to be. Armie Hammer does fine as John Reid, but it is arguably not a very hard role to play and does not require too much emotion. Helena Bonham Carter's character is not particularly needed in the film, but she is always a treat on screen. Ruth Wilson is another who's character as Reid's sister in-law/ romantic interest is not particularly needed and not a particularly exciting character on screen.
The Lone Ranger perhaps doesn't need to be accused of being as big a disaster as it is being made out to be, but it is not a Disney classic. Just a splash of entertainment for the here and now.
Cast: Hugh
Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway, Amanda Seyfried, Eddie Redmayne, Helena
Bonham Carter, Sacha Baron Cohen
Before I begin my
review….
With the exception of some films which definitely don’t
stand a chance, this section of my reviews should be renamed, “ Let’s Talk
About Nominations” for the next few months.
And this is one of those films that should.
The big question on everyone’s lips when it comes to Les Miserables and the Oscars or Golden
Globes is whether this is Anne Hathaway’s year. One might argue that it has
been already with her recent marriage to Adam Shulman and two career milestones
playing Selina Kyle in The Dark Knight
Rises and Fantine in Les Miserables,
but a golden statue or two might just top this off for her.
In all honesty, just from seeing the trailer to Les Miserables I was already in belief
that she was going to win the Oscar. I’d tear up every time I heard her sing “I
Dreamed A Dream” and I thought that if she was able to do that to me in the
trailer, what could she do in the film?
And yes, I was in tears when she sang the whole song in the
film. Hathaway has come a long way since we first saw her in The Princess Diaries eleven years ago. She
is brilliant every second she is on screen in Les Miserables, but it is in that 4 minutes and 40 seconds of “I
Dreamed A Dream” that she has given one of the best performances of a female
actress of the year.
Well, I have actually yet to see better if there is going to
be.
Team Hathaway for Best Supporting Actress In A Motion
Picture.
And Team Jackman for Best Actor In A Musical/Comedy at the
Golden Globes. He’s not to be forgotten in the Hathaway hype. If all goes his
way, there may well be an Oscar nomination there for him too.
Review
Les Miserables will
have its lovers and haters and people will love it for the reasons people will
hate it.
If you are familiar with the stage production, then you will
love it for how true the film stays to it. However, if you are not and are not
prepared for two and a half hours of song with barely any spoken dialogue, then
you are probably going to be wishing you were outside the cinema doing
something else for that period of time.
Yet, there is no denying that Les Miserables is a beautiful film with amazing cinematography,
music and some of the best acting performances of the year. Not to mention you
can tell how much hard work has gone into this epic production by director, Tom
Hooper.
Based on one of the world’s most popular musical’s and the
novel by Victor Hugo, Les Miserables is
set in 19th century France. Newly released prisoner, Jean Valjean (Hugh
Jackman) violates his parole and Inspector Javert (Russell Crowe) is in
constant pursuit of him. Valjean turns his life around after being shown
kindness by a priest. He encounters a young woman, Fantine (Anne Hathaway) who
has turned to prostitution in order to care for her young daughter, Cosette (Isabelle
Allen and Amanda Seyfried) and his life is forever changed. He raises Cosette
as his own and together they travel to Paris where their journey eventually
takes them to the June Rebellion.
Tom Hooper has certainly put his heart and soul into this
film, there is no doubting that. Gone are the days when singing is dubbed into
the film, as Les Miserables contains
all live performances by each of the actors. The musical numbers are wonderfully choreographed and the editing splendid. When you look at how much power is
behind the majority of these voices and the brilliant acting that goes along
with that, doing that over and over would be an extremely gruelling and
exhausting process.
Although the cinematography is breath-taking the majority of
the time, there are some moments where it is completely obvious that this is a
green screen moment for the stars. Some of the CGI which is supposed to make
you believe that characters are actually in a location such as the shipping
yard and the night sky of Paris, seem more like live actors set against an
animated backdrops.
The highlights of the film are the musical spectacles and
the acting involved in them. As these are the focus point, some of the
relationships between the characters get lost and the story slows down. This is
what can be frustrating about the film. It is a long film and although Hooper tries
to make the most of every scene (which he nearly does), the story slows down
and you are sometimes so caught up in the main songs that you almost forget
what is going on and why they are actually singing the song. However, this is
what the musical is all about on stage so it is Hooper staying true to its
basis.
Hooper has once again proved that he can direct movie stars
to some of their best work. Hugh Jackmangives his first musical big screen performance (not counting Happy Feet). While no stranger to
working in stage musicals, on screen this is new territory for him and he is
brilliant. He is captivating from the opening scene of the film and gives an
emotionally charged performance. Not to mention his absolutely exquisite
singing voice he makes the most of.
Anne Hathaway gives the performance of her career as
Fantine. She completely personifies the character and is heartbreaking from her
first moment on film to her last. “I Dreamed A Dream” is one of the most
amazing musical moments on film in years, where you almost forget that she is
singing this beautiful song as you are so captivated by the way her character’s
heart is breaking at the realization that all the happiness and freedom to
dream happy dreams has been sucked out of her by life.
Russell Crowe is quite lack lustre compared to Jackman and
Hathaway. Although he is not bad by any means, he doesn’t give off as cruel a
vibe as one would hope in the “villain” of the film. He is serious and there is
no problem believing that he is law abiding, but you don’t see in him any of
the feelings he is professing to feel when he sings. Therefore his climax in
the film does not really seem justified.
Amanda Seyfried, though sweet, is over-shadowed by her
fellow actors. She is a lovely Cosette, but Isabelle Allen, who plays the
younger Cosette, is even lovelier.
Eddie Redmayne also gives his career best performance so
far. It’s actually a lovely shock as to how good he really is in Les Miserables , as he gives a
completely different performance to anything he has ever done on screen. “Empty
Chairs at Empty Tables” is his moment in the film where he shines and shows how
much talent he really has.
Samantha Barks makes her film debut as Epinone, a role she
has played previously on London’s West End. What a film debut. ”On My Own” is
one of the best known Les Miserables
songs and Barks performs it with such ease and natural beauty, although it is
again one of the most heart breaking moments on screen. During “A Heart Full Of
Love” in which Seyfried, Redmayne and Barks all sing, you just want to hear
more of Barks.
And Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter are a
fantastic team as the comical inn-keepers. Daniel Huttlestone, who plays young
Gavroche also gives a wonderful breakthrough performance.
Les Miserables is
a must see for any musical fans and especially fans of the original stage
musical. Those who aren’t won’t understand the hype, but still won’t be able to
deny some of the best acting of the year.
Cast: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Ralph Fiennes, Helena Bonham Carter, Alan Rickman, Tom Felton
In My Own Words
Well, here we are. At the end of the Harry Potter film series. It really is the end of an era. I feel the way I did at the end of the Lord Of The Rings series, but perhaps a bit sadder to say goodbye than I was then. With Lord Of The Rings it was a film series of three years, Harry Potter it feels like when you were at school. You meet all these news friends on your first day of high school and on the last day of school it’s like you are saying goodbye forever. Although with leaving school you tend to see everybody again. No more Harry though! It really is a sad feeling for die hard supporters such as myself.
I would be lying if I said I had always liked the Harry Potter books and movies. I have liked them for a long time now, but not since the first book or movie was released. I remember being in high school (that subject seems to be coming up a bit in this post) when the first book came out and quite a few of my school friends were reading. I was a tad confused as to why as I thought that Harry Potter was for children. A few years went by and when Harry Potter and The Prisoner of Azkaban was released, I thought “I may want to see this film” (this was before I was a film reviewer). So I went out and hired the first two movies. I was hooked. This series was so much fun to watch and not to mention completely addictive. So I have been a die hard fan since 2004.
I guess what a lot of people like about Harry Potter is not just that it has these three misfits who you almost fell like you get to grow up with or it meddles with the idea of a magical, fun world running parallel with reality, but it is always a great form of discussion. Before the final book was released, theories about how it was going to end were flying around all over the place. Even know, people think there may be something more which J. K. Rowling isn’t telling us. The films and the books will always draw people together in conversation and be and interesting conversation starter.
I miss the movies already and I have only been out of the cinema for an hour! It is a sad feeling that it is now all over. I really hope the best for Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson. They are each wonderful actors in their own right and I really hope we are going to see lots more of them in the future. I recently saw Rupert Grint in Wild Target on DVD which I really enjoyed him in, and I am looking forward to seeing Daniel Radcliffe in The Woman In Black and Emma Watson in My Week With Marilyn.
These are my own words and here is my Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows: Part 2 review. Enjoy.
Review
“It All Ends” shouts the posters for Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows: Part 2. And so it does. After 10 years and 8 Harry Potter films, the final movie event in J. K. Rowling’s phenomenon finally hits cinemas. It is a bittersweet experience for fans which these films and their almost annual releases have become a part of their lives for a decade. The final film doesn’t disappoint for these die hard fans. It is a fitting farewell to the characters which they love and stays true to the book, with some slight adjustments to aid the excitement on the big screen. However, those who haven’t seen any Harry Potter films before and are thinking about seeing this film, shouldn’t unless you watch at the very least Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows: Part 1.
The final Harry Potter film picks up right where it left off in Part 1. Lord Voldemort’s (Ralph Fiennes) power is at its strongest and Harry Potter (Daniel Radcliffe) and his ever trusted friends Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson) know they have to find all the horcruxes in order to kill him once and for all. The showdown takes place at Hogwarts, which is now under the rule of assumed Voldemort follower Severus Snape (Alan Rickman). One thing is for certain in the final war between Harry and Voldemort, only one will survive.
The great things about the final instalment of the Harry Potter series is that it delivers everything it promises to be. There is suspense from the beginning to the end of the film and it does stay true to the book. In some ways, the final scene at Hogwarts is anti-climatic and may be a bit too subtle for some people. However, it is plain to see why director, David Yates chose to make it like this. It isn’t cliché or a scene where people wave their fists in the air in response to the ending of the battle, and it is a feeling of surrealism and calm now that it is finally all over, and a feeling of wondering where to go from there.
The directing and cinematography is actually the best in this film than any of the other films. There are some great techniques used in filming some scenes in particular, such as at the very beginning when the three friends are standing outside Olivander’s door and are almost silhouettes. The sound affects for the battle scenes are very impressive, as are the visuals and special effects in these scenes.
The only real downfall of the film is that it is not quite as emotional in certain scenes as it should be. This is not to say that there is no emotion in this film at all, as there definitely is and there are tears to be shed. Yet, some scenes such as when somebody is thought to be dead, there is only a reaction from one person and barely any tears from others who should be showing some type of emotion.
As for the acting, job well done by all. Radcliffe gives his best performance as Potter in this film. He isn’t over the top and he is a complete natural now, as you would hope he would be as if he didn’t know his character inside and out by now, he never will. Only criticism is that his chemistry with Bonnie Wright, who plays his love interest, Ginny Weasley is almost non-existent.
Again, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson are very good. Neither is over the top and give their characters all they can. It is almost a moment of triumph when these two finally kiss on screen as everybody has been waiting for this for years. You can see that these two are very close as friends in real life, as they just work on screen together and are very sweet.
Perhaps the best performance in the film is that of Alan Rickman. He is fantastic in this film. He has the most complex character in the series and in this final film, his character is completely broken down and all the raw emotion of this character comes to the screen. Ralph Fiennes is also brilliant as Voldemort. He is as evil as they come and shows no hint of having any good in his soul at all. Helena Bonham Carter is not on screen too much as Bellatrix Lestrange, but she makes an impact when she is. A great moment and a credit to her acting is when Hermione has taken the polyjuice potion to make her Bellatrix and Bonham Carter charges everything about her performance. You completely forget that you are watching Bonham Carter pretend to be Watson and believe that it really is Hermione trying to be Bellatrix.
It is definitely a sad time to see the Harry Potter series finish up, but Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows: Part 2 is a fitting conclusion to the phenomenon. Again, non-fans of the books or movies or people who haven’t had anything to do with either, shouldn’t waste their time as they will have no idea what is going on, but fans will love it. Don’t cry because it’s over, smile because it happened.
The King's Speech Year: 2010 Director: Tom Hooper Cast: Colin Firth, Geoffrey Rush, Helena Bonham Carter, Guy Pearce
In My Own Words Wow. No really...wow. I am still in absolute bewilderment nearly two hours after I walked out of the cinemas after seeing "The King's Speech". I have nothing but praise for this film and I truly believe that I have just seen the film that will win the big one at the Academy Awards in March and I have no doubt that I have also witnessed the performance that will win Best Performance By An Actor In A Leading Role. It was only one scene into the film that I realised when watching Colin Firth in his role as King George VI that I was witnessing something special. Halfway through the film, I whispered to my soon to be husband, "He is going to win the Oscar". I sincerely hope that "The Kings Speech" is also the source of the Best Supporting Male and Female Actor's too. Geoffrey Rush and Helena Bonham Carter were truly brilliant. I'm not usually one to make huge and confident predictions like this, but I feel like I have become so emotionally attached to this film that I will be absolutely devestated if victory is taken from it's grasp for the Golden Globes in the next few weeks and the Oscars in March.
The point about this film that I really want to make is that it is one of the most emotional films I have seen in a long time. Unlike the large majority of emotional films, this film does not contract the emotion from death or romantic angst, but rather from everyday human feelings show by an amazing man. I had tears in my eyes for the large part fo the film and found myself weeping in the final scene. I have never had this type of experience with a film that, as I said, does not have any death or hard core romance in it. Some of the tears were from feeling "Bertire's" pain and some of them were from the overwhelming feeling of seeing so many amazing things on the screen at once. I think I may break down in tears once again if Firth takes home the Oscar because I haven't seen a performance more deserving in a very long time.
I feel like this was the perfect time for me to be watching this film which is a great representation of an important time in British modern history as I will be visiting England for the first time in the next few weeks. I am extremely excited and seeing Westminster Abbey on the big screen has just heightened my excitement.
These are my own words and here is my review.
Review It is a very rare occasion when a film comes along which can be described as near flawless, but when it does, it is a film and time to be cherished. "The King's Speech" is an extremely powerful and awe inspiring film. It does not have visual effects or crazy CGI images in which many films are these days measured by, it relies purely on the amazing performances by Colin Firth, Geoffrey Rush and Helena Bonham Carter and a brilliantly written screenplay to create an emotionally charged film which is almost completely character driven. The film opens with the Duke Of York (Colin Firth), affectionately known as Bertie by his family, giving a speech at Wimbeldon. As soon as he opens his mouth, realisation sets in that he has a bad stammer and is incapable of speaking in the same manner as others because of it. His wife, Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter) seeks out the help of Ausralian speech therapist, Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush) to help with her husbands problem after a series of failed attempts by advised psychiatrists. Although Bertie is cynical at first of Logue's methods, the most unlikely of friendships starts to form and Logue becomes an even more crucial part of his life when he becomes crowned King George VI.
This movie is an amazing story of real human emotion which can be felt by anyone, not just the King of England. There are millions of people out there who have problems with public speaking or have low self esteem because of one reason or another. This movie reaches out to those people and pulls on their emotional strings. It is extremely rare for a film which is based on a powerful and historical figure to become one which everyday people can relate to. This film would not be what it is without the amazing acting by the three lead's. This is very much a character driven film, which means that the acting had to be superb in order for it to be any sort of success. Tom Hooper certainly knew what he was doing when casting this film. Colin Firth is absolutely incredible as Bertie. He well and truly becomes the character and the audience becomes completely lost in the character to the point that you completely forget that this is Colin Firth you are watching. Gone is Mr Darcy and every speck of "Pride And Prejudice" and "Bridget Jones' Diary" which Firth used to project when he appeared on the screen, this man is the real deal. He shows the pain and embarassment he feels over his stammer right from the first sight of him on the big screen. He truly becomes the character right down to the smallest detail. Firth carries himself like royalty and his stammer brings tears to your eyes. He has indeed reached he pinnacle of his career, and there seems to be no real threat in sight for the Best Actor Oscar.
Geoffrey Rush is great as Logue. Unlike Firth, it is not the hardest role he has ever done, but he nevertheless is brilliant and extremely likable. Like Bertie, the audience feels pity for Logue. His character is extremely witty and funny. Helena Bonhom Carter is also brilliant as the future Queen mother. In this role which see's, for the first time in a long time, take on a film role which is not a quirky Tim Burton or Harry Potter role. It is not the first time she has played royalty ( as she was cast as Anne Boleyn in the TV movie "Henry VIII" in 2003), but it is defiantely her finest. She is sublime as Elizabeth and you can see the love she has for her husband and the pain she feels for him in his eyes. Timothy Spall was also brilliant as Winston Churchill, taking on the persona ansd mannerisms of the man to perfection.
The screenplay is brilliantly written. The reference for this film was the diaries which Lionel Logue left behind and these diaries were available to Hooper and and writer, David Seidler when putting together this film. The research which has gone into this film is just incredible. It is also quite funny in parts, such as when Bertie is learning how to swear, which is quite unusual for such an emotional drama film. The cinematography and musical score enhance every emotion throughout the film and create suspense and intrigue. The monologue of Bertie and Logue's therapy sessions is very clever and highly enjoyable.
In colnclusion only one thing can be said to sum up everything which "The King's Speech" is. The future best film of the 2011 Academy Awards, and that is no light statement. 10/10
Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows: Part 1 Year: 2010 Director: David Yates Cast: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Ralph Fiennes, Helena Bonham Carter
In My Own Words I am an unashamed Harry Potter fan, not afraid to say it. I won't say I was always a Harry Potter fan, but I became so with the release of "Harry Potter and The Prisoner Of Azkaban" in cinemas back in 2004. After deciding that I wouldn't mind seeing the film, I went and watched the first 2 movies and was hooked. Since then, I've read every one of the Harry Potter books, seen all the films the day or day after it came out and stood in lines at bookstores on the day the books were released. What do I love the most about Harry Potter? It's a story about growing up and life as a high school student with a difference. Even though it is a fantasy story, people can identify with Harry, Ron and Hermione. They are outcasts in a world of outcasts and struggle with growing up issues, but then they are great fun to watch and by now you know them as well as you would your best friends.
How do I feel about the last chapter of the Harry Potter saga? It didn't feel like it at all. Personally I don't think it was a great idea to split the last book up into two movies, but I can see why they did it. I know I first thought that they split the last book into two to keep the franchise going and keep the money rolling in, but now I see that it would have been a 4 hour movie if they made the last book into one film. I still don't know if it worked though. Of course I have an advantage over the people who haven't read the books, but I don't think it ended in the right place. Yet I don't know if there would've been the right place to finish part one. Hurry up part two! In saying this, I would really be interested in hearing from people who haven't read the books to see whether they think that the ending was sufficient. It is hard for me to say knowing what is coming next.
These are my own words and here is my review.
Review So, the last chapter of the Harry Potter saga. But wait....there is still more! Whatever the reason for making "Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows" into two movies, it definately doesn't feel like it ends in the right place. Not intense enough to be a cliff hanger, just needed to end maybe 15 minutes earlier. However, it is definately not the worst of the Harry Potter movies and nowhere near the worst movies of the year if you look at it as a stand alone film. A word of warning though, if you are going to the film to see it as a stand alone film as you haven't seen the first six movies, then you won't have a clue what is going on. After the death of Hogwarts head master,Albus Dumbledore (Michael Gambon) at the end of the last Harry Potter film, Harry (Daniel Radcliffe), Ron (Rupert Grint) and Hermione (Emma Watson) set off to begin their end battle with Harry's life-long enemy, Voldemort (Ralph Fiennes). They take hiding in the woods of England to destroy Voldemort's horcruxes (a term which only those who have been following Harry's journey will know) before Voldemort finds them and destroy's them first.
The second last installment of the Harry Potter series is very close to being, if it isn't, the darkest of the films. There are not many smiles to be had by any of the characters and this is the way it was always going to be in this movie. The movie stays true to the book which it is based on and some things work better on screen than they do in words. There are segments in the book which are extremely tense and the intensity of Harry's situation is transferred to the audience very well. The audience feels the danger and fears for their safety. It does tend to drag on a bit at one point in time, but in these scenes it still manages to show how the journey is taking it's toll on the three friends and again, it is still true to the book in doing so. The cinematography and visuals have definately progressed with the films over time and several scenes are really quite beautiful. The musical score is also perfect for the film and again brings more emotion into the film. The ending is somwhat questionable though, as it is not a cliff hanger by any means. This film didn't need a cliff hanger at the end of it to increase interest and encourage people to go and watch the final film though so it can be forgiven.
"Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows" is the Harry Potter film which shows the true acting ability of Radcliffe, Grint and Watson. They have all matured in their acting so much in the past few years and this film is very well acted. The three of them just bounce of one another in their acting and create such a strong relationship not just between themselves, but also between themselves and the audience. Radcliffe, Grint and Watson all give strong performances and you can really tell that their acting is not as forced as what it felt back in their earlier days. There shouldn't be a doubt in anyone's mind now that these three will all have careers after Harry Potter, and good careers at that. Helena Bonham Carter is also great to watch as the evil and clearly insane Bellatrix Lestrange.
Whether or not "Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows: Part 1" was a great film or not or whether it had a cliff hanger ending or not, won't take Harry Potter fans away from enjoying this film or looking forward to the finale. Not the worst Harry Potter film, not the best Harry Potter film. It is no longer a children's tale and it is very dark. Nevertheless, it is still Harry Potter and it definately shows how the film saga has become better production wise over the years. Let's hear it Harry Potter fans....bring on July 2011. 7/10
Alice In Wonderland Year: 2010 Director: Tim Burton Cast: Mia Wasikowska, Johnny Depp, Helena Bonham Carter, Anne Hathaway
In My Own Words
“Alice In Wonderland” marked a momentous occasion for me, my first experience of 3D in my local cinema. I have experienced 3D before, but only in theme parks. It seemed like such a special concept at places like Warner Bros Movie World, Universal Studios and Disneyland, I guess that’s why 4D is becoming the rage there now. I didn’t find my 3D experience quite as exciting as I thought I would. It didn’t feel like it enhanced the film at all and it didn’t feel like it was quite the excitement it has been hyped up to be. I’m on the fence as to whether 3D is really worth the extra $5 we paid for it. I thought that is I was going to go to my first 3D film that Tim Burton’s “Alice In Wonderland” would be a good one to go with. Maybe I should have started with “Avatar”. Don’t get me wrong, there were some scenes where I thought the 3D made the visuals amazing...actually there was only one scene that stood out like that too me and that was where Alice was falling down the rabbit hole. I think I will be reserving 3D for the action films.
As for the movie, I really enjoyed this film. From beginning to finish, it is very Tim Burton though. Burton is one of those directors that you can walk into a cinema not knowing who the director is and recognise his styling trademarks not far into the film. The one thing I will say about “Alice In Wonderland” is in order to enjoy, take it for what it is. It is a family sequel to the Lewis Carroll tale which is a showcase of fantasy visual effects. Don’t expect a film that will shake you emotionally, Carroll’s fantasy was never supposed to be that.
These are my words and here is my review.
Review
Tim Burton’s highly anticipated film “Alice In Wonderland” is, just like the original fantasy by Lewis Carroll, loads of fun and extremely enjoyable. Not just for children, unlike its Disney animation relative, the film shows Wonderland through a grown-up’s perspective as well as having aspects of it that children will also enjoy.Alice (Mia Wasiknowska) returns down the rabbit hole 15 years after her first journey to Wonderland to find that the Red Queen (Helena Bonham Carter) has taken over and is out to get Alice, as she is the only one who can strip her of her rule. Alice is helped along the way by her friends which she made in Wonderland when she was young such as the White Rabbit, the Cheshire Cat, Tweedledee and Tweedledum and the Mad Hatter (Johnny Depp) and the White Queen (Anne Hathaway).
The film is just beautiful to watch and a lot of fun. The visuals and script mix well together to create a film which is a pleasure to sit back and enjoy rather than worry about the ending. Yes, it is predictable, but “Alice In Wonderland” was always meant to be a family film and not to be too stressful. It is also important to remember just how strange the original novel and film is, and then the film seems fitting as it just carries on the tradition. The visual effects which Tim Burton employs are beautiful and completely appropriate. The costumes, especially the ones made for Alice, are beautiful and stunning. On the whole, the film is extremely Burton-esque. In the first 60 seconds, it is completely obvious that you are in a Burton film. The score, by Danny Elfman, is reminiscent of his past films and the visuals ring of “Charlie And The Chocolate Factory”. However, this does not take away from any of the beauty and the magnificence of the production. Although the story is quite original, the big criticism here is that it extracts from so many other stories. There are elements of the story which are so much like other stories. For example, there are traces of “The Chronicles Of Narnia”, “The Lord Of The Rings”, “Robin Hood”, “Where The Wild Things Are” and “Peter Pan” and its film sequel “Hook” in it all over the place. It almost feels like déjà vu throughout parts of the film.
Another criticism here is that there are many references to the Disney animation version of “Alice In Wonderland”. These are references that people who have seen the 1951 animation version will not get at all, but those who have seen it will recognise immediately, such as “Twinkle twinkle little bat, how I wonder where you’re at”. These references and this fact are not major criticisms though, as those who haven’t seen the animation, will still understand the film regardless.
Mia Wasikowska is the perfect Alice. She has the right amount of innocence and is picture perfect for the role. Although she does not strain herself at all in the role, she is extremely likable and brings to the role everything that one should. The Mad Hatter is definitely not Johnny Depp’s best role, but he is still good. It does feel as though he is channelling his inner “Drop Dead Fred” in this role through the visuals and as the young Alice’s mentor. Helena Bonham Carter does a great job as the Red Queen and her character stays true to the original Queen in the Lewis Carroll novel and in the first film. “Alice In Wonderland” feels like a very different film for Anne Hathaway. Although she has done fantasy films before, this is the first time she has not played the role of the young girl, and instead takes on the role of a superior, but quirky queen. The March Hare is also a great character to watch, as he is hilarious and definitely mad.
The most important thing when watching “Alice In Wonderland” is to purely enjoy it for what it is. It relies greatly on the visuals and not on an emotional journey or anything remotely thought provoking. It is purely fun and just beautiful to watch.
8/10
