Cars 3 (2017) film review

Year: 2017
Running Time: 109 minutes
Director: Brian Fee
Writers: Brian Fee, Ben Queen, Eyal Podell and Jonathan E. Stewart (story by), Kiel Murray, Bob Peterson and Mike Rich (screenplay)
Cast: (voices) Owen Wilson, Cristela Alonso, Armie Hammer, Chris Cooper, Nathan Fillon, Larry the Cable Guy, Bonnie Hunt, Kerry Washington

Cars 3 is now in cinemas everywhere and is distributed by Walt Disney Studios.

Disney Pixar has completely redeemed it's popular Cars franchise, by allowing Cars 3 to be exactly what Cars 2 should have been and goes even further than this.

The third film in the popular Disney Pixar Cars series captures the essence of the original film, but brings to life new, intriguing characters who bring with them important and relatable themes. Cars 3 also surprisingly takes a stand by breaking down gender stereotypes in a quiet, but highly effective way. For this reason, Cars 3 may actually even be superior to the original.

Brian Fee has proved to be the perfect person to take over the Cars franchise from John Lasseter, who co-directed the first two films with Joe Ranft (Cars) and Brad Lewis (Cars 2). Fee and his team of writers have successfully identified what made the first film a success and what gave the second film the unenviable reputation of being known as the worst Pixar film so far. Cars 3 embraces the themes of remembering where you come from and kindness to others that resonated during the first. It also brings back the excitement of the world of high speed car racing that runs parallel to quiet moments of reflection in quiet, rural towns.

However, the Lightning McQueen (once again voiced by Owen Wilson) we meet here is a much different race car compared to the character he once was in the previous films, as he exhibits in the very first scene when he questions himself saying his usual "I am speed" mantra. While he is still regarded by many as a champion, he is falling behind as new and improved race cars are making their way into the competitive arena. He is labelled and ridiculed by many as the old guy, especially by the new and cocky Jackson Storm (Armie Hammer).

It is a situation that will ring true for many. As our world progresses, it is not only sportsmen that are finding themselves in the shadows of younger competitors, but people in any industry. There are new products being developed and people are being made redundant as their positions are being dissolved. What Lightning McQueen reminds us is not to give up without a fight. However, at the end of the day, there is always a Plan B as he finds thanks to Cruz Ramirez (as voiced by Cristela Alonzo).

Disney has always been a champion for strong women in their animated films. What makes Cruz Ramirez different to the strong female characters that have come before her is that she is a girl in the racing world which is primarily a male domain. However, this is not the only that that is ground-breaking about the character of Cruz. She is a trainer who has always had dreams of becoming a racing car, but those around her made her doubt herself by encouraging her not to reach too high.

The beautiful thing here is that her gender is never once addressed. It is never said that she is discouraged based on her gender. This is the right way to break down gender stereotypes in cinema. We have also seen this recently in Wonder Woman , where Gal Gadot's Diana takes it on herself to save the world and is the only female fighting in the trenches. Yet, no one in the film speaks of how she shouldn't be doing these things based on her gender. As both Cars 3 and Wonder Woman prove, gender stereotypes are broken down when they are not directly addressed in the film. Gender equality is achieved when gender is no longer questioned.

Cars 3 is deceptively simple. There is plenty for young families to enjoy with it's stunning, colourful visuals and basic themes, but there are also themes of greater depth built into the story which makes it as important for adults as it is for children.

7/10

Zoolander 2 (2016) film review

Year: 2016
Running Time: 102 minutes
Director: Ben Stiller
Writers: Drake Sather (character), Ben Stiller (character and screenplay), Justin Theroux, Nicholas Stoller and John Hamburg (screenplay)
Cast: Ben Stiller, Owen Wilson, Penelope Cruz, Will Ferrell, Kristen Wiig, Cyrus Arnold, Christine Taylor, Billy Zane, Benedict Cumberbatch, Kiefer Sutherland

Zoolander 2 is perhaps not a completely unexpected disappointment. It was always to be a massive task recreating the success of the first film, especially when the sequel's screenwriters focused and tried too hard with the wrong elements, Instead of recreating the unique brand of humour displayed in the original film, Zoolander  2 is hardly funny and incredibly weak.

After years in a self inflicted exile, male model Derek Zoolander (Ben Stiller) comes out of hiding when he receives an invitation to make his comeback on the catwalk in Rome. He is reunited with his old friend, Hansel and the two discover that the world of fashion has changed a great deal. When they meet ex-swimsuit model, Valentina Valencia (Penelope Cruz), they find out that celebrities all around the world have been dying and using a past signature look of Derek's to communicate information regarding their killer. However, it all becomes personal when Derek finds out that his estranged son, Derek Jr. (Cyrus Arnold) is in great danger and he, Hansel and Valentina must find a way to save him.

There is no better way to describe Zoolander 2 than an absolute mess. It's screenplay is less of an actual story and more of a cluster of ridiculous one-liners and references to the 2001 film thrown together in no particular order. Ben Stiller and his co-writers, Justin Theroux, Nicholas Stoller and John Hamburg seem to have approached the writing of the Zoolander sequel in much the same way as most sequels are written, which is working with the elements that made the first film work. In this case, they got the idea of what worked in Zoolander completely wrong. Zoolander has become something of a cult classic because it was it was a satire of the modelling world that was clever and ridiculous at the same time.

There is nothing clever about Zoolander 2. The story is incredibly weak because the focus is more on making the film as funny as it can possibly be and this is the reason that the film is not funny at all. Every single piece of dialogue and every scenario is just designed to be funny and instead is just irritating. The sad thing is that there are actually some moments in the film that would be laugh out loud funny if audiences hadn't been inundated with other things significantly less funny around it. More than laughs, Zoolander 2 induces more eye rolls with the things it wants you to find funny, many of which are incredibly predictable such as Derek discovering his son is not male model material.

The entire concept of a satirical look at the modelling world does not have the same appeal as it did fifteen years ago when it was something unique with a creative screenplay. One cannot help but believe that Stiller just waited too long to make a Zoolander sequel and the concept does not work as well in 2016 as it did in 2001. Despite the introduction of new characters and even the world of fashion which Derek and Hansel exist in having changed with the times, the whole concept just feels tired.

What was once considered funny about Derek Zoolander and Hansel now just feels overtly exaggerated and much too ridiculous. Admittedly, the only two performances in the film which one does feel comfortable watching are Billy Zane's and Cyrus Arnold's, who plays Derek Jr. Zane plays himself and his presence actually gives an enjoyable start to the film, while Arnold plays a moody teenager. The two are unforced in their delivery and it is a welcome change to every other performance in the film (except for Christine Taylor as Matilda's ghost). Every other character in the film is so incredibly over the top and exaggerated to the point of irritation, especially Stiller's Derek Zoolander who proves that exaggerating a character who was successful the first time round doesn't work.

Zoolander 2 is a film that should never have existed. The original film should have been allowed to remain a stand alone film and the name Derek Zoolander be met with fond memories. However, Zoolander 2 proves once again that the sequel is never as good as the first and lightening does not strike in the same place twice.

2/10

Inherent Vice (2014) film review

Year: 2014
Running Time: 148 minutes
Director: Paul Thomas Anderson
Writers: Thomas Pynchon (novel), Paul Thomas Anderson (screenplay)
Cast: Joaquin Phoenix, Josh Brolin, Owen Wilson, Katherne Waterston, Jena Malone, Reese Witherspoon, Joanna Newsom, Eric Roberts, Bencio Del Toro, Maya Rudolph
Inherent Vice is now showing in cinemas everywhere and is distributed in Australia by Roadshow Films.

Based on the novel of the same name by Thomas Pynchon, Inherent Vice is a wonderfully unique and nostalgic journey back to the very early days of the 1970's when Los Angeles was experiencing a change in identity. Larry "Doc" Sportello (Joaquin Phoenix) is a detective living the hippy lifestyle who the officials, including Lt. Det. Christian "Bigfoot" Bjornsen (Josh Brolin) ridicule and his friends rely on. When he is visited by ex-girlfriend, Shasta (Katherine Waterston), he becomes caught up in a web of illegal activities and cover ups in a world where everyone he meets is somehow connected. However, when Shasta goes missing, it all turns personal for Doc.

Paul Thomas Anderson's adaptation of Thomas Pynchon's novel is a fine one. Anyone who has read the book will find that the film mirrors the book in the best of ways and Anderson has overcome the features of the book that may have been problematic in the process of adaption with style. However, the novel "Inherent Vice" is one that has divided opinions which inevitably leads to the film being quite the same way. Many people enjoyed the novel for it's nostalgic and vivid imagery, but Pynchon's writing style and method of storytelling can be troublesome for others. Those who are troubled by the latter will find that the screenplay is much like the book and therefore will not understand the attraction that others feel to it as they will feel that there is too much going on with too many characters. The psychedelic drug fuelled and sexual nature of the film will also take away from the enjoyment of other viewers. Yet with an open mind, Inherent Vice is a lot of fun and rather hilarious. The script is incredibly witty with colourful dialogue and there are plenty of laugh out loud moments.

However, Inherent Vice lacks the thing that one has come to expect from an Anderson film as such and that is the presence of impressive cinematography with amazing visuals. The film is nostalgic and very atmospheric of the times, but the one thing that is missed in the film as opposed to the book is the love felt for the Los Angeles landscape. It feels as though an opportunity is missed in this respect, as Pynchon's book lovingly created these vivid pictures of Doc's home beside the sea. These lingering shots of the featured locations are missed, but the nostalgia is created by the costumes and production design which add to the overall atmosphere of the film. The soundtrack is also completely fitting for the year of 1970 and is unique in the way that it isn't a compilation of over played songs from that era.

While Inherent Vice provides a visually nostalgic imprint of Los Angeles in the year of 1970, it is also a snapshot of the times with a focus on a type of prejudice that was brand new. Throughout the film, the character of Doc is continuously ridiculed and insulted for being a hippy and living the lifestyle associated with being a hippy. The two girls of his life, Penny and Shasta were both once part of the hippy lifestyle, but they have both cleaned themselves up to seem more respectable in society and Penny in particular makes it no secret that she has conformed. This hippy hate in Los Angeles was the doing of Charles Manson and his band of followers known as The Manson Family. When the murders that shook Los Angeles were committed by this group of free spirits under Manson's spell, hippies were no longer seen as the innocent members of society they once were, but as sinister and a mark on society. Of course we see in Inherent Vice that this was not true of all hippies as there is nothing sinister about Doc and the movie does a fine job at demonstrating society's view on this sub-culture at this point in time.

The colourful characters and their wonderful dialogue are brought to life by way of perfect casting and fine performances. Joaquin Phoenix is truly brilliant as Doc Sportello. Phoenix brings a very natural comedic style to the role which is neither forced nor dull and it is a style which is perfect for the character. His character of Doc is incredibly likable and despite how much verbal abuse he receives throughout the film from almost everyone, remains so laid back (whether that be with some support) and harmless. It is a role which one can imagine Phoenix would have had a great deal of fun with as he is a real treat to watch.

Josh Brolin is also tremendously entertaining as tough talking cop, Bigfoot Bjornsen. Brolin's memorable character arguably gets some of the best lines in the film and is truly hilarious. Joanna Newsom, who's character Sortilege acts as narrator, does a wonderful job of holding her own in the film and is the personification of the typical carefree Californian girl of 1970. Benicio Del Toro and Owen Wilson are also very funny and entertaining.

Inherent Vice is not your average comedy and is completely unique. This uniqueness will be too quirky for some, but an open mind will lead to a rather fun experience at the hands of Paul Thomas Anderson.

7/10

The Internship (2013)

Year: 2013
Director: Shawn Levy
Cast: Vince Vaughn, Owen Wilson, Rose Byrne, Josh Brener, Max Minghella, Jessica Szohr

The Internship pulls no surprises. One look at the poster and you know exactly what you are getting. Actually, as soon as your hear the title you could guess what the film would be about and you could bet your last dollar you wouldn't be far off the exact plot outline.

Thankfully, you could guess the story and the end, but watching it is still entertaining and provides the laughs you are craving when you see it.

Billy (Vince Vaughn) and Nick (Owen Wilson) are two salesmen who find themselves out of a job due to the changing economy and the changing face of technology. They decide their last chance at getting a real job is to apply for an internship at Google which gives them a chance to earn a position at the search engine company. Upon turning up on their first day, they realise that their age sets them apart from the younger interns and they join a group of other misfits. Billy and Nick are able to help change their new friends lives, but they still need some help in order to change theirs.

The Internship is predictable and quite cliché from beginning to end. You could figure out what the ending is and how they are going to get there. However the good news is that there is some laughs along the way. There are some parts that can be more annoying than funny at the hands of Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson, but the important thing is that the laughs are definitely there considering this is a comedy film. The story may not be a completely brilliant one, but the script, written by Vaughn and Jared Stern is fairly strong.

This film could not have made Google look any better. The setting for this film, which is the Google offices in San Francisco, is like a theme park for adults. There is sure to be many people in the area looking to apply for an internship looking to Google based on this film. It gives a really fun feel to the film and at the same time, does a great job of giving Google a fun image.  If Google wasn't the search engine you normally went to, straight after this film it will be the one that is at the forefront of your mind.

Vaughn and Wilson have proved in the past with their 2005 film, Wedding Crashers that their combination does work on screen. Thy work off each other when it comes to their dialogue. Again, sometimes the way which they try to create laughs by using long drawn out anecdotes explained by the two of them can become annoying when done more than once or twice, but there are still some very funny scenes with the two of them. The opening scene with the two singing along to Alanis Morissette's "Ironic" is quite hilarious.

The other good thing about this film is that it does well in character development and creating colourful and amusing characters. The group of interns played by Josh Brener, Dylan O' Brien, Tiya Sircar and Tobit Raphael all do well and are relatable as well as being fun to watch.

The Internship isn't a film which will have you rolling on the floor laughing whenever you think of it, but it funny enough to make it a fine watch and a visually fun one.

6/10



On a side note.....
Like many people who saw this film, I had to wonder whether Google's offices were quite as fun as this. I had my doubts, but according to this article, it does sound like the most fun place to work ever!
http://mashable.com/2013/06/09/google-the-internship/

You may have also seen Vince Vaughn in....
Couples Retreat as Dave

You may have also seen Owen Wilson in.....
Midnight In Paris as Gil

Midnight In Paris

Year: 2011

Director:  Woody Allen

Cast: Owen Wilson, Rachel McAdams, Michael Sheen, Kathy Bates, Marion Cotillard, Carla Bruni, Adrien Brody

Before I begin my review…..

You know, there is a difference between thinking a film is a good film and truly liking it. Of course the two can usually come hand in hand with each other, but you can walk away from a film saying “Yes, it was good”, but it is different to walk away and saying “I really loved that film!”

Being a reviewer, I see many films that I know are great films and because I am a fan of great film, I do like them. Yet that doesn’t mean that I am going to put the film on my list of all-time favourite films.

On my list of favourite films, there are many films which I would consider great film, others which I know perfectly well won’t end up on any “Greatest Films Of All Time” lists…except mine. These are the films which you think are great films, but you have that extra emotional attachment to them because they strike an interest with you or you can relate to them.

Why am I talking about this? Because I loved Midnight In Paris! It is a good film, not one of the best films at the year or a contender for the Academy Awards (but I wouldn’t mind seeing it as one!), but it had a lot of me in it. I love the city of Paris, I loved all the literary and art maestro’s in the film and I love films that take you back to the glory days or yesteryear. Yes, I do want to live in Paris in the 1920’s. And if I do, I want to look and dress like Marion Cotillard.

Here is my review…

Review

It’s been a long time since Woody Allen has made a critically acclaimed film and you may have heard that Midnight In Paris is his best film in decades. You may like to know that this is true.

Woody Allen is completely back to form in Midnight In Paris. He has discharged the trends in the films he has made in the past 10 years which were still selling cinema tickets, but clearly not working for him. Midnight In Paris is subtle but charming and very sweet. It is almost like a modern day fairy tale with the all-important moral of the story at the end. New territory for Allen, but it works.

                Hollywood screen writer, Gil (Owen Wilson) and his fiance, Inez (Rachel McAdams) are on a trip to Paris. Gil, who is struggling to write his first novel, falls in love with the city, while Inez is quite the opposite and doesn’t romanticize Paris the way her fiancé does, except if it includes her friends and in particular old flame, Paul (Michael Sheen). Gil decides to take a night walk back to their hotel while Inez goes out dancing, and he finds that Paris comes alive at midnight.

                It is completely obvious within the first five minutes that Allen is in love with Paris the same way he is with New York. His montage of Parisian landmarks and Parisian life is a wonderful way to set the scene and make the audience fall in love with the city.  His cinematography of the city is loving and beautiful.

                People who are not fans of Allen’s past work will still enjoy Midnight In Paris, as it is completely different from the majority of his films. It hasn’t got the same “weird” vibe as most people describe his films as having. It is a load of fun, and helps if you know a bit about great writers and artists of the early twentieth century to make it all the more fun. Some people may find it all just a bit silly and the concept completely ludicrous, but there is no doubt it is entertaining.

                The script is very clever for a subject which is actually quite simple when it comes down to it. The concept of going back in time is not a new one, but it seems completely fresh in this film and Allen does a wonderful job of recreating both turn of the century Paris and 1920’s Paris.

                What the best thing about Owen Wilson’s role in this film as opposed to his past roles, is that he comes across a lot more natural than usual. He is often criticised for giving forced roles where she seems like he is trying too hard to be funny, but here he is just completely at ease. He gives one of his best performances in years.

                Wilson and Rachel McAdams are completely mismatched on screen, which means that they have achieved their objective. Unfortunately, she is not quite as believable as the hard to handle fiancé. She seems like she still really wants to be nice so her performance does feel forced.

                Alison Pill and Tom Hiddleston are a real treat as Zelda and F. Scott Fitzgerald and Adrien Brody is hilarious as Salvador Dali. Marion Cotillard is charming as usual and completely at home in her city of Paris.

                A wonderful treat, especially for those who love Paris.

8.5/10

Hall Pass

Hall Pass
Year: 2011
Director: Bobby Farrelly and Peter Farrelly
Cast: Owen Wilson, Jason Sudeikis, Jenna Fischer, Christina Applegate

In My Own Words

You've got to love the type of comedy which "Hall Pass" is. Actually no you don't. It's not everybody's type of comedy. It's honestly not mine. It's like I always say though. A good film will break through the genre mould and make people who don't like that genre normally appreciate it. I'm not one for crude, toilet humour and there are a lot of people out there like me. Yet, there are some films from this sub-genre of comedy that I do appreciate, such as "The Hangover" and "Hot Tub Time Machine". Mind you, I thought "The Hangover" was quite tame as opposed to other films it's placed in the same pool as. So my theory is that you have to give every film a chance, whether you don't think you would like it or not. If you don't like the film, you bask in the glory of knowing that your suspicions were correct and if you were wrong, you get to enjoy the film! So you win either way!I'm not telling you to go out and see all the movies you don't want to see as it may result in you being quite irritated and feeling like you have a wasted a considerable amount of money. My point is that you never know when you will find a hidden gem. Unfortunately I did not feel this way about "Hall Pass". Not a hidden gem for me, but at least I feel as though I was proven right by thinking that it wasn't my type of movie! At least I didn't feel as grossed out when I came out of watching "Van Wilder: Party Liaison". This was tame compared to that.

These are my own words and here is my review

Review
A hall pass, in the traditional sense, is an exclusion from class. In Bobby Farrelly and Peter Farrelly's new movie "Hall Pass", a hall pass isn't the exclusion from class, but the exclusion from marriage. Rick ( Owen Wilson) and Fred (Jason Sudeikis) are two men who feel they are stuck in the rut of their marriages and are longing for the single life. Feeling their husbands frustration, Maggie (Jenna Fischer) and Grace (Christina Applegate) decide to give them both a hall pass, so they can have a week off from marriage and do whatever they need to do. So the two men set off on a week of what they think will be week of lots of sex and girls. What one can imagine from this description is that, yes, there will be lots of dirty references and nudity here and there. It is not the type of comedy you would take your parents with you to see.

However, "Hall Pass" does come across as though it is trying to be really funny by using jokes that have all been done before and just aren't quite as shocking as the Farrelly brothers try to make out. There are very few laugh out loud moments in this film considering it is a comedy. The script is quite weak and quite random, as several jokes just come out of nowhere and have no real relevance to what is happenning at that point in time. It really feels as if the film is trying too hard to be funny and the jokes are very forced. for example, Fred's scene with the girl in the bathroom. If one has to result to something like that for a laugh, you know they are struggling. Also, Fred's scene in the car at the beginning which we have seen in so many films over the years that it no longer has shock value and is simply a silliness value. The film itself actually feels quite forced and as a result feels very jerky. After the Farrelly brothers have shown what they are capable of with such films in the past as "There's Something About Mary", it is a real disappointment to see a movie like this from them when comedy is meant to be their forte.

The acting in "Hall Pass" is really very average and badly directed. The majority of the acting felt as forced as the jokes in the film. Owen Wilson and Jason Sudeikis don't seem natural at all in their roles. One would think that a man who feels like he is trapped in his marriage and wants to have some time to relive his single life would be an easy role to play and would be a character that would be completely relatable to many people out there, not just men. However, the way the Farrelly brothers direct these two just depicts two pathetic creatures who are over-exaggerated and simple. The way both Wilson and Sudeikis portray their characters is more the fault of the Farrelly brother's direction of them rather than their acting abilities, as both actors have shown in the past that they can act and are great comedy actors. The on screen relationships of Rick and Maggie and Fred and Grace are also very weak with no chemistry between the two sets of actors. Once one confesses their undying love to the other, you think "Really? Is that how you really feel?". And when the film finished, how much do we really know about Fred and Grace, besides what we have seen in the movie? Very, very little. Probably the best part of the film is the "bromance" between Rick and Fred, as Wilson and Sudeikis seem to just bounce off each other.

There is nothing new under the sun, and "Hall Pass" proves that. All the jokes are completely unoriginal and not very funny. Every year there seems to be a number of majorly publicised comedies which come out and are just not very funny, and this is one of them.

2.5/10