Genre: Fantasy

The Mummy (2017) – Film Review

/ Joe Baker / Leave a comment

When Universal Pictures first announced their plans to build a cinematic universe based around their gallery of iconic monsters, general audiences seemed to roll their eyes at the idea, seeing the forthcoming franchise as nothing more than a shameless attempt to copy and paste the formula of the Marvel Cinematic Universe, with the hopes of making the same box-office returns. Nevertheless, Universal continued with their plan, releasing the first instalment of the series in 2017 with ‘The Mummy,’ a film which even with the star-power of Tom Cruise, failed miserably both critically and commercially, instantly destroying any plans for the future of the franchise and embarrassingly leaving the ‘Dark Universe’ with a single film to its name.

Plot Summary: Once destined to rule all of Egypt, the beautiful princess; ‘Ahmanet’ sees her birthright stolen from her when her father begets an heir. Knowing this boy would be the Pharaoh’s new successor, ‘Ahmanet’ turns to a dark deity, selling her soul for an unholy power, for which, she is captured by the Pharaoh’s priests, mummified alive and buried in a tomb far from Egypt. Five thousand years later, opportunistic U.S. Army reconnaissance sergeant; ‘Nick Morton,’ accidentally discovers her tomb during a firefight in the Middle East, and once venturing inside, inadvertently sets her free…

According to a number of reports, Tom Cruise not only starred in ‘The Mummy,’ but also has an excessive amount of control over the film, having creative oversight on nearly every aspect of the production. So much so, that Cruise even had influence on the film’s screenplay, as it’s been stated that Cruise had his personal writing team rewrite certain scenes to give his character more screen-time and a more dramatic character arc, and even though most Universal executives weren’t thrilled about the rewrite, feeling it was disjointed and insipid, they reluctantly agreed to keep Cruise on board. Regardless, Universal Pictures soon saw the fallacy in their blind faith towards Cruise, as despite ‘The Mummy’ earning nearly £300 million worldwide, it was still considered a financial flop when taking into account its immense marketing campaign, which promoted the film purely as the franchise-vehicle it is as opposed to a riveting blockbuster.

Having both her design and gender altered to avoid any similarities with the titular villain of ‘X-Men: Apocalypse,’ which released just a year prior, ‘The Mummy/Ahmanet’ herself, portrayed by Sofia Boutella, is remarkably forgettable, never developing into a compelling or even threatening antagonist, which should be nearly impossible considering ‘The Mummy’ fills over a quarter of its runtime with extensive exposition regarding her backstory and sinister motives. Likewise, the actual protagonist; ‘Nick Morton,’ rarely benefits from Cruise’s natural charisma and wit, as ‘Nick’ is simply an unlikeable character, emerging as a foolish, self-centred adventurer and leaving in the exact same manner, in addition to being miraculously skilled with/in every type of firearm and hand-to-hand combat, of course.

When it comes to visuals, the film’s cinematography by Ben Seresin is generally visually pleasing, resulting in a fair share of alluring wide shots, yet much of the film’s beauty is consequently hindered by its ghastly colour palette, which hardly ever strays away from greys, blacks and beiges, an issue that is only worsened by the prosaic setting of modern-day London. Furthermore, the film’s action sequences (which are less frequent than most would expect) are fairly unimpressive, with many of the story’s thrilling moments having an overreliance on apace editing and CG creatures. That is, with the exception of the stunt work, which, due to Cruise’s heavy input on the film, is mostly practical and just as awe-inspiring as the stunts in the ‘Mission Impossible’ series, no thanks to director Alex Kurtzman (People Like Us).

Built around two central themes with various less significant tracks cropping up in-between, the film’s original score by Bryan Tyler is serviceable, for the most part, balancing its two signature tracks of ‘The Mummy’ and ‘Nick’s Theme,’ before then switching to far more dramatic orchestral tracks, like ‘Sandstorm,’ ‘Enchantments’ and ‘World of Monsters,’ for the film’s larger scale set pieces and handful of brief dream sequences.

Interestingly, ‘The Mummy’ wasn’t actually Universal’s first venture into crafting a cinematic universe of monsters, as the company originally envisioned 2014’s reboot of the renowned vampire in ‘Dracula Untold,’ as the first instalment in the series. There was even early talk of ‘Dracula’ appearing in ‘The Mummy,’ but this idea was ultimately scrapped, and the film was eventually cited as non-canon to the ‘Dark Universe.’ However, there are still several props alluding to other monsters within the film, as a vampire skull, along with one of the ‘Creature From the Black Lagoon’s hands, can both be seen in ‘Dr. Jekyll’s headquarters.

In summary, I feel it’s easy to see why many avoided ‘The Mummy’ when it first released back in 2017, as this film was merely Universal’s first attempt at revitalising the many well-known creatures locked away in their vault by lazily repackaging them for a new generation. The issue being that general audiences had little interest in this concept, and those that did quickly lost their engrossment as the film failed to capture even a fraction of the adventurous spirit present throughout the ’90s reboot. Instead, it seems ‘The Mummy’ will simply be lost to time, unremembered and disregarded. Final Rating: 3/10.

mummy-poster-1

Cats (2019) – Film Review

/ Joe Baker / 1 Comment

Despite ‘Cats’ being well-known as one of the longest-running stage shows in West End/Broadway history, it is also widely acknowledged that the cat-centric musical is empty spectacle and not much else. This along with many other reasons, may explain why the adaptation of the musical we received in late 2019 has since gone on to be regarded as one of the worst musicals ever put to film, as director Tom Hooper (The King’s Speech, Les Misérables, The Danish Girl) utterly squanders an enormous budget and a talented cast in exchange for a paper-thin plot, a constant bombardment of irritating songs, and some truly horrendous CG effects that will leave most audience members begging to be put out of their misery.

Plot Summary: A tribe of cats known as ‘The Jellicles’ yearly meet for a ‘Jellicle Ball,’ in which, they decide which of their group will ascend to the ‘Heaviside Layer’ and return to a new life. But, on this year, the mysterious napoleon of crime; ‘Macavity,’ has other, more sinister plans…

Ever since it was first announced that Oscar-winning director Tom Hooper would be adapting the iconic feline-focused musical, the film has become such joke-fodder that it’s hard to see past the countless number of memes mocking the film’s dreadful visuals or comedic moments, which is a shame. Not because the film we received is even remotely entertaining, of course, but because the adaptation we almost received could’ve been fantastic, as originally, animation house, Amblimation, planned to adapt the musical into an animated film before the project was shelved following the company’s closure. This idea of translating ‘Cats’ into a traditionally animated film remained all the way to Hooper coming on board to direct, and, in my opinion, also makes considerably more sense considering the original musical is based on the 1939 poetry collection; ‘Old Possum’s Book of Practical Cats’ by T. S. Eliot, a book brimming with whimsical sketches of various cats from a variety of backgrounds.

Newcomer Francesca Hayward, stands-out as one of the film’s few redeeming aspects, as her character; ‘Victoria,’ serves as an audience surrogate, her empathy occasionally shining through as she is rapidly introduced to character after character, until we uncover which ‘Jellicle’ cat will be chosen to ascend. The rest of the film’s prominent cast, however, including Jennifer Hudson, Taylor Swift, James Corden, Jason Derulo, Idris Elba, Judi Dench, Rebel Wilson, Ian McKellen, and many more, range from extraordinarily cringe-worthy to subpar, although their performances are further hindered by the screenplay’s lack of characterisation and dramatic moments.

Whilst the film’s cinematography by Christopher Ross does a successful job of upgrading the beige setting of the stage show into a vibrant, neon-lit approximation of old London, allowing for a handful of visually pleasing shots, it’s impossible for ‘Cats’ to claw itself away from the rest of its distracting visuals. That not only includes the obvious, but also much of the film’s set design, as several of the locations the cats enter are supposed to appear as if they are far larger than the characters in order to display each cast member as cat-sized, the drawback here being that there is usually no consistency with these scaled-up sets between shots.

Moving onto the music, Andrew Lloyd Webber, creator of the original musical, actually handled the film’s original score in addition to writing a couple of songs exclusively for the film. And, while songs, like ‘Jellicle Songs for Jellicle Cats,’ ‘The Old Gumbie Cat,’ ‘The Rum Tum Tugger’ and ‘Skimbleshanks: The Railway Cat,’ may bring a smile to fanatics of the stage show, in the film, these songs only come across as infuriating as they are so frequent, barely making time for anything else, aside from one or two atrocious cat puns.

Lastly, there is the appearance of the cats themselves, by far the most discussed/mocked element of the entire film, and for good reason, as the uncanny part-human, part-CG appearances of the furred critters appear extremely unnatural and very under-polished. So much so, that a mere two days after the film’s initial release, Universal Pictures announced that they would be releasing an updated version of: ‘Cats’ with enhanced CGI. Whilst this is partly a result of Tom Hooper’s broad direction, an article published the following year by The Daily Beast featured multiple visual effects artists who worked on the film, each claiming they had little-to-no time to finish the film’s huge array of effects, with some artists even having to sleep under their desks to get the film completed on time, at least, if said article is truthful.

In summary, even though I’m personally not an admirer of Tom Hooper’s filmography, Hooper is not a wholly incompetent director, but ‘Cats’ is undeniably, an absolute catastrophe of a fantasy-musical from beginning-to-end. Quickly being placed amongst the one hundred worst films of all-time on IMDb and forcing the plans for its sequel (and spin-off television series) to be immediately scrapped, ‘Cats’ is possibly one of the biggest cinematic failures of the past decade, as its copious number of flaws massively overshadow what few, if any, redeeming factors the film had left, resulting in an insufferable viewing experience that’ll make most film buffs feel remorse for everyone involved in this embarrassing production. Final Rating: high 1/10.

cats_xxlg

Hellboy (2019) – Film Review

/ Joe Baker / 1 Comment

In mid 2012, actor Ron Perlman once again endured the four hour make-up routine required to transform him into his iconic character: ‘Hellboy’ and fulfil the Make-A-Wish request of a six-year-old boy with leukaemia. Director Guillermo del Toro was so touched by this event that it inspired him to start production on a third ‘Hellboy’ instalment. But, following a dispute between del Toro and producer Mike Mignola, the project was soon cancelled, and instead, Mignola and his team began work on a reboot of the franchise, which finally released in 2019, to truly abysmal results.

Plot Summary: Whilst working side-by-side with his adopted father for the ‘Bureau for Paranormal Research and Defence,’ ‘Hellboy,’ a supernatural creature who came into our world in 1944 as a result of a demonic Nazi ritual, struggles to accept which world he belongs to, that being one of monsters, or one of men. All the while, an evil sorceress known as ‘The Blood Queen,’ returns to the modern world, eager to take her revenge on humanity for imprisoning her centuries ago…

According to producer Mike Mignola, the intention with this reboot was to replicant a style and tone closer to that of the original source material, as despite del Toro’s version of ‘Hellboy’ often being light-hearted aside from one or two disturbing moments, the original comic series created by Mike Mignola is, in reality, far darker and more gruesome. And, whilst this goal of wanting to make a ‘Hellboy’ film more horror/fantasy-oriented rather than just a typical superhero blockbuster is commendable, this reboot of the series continuously stumbles due to this tonal shift, even with talented director Neil Marshall (Dog Soldiers, The Descent, Doomsday) overseeing the project. Yet, this is only one of the film’s many problems, as it’s hard to sit through even a single viewing of ‘Hellboy’ without noticing the film’s incredibly fast pacing, awful comedic moments, and beyond messy plot, which for some reason draws, from four separate storylines from the ‘Hellboy’ comics.

‘Hellboy,’ or particularly, David Harbour’s performance as the titular character, is possibly the film’s finest aspect, as rather than just lazily mimicking Perlman’s beloved version of the character, Harbour displays a less mature interpretation of the superhero. Portraying the horned hero as a conflicted character, younger and stronger than Perlman’s version, but unsure as to if he is a real hero, which is an interesting internal conflict to explore and about the only element of the film that is consistent. Then there is Ian McShane as ‘Hellboy’s father figure, who is serviceable in his role alongside Milla Jovovich as the villainous; ‘Blood Queen,’ who, unfortunately, delivers one of the most over-the-top performances of her entire career.

Aside from the small detail of the filmmakers ensuring the colour red is never present in the same scenes as ‘Hellboy’ himself (excluding scenes where blood is shed, of course), the cinematography by Lorenzo Senatore is your usual affair for a superhero flick, having a handful of pleasant shots scattered amongst the plethora of bland hand-held camerawork utilised for action scenes and grand moments of destruction. But, regardless of how impressive the cinematography may or may not be, there is no distracting from the film’s unappealing CG effects, as in spite of the creature department clearly trying their best with the detailed costumes and prosthetic make-up on display, nearly all of the CG effects throughout ‘Hellboy’ appear instantly dated.

The original score by Benjamin Wallfisch is a peculiar concoction, being an odd mish-mash of orchestral and electronic tracks which only succeed in making the soundtrack feel quite dull when it’s not overly loud and irritating. Or at least, that’s the score before mentioning its use of electric guitars, which try desperately to present the soundtrack as something ‘awesome,’ but only emerges as annoying at best, with the film’s signature track; ‘Big Red,’ being the biggest offender for this.

However, an aspect of the film that is more in line with del Toro’s previous ‘Hellboy’ adaptation is its creatures, as although the effects that bring them to life aren’t impeccable, the actual creature designs are truly something be admired, with the ‘Hellboy’ comics clearly providing the filmmakers with plenty of visual influence. Even ‘Hellboy’s redesign was inspired by David Harbour’s own features, with the effects team adding a larger jaw and a heavier brow to further fit with Harbour’s facial structure.

In summary, while I can appreciate the effort that went into ‘Hellboy’ in some areas, the film’s flaws are just so evident it’s nearly impossible to ignore them. From its convoluted and overstuffed story to its dreadful CG effects, ‘Hellboy’s thrilling moments of action or amusing dark humour are minor when compared to its faults. Yet, by far the most frustrating part of this reboot is that it stripped away our final chance of seeing a third entry in the original ‘Hellboy’ series, an instalment myself and many other fans of this beloved character had been wanting to see for quite some time. Instead, we’re now stuck with this disappointing reboot, which failed miserably to reignite the spark of excitement in this superhero franchise. Final Rating: low 3/10.

hellboy_ver6_xxlg

About Time (2013) – Film Review

/ Joe Baker / 1 Comment

Written and directed by Richard Curtis (Love Actually, Pirate Radio), ‘About Time’ would go on to be the final outing for Curtis as a director, as after this time-travelling drama’s release in 2013, Curtis would return to exclusively being a screenwriter, which I feel is probably for the best. As, whilst ‘About Time’ does manage to keep itself afloat thanks to its captivating writing and wonderful performances, the film is often let down by its fairly bland presentation and apparent disinterest in exploring its unique time-travelling concept, ensuring the film’s eventual confusion with many of the other romantic-dramas seen in recent years.

Plot Summary: At the age of twenty-one, the timid; ‘Tim Lake,’ is informed by his father that men in their family have the unique ability to travel through time. Although this ability is restricted to the window of their own lives, it can be used to undo any past mistakes, so ‘Tim’ decides to use his newly found ability to escape his current lonely existence, visiting all of his past loves to find the one who could be his future…

Due to Richard Curtis writing a number of iconic rom-coms from ‘Love Actually’ to ‘Four Weddings and a Funeral’ and ‘Bridget Jones’ Diary,’ in the past, it comes as no surprise that ‘About Time’s screenplay is certainly its finest aspect. As, in many scenes, the film chooses to push ‘Tim’s time-travelling ability aside in favour of delivering sincere character moments, playing into the story’s theme of life itself being the greatest experience. Yet, while I do like both of these ideas, it’s a shame that the film barely touches upon the great deal of consequence time-travelling can have, as scenes focusing on time paradoxes and the butterfly effect could’ve made for some of the film’s most impactful story beats. Sadly, they are incredibly sparse and only appear when the story necessitates them.

The main couple of ‘Tim’ and ‘Mary’ portrayed by Domhnall Gleeson and Rachel McAdams do share a good amount of chemistry and have plenty of charming moments together, as ‘Tim’ tries desperately to impress ‘Mary’ by recalling everything he remembers about her from his past encounters. The supporting cast of Lydia Wilson, Lindsay Duncan, Tom Hollander, and Margot Robbie, are also great, as each member of the cast serves an important purpose within the narrative whether big or small. But, it’s Tim’s father, portrayed by Bill Nighy, who is the true emotional core of the film outside of ‘Tim’s love life, with Nighy doing a fantastic job as usual.

Despite visuals never being the main focus of rom-coms, the cinematography by John Guleserian is the film’s worst element, as even somewhat creative shots are rarely seen throughout the runtime, with the film usually just relying on mid-shots or close-ups to enhance the drama. The film’s colour palette doesn’t help in this regard either, as the pale colours almost present the film as if each scene is an extension of a photo framed in the family’s home, which is ingenious if that was the filmmakers’ attention, yet I’m not entirely sure it was. ‘Tim’s time-travelling ability, however, is a little more visually interesting in spite of its simplicity, as the film makes use of rapid editing to cut between many different events during ‘Tim’s life, a straightforward but understandable method of displaying how ‘Tim’ is flicking through his memories.

Although ‘About Time’s cinematography is lacking, the original score by Nick Laird-Clowes is far more enthralling, as the film’s soundtrack utilises ticking clocks and heart beating sound effects to relate to the story’s aspect of time travel. And, when focusing more on the story’s characters, the score switches things up to be piano-focused, depicting a variety of experiences of life such as joy, heartbreak, reflection and confusion. ‘About Time’ also features a number of recognisable songs similar to much of Richard Curtis’ other work, all of which, luckily, never distract from the story.

While ‘About Time’ does eventually continue on to cover a fair number of years throughout the character’s lives, much of the early portion of the film leans on ‘Tim’ trying to ignite the spark with ‘Mary,’ and with Rachel McAdams,’ previously portraying the titular character in ‘The Time Traveler’s Wife’ from 2009, this should seem like familiar ground. However, unlike McAdams’ character in that romantic sci-fi flick, ‘Mary’ is never made aware of ‘Tim’s time-bending secret, which might make some viewers a little uncomfortable regarding the absence of honesty in their relationship.

In summary, ‘About Time’ is enjoyable, it just doesn’t quite live up to its interesting ideas or nearly two-hour runtime. Unfortunately, whilst the film’s many humorous and heartwarming moments do excel, the story’s huge missed opportunities are always ever-present, and the mostly dull cinematography and colour palette simply can’t be ignored, and even though I would personally only recommend ‘About Time’ to those who have a sweet-tooth for light-hearted romantic-dramas, I can’t deny that the film is heartfelt, with a fragile sort of sincerity at its centre. Final Rating: 6/10.

about_time_xlg

A Monster Calls (2016) – Film Review

/ Joe Baker / Leave a comment

Based on the novel of the same name by Patrick Ness and directed by J. A. Bayona (The Orphanage, The Impossible, Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom), 2016’s ‘A Monster Calls’ is far from being the simplistic creature-feature its title may imply. Instead, this imaginative and soul-stirring drama balances its mature themes and fairytale-esque elements to deliver an engrossing and incredibly moving story, which despite its many positive reviews, has mostly gone unmentioned by many film fanatics since its initial release.

Plot Summary: After realising his mother is dying from terminal cancer, twelve-year-old ‘Conor O’Malley’ struggles to accept that he soon may have to live in a world without his caring mum. Until, later that night, when ‘Conor’ is visited by a tree-like monster in what he believes to be a dream, ‘Conor’ sees an opportunity to save his mother as the creature tells the boy he will heal her after he listens to his three stories…

Focusing on heavy themes of family and loss, the film adaptation of ‘A Monster Calls’ follows its source material very closely, with only a few small differences. One of these alterations being some additional scenes that were written exclusively for the film, including one scene that takes place immediately after the ending of the novel. But, with the original author Patrick Ness writing the film’s screenplay, this accuracy shouldn’t be too surprising. However, interestingly, it wasn’t Ness who originated the story, as the novel was actually started by Siobhan Dowd, who, sadly left it unfinished after her death, leaving Ness to complete the novel in 2011, yet Dowd is still credited as the creator of the original idea during the film’s end credits.

While the film’s supporting cast of Felicity Jones, Sigourney Weaver, Toby Kebbell, and Liam Neeson as the voice of ‘The Monster,’ are all superb in their various roles, its Lewis MacDougall who takes on the lead role as ‘Conor’, which is by no means an easy feat considering his age, as ‘Conor’ is a fairly complex character, being a young boy dealing with a very difficult situation he doesn’t fully understand, unwilling to accept that is mother is in constant pain, and more than likely, won’t be able to recover from her sickness. ‘Conor’s young age also makes his outbursts of rage and sorrow more understandable, as nearly every viewer can probably recall the difficulty of attempting to control their emotions when they themselves were a child. The now-sought-after actor Tom Holland also has a small role in the film, as Holland actually served as the stand in for ‘The Monster’ on set, following his previous collaboration with Bayona on ‘The Impossible’ in 2012.

The film’s cinematography by Oscar Faura not only manages to capture the true scale of ‘The Monster’ at many points, but also allows for a large array of visually appealing shots, effectively utilising everything from extreme close-ups to aerial wide shots to increase the film’s spectacle. The film’s CG effects aren’t quite as impeccable, however, as there are a noticeable amount of CGI-heavy moments which have suffered (if only slightly) from the film’s age.

Although the story of ‘A Monster Calls’ is very powerful on itself, there is no denying it is greatly elevated by Fernando Velázquez’s original score, as many of the film’s accompanying tracks, such as ‘Dad Arrives’, ‘Big Dreams’, ‘The Truth,’ and certainly the film’s final track; ‘End Credits’, all massively help to evoke emotion in the viewer, inevitably adding up to the film’s gut-wrenching conclusion. Any fans of Bayona’s early filmography are also sure to enjoy the film’s quick throwback to the director’s horror roots, as the score becomes quite dread-inducing during the first scene with ‘The Monster,’ as ‘Conor’ is unsure of the creature’s intentions.

But, without a doubt the most impressive aspect of this adaptation has to be ‘The Monster’s stories, as every time ‘The Monster’ tells ‘Conor’ these fantastical tales, the film takes a dramatic shift from live-action into animation, bringing its stories to life through water-coloured drawings and sketches, which not only plays into ‘Conor’ and his mother’s flair for artistry, but these sequences are also when the film is at its most creative, having the camera fly through splurges of paint and water, engulfing the viewer in an array of magnificent colours and locations alike.

In summary, ‘A Monster Calls’ is truly a touching and prodigious film. Whilst perhaps not completely flawless in its execution, mostly due to its unexplored side characters and occasional piece of hand-held camerawork, I feel most would find it impossible to not relate to the story in someway, as it’s sublime performances, enchanting visuals, and beautiful original score all serve their purpose of complimenting the film’s narrative, which is just as captivating as it’s novel counterpart. And, for me, ‘A Monster Calls’ still reigns as my personal favourite film from J. A. Bayona, and I’m positive the film became (and will continue to be) a showcase for Patrick Ness as a talented screenwriter. Final Rating: 8/10.

monster_calls_xxlg

Arthur Christmas (2011) – Film Review

/ Joe Baker / Leave a comment

From Sony Pictures Animation and Aardman Animations, the latter being the iconic British company behind many beloved handcrafted films, such as ‘Wallace & Gromit,’ ‘Chicken Run,’ ‘Morph’ and ‘Early Man,’ comes a festive family adventure focusing on ‘Santa’s son; ‘Arthur,’ as he races across the globe to deliver a present to an overlooked child. And, although the film doesn’t feature the impeccable stop-motion animation the company is best known for, it does make up for its mostly generic CG visuals through its amusing moments, charming characters and inventive story.

Plot Summary: On the night of Christmas Eve, after ‘Santa’ and his enormous team of elves believe themselves to have succeeded in another year of present delivery for the children of the world. ‘Santa’s clumsy son; ‘Arthur,’ and a skilled gift wrapping elf, named; ‘Bryony,’ discover a young girl’s present has been misplaced, leaving her the only child in the world without a gift from ‘Santa.’ Fearing what the young girl will think when she awakens to find nothing under the tree Christmas morning, ‘Arthur’ sets out on a desperate mission with ‘Santa’s elderly father to deliver the forgotten gift…

Directed by Sarah Smith and Barry Cook, ‘Arthur Christmas’ is actually the first directorial effort from Cook since the iconic Disney flick; ‘Mulan,’ in 1998, with Smith having never directed a feature before in her career. Yet, even with these fairly inexperienced directors, ‘Arthur Christmas’ never gets muddled within its own story, managing to balance its many characters, exciting sequences and themes of family and symbolism/icons immensely well, whilst the film also cleverly answers the question that has perplexed children around the world for years, that being “How Does Santa Deliver Every Child’s Present in a Single Night?” The only major issue ‘Arthur Christmas’ suffers from as a film is its fast-pacing, which does remain very quick throughout the runtime and results in some scenes feeling very rushed.

James McAvoy portrays the film’s humble protagonist; ‘Arthur,’ who is likeable enough and easy to root for as a character in wanting to deliver the misplaced present, though I could see McAvoy’s performance irritating some viewers, as ‘Arthur’ is always very energetic, jumping from fearful to cheerful incredibly fast, even if it is a nice change-of-pace for a protagonist to have nothing but love for the Christmas season. The rest of the cast of Bill Nighy, Hugh Laurie, Ashley Jensen, Jim Broadbent and Imelda Staunton, are all exceptional in their roles as the ‘Claus’ family, adding up to a splendid family-dynamic which the story actually explores a fair amount of.

Just as lively as the film’s fast pacing, the animated cinematography for ‘Arthur Christmas’ is very innovative, constantly displaying a number of visually interesting and fairly unique shots, many of which capture the massive scale of the ‘S-1,’ the high-tech sleigh-replacement ‘Santa’ now utilises, as it soars across the sky. Additionally, with ‘Arthur’ and ‘Grandsanta’ being unfamiliar with the modern world due to them being confined to the North Pole for much of their lives, much of their journey revolves around them accidentally arriving at various locations as they attempt to find the young girl’s home in Trelew, England. And, each location manages to feel diverse and allows for many exhilarating set pieces, from the sleigh being chased by the Spanish police force through Trelew, Argentina, to ‘Arthur’ and ‘Grandsanta’ almost being eaten alive by lions after finding themselves on the Savannah plains.

However, the original score by Harry Gregson-Williams is the complete opposite, as the film’s soundtrack is your standard animated score with little memorable or interesting about it. From tracks, like ‘Trelew, Cornwall, England,’ ‘Operation Christmas’ and ‘Goodbye Evie,’ the original score is fairly disappointing when considering many of the film’s creative ideas in regards to its story. With that said, the track; ‘One Missed Child,’ does capture ‘Arthur’s true awe at the sight of the original sleigh perfectly, as short as the scene itself may be.

The animation itself isn’t extremely well detailed but does remain attractive throughout the story, despite my distaste of a few of the character’s designs that is, as I personally found many of the characters to appear far too cartoonish and even slightly unappealing, particularly, when it comes to many of the elves’ designs. These design choices are actually intentional, however, as the animators decided to approach the character designs with the goal of making them feel authentically British and quirky, rather than air-brushed and immensely appealing.

In summary, ‘Arthur Christmas’ has far more merits than it does faults, as the film serves as a refreshing take on the typical ‘Santa’ saves Christmas story. Interjecting a family dynamic and a large array of adult-centred humour into what is already an entertaining and surprisingly smart narrative for a family flick. So, even in spite of its average-looking animation and overly fast pacing, ‘Arthur Christmas’ is truly a joyful film to watch with a heartfelt message at its core, and I feel is likely to become a modern Christmas classic in time. Final Rating: 7/10.

0c1f74f2f315a3b102cde84ba1b6000e

The Grinch (2018) – Film Review

/ Joe Baker / 1 Comment

Theodor Seuss Geisel, better known as his pen-name; ‘Dr. Seuss,’ is recognised today as one of the best authors in children’s literature. Through his whimsical writing, memorable characters and surreal illustrations, many of Geisel’s stories have become truly timeless as a result of how original they were compared to other children’s books released around the same period. So, of course, it would only be a matter of time till Geisel’s various characters began making their way to the silver screen, with one of his most villainous characters; ‘The Grinch,’ receiving many adaptations, the most recent of which possibly being the worst to date.

Plot Summary: In the town of ‘Whoville,’ the residents, known as the ‘Whos,’ excitedly await the arrival of Christmas Day. But, just north of ‘Whoville,’ on the top of ‘Mount Crumpit,’ the cantankerous and green-furred; ‘Grinch,’ begins to hatch a plan with his loyal dog; ‘Max,’ crafting a scheme to steal Christmas from the ‘Whos’ in an attempt to silence their irritating holiday cheer once and for all…

This 2018 readaptation of ‘How the Grinch Stole Christmas!’ is animated by Illumination Animation, the animation company behind modern family flicks, like ‘Despicable Me,’ ‘Sing’ and ‘The Secret Life of Pets,’ in addition to a previous ‘Dr. Seuss’ adaptation; ‘The Lorax,’ in 2012. This isn’t surprising of course, as Illumination Animation have truly exploded in popularity since 2010, mostly due to their creation of ‘The Minions.’ And, whilst I personally don’t despise the company as a whole, as I feel many of their films are entertaining enough for younger viewers, it’s fair to say their film catalogue is spotty at best, with many of their films boasting extremely predictable humour and generic animation/character designs, and ‘The Grinch’ is, unfortunately, no exception.

Benedict Cumberbatch portrays the title character, and although Cumberbatch is usually an actor I adore, having given an array of brilliant performances throughout his career. ‘The Grinch’ is without a doubt one of his weakest, as his performance somehow manages to feel both minimum effort and also far too cartoonish. Resulting in this version of the nefarious characters becoming instantly forgettable, especially when put in comparison with Jim Carrey’s beloved performance. Then there is also Cameron Seely and Rashida Jones, who portray ‘Cindy-Lou Who’ and her mother; ‘Donna,’ who this time around have their own subplot mostly unrelated to ‘The Grinch’s scheme, which serves little purpose aside from one particular scene. And, finally, there is Pharrell Williams as the story’s narrator, which is some of the most bizarre casting I’ve ever seen, as his Southern American dialect doesn’t at all fit the role of a traditional Christmas storyteller.

Similar to the rest of Illumination Animation’s releases, ‘The Grinch’ is visually impressive at a first glance, as the film’s animated cinematography and extremely vibrant colour palette is likely to catch any viewer’s eye. Yet, also in line with their other films, Illumination Animation’s style does feel very repetitive after so long, as each character/location does little to make itself stand out. A perfect example of this is ‘The Grinch’ himself, as while ‘The Grinch’ is implied to have very poor hygiene similar to other adaptations of the story, neither ‘The Grinch’ nor his home within ‘Mount Crumpit’ are ever displayed as unpleasant, even though ‘The Grinch’s home being dark and filthy serves as an extension of his vile personality.

Aside from ‘Tyler the Creator’s abysmal new rendition of ‘You’re a Mean One, Mr. Grinch,’ the original score by Danny Elfman is completely unremarkable. From ‘A Wonderful Awful Idea’ to ‘Stealing Christmas,’ all of the film’s tracks lack both memorability and charm, barley embracing the fantastical nature of ‘Dr. Seuss’ stories or the festive season itself, with the rest of the film’s soundtrack just relying on other modern renditions of classic Christmas songs.

Undoubtedly, the most disappointing aspect of this readaptation, however, is the actual animation style as one obvious benefit that this new adaptation has over the live-action adaptation of ‘How the Grinch Stole Christmas!’ is simply being animated, as this allows the film’s designs to greatly lean into the wonderful illustrations of ‘Dr. Seuss,’ as his sketches are incredibly difficult to recreate in real life as result of their harsh curves and gravity-defying architecture. But, strangely, the film doesn’t take advantage of this, with many designs only having a slight ‘Seuss’ influence in spite of the clearly inspired rhyming dialogue.

In summary, ‘The Grinch’ is a worst-case scenario for a readaptation, as I feel this animated film falls flat in most areas, never reaching the emotional or comedic heights of ‘How the Grinch Stole Christmas’ from 2000, or even matching up to the delightful hand-drawn animation seen in the original 1966 short. So, whilst its visuals may appear pleasant at first, it quickly becomes apparent something is missing, as this new adaptation gives the impression it was made by a team of producers rather than just one director, and as a result, fails to breathe new life into this age-old Christmas tale. Final Rating: 3/10.

grinch_ver5_xxlg

Krampus (2015) – Film Review

/ Joe Baker / Leave a comment

Whilst most Christmas films get across their message about how family is the true meaning of the holiday in a wholesome and light-hearted fashion, ‘Krampus’ takes quite a different approach as director Michael Dougherty (Trick ‘r Treat, Godzilla: King of the Monsters) crafts a cynical and amusing horror-comedy based around ‘Krampus,’ a creature from European folklore with origins stretching back to the days before Christianity, serving as essentially the sinister twin of jolly ‘Saint Nicholas,’ punishing those who misbehave in various odious ways. And, while the film is far from perfect, ‘Krampus’ creative ideas and impressive practical effects make the film worth its runtime.

Plot Summary: When his dysfunctional family clash over the holidays, young ‘Max’ finally decides to turn his back on Christmas, tearing up his letter to ‘Santa Claus’ in a fit of rage. Little does he know, his lack of Christmas spirit has unleashed the wrath of ‘Krampus,’ an ancient demon who punishes those who don’t celebrate the festive season. Forcing ‘Max’ and the rest of his family to fight for one another if they hope to survive…

Although there are plenty of enjoyable films out there to watch over the festive season, I usually always find myself craving something new around the Christmas period, as the cliché narrative of children helping ‘Santa Claus’ save Christmas gets very old quick. ‘Krampus’, however, does certainly attempt something new, even if it isn’t always successful. While the original outline for the film was closer to a straightforward horror, focusing mostly on ‘Krampus’ picking people off throughout ‘Max’s town, it was eventually decided to make it more of a dark retelling of a traditional Christmas film. This is why the plot is kicked off with a letter to ‘Santa,’ and why the film’s first act begins much like a family film would before then having a drastic turn towards horror and dark fantasy.

The film’s large cast of Adam Scott, Toni Collette, Emjay Anthony, David Koechner, Allison Tolman, Stefania LaVie Owen, Conchata Ferrell and Krista Stadler are all serviceable in their roles, even though many of their characters aren’t developed nowhere near enough. Additionally, ‘Tom Engel,’ a.k.a. ‘Max’s father, also has many moments where he doesn’t seem to take their life-threatening situation that seriously, almost as if he is acknowledging how bizarre the story is, which diminishes the film’s tension at points. But, with ‘Krampus’ featuring moments of humour and fright alike, the film obviously has many shifts in tone between scenes.

Jules O’Loughlin’s cinematography is nothing amazing altogether, as in spite of the film having quite a few memorable and attractive shots, there are also a large number of bland shots whenever the camera is focusing on the actors themselves. What is far more admirable though is how the camerawork enhances the film’s set design, making the audience believe that the film was shot inside a real house and outside on a real wintry street. When, in reality, over 95% of the film was shot on a soundstage, with the snow covering the ground being made from a material that’s commonly used for making nappies.

Composer Douglas Pipes handles the film’s original score, and he described his soundtrack as “A Collection of Twisted Christmas Carols With Pagan Thrown in,” as the score incorporates everything from the sounds of chains, bells, bones and animal-skin drums in addition to having choirs chant and whisper in different tongues, making for a foreboding but suitably Christmassy score. The track; ‘A Cold Wind,’ also does a phenomenal job of reiterating ‘Krampus’ as the ominous shadow of ‘Santa Claus’ through its use of sleigh bells. However, the film’s actual sound design features some incredibly strange choices for horror, as many cartoonish sound effects can be heard within the film, feeling immensely out of place every time they are.

One of the finest aspects of ‘Krampus’ as a film has to be its effects, as rather than having an overreliance on CG visuals, ‘Krampus’ brings all of its uniquely creepy creatures to life through detailed costumes and animatronics, harkening back to classic ’80s horror-comedies, like ‘Gremlins’ and ‘Fright Night.’ Many of the film’s terrifying monsters also share wonderfully horrific designs, with the final design for ‘Krampus’ and his elves being distilled from various postcards and illustrations seen over time. Or, in the case of the malevolent toys, taking inspiration from the 1992 low-budget horror, ‘Demonic Toys,’ with the angel ornament, teddy bear, robot and Jack-in-a-box that attack the family sharing many similarities to the toys seen in that obscure horror flick.

In summary, ‘Krampus’ is a rollicking ride of a Christmas film even if it isn’t quite as polished as Dougherty’s Halloween flick; ‘Trick ‘r Treat,’ as the film’s excellent practical effects, menacing creature designs and great original score all lend themselves very well to the distinctive story, despite the narrative itself often feeling like wasted potential considering ‘Krampus’ doesn’t full appear until near the end of the runtime. Regardless, this horror-comedy is still, in my opinion, the best on-screen interpretation of ‘Krampus’ and his devilish minions as of yet. Final Rating: 7/10.

krampus_ver3_xxlg

How to Train Your Dragon (2010) – Film Review

/ Joe Baker / 1 Comment

One of the highest-regarded films from DreamWorks Animation, 2010’s ‘How to Train Your Dragon’ is successful in nearly every regard as an animated feature, making many changes to its original source material (all of which for the better), to excel as a brilliant piece of family-focused storytelling. With plenty of memorable characters, exhilarating action sequences and an outstanding original score by John Powell, ‘How to Train Your Dragon’ would soon go on to become one of DreamWorks’ most recognisable and profitable franchises for good reason.

Plot Summary: On the island of ‘Berk,’ ‘Hiccup,’ the frail son of the Viking Chief, aspires to hunt dragons and keep his home safe like the rest of his clan, earning the respect of his fellow Vikings. But, after injuring a ‘Night Fury,’ one of the rarest and most powerful dragons known to exist, ‘Hiccup’ forms an unlikely friendship with the creature, soon realising that dragons aren’t at all what Vikings believe them to be…

The first film to be directed by duo Chris Sanders and Dean DeBlois since the Disney animated classic; ‘Lilo and Stitch,’ in 2002. The film adaptation of ‘How to Train Your Dragon’ makes many alterations to the story seen in the original children’s book. As, firstly, ‘Hiccup’ does not have a love interest, and the now-iconic DreamWorks character; ‘Toothless,’ is about the size of the ‘Terrible Terror’ dragon breed, his skin is also green and red, not black. Furthermore, ‘Toothless’ gets his name when ‘Hiccup’ first finds him with no teeth. But, the film’s producers decided, with the approval of author Cressida Cowell, that it would be more cinematic to make ‘Toothless’ large enough to be ridden as a flying mount. As such, ‘Toothless’ was completely redesigned as a rare ‘Night Fury,’ a highly intelligent breed of dragon evolved for speed and stealth with teeth that retract into their jaw when shooting a fiery pulse.

Protagonist; ‘Hiccup,’ is portrayed by Jay Baruchel, a fairly under-the-radar actor. But, similar to his character in ‘The Sorcerer’s Apprentice’ from 2011, Baruchel suits a nervous character, like ‘Hiccup,’ extremely well due to his naturally anxious voice, making for a likeable yet never vexatious protagonist. Gerard Butler as ‘Hiccup’s father; ‘Stoick,’ is another member of the cast who naturally fits his character, as Butler’s rough Scottish accent melds with the hefty Viking’s design perfectly. The film also features a great ensemble cast for the other young dragon recruits through America Ferrera, Jonah Hill, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, T.J. Miller and Kristen Wiig, who together provide many of the film’s comedic moments.

The animated cinematography throughout ‘How to Train Your Dragon’ is superior to a number of other animated flicks when put in comparison, as the film continuously features beautiful visuals. The most obvious being within the scene; ‘First Flight,’ in which, ‘Hiccup’ hops aboard ‘Toothless’ for the first-time as they soar across the stunning land of ‘Berk,’ breezing over acres of forest and past/through cliffs, all while being tracked by the camera. Interestingly, many of these dragon-flying moments are also inspired by combat and aerobatic aircrafts, as ‘Toothless’ performs many aerobatic maneuvers and combinations, such as a ‘Loop and Snap.’

Nominated for an Oscar at one point-in-time, the original score by John Powell is truly sensational, a majestic score that occasionally even utilises bagpipes in order to further fit with the film’s Scottish setting (which is alluded to by the many Scottish accents). And, while Powell has always been known for creating phenomenal scores for animated flicks, with ‘Ice Age,’ ‘Kung Fu Panda’ and ‘Horton Hears a Who!,’ being just some of his sublime work, the soundtrack for:’How to Train Your Dragon’ is by far some of his best, with the tracks; ‘This is Berk’ and ‘Forbidden Friendship,’ becoming some of the most notable tracks in all animation.

The animation itself has begun to show its age in a handful of shots since the film’s initial release, but as a result of the film’s many wonderful designs, usually in relation to its dragons, which display different abilities, colours, horns and skin-tones for each breed, the film manages to redeem any shot that feels at all dated. These pleasant designs also help distract from the film’s overly fast pacing, as whilst I understand that younger viewers may have shorter attention spans, the film can sometimes feel as if its rushing through one scene to quickly get to the next.

In summary, although I possess the quite controversial opinion of disliking the sequels to ‘How to Train Your Dragon,’ as I personally find them much more generic and by-the-numbers in terms of their storylines, especially when compared to the original, the first of the series is still one of DreamWorks’ best efforts, and I’d even argue is on the level of beating out their previous fantasy franchise; ‘Shrek,’ in regard to its characters, creatures and world-building. So, even if you don’t enjoy animated/family films, perhaps ‘How to Train Your Dragon’ will sway you into the genre just as it does with its wondrous story. Final Rating: 8/10.

how-to-train-dragon-poster1

Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark (2010) – Film Review

/ Joe Baker / Leave a comment

Co-written/produced by Guillermo del Toro and directed by Troy Nixey, ‘Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark’ embraces many of the same elements as del Toro’s other films, crafting a narrative which combines both traditional gothic horror and childlike fantasy. But sadly, unlike a usual del Toro project, there is a noticeable absence in everything from captivating characters to memorising practical effects/creatures, resulting in a film that feels like a mostly copy-and-paste effort beyond one or two interesting ideas.

Plot Summary: After being sent to live with her father and his new girlfriend at their recently renovated manor, the previous home of the long-missing painter: ‘Emerson Blackwood’. Young ‘Sally’ begins to hear ominous voices emanating from the basement’s ash-pit, soon leading her to discover the cause of the painter’s disappearance…

Taking heavy inspiration from the classic H.P. Lovecraft short story: ‘The Rats in the Walls.’ ‘Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark’ is actually a remake of a low-budget 1973 TV film, as the now-iconic director Guillermo del Toro has stated in the past that he was terrified of the film when he first watched it as a child, later inspiring him to reimagine the mostly-unknown horror flick. Yet even with a much larger-budget and a more well-known cast, the film is still quite underwhelming when it comes to both its scares and story, as the film’s narrative follows a formula almost identical to many other modern horrors.

All of the performances throughout the film aren’t anything overly impressive, as whilst Katie Holmes does try her best to portray a young girl witnessing sights that no one else believes. Her character: ‘Sally’ (similar to the rest of the film’s characters) receives very limited characterisation, which does make many of the scenes revolving around the family-dynamic far less entertaining. Then there is also ‘Sally’s father and his girlfriend: ‘Kim’ portrayed by Guy Pearce and Bailee Madison respectively, and although Madison gives a serviceable performance, Pearce may give one of the weakest performances of his career here. As ‘Sally’s father: ‘Alex,’ always shows little concern or remorse when it comes to his daughter, making the character immensely difficult to resonate with.

The cinematography by Oliver Stapleton is very grand in its execution, allowing for a large number of wide-shots, some of which even flow smootly-around the various rooms of the manor. But it’s the film’s colour palette which is most worth noting, as the film utilises much more red and yellow than many other modern horrors, which is a pleasant change in terms of visuals as the more vibrant colours reflect the manor’s elegant design, which is probably one of the most visually striking ‘haunted houses’ in recent memory, with even the manor’s front entrance having a beautiful carving of an old oak tree merged into the multi-coloured glass.

Marco Beltrami and Buck Sanders provide the original score for the film, which similar to the film’s cinematography, gives the story a much more epic feel. As the heavy orchestral score could’ve easily been taken from any classic gothic horror, lending itself effectively to many scenes aside from a couple of generic tracks. The film often also features some fantastically creepy sound design, as the film’s creatures continuously speak to ‘Sally’ using their ghostly whispering voices, which seemingly echo throughout the usually empty corridors of the manor.

Although many of del Toro’s other outings do provide plenty of wonderful practical effects to gaze at, usually creating an array of unsettling and memorable creatures, ‘Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark’ takes another (less appealing) route to its monsters. As the film’s creatures are brought to life almost entirely though CG effects, which not only makes some shots appear slightly dated, but also manages to take away from nearly all of the film’s tense moments. Additionally, the film’s creature designs aren’t all that menacing, as despite the idea of evil fairytale monsters being quite unique (as the creatures are later revealed to be a sinister incarnation of tooth-fairies). The creature’s extremely small-size does make them feel very unthreatening even if it is a nice change-of-pace over having one large entity, as the film never does enough with its miniature antagonists regardless of what knives/tools they arm themselves with.

All in all, ‘Don’t Be Afraid of the Dark’ is a film that is regrettably just not worth its short runtime. As while I admire the effort to combine famed fairytale stories with a chilling atmosphere, the predominantly poor performances and numerous unexplored concepts leave the film simply another bland horror flick with a surprisingly weak screenplay by del Toro to-boot, especially when compared to much of his other work. Still, with all that said, I feel that Troy Nixey does deserve another shot in the director’s chair someday, as since this film’s initial release, he actually hasn’t worked on any other projects, which is unfortunate, as I do believe he does have some talent as a filmmaker when looking at this film’s merits. Final Rating: high 3/10.

Layout 1