REVIEW: WONDER WOMAN (2017)

**SPOILER-FREE**

Following the release of Director Zack Snyder's MAN OF STEEL (2013) and BATMAN V SUPERMAN: DAWN OF JUSTICE (2016), and David Ayer's SUICIDE SQUAD (2016),
WONDER WOMAN stands as the fourth film in the ever-expanding DCEU (DC Extended Universe); Warner Brothers' equivalent of Disney's 'Marvel Cinematic Universe'.

Since its inception, the series has proven extremely lucrative for the studio.

However, fans and critics alike have always struggled to wholeheartedly embrace it; and understandably so.

Though they may be technically sound and visually hypnotising, the aforementioned films (in particular, the latter two) are fundamentally, heavily and inexcusably flawed. Though they DO have their moments, they are simply not great films.

Two flops in a row; many feared this would be a continuing trend.

Concerns grew for the future of the DCEU.

Enter WONDER WOMAN (2017)...

DC fans, rejoice! The curse is lifted! WONDER WOMAN is a resounding success!

Director, Patty Jenkins [clearly aware of the sins of the past] helms a production that flourishes; precisely where its predecessors failed to do so.

The film tells the coming of age tale of Diana (played by Gal Gadot), a young woman of mythological origin and Princess of Themyscira (Paradise Island); a mysterious, hidden land, disunited from the rest of the world. She is an Amazon; a part of a legendary, warrior race [within Greek mythology]. She dreams of becoming a warrior herself, against the wishes of her mother, Queen Hippolyta (played by Connie Nielsen). However, it soon becomes all too clear that Diana cannot be denied her destiny.

Upon saving the life of a downed and drowning pilot (Steve Trevor, played by Chris Pine), Diana learns of the world beyond the shores of Themyscira; a world at war.

Believing she can make a difference and bring an end to the global conflict (WWI), Diana joins Steve on his mission to restore peace.

WONDER WOMAN far outshines previous DC films in a number of areas.

First and foremost, it presents a very concise plot; something that cannot be taken for granted considering the jumbled and disjointed BATMAN V SUPERMAN and SUICIDE SQUAD films.

These last two films focused way too much on world-building and interconnected continuity; ultimately causing them to lose sight of the stories they were trying to tell.

Here, the focus of the plot always resides precisely where it should; around Diana and Steve. It's their story, and thankfully, anything that would fail to serve these characters or fail to strengthen the main narrative itself is of little concern.

The story serves its iconic characters respectfully and faithfully; as does the cast!

Gal Gadot and Chris Pine own their roles! They are fantastic!

Throughout my years reading comics, and experiencing different writers, I've come across a number of pretty harsh interpretations of the warrior-princess; many depicting her as something of a brute. Strong-willed and powerful - yes! But almost a little cold and distant too. More warmonger than peacekeeper.

Personally, I gravitate far more towards Gadot's Wonder Woman than perhaps any other to have existed before it. She has an immediate appeal due to her warm, fostering, kind-hearted nature and Gadot plays the role with such incredible earnestness, you can't help but embrace her.

This Wonder Woman is strong, courageous and compassionate, if not a little naive in the most endearing of ways.
She is a hero by the very definition of the word. Someone to look up to! And [should the need arise] she knows how to kick ass!

Chris Pine's Steve Trevor shares similar traits.
A level-headed professional, driven by duty; charming and charismatic. He has a heart of gold; willing to give it all for a good cause.

There's a fantastic chemistry between these characters (and the people who portray them). Their time shared on screen together is absolutely captivating.

They cannot help but resonate with an audience, as we find ourselves completely immersed in their tale.

(That's a great word to use: 'immersive'.)

This film is very 'immersive'. It really sucks you in!

The ancient island city of Themyscira, the bustling, early 20th Century streets of London, the war-torn battlefields of Eastern Europe; the costume and set designs (of both fictional and real-world origin); it all feels so authentic, inspired and full of energy!

The film's epic score wonderfully accentuates both the action and emotion; boosting the grandeur to new heights!

The culmination of all the above; these great performances, the intriguing character-driven story and impressive aesthetic; it all takes a hold of you, right from the get-go!

Now, on a side note: I feel I there's something else I need to address.

As indicated earlier on, WONDER WOMAN is directed by a woman - Patty Jenkins.

I think the choice to hire a female director was a no-brainer that made complete sense, and I think she did a great job.

For context: Wonder Woman first appeared in print in 1941, and has since then been heralded as a real-world, feminist icon and role-model.

Now, I must further commend Patty Jenkins and her team.

It would have been very easy for this film to introduce some form of 'social agenda'.

In this day and age - you know what I'm talking about.

Thankfully, the film completely steers clear of any 'on the nose' commentary.

I must stress that I, by no means, have an issue with female empowerment or anything like that! Hell, most of my favourite characters in literature and film are female; Wonder Woman being among them!

I simply believe that there's a time and a place for everything; and honestly, I feel that any type of perceivable 'agenda' (regardless of what it might be) would only hinder a film like this; potentially segregating the audience.

WONDER WOMAN doesn't push anything of the sort, and I truly appreciate it!
Instead, it presents strong, female characters and lets these positive representations speak for themselves; precisely how it ought to be done!

All this said, of course, I do have a number of small gripes with the film.

Nothing too major, but still worth mentioning.

The film's visual design is great. There's no disputing that.

However, the overall aesthetic is somewhat compromised at times by some pretty shoddy CGI (computer generated imagery), of which - there is an unnecessary overabundance.

Poor, unconvincing CGI is particular prominent during action scenes with complex camera movements. I know why this particular technique/ technology is employed, but these computer effects are often so blatant that I unfortunately found myself distracted and removed from the scene.

The choreography of the action throughout the film is pretty well done, however, again, it is hindered by what I can only put down to as a misstep in direction.

There is ton of slow motion!

Just about every fight scene in the movie uses it, and it very quickly grows tiresome.

I guess it's supposed to look 'cool', and perhaps depict some sort of elegance or grace, but honestly - it just slows down the pacing and makes combat far less impactful.
Played in real-time, watching Wonder Woman clear a room full of hostiles in mere seconds would appear far more devastating and bad-ass!

Speaking of 'bad-ass' or a 'lack thereof', I gotta say: the film's primary villain is a bit of a letdown. I think perhaps this was a case of poor casting, but he just doesn't really feel that imposing or menacing. In fact, he's a bit of a cliché, more in line with Star Wars' Darth Sidious than the Greek God of legend, from which he is derived. He just doesn't have much of a presence.

Another of the film's more prominent villains is tragically underutilised.

This character sparks a lot of intrigue, and yet, we learn very little about her -if anything at all!

There's also a bunch of other, more minor characters that don't really amount to much. They simply feel tacked-on and a little redundant; sadly - forgettable.

On the nitpick side of things: a few scenes play out too long. I get that they're for character development, but they drag and outstay their welcome.

I also raised an eyebrow at some strange cuts (edits), but these are things easily overlooked.

Ultimately, WONDER WOMAN is a damn good movie, and I do recommend it!

It's by no means perfect, but it does right by the source material and is extremely entertaining! It's great to see this character finally receiving some quality, cinematic recognition (it's long overdue), and I can't wait to see Gal Gadot return to the role this November is Zack Snyder's JUSTICE LEAGUE (2017).

- Woody

REVIEW: GHOST IN THE SHELL (2017)

**SPOILER-FREE**

Now, before I begin, I should clarify: I'm a BIG fan of the GHOST IN THE SHELL series!
With the exception of the original manga (which I've only briefly dabbled in), I've seen everything it has to offer and loved the majority of it!

Like so many others, I too regard Director Mamoru Oshii's original [1995] film to be something of an animated masterpiece, and its subsequent spin-off television series [Stand Alone Complex] is one of my favourite Japanese animated series!

I've spent a lot of time with GHOST IN THE SHELL, and so, it's important to preface this review by admitting; I did walk into the cinema with a pre-existing affinity for this world and its characters. First and foremost, I approached this film, not as a film critic, but rather as a long-time, well-versed fan, looking to be impressed.

Admittedly, this probably means, if anything, that I'd be MORE critical of the film, [since it does hold a special significance to me] but I feel that you [the reader] should be aware of any biases a reviewer might harbour. It's only fair, right?

Anyway... That said...

If there is such a thing as the 'perfect' film, GHOST IN THE SHELL (2017) is it.

Yes, I know - that's a HUGE statement.
Honestly, I never really believed there could be such a thing, but there is and this is it!

Let me define 'perfection' in this sense.

It is to be: "without flaw".

In my mind, the 2017 live-action adaptation of GHOST IN THE SHELL is without flaw.

This film not only exceeded my high expectations but completely blew them out of the water!

Of course, I'm gonna keep this review spoiler-free, but in order to discuss the film, it's important that I at least provide the basic premise. Fear not! I wont give anything away!

GHOST IN THE SHELL (or "GITS", as is the abbreviation) is [at its core] an analysis piece; an insight into advancing technologies and their integration into an ever-evolving society.

In this world (the world of the film), science has developed incredible, cybernetic augmentations.

Human beings and machines bond like never before in the pursuit of human betterment. Mankind is getting an upgrade!

After having suffered irreparable injuries, our main protagonist, The Major (played superbly by Scarlett Johansson) is 'rebuilt' from the ground up as a purely synthetic being; a cyborg. The only remnants of her life prior to undergoing this delicate procedure are preserved beneath a metal skull, wrapped in complicated circuitry; her human brain. A human consciousness, a human soul, operating a purpose-built, manufactured body.

The Major is the most advance of her kind. She stands at the cutting edge of modern technology and medicine.
However, she is ultimately a corporate investment; built to serve.

She fulfils her dues as a special operative for the security department, Section 9.

Under the leadership of Section 9 Chief, Aramaki, under the direct order of the Japanese Prime Minster, The Major leads a team of tactical operatives (many of whom possess cybernetic enhancements of their own) as they investigate a mysterious crime spree.

Section 9's mission provides the basic framework for the plot, but ultimately NOT what the film is all about!

GHOST IN THE SHELL (2017) is an extraordinary examination of identity.

What is it that truly defines us?

This is the question at the heart of the film.

Is it our experiences, our memories? Is it something physical and tangible?

Unable to recollect her old life, prior to her rebirth, trapped within an artificial body - The Major seeks these answers!

As it is with The Major herself, so much lays beneath the surface in GHOST IN THE SHELL (2017). The themes this film incorporates and questions it raises are genuinely thought-provoking. What is it that defines a human being? At what point do we stop being human? Can something artificial ever be considered 'human'? Is it wise to play god? When does science cross the line? This is incredibly profound subject matter!

Yes, the original 1995 animated film explores the same material.

This film IS an adaptation of THAT film, only - this new film does it better.

I fully expect people to disagree with me when I say that, but honestly, for as good as that earlier film is, GHOST IN THE SHELL (2017) is far more accessible!

There's some great subtleties that I love in the '95 version. Here, in this newer production, those same subtleties are a little more obvious, but there's still plenty of subtext.

Honestly, the themes and ideas (and even basic plot) expressed in GITS (that is: the series as a whole) can be pretty tough to wrap your head around at times. The series is actually kinda notorious for being obscenely complex.

To its credit, GHOST IN THE SHELL (2017) manages to present these same themes and ideas without it ever feeling too convoluted or overwhelming.
The story and character intricacies are just as multifaceted as you'd expect from a film in this series and yet, still very digestible.

This film asks you to think, but thankfully, never do you feel lost. It just flows so well!

Speaking of 'flow', whenever I review a film, I like to address pacing.

GHOST IN THE SHELL (2017) has a runtime of 107 minutes and is paced perfectly!

Every story-beat arrives precisely when it should. The flow never breaks!

The film is completely engaging from the moment it starts, until the moment it ends!

Beyond the fantastic story, GHOST IN THE SHELL (2017) has so much going for it!

And by that, I mean: literally everything works! No exaggeration - it's that damn good!

An excellent script has provided the cast with plenty of great material to work with, and every performance delivers!

Scarlett Johansson is a stand-out. She's so perfectly suited to this role that I simply cannot imagine anybody else playing the part. Her supporting cast are all magnificent too, but she really carries the film. There's a subtlety and honesty to her performance that's just astounding. There's such a clear thoughtfulness in her delivery; every action, every line. She's so convincing. She's just perfect.

There I go, using that word again: "perfect".

Well, you know what else is "perfect"?

The design.

This film is visually breath-taking.

Sure, a lot of modern films look great. It's kinda come to be expected, right?

GHOST IN THE SHELL (2017) is in a league of its own.

The cinematography is gorgeous. The way shots are framed; compositions expertly direct the eye, and the brilliant use of lighting really accentuates the drama.

The level of design detail in this film is absurd. I mean, just crazy impressive!

The film's futuristic metropolis setting is incredibly unique, but miraculously, maintains a strong sense of believability. This make-believe world of the future and its technologies feel so authentic.

So much consideration has gone into every design choice.

The environments, the attire, the vehicles and especially the futuristic augmentations and machinery; it's all so innovative and interesting!

The VFX (visual effects) are top-notch, bringing even the most outlandish concepts to stunning fruition.
Not once were computer generated images a distraction. They worked seamlessly; something definitely worthy of commendation in this day and age of cinema!

The sound design is also fantastic; perfectly complimenting and enhancing the mind-blowing visuals.

The film's score is tremendous!
It ingeniously blends both traditional and electronic orchestration, to create a soundtrack backing perfectly befitting of a technologically driven civilization.
Long-time fans will also recognize elements of Kenji Kawai's classic GITS soundtrack, which are a treat to the ears.

Every element of this film is so well-realized! It's just remarkable!

Now, addressing the film's drawbacks...

There aren't any.

I know! I can hardly believe it myself!

In my opinion, GHOST IN THE SHELL (2017) is simply flawless.

As noted earlier: The original '95 animated feature is extremely highly regarded.
Speaking sincerely, however, I believe this live-action adaptation to be the superior film.

Of course, it can't break the same ground the original film did, back in the day, but it undeniably tells a far more cohesive and heartfelt story!
Any time the 2017 film deviated from its predecessor, I supported those choices; understanding that they were for the betterment of the narrative and the characters.

Again, I'm sure there will be those who oppose this attitude, and I can appreciate that.

At the end of the day, this isn't meant to be a comparison essay, and I can absolutely recommend this film to any GITS fan! Despite the changes made, this newer film remains an extremely respectful and faithful adaptation. If you're a fan, you owe it to yourself to check it out. I can pretty much guarantee, you'll love it!

The only reason I can't see this film appealing to a particular viewer, simply comes down to a matter of taste.

Is this your kind of film? It might not be, and that's fine.

However, there is no denying the artistry on display!

Both cast and crew alike present an unquestionable insightfulness and understanding of the GITS world, its characters and its themes.

A ton of finesse, heart and soul has gone into this production.

Creators, both on and off screen, are at the top of their game here!

GHOST IN THE SHELL (2017) is an incredible accomplishment!

I absolutely and unapologetically adore it!

I entered with high hopes - cautiously optimistic.

I left, having had one of the greatest cinematic experiences of my life!

Brace for another big statement...

GHOST IN THE SHELL (2017) is now, one of my FAVOURITE FILMS OF ALL TIME!

- Woody

REVIEW: KONG: SKULL ISLAND (2017)

**SPOILER-FREE**

Set in 1973, at the tail-end of the war in Vietnam, this film tells the story of a hazardous, scientific expedition into uncharted lands.

A small group of researchers, documentarians, and their military escort set out on a quest to map and explore the mysterious 'Skull Island'.

Upon arrival, the team soon finds that their presence has not gone unnoticed by the natives. The outsiders are unwelcome guests on an island forgotten by time.

Military-might and nature clash when the expedition crosses paths with KONG, the ancient guardian of Skull Island. The mission quickly descends into chaos when the gargantuan beast makes short work of the human invaders and their machines of war. Man finds itself at nature's mercy, but this is just the beginning; for Skull Island is home to more than just The Mighty Kong. As the island's secrets are unearthed, a fight for survival ensues.

SKULL ISLAND is, unquestionably, a very entertaining film.

However, it has also has its fair share of problems.

I'm gonna start with some positives!

This is a gorgeous looking film!

The framing and shot compositions in SKULL ISLAND are incredible.

Just about every shot is praiseworthy. There really isn't a dull frame.

Every shot is extremely creative. Every shot is engaging and multifaceted; like a comic book panel come to life! There's some great artistry on display.

It's obvious throughout, just how much effort, love and consideration went into producing such eye-catching stuff.

I must also commend the colour grading and lighting!

Vivid colours and lighting really makes everything on screen 'pop'.

Every shot, regardless of subject matter, is bursting with energy!

Speaking of energy; SKULL ISLAND has some really great action scenes!
Whether it's our human explorers fending against the local wildlife, or Kong himself, facing off with the other giant inhabitants of Skull Island, there's plenty of excitement to be had. The finale [in particular], is a standout moment. I wont spoil anything, but if you were ever looking for a great Kaiju/ Giant Monster battle - this is it!

Really, I suppose if you've any interest in seeing SKULL ISLAND, then you're probably a fan of the Kaiju (Japanese for: "strange beast") genre.

If that is the case, then I think you're incline to get some enjoyment out of this film about giant monsters.

Kong [as depicted here] is awesome!

Despite his design having been tweaked a little from previous incarnations, his strong but caring personality remains intact.

Make no mistake: This is still the Kong fans know and love!

There are also many other creatures that inhabit Kong's world.

They range from; almost cute and cuddly - to - genuinely terrifying.

The design work, across-the-board is really great!

This film has a great aesthetic!

Not only have the filmmakers done an excellent job bringing Skull Island and it's inhabitants to life, but they've also done outstanding work recreating an authentic feeling 1970s setting.

From the costumes, props and hairstyles, to the architecture and music - everything feels genuinely "of the era".

The music [as mentioned] includes many well-known tracks from many well-known and highly-regarded artists, and while some of these inclusions do come off as a little cliché, they work for the film; enforcing the setting and period.

There really is a lot to love about SKULL ISLAND!

However, as stated earlier: I do have a number of issues with the film.

The biggest problems stem from the film's script.

There's nothing wrong with the story. It's very easy to follow. It's not going to challenge its audience, (you don't go into a film like this expecting something like that) but it's fine. My issues with the script primarily relate to the characters and dialogue.

The film's characters fall flat.

They're paper cut-outs, lacking any real depth or development.

They fail to grow or evolve over the course of the narrative and are essentially defined by their occupations, as opposed to their personalities.

I can remember what role each character serves in the expedition team, but [oddly enough] I can't recall even a single name! Of course, Kong himself is the exception here. (He's also, easily, the best character; as he should be!)

The film has an impressive, star-studded cast; Including the likes of: Tom Hiddleston, Samuel L. Jackson, John Goodman and Brie Larson - all proven actors!

It's just a shame that these great actors have so little to work with and that [as a result] these human characters are so one-dimensional. They get the most screen-time and [for better or worse] they are the focus of the film, but it's hard to feel for people you don't really know!

More or less; we learn about each character through the lips of another.

This delivery is usually a very brief, hasty synopsis of just a few, short lines.

Due to the large size of the cast, each character introduction is rushed and we get very little one-on-one time throughout. There's simply no time to form a connection.

Another issue with the script shines through when these characters speak.

The dialogue is almost purely expositional.

Characters continually force-feed the audience information.

It's said that 'film' [as a medium] should be more 'show' than 'tell' but there's a lot of 'telling' in SKULL ISLAND. A film that spells everything out for you isn't really asking much of its audience. There's too little room for intrigue; something that should have been at the heart of this story. Sometimes, it's important to let your audience fill in the blanks for themselves.

Excessive exposition made the film feel very scripted at times. Character exchanges often felt very unnatural and forced. It unfortunately felt very 'dumbed-down' in-part.

Yes, this is absolutely a big, kinda goofy, over-the-top popcorn flick, but as an audience member, I'd like to be given a little more credit and some room to think for myself.

Another glaring issue with SKULL ISLAND is in its editing.

What I'm about to address mightn't consciously bother most moviegoers, but it sure bothered me.

Edit-wise, this is a very choppy film!

I know, I stated before that SKULL ISLAND is a "gorgeous looking film", and it is!

Just about every shot is a winner! However, that doesn't necessarily mean that these beautiful, brief snippets blend cohesively together.

Funnily enough, the issue here is that there are TOO MANY great shots.

I know that sounds strange, but let me explain myself.

It's a film editor's job to decide what footage should make it into the final cut.

He or she needs to discern what shots are crucial to telling an effective, cohesive story.

Any shots that don't meet the criteria should be exempt from the final product and left on the cutting room floor.

In this instance; I don't imagine there was much footage leftover on that floor.
The editor just wasn't willing to sacrifice such beautiful imagery for the sake of the overall 'flow' of the film.
Obviously, there were a lot of great shots to work with, but attempting to find a place for all of them within a two hour runtime was, unfortunately, a detriment.

So many shots in the film fail to server a purpose other than to just look pretty. Instead of adding to a scene and propelling the story forward, these out-of-place, unnecessary shots will often completely obliterate the flow of said scene! Yes, it's eye-candy, but it's often, very distracting eye-candy.

I'd actually go so far as to say that this film [in-part], is less a culmination of a bunch of 'scenes' and more a mix-match of individual shots or moments.
Of course, that sounds like an exaggeration, [and it is] but there are often times it feels like this!

Some really strange editing choices often make for some really strange pacing.

There are some really jarring cuts in this film and shots/ scenes do not always tie together well.

Now, naturally, I have a few more criticisms, but that'd be going into nitpick territory; something I'm going to avoid this time around.

Despite its many flaws, I still had a good time with KONG: SKULL ISLAND!

There's some very impressive cinematography, a ton of great action and Kong himself is a delight to watch!

I think if you can approach this film with a less critical eye and just accept it for what it is (an over-the-top action/ adventure about a giant ape) then you'll enjoy yourself!

Turn off your brain and have fun!

If you haven't your heart set on seeing it right now in theatres, then perhaps catch up later, when it hits home release.

Oh, and be sure to stick around 'til after the credits! You'll be glad you did!

- Woody

REVIEW: LOGAN (2017)

**SPOILER-FREE**

 In a word: James Mangold's LOGAN is a triumph!

The film depicts the latter years of a rapidly aging and increasingly weary Logan (now going by his birth name: James Howlett) as he cares for his long-time mentor and friend, Professor Charles Xavier. As the last of their kind, in a world that has persecuted mutant-kind to near-extinction - life is tough for these former 'X-Men'. Time is catching up and the scars show. Long gone are the glory days.

LOGAN is pretty unique in how it approaches these fan-favourite characters.

Yeah, they're essentially [retired] superheroes, but never are they at all glamorized like you may have come to expect from the genre. Never are you envious of the lives they lead. Never do you wish you could fill their shoes or fight the good fight alongside them. Their existence in this world is one of terrible suffering and pain.

After long lives filled with horrific violence and devastating losses these characters are understandably very damaged by their experiences.

Our main protagonist in particular, is really at the end of his rope. He's defeated and hopeless. The trauma sustained by Logan has been explored in previous X-Men films, but never to such an extent and never so masterfully. Never before have these characters felt so tangible. Never before have you felt so much for these characters and never before has a film in the 'X-Men Universe' felt so damn authentic.

This is by no means, a flashy superhero flick.

In fact - I'd hesitate to call it a superhero film (at least in the sense that we've come to know them).

LOGAN is [at its core] a story of people dealing with immense hardship and trauma.

Yes, super-powers come into play and there is certainly that science-fiction element, but the film's focus isn't on spectacle, but rather - humanity. The humanity of these characters, who despite their great abilities, are as 'human' and open to 'feeling' as any of us.

The story, or rather the 'world' of LOGAN (as penned by Director, James Mangold) is very grounded and low-key. It's a very harsh reality these characters live in. It's a tragic existence.

Yeah, all this might make you think: "Wow. This sounds depressing!" and yeah, no doubt - it kinda is!

It's important to understand: LOGAN [as a film] is a very sobering experience! But the film works very well and NOT because it's depressing. It's because the film, its world and its characters are HONEST. Honesty is what makes this film so brilliant - a truthfulness. It's in the story, the dialogue and character exchanges and my god - it's most certainly in the acting!

The acting ability on display here (specifically on the part of our three protagonists) is incredible!
Hugh Jackman (Logan) and Patrick Stewart (Charles) give performances of a lifetime! They perfectly sell every line, every little look or glance. Their performances are so nuanced, so utterly convincing! Their chemistry is so genuine - they're perfect!

The same can be said for Dafne Keen (Laura).

I admit: Ordinarily, I'm not the biggest fan of kids in films, but again - she just sells it!

This is a spoiler-free review, so I wont go into her character too much, but she's plays the role perfectly - and with minimal dialogue!

Ninety percent of the time, Dafne is forced to work without dialogue, using only her body language to express and emote.

Again, she's perfect. The emotion is all there. She's Brilliant!

Oh, and my God - she kicks A LOT of ass in this film!

Of course! We should talk about the action now, right!?

Well, let's just say-... Yeah, it's everything you've ever wanted out of a Wolverine film.

The action in this film is intense! The fight scenes and fight choreography in this film, ARE INTENSE!

THIS FILM IS INTENSE!!!

Seriously, this is NOT a film for children... Haha!

LOGAN earns its mature (MA15+) rating within the first five minutes.

Straight away, you know the film isn't pulling its punches. This is established in the very first scene with the very first line of dialogue.

This is an adult film.

There's a lot of language. There's A LOT of violence. And the film is better off for it.

I'm not a big fan of gore. At least, I don't appreciate it, for the most part.
Particularly, when it seems over-the-top or unnecessary.

The violence depicted in this film is neither, 'over-the-top' nor 'unnecessary'.

It's brutal. BOY, is it brutal! But it serves a genuine purpose.

True, Logan fights with knives that protrude from his knuckles.

"What do you think is gonna happen!?"

Yeah, it makes sense that there's gonna be some blood.

That said: the addition of 'blood' doesn't automatically equal a better film!

The violence in LOGAN is necessary (in my opinion) because it serves the character and the story. Violence is central to who this character is! His life has been nothing but violence and death - the loss of all those he's ever held dear. It's bloodshed and the consequences of bloodshed that have shaped his very existence and it's something that follows him wherever he goes. Something he [seemingly] can not escape. That's the tragedy of his life. The filmmakers understand this and do a great job depicting it!

LOGAN is very violent. It's NOT a film for the whole family.

Some people may be turned-off by the graphic nature of this picture, but it's a crucial element in exploring this character and doing right by him.

This film does right by the character.

It does so much right!

...

But it's not perfect.

My first gripe with LOGAN is minimal, and by no means affected my enjoyment of the film.

This is kinda going into 'nitpick' territory but some of the exposition in the film was a little 'convenient' for my taste. Without spoiling anything; certain character details are revealed through, what'd I'd consider 'found-footage'. The kind that conveniently answers any and all questions you could possible pose in a short, three minute time span. As interesting as this footage is, I found myself thinking it was way too conveniently edited. A lot of information is revealed, but it's all a little too easy. I felt this information could have been better conveyed in a way that didn't feel so spoon-fed.

Again, that's just a minor gripe! A nitpick! If that's the worst thing I have to say about the film, well then - it got off lightly!

But, I'm not done.

My biggest issue, by FAR, with LOGAN is the introduction of a certain antagonist or more appropriately a certain 'adversary'.

I didn't see this 'twist' coming, and for good reason: It's dumb.

Late in the Second Act, a character is introduced right out of left field.

I'm not gonna disclose who this character is but I will say this:

This character's only purpose is to present Logan with a physical threat.

AND therefore: This character is completely unnecessary.

Logan is already shown to be a vulnerable character in both a physical and emotional sense. His wellbeing is constantly under treat. This vulnerability is central to the plot.

It's established really early on and is ever-present throughout the film!

There is no need for this 'new' character to exist!

As soon as they appeared on screen, I was immediately taken out of the scene.

I was genuinely confused. I initially thought: "This must be a dream sequence".

Sadly, I was mistaken.

Any time this character was on screen, I was taken out of the moment.

It was the one element of the movie that fell into 'terrible comic book clichés'.

It was incredibly distracting and created a big clash of tones!

Again, this element could have easily been removed. The character wasn't at all established, so you felt nothing for them one way or another.

What they contributed to the plot could have been handled differently, with already established characters, and to greater affect.

What I said before, about spoon-fed exposition: Just a nitpick - didn't hurt the film.

This character hurt the film.

What a shame.

Still, at the end of the day, [despite one noteworthy misstep] LOGAN is a great film!

Its unique approach to the genre breathes new life into the [arguably] stagnating X-Men Film Franchise.

It's very well written and directed! It's well shot and has a great score! The action is intense and exhilarating! The acting - phenomenal!

It's a genuinely moving cinematic experience and a tribute truly befitting its great characters and cast!

It's just sad to know that [due to Hugh Jackman and Patrick Stewart retiring from their respective roles] we'll never see a sequel. I'd love to see more!!!
LOGAN is truly something special.

- Woody

REVIEW: SUICIDE SQUAD (2016)

** SPOILER-FREE**

SUICIDE SQUAD is a real mixed-bag of a film.

Did I enjoy it? Yes, I did!
Would I call it a GREAT film? Probably not.

It IS very entertaining, but it also harbours some major flaws.

Without going into too many specifics, let's start with some positives!

The casting is choice! Everyone plays their part really well, and there are some surprisingly solid performances throughout - even from the lesser-knowns!
Will Smith [as Deadshot] totally steals the show. He's easily my favourite member of Task Force X. This character is quirky and fun, while baring some genuine weight and depth. It's a really well-struck balance - well written, and Smith's innate charisma just sells it perfectly. He is the humanity a film like this needs. A winner in my book.

Other characters like 'Diablo' for example (who I was previously unfamiliar with), also help bring something relatable, somewhat grounding, honest and heartfelt to the film. While a number of these 'smaller role' characters get very little screen-time and dialogue, their unique personas are still conveyed quite well - and that's ultimately what this film is all about!

SUICIDE SQUAD is less about the plot and more about the personalities.

The story is pretty straight forward. A little generic in part, but still serviceable.
It's not so much 'the mission', but the character interactions that are the focus here.
The action is, admittedly, a little generic too, but once again - it's about the characters!
The dialogue is decent! There are a few stand-out lines in there. (Particularly pertaining to Smith's 'Deadshot'). Some of the design work is really creative too! I was pretty impressed overall!

Now...

The most glaring issue I have here, is with the film's editing and pacing.
This thing is pretty damn choppy! It feels kinda like a puzzle, where your pieces aren't quite fitting together how you'd like, but you try and mash them together anyway. You should be taking your time to find just the right place for the right pieces, but maybe the problem is, you're actually missing a few..? Bummer.

There's a lot of unnecessary jumping back and forth between scenes and locations. There's a lot of scenes inappropriately inserted over other scenes. There's a lot of segues that don't really add-up, and there's an overabundance of flashbacks! It can be damn confusing!

With all this jumping around, you can easily lose your place in the story - your grasp on the timeline. I often felt a little left in the dust, trying to piece things together - figure out how they interlocked, when I shouldn't have had to. More than a couple of times throughout, I thought to myself: "Why is this [scene] here?". I found myself distracted from the story, second-guessing, trying to comprehend what direction the film (and by extension - it's creative team) was taking. It's not directionless by any means, but it's often quite misleading, and NOT in a way that purposely serves the story. There are just so many [seemingly] random inserts that completely halt the story.
We need less cuts! Just let the scene run its course! Please, don't put any more on my plate 'til I've finished what's already there!

Oh, and I should mention that the film feels like it doesn't have a Second Act...
It just goes: First (Setup and introductions) - BAM! -Third (Let's save The World).
It's a structure that totally threw me for a loop.

It really is an odd cut - a bizarre amalgamation, and one that I questioned throughout.

The plot is an easy one to follow (I wont spoil anything here), but the tone the film sets for itself is constantly being interrupted and brought into question. This is primarily due to some strange editing choices.

The film can be really punchy and fun, but in the blink of an eye - it can turn really quite sombre. This doesn't sound like a bad thing, right? I mean, it's an action drama! It's gonna have it's ups and downs! This is normal, right? Absolutely!
The problem is the inconsistencies in the tone and the rate at which they occur.
The tone in SUICIDE SQUAD shifts back and forth at breakneck speed! We don't know how to feel about a lot of things, because we're never given enough time to let anything sink in. AGAIN, this is due to the editing - cutting from one thing to another so haphazardly!
Sombre scene! Now, a quick, fun, bubbly scene! Now, back to sombre! It's so arbitrary and disjointed!
How am I supposed to feel, film!? Huh!? What are you? A Warhol or a Rembrandt!? Tell me!

Another issue I have with the film relates to it's Soundtrack. (Specifically, the licensed martial). Now, don't get me wrong! This film has a kick-ass soundtrack! You'll hear some legendary tunes from some legendary artists! My issues stems from their usage, or rather, their misuse.
There's a time and a place for each of these tracks. An editor just needs to find that sweet spot. Sometimes, they get it right. Often, they don't. It's when they don't, that these tracks become a problem. They become little more than a distraction - overbearing and unnecessary. This film just has more tracks than it knows what to do with! Again, just cram them all in and hope for the best, right? Sorry, but that doesn't work! Music should be used to enhance the cinematic experience. It should be there to set a mood or create an emphasis - to mean something, assist in the story telling and make the audience feel a particular way. It should NEVER be there, just for the sake of it!
"We have this song. It's a pop song. People like pop songs. Let's put it in the movie."
Unfortunately, that's how a lot of the song placement in this film comes across. Simply for the sake of it. That's a BIG mistake. All these songs are great, but do we really need them? You've gotta ask: what purpose does each song serve? How does it enhance the experience? If you struggle to answer either of these fundamental questions, then it's time to re-evaluate.
...

Okay, so I should wrap this up before I get too carried away!
Obviously, I have a few gripes with the film. A few considerable gripes.
The pacing can be jarring, the repeated tonal shifts are honestly, quite mind-boggling, and a number of intriguing characters are sadly neglected.

Nonetheless, I did like SUICIDE SQUAD!

You don't go into a movie like this expecting something ground-breaking or poetic or whatever. You go in to see Will Smith, a psychotic clown girl and a crocodile man do-... Whatever it is Will Smith, a psychotic clown girl and a crocodile man do!
If you've seen the trailers, then you know what to expect.
If you liked what you saw in those trailers, then you'll probably like the film!

(Oh, and I should note: A lot of the biggest and best beats from the film ARE in the trailers, but funnily enough - there's a whole heap of material in those shorts, that doesn't appear in the final product! No doubt, a messy cutting room floor!)

All in all, SUICIDE SQUAD delivered exactly what I thought and hoped it would deliver!
It's a fun, entertaining movie! It's exciting and creative! It's a couple of hours of mindless escapism, and that's precisely what the doctor ordered - a good time!

- Woody

REVIEW: THE KILLING JOKE (2016)

 

**RECOMMENDATION: See film for yourself, before reading any further!**

THE KILLING JOKE makes for a fantastic read but, unfortunately, makes for a pretty lacklustre film.

The graphic novel has been a favourite of mine since I was a kid, so needless to say - I was really looking forward to seeing the animated adaptation!
It's sad to say - the film falls flat in just about every department.

For starters, it suffers from an extremely unfocused plot.
Pretty much the first half of the movie revolves around Batgirl and her relationship with Batman. Now, I LOVE Batgirl! She is, without a doubt, my absolute favourite female character and she is totally deserving of her own films!
Her prologue here, however, is a complete hindrance.
I understand why it's there, but all it does is detract from the over-all experience!
You're here for THE KILLING JOKE, but first - let's watch this OTHER MOVIE!
It's filler. It's fan-service. It's not what I came to see.
Somehow, The Joker manages to take backseat in his own movie.
Structurally, this thing is all over the place and the pacing sucks.

The film is also very disappointing from a technical standpoint.
When we first saw the trailer, I think we were all kinda 'cautiously optimistic'.
The art looked kinda 'meh' but we figured everything else would make up for that, right? WRONG!
Yeah, I know there's a lot of talent behind these productions, and Warner Bros is easily my favourite animation studio. They're a studio behind some mind-blowingly cool stuff, but mind-blowingly cool this is not! In fact, it's pretty damn ugly!
The art sucks. The animation sucks. The framing and compositions suck.
Honestly, it's all rather baffling. If you've read the graphic novel, then you KNOW just how great Brian Bolland's art is! You KNOW how much gorgeous imagery there is to draw from! Dammit! You're basically being spoon fed! Why ignore the genius that is right in front of your faces!?!
The art is so important. In the book, it's the illustrations that emphasise the theme. The story is about madness and so, the art is suitably twisted! It's all there, in the book and it works wonderfully! The writing and the visuals complement one another perfectly! Visually, the film is just dull. It's boring to look at, and what a shame this is.

...

Yeah, I'll admit, I'm very passionate about this stuff. It's my bread and butter, and I DO take it seriously.
That said: please, don't write this off as just some stupid fanboy rant.
I swear, I'm not "butthurt".
I'm not saying you can't or shouldn't enjoy this film.
I'm not saying it's TERRIBLE or that it's a waste of your time.
This is purely one man's opinion.
I don't regret watching the film. It just has A LOT of glaring issues.
...
One of them being Mark Hamill...

YES! I know! I know! Now, before you kill me - just hear me out!
Mark Hamill is The Joker. His depiction of The Clown Prince of Crime is, by far, the most faithful and entertaining to date. The man is a great actor and he knows this character!
However... Someone dropped the ball.
Mark plays a great Joker. He DOESN'T, however, play a good 'pre-acid-dip' Joker.

In the graphic novel, Alan Moore depicts Joker's origin as a tragedy. He depicts this character (again, pre-dip) as an incredibly frail, almost pitiful man, down on his luck. Particular events in the book push this man to his breaking point and [wouldn't you know it] - he breaks!

Mark's performance here (as pre-dip Joker) is misguided to say the least.
I don't know what happened exactly. Ordinarily, Andrea Romano supplies the voice direction for projects such as these. She's a veteran and she knows how to get the best from her actors. This time, Wes Gleason was given the job. I'm sure by now, Mark has a solid grasp on the intricacies of this character but I'm not sure the same can be said for Gleason. So, yeah. I AM gonna blame the direction!

Pre-Joker Joker is (as mentioned before) a pretty pitiful guy, and when tragedy strikes, it shatters his whole world!
Mark's performance is less one of: "Jesus Christ! I've lost everything. My life is over..." and more one of: "Hmm... Well, that's life! Shit happens! I'll get over it!".
It's bizarre! Do you feel the tragedy? No! Not really! You don't! There is very little sense of grief in Mark's delivery, and you really get no sense that this is a pivotal moment for this character.
Obviously (Sarcastic "Spoiler Alert"), the dude loses his mind and The Joker is born, but this transformation is so spontaneous that is seems kinda silly and out of place! It's like an over-reaction - uncalled for - not really warranted, considering the character's composure moments before! It doesn't make much sense and it doesn't mean a lot! The significance is lost.

That's the problem. There is little to no weight to anything that happens in this film. It has no gravity. It's not the story's fault. It's the way the story is told HERE - this adaptation!

The book is structurally sound and carries weight. The film is not and DOES NOT.
Let's face it - the book is iconic. It's well written and gorgeously presented. It's a turning point for so many characters. It's insightful and thought-provoking. It's a fantastic, gritty drama and most importantly - it's creative.

This was an opportunity to get creative - to really make something special.
This adaptation is paint by numbers. It's based on a great story but ultimately, comes off pretty bland because it fails to think for itself or pause to let its audience ponder!

Let me just say this too: this review isn't a 'book versus film' kinda deal.
I understand that they are two totally different mediums - incomparable to certain extents.
I'll just clarify by saying: the film is a poor adaptation. It's simply missing what made THE KILLING JOKE the must-read that it is. The book is not just an origin story - it's a study of the human condition. This exploration and insight is at the heart of the story. It's what makes it meaningful. The film struggles to capture and convey this. Things just happen and then they're over. Again, there's just no weight to it.
What's happened here is: they've taken a solid template, a great script, without knowing how to translate it to screen. Plain and simple.

Man, I could go on and on!
Believe it or not - this was intended to be a BRIEF review.
So, I'll finish up by saying this: The film is entertaining for the most part. It's by no means an insult to the original material but it certainly doesn't do it the justice it deserved. There are some decent performances throughout but they alone, can't make up for what could have been.
At the end of the day, THE KILLING JOKE can be summed up in two words: Missed opportunity.

- Woody