Stoker Review



Imagine Alfred Hitchcock adapting The Addams Family, not especially faithfully, and that should give you some idea of the mood of Park Chan-wook’s superb first English-language film — a very grown-up horror movie. It’s not the sort of horror movie that waves chainsaws around and chases pert young women through the woods. It’s much smarter than that. It’s spooky, clipped and elegantly bonkers, like an ancient dowager aunt.

The story takes place almost entirely in one of those giant, immaculate houses, which movies would have us believe were built so large in order to offer rich people room for all their secrets, where brittle widow Evie (Nicole Kidman) lives with her daughter India (Mia Wasikowska), an 18 year-old who is a creepy mix of old soul and petulant child. Their days pass in loaded glances until the funeral of Evie’s late husband (played in flashback by Dermot Mulroney) brings his younger brother (Matthew Goode), who gets his feet under the table and his fingers in all the family’s troubles. Nobody ever smiles, at least not all the way up to their eyes, and everyone suspects everyone else of being up to no good, usually with perfectly valid reason. It bleeds into a murder mystery, with each character becoming madder and more ambiguous at every turn.

Park directs the film with a precision and control that are astonishing. There doesn’t seem to be a single frame that he hasn’t carefully considered or included without necessity, even if some of the odder ones take a little while to figure out. The imagery is just magnificent, all chilly but dreamy — or possibly nightmarish — his regular cinematographer Chung Chung-hoon giving it a feel a little like Douglas Sirk with more menace. There are touches that could keep film students deliberating for days, notably one transition from hair being brushed to a field of wavering grass, and lots of bits with a spider all but begging for someone to ascribe him a metaphor.

Before disappearing up our fundament, it must be said that rather than make the film feel finickity or pretentious, all this fastidiousness anchors the world. Although what’s happening is deeply unusual and detached from reality, Park’s commitment to its every detail gives it a logical reality of its own and an atmosphere so thick, you can’t see beyond it. In less steady hands it could very easily have become camp, but wherever there might be a temptation to play a scene in high emotion, Park flattens it out, only enhancing the strangeness.

The script, by Wentworth Miller — yes, him from Prison Break — is a very trim piece of work, never wasting a word when a look will do. Miller has cited Bram Stoker’s Dracula as an influence, and presumably source of the title, though really the most it appears to take from that book is a Gothic mood. Nobody’s sucking on anybody’s neck or flying out the window on a little bit of elastic. More evident is its other influence, Hitchcock’s Shadow Of A Doubt, with which it shares a bad Uncle Charlie, the weirdness of intensely close family relationships and the damage childhood can do, although it’s even more twisted than Hitchcock’s film. The savage evil of Shadow Of A Doubt’s ending would just be a kicking-off point here, a little warm-up before the depravity really gets going.

To tell this story in this way, Park needs actors who can do a lot with a little and he’s served by a faultless cast, particularly a prime leading trio. Wasikowska comes over like a more damaged take on Alice In Wonderland, Kidman’s Evie is heartbreaking in her own messy way, and Goode glowers handsomely as if he is simultaneously plotting abominable acts and taking part in history’s most sinister fashion shoot. They’re each powerful enough to hold the screen alone, but the scenes that bring all three together are an exhibition in underplaying. This lot can tense up a casual dinner conversation like nobody’s business.

These are the kind of performances that should be nominated for awards but generally aren’t because there’s absolutely no showing off; no big moment, just a stream of smaller, more effective ones.

Don’t come in expecting the action or screwy aspects of Oldboy or Sympathy For Lady Vengeance, because this is a much more, for want of a better term, formal film than Park is known for. His consistent theme of revenge certainly plays a part, but all the violence is emotional, with even the few moments of actual physical harm taking place mainly off screen. That said, although Stoker is a film told in a much more polite way than Oldboy, it stillhas a soul every bit as artfully cruel.

Wreck It Ralph Review

Disney animation pushes all the right buttons

When it comes to the game of film making, Wreck-It Ralph plays on the hardest difficulty. For this is a project - long-awaited, highly anticipated and highly ambitious - that could have gone spectacularly wrong. Luckily, with Disney and director Rich Moore (The Simpsons), the controller is in the right hands. The story, scripted by Phil Johnston (Cedar Rapids) and newcomer Jennifer Lee, is as human as it is pixelated.

John c. Reilly’s Ralph - he of ‘Wreck-It’ fame - is fed up with his villainous role in the virtual world of Litwak’s arcade: a place where video game characters come to life in spectacularly realised detail after we’ve stopped playing with them. From its opening scene in ‘Bad Anon’ - a support group for digi-villains such as Bowser, M Bison and Doctor Robotnik - to its Game Central Station setting (a city populated by hundreds of classic characters travelling from game to game), this is a world created with the sort of love, precision and cheeky referencing that, especially if you’ve ever been a gamer, you’ll never want to leave.
Ralph doesn't feel quite so thrilled, however. Faced with the daily ridicule of playing the bad guy in the shadow of his heroic nemesis Fix-It Felix Jr (Jack McBrayer), he decides to abandon the confines of his game in the hope of finding the gold medal that will earn him status and respect among his fellow pixel pals. His quest first lands him in the Halo-esque ‘Hero’s duty’, led by Jane Lynch’s no-nonsense Sergeant Calhoun (“she’s programmed with the most tragic backstory ever”), and eventually into the sickly-sweet kart-racing game ‘Sugar Rush’, where he meets kindred outsider Vanellope von Schweetz - a nine-year-old wannabe racer banished for being a ‘glitch’ - and decides to help her win her way back onto the circuit.

Perkily voiced (with an edge of snark) by Sarah Silverman, Schweetz cements the film’s themes of individuality and self-acceptance, although she does cue up a barrage of candy-based punnery - visual and verbal - that some may find a little jarring. (The bumbling cop duo who come in the form of a talking donut and chocolate éclair are lip-smackingly cool, mind). Still, such a glitch in the script is hardly enough to undo the film’s high-scoring virtues: warmth, wit, scale and ambition. And though loose ends are neatly tied - no mean feat given a spate of subplots - there’s also tantalising scope for a franchise.

Overall - 8 stars out of 10

In the words of its final shot: PRESS START.

A Good Day To Die Hard Review

Bruce Willis does what he does best, but this is quite simply one of the worst days of the 'Die Hard' series.


It's been 25 years since Bruce Willis wore a sweaty vest to save the day in Die Hard. And 23 years since Die Hard 2, when he asked, disbelievingly, "How can shit like this happen to the same guy twice?" That question persisted right through to Die Hard 4.0, when Willis, as hard-ass cop John McClane, teamed up with an ace computer hacker (played by Justin Long) to save America, again.

The variations seemed all played out, but lo! McClane is back in A Good Day to Die Hard, this time to join forces with his equally fearless son. Did anyone know that he even had a son? The series seems to be taking on the disturbing aspect of a family business. I wouldn't put it past McClane to line up with his grandchild in time for Die Hard 8.

For now, though, we're in Moscow, where John has gone to bail his estranged son Jack (Jai Courtney) out of trouble. Little does he know that the kid is not just a chip off the old block: he's on a mission for the CIA to rescue top-level scientist Komarov (Sebastian Koch) from a gang of murderous Russian goons. "So, you're the 007 of Plainfield, New Jersey," says father to son, pride mingling with envy.

The director, John Moore, delivers two huge set-pieces in quick succession, the first an explosive assault on a Moscow courtroom, the second a long car chase through heavy traffic and across floyovers that ends in a demolition derby. Scenery-trashing has been integral to the franchise from the off, the difference being that the first Die Hard cleverly confined itself to a single building (the Nakatomi tower!) and gave Willis one of the greatest adversaries in movies – take a bow, Alan Rickman, your beard and soft-voiced suavity live on. Here, the bangs come quickly but with less ingenuity, the rule being that if one loiters in a building for longer than five minutes a barrage of gunfire will shatter the windows.

As for Willis, he's pushing it as an action hero but doing OKAY. The patented smirk is still intact, as is the bellyaching about how he neglected his kids because he was too busy working. Any remorse over his selfishness, however, is forgiven in the face of his willingness to go out on a limb for his family and his country. The screenplay by Skip Woods (The A-Team) keeps reminding us exactly what sort of scumbags he's up against: they stand over their victims and sneer, "Do you know what I hate about Americans?" Pause. "Everything." What can you do with such people other than blast them to smithereens with a cry of "Yippee-ki-yay"?


Overall - 5 stars out of 10

Snow White And The Huntsman 2012 - Review


Snow White And The Huntsman
Certificate: 12A
Director: Rupert Sanders
Run time: 127 minutes
Starring:
Kristen Stewart
Chris Hemsworth
Charlize Theron
Sam Claflin
I recently watched the new film, Snow White and the Huntsman and I am sure that everyone reading this will be able to realise that it is based off of the traditional fairy tale; Snow white. Other than the plot line this film is nothing like the original fairy tale that we all know so well. Obviously this is done purposefully to give the story a fresh viewpoint and make it something that people will want to watch and won't be limited to young children as the fairy tale version has always been.
My first thoughts were that the fresh take on this fairy tale was really good idea, and I still think this is true. However I don't think this film was done as well as it could have been. As the movie progressed it seemed to get worse (and it didn't start off to great either) sadly it got extremely boring and I felt the strong urge to walk out of the cinema, on the other hand I hate to give up on a film so decided to stick it out and  finish it. In many ways I'm glad I did as the end fight scene did become quite good with some really exciting fighting although the overall battle was very short, somewhat underwhelming and lacking in the serious action that I had hoped for.There were a fair few redeeming features of this movie which I'll get to soon but for now More bad points ! Woo.
Kristen Stewart's acting in this film is genuinely awful, I swear her facial expression never changes! Her voice rarely seems to have any energy behind it and seems to be a monotone throughout. She never seems to change and even in one scene (Wont say to much, No spoilers) when she is meant to be giving an inspiring speech there is so little feeling and enthusiasm that I cant imagine the speech inspiring anyone. What positive points of her acting that there are, are easily seen through and we can tell that they are clearly forced, it certainly isn't the naturalistic acting that so many other actors are capable of. In short I really believe that her acting abilities do kill this film, of course she cant be completely blamed but really my major problems with this film are entirely centred around her and her acting. So back to the inspiring speech that I mentioned, my first thought was "This is the least inspiring speech I've ever heard." now obviously it isn't going to be a speech of Braveheart quality but I really expected something a bit better than what Stewart delivered.
So onto the good points, Charlize Theron players her role extremely well, she seems to make the perfect evil queen and unlike Stewart, her acting is pretty good, she shows her anger and hatred very well and she does a great job in her supporting role. Chris Hemsworth does a decent job in this film also, but as his character is so key it would have been nicer to hear a bit more about his past as it is clearly a bit reason for why his character is the way that he is.
For me the highlight of this film was the dwarves, its difficult to say why I loved them so much as they didn't even have a lot of individual screen time. But what I did see was very good, they were all very well cast with actors like Ray Winston, Nick Frost and Ian McShane to name a few. It would have been good to see more from the dwarves and even give them a bit of an explanation and a clearer introduction.
My final good point on this film is the action scenes that we are presented with, although many of the fight scenes are very short what we are given are fast, fluid, exciting fights that are actually pretty good and give a bit of energy to the film.
Overall I think that this film was little more than average. It would have certainly been a lot better without Kristen Stewart as the rest of the film was fairly good, and in fairness  the rest of the actors did a great job. Its just a shame Snow White was so poorly cast. The film really didn't live up to what I thought it could have been and to be honest it was fairly underwhelming. I would probably rate this film as a 6/10, as although I didn't really like it there were some good, redeeming features that made it a lot better.   


Watch the trailer here and make up your own mind!

Men In Black 3 Review



Certificate: PG
Director: Barry Sonnenfeld

Starring: 
Will Smith
Tommy Lee Jones
Josh Brolin
Jemaine Clement
Michael Stuhlbarg
Emma Thompson
In 1997 the first men in black movie hit our screens. The film was a massive success, loved by many and even redefined the genre. The first movie was a major boost in leading man Will Smiths career and 15 years later he's easily one of the best known faces in Hollywood.

Men in Black 3 certainly doesn’t disappoint, Its packed with tonnes action and background, in some ways more so than the first two movies. Yes the background aspect is sort of a given considering the plot is mainly about travelling back in time but there’s no doubt it has been done spectacularly. The young actors of K (Josh Brolin) and O(Alice Eve) have been superbly chosen and its difficult to think how the casting could have been improved upon, for example Young K seems to have captivated the older K's(Tommy Lee Jones) mannerisms and voice spot on. Sadly as the majority of this film is set in the past we don't see nearly as much of 'K'(Tommy Lee Jones) or the new character 'O'(Emma Thompson)as many fans may have hoped for.

In this film the Action and special FX are really stepped up from the previous instalments. There are significantly more Aliens and more extra terrestrial enemies, this calls for more action as agents J and K are given amazing weapons and a lot more opportunity to use their “Space guns”.

Perhaps one of the only downsides to this movie (if it can even be considered a downside) is that in comparison to the previous instalments the mood of this film seems somewhat lighter, although it was pretty light to begin with. I’m not saying that this is necessarily a bad thing but its no doubt very different. Where the previous films presented the MIB agency as a mysterious, secretive organisation this film seems to show it as more open and less serious than previously thought.

The jokes in this film seem to be a lot more in your face and blatant then the previous titles, when watching it seems that the jokes are forced and while the same style of comedy is often implemented for some reason it doesn't produce the same effect as the earlier instalments, possibly due to the jokes being less subtle and seemingly more forced. On the other hand although many of the jokes don't induce fits of laughter (while many do) they all consistently bring a smile to your face.

There's no doubt that the absolute best thing about this film and indeed the series is Will Smiths character “J”. J is still his light-hearted, comical self even with the added years, he turns somehow manages to turn even the most serious situations into something laughable, luckily this added comedy rarely breaks the mood and only adds to the experience. Its difficult to think how effective this series would have been without the charismatic acting of Will Smith, Its certain the atmosphere would be different and many of the jokes probably wouldn’t have worked as well as they did but its clear this is an example of perfect casting.

We give Men In Black 3 a 7.5/10. Its a good film and in many ways it is as good, if not better than the previous 2 films, however in many other ways its very different and we think that the change works very well. This film is defiantly worth a watch and is sure to bring a smile your face, it seems to be the type of movie that can be watched many times and will consistently give the viewer a great experience.


The Senores rate the Men in black franchise as 8/10


Watch the full trailer here: 





That's My Boy Preview

The Lonely Island's Andy Samberg (left) with Adam Sandler on the right.
So I watched the Trailer for 'That's My Boy' before I watched this I expected it to be another of Adam Sandlers recent awful movies, however after watching this I realised that it actually doesn't seem too bad. The trailer is actually surprisingly funny, the classic story of  boy meets middle aged woman and impregnates her is not lost on this trailer. The story is basically about a crappy father who is nothing but a looser and is attempting to restart the failed relationship with his son in the hope that he can use his estranged child self found success to pay off his debts and avoid a prison sentence. Andy Samberg playing the son is understandably unhappy about his poor excuse of a father coming back into his life and we're given many example of how his irresponsible dad has screwed him up, including a giant tattoo of 'The new kids on the block' which he received at the age of 8. When watching this trailer I couldn't help but be reminded of the Adam Sandlers classics, he seems to be playing slightly similar characters as before such as Little Nicky but as its a great character I'm sure nobody will mind.

While the trailer seems fairly funny I cant help but think its a really predictable storyline. My guess is that Sandler's character will move in with his son, who's is hesitant at first but eventually the two will bond, Sandler will then stop caring about the money he needs and be happy that he is with his son. The movie will take a turn when Sambergs character realises that Sandler only found him again for his money, then Samberg will get angry and kick his father out, who will then get soppy. Realise how much he loves his son and make some sort of grand stupid gesture to gain his sons love and respect, the film will end with one big happy family and they'll all cry at the end. It will get a lot of laughs and we'll all feel better for watching.  


That's My Boy official trailer: