Movies – T2 Trainspotting Review (or ‘Exposing One Of The Great Pop-Culture Hypocrisies’)

February 7, 2017

Some people are as fanatical about Trainspotting as others are about the likes of Star Wars, Doctor Who, WWE, Game of Thrones or Harry Potter. Some more-so.

Indeed, I’ve never come across so much excitement and fervour among people in general society over the release of a film as this one, and when I went to see it, the sort of whooping enthusiasm in the cinema during the showing of T2 was unlike anything I’ve witnessed before.

People laughed hysterically at early lines of dialogue that were not worthy of a titter, and would shout and cheer when characters first made their appearances on-screen.t2-trainspotting-uk-poster

It was baffling, and to me it represented one of the great hypocrisies of pop-culture among people in my age range.

What it showed me was that in the eyes of the sort of people who would criticise you for being interested in more ‘geeky’ things, it’s perfectly alright to be fanatical about a film if it’s about something ‘cool’ like – in their minds – drugs.

That’s just…pathetic. But it is what it is, and that’s why these people should be largely ignored.

Anyway, my thinly veiled passive aggression aside, I’m happy to judge this on its own merits. I’ve only seen the first Trainspotting once and barely have any memory of it, such was the impact it had on young Stuart, but I didn’t dislike it, so why not give the new one a go?

And I enjoyed it, but I wonder how much of that was down to certain crutches that held it up?

For example, shallow as it is, if it’s got a guy with a broad Scottish accent calling people cunts, then it’ll definitely raise a chuckle, and so thanks to Robert Carlyle I laughed a lot.

And as a Scot and more to the point as a Scottish football fan, the scene in the Rangers pub was probably the funniest and cleverest set piece I’ve seen in any film in ages. How funny that will be to people less aware of the utterly pointless sectarian divide that poisons certain areas in Scotland I couldn’t tell you, but it was funny to me.

Beyond that though? I dunno; it seemed like a bit of a by-the-numbers sequel with an uninspiring overall plot and a limp resolution.

It’s not fair to say that without certain elements it wouldn’t be good though, because those elements were there and so it was good.

So I’d recommend seeing it, but at the same time, don’t quite understand why people are so enthusiastic about it.

I await some snarky replies.


Movies – La La Land Review (or ‘Worthy of the Hype?’)

January 29, 2017

“I’m probably the only woman here who has been dragged along by their boyfriend”, said my girlfriend as the title card for La La Land came on to the big screen today.

She wasn’t keen to see it, and as it turned out did not enjoy it. But then she doesn’t like musicals.

Neither do I really, although not as strongly as her. Sure, I enjoy Disney movies like The Lion King, Aladdin and Beauty and the Beast that have songs throughout them, but if you were lalato ask me to sit down and watch a Fred Astaire musical or something of that ilk, I’d make my excuses and leave.

So why did I want to go to La La Land?

For one thing, everyone’s been raving about it, and even though it’s Oscar season and people tend to rave about movies that are in fact overly-worthy piles of self-important pish, the sheer amount of praise meant that I felt I had to give it a chance.

For another thing, Whiplash is one of the best movies I’ve seen since I started this blog, and seeing as it’s from the same director – Damien Chazelle – I suspected I’d like it.

So did I?

To an extent, yes, I thought it was fun, but there were elements to it that I didn’t think were all that good, and ironically those are some of the parts that have made it stand out to other people.

Or to put it another way, I didn’t like some of the songs.

The opening song on the freeway near LA was a bit cringey and the number about standing out from the crowd had me on the ropes thinking “Have I got to put up with two hours of this?”. Those types of set plays are just not for me, and neither was the musical style within them.

Eventually though, La La Land settled down into a proper story about two people – well performed as they were by Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone –  trying to make their own pathways in the entertainment industry. It was good; it held up well and kept me entertained. The music improved too, with the piano stuff and the later songs – especially the one towards the end when she was in for her audition – being much more my type of thing.

It also looked nice, with the director making great use of colour in his shots. It’s one of these movies where the quality of the director and his vision makes a difference to what you’re seeing. In a world where bland CGI tends to rule, this was a welcome relief.

Finally, I thought the ending was refreshingly different. Without spoiling it for you if you’ve yet to see it, it’s not how this type of film would traditionally end.

So on the whole, I liked La La Land enough to understand why it’s been getting hyped up so much. Some of it just wasn’t to my tastes, but there’s no doubt it’s good for what it is.

If you like that sort of thing, go and see it. If you’re like my girlfriend and have no time for the genre, then don’t bother.

 


Movies – Jackie Review (or ‘Like Something More Interesting Is Going On In The Background’)

January 29, 2017

When I woke up yesterday morning – having seen Jackie on Thursday – I was saddened to read about the death of John Hurt. He was a brilliant actor who did such a great job in shows like I, Claudius and made a small but lasting impression in Doctor Who.

But before I read about his passing, I was about to write this review and say that “…even John Hurt was poor by his standards”. I wondered if it would go down well and be right to jackiecriticise the performance of someone who had just died and who no doubt everyone would be sympathetic towards.

I decided it was fair enough; Hurt was poor by his standards. It took me until he’d been in three scenes to realise that he was playing an Irishman, as if he only decided to put on the accent half way through. I was disappointing.

But then I was disappointed with Jackie in general.

It’s one of these bleak movies that’s clearly trying for an Oscar rather than looking to entertain.

Now I know that a movie about a woman who has just lost her husband isn’t going to be light or whimsical, but for me, the bleakness was slapped on far too thickly, with depressing and relentless incidental music played over almost every scene.

And whether or not she sounded like her or not, all I could see for the most part was Natalie Portman putting on a funny voice. It’s the complete opposite of Tom Hanks in Sully.

Most of all though, it just wasn’t that enjoyable. It felt like something interesting was going on in the background but we were being prompted to focus on the dull stuff. And at the last moment – as if they knew the film had been as dull as dishwater and they needed to wake people up – they finally show JFK getting his head blown off. That seemed very cheap.

So overall, I thought this was a waste of my time. On the plus side, the only way is up for movies in 2017.

I hope…


Movies: Allied Review

December 16, 2016

For some reason, Allied hasn’t done well with reviewers.

It’s been described as ‘plodding’ and ‘passionless’ by some and generally gets below average scores.alliedposter

That surprises me, because I thought it was great.

Reminiscent of the sort of a Hitchcock directed James Stewart movie, I found it to be dramatic, engrossing and pretty straight forward.

Maybe that’s the problem some have with it? Maybe it’s that it’s a return to a simpler form of storytelling that doesn’t jump around in a non-linear fashion with flashbacks and flashforwards galore?

Or maybe it’s the acting? I can’t say that Brad Pitt or Marion Cotillard blew me away with their performances, but I certainly didn’t think they were worth being negative about.

All I know is that as a story, this was one of the best movies I’ve seen all year and I’d recommend it highly.

I guess it’s just a matter of which critic you listen to?


Movies: Sully Review

December 12, 2016

In 2016, the notion of going to see a film because of the actor or actress starring in it seems like a thing of the past. I don’t know if that’s down to the lead actors now being less important in the overall scheme of things or whether they are simply less talented than the stars of Hollywood’s past, but that’s how I see it.

The sole exception to that for me is Tom Hanks.sully

With very few exceptions, movies starring Tom Hanks tend to be good, and they are always well acted.

So when I saw a poster for his newest movie – Sully – about the pilot who landed a passenger jet on the Hudson River, I knew it would be worth seeing.

And it was.

Sully is an engrossing retelling of the events of January 15th 2009 and does a good job both of detailing the actual events of the splash landing and the aftermath and enquiries into it. The latter point is important because in itself, the story of how the plane came to land on the Hudson isn’t worthy of a movie. It’s worthy of being revisited as a visual spectacle, but not of being a movie in its own right.

The main draw here is the character of Chelsea “Sully” Sullenburger and how he dealt with the situation and its aftermath.

And to come full circle, what makes that main draw work is that Tom Hanks is – as usual – excellent.

This is a movie you should definitely seek out.


Movies: Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them Review (or ‘Oh, I Can’t Be Bothered…’)

November 28, 2016

Part of me can’t be bothered writing a review of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them.

It’s not that it’s a bad film – bad films are easy to write about – it’s just that it’s yet another movie from the cookie cutter mould of modern Hollywood blockbusters.fantastic-beasts-sequel-03aug16

With a by-the-numbers plot, an over-abundance of CGI in lieu of good direction and cinematic flair, New York city getting destroyed again and acting that is simply ok (or in the case of Eddie Redmayne, copied directly from Matt Smith’s interpretation of The Doctor), I just found it utterly unremarkable.

The only unique selling point is that it’s set in 1920s New York rather than modern day.

People will love it – I know someone who’s going for the second time to see it today – but I just found it as bland as bland can be, and therefore I can’t muster up anything worthwhile to say about it.

It’ll be nice to walk through the set when it inevitably comes to Universal Studios though…


Movies – A Street Cat Named Bob Review (or ‘If You Find Yourself Homeless, Get A Cute Animal Immediately’)

November 8, 2016

If you’re going to take one thing away from A Street Cat Named Bob, it’s that if ever you find yourself unfortunate enough to be a homeless drug addict, then get a cat, because it’ll turn your life around.

And yes, you could argue that’s an overly simplistic point of view to take having watched this movie – based on a best-selling book – about the real life struggles of homeless drug addict James Bowen, but it is true tobob a large extent.

Before he took in Bob the Cat, James was just like any other homeless drug-addict busker; it was the cat that got his singing noticed and gave him the lift up to get himself out of the hole he was in. It also allowed him to thrive as a Big Issue seller to the detriment of his rivals because people wanted to buy it from the guy with the cat sat on his shoulder.  If he didn’t have the cat, would he have been as successful a busker and Big Issue seller as he was? No. Sure, he might have managed to get back on his feet without Bob, but not to the point of having a best-selling book, a movie and an appearance on The One Show.

So get a cat, preferably a cute one who will happily sit on your shoulders and not move. And if not a cat, any crowd pleasing animal will do. A monkey with a fez and a set of cymbols might go down a treat, or a parrot who sings the songs with you. But don’t get a snake; those guys get a bad press even though they are simply trying to get by.

Oh, did you want to know if the movie was any good?

Well yes, it was. It’s basically a heart-warming and at times funny British drama that doesn’t get boring. If I had one criticism of it, it was that apart from a couple of minor setbacks that were immediately resolved, James faces no real adversity in the movie, and while that might have been true to his life from the point we pick his story up at, it made the whole thing seem a bit one-note.

But having said that, I enjoyed it.