Film Review: Man of Steel

I think when it comes to reviewing this film, I do first have to mention the absolutely awesome trailer that was used to promote it. Honestly, that trailer was easily one of the very best I’ve ever seen and it did hype up the film for me. Kudos to whoever put that together.

As origin stories go, Superman’s story is one that I’m most familiar with, simply because I’ve been exposed to quite a lot of Superman over the years. I’ve heard the story, and I didn’t hold to much hope that it was going to hold my interest. I was so wrong about that. The opening sequences showing the reasons why Krypton ended up being destroyed was brilliant. I’m not a comic book fan, so I don’t know how much of that came from original source material, but I thoroughly enjoyed it.

I also really loved that the reason why Krypton was destroyed was because everyone had their place and they couldn’t deviate from that place. This then being the very reason behind General Zod’s desire to destroy Earth, to built Krypton anew because protecting it is all he knows, was a great bit of writing to tie together the whole film. It makes Superman into what he is: not human but also not a proper Kryptonian either.

I know some people I’ve talked to about the film find the plot quite slow in places, and that many of the flashback sequences feel like fillers. Personally I’m not that keen on the fight scene in his home town: I thought I was going to be sick when I watched it on the big screen for the first time. I like realistic, but there is realistic and then there are sequences that actually turns your stomach, and that fight scene for me falls into the latter.

For that reason I actually really like the slower scenes as it shows Clark to be a decent person, and his parents to be extraordinary, especially his mother, for raising him as well as they did. Not all children have supernatural powers, and being able to talk a child who is freaking out in a cupboard is hard enough as it is; getting a one to come out who can keep the door shut if he wants is a whole different challenge.

Those family scenes are there because they demonstrate who Clark is as a person, and when combined with the sequences with his real father, they show his potential to be a truly great hero and a decent person. It makes his choice when fighting General Zod all the more horrific, because that is not who he is as a person. He has to make a choice in terms of his ethics, and while he makes the right choice it is at a personal sacrifice.

It is not an outstanding film, but it is really good, and I find Henry Cavill’s performance as Superman one of the most believable of the ones I’ve seen. Well worth a viewing.

Film Review: The Dark Knight Rises

I have to admit the first time I saw the Dark Knight Rises I wasn’t keen on the film. In truth when I watched it I was bored. I felt like Bane was just a poorer version of The Joker trying to make the world descend into chaos.

On having seen it again though, I do appreciate that it is a good film. It’s better than Batman Begins, but not as a good as The Dark Knight. One of the reasons I don’t think it is as a good is because it relies heavily on what happened in the first two films. You can watch Batman Begins and The Dark Knight as stand-alone films and not be confused.

As far as I remember the only references made in the second film to what happens in the first film is a short comment by Alfred about the manor needing to be rebuilt, and Cillian Murphy making a brief cameo, neither of which affects the plot.

If you watched the Dark Knight Rises without having seen the other two films you wouldn’t understand many of the references and the true nature of the villain and their origins wouldn’t have as much of an impact. I was bored because the films just goes over old ground without bringing very many new ideas.

What I do really like about this film though is how many of the secondary characters have a much more prominent role and show that they don’t need to be Batman to be a hero. I know that one of the major criticisms of the film is that there isn’t very much screen time for Batman. Not being a Batman fan this didn’t bother me much, though I will admit I was excited in the same way the older police officer was when Batman gunned down a tunnel on his motorcycle.

This lack of Batman though meant it was easier for Gary Oldman and Joseph Gordan-Levitt to be the heroes in the meanwhile by being decent police officers. One of the things I was never keen on was the level of corruption within the justice system in Gotham: I know it is the reason why the city needs Batman, because he isn’t corruptible, but having to watch Oldman, and in this film Gordan-Levitt as well, struggle trying to be a decent cop just doing their job was tough. Seeing them getting to step up and prove themselves because even Batman wasn’t there any more to save them was well worth it.

So I’m not the biggest fan of the film, and much of that is because it relies far too much on what was good about its predecessors, but it does have some merits, and it is a good end to the Nolan Trilogy.

Film Review:The Dark Knight

The Dark Knight is easily my favourite film of Nolan’s trilogy. The writing was superb, the acting was superb and the overall quality of the film-making made it an instant classic when it came out at the cinema.

This film is also the only film of the trilogy where I actually like Batman as a character. However it is very much because of the fact he is up against one of my all time favourite villains. When compared to Heath Ledger’s Joker, of course I’m going to sympathise with Batman.

It is something that I have noticed about myself when it comes to DC characters, especially the heroes; I’m not fond of them, but I will watch them eagerly when they are facing a half decent villain. There was nothing just ‘half-decent’ about the Joker in this film either. Reviewing this film as a writer and as a fan , the Joker is the perfect villain.

The Joker is creepy, sadistic, and when it counts he doesn’t hesitate. As Alfred says, he is a man who wants to watch the world burn, and this film is all about the descend into the chaos that he masterminds. Perhaps ‘masterminds’ is the wrong word, as after all he doesn’t actually have a plan, which is probably what makes it even more brilliant.

I don’t think I’ve ever done such an easy review for a film. While I’m not a massive fan of the character Batman, I do love what a good villain can do to upset normal everyday life. There was so much in this film that was good and could be equally as worthy of discussion, but Heath Ledger was what made this film excellent in my opinion so I’m not going to over complicate things. If you’ve never seen the film, his performance in itself is enough of a reason to give it a try.

 

Film Review: Batman Begins

The first film of the Dark Knight Trilogy, ‘Batman Begins’ is my least favourite. I’m not keen on the cinematography and the stylisation of Gotham City, and overall when compared to the other films in the trilogy, the first just doesn’t quite match the quality of the later films.

However, there are some great performances especially from Liam Neeson, Cillian Murphy, Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine, but as none of these actors are playing the main character it is a bit problematic. I’m not a fan of Christian Bale’s Batman, not that I’m a massive fan of Batman to start with, but the dark and husky voice just does nothing for me, except send shivers down my spine akin to fingernails down a chalkboard. Bale as Bruce Wayne is fine, but once he puts on the suit I’m not interested.

Which probably sums up why I’m not a big fan of the film, because the entire point of the film is Bruce Wayne’s journey into the suit. However as a writer, it is this journey, which will bring me back to the film, but only on occasion. In terms of comparing it to the later films, the storyline and the quality of the screenplay is just as good as the rest of the trilogy. I also like the idea of Bruce Wayne becoming what he fears most following a childhood trauma: Bats.

The very best bits of the film are Bruce Wayne’s interactions with Ra’s al Ghul, as he journeys from prison to the realisation that the League of Shadows wants to destroy Gotham City. Liam Neeson was cast perfectly as the villain, delivering an elegant performance. There was nothing showy or over the top about his character, which makes him all the more frighteningly ruthless.

I’m also particularly fond of Cillian Murphy’s performance as the Scarecrow and his sub-plot of trying to destroy Gotham using an hallucinogenic drug. The two plotlines lines of Batman’s origin story and Scarecrow’s plans tie together elegantly, and the lighter relief of Caine and Freeeman’s characters toning down the seriousness of Bruce Wayne does make the film watchable.

So while I’m not a massive fan of the film, in terms of the storyline and the screenplay, what Nolan and the actors tried to do with this film does make it worth watching.

DC Comics

When it comes to choosing between DC and Marvel, I am very much a Marvel Girl, purely because the X-Men are my favourite superheroes, to the extent I even remember reading some of the comics as a kid (though not which ones). It’s strange that I’ve developed this preference, because in truth I have had a lot more exposure to DC than I ever have to Marvel.

Despite this I’m not actually a massive DC fan, though I do watch the films, but I am just not as attracted to DC as I am to Marvel. I think it might be because I’m not as attracted by the two main superheroes that I’m most familiar with: Batman and Superman.

I don’t particularly like the character of Batman. I can remember as a child really disliking Batman and even Batman comics on the odd occasion when I caught a quick glance at one. The impression I formed as a kid of Batman was a really dark world where nothing is happy and nice. Now while I know as an adult the world is not as bright and as happy as I thought it was in the naivety of my extreme youth, that initial impression has stayed with me.

With Superman I have almost the opposite problem, and it is very much because I was introduced to the character via two mediums that gave me a conflicted opinion of the character. The films that I originally saw growing up were the Christopher Reeves films. I have the impression that they were quite serious Superhero films, but my main memory is from the 1978 Superman film where Lois Lane dies. This made a massive impression on me, especially given I’d grown up watching Disney where the ‘princess’ lives happily ever after.

I think what really did it for me though is that Superman fixes the problem by flying around the earth quickly enough to change the spin of the axis and turn back time. Honestly, even as a kid I thought this was pretty stupid. If he did that didn’t that mean he’d just undone his defeat of his enemies, not to mention caused massive tidal waves and tectonic stress (I might not have used the word tectonic as a kid, but something along those lines was mentioned)? I also questioned how doing that would actually turn back time? Needless to say I was dubious about the scientific accuracy of how time travel can be made to happen. Having been raised on Back to the Future, and the power of 1980s supercars, I wasn’t convinced.

The other medium where I encountered Superman, was the 90s TV series ‘Lois and Clark: The New Adventures of Superman’. I wasn’t all that old when this was released and my main impression of the show was that it was good, light enough for my parents to let me watch, and nothing to take too seriously. I never really got into Smallville, so my impressions of Superman comes from what I thought of him as a young kid.

To me Superman is a bit of fun and contrasted with Batman, who is dark and grim, I never really gelled with the DC World. I wasn’t aware the two characters were connected together as I was growing up; one of them was someone too serious for me, and the other was someone that I never took seriously. Those were my first impressions of those two heroes, and no matter how much new material I get exposed to, and how many new TV shows or films DC makes, I will always struggle to get rid of those initial impressions.

The thing is with DC though, I know that it can be brilliant. I’ve never been able to watch ‘Arrow’ after I attempted to watch the pilot of the show, which is honestly one of the worst hours of TV I’ve ever tried to endure, but I do know the show after that pilot is very good. My problem is the Green Arrow is too much like Batman for me to be able to connect with him. I’ve also never seriously sat down and seen ‘The Flash’, though the few moments of it I’ve caught does make me think I’d like it. I have hopes for ‘The Legends of Tomorrow’, which via some keen trailer plugging by my other half, does strike me as a DC show I’d actually sit down and watch.

The only DC TV show that I’ve seen is ‘Supergirl’, because I was instantly attracted to watching a show about a super hero where the lead is a woman, who talks with other women about things other than boys (at least most of the time.) From what has been released of Supergirl Series one so far I’m quite happy about where they are going with the character and the messages it can send out to young girls out there about what it means to try and identify yourself as a strong woman of the 21^st Century.

It is exciting, and from what I know of where DC on going with its films I’m generally very excited about what they are planning, namely because I feel as if DC has listened where Marvel has not, and they are making/have made a Wonder Woman film. A Hollywood blockbuster about a superhero, and they have cast a female lead; trust me I read it a few times and watched the trailer more than once to convince myself it was real.

The Marvel Fandom has been crying out for a Black Widow film for years, and those requests have fallen on seemingly deaf ears. I think there was debate for a while about DC not believing the world wanted a female lead, but DC have decided to ‘take the risk’ and are just doing it. (Trust me Marvel, a Black Widow film would work, I even have ideas of what it could be about, and I’d quite happily write it for you.)

And it is this ‘risk’ that has made me pay more attention to my preferences between Marvel and DC. Marvel have had a long term plan with the Marvel Cinematic Universe, and I’m interested in seeing where it is going, but I’m not the only one to have been watching. DC have been watching as well, and have plans of their own to create a large scale film franchise. They have Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight Trilogy and Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel to build upon, and the upcoming Batman Vs Superman: Dawn of Justice looks set to begin what could be DC’s takeover of what the Marvel Cinematic Universe has set up for them.

And in my opinion DC could have up their sleeve something that Marvel hasn’t produced many of over the years; decent, long lasting villains. The upcoming Suicide Squad looks like it’s going to show Marvel’s anti-hero Deadpool what proper bad guys are all about. While my impressions of Batman and Superman may have been tainted by early childhood impressions, my grown up experience tells me one think: DC villains are the absolute best.

They are dangerous, they are proper threats and they are not disposable villains like what Marvel have made over the years. I have an appreciation for the Red Skull; I adore Loki and his trickster ways; Ultron was a bit different as an AI threat; and Thanos is being set up as Marvel’s ultimate bad guy, but DC has the likes of the Joker, Lex Luther and General Zod. None of these villains are easily defeated by the heroes; there is always a cost, and the pat on the back doesn’t come as readily as it does for Marvel heroes. DC can go deeper than Marvel can when it comes to creating darker villains and more complex heroes.

As much as I love Marvel and their films will always draw me to the cinema, DC’s darker side is going to pull me in as well. Given I have a soft spot for the likes of the complex characters like Loki, DCs better selection of complex heroes and properly bad-ass villains might turn me into a DC Girl after all.

 

Film Review: Maleficent

I’m still not convinced by Disney doing live action remakes of their classic films. I am of the generation who grew up when the likes ‘The Little Mermaid’ and ‘Beauty and the Beast’ were being released, while classics like Snow White and Sleeping Beauty were already there to be a staple of my childhood as well. I feel as if Disney are just being lazy in terms of their creativity by remaking films that are already successful. I haven’t seen them all, and I might be convinced if I do watch them, but only if I convince myself they are worth the effort.

However, when it came to Maleficent I was more convinced that Disney were carrying to do something different, by setting it from the perspective of the villain Maleficent, who has always been one of my favourites from the classics. When I heard that the screenwriter, Linda Wolverton, had also based the screenplay on ‘La Belle au Bois Dormant’ by Charles Perrault, the original Sleeping Beauty fairy tale, and not just on the existing Disney animation, I was convinced enough to go to the cinema to see it.

I wasn’t disappointed.

The film is a wonderful re-imagining of the classic tale of Sleeping Beauty. I’m not the biggest fan of Angelina Jolie, but in this film the casting was absolutely perfect and while her costume certainly helped with her screen presence, at no point are you in any doubt that Maleficent is a powerful, strong and yet deeply emotional character. Yes, Maleficent is a villain and she vents her anger towards the king rather unjustly by directing it at Aurora, but over time her regret over that decision sends a powerful message: your actions have consequences.

The other thing I really love about the film, especially in comparison to the animated film, is at Aurora is portrayed as a normal teenager. She is kind spirited, good natured, and she remains an innocent child. She is supposed to be sixteen at the oldest, but at no point is she perceived to be any more grown up than that.

While I loved the Disney films as a child, many of the expectations I had of how grown up I’d be when I reached my late teens, came from Disney Princesses, who were making adult decisions about their future in terms of marriage and love when in truth they are little more than children.

The innocence of Aurora, the reluctance of Phillip to kiss a sleeping and non-consenting girl, and the focus on sort of true love as sixteen year old is mature enough to comprehend and appreciate fully, that between a child and a parent figure, was refreshing to watch.

That combined with the creative force behind the world-building and the re-imagining of the story makes Maleficent a refreshing change from the usual fairy tale story told by Disney.

Film Review: About Time

I am a massive Richard Curtis fan. I also really love Rachel McAdams. So on recently discovering Domhnall Gleeson after his stint as General Hux in Star Wars, I thought it was about time, I actually got around to watching ‘About Time’.

Personally I think it is Richard Curtis’ best film. I know some die-hard Four Weddings and Love Actually fans might argue with me on that one, but please do hear me out. Before ‘About Time’, Richard Curtis’ romantic comedies certainly rank as some of the very best of the genre. I’m not disputing that; only Curtis’ films fill me with a warm fuzzy feeling about love and how the pursuit of love, even in the face of heartache is completely worth it.

The problem is that the majority of romantic comedies follow a very similar formula of ‘will they or won’t they?’ Honestly, after a while it does get boring, and it is only because  the quality of Curtis’ films that keep me coming back again and again to his films.

‘About Time’ though isn’t just about Tim and Mary getting together, it is about how Tim has the ability to travel in time in order to make it happen, and also in order to make it happen even better and better. The chemistry between McAdams and Gleeson is sweet and loving, and one of the most natural of pairings I’ve ever seen in a film. The casting was perfect for the romantic relationship in the film.

What really touched my heart though is that it isn’t just Tim’s relationship with Mary that is focused on by the plot. He has a very strong relationship with his sister Kit Kat as well, and he has to make tough choices about how he uses his time travelling ability in order to help her, but not at the sacrifice of the rest of his life.

The very best relationship he has though is definitely with his father, portrayed by Bill Nighy, who can also travel in time, and has used his ability to ensure that he has the very best life he possibly can have. For me the film centred around Tim’s two most important relationships, with Mary who is his future and his father who is his past.

I adore this film because of all of Curtis’ films, despite the element of time travel, I feel as if it is the most realistic in terms of how couples meet, get together and how we all have to learn with letting go of loved ones through the natural course of time. All of this was beautifully filmed, very well acted and one of the best written romantic comedies I’ve seen in a very long time.

Film Review: Deadpool

I was really very excited about the Deadpool film; the concept of having a more adult themed comic book film appealed to me. It was going to be something different and the humorous marketing campaign gave it a quirky edge.

I got in my seat at the cinema, glad to see it was an all adult audience, many of whom were embracing their fandoms via their clothes. I waited eagerly through the trailers, enjoying that I got to see trailers for different films than the normal fest I get with a younger rating.

The film started, and I hated every single minute of the film. As much as I like Marvel and I like X-men, it turns out that I am not a Deadpool fan.

This is very much a personal opinion though: I’m not keen on the character; I didn’t really like the objectification of Morena Baccarin; I disliked that he thought vanity was more important than personality, though given I didn’t like his personality I could understand his decision; I thought the stereotypical funny side kick, goody two shoes good guy and the moody teenager were completely boring; the villains were great but they weren’t particularly well developed and having a British guy as the antagonist is beyond old.

I was looking for something fresh and new in Deadpool, and instead I ended up more bored than I have ever been watching a comic book film. What was fresh and different about the film was where Deadpool breaks the fourth wall. Generally as a concept I deeply dislike where characters break the fourth wall; it jars me back into reality. I go to the cinema for escapism and I can’t escape into something that reminds me all the time that I’m simply a member of the audience. Reducing the fourth wall to dust only works well when not overdone.

In Deadpool it is constant and downright annoying. However, it is as far as I’ve been told, this is what happens in the comic books. I’ve been told by fans of the comic books that the film is really good and a good adaptation. I’m not going to doubt them and in fact I would recommend the film to most people.

It just wasn’t my cup of tea, to the point I actually wanted to walk out, but that wasn’t the general feeling that I got from everyone else in the cinema with me. They were all laughing so hard I was surprised that there wasn’t as many spilled guts in the cinema as there was on screen.

Book Review: In the Darkness That’s Where I’ll Know You by Luke Smitherd

 

 

The Black Room Story, also know as In the Darkness That’s Where I’ll Know You by Luke Smitherd was originally published as four stories. I read the omnibus edition though, and I feel that it was a full and proper novel. If you’re interested then I definitely recommend the full version.

I was drawn to this story by the logline: ‘There are hangovers, there are bad hangovers, and then there’s waking up inside someone else’s head.’

Having recently tried to diversify my reading this sounded akin to David Levithan’s Everyday which I reviewed last year. The concept of being inside someone’s head is very intriguing to me, and while the similarity between the two works ended at that basic concept, I wasn’t disappointed with how brilliant Luke Smitherd’s book is; I would even say that I enjoyed it more.

Part of the reason I enjoyed it more is because its set in the UK so I immediately could relate to it better, but it was mainly because it was about adults. While I love YA and NA fiction, I’m older than those target audiences. Charlie and Minnie the main characters have a bit more mileage on them than the average age of a YA character. They are in their late 20s/early 30s, and they are still trying to figure out what they want from life.

This is very relateable to many people of my age; waking up inside someone else’s head after a bender would definitely be one hell of a wake up call for us, and that is exactly what happens to Charlie. He has a bender, fuelled a bit by drugs, and wakes up inside Minnie’s head.

From that moment on the reader is drawn in and intrigued about why it is happening in the first place; why it is happening to Charlie and Minnie specifically; and how it is ever going to end. As much as they come to respect one another, it isn’t an ideal situation to find oneself in; as it turns out events that are happening are even more complicated and complex than Charlie and Minnie first imagine.

It is very rare for a book to be able to surprise me with it’s ‘twist’: I usually roll my eyes because I had see the twist coming from a mile off. While I was able to use my experience of science-fiction to guess why there was differences between Charlie’s reality and Minnie’s reality, I never saw the biggest twist coming.

In fact I had thought the book had gotten a bit samey and comfortable about two pages before the biggest reveal of the book smacked me across the face and made me utter OMG! (Anyone who knows me, knows I rarely use OMG! unless genuinely prompted to do so).

This book is crafted beautifully, just enough is revealed by Smitherd to want to make you keep reading, and the twists in the book are just sublime. It will make you think, keep you on the edge of your seat, and ever so slightly break your heart.

I love that I have discovered this book and this author, and I’m eager to read more by him.