Sunday 23 June 2013

World War Z

 
It is not often I get to make the disclaimer that I have read the book before seeing the film.  It is important that I admit now that WWZ is one of my favourite books.  This is by way of an apology for this review turning into a rant but not for the content of said rant.
It is quite the achievement that one of my favourite books has become one of my least anticipated films in recent memory.  WWZ had been stuck in development hell for years, was subject to countless reshoots and when I first viewed the trailer a little piece of my heart withered and died.
PLOT:  A zombie virus has broken out on a global scale.  The world is falling apart and former UN employee Jerry (Brad Pitt) travels from country to country in an attempt to discover the source of the virus.  The world goes to shit and everyone loses the ability to swear.  The smartest person in the world trips and accidentally shoots himself.  The source is found in Wales.  The door is left wide open for a sequel but the hint is accompanied by a brass band and flashing neon signs.  END PLOT
The plot is so far removed from the source material it feels like the writers read WWZ and wrote the script on Opposite Day. 
The storyline of the film captures nothing of the emotional first-hand encounters contained in the book and instead focuses on the story of one man’s globetrotting adventure to find the source and thereafter the cure.
The worldwide scale works well in the book and we follow the story of the different characters from start to finish.  The film seemed to have missed the point of this entirely as the scale is there, it is just devoid of any emotion, drama or tension and that important ingredient – characters.
Brad Pitt is fine as Jerry but he is lumbered with wooden dialogue and despite being the “hero” he is given absolutely nothing to do other than look bemused and accessorise with jaunty scarves. 
The action ranges from nameless extras running from CGI zombies to CGI zombies chasing nameless extras.  The constant running around and zippy camera movements did create a sense of chaos but it didn’t add anything to the film as it was just a sea of faces that I didn’t know or care about.
The set pieces felt lazy and the woeful grand finale inside the WHO consisted of approximately ten zombies.  The finale did try to slow things down but unfortunately the change in pace still didn’t manage to create any tension.  It was never believable that Jerry was in any real danger.
I will concede that zombies on a plane is a terrifying thought.  This was the best part of the film.  I have a fear of flying so that section was always going to make me feel on edge.
The mass hordes of CGI zombies looked like something from an old computer game with the “climbing the wall” section in Israel being as bad as the trailer predicted.  The makeup and prosthetics from the few zombies we saw up close in the WHO were poor.  The effects on The Walking Dead have made a big budget production seem like amateur hour. 

It looked as bad as I feared. 
 
There are very few onscreen deaths and when there is a kill the camera cuts just before it is made.  There is no blood.  There is nothing.  Two hours of undiluted nothing.
WWZ has very few redeeming qualities:
As a zombie film World War Z is devoid of any tension, emotion or scares and gets 2/10.
As an adaptation of a book World War Z is a catastrophic mess in which all involved should hang their heads in shame – 0/10

This has become my most hated film.  I would happily watch Scott Pilgrim if it meant avoiding sitting through WWZ once more.

Much Ado About Nothing

 
Joss Whedon adapts William Shakespeare’s Much Ado About Nothing.
The film advertises itself.
PLOT:  Love is in the air in the home of Leonato (Clark Gregg) when his daughter Hero (Jillian Morgese) falls for Claudio (Fran Kranz).  As their wedding day approaches jealous Don John (Sean Maher) conspires to split up the happy couple.  Meanwhile Beatrice (Amy Acker) bickers with Benedict (Alexis Denisof) unaware that Leonato, Claudio and Don Pedro (Reed Diamond) are manipulating them in the hope that they will fall in love.  END PLOT
Adapting Shakespeare’s original text in a modern day setting is always a risking move.  Joss Whedon did it on an eleven day shoot in his own home (wiki) and made it look easy.
The dialogue and pacing runs at break neck speed. It took me a few minutes to get into the flow of the film, but once I did, I was engrossed. 
Despite being written over 500years ago the wit and comedy feels fresh and there were a few emotional moments thrown in for good measure.  The comedy ranges from witty zingers to broad slapstick with very few jokes, if any, missing their marks.
The cast is a who’s who of Joss Whedon’s back catalogue however they have been cast on their own merits.  Amy Acker, Alexis Denisof and Clark Gregg are all excellent and Sean Maher pops up as a moody Don John
As expected Nathan Fillion steals the show and earns the biggest laughs however Alexis Denisof is close behind on the giggle stakes with will some brilliantly timed slapstick.
Much Ado About Nothing is shot in black and white and despite the simple cinematography it looks stunning.  The camera felt a bit too shaky at times but this is only a minor quibble for the sake of having something to complain about.
Much Ado About Nothing is simple filmmaking at its finest.  It gets a 9/10.    

Byzantium

 
Byzantium is a film which has been given a limited release with next to know fanfare.  This is a crying shame and a spectacular waste.
PLOT:  Vampires Clara (Gemma Arterton) and Ella (Saoirse Ronan) have been on the run from the mysterious Brotherhood for several hundred years.  After almost getting caught they hide out Byzantium, a rundown coastal hotel.  Clara turns the hotel into a brothel to make money and Ella joins a local school and befriends Frank (Caleb Landry Jones).   As Clara and Ella's' web of lies begins to unravel the Brotherhood finally catches up with them.  END PLOT.
Byzantium is a slow burner but not for one second was I ever bored or able to take my eyes off the screen.  The film suited the slow pace but the steady build up meant that the final ten minutes was brilliantly stressful and tense.
The plot deals with family relationships and vampire mythology but manages to make familiar themes feel fresh.  The relationship between Ella and Frank shows that when it is in the right hands forbidden teen romance works; as does the fractured relationship between Clara and Ella.
I have always been a fan of Saoirse Ronan and although she did have a few accent problems at the beginning of the film but they settled down very quickly.   Ronan’s performance was as strong as expected but it was Gemma Arterton who stole the show.  Arterton is always fun to watch but in Byzantium she proved that she is also a very good actress.
Jonny Lee Millar (The Captain) and Sam Riley (Darvell) were lumbered with limited roles and unfortunately Caleb Landry Jones strayed into overacting but it doesn’t really matter as they were very much supporting players.
There is very little action until the very end of the film but Byzantium is not stingy on the gore with the film containing one of the best “deaths by razor-wire” scenes since… erm…. Ghostship.   
A film with vampires requires blood and the differing attitudes of Clara and Ella in respect of how they feed and who they choose to feed upon added another layer to the characters.
One thing a vampire film should never scrimp on is the blood and Byzantium does not disappoint.  There is plenty of blood however the blood spurts from an accidental cut were a bit over the top – on the other hand the blood waterfall looked absolutely stunning.
 
Neil Jordan is no stranger to vampire films and it is hard to fault anything about this one.  Byzantium deserves to be a sleeper hit and it is one of the best films I have viewed in a long time.  This film will appear in my top ten films for 2013.  Byzantium gets 9.5/10.

Despicable Me 2

 
The cute kids and hilariously bizarre minions meant that Despicable Me was an easy film to fall in love with.
The sequel although inevitable was not unwelcome.
PLOT:  Now settled with Margot (Miranda Cosgrove), Edith (Dana Gaier) and Agnes (Elsie Kate Fisher) Gru (Steve Carell) is living the life as a happily retired villain.  The family setting is interrupted when Gru is recruited by the Anti-Villain League to catch a criminal who is hiding out in a local mall.  END PLOT
The plot of Despicable Me 2 doesn’t miss a single beat in terms of predictability.  The script covers family drama, mother issues, father issues, dating issues and of course self-acceptance.   There are a lot of plot threads contained within the 98min (IMDB) running time.  A little bit of trimming here and there would have tightened up the film and brought it down to a solid 90mins.
The story-line is a paint by numbers affair but as soon as you sense the monotony creeping in the ridiculously adorable Agnes or the minions appear on screen.  Despicable Me is a simple premise but cleverly knows when to play its ace cards.
Steve Carell is excellent as Gru and more importantly the voice work of Miranda Cosgrove, Dana Gaier and Elsie Kate Fisher is perfect.
The humour is a mixed bag.  I will never find fart joke humour funny and I didn’t hear shrieks of laughter coming from the younger members of the audience.  Perhaps it is time to retire this particular brand of comedy.  It is lazy.
There are some witty one liners but as expected the vast majority of the giggles comes from the minions.
The animation is similar to the first film however it isn’t up there with Dreamworks or Pixar.  This isn’t a criticism as Despicable Me 2 is a bright and colourful film.  I commend it for not being released in 3D.
Despicable Me 2 was everything I expected it to be.  I have a real affection for the first film and the sequel lived up to the hype.  It didn’t surpass the original though – it just lacked that extra something special.  Despicable Me 2 gets a very respectable 7.5/10.

Sunday 16 June 2013

The Ultimate CANDYMAN Uber-Extravaganza

 
I am not a horror blogger.  I do enjoy watching horror films but they are usually 12A cinema releases or random straight to dvd releases that have been recommended by those who are much more knowledgeable about the genre than I.
When the opportunity came along to do a group review of Candyman I jumped at the chance as Candyman is one of the first proper horror films that I watched. 
This particular review is split into three sections, the first of which is my review written in my usual low standards.  I recommend skimming part 1 and reading parts 2 and 3 which are written by the lovely Maynard Morrissey and Kweeny Todd.
Part 1:  Karina Bamber
"I first watched Candyman at a sleepover when I was no more than 12 years old.  I am now 27 and even to this day I will not tempt fate by uttering Candyman anyway near a mirror.
I was obviously far too young when I watched the film so it was interesting to see how my mature adult mind would cope with a film that absolutely terrified me as a child.
PLOT:  Helen (Virginia Madsen) is writing a thesis based on modern folklore when she stumbles upon the local urban legend of the Candyman (Tony Todd), a vengeful spirit with a hook for a hand.  Helen is rightfully sceptical but when her research takes her to a rundown inner city area she finds that the residents truly believe in the story and that there may be some truth to the legend.  END PLOT
Candyman is a slow burner with the first half of the film focusing on Helen’s research into the legend.  This helps to keep the film grounded as Helen is not a shrieking, idiotic teenager; she is an educated woman writing a thesis. 
Once the Candyman finally arrives the pace picks up however the film never descends into a violent slasher – oddly the final scene is the only moment when Candyman ever feels like a traditional horror film. 
There are no true scares but the eerie tone does make for some unsettling viewing – I can see why, at 12 years old, the film scared the hell out of me.  As an adult the film plays out like a psychological thriller with a hefty dose of the fear of the unknown and word of mouth hysteria thrown in for good measure.
The theme of social/racial class is a prominent feature but unfortunately it is laid on with a trowel.  Luckily the performances of Vanessa Williams and DeJuan Guy are strong which means that their characters are not completely reduced to stereotypes.
Virginia Madsen is excellent as Helen as it Tony Todd however he isn’t required to do much other than provide sinister narration.  Todd commits fully to the role and his scene with the bees feels like it lasts forever.  It was not pleasant to watch.
The unsettling tone of film is helped by the simple yet creepy score – Music Box and The Slave Quarters are excellent but it is the instantly memorable Helen’s Theme that really stands out.  I have, rather predictably, now added the soundtrack to my i-pod.
 Candyman absolutely terrified me as a kid however re-watching the film as an adult has made me realise that it is a lot cleverer than typical horror movie fare.  It gets 8/10. 
Will there be a time that I could ever say Candyman in the bathroom mirror? No. "
 
Part 2: Maynard Morrissey
Maynard has been the reason that I usually go over my dvd budget for quite some time now.  He hasn't recommended a bad film yet!

"I laugh at everyone who claims that the 90s were a bad decade for horror. Why? Because it's just not true! Of course, the 90s weren't as "productive" as the 80s and they certainly didn't spawn as many classics as the 60s, 70s or 80s did, but hey: the 90s brought us many, many movies that are as timeless as older stuff. Think about "New Nightmare", the "Scream" trilogy, "From Dusk Till Dawn", "Jurassic Park", "The Crow", "Stir Of Echoes" etc. etc. …

...and another one, one that often gets overseen for reasons I'm not sure of. Hell, even I almost forgot about it! I'm obviously speaking of the mighty "Candyman",
Bernard Rose's fantastic adaptation of Clive Barker's short story "The Forbidden". I remember the day when it "arrived" in our local rental store back in 1993. The cover differed immensely from all the other VHS's in the horror section; the image of the huge shadow figure with the hook deeply impressed me and there was something really haunting about the German title [Candyman's Fluch = Candyman's Curse].

I watched it together with my parents a few weeks later, and we all loved the hell out of it. It scared us a lot, but it also made us joking around with mirrors and hook-like items :)
 
Then it disappeared off my radar (just like Beatlejuice did and I didn't see it for almost 20 years - until I found a cheap copy in the bargain bin a few weeks ago. I was browsing through the DVDs, not expecting to find anything worthwhile - and suddenly, the cover of "Candyman" jumped at me. I immediately felt like I was 11 years old again, the little boy who stood in the horror section of the old rental store, looking at that cover for what felt like hours.
 
I took the DVD, bought it and left the shop feeling like a king. And now that I finally re-watched it, I feel even better :-)
 
My goodness, "Candyman" is such an incredible and outstanding-looking movie! It's intelligent, excellently made, highly thought-provoking and SCARY AS HELL!! It's such a shame that director / writer Bernard Rose never made another film like that. The direction is pitch perfect, plot and script are unique and completely unpredictable, and the look of the movie is simply striking. Also, love the awesome build-up: the first half is eerie and thrilling, the second half ranges from mysterious to frightening, from brutal to batshit insane. The ending is amazing, not only because of a simple but immensely effective twist, but also because it's unexpectedly strong and wonderfully over-the-top.

"Candyman" possesses an uncanny atmosphere that is completely unique in horror. I've never seen anything like that. The bizarre opening (gigantic bee swarm over Chicago) sets a haunting tone that carries on throughout the whole movie. The shabby, rundown and graffiti-covered apartment buildings at the Cabrini-Green housing project all look extremely eerie and gave me an uneasy feeling because I instantly thought of a few similarly eerie buildings in my area.

Also, the movie is able to make your dwelling place a lot more scarier. What if I look into one of my mirrors and say "Candyman" five times? Will he really come and get me? What's with the medicine chest in my bathroom? Is it connected to the apartment next door? What if someone crawls through it into my apartment?

Maestro Philip Glass ("Koyaanisqatsi") composed a stunningly beautiful and totally exceptional score with lots of intriguing organs and spooky choirs. At times, it feels like it was created for a religious horror film like "Omen" or "Exorcist".

Anthony B. Richmond's ("The Man Who Fell The Earth") smooth cinematography / camera work is powerful and breathtaking. Lots of great angles, many superb bird's-eye shots, and tons of creepy images that will cling to you long after watching (the huge and fucking scary Candyman-Graffiti, the arrow on the wall that points down to the bee-filled toilet, undead Helen...).  The costumes all look simply beautiful, make-up / gore effects are brilliantly done.

The uber-gorgeous
Virgina Madsen gives a compelling and authentic performance as Helen, a curious college student who tries to finish her thesis on urban legends. Tony Todd, the man with the creepiest voice in horror, is stellar as Candyman, one of the most fascinating horror icons in history. Candyman a.k.a Daniel Robitaille, son of a slave on a New Orleans plantation, a poor sod who got tortured and killed by a lynch mob (sawed off his hand, poured honey over his body, getting stung to death by bees), but ultimately resurrected as restless ghost who became a myth and can be summoned by saying his name five times into a mirror.

More great acting:
Vanessa Williams as lonely mother Anne-Marie, Kasi Lemmons as Helen's college fellow Bernie, and Xander Berkeley as Helen's cheating husband.

"Candyman" = a top-notch horror film, a modern classic, a work of art.  9,5/10"
 
 
Part 3: Kweeny Todd
I don't think Ms Todd will take offence when I say that she is a relatively new blogging friend.  It is a testament to the variety of people you are introduced to through the world of blogging!
A Love Letter to Candyman
"Hello my darling!
 
It’s me again Kweeny. I know I've written you many letters, but I figure if I write enough of them it would be the same as calling your name in the mirror 5 times.  This is my fifth letter. Maybe when this reaches you we will finally be together…or you’ll gut me with your hook.  Both options excite me honestly.
 
In all my letters I profess my love to you, but I feel a little sad that you've never crooned a word at me in your sensual voice. Not even one soft syllable to tickle my ear and make me want to be your victim. Hell, I NEED to be your victim. To have you torment me as you did Helen, driving her to the point of madness, dog-killing and baby kidnapping would be divine. Okay, maybe YOU killed the dog and took the baby, but I don’t care about that really. All I want is for you to understand that I would be better suited to you than Helen ever could be.
 
First off, she didn't believe you were real, and because of this, tried to disprove your existence. This only mad your job harder didn't it my love? You had to steal that baby and frame her, just so she would have to face you in a showdown at the end. And after you go through all the trouble of proving that you’re real, she betrays you. She never wanted to stay with you, never understood your message or your plight.
 
I do. I understand what “Sweets to the Sweet” really means.
 
And sure, my only friend thinks I’m crazy for loving you. He says you’re not real either. But he’s a demonic spirit trapped in my head with a pension for meat pies and razors. He really doesn't get to comment on my choices for a mate.
 
Though I do have other friends, and I shouldn't forget them. I sometimes wonder if they really are my friends, or just hallucinations I developed from being a werewolf possessed by a demon barber. My friends include a super intelligent bear and a Jester who escaped a mental ward…but they tell me I might scare you away if you actually met me. Mad Jester says you’ll take one look at my razors and toss your hook away in shame. Lord Bearington just claims I’m a stalker. But Sweeney says it’s not stalking if I can’t crawl into your bedroom window and watch you sleep! Going to Cabrini–Green and sleeping in piles of candy with razors in them doesn't make me a stalker! It makes me devoted!
 
No one appreciates true devotion these days…except maybe Clive Barker.
 
Well my darling, I should end this letter. I have a beehive to kick, and a hand to cut off. I have to say, the last time I did this I regenerated it all back after my shift. I make a terrible vengeful spirit I’m afraid. Being cursed as I am already means that if I pile too many curses on, some start negating each other. It’s rather sad. I’m trying to collect the whole set.
 
Forever enslaved to love…
 
And constantly getting stung by bees,
 
~Kweeny Todd"


As you can see we have three very different reviews but one very solid conclusion - Candyman is most definitely worth your time!!
 

ENJOY!

Man of Steel

 
When the Superman trailer arrived it was greeted with nothing more than a casual shoulder shrug.  I probably used the word “meh”.  Superman is a superhero that has never held any appeal.  I haven’t seen the Christopher Reeve adaptations, I remember enough about the tv show to know that I was not a fan and the previous reboot bored me rigid. 
There was no exciting build up to Man of Steel but I always accepted that I would see it in the cinema.  I had to have low expectations to give the film a sporting chance.
PLOT:  As the planet Krypton is dying Jor:El (Russell Crowe) ships his infant son Kal-El to earth to save him.  The child is adopted by Jonathan (Kevin Coster) and Martha Kent (Diane Lane) who raise the child as their own son, Clarke Kent.  A side effect of living on earth gives Clarke super strength which he struggles to control as he grows up and into the rather dashing Henry Cavill.  Clarke’s secret is short lived when a surviving native of Krypton General Zod (Michael Shannon) threatens to destroy earth unless Clarke surrenders to the General.  END PLOT
Man of Steel is very much an origins story but unfortunately this is at the expense of an actual plot.  The origin aspect of the film flows well with a significant portion of the film focusing on Clarke’s upbringing on Krypton and with the Kents however once Clarke reaches adulthood he becomes almost an afterthought.
Clarke Kent puts on the suit and before you can say training montage he transforms into Superman.  The transformation rendered Superman speechless as Henry Cavill didn't have anything to say for most of the final act.  Despite the title character having absolutely nothing to do other than look good in fitted tees Henry Cavill is very good in the little screen time he gets. 
Amy Adams is fine as Lois Lane and does the best she can with the “pushy, nosey, independent female journalist” cliché.  It felt like Lois Lane got the vast majority of the screen time which surprised me.
Russell Crowe and Kevin Coster add some class to the film but, as one could have predicted, Michael Shannon steals the show.  General Zod deserved some sympathy after we discover that ensuring the survival of the Kryptonians is the only reason he was born.  The idea of Zod being a product of Krypton’s failings was handled well and Shannon’s angry eyebrowed performance added some drama to an almost drama free 2hours 23mins (IMDB).
The sets and costumes were as expected but nothing stood out as being particularly remarkable.  The best design feature in the entire production was removing Superman’s bright red briefs.
The action was again as expected however there was a noticeable lack of jaw dropping moments.  The set piece in the third act was too long and became a CGI mess in which Superman, Zod and several other nameless Kryptonians spent a good half hour throwing each other through buildings.  It was impressive the first time. It was repetitive by the second.  I was bored by the ninth.  There is however an opportunity for a drinking game in which you take a swig each time Superman ge­­ts thrown through a building.  You will contract liver poisoning in the space of thirty minutes.
As Superman and General Zod became lost in the melee it meant that the random subplot known as “Jenny’s bad day downtown” stuck out like a sore thumb.  I appreciate that Laurence Fishburne can be considered a big name actor but to shoehorn scenes with Perry and his staff during the climactic battle between Superman and Zod was completely unnecessary.  I will concede that Laurence Fishburne outrunning a falling skyscraper was the (unintentional) comedy highlight in a humour free film.
I saw Man of Steel in 2D and my eyes found it hard to keep up with the blurry CGI action.  I thank the gods that I did not even consider 3D.  The action needed to adopt a less is more attitude. 
Man of Steel had many flaws but as an origins story it did a commendable job of laying the groundwork for a new run of Superman films. It gets 6.5/10.  The balance of screen time and the action sequences need to be addressed as Man of Steel didn’t leave me wanting a sequel. It left me wanting a film which actually features Superman...........as someone who has never held any interest in Superman before this is a success.