Showing posts with label Eddie Redmayne. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Eddie Redmayne. Show all posts

Thursday, 5 January 2017

2016: My Year in Review (plus a couple of films i haven't blogged about)

2016 Scholarships
 
Hello dear reader, well it’s time to play catch up on 2016. Below you’ll find my top five films of the year and also five films that I managed to miss. I’ll also be taking the time to tell you about two films I saw towards the end of the year and didn’t have time to blog about, including the excuses why I didn't as well.
 
The first film I failed to tell the world about was Arrival. This was one of those odd films that crept up on me and that I didn’t know much about until about two months before its release date. However, once I had heard of it, it seemed to be everywhere. Directed by Denis Villeneuve, who was responsible for 2015’s Sicario and who has been given the big chair for this year’s Blade Runner sequel, it tells the tale of a potentially non-hostile alien race that ‘arrive’ on earth. Their arrival comes in the form of twelve spaceships that take up positions over various locations all over the globe and then just hover there, exactly that same way that cars don’t. The U.S. government decides that communication, not conflict is the way forward and hires the best Linguistics Professor they can get their hands on. Louise Banks, played by Amy Adams, is the Professor in question and with the help of a Theoretical Physicist Ian Donnelly, played by Jeremy Renner, they set about trying to make sure things don’t deteriorate with other governments and the ships that they are dealing with. Throw in a military operation run by Forest Whitaker, a few flash backs and some wibbly wobbly timey wimey stuff and that’s basically Arrival in a nut shell. I can’t really get into the story any further without getting heavily into spoiler territory but I would say that it’s a film that’s worth watching.
Arrival is an odd film. A lot of reviews I’ve read for it have tagged it with the ‘thinking man’s’ Sci-Fi film label. That’s a little unfair to be honest. It certainly isn’t a film that is full of flashy special effects and alien’s hell bent on world domination, like Independence Day for example. It is however a film that is character and story driven. It doesn’t waste money on frivolous things like an extensive colour pallet or creating huge sound stages that get used only once. Instead it uses rolling fields and oceans as its back drop and is also a film that doesn’t seem to be in any rush to tell its story. It will almost certainly garner Amy Adams an Oscar nod although from what I’ve read she’s ultimately likely to lose out to Natalie Portman for Jackie. To sum Arrival up I’d say that you will never have watched a Sci-fi film like it before and it will stimulate the little grey cells when you watch it. It’s also one of those rare films that almost certainly won’t get a sequel, not because it didn’t make enough money but simply because it’s a completely self-contained story. Make time to see it. You’ll be glad you did.
The second film on my tardy correspondence list is Fantastic Profits and Where to Find Them, or something like along those lines. For those of you how don’t know or for that matter don’t care. This is a film that is set in the same universe as the previous forty seven Harry Potter films. Now, I should say for the record that it may look like, given that preceding introduction, I’m not the biggest fan of J.K. Rowling and all things Voldemort, Muggle and Magic. This could not be further from the truth. I own all of the forty seven previous aforementioned films on Blu ray and not one of them is currently doubling as a coaster. My problem with these films although I consider them to be good, I just don’t see them as great. Yes I know I’m not really the demographic they’re aimed at and there’s as much chance as me jumping on the HP merchandising bandwagon as there is me being used a Vidal Sassoon model but as films judged on their own merits, they’re all three or four star films at best.
Fantastic Beasts follows the main character Newt (not the one from Aliens) Scamander and his trip to New York. Armed only with his trusted wand and with a suitcase that could quite easily give the Tardis a run for its money in the ‘open plan’ stakes, Newt finds himself very quickly embroiled in the local wizard vs No-Majs secrecy battles and before you can say “I hope nothing escapes from that case of his” lots of things, well three to be exact, have escaped and disappeared faster than a rat up an aqueduct. The film then follows Newt’s attempts to recapture these beasts and not let the general public in on the fact that there are is also some fairly dark and evil magic roaming around the Manhattan. As per usual with these films they have a great cast. To start we have Oscar winner Eddie Redmayne as the aforementioned Newt. Add to this Colin Farrell, Jon Voight, Samantha Morton, Ron Pearlman, an almost unrecognisable Ezra Miller and Johnny Depp (although I wouldn’t be at all surprised if his part is recast for the next film and other sequels that have already been green lit) and you have the makings of a great ensemble cast. My main problem with this film is its running time. Two hours and thirteen minutes isn’t exactly what you call a long film. That’s precisely the same time Rogue One had. However, Rogue one didn’t feel like twenty minutes could have been lifted out of its second act without it having any detrimental effect on its story or characters, Fantastic Beasts did. It is Rowling’s first foray into screenwriting and you’d expect her to be able to write these characters better than anyone else available, given that she created them in the first place but it did feel at times as though something was missing. Redmayne seems to spend the majority of the movie trying to do his best Hugh Grant ‘bumbling but loveable’ impression that Mr Grant had down pat for most of the previous twenty years and Colin Farrell just seems to be acting by numbers during certain parts. For those of you who are interested in this film universe I suspect you will have already parted with your hard earnt pennies and taken yourself off to your nearest multiplex to watch this film. I for one would have probably waited for the dvd release but I think seeing it on the big screen was probably a good thing. The third act is crammed with more special effects than you’d find at an Industrial Light & Magic convention and although the film wasn’t scored by John Williams, James Newton Howard had baton duties this time, it certainly filled the room I was sat in without any problems at all.
 
So, now we’ve played catch up, I can get down the best films I’ve seen this year. I thought long and hard about this, placed ads stating that I’d be willing to take bribes to include certain titles and even considered just pulling names out of a hat but In the long run I decided that honesty was the best policy and so, without further ado, I present to you my top five movies of 2016 that I thought were bestest.
 
1: Spotlight
2: Victoria
3: Arrival
4: The Big Short
5: Captain America: Civil War
 
Civil War was one of those films that shouldn’t have worked. Far too many characters to keep interesting and way to much visually to fit in, even with a running time of about two and a half hours. However not only does work, it showed that Marvel were and are leaps and bounds ahead of what DC are trying to do. If you’ve seen Batman v Superman or Suicide Squad, you’ll understand precisely what I mean. The reboot of Spider-man not only worked but pretty much stole the show and the script was sharper than a sharp thing, on national sharp day in sharp land.
The Big Short is a story about capitalism at its finest. If you can get past the fact that Christian Bale is playing the smartest person in the room, gets his hair styled at supercuts and has some pretty serious commitment issues when it comes to shoes, then you’ll probably enjoy this film. Based around the financial recession that hit back in 2008 and the subsequent collapse that followed. It tells the story of how, to quote Gordon Gekko “Greed works” and what lengths people will go to in order to make money, even when that comes at the detriment of others.
Next is Arrival and as I mentioned earlier it’s a Science Fiction film that doesn’t really like conforming to the genre it’s sitting in. It also proves that any passing aliens that do turn up on our door step should be just as scared of us as we are of them.
At number two we find Victoria, which I blogged about last year. In short it’s a two hour film about a Spanish woman who’s recently moved to Berlin. Now, that may not sound like a film you’d want to invest over one hundred and twenty minutes of your life in but when I tell you that the entire film is just one single shot and includes a night club, a bank robbery and a shootout with the police, you should change your mind. Seriously, go and watch it. It’s simple, it’s unique and it’s a piece of film making brilliance. This leads me to my film of the year.
Spotlight is a film that does something that shouldn’t really be possible. It takes a subject matter that shouldn’t be watchable, not only watchable but also compelling. The Boston Globes ‘Spotlight’ team look into allegations of child abuse in the Catholic Church. The further they look into these allegations the more apparent it becomes that there has been an extensive cover up, going back decades, in order to keep these accusations from ever seeing the light of day. Along with Keaton the cast also includes, Mark Ruffalo, Rachel McAdams, Live Schreiber, John Slattery and Stanley Tucci. If you’re not keen on plot driven stories and acting of the highest calibre then this film probably isn’t for you.  If you like your films to be a bit more ‘bang for your buck’ the closest this film comes to an action scene is when someone does some photocopying. Despite the very heavy tone and subject matter of Spotlight it’s a film that should be watched, it’s a film that should be praised and it’s a film that should be championed as much a humanly possible. It’s also worth noting that for the second year in a row Michael Keaton  has found himself playing a major part in the Best Picture Oscar winner, the first being Birdman. After several years in the wilderness it looks like Hollywood may have actually realised that Keaton can not only act but he can cat very well. Long may this revival continue…
 
Now, its excuses time. There were films that were released last year that for various reasons, namely lack of time, three week holidays to the other side of the planet and having a boat load of good TV to get through first (Game of Thrones, West World, Stranger Things, Home Under The Hammer etc) that I never got around to watching. There is of course no way I can put these in any particular order of preference but I have heard from people, whose opinion that I hold in very high regard, that some of these are simply brilliant. I do plan on rectifying the whole ‘not having seen them’ issue pronto quick but if you do have a spare evening and are at a loose end as to what to watch, may I put forth the following five films as genuine bona-fide recommendations. 
Firstly we have Hateful Eight, which is the second in a promised trilogy of westerns from Quentin Tarantino. The first of course being Django Unchained. I could speculate about the plot of Hateful Eight but having not seen it I’d just be shooting in the dark. I think I’m safe in saying it doesn’t have anything to do with the Fantastic 4 fighting their own evil clones in the middle of a Wyoming winter. I do know that as per usual, for a QT film, its cast is abounding with A-list talent. Kurt Russell, Jennifer Jason Leigh, Samuel L Jackson, Tim Roth and Bruce Dern, to name but a few.  It’s a shade over three hours long and has an eighteen certificate so I’d expect there to be quite a lot of the red stuff splattered around the screen and probably best avoided by the squeamish.
Next we have Hacksaw Ridge. Directed by Mel Gibson, which I’m sure will automatically make it a no-show for some people but if you can past the politics and religion issues then I am told that as war movies go it’s found itself nestling in quite a few well regarded critics all-time top ten in the film genre. Staring Andrew Garfield it tells the tale of U.S. army medic Desmond T Doss who served during the battle of Okinawa and refused to kill anyone. Thus becoming the first American soldier in history to win the medal of honour without firing a single shot.
Option three is Hunt for the Wilderpeople. This is a film that caught many by surprise and probably slipped past most people’s radars completely. Written and  Directed by Taika Waititi, who also took on both duties for What We Do in the Shadows, it’s a story about a rebellious kid and his foster uncle, who go missing in the New Zealand bush. These two characters, played by Julian Dennison and Sam Neil respectively have won over pretty much every reviewer that’s gone to see it and it has been repeatedly mentioned as the feel good movie of the year. It’s also worth noting that Waititi has been given the directorial reigns over Thor: Ragnarok, which is due to arrive in cinemas at the end of October. It seems like he’s building up quite the CV and it will be interesting to see what he takes on next.
Fourthly come Room. A story about a mother and son who are locked in a room. She creates a whole universe for him inside the confines of the four walled prison that they find themselves trapped in and is steadfast in her unwillingness to let that stop her from raising him to the best of her ability. They plan an escape and this brings them face-to-face with what may turn out to be the scariest thing yet: the real world. The mother is played by Brie Larson and it won her last year’s Oscar for best performance by an actress in a leading role. It also may have helped her land the part of Carol Danvers or Captain Marvel as she’s also known in the self-titled MCU film that’s due in 2019.
Lastly on my list of shame for not watching is Hell or High Water. Now I suspect I’d be right in saying that of the five films I’ve listed here, this is almost certainly going to be the one that most people will know little about or nothing about. Staring Chris Pine and Jeff Bridges, it’s a story about two brothers, one of which has just been released from prison and their struggles to raise enough money to save their ranch and pay off the mortgage attached to it. Their struggles come in the form of bank robberies and this brings them to the attention of Texas Ranger Marcus Hamilton (Bridges). On a quick side note, should you ever be offered a choice between hell or high water, always go for the high water. It has to be by far the more preferable choice. Unless of course your particular skillset doesn’t yet include floating. The more astute of you will have noticed that four out of five of those movies all start with the letter H. I can assure you that it’s all purely coincidental and that I didn’t spend all of 2016 being overtly hostile to anything that started with the letter H. I am not H’ist in any way at all.
 
So that concludes 2016 and my trips to the local picture house. I hope you enjoy these little written reviews and I also hope they entertain and occasionally raise the odd smile. I do try and keep these blogs light hearted and I don’t pretend to think that at the end of the day it’s anything other than my opinion. There will be more over the course of 2017 and I’m sure they will cover the good the bad and the indifferent. Thanks for your time and attention and as for my next blog. Keep watching the skies…

Sunday, 11 January 2015

The Theory of Everything


I'm going to start with a confession. I originally didn't want to see this film. From when I first became aware of The Theory of Everything to seeing its trailer I just had at best a lukewarm reaction to it. I suspect a lot of people, like myself, categorise films when they first here about them or stumble across a teaser trailer into 'must see', 'I'll wait for the dvd', 'take it or leave it' and ‘not interested in the slightest’. This last category is where movies go to die as far as a I’m concerned and should I ever compile a list of said films to be avoided ‘at all costs’  it would include such gems as ‘The Twilight Franchise, Hugh Grant Rom-Coms (so basically every film he’s ever made) and Borat . There will of course be variations on a theme here. Some people may have lots more categories, some people less but for me The Theory of Everything definitely fell into the 'take it or leave it' pile. 
Time for confession number two. I can't really put my finger on why. It has a great cast, Eddie Redmayne, Felicity Jones, Davis Thewlis, Emily Watson to name but a few. From what I saw in the trailer it looked like it was going to be an accurate portrayal of Stephen Hawkins life story. It appeared to look authentic with regards to the time period the story is set in. It had the feel of a film that had had a lot of money thrown at it and a film that wasn’t going to be lacking when it came to production values. The closest reason I can come up with for not being interested in watching this movie, which doesn’t paint me in a particularly favourable light, is that I wasn’t sure that I would be comfortable watching someone struggle with a disease that ultimately takes control of him and leaves him dependant on others. 
Time for confession number three. I was completely and utterly wrong.
For whatever the reasons were I decided that I didn’t want to see it I can only say this. I’m going to be a lot more open to suggestion and prodding from my significant other when it comes to taking trips down to my local multiplex. 

The Theory of Everything is a story based on the book that Jane Hawking, Stephen’s first  wife, wrote after they separated. (Sorry, spoiler) It tells the tale form when they first met at Cambridge in 1963 to Stephen receiving his CBE from the Queen in the early eighties. It shows Hawking and his brilliant academic mind slowly losing control of his body and succumbing to Motor Neurone Disease. A short aside here. I didn’t know that ‘Lou Gehirg’s Disease’ and Motor Neurone Disease where the same thing. You learn something new every day. 

At the films core it’s a love story. A story of struggle and compassion and the sacrifice it takes to care for someone who is slowly losing physical control. A chronicle about a marriage and the struggle of a wife who is having to balance the twenty hour care Hawking needs with raising a family and somehow finding the inner strength to do both. The film lives and dies with its two central performances. Eddie Redmayne, whose last two films sawing him having a seven day dalliance with Marilyn Monroe and then belting out the odd tune in revolutionary France and Felicity Jones who has managed to compile a short but impressive body of work including ‘Dr Who’ and ‘Breathe In’ with Guy Pearce. 
Eddie and Felicity complement each other very well. There is definitely chemistry between them and when they are on screen together they both come across as vulnerable and compassionate. However its Eddie’s portrayal of Hawking that real does stand out. Until recently I had thought that Benedict Cumberbatch was not only a shoe in for a Best Actor nomination at the Oscars for his role as Alan Turning in ‘The Imitation Game’, he’d also walk away with the thirteen and a half inch golden statue as well. Now I’m not so sure. Eddie Redmayne puts in the sort of performance that people will be talking about for a very long time. It’s one of those iconic performances that don’t come along too often. Sir Ben Kingsley’s Ghandi and Dustin Hoffman’s Rain Man are stand out roles that will be forever associated with those actors and I truly believe that Redmayne’s Stephen Hawking should be mentioned in the same category. His portrayal of Hawking as he fights to continue with his academic work as his body fails him is nothing short of remarkable. Even more so when you consider that for the last half an hour of the film he doesn’t actually talk and he verbal communications are handled by his now world famous American voice box. 

The Director of The Theory of Everything, James Marsh, has made a very compelling film here. With a lot of subject matter to cover here James, along with screenwriter Anthony McCarten, have put together a film that doesn’t feel overblown or too long. In fact I think it could have been longer without it being detrimental to the film itself. It’s a moving film at times and has light hearted moments too, including Hawking having a hug from Queen Victoria. 
As I mentioned before the supporting cast aren’t exactly there just to make up the numbers either. David Thewlis plays Dennis Sciama, Hawking’s mentor whilst he studies at Cambridge and ultimately becomes one of his most trusted and valued friends. Emily Watson doesn’t get much screen time but you know she is there when she does. An honourable mention should also go to Charlie Cox who plays Johnathan Heller Jones. He’s character is central to both Jane and Stephen’s lives and without him everything could have been very different. A gentle and broken soul who himself has had to deal with his own personal tragedy. 

James Marsh seems to be good at everything he tries his hand at and if you like The Theory of Everything and you have ninety four minutes spare I would also recommend you watch the documentary ‘Man on Wire’ that Marsh made in 2008. A completely different subject matter but equally compelling.

Twitter Review: 
Redmayne & Jones are enthralling. See the film, read the book, buy the t-shirt. The Theory of everything is a 5 star triumph.
#TimeHeals

Useful Links:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2980516/?ref_=nm_flmg_act_4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Salz7uGp72c
http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/review.asp?FID=138755