[Phalanges]

Scream 4

If the original Scream was a satire on slasher films and it’s next two parts spoofed their sequels, then Scream 4, being released 11 years after the trilogy was supposed to have concluded, is about the rebooting of old and tired franchises. And that can make the reviewing difficult, as it’s hard to differentiate between its shortcomings and the satire.

The film opens fifteen years after the events of the first film in the same town of Woodsboro with the murder of a couple of high school students. It’s a very clever and self-deprecating opening scene, showcasing the franchise’s observant wit without allowing it to take over, and it’s one of the very best moments of the film. The next day the original survivor, Neve Campbell’s Sidney Prescott, returns to the town to publicise her book, and gets caught up in the mess when evidence is found in the boot of her car. David Arquette and Courtney Cox also reprise their previous roles, and the three of them hunt for answers as the goings on start to mirror those of the original Woodsboro murders.

The issues with the film all stem from the success of the originals. The three highest grossing slasher films of all time in the US are Scream, Scream 2 and Scream 3. When the three biggest films of the genre are the previous instalments of this one, it’s difficult for the makers to maintain the subversive tone that satire demands or even know what it is they’re supposed to be satirising. Nobody makes slasher films any more. Aside from a couple of off-hand jokes, there is no real accounting for the evolution of horror and the rise of gore and found footage. Scream 4 feels tired and out of ideas, reduced to living off the back of its former successes. In essence, the franchise has become exactly the film that the original Scream so cleverly deconstructed. That the idea to reboot the franchise came not from the creative side but a producer is no surprise.

If you enjoyed the original trilogy there is still something to enjoy here, if only for the nostalgia of seeing the core cast together on the big screen. There are moments when everything clicks and it really works, but overall it comes closer to the disappointment of the third than the genius of the first two.

[Phalanges]

Arthur


You will be able to predict how much you will enjoy this film based on your opinion of it’s lead actor, for Arthur could just as easily have been titled Russell Brand in New York.

Arthur is a retelling of the 1981 classic comedy film with Dudley Moore, here slightly rewritten for our cash-strapped times and to try and recast the formidable John Gielgud. In overcoming this problem the character is converted from butler to nanny and Helen Mirren inhabits the supporting role, in what proves to be one of the smartest decisions of the film. In the film Arthur is a spoiled child in an adult’s body, an eccentric bachelor looked after by his nanny and content to live off his mother’s millions until his antics start hurting their company’s public image. She demands he marries social climber Susan (Jennifer Gardner) to restore respectability. Unfortunately for him he has started to fall for simple girl Naomi (Greta Gerwig), a relationship which if continued promises to shut him out of his inheritance completely.

If this sounds boringly predictable, it’s because it is. The story is as lame as it is tame; it never ceases to amaze how many rom-coms seem happy to treat alcoholism as a fun little quirk devoid of negative consequences. The film plays out almost exactly as expected with no sense of growth or development of the one-dimensional caricatures the actors are playing, but then that isn’t the reason anyone would go to see a film like this.

Russell Brand towers over the film, over-acting his way happily through every scene. He’s comfortable in front of the camera, and is given enough funny lines to make it enjoyable. The real star is Helen Mirren though, largely playing as the straight character but with plenty of dry wit to steal all the scenes she’s in. When she’s off screen the film suffers a lot for it, evidenced in the final act that is instead very dependent on Naomi and Arthur’s relationship and suffers from a distinct lack of chemistry between the two characters.

Arthur is nothing more than yet another forgettable romantic comedy. The jokes help to sustain it through most of the runtime, but when the romance takes over it sinks deeply into mediocrity.

[Phalanges]

Hanna

Hanna is the second actress-led action film I’ve seen recently, the other being Sucker Punch. They couldn’t be more different. While Sucker Punch bordered on exploiting women yet claimed to empower them, Hanna is a complex character defined by more than just her gender. While the action sequences felt so boring and lifeless in Sucker Punch, in Hanna they mean something and you feel so much more invested because of it. Ultimately Sucker Punch can be dismissed as a vacuous piece of teenage masturbation, whereas Hanna is one of the very best films so far this year.

Hanna (Saoirse Ronan) is being raised in remote Finland by her father (Eric Bana). Raised isn’t perhaps the right word; trained is more apt, trained for the assassination of corrupt CIA agent Marissa Wiegler (Cate Blanchett). After she completes her training and allows herself to be captured, she unknowingly kills Marissa’s double before fleeing and beginning a long journey to reunite her with her father.

A fast-paced thriller seems an odd choice for director Joe Wright, who made his name with literary adaptations of period dramas. His stroke of genius is to make Hanna’s journey the focus and the story is instead packaged almost as a fairy tale, with the action sequences serving as an allegory for puberty. Combining quick editing and varied camerawork along with a frenetic score by The Chemical Brothers the film really feels brought to life in a way that demands your attention.

Saoirse Ronan has been a promising talent for a while now. She was excellent in Atonement and the best thing about The Lovely Bones, but it was The Way Back that really served as her breakthrough. In a film about a perilous journey across thousands of miles for freedom she gave it a sense of humanity, and the film would have felt much more detached without her. Her performance as Hanna is therefore one of the most surprising things about this film, as it shows she has tremendous range. She embodies her character perfectly, a girl bred for battle almost entirely devoid of humanity save for a burning sense of wonder in the world. That she could give such contrasting back-to-back performances at such a young age is nothing short of staggering.

Hanna is, quite simply, the best thriller since the Jason Bourne films. If you like action with substance, you will not regret seeing this.

[Phalanges]

Senna


Muhammad Ali. Michael Jordan. David Beckham. Throughout history there are men whose fame exceeds their sport, and who go on to become icons in their own right. If there is one thing this documentary does, it confirms Ayrton Senna’s iconic status. Why should you spend two and a half hours watching a tribute to a racing driver? Two reasons. The story is so gripping and exciting that it would take a very talented scriptwriter to be able to match it, and the film is a study of the man as much as it his profession. You watch him grow and change in front of your eyes, and that is something special.

The film is crafted in such a way that offers up something for everyone. You can come into this knowing nothing about Senna and be educated, or you can enter as a lifelong fan and get a sense of context and nostalgia. The film is paced to perfection; it never feels rushed and no section overstays its welcome. You are guided through his beginnings in karting, and his various phases at Toleman, Lotus, McLaren and finally Williams. You meet his arch-rival Alain Prost, a man so cleverly evil you are sure he should be British and played by Alan Rickman, and this relationship forms the basis of many confrontations. As you watch the man’s life unfold in front of you, you can clearly see changes taking place – an early excitement crushed, wonderment being replaced by determination, and finally a deep unhappiness. You feel a deep sense of connection with him. This is brought about by an exceptional choice of the clips shown. Formula 1 has always been well documented, and the filmmakers had available to them over 5000 hours of footage. They could have easily cut together a film from the famous clips that would have been acceptable for fans. That they didn’t just do this and instead combed through to find the perfect accompaniments for his narrative is what elevates this film to greatness.

While the runtime may seem lengthy, it goes by quickly in a blur of emotion. It is an easy film to invest in, and you experience a wide range of feelings, from elation to crushing disappointment. Being in the cockpit on the last few turns at Imola, knowing what is about to happen, is truly harrowing. As a driver, he ranks amongst the greatest ever. As an icon, he carried the dreams of Brazil. As a film, Senna is sensational.

[Alext dan]

yes truly great reviews...Thanks for the efforts

[Aj12]

Anyone seen the last king of Scotland. Thoughts?

[DrummingThunder]

Wrote this just after release, but forgot to post it here >.<

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides

The first thing you’ll likely notice about the fourth instalment in the Pirates franchise is the scale. Gone are the majestic effects and locales of the previous trilogy; there’s barely a cannon fired - returning antagonist-turned-protagonist Captain Barbossa comes closest, flirting a skirmish with the Spanish which inevitably fizzles out - and the use of fewer locations diminishes any feeling of a lengthy journey or crusade.

But On Stranger Tides doesn’t feel like it needs them. A more personal adventure, but something of a pirate road trip - the film revolves around a race to the Fountain of Youth, as teased by the close of At World’s End, the final chapter of the Will Turner trilogy. Jack’s back, obviously - this is, at heart, Johnny Depp’s franchise, after all - as are the aforementioned Barbossa (Geoffrey Rush), who’s now a King’s Privateer and sporting a dashing wooden leg, and Jack’s faithful sidekick Gibbs (Kevin McNally). But that’s about as far as it goes for returning characters; replacing Orlando Bloom and Keira Knightley’s romance thread are the token religious fanatic Philip (yes, even Pirates has one now) and mermaid Syrena, captured in one of the film’s strongest scenes. Penelope Cruz has a rather surprising turn as one of Cap’n Jack’s old flames, who joins the big bad on his ship - the beautifully designed Queen Anne’s Revenge. Ah, yes, the big bad of Pirates 4 - notorious villain Edward Teach, aka Captain Blackbeard.

Ian McShane does wonderfully with the material he is given - the only problem is, there isn’t enough of it. And sadly, this tends to ring true for much of the new cast. Despite a lengthy 138 minute running time, On Stranger Tides has developed a rabid case of Harry Potter syndrome. Characters are introduced for a line or two then discarded without second thought; Blackbeard himself remains a mystery - at one point something is mumbled about his crew being ‘zombies’, but no explanation is given as to why or how they have come to be in this state. The audience is simply left to accept that Blackbeard is some kind of living deity who can manipulate his ship and crew merely by pointing a sword in their face (in an obvious and cringe-worthy attempt to showcase the series’ adaptation of the frankly unbearable 3D phenomenon).

But such criticisms, thankfully, fail to detract completely from On Stranger Tides. The race to the Fountain of Youth is a less exhilarating one, but then the series feels less like it’s trying to cram grandiose action down its audience’s necks at the expense of the bulk of the film’s character and narrative development. Seemingly director Jerry Bruckheimer has done all in his power to stay away from Michael Bay methods of filmmaking: we’re given time to consume the plot and characters, and it is herein that the strength of On Stranger Tides lies. But that’s not to say it’s gone all serious - the action is still replete throughout, regardless of the scale or brevity of it; particularly memorable are the mermaid capture at Whitecap Bay and the fast-paced, classic Pirates intro involving an impromptu dash through London town.

A more pointless plot device comes in the form of the Spanish: merely an instrument to prolong the warring Barbossa and Blackbeard’s plight for their watery treasure for just a few minutes’ more runtime, their presence might be considered irrelevant - particularly based on their actions when they eventually reach the fabled fountain. But this mechanic still doesn’t feel jarring; simply an obstacle that is passed over briefly (and does allow for one of Depp’s more cynically humourous moments, whereupon he pulls apart a staple of fight scenes - watch out for it in the final act).

And once again, the Pirates series has somehow managed to overcome its flaws while riding them along anyway - by now, these films exist purely as entertainment; they’re enjoyable. It doesn’t matter that some of the characters might be paper-thin, or the plot not water-tight; Captain Jack is back, and, amidst a summer of South London street gangs taking on Independence Day and everything being Furiously Fast (Five times over), he’s damn welcome.

8/10

[mevidek]

(Original post by Aj12)
Anyone seen the last king of Scotland. Thoughts?

Last King of Scotland is a great film, I could write a review if you wanted

[Aj12]

(Original post by mevidek)
Last King of Scotland is a great film, I could write a review if you wanted

I'd appreciate it.

[mevidek]

(Original post by Aj12)
I'd appreciate it.

I'll write it on Tuesday as I have an exam earlier on Tuesday

[Aj12]

(Original post by mevidek)
I'll write it on Tuesday as I have an exam earlier on Tuesday

Thanks, good luck with the exam.

[zjs]

(Original post by Aj12)
Anyone seen the last king of Scotland. Thoughts?

If you like films that are subtle and explore emotions and shifting dynamics between characters, then you'll like Last King of Scotland.

McAvoy plays an excellent part as a young, arrogant, doctor. He ends up in Uganda after putting his finger on it when spinning a globe and, as I'm sure you'll know, ends up running into Amin. He had no idea of politics when he first arrives and forms a close friendship with him. From there, the mood starts to sour as Amin's political personality starts to shine through.

Whittaker nails the unpredictability of Amin's nature, which made him so frightening. His Oscar winning performance was deservedly lauded, imo. It also uses black humour well, with a tense situation often being defused by an Amin joke, which only works thanks to Whittaker in the role.

The way it's capture is beautiful and every frame seems soaked with the African heat. In this stifling climate, all the tensions seem all the better for it and the tension really grips you. It evolves into a great thriller.

I'd recommend you see it, whatever your interest level in Amin.

[Aj12]

(Original post by zjs)
If you like films that are subtle and explore emotions and shifting dynamics between characters, then you'll like Last King of Scotland.

McAvoy plays an excellent part as a young, arrogant, doctor. He ends up in Uganda after putting his finger on it when spinning a globe and, as I'm sure you'll know, ends up running into Amin. He had no idea of politics when he first arrives and forms a close friendship with him. From there, the mood starts to sour as Amin's political personality starts to shine through.

Whittaker nails the unpredictability of Amin's nature, which made him so frightening. His Oscar winning performance was deservedly lauded, imo. It also uses black humour well, with a tense situation often being defused by an Amin joke, which only works thanks to Whittaker in the role.

The way it's capture is beautiful and every frame seems soaked with the African heat. In this stifling climate, all the tensions seem all the better for it and the tension really grips you. It evolves into a great thriller.

I'd recommend you see it, whatever your interest level in Amin.

Sounds good. I'll give it a watch when I have the time. Has to be better than this Anaconda 3 **** I am watching now lol. Good ol SyFy channel

[zjs]

(Original post by Aj12)
Sounds good. I'll give it a watch when I have the time. Has to be better than this Anaconda 3 **** I am watching now lol. Good ol SyFy channel

Anything is better than any of the Anaconda films, tbh. Except, perhaps, Piranha 3D.

[Aj12]

(Original post by zjs)
Anything is better than any of the Anaconda films, tbh. Except, perhaps, Piranha 3D.

The first one had its charms if you have an hour to waste. Not sure how to convey into words how poor the other two are.

[zjs]

(Original post by Aj12)
The first one had its charms if you have an hour to waste. Not sure how to convey into words how poor the other two are.

The phrase that sums them up is probably: "Why the **** are those Anacondas fifty feet long?"

[Aj12]

(Original post by zjs)
The phrase that sums them up is probably: "Why the **** are those Anacondas fifty feet long?"

And why would you use a submachine gun to take on a giant snake?

[zjs]

(Original post by Aj12)
And why would you use a submachine gun to take on a giant snake?

The logic doesn't stand up to scrutiny too well. Not just a submachine gun, but a submachine gun from a tiny little wooden raft.

[Aj12]

(Original post by zjs)
The logic doesn't stand up to scrutiny too well. Not just a submachine gun, but a submachine gun from a tiny little wooden raft.

Ah well. Just wasting time till I watch the rest of true grit

[zjs]

(Original post by Aj12)
Ah well. Just wasting time till I watch the rest of true grit

Bridges or Wayne version? The Wayne version was superb; haven't got round to the remake yet.