SPECTRE:Impressions

And so, after three years of waiting, the latest James Bond film christened “SPECTRE”, has been released to an immense amount of hype, perhaps even the second most anticipated release in this quarter of the year. Not to mention that it will be the last film where Daniel Craig plays the iconic 007. So, how does this film hold up?

Before we get into that, a brief impression on the Daniel Craig Bond films: Never saw Casino Royale, Didn’t like Quantum of Solace, aside from the intro song, and as for Skyfall-well, nearly everyone loved Skyfall and I put myself in the majority. All in all, I was fine with the series of films. In fact, one thing I loved in particular with the films is that unlike the other Bond films, these ones felt connected to each other, as if every film was a chapter in a saga instead of being standalone. Since the Daniel films are technically prequels it fits, but its also refreshing to see consequences and effects passing on to the next films. I’m not a fan of Daniel Craig himself though. To me, he always looked like he had only one facial expression regardless of anything going on. I couldn’t ever picture him as the charming, suave even seductive 007. Don’t get me wrong, he isn’t bad at all, just unfitting.

Fun fact: SPECTRE as of now is on record to be the most expensive film in the James Bond franchise ever made, coming up to around $350m. Also, the film has had the biggest opening of all time in the UK, netting an estimated £41.7m at the box office in its early days of release. Its also had the biggest openings in the Netherlands, Finland, Norway, Denmark and Sweden.

But that’s the past, let us talk about the now:  Where does Spectre fit in with all of this? The story begins with Bond carrying out a hit in Mexico City. To M, its the final straw, especially with political powers plotting to end the secret services for good. But for Bond, it is only the first step of many towards exposing a sinister organisation that has haunted him since the beginning, not just in his career as 007, but also in his childhood….

Firstly, SPECTRE plays out as the quintessential James Bond film, full of glamorous suits and dinner dresses, big brutes of villains, big action set in the most iconic of places…you know what you are given with this one. The action scenes in the film are very entertaining and well-done, with the right hint of danger and grandeur. Personally my favourite has to be the one in Austria with the plane, only really because the action scene in Mexico City in the helicopter felt a little odd. I don’t know if CGI was implemented, but it does feel that way, making it feel less tense. Otherwise it would have stood out the most.

Fun fact: Turns out the helicopter scene WAS real, it was a Red Bull helicopter, built especially for barrel-rolling and free diving, and it was flying out of control in the Zocalo,which is the main square in the centre of Mexico City, piloted by the world-famous aerobatic Chuck Aaron.

I also like the camerawork in the film, with key objects and people only partly or briefly revealed, either blurred out in the background, or just appearing from out of shot. In particular, there is one scene where a widow is just walking through her house, playing to orchestral music, but things are playing out behind her but everything is blurred and barely visible. Although the outcome is predictable, its worth it to see how beautifully simple the sequence is, a true homage to the charm of Bond.

As for the actors, I’ve already said my piece about Daniel Craig as Bond, and it stands here. Lea Seydoux I have always had a liking for, since I saw her in Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol. There is a cold, icy beauty to her which I think works well in a spy flick like Bond, but the effect is weakened by the moments she shows emotion. Monica Bellucci felt wasted to me: Only there for Bond to smooch up to and once that happens she disappears into the nether. Batista as the big silent henchman ‘Hinx’…well he’s big, is very good at beating up people and doesn’t afraid of anything. But seriously, his brutal fighting style and size gives off a looming, ominous presence. Finally, as soon as I saw that Christopher Waltz would play as the villain Blofeld, I instantly knew that he would steal the show. Since Inglourious Basterds I have always liked Waltz in everything he has been in, especially villains. There is something about the way he smiles and talks that engages you but leaves no illusions that he can be truly diabolical.

Fun Fact: This will be the first Bond film where the whole main cast will have been born AFTER the Bond franchise itself was established.

However despite the solid casting, SPECTRE still has a very high bar to meet and even exceed, which was set by its predecessor Skyfall. And SPECTRE I’m sorry to say didn’t meet that standard. Perhaps the biggest drawback is the plot. In the first half, its good. I loved the gradual unravelling of the SPECTRE organization, in particular the big meeting, however by the second half of the film it becomes very clear that the plot is missing something significant.

In Skyfall, even though the danger was at a more personal level, there was still the sense of urgency, that this danger needed to be quelled, and it needed to be quickly, otherwise more should suffer the consequences. In SPECTRE, there is never the presence of a global risk. When you think about it, what does the SPECTRE organization actually do, other than strike at Bond? Nothing that gives them the feel of a group that could crush nations. The quest to stop SPECTRE is tied in with a new international law proposed by C to create a global surveillance network, rendering the secret service obsolete. For the most part, this plotline feels like the weaker side of the film, due to a sort of unoriginality (Spooks did it!) and predictability to its outcome. The final climax to the film isn’t very good either. True its very symbolic, particularly given the point that the overall story is at right now, but I get the feeling it should have been more confrontational.

Fun fact: According to the TV Tropes website, the Mexican government had apparently given Sony Pictures money in return for “not portraying Mexico in a negative way.” Allegedly they wanted to remove any references to Mexican gangsters and a sub-plot about assassinating a Mexican official, asking them only to show the nice and prosperous side of the country.

To conclude, I would give SPECTRE a 7 out of 10. Its good, but not as good as Skyfall. Nothing more I can say about that.

The Martian: Impressions

Alright, its time to start October with a great big bang! Or should I say “Lift off!”, as we take a gander at the new blockbuster film from veteran director Ridley Scott, The Martian! Featuring the likes of Matt Damon, Sean Bean, Donald Glover and Chiwetel Ejiofor this is the story of a NASA operation on the surface of Mars. However things go wrong in a storm and one of the team, Mark Watney is blown away and presumed dead. Against all odds, he survives but is now left with new problems: No way back to Earth, no way to call Earth, and a limited food supply. Until anyone realises that Watney is still alive, he must start adapting to a new life on the Red Planet….

First and foremost, this film is beautiful. Especially in 3D. Now that is a statement you will hear me say very often, since I’ve never had much faith in 3D. But 3D works here for the same reason that it works in the Martian for the same reason it worked in Dredd. Because the film gives you time to appreciate just how much the 3D effect adds to the atmosphere triggered by the landscape. The shots which hang over the deserts of the Red Planet is allowed to just pan over, to give the viewer long moments to drink in the landscape, and through it the situation. Mars is breathtaking in its emptiness, mountains and deserts that give the impression of being untouched by human feet for billions of years. The sound and music is also immersive, with the near silence of space aside from the breathing and muted impacts, to the contrasting music. On the one hand, there is the familiar, trendy disco music of Earth, and on the other, the unfamiliar, alien tones of Mars.

Fun Fact: This film is based on a novel by Andy Weir, who simply posted chapters of his story for free on his blog. Eventually, fans persuaded him to make his story downloadable, and then to publish it on Amazon for downloading on Kindle at the minimum price of $0.99.

The tone of the film is, above all else one of wonder: As I said before, there is an empty, dangerous beauty given to Mars, and also the structure and design of the spaceship Hermes, as the crew floats through to different rooms. Also there are the scientific experiments on a smaller scale, such as the process of generating water, growing food and the salvaging of old equipment from previous NASA missions.  The narrative is told in the style of a dramatised documentary, which the days being recorded, along with the introduction of each character and their position. The different style to this kind of film that works in its own curious way. Although it does give off one of the very few problems I have about the film.

And that problem is that I feel like, at least in the first half of the film, it felt too….comfortable. In fact, Watney seems to take the concept of being trapped alone on another planet with no breathable atmosphere, no way to grow food and limited supplies a little too well. There’s no real moment where he breaks down, or where the danger of the situation starts to dawn on him, allowing him to pull himself together. He just goes straight to work. Also I feel like Donald Glover overdid the ‘clumsy, weird but undoubted genius’ trope. Doesn’t mean it’s not fun to watch…just a little too much. Plus, could you really believe that ‘3005’ Donald Glover can be THAT quirky?

Fun Fact: NASA has had a LOT of influence in the development of this film. Before filmmakers can portray NASA in a film, they need to get permission. NASA will then judge how seriously the filmmakers are taking the subject and also if the facts are scientifically sound. 50 pages of the Martian script is material from NASA. Also, two days before the film’s release, NASA had tweeted about the discovery of briny water on Mars. Yet in the film, creating water literally from scratch was one of the important plot points in the film.

This brings me to the rest of the characters. Mark Watney is infinitely enjoyable to watch: Smart, and also able to see the bright side even in the worst of situations. Seeing him come to the weirdest and witty conclusions about everything that happens throughout the film. You really do feel like one of the crowds on Earth cheering for him to come home. As for the others, I think its Vincent Kapoor and Rich Purnell that stands out, due to the former’s earnestness and the latter’s OTT awkwardness. But it’s mostly Watney’s story, almost all of the other characters feel like they are in the sidelines.

The real drama and tension starts in the second half, when things start to go wrong. I do think that things should have started to get difficult earlier in the film, but I’m not too fussed about it. Also, I do like the media presence, and just how public the situation gets, but I also like how they don’t take the tired route of the debate whether they should save him or leave him to die for the sake of ‘whatever they have to lose’. It makes things as simple but smart as possible.

Fun Fact: The biggest inaccuracy in the story (both film and novel) is believe it or not present at the beginning. The atmospheric pressure on the surface of Mars is an average of 600 Pa, which is only 0.6% of Earth’s mean sea level pressure of 100kPa. It is so low that a ‘fierce storm’ on Mars would be like a breeze that at worst messes up your hair.

Finally, let me just say that the last 25 minutes of the film was probably some of the most tense and gripping moments I have seen. Throughout that sequence, I was literally on the edge of my seat, stomach twisting with the chaotic camerawork, and the emptiness surrounding the characters. All the risks taken, stops pulled. You could feel the desperation and determination, emotions running high. Honestly, the film was worth watching just for that scene.

Overall, I give The Martian a high recommendation of 9 out of 10. It is a really beautiful film, both in visuals, music and the science behind it all, that becomes almost magical in how wondrous it is portrayed. The characters are mostly enjoyable to watch, particularly Watney and his adventures, and although the film starts quite low-key in the beginning, it starts to really pick up, granting an epic conclusion to an epic film. And like I said, very rare you will hear me say this, but I recommend watching this in 3D. That alone speaks volumes of how much I like this film.

Sicario: Impressions

Well, I ain’t felt this way in a long time about a film, but it can’t be all feel good every time. Let’s look at the newly released Sicario.

Sicario is set in the continuing war between the US government and the Mexican drug cartels. This one battle features Kate Macer, an idealistic FBI agent who after launching a successful raid that ends bloody, is recruited into a special task force assigned to end a specific drug cartel that operates on both sides of the US-Mexico border. However as the case lengthens, Macer begins to realise that the border is the first of many lines crossed in this war. And the clearest sign of bypassed protocol comes in the form of a mysterious Mexican known only as Alejandro, otherwise known as ‘Sicario’, the Mexican term for hit man…

Fun Fact: The term ‘Sicario’ comes from the Latin word “Sicarius” which means “dagger man”, a term used by the ancient Romans to describe Jewish Zealots who would assassinate Roman citizens using a small dagger known as a “sicae” hidden in their cloaks. There were so many murders in the Province of Judea that the figure of Sicarius was used in Roman law: Lex Cornelia De Sicariis et Veneficis- Cornelian Law for Stabbers and Poisoners.

First of all, the strongest point to the film is how it is made, or more specifically how it is filmed.  The camerawork is just phenomenal, perfectly immersing you in the world of the film and every event happening.  The creativity is boundless: From sitting in the passenger seat of a car, looking around in a city where everyone is a potential threat, or seeing through thermal goggles, as someone looks at you and signs to you. You feel the urge to respond, or even duck for cover when the situation heats up. Also the way the camera moves, whether from the God’s eye view of a helicopter or from someone’s perspective, the movement and angle feel so genuine. Especially when they are riding through the city: Although the mutilated and hung corpses are the most horrifying thing seen, they are seen without detail or focus, as if they have just been noticed by someone’s eye. Now that I notice, most of the deaths are seen by proxy, whether at an angle, out of camera shot or behind filters. The horror is real, but muted, not given any embellishment or fake focus.

Fun fact: Cinematographer Roger Deakins got the inspiration for his unique camerawork from the photography of Alex Webb, in particular “Crossings: Photographs from the U.S.-Mexico Border”, which was published in 2003.

Acting wise, the two that I must say stand out to me is of course, Emily Blunt and Benicio Del Toro. Blunt’s character’s progress of deterioration is structured incredibly well, as you begin to notice the stress of the job make its mark on her in subtle but noticeable ways, from the increased consumption of cigarettes to practically how drained and battered she looks by the end. Of course, these are paltry compared to the crisis she suffers when challenged by how easily her by the book methods are not just stamped on, but also ineffective. In this regard, I think that Blunt fits perfectly into the performance: She is one of the few actresses I know that can change from tough action to raw emotion in the same film without seeming forced, and this role is no different.

Fun Fact: Originally Alejandro was supposed to have more lines in the film, however Del Toro said “The character explained his background several times to Kate. And that gave me information about who this guy was, but it felt a little stiff to have someone you just met 15 minutes ago suddenly telling you what happened to him and who he is.” So they cut 90% of Del Toro’s dialogue with director Villeneuve’s blessing. “Movies are about movement, character and presence, and Benicio had all that.”

But to me, I’d say the star of the show has to be Del Toro as Alejandro. That is all you know about him, and yet despite him barely talking, his presence just dominates every scene. It’s not his dialogue, more so his actions that define the brooding, undoubtedly dangerous person: The hooded, smouldering eyes, rumbling deep voice and the absolute professionalism that he brings to his work. As the film progresses, his story begins to unravel, and although shocking in its brutality, we can’t help but feel that it can’t have turned out any different. It is after all, a ‘land of wolves’.

If there was a criticism that I can bring into the film, its perhaps two things. First are the scenes which I can only say come from the ‘other side of the fence.’ To be honest, there are two few and far between each other to give much of an impression, and even how it ends feels…empty. Although I could find a countering explanation for it. The plot to Sicario doesn’t feel like an entire story in and of itself, as if a war has been won and everyone leaves victorious or defeated. It’s more like a chapter in the war against the cartels. Although this one has been resolved, the ending shows that another chapter will begin and the battle will continue, regardless of the lives lost or changed forever.

To finish, I would give Sicario a 9 out of 10. Not exactly on the lines of “best film I would never see again”, but a film that hits very hard. Well-crafted, well-acted and well produced, I highly recommend watching it, just be prepared to learn a lot of tough lessons on the way.

 

Legend: Impressions

Legend portrays the story of the twins who became London’s most notorious and legendary gangsters, Ronald and Reginald Kray. It is the tale of how through ruthlessness and ambition they rose to the top, from the East End to the richer, more higher-up West End. With money and power the lips of Lords, American Mafia, police and even the Prime Minister spoke their names with fear and respect. However, behind the legends were men. Exceptional men, but still with their own flaws and problems. And it was these ‘human’ problems that precipitated their fall…

Right, let’s deal with the positives. First of all, acting wise everyone is good, however Tom Hardy is just absolutely brilliant in his double performance. Having to play two very different characters is difficult for any actor, let alone such dynamic characters as the Kray twins. But Tom Hardy not just manages, he excels: from the psychopathic, unstable Ronnie, to the calm, measured but ruthless and fallible Reggie. But in particular it’s the character of Ron that shines out of everyone. Every time he is on set, you can feel his presence like a chill. Every time you look into his eyes, you can see the intense, chaotic emotions running in his damaged brain. Hardy’s performance as Reggie starts out fine, but it starts to really pick up in the last parts of the film.

Fun fact: Tom Hardy also played the role of the most notorious prisoners in Britain, Charles Bronson/Michael Peterson in the film Bronson, and believe it or not, Reginald Kray actually did know Bronson and Peterson, because they served in prison together. Kray would describe their first meet as “The most frightening prison experience I’ve ever had.”

Technical-wise, the film is well done, with a visible effort to recreate London of the 60s, both East and West End. I love the costumes, especially the ones that differentiate class, and I do like the soundtrack as well. Not as stylish as Man from U.N.C.L.E. but still very immersive, with notable classics.

Fun fact: Critic Benjamin Lee from The Guardian had given a negative rating of the film, giving it only 2 stars out of 5. His rating was actually featured in one of the promotional posters for the film, but placed in between the heads of the twins so that it would look like a four/five star rating, merely obscured by the twins. At the very least, it worked until Lee himself brought it up.

Story-wise however, the film felt…..limp. That’s the only real way that I can describe it. I don’t know why, but the structure and narrative of the film just gives the impression of going through events, without giving them real emphasis or focus. There isn’t any high or low moments, just working at the same tone, even considering the romance between Reggie and Frances, or concerning the ties between Kray and the Mafia, or even the rivalry between Reggie and the police officer Leonard “Nipper” Read. Also, I feel like where the film began and where it ended were the wrong moments. In the history of the Krays they were in National Service in the 50s, and even then they rebelled against authority. It should have begun perhaps at the end of that, where perhaps they would have got the idea for starting their own gang.

Fun fact: The Krays first started out as professional boxers from the age of 19, however their criminal records and dishonourable discharges prevented them from pursuing it further, paving the way for their criminal careers. Also Ronnie Kray was openly bisexual, as he said so in The Kray Tapes: “I’m bisexual, not gay. Bisexual,” and was planning to marry a woman named Monica in the 1960s, calling her “the most beautiful woman he had ever seen.” 

Not the most detailed recap of mine, but I give Legend a 6 out of 10. An absolutely phenomenal Tom Hardy performance, truly deserving of an award. As for the film itself, it’s merely serviceable. Not bad, but I could understand why other people would call it bad.

A Major Update

Right, time for some updates. You may all be wondering why there hasn’t been much activity on this blog lately. Well in truth, I haven’t been entirely lazy, I have done my impressions on both Legend and Sicario. Personally I don’t know which one is going to come next: Spectre is definitely going to be written on, but first I need to see Skyfall. Other than that, Pan doesn’t really interest me and writing about Suffragette would be me just ranting about historical inaccuracies.

BUT, what is happening for me now? Well, As you know I work in Cineworld Hammersmith as a team member, but over time my managers started to realise that I was good at explaining the plot of the films and my own opinions on them. So one of them approached me and asked me to write my impressions to be printed in the cinema, for team members to look at and help them with explanations of the films. I accepted, considering that it would help me with my CV and experience, so that when people ask me what I did at Cineworld I can say more than “issued tickets and shovelled popcorn into bags.”

Now more recently, one of my supervisors with filmmaking experience, came up to me and asked if we could expand on the written review, to create more bitesized reviews in video format for the Facebook and Instagram pages for Cineworld Hammersmith. Although the both of us are still debating why Cineworld needs an Instagram, I accepted, cos why the hell not, and right now we are working on the legal problems, filming stats, where to start and most importantly, the reply from Head Office.

All I can say is, its real nice to actually have something to do other than look dead eyed at my job and continue thinking to myself how did it come to this? Until God willing, I get into my postgraduate course, I will be able to practice my journalistic skills in some way, and who knows? This whole thing could evolve into something paid? Maybe I’ll create my own career instead of finding it. But for now, something has to be born first before we can start thinking on grand levels.

For now, I’ll just say that Legend and Sicario Impressions are on their way. Very late, especially in terms of Legend, but better that than never.

Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain: Impressions

Time for something not-so-different-but-different-enough to this blog. A video game review! And what else can I talk about but perhaps the last great big chapter in a series that has lasted nearly three decades: Metal Gear Solid V: The Phantom Pain! Normally I don’t do my impressions of games, since there are elements to it that I don’t feel qualified to talk about i.e. Frame-rate, animation, coding etc. But there are times when you feel about something so strongly that you have to talk about it, entitled or not. So let us begin!

So the story takes place after Ground Zeroes, where Big Boss finally awakens from a nine-year coma, lacking an arm and a piece of shrapnel embedded in his head. Only minutes later the hospital he is in is attacked by the forces of the mysterious group Cipher, intent on killing the legendary soldier. Narrowly escaping with the help of Ocelot, Big Boss travels to Afghanistan to find his old friend Kazuhira Miller. From there, he must rebuild what was lost for no reason other than simple revenge against Cipher.

First of all, the gameplay is magnificent. One of the best I have gone through. The game is very, VERY responsive to the playstyle of each player, and it adapts itself to counter it, giving the game an added sense of atmosphere. For example, if the player prefers to conduct missions in the night, then enemy guard post and sentries will have more searchlights, and even Night Vision Goggles. If the player takes a lot of headshots, the enemies in that area will start wearing helmets, maybe even body armour. These changes and adaptations ensure that you either increase your stealth/marksman skills, or adapt, by changing guns and other equipment. Also, building your Mother Base can be both rewarding and annoying.  On one hand, actually being able to see your base grow, seeing the men you have recruited, it is very satisfying to see the fruits of your labour right in front of you, and that’s before getting to the assortment of weapons and items you can create and customize. On the other…..godamned fighting between staff!

Like I said, in terms of being on the field, the game allows you to use whatever tactic you see fit: Sneak by without being noticed, take over guard posts or eliminate enemies by force, or just pass everything by with the use of your buddy. As for gathering soldiers for Mother Base, they are not just simple numbers to ensure your access to better stuff; although a lot of people would just prefer using Snake himself, the soldiers can have different perks, such as faster running, more health and a longer Reflex mode. On that note Reflex mode, although very useful can make the game a little too easy, since a lot of mistakes made can be rectified.

Aesthetics wise, the game just looks beautiful. It’s hard to appreciate how much effort is put into creating the landscape and areas in the night, but in day it looks magnificent, especially the day and night cycles, which again adds atmosphere to the game. The world is not by all means extensive, you can reach the edges of a mission area, which can be frustrating especially in more hectic missions, but the areas of deployment are certainly big enough to easily lose yourself in.

Alright, now before I get to where I feel like MGSV falls short, I will need to deal with a quite big elephant in the room: And that of course is the presence of Quiet, the sniper robbed of her words, who happens to be dressed in quite a ‘unique’ fashion, which has led to quite a big backlash. Now I’m not going to do go all SJW on this, first of all because I don’t think that the objectification of a character completely eclipses who they really are. Take Revy Two-Hands from Black Lagoon: let’s be perfectly honest, she is one of the most objectified characters in the show, if not the most. However, her character is striking enough to stand out to the point where you don’t care how she looks. If you can focus on who they are more than how they are portrayed, then to me any form of objectification could be forgiven. Also, I think we’re in a sort of post-GamerGate stage considering that no one had THAT much of a problem against EVA from MGS3 (Or if someone did, they were in the minority).Plus, the game does try to explain (emphasis on ‘try’) why Quiet is the way she is, which is more that can be said for others. WITH THAT SAID,

-She barely talks

-She is part of the buddy system, meaning that she has to compete for competence with a dog, a horse and a robot

-Shower scene and “Dancing in the rain” scene

-Icon for her costumes is her chest

-And reason for being the way she is pretty much comes down to “Parasites, Son.”

All I’m saying is, there’s adding sexiness to a character, and then there’s painting two bullseyes on your buttcheeks and then making lewd gestures at Anita Sarkeesian. Making things too easy for critics, wouldn’t you say?

Anyway, back to impressions. Where MGSV: The Phantom Pain falls real short is the plot. Okay, not necessarily the content, more like its consistency. Putting it simply, the story is a mess. Granted a delicious mess, but still a mess. Many people have called the game “unfinished” and I can see why. There are brilliant moments in the story, such as the Prologue, and Mission 43 which are the most harrowing moments in the game. There is real potential in the story to be truly engaging, but the terrible structure just squanders it.

In a broad sense, we were all expecting to see the downfall of Big Boss become complete, as he proceeds towards the building of Outer Heaven, and an ideal world for soldiers, casting away the last of the ideals given to him by the Boss. The game is that in some ways, but in many others it really isn’t. In particular the big M. Night Shyamalan-esque twist….it’s not bad, but at the same time it feels too insufficient to be the BIG twist. It only really serves as retcon, to tie this game to the others, albeit very, very thinly. I believe that it would be the conclusion of Chapter 2 and then it rolls into 3, but this is just a personal opinion, no real theorems behind it.

The first chapter is, albeit quite short the best section of the game: Everything feels fresh and big, and the genuine feel of building up to a final confrontation. The second chapter is where it falls apart, with most of the missions being more difficult versions of those in the first chapter, with events and features that are given no closure. It’s like the first chapter is the party, while the second is the clean-up job. In fact, it has been news that Konami had certain parts of the game taken out before release: Mission 51 was removed, and there is supposed to be a third chapter named ‘Peace’. To be honest, if the game was going to be complete, they would need the third chapter. Mission 51 concludes one stray plot thread, but not all of them.

Another peeve of mine is perhaps the same problem that MGS4 was afflicted with: Using one thing to explain all the weird stuff. In Guns of the Patriots it was “Nanomachines, son”. Now it seems to be “Parasites, Son”. If it didn’t work for explaining Vamp, then it won’t work here. Though I guess old habits die hard.

Character-wise I feel mixed. Venom Snake I believe can be a charming and engaging character….when he actually talks, which is strangely a rare phenomenon in this game. Most of the talking is done by Miller and Ocelot. Ocelot is his typical enigmatic but helpful self, but Miller is perhaps the most engaging character in the whole game. Every line he speaks is laced with nine years of bitterness, pain and anger. Robin Akin Downes really out-did himself in this performance. As for Huey, I think they tried a little too hard to make him unlikeable, and although he is very demonised, there is still uncertainty as to whether he did everything accused of. Perhaps it’s a reference to the “phantom pain”, which would have a phantom cause causing them to lash out at anyone?  But it does remove the use of something which is bigged up a lot, which can only be used in Combat Deployment, NOT by you. As for Skull Face, he is a very charming villain, but as with a lot of things in the story, a lot of his potential feels wasted.

So in the forest of 9s and 10s, I think MGSV: The Phantom Pain gets 7 out of 10 from me. Truth be told, I don’t hate it as much as I want to. Buried within the mess that we got is a absolutely brilliant piece of work that would have been a fine conclusion to the Metal Gear Series: It is an absolute blast playing the game, I love how interactive and even intuitive the gameplay is, the whole game in general looks beautiful, particularly in the day. But storywise, as an addition to the Metal Gear series it falls flat, a conclusion committing the one sin that cannot be forgiven: leaving more questions than answers.

No Escape: Impressions

When waterworks engineer Jack Dwyer is given a chance to move to Southeast Asia to head a new waterworks power plant for the company he works for, he takes it eagerly, bringing his wife and two daughters. As they settle into their new home, they notice that barely anything electronic works and that the streets are…too quiet. Minor problems for the night. Except it gets worse in the morning, as Jack finds himself caught in the middle of a street fight between riot police and armed rebels. Eventually he discovers that a military coup is taking place, and that the rebels are specifically targeting foreigners. Aided by a mysteriously capable British tourist, the only way for Jack and his family to survive is to escape…from a country they have only been in for a day….which is full of a lot of people that want them dead. Not the best odds now, are they?

And that is ALL you need t know about the story because there isn’t anything else that the film will tell you. The Dwyer family is stuck in a coup, they need to escape, it’s honestly that simple. Hell, we don’t even know what country we are actually in, only that it borders Vietnam, so it can either be Cambodia or Laos. Then again, specifically referring to one country or another would step on one too many toes so I suppose it was the safest bet.

Also despite my tone, I’m not bitter at all. You have to remember that the whole film is being playing out in the perspective of the Dwyer family, who have only been in the country for a day. They probably know little to nothing about the language, the political situation, who the president is or even what the rebels are fighting for. All they would know is that the rebels are killing foreigners in particular, which puts them in the most danger.

The claustrophobic, vulnerable atmosphere is created to near perfection in this film, both by the fact that you and the characters know next to nothing about what going on around you except the obvious; barely any music playing in the background, and the small amounts of it are low, rumbling and ominous; and also the incredibly close, shaky camerawork which implies the fear and overall sense of being dangerously alone.

There are few criticisms that I can really think of, one being the very beginning of the film, in the presidential palace. I think it would have been better if that scene wasn’t there, so that we would be completely unprepared for the chaos that comes afterwards. The scene felt a little pointless to me, especially since nothing concrete in that scene has any effect on the overall film.

But now for the elephant in the room: Owen Wilson as the lead in what can be quite a serious film. We all thought that despite the cool premise it would be doomed from the start. But I think that Wilson held his own, giving a decent performance as someone stressed, angry and scared but knows he has people to protect. Pierce Brosnan I’m a little mixed about. His character was an eccentric, even a little loco British tourist, who did supply some laughs for the film (Yes, there are parts of the film that were funny: Emotionally conflicted, but there you are), but I felt that his twist, although it makes sense in the situation doesn’t really add anything. As for the family, I do like how the wife, played by Lake Bell is understanding of the situation, and tries her best to be supportive and helpful and they don’t waste time by going through unnecessary family drama.  And the children are fine as well; they act how exactly a normal child would in a dangerous and hectic situation like theirs.

Overall, I give No Escape 7 out of 10. A very simplistic but decent film, which has few ambitions but accomplishes them with ease: A good idea bulging with potential, tension running throughout the entire length of the film. There are some uncomfortable and funny moments that threaten to break the tone, but a good piece of cinema, with high replay value.

Straight Outta Compton: Impressions

In the streets of Compton, California in the mid-1980s, a group of young, black men had a vision. A vision that would take them from the crime and drug-ridden streets of their home to both nationwide fame and infamy throughout America. A vision that would pave the way for rapping legends such as Snoop Dogg, Tupac and Eminem. A vision that would bring out such commercial successes like Friday, Boyz in The Hood and Dre Beats. That vision was the rap group known as the N.W.A. and the film Straight Outta Compton is the story of their rise, eminence, and fragmentation.

At first you may expect the film to be an origin story, perhaps an insight into the lives of all the individual group members and how they got into music in the first place. But instead it’s a biography of the group itself, from its creation, to its peak and finally the friction that led to its end. I personally think this was a better approach to the plot, since it allows the characters to be more fleshed out, motives and personalities changing along with their fortunes.

If I was to sum up Straight Outta Compton in one word, it would be sharp. Razor-sharp. It is a very emotionally charged film, each line spoken or sung dripping with potency designed to hit the viewer as hard as possible. Your emotion are taken on a ride with this film, as it paints a very distinct picture of just how revolutionary this new genre of music was, up to the point that the FBI themselves have to send a letter to the group criticising their music. This in fact did happen, with Milt Ahlerich, the assistant director of the FBI at the time was pushed by the group Focus on the Family to send this letter to them saying: “advocating violence and assault is wrong and we in the law enforcement community take exception to such action.

Fun Fact: The original cut of the film was 3 hours, 30 minutes, plus there was a point when the script called for a scene where Eminem is first discovered by Dr Dre. Although Ansel Elgort was invited to play him, the script was changed and the scene was never shot. Oh, and Dr Dre has released his newest album after 16 years, Compton: A Soundtrack on August 7^th 2015, crowning it his ‘grand finale’. Good luck trying to download it anywhere other than iTunes though.

Even now, it would be hard to support or even agree with everything done and said by the N.W.A. From the references to some of the main characters belonging to the Bloods and Crips, to Ice Cube’s ties with the Nation of Islam and the apparent anti-Semitism in one of his tracks. In fact, I do remember one criticism being how so many successful films primarily featuring black people have to be about slavery, segregation or gang culture. That it was somewhat embarrassing, even a little racist, in implying that they are the only themes associated with black people to have commercial success. For example, the owner of Gatwick Airport is black; why not make a film about him?

All I can say to that is, whether a good experience or a bad experience, it’s still someone’s experience. It’s the same with history, and in both cultural and musical history, we cannot deny that N.W.A. established themselves as a prominent figure. Even they have said themselves that they are not role models. Besides, can we say we would have thought any different had we been in their shoes?

Fun Fact: Of all the group members o the N.W.A., only Eazy-E and MC Ren were part of a street gang, being part of the Kelly Park Compton Crips, and were friends before the group actually formed. It puts a scene in more light when Suge Knight refers to Compton as ‘Bompton’, implying heavily that he part of the Bloods, a rival gang whose enmity for the Crips is so great, that they will say words beginning with the letter ‘C’ as if it starts with ‘B’ instead.

But enough of the soapbox, let’s talk about the music. What else can I say about it? Brutally honest, holding no punches, “if it isn’t hard, then it’s weak!” There are moments when you can tell that the original tracks are dubbed in over the actors while they are singing. Although some would accuse it of being lazy, I think it’s a good choice. It would be more effective to hear the real thing rather than a remaster.

As for the characters, to be honest the three actors that really stood out to me was Corey Hawkins as Dr Dre, O’Shea Jackson Jr playing as his father Ice Cube and Jason Mitchell as Eazy-E.  Its funny how at first, O’Shea Jackson Jr felt like he couldn’t possibly fill in the role of his father. But seeing him as Ice Cube, it’s as if there was no-one more suited for the role, displaying the volatile persona that Ice Cube would have had. Corey Hawkins as Dr Dre is almost perfect, since being the producer of the music, you would expect Dre to be more reserved, smart…the thinker of the group. And Jason Mitchell is great as Eazy-E, especially up to the third arc of the film as everything start to unravel.

Fun fact: At first, O’Shea Jackson Jr felt uncomfortable playing his own father Ice Cube when cast. But given the training and coaching, eventually he said that only he should portray his father in the film. Eazy-E’ son Lil Eazy-E also wanted to fill in the role of his father however it didn’t work out, according to Ice Cube. Lil Eazy would then coach the actor Jason Mitchell, who got the role of Eazy-E.

And as a small note, I love the small cameos of big rap stars like Snoop Dogg and Tupac. I ‘am slightly miffed they didn’t add Eminem, perhaps as a cheeky addition to the end, but no big deal.

As for criticisms, the few I can think of is that Jerry Heller in particular, I feel like his role got screwed over towards the end, especially when in the beginning he goes to such extraordinary lengths to protect and help the group. Although it is built up, the revelation still feels like it came out of nowhere and without reason. It’s unsurprising that the real Jerry himself wasn’t happy about his portrayal, but refused to elaborate on what really happened  stating himself that “Eric isn’t here to tell his side, so why should I?”

There are also the other members of N.W.A. who are pretty much reduced to side characters and comic relief, particularly MC Ren who in reality wrote the majority of the lyrics for the group. In particular, the film does tend to bump up Dr Dre a little too much, not up to Mary Sue levels, but enough to be felt.

In the end, I give Straight Outta Compton 7 out of 10. If stretched, it can be called a vanity project, but it’s a well done vanity project. Everything about it, both good and bad is sharp and potent: The music, the performances both acting and musical, and the volatile atmosphere that broods over the whole film is designed to cut deep. Of course, it will cut deeper for some than others, and not everyone is going to like this film. In that regard, it fits the biopic for the N.W.A perfectly.

The Man From U.N.C.L.E.: Impressions

It is the early 1960s, and the Cold War rages in the shadows. Separated from each other by the Iron Curtain of Europe, the USA and the Soviet Union wage war on one another in every way except on the battlefield. One wrong move in the political arena can lead to a catastrophic nuclear war. In hidden alleys, alcoves and safehouses, spies from both sides plot the silent destruction of their enemies while evading authorities. In smaller countries, governments are toppled and set up on the cultural whims of their American or Soviet overlords through proxy wars.

It is in this world pulled taut that our film takes place. In East Berlin, CIA agent Napoleon Solo is carrying out a mission to bring the daughter of a German nuclear scientist beyond the curtain into the American side. After encountering and evading a KGB operative, Solo is then informed of a criminal organization consisting of former Nazis who are in the process of simplifying the process of creating nuclear weapons. To stop them, the US and the Soviet Union must co-operate, meaning that Solo must team up with the KGB agent from before, Illya Kuryakin. Together they must battle this criminal organization, as well as the ingrained mistrust and differences between each other.

Fun Fact: A LOT of people were considered for the role of Napoleon Solo. George Clooney could not take on the role because of health problems, and Tom Cruise was occupied with Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation. Others considered include Joseph Gordon Levitt, Robert Pattinson, Michael Fassbender, Joel Kinnaman and Ryan Reynolds. Henry Cavill actually auditioned to be Illya.

Perhaps the strongest point of the film is its aesthetic value, including the cinematography, sound and visual editing. I love the one detail where the filter is given a grainy texture, as if filmed by a camera from the 60s. Also, the beginning and the end is perhaps my favourite moments, when the director does this best to suck the audience in, telling the tale of the Cold War through photos, newspaper clips and maps, and also lead them out of the film as well.  And it would be a sin to leave out the costumes as well, most of it being vintage clothing.

Second of all, I love the music, particularly the flute tracks (I’ve realised that Guy Ritchie has always had a thing for flutes in his film soundtracks) and Take Care Of Business by Nina Simone. A lot of effort is put into immersing you in the world of the Cold War, whether in 60s Germany or Italy, through the clothes, speech and music.  There are moments when the music dominates the scenes, where the dialogue and sounds are muted, letting the music set up the atmosphere. Most of the time its effective, sometimes it can be excessive. It doesn’t have to happen or every dramatic scene.

Fun Fact: Hugh Grant is the ONLY main cast member to use his natural accent in the film.

Another strong point is the relationships between the main characters, particularly Illya and Solo. The constant dick-measuring between the both of them, is just a treat to watch, especially when their different cultures and methodologies clash. Of course, being spies from different nations it is inevitable that there is the constant feeling of mistrust, especially in the case with the rewards of their mission, but I didn’t think it really led to anything, since it came up close to the end. I’m not saying it was completely necessary, but I think they should have gone all in with it or not at all and just stick to them being more or less competitive rivals.

Storywise, it was alright, but no ball of fire. If you have watched any James Bond film or other spy flick, especially those that embrace the style of spy-flicks, then you will have seen the plot to this one. It is for all intents and purposes an origin story, which does explain why the romance between Illya and Gaby never blooms, but is still present. Perhaps there are hints of a sequel? But as is one of the common problems with origin stories, you feel that the big villain got beaten a little too easily. Granted the way it happened was creative and smooth but still more anticlimactic than I would have hoped.

Fun Fact: Both Cavill and Hammer did their own stunts in the film. In particular there s a scene where Solo removes a tablecloth without disturbing any of the objects on top was actually done by Henry Cavil, as he was trained by British Variety star Mat Ricardo.

Overall, I give The Man from U.N.C.L.E a 7 out of 10. A very stylish film by Guy Ritchie. Not perfectly  done, but you can tell there was passion and effort put into it. A real treat to watch and to listen to, even if the story is no sparkler.

Inside Out: Impressions

Ok, before I get to actually reviewing the film of Inside Out, let me first say this: Inside Out has probably the best trailer I’ve seen in a very long time. Practically the moment I saw it I knew deep down I had to go see this film. It’s so simple, in fact it’s one of the very scenes in the film, a little altered but just in those two minutes you get everything you need to know about the film: You learn what it’s possibly about, the conflicts that can arise, possible main characters and so on. I don’t know who directed the trailer, but they did a very good job.

Oh, and before the film starts there is a short piece about a lonely volcano looking for a companion. Nothing much to say about it except it’s going to be a prelude to the feels that you will experience in Inside Out. So, the film is about a 14 year old girl named Riley, or more specifically the emotions inside her mind: Joy, Anger, Fear, Disgust and Sadness. When Riley moves from Minnesota to San Francisco, it not only turns her life upside down, but that of her emotions as well. A disastrous event within and without leads to Riley’s core emotions being lost in the depths of her mind, along with Joy and Sadness, leading her to become more withdrawn and sullen. Now Joy and Sadness must find their way back to their headquarters, before Riley’s remaining emotions lead her towards making even bigger mistakes.

I remember a friend saying that this film is actually a depressing sit, and although I wouldn’t go that far, I can see why she would say that. Inside Out can be funny at times, particularly at the end, but when it goes dark, it can REALLY go dark. Honestly, throughout the film we are going through the slow destruction of a child’s mind. Her imagination, memories and relationships, sent crumbling and condemned into the memory dump to be forgotten forever.  Don’t be surprised if you are already tearing up by the first half of the film.

Fun fact: The crew behind Inside Out is actually very small: it had only 45 animators, which would make up half of a crew for previous Pixar films. In fact, production designer Ralph Eggleston worked for five and a half years on Inside Out; the longest and hardest he has ever worked on just one film. Director Pete Docter said the film was “one of the most challenging I’ve ever had to put together,” due to having to tell two stories: what is going on with Riley and what is going on in her mind at the same time.

I do like this film though, not only because of the emotional impact, but also because I think it’s a lot smarter than it lets on. One of the first things I didn’t like was that weirdly enough, Joy is actually a *****.  The way she treats Sadness is selfish, even cruel at times, even to the point where she literally abandons her because she “needs Riley to be happy”. It is true, that at the beginning Sadness doesn’t really have a purpose. In fact just by touching memories she can taint them, turning them into sad memories, which is why she is sidelined all the time.

But thinking about it, there is a hidden message behind it. Sometimes, we ourselves can be selfish in pursuing our joys, not caring who we hurt or push aside to make ourselves happy. In our worst moments, sadness is an unwelcome, but necessary emotion. Because by expressing it means others can notice the pain within us, and they can help lead us on the healing road back to joy. Keeping it in can lead to bitterness, and foolish, maybe even fatal decisions.

Fun fact: The writers behind the film were considering putting in up to 27 different emotions, but cut it down to five to make everything less complicated. Major emotions cut out include Surprise, Pride and Trust.

Inside Out is also a tale of growth and a new transition in life, albeit an extreme one. It is actually heartbreaking at how much of Riley’s mind disintegrates, and old ideas and memories which held so much value before can disappear so easily, swamped by time and new experiences. But as challenges come and go, the mind grows and expands, becoming bigger, stronger and capable of more. At first I was going to say that it’s perhaps the process of puberty, but the film already covers that question.

Character wise, I do like the growing relationship between Joy and Sadness. The only problem is that the focus on them kind of diminishes the other characters. Fear holds himself up because he mostly fills the role of comic relief, but Disgust and Anger don’t really have much of a presence in the film for the sake of just being there for their own gimmicks. The parents are alright, but I do wish I could see more of their emotions, especially since its curious how their minds not only have their own design and personality, but also how controlled and in tune they are with each other. Again, a tale of growth and development.

Fun fact: Mindy Kaling, who plays Disgust, was moved to tears when director Pete Docter and producer Jonas Rivera pitched the film to her. She said, “I think it’s great that you guys are making a film that shows it’s difficult to grow up and it’s okay to be sad about it.”

Design wise, the film looks so beautiful, and I ‘am astonished by the thought that went into constructing Riley’s mind, such as the Train of Thought, different states of Dream and Awake, Memory dump and the different islands of Riley’s personality. It breathes real life into the setting, sucking you into the world easily.

I give Inside Out an optimistic 9 out of 10. Not just highly engaging emotionally, but also on an intellectual level. Although the film can be dark and even depressing at times, it’s worth it for children and even adults to learn its endearing moral: That all of our emotions have a purpose in our lives, no matter how hard or painful they can work.