Film Review: The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire   10/10
Director: Francis Lawrence
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth
Plot: A rebellion occurs after Katniss and Peeta succeed in the 74^th Hunger Games. President Snow must now seek justice and revenge.

Well, well, well. The Hunger Games – released back in March 2012 – surprised audiences worldwide with its chilling political message. Labelled a ‘teen franchise’ before it even began; Gary Ross turned the stigma surrounding this so-called ‘Battle Royale’ copycat and ‘Twilight’ successor onto its head. The first film was shocking yet ultimately unsatisfying, leaving audiences craving for more. This time around, Catching Fire is unbelievably epic and satisfying.

Firstly, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is beautifully shot and one of the most atmospheric films of the year. From the get-go, Francis Lawrence throws us into the murky, distorted yet familiar world of District 12. Cinematographer Jo Willems captures the setting perfectly; the light blues are particularly effective when we see Katniss and Gale together in the forest; giving the forest a chilling effect. In addition, the special effects have stepped up ten notches since the first film. The sweeping shots of the tribute train zooming from district to district are truly beautiful and completely believable. It is however the arena scenes where the budget (approximately $130 million compared to the first film’s $78 million) really shows. Colossal shots – which were left out of the trailers, thank goodness – such as giant waves, fighting monkeys and deadly mists, are captivating to watch on the big screen.

Katniss, played by Jennifer Lawrence, is nothing short of phenomenal here. She steals each and every scene she’s in. Her most heartbreaking scene may well be her speech to Rue’s family – a victim of the previous Games - as well as the moment afterwards in which Lawrence is pulled away as the audience rebels. It’s really quite difficult to put into words Lawrence’s excellence in this film.

Though Lawrence shines, there are other notable cast members. President Snow, played by Donald Sutherland, takes a more pivotal role in this second instalment; an earlier scene where he and Katniss have a face-off in her new home is utterly captivating to watch. It’s so very rare you see a younger and older actor and actress play off a scene so perfectly. You don’t for one moment doubt their seriousness and realism in the scene. Elizabeth Banks as Effie Trinket also returns with some extraordinary costumes and make-up throughout the film; some so laughably outrageous, that you can’t help but love her. Stanley Tucci plays a far different side to Caesar Flickerman this time around; his role, to keep the viewers at home away from the news of the rebellion, is so interesting to watch. The fear in his eyes as all the Victors hold their hands up in the air makes you realise how high the stakes are. You see him realise, for the first time, that he has been contributing to these games. These small touches are the most memorable, which is a reason to believe that this film series is working.

Sam Clafin is also a new addition, who works well as Finnick Odair. His accent is carried out surprisingly well and it’ll be interesting to see how he develops his character through Mockingjay. The most brave, outrageous and excellent addition has to be Jena Malone as Johanna. She is by far the most intriguing tribute to watch, and flourishes whenever she comes onto the screen – her interview before the Games and the ‘lift scene’ are just two of her many highlights.

In Conclusion: The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is ultimately flawless. As a book to film adaptation, it works perfectly for book fans and casual moviegoers alike. Jennifer Lawrence is superb and the supporting cast alongside her reflect how this series is truly about its characters. And finally, Francis Lawrence has directed an intense rollercoaster which culminates in a chilling final shot – Mockingjay has a lot to live up to.

Film Review: Gravity

Gravity   8/10
Director: Alfonso Cuaron
Starring: Sandra Bullock, George Clooney, Ed Harris
Plot: a tragic accident leaves a medical engineer and astronaut out in space, alone.

It’s difficult to find an adjective a newspaper, magazine or blog hasn't yet used to describe Gravity; but here’s a start, unique.

Following the space antics of Dr. Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock) and Matt Kowalski (George Clooney), Gravity thrusts its audience into the abyss. To begin with, the most impressive aspect of this film is its visual effects. As impressive as the performances are, Gravity presents audiences with effects unlike any they’ve seen before. As a viewer, I didn’t once question whether the events were really occurring in space; the effects are so seamlessly put together, that there doesn’t seem to be one, poorly established or unfinished shot – it all looks so real. In addition, the 3D here is phenomenal. So many films have tried and failed to achieve what Avatar did in 2009, which was a cinematic experience like no other. Gravity continues this ‘must see in cinemas’ hype, which is an occurrence all too rare.

Though its effects are top-notch, it’d be an incredibly thin piece of cinema if its acting didn’t stand up to the mark also. Thankfully, it does. George Clooney does what he does best here, which is… George Clooney. He’s utterly charming as Matt; a character who assists Ryan from the get-go. The main star here though is Sandra Bullock. Her fairly turbulent (pardon the pun) yet – at times – phenomenally successful run in the genre of comedy has become only natural to her. Thankfully though, she has finally returned to the other job she does best; getting down and dirty in a role. Like in the Blind Side, we see Bullock transform into a completely different person, and Ryan is the perfect role for her. Her portrayal is utterly heartbreaking at times, yet steely and determined during others.

Whilst there is much to applaud in Gravity, there are flaws. Firstly, on entering the cinema, I hadn’t once heard how incredibly cliché and corny the dialogue was going to be. At first I considered it a mockery of other science-fiction films but it continued throughout. The painfully random, out-of-place Bullock line, “I hate space” seems forced and if anything, annoying. Unfortunately, such dialogue continues throughout; it seems as if Cuaron (director and writer) was too insistent on keeping these characters grounded (again, pardon the pun), whilst they seem (mainly Clooney’s character) a lot less grounded than they should.

In Conclusion: Gravity’s running time of 90 minutes has become so very rare in today’s cinema, yet it fits its time comfortably and its pace doesn’t falter once. Sandra Bullock is the one to note here, stealing the show throughout, spinning alongside the flawless graphics. Cuaron has crafted a very technically complex film here and you wouldn’t think it had taken so long to make – a real masterpiece in filmmaking. 

Film Review: Monsters University

Monsters University    7/10
Director: Dan Scanlon
Starring: Billy Crystal, John Goodman, Steve Buscemi

Plot: set at Monsters University, we meet Mike and Sulley before the events seen in Monsters, Inc., where conflicts soon arise.

It’s hard to believe that Monsters, Inc. was released a staggering 11 years ago; yet it still stands today as one of the most popular animations of the 21^st century. Amazingly, a total of three directors steered the first film. This time, however, Dan Scanlon takes to the wheel alone and with great success.

Scanlon is a very risky choice considering he’s only directed an independent ‘mockumentary’ and co-directed a short film. Thankfully, he proves why Hollywood should take more risks, particularly when hiring new talent. Scanlon (who is also one of the six writers for the film) expertly weaves in between characters perfectly; it would be all too easy to spend too much time with Mike and Sullivan, characters we already know and love. Instead, we see new, loveable faces such as Squishy (voiced by Peter Sohn) as well as dark, villainous additions like Dean Hardscrabble (voiced by the increasingly cool Helen Mirren).

Also, for a family film, Monsters University is jam-packed with humour for adults and children alike. Many animations from recent years have failed to entertain those of all ages, with the likes of Finding Nemo and The Incredibles proving the most successful (in my eyes!) Nevertheless, this ‘prequel’ does suffer from feeling like a mere add-on. There is no real reason for this sequel at all; yes, we gain insight into how Mike and Sullivan’s friendship began but it doesn't quite have the freshness of the first film.

In Conclusion: though it isn't a necessary film… who cares! Monsters Univerity pulls off humour, features fabulous voice actors and steers its audience to a satisfying conclusion. Though it was great to visit these characters again, these two films should now sit nicely together... alone (no sequels please!)

Film Review: The Lone Ranger

The Lone Ranger    6/10

Director: Gore Verbinski
Starring: Johnny Depp, Armie Hammer, Helena Bonham Carter

Plot: A tale following the transformation of a dedicated man of the law, John Reid, to a man of justice.

It’s surprising this film ever made it to the silver screen; budgetary problems (reaching a staggering $215 million), a chicken pox outbreak and wildfires just a few of the setbacks. Before the film even hit screens, the giant blockbuster was already deemed a ‘failure’ by critics and seems to have suffered financially because of it.

The top tip for watching The Lone Ranger is to not take it too seriously. From the get-go, it becomes a giant, action-packed Western with action scenes bordering on barbaric at times. It is, however, a 149-minute form of escapism, with comedic performances from Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter working perfectly. Depp (Tonto) is incredibly loveable as the Native American warrior; it’s a shame, because the character could only benefit from fleshing out a little more with a sequel.  Armie Hammer also pulls off the role as the Lone Ranger very well; Hammer finally returns to a role more solid (similar to that of The Social Network) after taking on a – frankly embarrassing – part in Mirror Mirror. Helena Bonham Carter, as usual, is fantastic as Red Harrington, thrusting up her leg to reveal a gun at the foot of her heel. Whilst being completely unnecessary, Carter’s part in the film is a breathe of fresh air during the slightly dreary middle act.

Also, the plot of the film seems interesting from the start, yet the entire piece suffers from constantly stopping and starting. It finally finds its feet in its final hour (at which point, critics had probably lost interest and began writing their sour reviews!) For those who are familiar with the original Lone Ranger there is a real touch of nostalgia during this part. However, as the film attempts to recapture the originality of the first Pirates of the Caribbean film, The Lone Ranger doesn’t have the same supporting cast, driving force in storytelling or audience craving more.

In Conclusion: The Lone Ranger is full of unbelievably chaotic (yet enjoyable) action sequences and a number of light moments throughout. Not to mention the main cast who all do their best. It does, however, suffer from an overly long running time as well as taking a while to find its feet as an enjoyable, adventurous family film.

Film Review: Zero Dark Thirty

Zero Dark Thirty   6/10

Director: Kathryn Bigelow
Starring: Jessica Chastain, Mark Strong, Joel Edgerton
Plot: a film following the decade long hunt for Osama bin Laden, spanning from 2001 to 2011.

The Oscar season proved how diverse a year 2012 to 2013 had been in film; boasting historical epics, disaster dramas, a musical and book adaptations. Most notably however, a thriller centring around the hunt for Osama Bin Laden was nominated for Best Picture… created by a female director.

Kathryn Bigelow steers a very ambitious film here, proving how female directors can be just as diverse, ambitious and dark as their male counterparts. The film skips through the intensive decade-long investigation, picking out key events and interrogations to fill us in on those main figures involved. Most of all, the film feels incredibly real, with a more documentary edge to it, rather than a sugar-coated Hollywood thriller. In turn, this successfully amplifies the scenes of intense interrogation, as well as some gritty policing – much of this is thanks to the very morbid cinematography and realistic camera-work. Also, whilst the trailer attempts to boast the films action, it is wrong to say this is an action film. The use of hand-held cameras, lack of soundtrack and amplified sounds work eerily well, making the explosions all the more random and shocking. Therefore, it’s safe to say that Bigelow has put her own, fresh stamp on action, proving that Michael Bay-styled (Transfomers) action, isn't always the best way.

Jessica Chastain fronts a cast of mostly unknown actors and actresses here; thankfully, it completely assists the sense of realism (with no famous stars to typecast to other roles!) Chastain, having shone in The Help, gets immersed into the case, completely unafraid of looking rather bleak during the morbid moments in the case. Similarly, Chastain deals with moments of intense anger and authority excellently.

Where the film seems to falter is in its pacing; whilst the case is incredibly engaging and its length unknown to those involved at the time, the film has little rhythm or drive. Unfortunately, this makes the film feel a little tedious during the second act, especially as the world already knows how this film ends.

In Conclusion: Bigelow presents an incredibly engaging and realistic portrayal of such a famous case. She has been ruthless and unafraid to get down and dirty and whilst the pacing falters, its understated finale is incredibly gripping and makes you forget its previous timing problems.

Film Review: Wreck-It Ralph

Wreck-It Ralph   6/10
Director: Rich Moore
Starring: John. C Reilly, Sarah Silverman, Jack McBrayer
Plot: Video game icon Ralph, travels through an arcade from game to game, in a desperate attempt to be a hero.

The animation market has become incredibly diluted in recent years; in 2012 alone, audiences saw Brave, Frankenweenie, Hotel Transylvania, The Lorax, Madagascar 3, Paranorman and Rise of the Guardians, to name a few. Unfortunately, it seems that;  the more animations, the more predictable they become – Wreck-It Ralph however seems to have revived my interest in a little.

Set across numerous video game worlds, Wreck-It Ralph is packed full of references to childhood favourites and the essence of these game worlds are captured perfectly. John C Reilly is the perfect choice to voice Ralph, switching from being an ‘emotional wreck,’ to angry and to sad in a matter of seconds as well as pulling off comedy (which he seems to do best, an example being in Step Brothers). Funnily enough, Reilly did have some input and has been credited as a writer for the project. This is, therefore, where the film really shines – in its script. There are jokes for children and adults alike, and they’re pleasingly consistent throughout.

Looking at the downsides, the film isn't particularly noteworthy for its animation. There are moments where the film is bursting with colour yet there’s nothing unique when compared to other animations that have gone before; it could still be seen as equally effective as some of the greats from over ten years ago. Similarly, the film isn't entirely fantastic on its characters; there seems to be an abundance of them thrown into the mix, and they all seem to pop in and out for little or no reason (something they could have held back on by introducing characters in possible sequels).

In Conclusion: Wreck-It Ralph sits towards the middle of the animation market; with its clever gags, fabulous voice actors and a fresh storyline. On the downside, it still doesn’t fit into the top band alongside Finding Nemo and The Incredibles (I think) and a sequel may not be entirely welcomed or needed.

Film Review: Man of Steel

Man of Steel    6/10

Director: Zac Synder
Starring: Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Michael Shannon
Plot: Earth is invaded and a man named ‘Kal-El’ must attack the people of his own kind in the hope of saving those who inhabit Earth.

Zac Synder’s career has been fairly turbulent to say the least; ranging from the fan-boy antics of Watchmen and 300, to the questionable and bizarre Sucker Punch. Synder has met himself in the middle with Man of Steel, and has only just improved on the lacklustre Superman Returns from 2006.

Firstly, Man of Steel successfully weaves Clark Kent’s youth with his present day; becoming closer and closer as the film progresses. Undoubtedly, as Executive Producer, Christopher Nolan’s stamp can well and truly be seen here as the Batman layer of darkness and murkiness has been applied. In addition to this, Synder, much like his previous ventures creates enormous and lengthy scenes of intense action, particularly during a siege and attack in the beginning, making Iron Man 3 look like a made-for-TV film!

As for the films stars, there’s nothing particularly interesting here. Henry Cavill as Clark Kent certainly looks the part, yet the rather limited script leaves little room for proper character development (alas, a sequel is inevitable). Amy Adams as Lois Lane is an interesting choice and although I’ve seen little of previous instalments; it seems that Teri Hatcher shall always helm the role of Lois Lane. It also seems a little bizarre that so many other characters are thrown into the mix with little merit; as audiences see cities fall to rubble, numerous men in suits and women in dresses run around, fearing for their lives - yet it’s difficult to feel anything for them as their input to the film is limited.

In Conclusion: Synder seems to have grasped the origin story of Superman perfectly. However, the action is rather overdone (which he does do well, yet leaves little for coming sequels.) In addition to this, I feel that he has failed to grasp the Clarke and Lois relationship at a critical stage. Does it play up to the hype? Not really, but it’s good fun.

Film Review: Now You See Me

Now You See Me    7/10
Director: Louis Leterrier
Starring: Jesse Eisenberg, Mark Ruffalo, Woody Harrelson, Isla Fisher
Plot: A group of illusionists are brought together to pull off a bank heist, the money from which is given to the audience – the question over how this heist will occur ensues.

In an interview with Jesse Eisenberg and Isla Fisher, they both seemed to think that magic-themed films are notorious for failing. Please note, the highest grossing film series of all time is Harry Potter and The Prestige put Christopher Nolan securely on the map! Now You See Me is certainly a mainstream, modern day magician flick, appealing to the masses through its cast and simplistic storyline, yet nevertheless is very enjoyable.

Firstly, it is rare that a film assembles such talent and allows each of them enough time to simmer and adapt! Jesse Eisenberg is phenomenal here and essentially takes the lead, playing an incredibly slick and alert character with unintentional humour splashed in for good measure. Woody Harrelson continues using his elegantly cool acting skills here, and Isla Fisher is top-notch, stunning, and a bad-ass red-head! Others are noteworthy, including Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman playing out what they know best. There are key scenes between the two that are completely engaging and effortless to follow.

Louis Leterrier, having directed the rather laughable Clash of the Titans, films this magical extravaganza to top-notch effect. The film shines during the arena performances – the camera glides across the stage and amongst the characters, really engaging the audience with the magic. Looking at the downsides of the film, it is difficult to distinguish between the ‘real’ magic tricks and the computer generated ones. A particular swirling, Batman-like, computer-generated cloak seems too far-fetched and distracts from the apparent ‘real’ magic shown, creating doubts as to what tricks could literally be done and which cannot. Similarly, the film falters in its ending – it pulls something out of the bag (no, not a rabbit!) to little dramatic effect. It all seems a little unbelievable during the final act.

In Conclusion: Now You See Me surprises its audiences with its utter coolness. All the characters are worth every moment of screen time. The tricks are (mostly) pulled off to fantastic dramatic effect; riveting for audiences. In addition to this, its incredible fast pace is great fun, however, the final few scenes do suffer because of it.

Film Review: Iron Man 3

Iron Man 3    7/10

Director: Shane Black
Starring: Robert Downey Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Don Cheadle
Plot: a terrorist called The Mandarin enters Tony Stark’s world, and only he can defeat him.

After the uninspiring, mediocre Iron Man 2 and then the explosive, inventive Avengers Assemble, Tony Stark has undergone a rapid change in recent years. The problems with the second Iron Man film included a poor script, uninteresting plot and an overlong running time. Iron Man 3, despite still having some flaws, has overcome the majority of the hurdles the character has previously faced, with some nice surprises.

Firstly, the action sequences are staged to a phenomenal level. Some of the set pieces challenge the likes of the Avengers Assemble in scale (with no Thor in sight!) The impressive collapse of Tony Stark’s house is far lengthier, grander and more exciting than the trailer teases (particularly thrilling in IMAX). The ‘Air Force One’ scene is incredibly realistic also; the falling of several passengers from an airplane turns into a mammoth catch-and-save mission at insane speeds. Black, a new director for the third instalment, has pumped adrenaline into the series which was squandered throughout the second film.

Also, the likes of Robert Downey Jr. and Gwyneth Paltrow - the two stars - are as fabulous as ever, with Paltrow finally getting more screen time (yet still barely enough). The film also boasts an impressive supporting cast; Ben Kingsley is chilling as The Mandarin (though heavily underused – those who have seen the film will understand) and Rebecca Hall is a surprising addition to the team (after her fantastic performance in The Awakening).

Now to the downside; the film sadly, hasn’t improved hugely on the script of the second. The overwhelming amounts of humour seem a little repetitive after a while and certain moments (particularly in the final thirty minutes) are incredibly predictable, removing the shock value of certain scenes. The change the film undergoes is also disappointing; whilst it’s difficult not to give it away, the film has marketed itself entirely differently, yet not in a good way. The change the film undergoes lacks any real punch and feels slightly anti-climatic in the final conclusion. Sadly, Guy Pearce falls into the role of Aldrich Killian, and doesn’t quite pull of the role as one would hope; there’s nothing new to see in his character and is fairly forgetful.

In Conclusion: boasting mammoth special effects, a wonderful cast and a suitable running time, Iron Man 3 is another exciting addition to the Marvel series. However, the film feels inconclusive and, inevitability, steering towards a larger goal… which boasts the ultimate question – is another Iron Man film really needed?

Film Review: Oz: The Great and Powerful

Oz: The Great and Powerful   7/10
Director: Sam Raimi
Starring: James Franco, Michelle Williams, Rachel Weisz, Mila Kunis
Plot: a magician finds himself in an enchanted land called Oz, where he must defeat the Wicked Witch.

At last! A fantasy epic which isn’t tied to a modern, young adult novel or ruined by Kristen Stewart! Oz: The Great and Powerful, directed by the wonderful Sam Raimi (whose original Spider-Man Trilogy shall remain the best), takes on the mammoth task of plunging audiences back into Oz, without ‘Return’ or ‘made for TV’ in the title.

Oz, like Tim Burton’s ‘Alice in Wonderland’ is full of special effects. Thankfully, the use of practical sets and CGI sets rarely becomes overpowering and Oz is bursting with colour. The 3D, having been used as an expensive gimmick for too long, finally plays out here to wondrous effect. The additional dimension immerses the audience into the layered, bright yet also dark land of Oz. The transition from black-and-white to colour is executed perfectly, and the performances are mostly very good.

The three witches; Michelle Williams, Rachel Weisz and Mila Kunis, are all on top-form. Williams plays the fluffy, loving Glinda, Weisz takes on the dark yet oddly loveable Evanora, and Kunis fills the shoes of Theodora, whose fate is played out beautifully. As well as on-screen actors, the voice of Zach Braff as Finley is very amusing. With the lavish special effects and costumes, the film would be nothing without a good script, which it thankfully does. Sadly, James Franco doesn’t pull the role of Oz off particularly well; whilst reading his lines perfectly, there’s no emotional connection or draw to his character, which was rumoured to (and should have) gone to Johnny Depp.

In Conclusion: despite Franco’s lacklustre performance, Oz resurrects the fairytale/fantasy genre; after the likes of Red Riding Hood, Mirror Mirror and Snow White and the Huntsman sadly failed. With huge action set pieces, stunning performances and a new Wicked Witch of the West, Oz may be deemed a modern family classic.

Film Review: Brave

Brave    7/10

Director: Mark Andrews, Brenda Chapman, Steve Purcell
Starring: Kelly Macdonald, Billy Connolly, Emma Thompson
Plot: Princess Merida is given one wish and following her mother’s forced marriage; Merida makes a mistake she must undo.

When Pixar chose to release Cars 2 in 2011, they received phenomenal box office success despite the fact that critics and audiences alike felt it to be Pixar’s first misstep - a sequel that wasn’t really needed. However in this case with directors Andrews and Chapman helming their first big-budget feature-length production – a risk Pixar rarely takes - they thankfully pull it off.

For the first time, Brave is set in Scotland, and it seems all the better for it. The animated landscapes and sweeping shots of Merida hunting, raise the question of why they’ve never done it before. The main highlight is in fact the animation; Merida’s bright red hair has been so wonderfully crafted, that you stare at it throughout. Similarly, Kelly Macdonald’s sweet yet bold Scottish accent finally plays out here, after having to play it down for recent roles. In addition to this, Billy Connolly and Emma Thompson - two other British greats -make the whole film seem that little bit more British. The film is also surprisingly funny; its script is entirely original and witty throughout, with jokes for both older and younger audiences.

Whilst there are many pluses to the film, the storyline itself feels a little weak towards the end. For such a big-budget film, the lack of big, bold action pieces seems to come down to a storyline which seems to wither away. The plot is extremely basic and entirely predictable. However, the characters seem to carry it perfectly and its running time of 93 minutes seems just right.

In Conclusion: with magic, a princess, various suitors and one bow and arrow, you’d expect a typical Disney fairytale, but you’d be entirely wrong. Merida breaks the conventions of a damsel in distress, and the setting of this Pixar film in Scotland is terribly ‘brave’ and it’s much better for it.

Film Review: Flight

Flight   4/10
Director: Robert Zemeckis
Starring: Denzel Washington, Nadine Velazquez, Don Cheadle
Plot: a flight is saved by a pilot and an investigation unveils the truth.

Robert Zemeckis has produced some ‘classics’ during his career; Forest Gump and Cast Away are among them. Reviewers have classed these as Zemeckis’ career highlights – I would, however, completely disagree. Zemeckis’ ten year development of motion-capture has created the likes of The Polar Express, Beowulf and A Christmas Carol. Both The Polar Express and A Christmas Carol are visually stunning, well-paced and thrilling. Flight is Zemeckis’ return to live-action, which is a transition that fails.

Flight is a film which, as many are, marketed to the wrong audience. The ‘main event’ seems to be the crash sequence at the beginning of the film; people flying, screaming children and utter carnage ensue within a ten minute sequence, which is utterly compelling – Zemeckis at his best. As soon as the gigantic sequence finishes (a particular moment in which the plane flips upside down is phenomenally done), the film steadily declines.

Unfortunately, Flight becomes a terribly slow drama; a particular sequence in which Denzel Washington is pacing his hotel room goes on for far too long, and the dialogue scenes are tiresome throughout. Any scene which involves the talented and mostly funny John Goodman is ruined by an overly heavy script that is neither fun nor compelling. Washington’s performance is on this occasion uninspiring; the drunk scenes are convincing yet lack of emotion and the persistent staring isn’t enough to revive the performance. Kelly Reilly is the stand-out of the entire film; whilst her performance isn’t award-worthy, her addictions and antics add at least a little more to this film.

In Conclusion: Flight is 40 minutes too long; its script is dull and its finale uninteresting. A phenomenally realistic opening sequence shows just how Zemeckis entertains his audience – by thrilling! Let’s just hope Zemeckis returns to motion-capture as soon as possible.

Film Review: Les Miserables

Les Miserables    7/10
Director: Tom Hooper
Starring: Hugh Jackman, Russell Crowe, Anne Hathaway
Plot: It’s the 19^th century, and Jean Valjean breaks his parole. However, he is being hunted by his enemy, policeman Javert.

Tom Hooper creates a film that’s dark, grand and comical. Hooper has loosened his belt significantly since The King’s Speech – a far more structured and tight production. Les Miserables is, despite its length, chaotic due to its many story lines; but somehow flows elegantly to its grand finale thanks to its cast.

The different stories that unravel are all captivating; Hugh Jackman’s rags to riches tale, Russell Crowe’s hunt and Anne Hathaway’s desperation, are all terribly grim at times; yet the stunning musical numbers are uplifting, punchy and powerful. Hooper’s decision to record vocals live is pulled off terrifically; Hathaway’s rawness is captured during a montage of having her teeth removed and hair shaven.

The talent of the cast cannot be questioned; highlights include the phenomenal Helena Bonham Carter and Sacha Baron Cohen; Cohen has grown significantly from his gross-out comedy, and here merges himself with Carter in classy humour. The tale between Amanda Seyfried and Eddie Redmayne is endearing, and one of the highlights of the picture; Seyfried’s high-pitched voice is a beautiful contrast to the deep, grand voice of Jackman.

In Conclusion: Les Miserables isn’t smothered in glitter and neither is it completely grim. Non-musical fans may be put off by its running time, but its multiple storylines and diverse musical numbers are bound to convert many.

Film Review: Dark Shadows

Dark Shadows   6/10
Director: Tim Burton
Starring: Johnny Depp, Michelle Pfeiffer, Eva Green
Plot: a vampire called Barnabas Collins returns and visits his dysfunctional family.

Tim Burton has seen gigantic box office success recently with Alice in Wonderland, which grossed over $1 billion; whilst receiving lacklustre reviews. Dark Shadows, similarly to Alice, is a blockbuster with impressive visuals. However, Dark Shadows isn’t as safe as Alice, and proves to be a strange mix.

The genre of the film seems to consistently change; it’s horror one minute, then comedy, then action the next. Usually Burton pulls off a mix such as this, however in this film it comes across as chaotic at times. In all, the plot doesn’t go very far at all. In addition to this, the abundance of characters feels cluttered, with only a few in strong focus. I think that if the film had focussed on Barnabas’ journey more, and perhaps more family back story, it could’ve been a little more consistent.

Whilst the plot is a little sketchy, the characters and acting is fantastic; Johnny Depp doesn’t surprise yet doesn’t falter. Michelle Pfeiffer plays Elizabeth Collins perfectly, wielding a shotgun to cinematic perfection. Eva Green as Angelique is not only stunning but beautifully evil. A particularly raunchy scene between Green and Depp is executed well and very funny. Helena Bonham Carter plays a mad person, a role familiar to her and one she does well with her usual skill.

In Conclusion: Dark Shadows is a bizarre film which feels a little too long; yet it is redeemed by its fantasy action, intelligent laughs and interesting characters.

Film Review: Jack Reacher

Jack Reacher   7/10
Director: Christopher McQuarrie
Starring: Tom Cruise, Rosamund Pike, Richard Jenkins

Plot: a man shoots five people at random; an investigator delves into the case further.

Christopher McQuarrie became a hit screenwriter with the likes of The Usual Supects, however critical falures such as The Tourist within recent years have been disappointed. However, McQuarrie has turned it around with Jack Reacher, a surprisingly entertaining action thriller.
 
Tom Cruise, despite failing to draw in audiences for Rock of Ages returns to what he does best, total annihilation. The action sequences are slick, fast-paced and terribly cool, something lacking from recent action flicks. A particular car chase makes use of ambitious angles and techniques, which are pulled off terrifically in the film (a zoom-in to Tom Cruise’s face while driving is just one of them). The film's trailer does, however, seem to market it as a full-on action film, yet the plot is surprisingly complex, with the different layers unfolding as the minutes tick by.

Rosamund Pike is also very good here; whilst her recent roles have been a little dry, Pike returns to the likes of Pride and Prejudice and Surrogates within her acting abilities. Her role is edgy and serious, something the film needed to keep grounded.

The plot, whilst being disturbing at times, doesn’t seem to take itself very seriously as it progresses. The film does, however, seem to change its angle and within the final thirty minutes, the plot drifts off and you soon forget who is chasing who. Yet in these moments, it’s the ‘ooh’ and ‘aah’ moments which keep you hoping for more.

In Conclusion: Reacher plummets full-throttle from the start, proving that giant robots and superheroes aren’t the crucial ingredient to a great action film. There’s nothing Oscar-worthy here, and it’s all the better for it - a sequel is likely and deserved.