Film Review: Robot & Frank

Robot & Frank   8/10
Director: Jake Schreier
Starring: Frank Langella, Peter Sarsgaard, Susan Sarandon
Plot: an elderly man named Frank (Langella) receives a robot butler from his son, with the purpose of looking after him. The robot assists Frank, an ex-jewel thief, in a heist.

Creating a 89-minute film about an old man and a robot is incredibly ambitious and brave during such a tough, economic climate. You may be pleased to hear, however, that this film is many things, and dull isn't one of them.

Firstly, the cast here is superb; Frank Langella’s portrayal of a lonely, old man is touching at times, and his relationship with the robot (voiced by Peter Sarsgaard) unravels on-screen beautifully. James Marsden and Liv Tyler, the two siblings, dip in and out of the film with terrific performances; we see Marsden introduce the robot to his father’s home and Tyler shooing it away. Susan Sarandon is also marvellous as the librarian; she seems to steal each and every scene she appears in and plays a vital role later on.

Most notably, the film’s script is witty, fast-moving and solely character driven. It seems a very risky film to make, as it’s unlikely to draw in the audiences. However, this film could gain widespread appeal and perhaps a cult status if it receives the right publicity. Perhaps the only part of the film which could've cost is the robot. Created by Alterian, a Los Angeles-based company, it moves flawlessly and is truly fascinating to watch. Thankfully, the robot isn't borderline creepy. Instead, thanks to voice of Sarsgaard, the robot becomes a well established character, despite having few physical, human characteristics.

In Conclusion: Overall, Robot & Frank is an endearing tale which explores the truth behind old age. With one of the most interesting and compelling casts ever assembled, Robot & Frank is a fantastic drama with an unexpected ending. 

Film Review: What If

What If     8/10
Director: Michael Dowse
Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Zoe Kazan, Megan Park
Plot: The friendship of Wallace (Daniel Radcliffe) and Chantry (Zoe Kazan) is questioned when one falls in love with the other.

If you're looking at the checklist for a typical romantic comedy, you'll find affairs, crude jokes and Jennifer Aniston as the female lead. Thankfully, What If is not any of these, it is a fresh, independently-written take on the genre, with electric chemistry between the two leads - Daniel Radcliffe and Zoe Kazan.

Michael Dowse takes the directorial reigns of this modestly budgeted comedy ($11 million) and has successfully crafted a film you'll recommend to your 500 Days of Summer-loving pals. Dowse has somehow manage to dodge the majority of rom-com cliches and pulls off a surprisingly witty coming-of-age tale. With that said, Dowse has merely utilised and built on Elan Mastai's simply marvellous script, with special effects used to only improve and elevate the script's potential. It's also one of those films where there aren't any awkward silences for the audience to laugh, the script almost knows when you're emotionally or humorously vulnerable and takes full advantage of that.

Likewise, leads Radcliffe and Kazan clearly saw the script's potential and decided to deliver a whole lot more. Their chemistry and comedic timing isn't something audiences can always expect, with numerous gross-out comedies pretty much bloating the market in recent years.

As well as the two main stars, there's Adam Driver and Mackenzie Davis as Allan and Nicole, whose side story is surprisingly enjoyable to follow and doesn't detract from the main events.

In Conclusion: Arguably one of the wittiest and sweetest romantic comedies in recent memory (and some of us can definitely relate). Radcliffe and Kazan steal the show with their undeniable chemistry. 

Book Review: The Maze Runner Series

The Maze Runner Series 9/10
Author: James Dashner
Books in the series: The Maze Runner, The Scorch Trials, The Death Cure as well as the prequel, The Kill Order

Since The Hunger Games, there’s been countless dystopian, young adult novels that have simply failed to reproduce the same intense, kinetic action extravaganza. The Maze Runner, though it still remains insuperior to Suzanne Collins’ masterpiece, is a refreshingly thrilling trilogy.

The Maze Runner – the first in the series – is by far the best of the four. From the first few lines of the first chapter, I was immediately captivated and puzzled as to what the world Thomas had found himself in really was. The characters (of which there are countless, almost on a LOST-type scale) are all established perfectly; it’s easy in young adult books for the characters to become too samey and generic. Here though, Dashner distinguishes between them all well and you really get to understand them all within a few chapters of the book.

What Dashner also does, which is very clever, is know what the reader is thinking. Though the book’s written in the third person, you always follow Thomas’ journey throughout the first book. There are points where you yourself, the reader, believe you’ve cracked it. Where you really believe you know what’s going on. Dashner, brilliantly, seems to then find a way of smashing down your theory at the exact same time. Thomas asks questions that you would ask if you were him, which is incredibly rare in a series such as this. Dashner is always a step ahead of you.

The next two books in the series are not quite as unique as the first. They continue the story on perfectly and the character development continues on. More characters are introduced and even more plot is pumped in. Although, Dashner doesn’t for one moment take away the enormously addictive cliff-hanger chapter endings, which stick with you until the final book.

I’ve never been a huge fan of prequels, but The Kill List serves its purpose well. Yes, it’s completely unnecessary, but it fills that sad void that you’re left with once you’ve finished the trilogy off – it eases you out of the world a little more easily.

In Conclusion: James Dashner has officially done it. The interesting characters and intriguing plot serve as a thrilling and tense read, and it isn’t bogged down by the number of characters or backstory that’s unfolding – definitely a series to read before it hits cinemas this coming November.

Film Review: The Help

DVD: The Help  9/10
Director: Tate Taylor
Starring: Viola Davis, Emma Stone, Octavia Spencer

Plot: a journalist by the name of Skeeter Phelan (Emma Stone) writes a book detailing the lives of maids in the 1960s, a dangerous however historically important job that Skeeter must fulfil.

Tate Taylor does a fantastic job bringing Kathryn Stockett’s imaginative and  funny  tale to life. Making the town of Jackson, Mississippi in the 60s; a swelteringly hot, sugar-coated place for white men and women yet a different place, for the  black “help”. Viola Davis (Aibileen Clark) steals the show here; she’s one of the warmest characters to have set foot on-screen in recent years. Her character Aibileen narrates parts of the films and keeps the pace going. Davis plays the scenes of emotion so well, she also has a number of comical scenes with her off and on screen friend Octavia Spender (Minnie Jackson). Every part of the film is perfect, the costumes, sets, food and hair all bring the world to life whilst still making sure that the idea of racism and minorities are played throughout. The more violent scenes are dealt with well, Taylor allows the audience to feel terribly fearful for their favourite characters but doesn’t show them in a light too horrifically, perhaps a pro and a con for the film as whether it depicted this particular time accurately enough and scarily enough.

Emma Stone, a rising star in the world of Hollywood does her job well also, playing the budding young journalist Miss Skeeter. She is almost too attractive, and not as tall as described in the book but her personality traits are the same, the general look too (the hair and the makeup). The films running time of 146 minutes feels strangely short; some characters could possibly do with more screen time (the upfront, in-your-face but strangely likeable Celia Foote). The time spent with Minnie Jackson and Aibileen Clark is kept to its maximum though, and is perhaps the greatest on-screen relationship in years with real, heartfelt, cinematic moments towards the end.

In conclusion: Tate Taylor having written and directed the film blends humour, racial discrimination and American culture perfectly, immersing its viewers into the world of Jackson, from the get-go – it’s a real old-school gem that could be viewed and loved by all ages. (also, if you have the DVD or Blu-Ray, check out the deleted scenes, they’re brilliant also).

Film Review: Snow Cake

Snow Cake    7/10  (2006 Film – watched on DVD)

Director: Marc Evans
Starring: Alan Rickman, Sigourney Weaver, Carrie-Anne Moss

Plot: a fatal car accident leads Alex (Alan Rickman) to form an unlikely friendship with Linda (Sigourney Weaver) who suffers from autism.

Snow Cake is a hugely underrated and largely unseen film. It is definitely one of 2006’s best kept secrets! The films’ most notable aspect is by far its casting; Alan Rickman reportedly ensured that Sigourney Weaver secured the role of Linda soon after reading the script. Weaver - whilst enduring a hit-and-miss career - excels here in an ambitious, wild and at times heartbreaking role. It’s quite an achievement for a famous actor or actress to completely immerse themselves in a role that makes audiences forget their other memorable characters – Weaver is purely seen as Linda here. Alan Rickman excels too, interweaving his relationship with Weaver and Carrie-Anne Moss’ character perfectly. Rickman carries a solemn and lost character superbly, proving extremely convincing during the days after the traumatic car crash.

Marc Evans, director, has had a career consisting of small, independent films. However, he makes such a small, intimate story with few characters such a moving film. The cinematography is gorgeous throughout; most films merely capture the season of winter with wide shots but here Evans uses hand-held cameras, close-ups (and wide shots) to relate the movement of the story with the outside world. Similarly, the film – whilst not giving anything away – seems to start in a very claustrophobic, quiet manner yet as it progresses, the film seems to open up along with the characters (a development which is rarely pulled off!)

In Conclusion: Snow Cake is a film where very little really happens, yet the intriguing script and character development will keep you transfixed throughout. This may well be Sigourney Weaver’s best performance to date and it’s a shame there was no Oscar recognition for it.

Film Review: Pitch Perfect 2

Pitch Perfect 2   6/10
Director: Elizabeth Banks
Starring: Anna Kendrick, Rebel Wilson, Elizabeth Banks
Plot: The Barden Bellas compete for a second time, but will they succeed in the Worldwide Acapella Championships?

"We're back, pitches"

2012's Pitch Perfect, on its minuscule Hollywood budget of $17 million, managed to reign in a whooping $115 million at the worldwide box office. Not only did the production greatly profit, but it catapulted its leads to super stardom; donning magazine covers and chat shows, Anna Kendrick and Rebel Wilson have become household names across the globe. Three years on, the Barden Bellas return, yet do they succeed in reaching such sky-high expectations?

Not exactly.

Elizabeth Banks has taken a break from hemming outrageous wigs in 'The Hunger Games', instead directing the Barden Bellas to their next acapella tournament. Now, the first installment (in the now-trilogy) balanced its comedic wit, slapstick humour and musical numbers with a refreshing ease. While it is clear that the sequel strives for bigger performances and more outrageous stunts (queue the opening scene), it all falls a little flat. Banks' direction feels a little chaotic, with the 112 minutes feeling a little tedious at times.

In addition, the first film set the ground work for its characters perfectly. Unfortunately for round two, there's little movement in the way of character development.

While it's easy to pick out the negatives, Pitch Perfect 2 does hit some right notes. The leads are all on top form; Anna Kendrick's lovable goofiness continues to shine, and Rebel Wilson rightfully receives more screen time this time around. Not to forget the final performance, which picks up the entire production and ends the film on a high note.

In Conclusion: Pitch Perfect 2 has clearly suffered from the sequel treatment. The mash ups aren't as fun, there's way too many characters and there's a messy amount of side stories. Ultimately, the leads keep the whole thing stuck together and the occasional giggle will make it worth your time and money.

Film Review: The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2    9.5/10
Director: Francis Lawrence
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth
Plot: Katniss must kill President Snow for good, otherwise Panem will remain under his rule forever.

Unless you've been living under a rock for the past few years, you'll be fully aware that splitting a novel across multiple movies has become all the rage. While Harry Potter nailed the split and The Hobbit failed miserably, it's time for Francis Lawrence to send The Hunger Games franchise out with a bang - but is he able to do it with only half a novel?

Following on from the rather dark and morbid final scene of Mockingjay - Part 1, we find Katniss ready for war at the start of Part 2. Jennifer Lawrence is as emotionally captivating as you can imagine (and more). The Oscar-winner masters the pre-battle speeches, moments of loss and gigantic action sequences like a true heroine. It's fair to say that after four giant blockbuster movies as Katniss Everdeen, Lawrence has truly made this franchise her own; and while the remainder of the cast remain very much in support mode, they are not without their standout performances.

Donald Sutherland as President Snow remains one of the most infuriating yet fantastic villains in recent years. Sutherland doesn't need to raise his voice once, as his truly punishing stare and haunting presence fills the entire screen (which has become increasingly rare in Hollywood blockbusters). Josh Hutcherson finally shines as the brainwashed and very much troubled Peeta Mellark. Meanwhile, fan favourites Elizabeth Banks as Effie Trinket, and Woody Harrelson as Haymith Abernathy, return for very sweet but awfully short scenes. With the acting box well and truly ticked for the grand finale, is this the most satisfying conclusion for worldwide audiences? The answer may well be mixed. 

The movie's IMDb rating currently sits at 7.0 out of 10, while RottenTomatoes holds a 70% approval rating. Looking back, Mockingjay - Part 1 forced the franchise to stoop to a new box office low. To counteract this, Part 2 ramps up the action to a whole new level. Director Francis Lawrence has turned the Capitol into a giant arena, with boobie traps around every corner. From zombie mutts to giant machine guns, the final hour plays out like a giant goose chase, as Katniss and co. race to President Snow's mansion before it's too late. Most notably, a sequence involving Katniss and Gale marching towards Snow's Mansion is one of the most intense and perfectly assembled in the entire series.

With all that said, this may not be the conclusion non-book readers were hoping for. With the 137-minute running time dedicating itself entirely to the original source material, moviegoers may well be disappointed with the lack of Return-Of-The-King-styled action. However, for the dedicated readers of the book, the more emotionally charged script leads for a refreshingly different finish, as the action takes a backseat to the story line.

In Conclusion: Though Catching Fire may well be the strongest entry in the series, Francis Lawrence steers The Hunger Games to its truly grand finale, with one of the most faithful young-adult adaptations to date. With its political and cultural backdrop becoming increasingly significant in today's culture, the story of Katniss Everdeen will go down as one of Hollywood's greatest.

“The Divergent Series” – Is The ‘Part 1’ and ‘Part 2’ Craze Dying Out?

The Divergent series is one of those that you’ve either heard of or you haven’t. You’re most probably aware of it if you’re a young adult, avid reader of popular fiction or dragged to your local multiplex by a younger relative. With news that the final novel in the trilogy shall be - once again - split across two, feature-length instalments, it begs the ultimate question… is the series really that popular?
 
The Divergent series of books sold in excess of six millions copies in 2013 alone, topped USA Today’s Best-Seller List and won numerous accolades in the process. Unsurprisingly, before the series grew into the young adult phenomenon it has become, Summit Entertainment had already picked up the film rights back in March 2011. No doubt, following The Twilight Saga’s incredible success, Summit were quick to pick up the new hot topic before the bidding war commenced. Likewise, before fans knew it, Shailene Woodley and Theo James had already signed up as the two leads.

Following its debut in 2014 with an $85 million budget, Divergent managed to draw in an audience of $288.7 million worldwide. Clearly, the numbers show a success story but comparing it to its predecessors? Not so much. The Twilight Saga’s first instalment pulled in a mighty $392 million worldwide on a mightily small budget of $37 million. Similarly, the first outing in The Hunger Games series accumulated $691 million, also on a smaller budget than Divergent. So why, may you be asking, should we be making these comparisons when Divergent is still raking in the cash?

Well, 2015 saw Divergent’s sequel Insurgent smash onto cinema screens across the globe. Now, even after cranking up the budget to $110 million (with marketing and advertising costs not included in this figure), Insurgent pulled in only a slice more than its predecessor, coming in at $295.2 million. While this figure doesn’t take into account DVD, on-demand and television broadcast revenue, it’s very clear that the series has suffered something of a tumbling block – a waning interest, you could say.

Now, this is where the real question comes into place. Following the news that the final novel in the series – Allegiant – would be split into two, only last week did Summit announce the surprising titles of the two final parts. While Harry Potter, Twilight and The Hunger Games series have embraced the ‘Part 1’ and ‘Part 2’ titles for their respective final novels, Divergent has decided to change to Allegiant (the title of the final novel) and the newly-introduced Ascendant for the fourth and final part.

Why does a series finale need to create a completely new name? Well, the fatigue surrounding splitting novels was evident in The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 1, which underperformed and took in over $100 million less than its previous outing, Catching Fire. Summit clearly want non-book readers to forget that Allegiant will be stretched across two feature films. Similarly, if the original Allegiant – Part 1 had taken in an even smaller box office than Insurgent, it could prove fatal to the series, especially with the budget likely to balloon for a more explosive and satisfying ending.

It’s also important to note that Insurgent wasn’t as favourable with the fans as hoped. Major changes were made during the adaptation process, with fans questioning where the series could go next. Meanwhile, it’s been proven to be a box office disaster to upset fans in the past (note The Mortal Instruments).

Overall, it’s strange to see a movie series with a moderately sized audience stretch out an additional two films when - taking into marketing and advertising costs – its previous outing barely put any pennies into the profit pot; particularly when there’s two more blockbusters to fund.


As much as we can speculate and question whether Allegiant and Ascendant will satisfy the book fans and pull in those that have only kept up to scratch by screen, only time will tell.
Take a look for yourself at Allegiant’s new and exclusive first-look trailer below.

Film Review: The Visit

The Visit     8/10

Director: M. Night Shyamalan

Starring: Olivia DeJonge, Ed Oxenbould, Deanna Dunagan
Plot: Two children visit their grandparents, yet not everything is quite what it seems.

**Major spoilers**

M. Night Shyamalan is probably the most famous hit-and-miss director on the Hollywood scene. With The Last Airbender and Lady In The Water being widely recognised as some of the worst films ever made, Night still receives the attention he deserves from his early hits such as Signs and The Sixth Sense. With many critical and financial misses in recent years, can Shyamalan resurrect his sinking career with The Visit?


Whether you're a fan of found footage or not, it's important to note that The Visit isn't your typical shakey-cam mess. Firstly, young actress Olivia DeJonge plays Becca; a budding young documentary director. As a result, the camerawork is far easier to follow than previous features in the genre. Funnily enough, it's probably the best use of this particular format since the first Paranormal Activity. Shyamalan has a keen eye for ensuring all the crucial action plays out on-screen, allowing audiences to feast their terrified little eyes on the whole picture - and boy does he succeed!

The Visit is a film that you'll talk about for months to come. Why, you may ask? It's far more memorable than other horror films in recent memory and that's because it isn't afraid to have a little laugh at itself. Viewers will be talking about scenes like the hide and seek encounter under the house, the cleaning of the oven, adult nappies and a terrifying bedroom finale. For those that haven't yet seen the film, you'll probably dwell on the 'adult nappies' for a moment - and rightly so - as Shyamalan has proved that you can gross out a modern-day audience without the need for SAW-esque gore. Likewise, the unveiling as to who the grandparents really are is also a nice surprise. You're almost led into believing that they're possessed or alien, when they've actually escaped from a psychiatric hospital (chilling stuff!)

As well as Shyamalan's innovative new stance on the overused found-footage genre, the casting is impeccable. Most notably is Deanna Dunagan as the children's supposed grandmother. In fact, Deanna is so chilling as the elderly character that she doesn't even need many lines. The most terrifying of moments are when she's stationery and staring into the camera. It's also important to take note of the two young leads, DeJonge and Oxenbould, who play Becca and Tyler respectively. Oxenbould as Tyler allows for some more lighter moments throughout the film, which work surprisingly well for such a chilling production. Likewise, the two work particularly well on-screen and seem a little more practical and clever than your typical scream-teens, something audiences seem to have numbed to.

In Conclusion: While It Follows became one of the most talked about horrors of 2014, The Visit steals the crown this year. Shyamalan handles the handheld genre as it was originally intended and with a terrific cast, unique scares and an interesting twist thrown in for good measure, Shyamalan is truly back.

Attraction Review: Studio Tour London, The Making of Harry Potter

Review: Warner Bros. Studio Tour London – The Making of Harry Potter
Location: Leavesden Studios, Watford, London

The Harry Potter film series has in total grossed $7.7 billion worldwide, with all eight films ranking in the 35 highest grossing films of all time. All films have received critical acclaim, picked up various BAFTAs and received nine Oscar nominations throughout its 10 year run and  to celebrate or commemorate the end of the series, Warner Brothers  have opened the ‘Studio Tour London’ to put the exquisite sets, costumes, make up and effects on show to the public.

Warner Brothers have, successfully, brought to the public, a great Potter experience. The Studio Tour is a real winner with plenty of ‘wow factor’ with its original sets; on-location (or near enough). The initial feeling of stepping onto the stone floor of the Great Hall is, sorry for the cliché, truly magical. The long tables, cutlery, plates and house colours show the amount of detail put into every aspect of the making of the Potter films with every part of the Hall getting its unique wizarding stamp (there is so much to see!). At the end of the Hall it is fantastic seeing the mannequin’s, representing the teachers, wearing their original clothing along with the House Point Hourglass, which has never featured heavily in the films, which is a shame, because it’s a real statement as you walk towards Dumbledore’s reading stand.

As the tour progresses, you get to see many seasonal-themed Hogwarts items, including feasts from the Yule Ball from the Goblet of Fire. There are a number of walk-by sets included too (which only die-hards fans would remember) including the Hogwarts gates, Leaky Cauldron corridor and cauldron. The tour should also be praised for being so spacious, whilst smothering the surroundings with even the smallest of sets and props (the seven Horcruxes, especially the diadem, are fantastic in the flesh). Dumbledore’s office is another great set with; the high ceilings covered in paintings of previous Hogwarts headmasters, the memory cabinet, Pensieve and, if you look carefully, the sword of Gryffindor all look so real, expensive and, in a good way, old. As well as the sets, a number of items, which mainly featured in the action sequences, appear including the Gringotts cart, Hagrid’s motorbike, Knight Bus and Quidditch broomsticks. All of them are seen in-action on large screens, along with commentary from the cast and crew with exclusive behind-the-scenes footage. The famous Butter Beer also features on the tour which, disappointingly, doesn’t taste as one would hope however it’s an experience that had to be endured!

In conclusion: The Harry Potter Studio Tour London is something that every Potter fan must experience at some point in their lives, the feeling of stepping into the real Great Hall, knowing the famous actors and actresses have performed their magic there, as well as all the scenes that took place there is an unmissable treat. As well as the Great Hall, Diagon Alley is a feature not to be missed too, as you see all the different shops with their windows stacked high with magic-related items. Not only is this a trip for Potter fans but for film fans too, as the genius art behind film making in general is explored. You couldn’t possibly go wrong.

Film Review: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

Dawn of the Planet of The Apes   10/10

Director: Matt Reeves

Starring: Andy Serkis, Gary Oldman, Jason Clarke

Plot: just go see it, you don't need plot details - the less you know, the better.

It’s really difficult to describe Dawn of Apes using just words. To put it lightly, it’s bloody massive; a cinematic spectacle that needs to be seen on the big screen without fail. Director Matt Reeves, the man behind Cloverfield, has created a movie unlike any other. Dawn has done for motion capture, what Jurassic Park did for animatronics... How can you prove this? Well, the apes in this – as you’ve probably seen from the trailers – are unbelievably realistic.

For a first viewing, it’s all a little too much to take in. The opening scene, which involves a mass hunting, is one of the many highlights. The sheer pace of these scenes, which have been flawlessly assembled together, will have your heart pumping fast and your palms sweating. Andy Serkis, who portrays Caesar, is incredible. Serkis has been snubbed from countless award ceremonies, with a divide between those that believe he deserves it, and those that do not. I for one, believe that Serkis deserves at least a nomination (Toby Kebbell as Koba is also menacing and gripping to watch). Watching behind the scenes footage, and the movie itself, there isn’t a single blip or loss of character in his acting. After all, Serkis is playing an ape… is that not an unbelievable undertaking that requires a hell of a lot of skill? 

Not to forget Gary Oldman, who seemed to take up most of the trailers, and pops in and out of the picture throughout. As you’d expect, his presence on-screen is felt. As he takes on the role as leader of the humans, you really feel the fear and the human side to him. Really though, it’s the speeches of encouragement before the battles that are his most impressive moments. Meanwhile, the rest of the cast aren’t particularly memorable. It’s not to take anything away from them, as it’s the special effects, electric pace and sheer amount of ape screen time that we notice most. There’s little time to dwell with mere humans! 

I’ve likened this to Jurassic Park already, and it can also be linked to Avatar. Where Dawn of Apes seems to succeed over these two though (yes, really), is in its resounding message. There’s something about this that will never feel old. Perhaps it’s the almost post-apocalyptic feel amongst the humans, or the conflicts that will always exist like this in the world, it just doesn’t feel like this movie will age – it’s effectively timeless.

Finally, it’s important to note that Dawn of Apes is a sequel. 2011’s Rise of the Planet of the Apes had scale and it successfully reintroduced us Apes fans back into that universe. Looking back, it was merely that. Dawn opens up the universe and takes us to an entirely different part of it. Not for one moment do you doubt that this is actually happening, and it’s nice to see the setting taken almost entirely to a forest. If you think about it, how many live-action movies have you seen, mostly in a forest and predominantly consisting of animals, and enjoyed? Exactly.

In Conclusion: Dawn of the Planet of the Apes may well be one of the most intense, stunning and truly unbelievable cinematic experiences you’ll ever have. Thankfully, a lot has been held back and kept well away from the trailers, including the final thirty minutes, which is truly incredible. The technological advancements since the first movie have come on leaps and bounds - it’s unlike anything I’ve ever seen.

Film Review: Maleficent

Maleficent    7/10

Director: Robert Stromberg

Starring: Angelina Jolie, Elle Fanning, Sharlto Copley

Plot: the untold story of Maleficent unfolds as a curse is put on an infant princess.

Maleficent is, as another critic has pointed out, magnificent. It’s magnificent in the sense that its world building is spot-on. Except the opening sequence which is a little shabby on the CGI front, the rest of the picture builds the world of Sleeping Beauty with absolute ease. Director Robert Stromberg has a real eye for detail and has successfully transformed the animated original into a visual feast. The battles are enormous in scale and the effects do, at times, really flourish.

Maleficent, however, suffers from some really serious flaws. To begin with, a film that markets itself as a dark retelling of an untold story feels a little under-baked at a painfully short 97 minutes. On a budget of $180 million, it feels as if the entire production has been pushed into a teeny, tiny box that doesn’t have nearly enough time to explore.

For starters, this really isn’t the dark retelling we’ve been promised. Yes, it does have its rather depressing and ominous moments, but it’s actually incredibly light-hearted, humorous but altogether silly for the most part. When you get Angelina Jolie on-board for a Disney production on this scale, it’s a missed opportunity to use her for anything other than her incredible acting abilities. Unfortunately, the script doesn't always let her do this; it’s overridden with clichés, cringe-worthy moments and random comments that really do not fit with the rest of the picture.

Another point of criticism for this is its pointless characters. Sam Riley as Diaval (Maleficent’s sidekick) is painfully unnecessary and takes up precious running time that we want to spend solely with Jolie. The three fairies also – Imelda Staunton, Juno Temple and Lesley Manville – are sweet and all, but err on the side of irritating all too often. It all feels a little wrong.

Finally, to the major lead that gives this film the worthy ‘MUST SEE’ stamp. Angelina Jolie, who has chosen film projects sparingly, finally takes on the villainous, leading role we've all been waiting for. As previously mentioned, she doesn’t portray the dark villain we all wanted to see for the entire film, but we do get hints of this, particularly in the birth scene. It’s possibly the highlight of the entire film; the doors bursting open, the wind blowing the chandelier and the dreaded curse placed on the young Aurora. Another excellent scene early on involves Maleficent being betrayed by someone dear to her. It shows off Jolie’s inner fire and strength as the Disney villain. She’s captivating and nothing less than perfect in this, and it’s definitely up there with her role in Changeling, which was incredible enough.

In Conclusion: Maleficent is confused with itself; the big battles we were teased in the trailer are mostly over within the first 30 minutes and the untold story of Maleficent completely twists and contradicts the original, in a manner that simply doesn’t work. However, Angelina Jolie is phenomenal here. She’ll take your breath away at times and you’ll want to see this again and again solely for her – Jolie was born to play this role.

Film Review: Transformers: Age of Extinction

Transformers: Age of Extinction

Director: Michael Bay
Starring: Mark Wahlberg, Nicola Peltz, Stanley Tucci

Plot: Explosion. Rubble. Smash. Bang. Wallop.

When you utter the words “Michael Bay”, you’re likely to get one of three responses; a complete blank look of someone that knows nothing about blockbusters, a big sigh and horrid rant about every movie he has ever made, or a big fat smile of joy. I, for one, am the third. Michael Bay, in all his explosive glory, is one hell of a director.

Firstly, Bay has such a keen eye for adrenaline; he builds up action sequences like no other. Just as you think you’ve seen it all, a drop from the top of a giant skyscraper just tops it all off. Even with a running time of 165 minutes, dedicated fans will not be let down by the movie’s electric pace and insane special effects sequences. Not only that, there’s a whole array of new additions such as Dino Bots (which are underused but incredibly cool) and a lot more combat between the humans too!

Amongst the cast there’s Mark Wahlberg, who takes on the leading role as you’d expect; he’s blimen huge and deals with the action scenes perfectly. Wahlberg isn’t used like Shia Labeouf was in the first three either, he gets fully involved in the action (which isn’t just running). Nicola Peltz – fresh from the outstanding Bates Motel television series - plays Wahlberg’s daughter, and does a stellar job too. Peltz doesn’t play the damsel in distress all the time. Unlike previous females in the Transformers series, she has some really feisty moments. Stanley Tucci as Joshua is also brilliant; his role isn’t unique in any way, like Wahlberg and Peltz, but who in the world cares? His reaction to a giant ferry dropping out of the sky is a highlight (even if it is in the trailers…)

Finally, with this being the fourth Transformers film, Bay has pulled out all the stops, with action that will blow your mind. On entering to see this film, you should already know exactly what to expect… yes, the script is basic, the acting is average and it’s predictable. If, by the fourth film, you have yet to understand why millions go back to see these movies time after time, you are the one with the problem.

In Conclusion: Age of Extinction is one of, if not the, biggest funfest you’ll have at the cinema this year. It’s colossal in scale and it ramps itself up into a giant climactic finish. Honestly, it’ll leave you with clammy hands! If you don’t know what to expect from a Bay movie by now, go and watch something else and let the rest of us mad, Transformer loving, explosion-craving lunatics, to enjoy this extravaganza of a movie.

   BOOM