Cats: Eye Bleach

Cats is a musical drama film directed by Tom Hopper. The film is a big screen adaption of the famous theatrical musical of the same name.

So, yes I watched this to see if it was as bad as everyone said and yes, I can confirm for you all it is trash. Copies of this film should be burnt and we as a species would be better if we could erase it from our collective memory. Here’s how I got there.

Right from the off, the design and look of the Cats themselves is off putting, they’re too humanoid and also weirdly sexual. I don’t know if Furriers where the secret target demographic for this film, but it is weird, the casts are often shaking what would be their human sexual organs and yeah, its uncomfortable.

Secondly there is no real plot, from the opening moments of the film we are bombarded with songs telling us about what cats are and what their world is, but they don’t really explain anything, and you have no idea what is going on. There is also a song very early on in the film that takes place in a graveyard and I personally found something very disconcerting about this one, like it made me panicky and troubled and I can’t really tell you why.

I understand that it is a musical, but the constant songs get to be a bit much, there are other musicals that have actual lines of dialogue in-between their songs, but this is not one of those films. The acting is blatantly not there, most of the actors seem to either be there for an easy pay day or because they were forced into it (at least that is how they appear when they are on-screen as they clearly don’t want to be there).

Overall, this is as bad if not worse than you have heard.

Pros.

It is bizarre.

Cons.

The furriness of it

The design of the Cats themselves

The lack of a basic plot

The repetitive non-sensical songs

The terrible performances.

0/5

Reviewed by Luke

Rise Of The Guardians: Forgotten Dreamworks

Rise Of The Guardians is an animated film directed by Peter Ramsey. The film sees the immortal guardians of children, Santa Clause (Alec Baldwin), The Easter Bunny (Hugh Jackman), The Tooth Fairy (Isla Fisher), and Jack Frost (Chris Pine), team up to defeat the evil entity know as Pitch (Jude Law).

So for the most part this was very generic family fantasy fare, the plot went the way you would think it would with an unlikely outcast hero rising to the occasion to save his friends and the world from evil. Same old same old. In many ways I don’t need to tell you what happens in this film because without seeing it you will be able to predict it.

The characters are likeable enough and the voice actors are giving it a valiant try to inject some personality into otherwise quite vacant character husks. However, the script certainly does the film no favours and often feels like it is caught between two different ideas; mainly in regard to tone.

The one positive I will say for this film, is the animation itself is great. It is very distinct and has it owns style that separates it from the rest of the DreamWorks line-up. I especially enjoyed how they showed the nightmare powers of Pitch on-screen, I thought it was very visually interesting to look at and that it also had an impressive scale.

Overall, very standard fare, you will have seen many other animated films just like this. The cool animation and strong voice acting won’t be able to change that fact. Very much a meh.

Pros.

The voice acting

The animation style

Cons.

Incredibly predictable

The characters feel very one dimensional

The tone cannot stay consistent

2/5

Reviewed by Luke

The Old Guard: Missing Something

The Old Guard is an action fantasy film directed by Gina Prince-Bythewood. The plot sees a group of immortal warriors get a new member. However, at the same time sinister forces gather to expose their existence to the world and use them for evil experiments.

I had such high hopes for this film, I had it on a few minutes after it dropped on Netflix and I have to say I have not been this disappointed for a film in a long time.

There were cool aspects to the film don’t get me wrong, but my issue with it is that it does not capitalise on these in any meaningful way and instead uses them for style over substance thrills. A good example of what I am talking about is the central mythology of these immortal beings, there are so many questions, so many implications and the explanation we get is incredibly lacklustre. This is most likely set up for a sequel.

Moreover, I enjoy seeing Charlize Theron in these very action heavy roles, she has a great physicality and is a very believable ass kicker, however I would have liked something more from her performance here. Much like a lot of other things in this film, it doesn’t matter if the character has motivation or is interesting as long as they’re constantly doing and saying cool things. It gets boring and repetitive fast.

Overall, this film let me down in a lot of different ways, it has its moments, but is severely missing something.

Pros.

Theron’s fighting prowess

It has interesting ideas

Cons.

It never builds on or does anything interesting with these ideas

Theron’s character lacks any kind of personality

It gets boring and samey quickly

1.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

King Arthur: The Legend Of The Double Edged Sword

King Arthur, Legend Of The Sword is a fantasy action film directed by Guy Ritchie. The film serves as a reimagining of classic Arthurian lore and envisions the Once and Future King as a street tough raised in a brothel destined to overthrow the evil king.

This film is a mixed bag, there was some stuff I really enjoyed and some stuff I thought was outright bad.

I enjoyed the world and the mythology this film sets up, it does not shy away from magic and shows off magical powers in quite a few sequences. Sadly the time slowing effect of when Excalibur is used in battle looks awful and like something out of a video game cut scene, so again very much hit and miss.

Moreover, Charlie Hunnam makes for a great King Arthur and has a lot of great lines and moments, his is easily the best performance in this film, but that is because pretty much everyone else isn’t trying; here’s looking at you Jude Law. I would like to see Hunnam in more of these sort of leading man roles in the future I do believe in the right hands he has a lot of potential to be explored.

This is very much a Guy Ritchie movie it has his style and fingerprints all over it, if you have ever seen one of his films before you know exactly what I mean. Very much like a lot of things in this film this too proves to be a double-edged sword. In the early parts of the film where Arthur runs a street gang it works very well and fits together, however as the story becomes more in line with the traditional depiction and more fantastical it starts to stand out for all the wrong reasons, proving to be quite out of place and jarring to watch.

Overall, a valiant effort to try something new, but only parts of it work out, incredibly hit or miss at the best of times.

Pros.

The world/ worldbuilding

Hunnam

The Ritchie tone in the first act.

Cons.

The terrible sword effects

Most of the cast are not even bothering to try

The Ritchie tone in the second and third acts

The fact that it doesn’t come together very well at all.

3/5

Reviewed by Luke

Kung Fu Panda 3: Mastering Your Craft

Kung Fu Panda 3 is an animated martial arts film directed by Alessandro Carloni and Jennifer Yuh Nelson. The plot sees ancient bad guy Kai (J.K Simmons), break free of the spirt world and return to the mortal plane hell bent on stealing the chi of every Kung Fu Master thereby destroying his old nemesis Oogway’s (Randall Duk Kim) legacy once and for all. There is only one Panda who can stop him.

I enjoyed this film quite a bit, it might have been my favourite since the first. I enjoyed the intensely personal journey at the heart of the story. Though you have all this end of the world end of kung fu stuff going on all around, the heart of the film is Po (Jack Black), coming to terms with you he is and finding his place in the world.

I think the journey that Po goes on, the inspiration for the series, is masterfully done and is a true achievement for the creatives involved. The progression feels natural and earned, when Po meets his birth dad Li (Bryan Cranston), it feels earned after all the soul searching he did in the second film. Truly his is a masterpiece of storytelling across multiple films and a beacon for how to do sequels.

I also enjoyed that the focus was not souly on Po, yes, he is the main focus, but this film gave those around him the chance to shine as well and shine they do.

Overall, this is the perfect end to the trilogy and feels like a much-deserved end, the character work and development is nothing sort of a master class and Black nails the emotion.

Pros.

The journey

The ending

The emotional heart at the core of the film

Giving the side characters a chance to shine

The voice acting

Cons

The villain is a bit weak, but it is such a minor issue.

4.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Maleficent, Mistress Of Evil: Hang Up The Horns

Maleficent 2 is a family fantasy film directed by Joachim Ronning. The plot follows an evil ruler go to war, wanting to wipe out supernatural creatures using a misunderstanding as justification to do so. Wait a minute, I am getting déjà vu, isn’t that basically the same premise as the first film?

If there was ever a needless sequel this is it. The plot rethreads most of the same beats of the first film, very little of substance is established and overall it feels hollow and made for the money. That would be my two-sentence description of this film.

The main issue with this film is its tone. The first half and hour and the last fifteen minutes of this film seem to think it is a light breezy affair where nothing it taken too seriously, however the rest of the film seems to be direly serious and bleak; did someone not get the memo? This tonal mismatch makes the film feel very jarring and hard to watch.

A lot of the new elements introduced to this film leave you feeling meh. This film introduces a lot of things to this world and this story and a lot of these things you’re supposed to care about, but the film in no way makes you care about them and makes most of them appear flat and boring which is a bafflingly stupid decision.

Jolie is okay here, she is a lot better than in the previous film and actually has some funny lines, sadly however she is kept away from the action for the most part and underused in her own film. Michelle Pfeiffer gets a lot of screen time as the new evil queen, but she is so one note and cartoonishly evil that her character sticks out for all the wrong reasons; clearly the writers don’t understand subtly or nuance.

Overall, this is generic, it adds nothing to the first film and might even undone some of the good things about the first film. Hopefully Disney doesn’t curse us with a third film.

Pros.

Jolie is better

Cons

The one note villain

The weird tone

Nothing new of substance added

Doesn’t justify its own existence.

1/5

Reviewed by Luke

Gnomeo & Juliet: The Cracks Are Showing

Gnomeo and Juliet is an animated family film directed by Kelly Asbury. The plot is basically a retelling of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, but with garden gnomes and a huge amount of dated references.

You know a film is going to be good when it opens by slagging off Shakespeare. This is one of the most mind-numbing films I have ever seen; it is so dumb I can’t see how anyone would be entertained by this.

It is not funny or charming in any way, at least bad kids’ movies like Peter Rabbit have a so bad it’s good factor to them, this one is just aggressively average. Not a single one of the actors seems to be trying. I don’t blame them for just taking the cheque on this one though to be fair, but it will hardly be the highlight of their resumé.

Another thing that I found off-putting was how often the film tried to ram the music of Elton John down your throat. Yes, I like Elton John, Yes he has good songs, do I want to hear them bastardised and put on repeat? No, no I don’t. What makes this more egregious is that it forces in songs when they don’t even need them just for the hell of it, almost as though they’re trying to torture the audience.

Overall, this is incredibly low effort and it shows. There are plenty of animated family films that standout for their storytelling or for their animation or their message, but this just seems corporate, cynical and cheap. Don’t waste your time.

Pros.

One good unintentional laugh

Cons

It is so dumb

It’s lazy

None of the actors are trying

It is boring

1/5

Reviewed by Luke

Smallfoot: Bring Back Channing Tatum!

Smallfoot is an animated family fantasy film directed by Karey Kirkpatrick and Jason Reisig. The plot follows Migo (Channing Tatum), a young yeti who dares to think differently. Migo believes that creatures called Smallfoots (Humans), exist, a view that gets him banished from his village. So, he sets out into our world to capture and bring back a live Smallfoot to prove himself right.

This film is made good by the never-ending charm of Channing Tatum. Tatum hasn’t been in anything for a while, so I had forgotten what a fabulous on-screen presence he has. I kid you not, if a lesser actor has the role in his stead then the film would never have been able to rise above average. This film owes a lot to Tatum.

What I really enjoyed about this film is its heart. The inter character relationships are particularly strong amongst the main cast, with the bond between Migo and Percy (James Corden), perhaps being the most heartfelt of all. This is furthered by the fact that Corden is playing a toned-down version of his usual ‘character’, which really helps the character to be likeable and not grating.

The one area where the film falls down is in it’s supporting cast. There are plenty of talented names amongst this films’ supporting cast, but most of them have little more than one or two lines and leave no impression on you at all. It is an insult to the craft to even call a lot of these minor characters and they’re so paper thin that they might as well be non-existent.

Overall, a happy family film that will leave you feeling good.

Pros.

Tatum

Character relationships

A toned down Corden

Feel good message

Cons.

The side characters aren’t even characters

3.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Hotel Transylvania 3: Dead And Loving It

Hotel Transylvania 3 is an animated fantasy family film directed by Genndy Tartakovsky. The plot sees Dracula (Adam Sandler), and family go on a summer cruise as a means to unwind and spend more time together as a family. Dracula himself is on a quest to find love after he realises how lonely he is, however, the woman he wants to spend the rest of his life with turns out to be the great granddaughter of his worst enemy.

The Hotel Transylvania trilogy is one of ups and downs, the first film was strong and had a keen emotional arc that worked, the second abandoned this and instead decided to focus on cheap jokes and walking back the character development of the first film. The third film, however, is the best of the 3, it loses the ensemble of the previous films, they are still there just not focused on, and instead tells a very personal story focusing on Dracula coming to terms with moving on after his wife’s death 100 years ago.

The concise storytelling allows for us to really go on the journey with Dracula and connect with him. Much like the first film the emotional heart of this film is strong and powerful, it made me feel something. I also thought having Mavis (Selena Gomez), come to terms with her dad dating again, to get another perspective on the issue, was a touch of genius from a writing point of view as it brought it all together.

Overall, this film learns from the mistakes of the previous films and betters them in every way, creating a film with something meaningful to say that will hit you with the same emotional weight as a good Pixar film.

Pros

The focus on Dracula

The strong emotional connection/ message

Mavis and how they use here

Moving the character development to interesting and new places

Cons.

I wish we got more of Dracula and Jonathan, Samberg and Sandler have great on-screen chemistry

4/5

Reviewed by Luke

Pirates Of The Caribbean, Curse Of The Black Pearl: Yo Ho

Pirates Of The Caribbean, Curse Of The Black Pearl is an action adventure film directed by Gore Verbinski. The plot sees a ghostly pirate crew go searching for the key to remove their curses, the only things standing in their way are a blacksmith, a lady of means and a dazzling pirate captain.

I have been a fan of the Pirates Of The Caribbean movies since I was young, I saw all the films from 2 onwards in the cinema, they were a big part of my early life. Yes, they dipped in quality after 3, rather dramatically so, but there is still a lot of quality to be found in the early entries of the franchise. I decided to rewatch the very first film and see if it still holds up; conclusion, it does.

The reason this film works so well is twofold, firstly the writing is sharp and well thought-out. Things are mentioned early on that come to be important later on and on repeat viewing this becomes all the clearer and you see the merit more. The character dialogue sparkles and the chemistry between the three leads is really built on and developed.

The other part of the reason is the scene stealing performance by Johnny Depp as Captain Jack Sparrow. Sparrow for better or for worse is one of the most significant pop culture characters of the last 20 years, he has appeared everywhere from spoof movies to videogames and it is all because of the fact that Depp’s’ performance stole our hearts and captivated our imaginations.

Overall, this is a great adventure film that stands the test of time, my one complaint is that there is no reason it should be as long as it is, and it really should have been cut down in editing.

Pros.

The sense of fun/mischief

Depp’s performance

It makes pirates cool again

The trio work well together

Cons.

It is way too long

4/5

Reviewed by Luke