Journey’s End

Spoilers ahead

Journey’s End, is a harrowing film about a company of British soldiers that are stationed on the front line in France for 6 days during World War 1. This film is adapted from a play of the same name by R.C Sherriff, so the idea for this film has been around for a while. With the feature film itself being first announced at the British commemoration of WW1 back in 2014. Whilst the idea itself of soldiers on the front line waiting for an attack is fairly generic this film manages to capture all the emotions and the hopelessness the situation itself would bring. The film even in scenes where nothing much is happening, where there might just be a few lines of dialogue, has this overwhelming sense of dread and foreboding; as just like the soldiers themselves you are awaiting the German advance. What the director Saul Dibb achieves so effortlessly is this idea of contrast, this contrast is shown in many different forms throughout the film, eagerness vs hopelessness, naivety vs realism, the heroics and bravery vs the complete senseless loss of life. Through these contrasts the film explores a lot of themes in an intelligent way, not glorifying or overtly patriotic; but honest. The performances here are all standout with Sam Claflin’s Captain Stanhope, being a particular standout. Claflin’s character is haunted by the events he’s lead his company through and is quite noticeably an alcoholic. Stanhope as a character is completely 3 dimensional, as we see him fly through many different emotions such as paranoia, a real strong care for his men shown in quite a few compassionate scenes, as well as a very real sense of fear and doubt. Claflin handles all of these different emotions with complete ease, and never once did I view him as anything other than Captain Stanhope. Paul Bettany’s performance as Lieutenant Osborne is perhaps the heart of the film with him being the one who keeps everyone together and is a friend to both Claflin’s Stanhope and Butterfields Raleigh. Through Bettany’s performance, we see more of Stanhope flaws but we also see the trauma he’s been through to get them. My main criticism of the film, is the raid scene where Bettany’s character dies, during the scene which is one of the emotional peaks of the movie the cinematography is quite jerky and moves around very quickly, (perhaps this was a stylistic choice on the part of the director), which I personally found took me out of the moment and I didn’t quite understand what was going on. On the whole, the cinematography and both the diegetic and non-diegetic music manage to paint quite an outstanding picture of what life in the trenches was like. Butterfield’s performance as Captain Raleigh is rather one note, personally, I believe he was only used as a contrasting figure to the character to Stanhope so that Raleigh could represent what Stanhope has left behind and will never be again. I believe that this film is a great insight into WW1 and one that doesn’t stray away from the dark pointless nature of war, it covers all the issues surrounding war such as loss and trauma with a well-rounded perspective. The film is at its core a drama film, as there isn’t much action in it when compared to something like 12 Strong, the character interactions and the interpersonal drama is amazing and obviously a result of a well-honed script based off fantastic source material. Overall I think this is a must-see film, as it so accurately shows all facets of war, as well as focusing on the men behind it really taking its time to develop the characters. Whilst the film is let down by the cinematography in one sequence it doesn’t detract from the overall experience, and Claflin and Bettany are such commanding presences that you will never really notice the underused Butterfield.

4.5/5

Reviewed by Luke.

All the Money in the World

This film is a testament to Ridley Scott as a director, with him replacing an actor and reshooting all his scenes only months before release. Whats more these scenes are hard to tell apart from the rest of the feature, blending in well; in contrast to other recent releases such as Justice League. Christopher Plummer portrays the role with equal parts ruthlessness, and a sheer sense of greed that perfectly encapsulates the character of J. Paul Getty. The film itself centers around the kidnapping of Getty’s grandson Paul, (played here by Charlie Plummer), and Getty’s refusal to pay any money in random. At its core, this film is defined by 3 key performances, Christopher Plummer’s Getty, who is tremendous throughout. With the performances of Michelle Williams, (Gail Harris), and Mark Wahlberg, (Fletcher Chase) also being critical. This is where the film fumbles, Michelle Willimas is perfect with her performance of a mother in crisis, trying to get her son back being both believable and the emotional backbone of the film. For anyone who has read any of my other reviews, they will know that so far this year I ‘ve been a big Michelle Willimas fan, with her role in the greatest showman being one of the best and most believable parts of that movie. However, it is the third key role that falls flat and that is Mark Wahlberg’s Chase Fletcher, who feels bland and uninteresting, really his role could be played by anyone. The strange standout social relationship of this film is between Charlie Plummers Paul and Romain Duris as Cinquanta, who are both excellent characters in their own right, but together they’re somewhat of an endearing pair. Duris’s Cinquanta is a sort of father figure to Paul and provides an interesting contrast to the usual stereotype of the despicable criminal. Through the character of Cinquanta, Scott explores the idea of a family with this man who is a criminal, who is one of the men who abducts Paul ultimately caring about him just as much as his mum. Furthermore, Cinquanta, when juxtaposed with Mr. Getty, is shown to be far more caring towards Paul than his own grandfather. This portrays one of the victims of the film as ultimately one of the antagonists. The negatives for this film really come from pacing, the film is paced badly, with the second act feeling dull and ultimately unnecessary, with too much time spent looking at the Chase, Getty relationship which ultimately goes nowhere. There were points in this film where it lost my interest to such a point, I debated the merits of going to the toilet for a prolonged break. Also, there were subplots with characters such as Pauls father which again feel like they go nowhere, with his character going through big changes in the first act without much explanation. The film could have benefited greatly from focusing more on Michelle Willimas’s character, and ditching Wahlberg outright. This is a gripping story sadly it’s just too long and not interesting enough, though I did appreciate the unusual captive captor relationship.

2/5

Reviewed by Luke

Darkest Hour

This film chronicles the early period of World War 2, through a time span covering roughly about a month. The period that the movie covers was before the Americans and Russians joined the war effort, a time when the British Empire was at its most vulnerable; and in many ways, this is reflected in the character of Winston Churchill himself. Gary Oldman portrays Churchill, a man synonymous with the British war effort. The director Joe Wright shows us a Churchill who is a far cry from the fearless war-time leader that we have come to know, we see a man who is loathed by his own party and has known many failures. The film acts as both a character study and also a new perspective on the previously trodden WW2 film. There are elements of a cat and mouse struggle throughout the film, with the hierarchy of the Conservative party made up of Lord Halifax, (in an excellent turn by Stephen Dillane), and the previous Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, (Ronald Pickup) trying to force Churchill to enter into peace talks, when the man himself wants to fight to the bitter end. This film is incredibly accurate in its presentation of figure from the time period, such as Ben Mendelsohn’s King George the 4th, before I went to see this film I had been watching Netflix’s the crown which featured both King Geroge the 4th and Winston Churchill, and I had loved the job Jared Harris had done playing the late king but Ben Mendelsohn’s performance here made me completely forget about Harris’s iteration. The film despite it’s PG age rating doesn’t stray away from the horrors of war with a Calais scene showing the sacrifice made and provoking an emotional response from anyone who sees it. It is in creating that emotional significants and capturing ideals and patriotism, that make this film as great as it is. Whether it is through Lilly James’s Elizabeth Layton, who experinces the horrors of war and carries on, or whether it is shown through the British public who have a bitter resolve to never surrender to Hitler no matter what. This film has an air of hopelessness with the British position often looking bleak and that brings with it many sad moments, but it is with that the film also brings with it a sense of optimism, a sense that through the bad we can endure and come out stronger. Also Joe Wright dedicates quite a bit of screen time to exploring Churchill relationship with his wife Clementine, (played here by Kristin Scott Thomas), is shown to be the rock that held Churchill together when he most needed it, this emotional softer element of the film helps to keep it varied, and develops the characters in quite a satisfying way. Overall this film is a well paced, well acted, well directed film and it deserves all the awards recognition it’s getting. This film inspired a strong sense of patriotism in me, what more can I say; except this film would make an excellent double feature with last years Dunkrik.

5/5

Reviewed by Luke