The Kitchen: McCarthy Mob Boss

The Kitchen is a crime film directed by Andrea Berloff. The plot sees three women single handily take over the Irish Mob, however problems soon arise, and things start to get messy.

This film achieved what I thought to be impossible, it showed me a good Melissa McCarthy performance. McCarthy is often cringey or outright embarrassing to watch on the big screen, but here she stood out, she was commanding, it seems playing it straight suits her.

My main issue with the film is how in your face with its message it is, from the very second the film opens you’re bombarded with agenda. Now I am not saying a film with a very clear message is bad, I am saying the way you deliver that message is everything. For me I appreciate a more subtle nuanced approached, whereas this film chose to whack you over the head with it.

My other issue is Tiffany Haddish. The central three performances are central to the narrative of the film and its believability, I bought McCarthy as someone who would do anything for family, and I bought Elizabeth Moss as a stone-cold killer, Haddish however was thoroughly unconvincing. This is by no means a comedy film, but she plays her role like it is; personally I think she was woefully, and I do mean woefully miscast.

Overall, if you can get past being slapped in the face with politics, this is a surprisingly strong crime drama, Moss, McCarthy and Gleeson are also terrific, sadly Tiffany Haddish is miscast.

Pros.

A good Melissa McCarthy performance

Tense and gritty

A great crime film

Cons.

It is far too preachy

Haddish is miscast

3.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Moana: The Ocean Rises

Moana is an animated comedy adventure film directed by Ron Clements, Chris Williams, John Musker and Don Hall. The plot sees a Polynesian island becomes the recipient of a curse; this results in life on the island becoming increasingly worse. That is until one day a brave young woman called Moana (Auli’I Cravalho), sets out to find the demigod Maui (Dwayne Johnson), and lift the curse forever.

Recent Disney Animation films have been hit or miss for me, so I was cautiously optimistic as I watched this film and I have to say it was much better than I thought it was going to be. Yes it had a fair few problem, but on the whole it was very solid.

So, straight of the bat the plot is very predictable, you can tell from very early on where it is going, and you will have seen many different films very similar to this one. Secondly, Moana herself to me felt quite bland she never really had much to her that made her standout; from the lead she was deeply underdeveloped. Luckily Maui and voice actor Dwayne Johnson steal the show, he is the reason this film works; without his easy charm the film wouldn’t be even half as good.

The songs are quite good, particularly the first song done by Johnson, who knew the man could sing as well. I found them all to be quite catchy and I enjoyed them, my only issue with them was that they were ten a penny, there seemed to be a song every five seconds and yes I enjoyed the most of them, but some of them just felt forced in.

Also, something I will penalise this film heavily for is that they wasted the legend that is Jeamaine Clement, they give his character one scene and then he never comes back; the horror.

Overall, standard Disney fare made better by the presence of the Rock and a few good songs, however it is far from perfect.

Pros.

The Polynesian influence

Dwayne Johnson

Some of the songs

Cons.

Too many songs

It feels too familiar

3/5

Reviewed by Luke

The Lost City Of Z: Madness Under The Sun

The Lost City Of Z is a historical biopic directed by James Gray based on the book of the same name by David Grann. The plot follows the life of legendary British explorer Percy Fawcett (Charlie Hunnam), as he searches for what he calls ‘Z’, a lost civilisation located somewhere in the Amazon.

I had high expectations going into this, I have read the book and I enjoyed it. This film very much captures the spirit of the book whilst also changing key parts. An example of such a change is the ending, in the book Grann concludes that Fawcett and his son Jack (Tom Holland in the film), were killed by native tribes. Whereas the film ends on a happier note and suggests that they might still be alive living amongst the natives.

For the most part I enjoyed this film, I think it told the story of Fawcett’s life and disappearance well. I thought Hunnam was a solid leading man, he convincingly pulled off the soldier turned explorer look and never broke my belief. He was however upstaged in the acting department by Robert Pattinson who played Fawcett’s faithful right-hand man Henry Costin. Pattinson clearly lost himself in the role and was borderline unrecognisable, another great performance by the young actor.

My main issue with the film was how long it was, at almost two and a half hours this film feels like a slog. It frequently lost my interest and felt incredibly self-indulgent.

Overall, a solid adaptation that has a very issue.

Pros.

A faithful recreation

The performances

The twist on the ending

Cons.

It is too long

It is badly paced and therefore boring

3/5

Reviewed by Luke

Midnight In Paris: That’s A Yikes

Midnight In Paris is a comedy film directed by Woody Allen. The plot sees aspiring writer Gil (Owen Wilson), a man who often remakes he was born in the wrong time period, gain the ability to go back in time to 1920’s Paris and meet some literary greats.

Before we get into this I just want to say, the fact that it was a Woody Allen movie bothered me. It creeped me out and after I knew it was one of his films I couldn’t enjoy it the same way, so in that this review might be a little skewed.

In spite of the infamous director I found myself intrigued by this film, I thought it had a novel premise and I enjoyed seeing literacy figures interacting with one another. However, I don’t think there was enough enjoyment to stretch across an hour and a half. The idea would have worked better as a short.

Owen Wilson seems to be enjoying himself and he gives a good performance for the most part, I can’t fault him, however the same can’t be said for the rest of the cast who are given very little to do. I found that the female characters were the worst served they had nothing to do aside from being love interests for various characters; some of said romances were icky on multiple levels.

Overall, if you can ignore the director and some of the themes then this is a good breezy turn your mind off kind of movie; that should be about twenty minutes shorter.

Pros.

Wilson

The premise

Cons.

The director.

Gil and his troublesome romances

The cast is underused

2/5

Reviewed by Luke

The Angry Birds Movie: Curse Breaker?

The Angry Birds Movie is an animated videogame adaption directed by Clay Kaytis and Fergal Reilly. The plot sees pigs invade Bird Island and no one can see their dastardly intent expect for one angry bird. Red (Jason Sudeikis), must set out on a question to recover the lost eggs and defeat the evil pigs.

I think this was the film that proved that videogame adaptions could be done well, before Sonic. I played the hell out of Angry Birds and I really enjoyed this film, I enjoyed how the film was able to create personalities around the game characters, which were incredibly hollow.

I thought all of the characters were done really well, with Red and Might Eagle (Peter Dinklage), probably being my favourite. The humour of the film is well done, and I often found myself laughing, the comedy itself was surprisingly mature for a kid’s film. However, the thing I connected to the most was the heart of the film.

Red being shunned because be was angry, unlike all the other birds who are happy all the time, was a stroke of genius and it made it feel earned and genuine when the towns people came to appreciate him for how he is and it was said anger that let him rise to the occasion and save everyone.

Overall, this is a nice easy to watch film, that will make you laugh and maybe make you feel something. Not as strong as Sony’s Hotel Transylvania offerings, but still a good watch.

Pros.

Bringing the game to life

Red and the other characters

The comedy and the heart

Cons.

The comedy is a little juvenile at times

The film is poorly paced and feels too long even though it is only an hour and a half

3.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Baby Mama: Safety Isn’t Always A Good Thing

Baby Mama is a comedy film directed by Michael McCullers. The plot follows Kate (Tina Fey), a successful career woman who has decided she wants to have a baby, she can’t do it herself, so she hires a surrogate Angie (Amy Poehler). The two women argue and disagree sharply about how best to treat the baby and then it is revealed that Angie was never really pregnant in the first place.

This film was one of the most boring and generic films I have seen in a long time. There was nothing new or original about it, I heard of films wanting to play it safe, but this was a whole other level. This film to me felt too clean, by that I mean it felt very fake and overly happy and sentimental, it didn’t really focus on the messy parts of having kids just a larger than life dumb comedic premise.

The humour again feels too safe, the jokes feel almost as though they were written for a kid’s movie. The humour didn’t land once for me and I didn’t connect with the films attempts at heart either.

Overall, to me, this is an incredibly bland film that doesn’t do or say anything interesting. It struggled to keep me engaged after the first ten minutes and I wanted to turn it off many times thereafter. This film screams Hollywood executives to me, it feels as though it was made by a focus group to be as inoffensive and as overly people pleasing as possible. Don’t waste your time with this, it is one of the weakest comedy films I have seen in a long time.

Pros.

Dax Shepard is mildly amusing

Cons.

It is too safe

It isn’t funny

Neither Fey or Poehler are likeable or entertaining to watch

It is boring

0.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Sisters: The Fey-Poehler Dynamic

Sisters is a comedy film directed by Jason Moore. The plot sees two sisters come together to sort through their parents’ house before it is sold. Of course the sisters are opposites to one another, Maura (Amy Poehler), is the self-disciplined scared to let lose type and Kata (Tina Fey), is the party girl who peaked in high school, both use this trip home as a means of trying to be different people and grow as individuals.

The plot is cliché and generic, this film will never win any awards for originality, but at the same time it is also very good and incredibly funny. The perhaps soul reason for this is the dynamic between the two leads and the fact that both are very humorous in their own way.

The dynamic between the two leads is definitely what makes this film so good, but it also boosted by a largely fantastic supporting cast, with the likes of Maya Rudolph and Ike Barinholtz proving to be standouts as well.

The humour worked for me and often made me laugh, though as I often say comedy is subjective so that doesn’t mean you will find it funny. As well as this the film has a lot of heart, that mostly comes off the right way. You do buy Fey and Poehler as sisters and when they face strife it is believable.

My one complaint would be that there is no reason this film is on for almost two hours as it just doesn’t need to be. It is self-indulgent and poorly paced as a result.

Pros.

Fey and Poehler

The comedy

The heart

The wider supporting cast

Cons.

It is poorly paced and on for far too long

4.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

How To Train Your Dragon 2: Hiccup The Horrible

How To Train Your Dragons 2 is an animated action and adventure film directed by Dean DeBlois. The plot sees Hiccup (Jay Baruchel), and the rest of Berk come under attack by a man who styles himself as the one true dragon master who sets his sights on taming an ancient all-powerful dragon and conquering the world.

I really enjoyed the first How To Train Your Dragons, I thought it had great emotional beats and set up a dense world. However, to me this film is a step backwards in a lot of ways. The emotional beats don’t hit as hard as they did in the first film, the death of Hiccup’s father does not make you emote as much as the almost death of Toothless in the first film, which says all you need to know.

Another thing I didn’t like about this film was the characterization of Hiccup, he goes from an unsure kid with a good heart in the first film, to a cocky, know it all, who blatantly thinks he knows better than everyone else and whose bad actions leads to terrible outcomes.

Moreover, this film makes the world feel far less big than it did in the last film, the villain and the new characters introduced in this film make the world seem to be only as big as the Viking territories. If the villain came from somewhere else entirely in the world that maybe had other fantasy beasts then they could have successfully built on the worldbuilding of the first.

Overall, this film is disappointing.

Pros.

I liked some of the new characters

It furthered the first films story

Cons.

The emotional beats weren’t as strong

The world feels very small

Hiccup is unlikable

2/5

Reviewed by Luke

You Should Have Left: Kevin Bacon The King Of Horror

You Should Have Left is a horror mystery film directed by David Koepp. The plot sees a family go to the Welsh countryside to escape from the pressures of modern life. However, the house they are staying at seems to draw in lost souls, the damned and the broken for its own evil intent.

This film proves that Kevin Bacon is still a staple of the horror genre, he feels incredibly well cast and probably has the best formed character in the film. There is a debate throughout the film as to whether Bacon’s character killed his ex-wife or not, towards the end of the film we get answers and realise that the horror that had been plaguing him in his dreams and in the house was himself all along.

The film has some genuinely scary scenes, that stayed with me long after I watched the film. I will kid you not, I had a nightmare for the first time in a long time after I watched this film. The horror is very minimalist in approach but is incredibly effective with what it does.

The one part of the film that I thought was far weaker than the rest of it was the ending. The ending doesn’t feel very satisfying, it feels very much like just another generic science fiction ending; there is no care in it.

Overall, the first two thirds of this film are really well done, genuinely scary and well written, however it all comes apart with an ending that feels incredibly underdeveloped.

Pros.

The scares

Kevin Bacon

Doing a lot with very little

Cons.

The ending

The side characters

3/5

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