Crimson Peak: Mystery, Murder And Misunderstanding

Crimson Peak is a gothic romance film directed by Guillermo del Toro. The plot follows Edith (Mia Wasikowska), a young woman who moves with her new husband Thomas (Tom Hiddleston), into his ancestral home know to some as Crimson Peak, due to the red ore turning the snow red in the winter. However, since she was a girl Edith has been told to beware Crimson Peak, mainly from the ghost of her dead mother, unsurprisingly once she moves into the house things to start to take a turn towards the ghostly and the demonic.

Whoever was in charge of the marketing campaign for this film should have been fired; if not, fire them now, clearly, they can’t do their job. This film was marketed in its trailers and supporting material as a horror film, it is not. Despite having ghosts appear and a few other horror elements, this film has nothing else in common with the horror genre and to say otherwise in an insult to both and to del Toro himself.

This film is beautiful to look at, every scene is chocked full of vibrant colour and gothic charm, this much like the rest of del Toro’s filmography is very pleasing on the eye. The people in charge of set design and costumes deserve a huge round of applause.

This film is very much unlike any other as it defies genre. It is a romance, but not in a traditional sense; hell this film makes the romance in del Toro’s The Shape Of Water look almost conventional. It truly is a gothic film however; you will see what I mean if you watch it.

The story is top notch, full of twists and turns that will keep you guessing right up until the end. The creatures/ ghost design is also on top form; if there is one thing you can expect to see in a del Toro film it is Doug Jones as any number of monsters, each one looking better than the last and all looking marvellous. The performances are strong especially from the women. Wasikowska is great in the lead role, it would be nice to see her in more films, and Jessica Chastain is superb as Lucile Thomas’s sister. I won’t go into specifics about their performances as it might spoil some of the reveals.

Overall, I think this is one of del Toro’s strongest films that was woefully mis-marketed and sold as something it was not. Hopefully after you have read this review and understand what it really is you will check it out and really love it, as I did.

Pros.

The look of the film.

The gothic beauty of the story.

The performances.

The creature design and Doug Jones.

Cons.

It is slightly too long, and the beginning feels a little indulgent.

4/5

Reviewed by Luke

Adventures In Babysitting: One Hell Of A Bad Night

Adventures In Babysitting is a comedy adventure film directed Chris Columbus. The plot sees babysitter Chris (Elisabeth Shue), looking after three kids, however her night soon takes a turn for the extreme when she takes said kids to the city to pick up her friend. From there a series of things go wrong and things go from bad to worse; leading to a comedic misadventure.

Some much of this film rests on the performance given by Shue, if she was bad it would turn out like the god-awful Disney Channel remake, however her performance is in my opinion one of the best of the decade. Shue manages to do kind and compassionate well, you can tell her character cares about the kids, she also manages to be a lot of fun and give you a sense that she is enjoying every single second of being on screen. An example of this would be the blues singing scene, which is a masterpiece in and off itself, plus Shue is actually quite a good singer.

Fun is the word I would use to describe this film, a lot of films are funny or charming, but only a few are fun. This film almost seems like an expertly crafted series of skits that are each great and then stitched together to form one hell of a film. This can be seen with the often-hilarious pop culture themed homages, by favourite was The Warriors esque scene on the train.

Another thing I will give this film credit for is that the child actors are actually tolerable in this film. Normally when a film has child actors, hell even teens, they are annoying, they don’t perform well, they’re distracting, and you can understand why Hollywood gets 30-year olds to pretend to be teens in films. However, Brad (Keith Coogan), Daryl (Antony Rapp) and especially Sara (Maia Brewton), are not only good, but crucially loveable, you warm to them over the course of the film and by the end, you realise that you have enjoyed the time you have spent with these characters.

My one critique of the film would be that some of the humour feels dated and a little out of touch with our modern sensibilities, however on the sliding scale of 80’s offensiveness this film is pretty mild, so that shouldn’t put you off!

Overall, an 80’s classic for a good reason, effortlessly charming and watchable and a guaranteed good time for all!

Pros.

It is fun.

The homages and references.

Elisabeth Shue.

The child stars are actually tolerable.

Cons.

Some of the humour has aged poorly.

4.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Sixteen Candles: Sickening, Wrong And Showing The Worst Of Hollywood!

Sixteen Candles is a comedy romance film by John Hughes. The plot follows ignored looked down upon teenager Samantha (Molly Ringwald), who tries to get the boy of her dreams to see her for who she really is and fall in love with her. This is one of the Brat Pack films of the 1980’s.

Before I get into this review, I just want to say don’t watch this film! It promotes harmful stereotypes every chance it gets, it encourages date rape and makes a joke out of it, even going so far as to say that it is okay because she thought she enjoyed it the next morning, it is wrong. As some people have said to me it is dumb to compare an 80s film to modern standards and that apparently there is nothing wrong with a film joking about taboo subject matter, to those people I say how is rape of a drunk barely conscious girl something to joke about? It is not PC to say that the jokes are in bad taste to say the least, it is just the truth, they’re deeply offensive and if John Hughes was still alive, I think he would have apologised for this film.

The messages of this film are rancid, the main girl gets with her dream guy at the end of the film and we are supposed to be happy about this, why should we be? The boy of her dreams blatantly didn’t care about his previous girlfriend, not only is he abusive towards her, but he also allows a group of guys to rape her when she is drunk, which again is played for laughs. So with that in mind, Samantha getting with him at the end of the film, is a sad ending, because it means she will have a terrible time and a horrible life.

This is most certainly the worst of Hughes’ films, some of his other films have issues with them such a racism and stereotyping, but none are as bad or as harmful as this film. It is sickening and the fact that it ever got made makes me lose faith in humanity. I hated it!

Pros.

Not a one.

Cons.

It has horrible messages.

It makes light of abuse and rape.

It plays a rape scene for laughs.

It normalises rape culture.

It is racist through and through as well.

0/5

Reviewed by Luke

Angus,Thongs and Perfect Snogging: The Teenage Experience?

Angus, Thongs and Perfect Snogging is a British teen rom-com directed by Gurinder Chadha, based on the novel series by Louise Rennison. The plot follows the life of Georgia Nicolson (Georgia Groome), as she tries to get a boyfriend and plan her 15^th birthday party, plenty of hijinks and misunderstandings happen along the way.

This is by no means a terrible film, it is watchable enough, though I did have a large amount of problems with the film and some of its themes and messages. Firstly 14 seems a bit young for a lot of the things these kids seem to be into, to illustrate my point, there is similar subject matter in seminal British comedy series The Inbetweeners and the characters in that are much older. I suppose the counter argument to my point would be that it isn’t as sexual as The Inbetweeners and that is true they mention intimate aspects, but not sex itself, though it is still slightly uncomfortable seeing them come out of the mouth of a 14-year-old.

Moreover, the film makes getting a partner seem like a life or death issue which I understand for some teens at that age it is, but these teens seem focused on it to an unhealthy degree. Also the way they go about getting boyfriends and the whole world these young kids seem to be in revolves around very questionable morality, like it goes beyond selfish at times to boys and girls manipulating each other to further their own aims, which is realistic in some senses I suppose, but it feels jarring when you consider what kind of film this is.

To that end, the film’s ending is as picturesque as you would expect, Georgia gets the guy, the mean girl who was cheated on and dumped at a moment’s notice is defeated and Georgia’s parents are staying together; it is all tied up in a neat little bow. To me, this happy ending doesn’t mesh with the rest of the film, towards the end of the film, Georgia is called out on a lot of the nastier things she has done and then is forced to live with the consequences of it, this is I think is good, this works. As such I think a sombre and more meditative ending would have been a better fit, conveying the films message that she has matured and risen above her childish behaviour rather than rewarding it, as it does.

Overall, this tries to be a YA film with a message, but it ends up being crushed under the weight of it’s flawed morals and feels almost a bit creepy at times.

Pros.

Some of the more grown up approaches to love.

The stuff with her parents.

Cons.

If they had been aged up by a year or two it would be less icky.

It is cliched.

The film seems to be two very different tones/messages that fundamentally don’t work together and clash badly.

2/5.

Reviewed by Luke

500 Days Of Summer: You Never Know What Is Around The Corner

500 Days Of Summer is a romantic comedy drama directed by Marc Webb. The plot see hopeless romantic Tom (Joseph Gordon Levitt), fall for Summer (Zoey Deschanel) a girl who believes true love doesn’t exist.

The film details the events the lead up to their relationship, their relationship and then what happens after they break up.

In many ways, this is an anti rom com, the two leads don’t end up together at the end of the film, the both end up in relationships with other people. However, that is the whole point of this film, it knows what a rom com is, and it goes against genre stereotypes in near every way to try and make something that is entirely different.

This is an incredibly nuanced film. It portrays love as it really is with all the highs and lows making the cut rather than portraying it in the idolised over the top ways a lot of romantic comedies do, which simply isn’t how real life is like; Bridget Jones wouldn’t exist in the real life.

Both Joseph Gordon Levitt and Zoey Deschanel are fantastic, they have great onscreen chemistry and are both easily charming and charismatic. They both add a lot to this film’s quirky sensibilities which really set it apart from other parts and makes it feel unique and special.

What’s more as a hopeless romantic myself I love the ending, just when it seems like all hope has been lost and that maybe fate and true love don’t exist the revelation comes that Summer was all part of fate’s plan for Tom and then the love of his life is just round the corner. This film borrows a lot from the logic of How I Met Your Mother.

Overall, this is a romantic comedy unlike anything else, both of the leads are great, and the ending is uplifting. Defiantly something to get you through the hard times.

Pros.

The ending.

The quirkiness.

The two leads.

The non-linear time structure.

Cons.

Misleading for people wanting to see a rom com as this isn’t that.

4.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

A Star Is Born: A Romance To Stand The Tests Of Time

A Star Is Born is a romantic drama film directed by Bradley Cooper, it is the third remake of the 1937 classic. The plot follows a hard-drinking self-destructive musician Jackson (Bradley Cooper), as he falls in love with a young singer called Ali (Lady Gaga). The film chronicles Ally’s rise as well as Jackson’s fall, with the love story acting as a means to show this.

Before I get into this review, I need to talk about the music. Music is a central focus of this film, and as such it is very important, with there being multiple songs scattered throughout. ‘Shallow’, is the big original song for the film and it is great, it is passionate and emotional, and you feel something every time you hear it, both Gaga and Cooper really nail the music. In many ways, both are incredibly believable as great musicians and that is the highest compliment I can give.

I have never seen any of the A Star Is Born film’s before this one so I was unfamiliar with the story, as such I can’t say to you how faithful of a remake this is, or if it is better or worse than the other versions.

Personally, I thought the film’s story was incredibly effective, I bought into the romance and genuinely warmed to the characters; which made Jackson’s self-destruction hurt all the more. This film has great emotional stakes, which is a result of the very, very believable chemistry between Gaga and Cooper, it is almost impossible to think they don’t actually love each other.

My one complaint about this film is that it is too long, and this is a problem that I believe ultimately ruins the film. If this film had really just focused on Ally and Jackson’s relationship and ignored everything else, all the needless B plots, all the musical drama, then it would be at least half an hour sorter and all the better for it. There are some many sub-plots and so many needless one note characters that the film feels so overstuffed that it loses focus of what makes it good, I don’t care about what Jackson’s brother is up to, or that he has an overly long drawn out backstory, I just want to see the two leads interact.

Overall, the music is what saves this film from being a very by the numbers rom-com. The two leads have great on-screen chemistry, but the lack of focus means that you get bogged down with other characters and barely get to see it.

Pros.

The leads chemistry.

The music.

The emotional stakes.

Cons.

All the side-characters and B-plots.

Far, far too long.

3/5

Crazy Rich Asians: How To Miscast Your Lead

Crazy Rich Asians is a romantic comedy film directed by Jon. M. Chu. It is based on the book of the same name. The plot follows economics lecturer Rachel (Constance Wu), as she travels to meet her boyfriend Nick’s (Henry Goldings), parents. Once she arrives in Singapore, she is shocked to find out that her boyfriend belongs to one of the richest families in the country.

I haven’t read the books, so my reaction is based only on the film. I thought that this was a fairly standard rom-com, I understand how it is important from a cinema diversity standpoint as this film features an almost entirely Asian cast which is something quite rare in Hollywood. However, as a rom-com this film left me going ‘eh’.

The love story between Rachel and Nick is as you would expect it to be, she feels out of place in this rich world, Nick’s mum Eleanor (Michelle Yeoh), doesn’t approve of their relationship, it all seems hopeless, they break-up, they realise none of that matters and then get back together in the end, this is pretty much your standard fish out of water rom-com plot line.

The far more interesting plot line is that of the failing marriage between Astrid (Gemma Chan), and Michael (Pierre Png). Michael is resentful that he doesn’t have any agency of his own as his business ventures keep failing, he also doesn’t like the fact this wife is rich from her own money, he is deeply insecure and it says a lot about relationship power dynamics and masculinity; it also works as a nice parallel for Rachel and Nick at the start of the film. This sub-plot between two supporting character is more interesting than the main story!

As for the main two characters, Henry Golding is as effortlessly charming as always, he has charisma for days and that is needed here, as his on-screen partner Constance Wu has none. It is very hard to root for Rachel as Wu does very little to make her warm or endearing, Wu seems to think that she herself is great and that is why you should care about any character she plays, she seems to refuse to shot scenes that make her appear even slightly vulnerable. This is true of her other projects as well and it just makes her come across as a very cold person, which is not want you want from the lead character in a rom-com. She is also outperformed by Awkwafina, who plays her sidekick/best friend in the film.

Overall, I wish this film had cast someone else as it’s leading lady, or at the very least had given Gemma Chan more screen time as she is by far the best actress on screen. Golding is charming, but that only carries the film so far.

Pros.

Gemma Chan.

Henry Golding.

A step forward for Hollywood.

Cons.

Deeply average.

Constance Wu is woefully miscast.

2.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Peter Rabbit: Stone Cold Killer

Peter Rabbit is a 3D live-action/computer-animated comedy film directed by Will Gluck. The plot of the film takes inspiration from the Beatrice Potter books of the same name and sees Peter and his family trying to steal from the garden of Thomas McGregor (Domhnall Gleeson), whilst also trying to stop the romance developing between him and the rabbits beloved Bea (Rose Byrne).

What can I say about this film? The only positive I will give this film is the fact that there is nothing else quite like it, it is bizarre in both a good way and a bad way. The good way is due to the fact that Beatrice Potter is interacting with the rabbits she created, so that worked for me in a meta way. However, in the bad way we have baffling decisions like having their be a cockerel character, who openly says things to the extent of, ‘he only had kids because he thought the world was going to end tomorrow and that now he is stuck looking after them’ and ‘he hates his life’. Fear not by the end of the film he loves his life as a single father, but my question is why was this put in? The cockerel is not a main character he is incredibly throw away, so who were his ‘jokes’ aimed at, they certainly weren’t child friendly, so maybe the parents? However, I doubt parents very much would like a lot of what he was saying.

Moreover, the film decides to make Peter evil. I get that he is having a fun war of escalation with McGregor, and McGregor tries to kill Peter, but he is the villain, so it is okay for him to do it. However, Peter (James Corden), who is the hero of the tale tries to kill McGregor both by trying to make him die of an allergic reaction as well as by torturing him with bear traps, it’s sounds like I am joking, but I am not. Why is the hero of a kid’s movie doing this, why?

Furthermore, this film is aggressively dumb and teaches kid’s bad lessons. One of peter’s sister constantly throws herself of things, breaking her ribs, but it’s okay because she has more ribs to break her fall the next time she does it. In no way should this be taught to kids because not only is it not true, but it is the sort of things they might see and try and imitate.

This review has already gone long, so I am not going to go on about James Corden and how the world should leave him behind, he isn’t as annoying as usual here, but it is safe to say that still means he is incredibly annoying.

Overall, the only reason to watch this film is out of morbid curiosity, there are some hilarious moments, not a single one of them is intentional. I wouldn’t let kids watch this because it has a lot of harmful messages and because it is just trash.

Pros.

Funny when it is not trying to be.

Freakishly bizarre.

Cons.

Peter Rabbit tries to murder people.

James Corden.

Who is this film for?

1.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Aladdin: Disney If You’re Listening Please Stop!

Aladdin is a musical romantic adventure film directed by Guy Ritchie. The plot follows a young street urchin called Aladdin (Mena Massoud), who finds a magical lamp that when rubbed produces a Genie (Will Smith), that then offers him 3 wishes. We all know the classic story.

This is yet another one of Disney’s live action remakes that they seem hell bent on making, even though the animated films are still perfectly good and more importantly no one asked for these new films. Personally, I think of the Disney live action remake trend this is probably the best, Will Smith is entertaining and it is a good date movie, it is very romantic at times.

That said let me get into why this film shouldn’t exist. First things first the very existence of this film is an implied slight to the animation, I know in Western countries there is that underlying belief that animation and animated films are for kids, which simply isn’t true, but even still this film is vastly inferior to the animated original in almost every way.

The characters lack any kind of warmth, the characters in the animated film are funny and endearing, you care about them and want them to be happy; here they’re just eh, I have literally never thought about them again since I left the cinema. Massoud is fine, so are the rest of the cast, but therein lies the problem they’re just fine, they’re trying to be as good as the animated original’s voice cast were and they come up short.

What’s more there is a general cheapness to the film, it is clearly an aesthetic choice to make the film look gritty, but I didn’t like it, it made the film look too washed out and serves to reinforce the lack of fun in this film. What’s more there is a lot of things in this film that date it, that in 5 years’ time people will be like that was such a 2010’s film, which in a way makes it bound to that time period and that isn’t a good thing. The thing that dates it of course is the new song for the film, which is incredibly on the nose and proves that Hollywood doesn’t understand the meaning of the word subtly and instead has to ram political messages into every single film; political messages if done right can be effective, but all this served to make me do was cringe.

My final reason for why you shouldn’t waste your money seeing this is because very little is new. As was the common complaint of The Lion King, which was shot for shot the same, there is little new material in this film, there are a few extra Will Smith Genie scenes and a new song, but everything else is pretty much beat for beat the same. I wouldn’t mind paying to see these live action remakes if they actually did something new, but they don’t, it is just a tired rehash and one I can’t support.

Pros.

It is romantic.

If you wanted a less fun version of the original film, you will be in luck.

Cons.

The cheap, gritty look to it.

The new song was bad cringe.

It is just paying to watch the same thing again.

2/5

Reviewed by Luke

Emma: Jane Austen In 2020

Emma. Is a comedy drama film directed by Autumn De Wilde, based on the book of the same name by Jane Austen. The plot follows Emma (Anya Taylor-Joy), a young woman who by her own admission is “handsome, clever and rich”, as she messes with the lives and romances of those around her; whilst also going on a journey of self-discovery, learning things about herself and love.

Austen period dramas aren’t really something that appeal to me greatly, but this one I thought looked promising. From the trailers I was hoping it might turn out to be something like The Favourite a period drama that had an edgy twist and something new to say about the genre; I was badly wrong. This film is by all means just a modern retelling of the same old story, just with a fresh coat of paint and a quirkier sense of humour.

Said quirky sense of humour was for me incredibly hit or miss, some of the jokes in the film had me smiling and chuckling whereas other fell flat; truth be told I found myself laughing quite a few times at things that upon later reflection I’m pretty sure weren’t meant to be funny.

Without that more modern sense of humour, you are just left we a Jane Austen adaptation, which is fine if that is your thing, you will probably love this, but for me I thought it was boring and dull; this is only made worse by the fact that the film goes on for what feels like an eternity, dragging further and further out.

On a more positive note I think Anya Taylor Joy was delightful and did really well in the role, her performance brought something new to the standard leading woman in these kinds of films. Likewise, Bill Nighy as Mr Woodhouse had some great comedic moments and was the standout of any scene, he was in.

Overall, I think I greatly misjudged the tone of this film from the trailers, had I known that it was just yet another modern adaptation of Jane Austen then I probably wouldn’t have gone to see it. Taylor-Joy and Nighy do their best and there are a few laughs to be had throughout, but unless you’re really into Austen I would probably stay well clear of this one.

Pros.

The jokes that do land.

Anya Taylor-Joy is fantastic.

Cons.

It is boring.

It is too long.

The humour doesn’t always land.

2/5

Reviewed by Luke