Alita Battle Angel: Trapped In The Uncanny Valley

Alita Battle Angel is a cyberpunk action film directed by Robert Rodriguez; based on 1993 Japanese anime series Battle Angel. The plot follows Alita (Rosa Salazar), a cyborg girl with a mysterious past who is rebuilt by roboticist Dr. Ido (Christoph Waltz), she tries to adapt to life as a normal teenage girl but her past gets in the way. She is hunted down by a series of other cyborgs and must defeat them all to keep those she loves alive.

For a long time I have been meaning to watch this film, I know a lot of people love it, so I decided to check it out. I enjoyed it, it has a series of issues that stopped it from being a perfect film for me, but as an overall film I think it worked well and I would like to see a sequel to this film.

I think the strongest thing about this film is its world, it is dense and well explored, the lore never feels forced it feels natural and becomes something you want to learn more about. It is also left ambiguous enough that there is plenty of room for further exploration if I sequel does come out. The performances are all also excellent especially Salazar, she does a lot with a character that is mostly CGI she gives her a warmth and a personality that makes her instantly likeable.

However, I think ultimately what harms this film is it’s CGI. Sometimes, albeit rarely, the CGI is impressive and does standout, it is not Avatar level, but it is impressive. For the most part however, the CGI is poor and video game esque. This is mostly true of the faces of other cyborgs especially the ones she fights throughout the film. What’s more the CGI on Alita’s eyes bothered me throughout much of the film they are weird looking and are trapped in the uncanny valley, it was only midway through the film that I got use to them and even then I had to try not to look at them.

Another thing I didn’t like about the film was the angsty teen romance. This is only a brief subplot, but whenever the plot deviates to it, it slows down. There really is no need for it as it adds very little to the film overall.

Overall, this is a strong science fiction film that has a great world and characters, what lets it down is poor CGI and a needless romantic subplot.

Pros.

Rosa Salazar.

The characters.

The world.

Cons.

The bad CGI.

The romance subplot.

3.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Rabid: Beauty Has A Price

Rabid is a horror film directed by The Soska Sisters, based on the 1977 David Cronenberg film of the same name. The plot sees fashion designer wannabe Rose (Laura Vandervoort), get into a grisly car accident. With the very likely future of being disfigured for life, Rose decides to undergo experimental cutting-edge surgery that can supposedly repair her face; it also turns her into a monster with a taste for human flesh, but hey every medical treatment has side effects.

It was a little surreal to watch a film about a viral outbreak, even if it was a different kind of virus; rabies. I have been a huge fan of the Soska Sisters since they started out, they are incredibly talented and remaking Cronenberg is no easy task, however I do believe they manage to not only match the man himself but exceed him in a few ways.

Firstly, and most importantly for a Cronenberg film/ in this case a remake, the body horror. This film is a little light on that, not in a bad way though, because the few times this film does have some quality body horror it is used to great effect. Such as the scene at the end of the film when Rose is trapped in the room with the mad scientists technically, but not really, dead wife, in this scene we get to see the scale of monstrosity we would expect from such a film and it is haunting.

I thought that Vandervoort was exceptional in the lead role, this is due to the fact that you really buy her emotion and her sadness after the crash. The desperation that leads her to undergo risky experimental surgery is real and plain to see. Even when the more malicious side of her comes out later in the film, she is constantly shown fighting against her darker half and is a hero until the end.

My one complaint of the film would be that I would have liked to see the Sisters themselves more, they’re great actors and after recently watching Dead Hooker In The Trunk I would have loved to see them have bigger parts, maybe next time.

Overall, this film easily manages to live up to Cronenberg, which is the highest form of praise a film can get, great horror and very watchable; check it out!

Pros.

Sparing use of body horror.

Laura Vandervoort.

Well written.

It lives up to the original.

Con.

I would have liked to see The Sisters themselves play a larger role.

The ending was a bit too open ended for me.

4/5

Reviewed by Luke

The ABC’s Of Death: Bring Back Moral Panics!

The ABCs Of Death is a 26-part horror anthology film with each segment being directed by a different person and being about a different letter of the alphabet. The film features such popular directors as Adam Wingard and Ben Wheatley.

Before I get into the review in depth, I just want to say don’t watch this film! I understand the need in cinema, especially in the horror genre, to be shocking and boundary pushing, but this film is just cheap shock value, it has no class, no taste, it is just edgy for the sake of being edgy. An example of my point, in Ti West’s segment M Is For Miscarriage the whole point of the story is a women looking for a plunger to push her stillborn kid down the toilet, there is nothing more to it than that, it is handled poorly and with questionable taste; also that is one of the more tame examples from this anthology.

There are plenty of other segments that feature, rape, paedophilia, illusions to bestiality, dog fighting and many other horrible things, not one of them is handled with any taste, it is all shock for shock value. Surprisingly one of the ones I just mentioned the dog fighting one directed by Marcel Sarmiento, is probably the one with the most taste; that is not something I expected to be writing this morning.

I can break down the shorts into 4 categories, good or at least well done, these are the segments by Wingard, Wheatly, Adrian Garcia Bogliano, Lee Hardcastle and Banjong Pisanthanakun. The weird stuff this includes the furry segment, the farting segment and the final segment. The average/ boring stuff, this includes the surfing segment and the life cycle one and then the offensively bad/ done in poor taste, which includes most everything else. So as you can see it is truly a mixed bag, with very few well done segments.

Finally, unlike something like V/H/S where are all of the segments worked together, they were separate and individual, but they all had the same feel and tone, the tone in this film is wildly all over the place, you have really dark unpleasant segments, followed by light and fluffy stuff and it is jarring to say the least.

Overall, this has been one of the toughest films I have watched recently and not only do I not recommend it, I advise you to stay away from it, you could probably find more cultured nuanced horror on Youtube. A black mark on some of the biggest names in horror.

Pros.

There is about 5/26 good segments.

Cons.

Most of the segments are horrible.

It is incredibly hard to watch.

It is done in such poor taste I would call it offensive.

The tonal inconsistencies and also the lack of effort by some, looking at you Ti West.

1/5

The Stepford Wives: The Perfect Spouse?

The Stepford Wives is a black comedy science fiction film directed by Frank Oz. The film revolves around former TV executive Joanne Eberhart (Nicole Kidman), who after a career mishap moves to a quaint little town in Connecticut to start anew. However, once she is there, she begins to become increasing alarmed at the strange goings on in Stepford Connecticut. The women are all subservient homemakers and the men spend all their time at the lodge, a place where business is conducted and people change, but what is going on? As it turns out, neural programming.

This film is a fascinating study of gender norms and what makes a woman a woman and what makes a man a man. The conversation proves to be illuminating, albeit a bit silly, as Joanne probes the depth of how far people are prepared to go to have the ‘perfect’ spouse.

Kidman is fantastic and manages to handle the more intense, scarier moments with a sense of weight and gravity as well as play off the other characters in the sillier, funnier moments. After all this is more of a wacky black comedy than a serious look at society. The film manages to walk the tightrope well never being too silly, nor being too serious; the tone is pitch perfect.

Christopher Walken plays Mike the leader of the Stepford men, or so you are led to believe, as always Walken is magnificent and oozes so much charisma it is hard to take you eyes off him. You buy him as this evil doctor/ cult leader figure, and he gives off palpable malice throughout.

Matthew Broderick as Walter Joanne’s husband proves to be the weak link in this film. This in my mind is all down to one scene, in the final act of the film there is a scene where it looks as though Walter has turned Joanne into one of the mindless Stepford wives, however he hasn’t. My issue with this is the character and Broderick plays him seems like the sort who would do it, the hero turn doesn’t suit the character and isn’t hugely believable. Broderick plays slimy well, so I find it hard to buy him as the hero.

Overall, despite a miscast Broderick, this film still manages to be both thought provoking and funny, something very few films achieve. Definitely worth a watch.

Pros.

Christopher Walken.

Nicole Kidman.

The underpinning social debate.

The good dark comedy.

Cons.

Matthew Broderick.

4/5

Reviewed by Luke

Vivarium: A Beige Hell

Vivarium is a science fiction thriller film directed by Lorcan Finnegan. The plot sees young couple Gemma (Imogen Poots), and Tom (Jessie Eisenberg), become trapped in a lifeless samey suburban nightmare with no way out. One day a package arrives that contains a baby the message on the box reads something to the extent of raise this and get out, things only get weirder from here.

I was quite excited for this before I watched this, however I was deeply let down by a number of factors throughout the film and I thought overall the film was subpar.

The two positive I will say of this film is that it has a great premise, it is suitably creepy and fills the viewer with a sense of existential dread, and that it has a get pair of actors leading the show. Eisenberg and Poots are a good pair, on a par with Eisenberg and Stone yeah probably, but not on the same level as Eisenberg and Stewart. Both give solidly good performances and are engaging.

However, both of these positives are undercut by a weak, smug and boring script. The how and why of the whole film is never really explained, as such you don’t know whether it’s aliens or hell or what; this was most certainly by design, but it does not pay off as it leaves the film feeling hollow and anticlimactic. The film seems to be in love with it’s own ‘smart’ premise and seems to think you should be impressed to, however the idea itself may be neat, but they never actually do all that much with it and a lot of it is a slog to get through.

How you know there is something wrong with this film is because it is only on for an hour and a half, but it feels like it goes on for years, maybe they want us to feel like we are trapped in a beige purgatory like hell just like the characters on screen.

Overall, this was promising, but it is the anthesis of everything it set out to be, it is a thriller that is not thrilling.

Pros.

Solid cast.

Interesting premise.

Cons.

It’s boring.

It is in love with itself.

It goes nowhere and explains nothing.

1.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

The Walking Dead:When A Show Lives Long Enough To Become A Zombie

The Walking Dead is a horror television series developed by Frank Darabont, based on the Robert Kirkman comic series. The plot sees a group of survivors lead by Rick Grimes (Andrew Lincoln), who spend their days fighting for survival in a world that has sunk into a zombie apocalypse; they must do whatever it takes to survive, no matter the cost.

I am a big fan of the Walking Dead comic, as well as Robert Kirkman’s other series Outcast. Invincible let me cold, but that is personal taste. As such when the Walking Dead series was announced I was excited, when Andrew Lincoln was cast, I was even more so.

The first few seasons were good, strong, must watch TV. However, when they got to the prison things changed, I don’t know what it was, maybe it was the shift in the behind the scenes creatives, but something changed, and it was very much for the worse. Season’s started to feel more dragged out, more and more episodes felt like filler and less and less happened, which is a shame as this was the same season that had introduced David Morris as the Governor.

From there things got worse, as well as the pacing issues and the season by season increase of filler episodes, the show started doing something else that ruined the quality, I am of course taking about the fake outs. In the promos for coming episodes of the show, we saw characters in situations where it looked like they were going to die, this got taken to an extreme when Glenn looked all, but dead and then a few episodes later it turned out he was alive; then he died at the end of the season. The issue with this is that it makes the actual character death have less impact, it also feels like a direct effort to manipulate fans.

Now we are at a point the show, where it has lost a lot of its core audience, I personally tuned out at the start of season 6, I saw the stuff they did with Negan, I didn’t like it. It has killed off a lot of the main characters and the ones we have left are less interesting. I am sorry but, Darryl is not a good character. All the issues that I have mentioned before are still there, and now they try and include direct adaption of scenes from the comic to try and lure fans back in but guess what they aren’t coming.

It has reached a point where the show needs to end, unless they want to drive it into the ground. They could focus on the spin-off shows if they wanted to carry on the universe, but the main show should end.

Torchwood: Doctor Who After Dark

Torchwood is a science fiction TV series created by Russel T. Davis, the show acts as a spin-off to Doctor Who. The show follows a group of agents led by Captain Jack (John Barrowman), who fight to protect the human race from extra-terrestrial threats as well as paranormal ones.

This show is the anthesis of Doctor Who, for all that show is about exploring other worlds, in a family friendly manor, this show is Earth based and very much not fit for child viewing. To that extent there are moments in each episode that seems to push the boundaries of what they can show on television, or at least what the BBC will let them show. There are many quite gratuitous sex scenes and lots of over the top swearing and violence. Normally, this wouldn’t bother me, because normally it is done in a tasteful way, but here it really isn’t.

Another issue with this show is that unlike Doctor Who, classic Who not the current bastard version of the show, and even the other spin-off series The Sarah Jane Adventures, Torchwood does not have any memorable monsters. A lot of them are just fairly generic and don’t leave much of an impression on you, it is to that regard that I think this is the weakest of the 3 shows; as I am not even going to acknowledge Class.

Captain Jack is easily the one of the best characters Doctor Who ever created, he is both charming, funny and carefree, but also troubled and brooding; Barrowman can pull of both emotional ranges with ease. The episodes that focus on him are easily the best in the shows run, however, these are few and far between. Mostly we get episodes devoted to the other members of the agency, with Jack only playing a very small part in their adventures and most of these other characters are dull and uninspired. Moreover, the characters often do things that are morally reprehensible, Gwen (Eve Myles), and Owen (Burn Gorman), are both examples of this and yet we are supposed to cheer for them? I think not.

I think the later season of this show are far better than the early seasons as it very much finds itself somewhere during its second season. I think that this show tries too hard to be an adult version of Doctor Who, it loses sight of what it was originally intended to be, of all the shows in the Doctor Who Universe the only show worse than this was Class, and that is saying something.

With Captain Jack coming back to current Doctor Who I wouldn’t be surprised if Torchwood did as well, hopefully time will gift this show with a fresh and less unnecessary take.

Men In Black, International: Erase Your Mind If You Have Seen This Film.

Men In Black: International is a science fiction action film directed by F. Gary Gray, it serves as the 4^th instalment in the franchise, also being the worst, it is notable for being the first Men In Black film to not feature Will Smith, or Tommy Lee Jones. The plot follows new duo Henry (Chris Hemsworth), and Molly (Tessa Thompson), as they try and stop an alien invasion.

This film came out with a thud, it was dead on arrival. The Men In Black franchise has been continually on the decline since the second film, the first two films were good, mainly because Jones and Smith had great on-screen chemistry together and were likable. The third film was fine, it wasn’t bad, it just left very little impression, the only notable good thing about it was that it featured Jeamaine Clement. However, Men In Black International dives even further still and is aggressively bad. There is not one reason why this film is bad, sure it is bland as hell, the plot feels like a rehash of other better science fiction films, the jokes like ‘oh Men In Black isn’t very inclusive we should change the name to Humans In Black’ are cringey and take you out of the film, but it is hard to point to any one thing.

I think the reason why this film is so bad is because there is no chemistry between Hemsworth and Thompson, unlike in Thor Ragnarök where the two had great on-screen chemistry, thanks in no small part to Taika Waititi, here it is cold and flat. Hemsworth just plays a caricature of the character he normally plays, the good-looking dummy who gets all the girls and saves the day and I don’t know about you, but I am starting to get bored of it. He has had no luck as a leading man outside the MCU and I think that is proven here. Thompson on the other hand is the more likable of the two, her character actually made me laugh, but even she wasn’t on top form, she seemed uninterested and as though she was just doing it for the paycheck.

The only good thing I will say about this film is that the side characters are great. Rebecca Ferguson as arms dealer and Henry’s ex Riza is a cool character and has an interesting fight scene later on in the film. Kumail Nanjiani is terrific as Pawnee and I could easily watch a whole film focusing on him, but these two characters are barely used.

I’m not even going to get into the ridiculously obvious twist about Liam Neeson’s character, which would be harder to miss if it was running down the street, towards you, wrapped in meat eating a can of dog food.

Overall, this film proves that the series has no where else to go and that it can’t work without Jones and Smith, so they should stop trying. It is aggressively bad and boring, and the thought that Sony was stupid enough to think this stinker could restart the franchise is in and of itself hilarious.

Pros.

The side characters are cool, too bad they are barely used.

Cons.

The “jokes” are cringe.

Thompson doesn’t really care, and Hemsworth is playing himself, but with a weird inconsistent accent.

The plot is utter garbage.

The CGI use is bordering on obscene.

1/5

Reviewed by Luke

X-Men Dark Phoenix: No More Mutants Please

X-Men: Dark Phoenix is a superhero film directed by Simon Kinberg; it belongs to 20^th Century Fox’s now defunct XCU (X-Men cinematic universe), taking place after the events of X-Men Apocalypse and is based on the Phoenix Saga from Marvel Comics.

Prior to writing this review I had been putting off watching this for a second time, it is a horrible film. Can I just ask the question before we get into the review, who thought letting Simon Kinberg a man who can’t even write films lead alone direct them, direct this was a good idea? All of the good X-Men films had very little involvement from this hack, or if he was involved, he was heavily reigned in by the director of whichever movie he was working on.

That said let’s get into the review.

First off, the action scenes in this film are atrocious, when you realise that they belong to a block-buster superhero film they seem even worse. They are a mad rush of CGI paired with the weakest blandest fight scenes you might ever see in your life, it is so lifeless and boring, it makes you wonder if they gave up on this film before it even started filming, and Fox wanted to release it just so it would cost, new franchise owners, Disney money; makes you think.

Secondly the acting, I can’t even bring myself to really go into this, so I will only talk about 2 noticeable bad performances, the rest are painfully average and feel so underdeveloped that you begin to question whether they even exist. James McAvoy as Professor X and Michael Fassbender as Magneto are the only 2 okay performances and even then, the incredibly bad, prequel era George Lucas esque bad, writing takes away anything it can from either performance.

The first of the woeful performances is Sophie Turner as Jean Grey. If I had to put together a list of the worst performances, or worst actors of 2019 Turner would surely be on it. I understand she was in Game Of Thrones and that was popular, empathies on was, but that doesn’t mean she is a good actress. Her performance has as much range and emotion as a bin bag floating down the side of the road, she can’t maintain an accent and as such it keeps slipping, she just can’t act, she can’t and if Hollywood learns one lesson from last year it should be to dump Sophie Turner as fast as they can.

The second performance and perhaps the more controversial pick is Jennifer Lawrence as Mystique. Never before in the history of film has it been clearer that an actor has only been in a film because they were contractually obligated to be. It is clear from the very first moment she appears on screen, in her human form because Lawrence doesn’t like the makeup, she is being payed millions to wear, that she doesn’t want to be there. Her now infamous line of “you should change the name to X-Women”, made me both cringe and feel annoyed at the same time, and shows everything that is wrong with this film.

Overall, I have to say bravo to Dark Phoenix as it actually made me like the rotting carcass that is X-Men: The Last Stand so well done for that!

Pros.

McAvoy and Fassbender are okay.

Cons.

Sophie Turner shouldn’t be cast.

Jennifer Lawrence should have left when she stopped caring, they should have let her go.

Someone should have stopped Simon Kinberg from ripping the X-Men apart.

The overuse of CGI hurts.

0.5/5

Reviewed by Luke

Kong Skull Island: The King Above All

Kong: Skull Island is a monster movie directed by Jordan Vogt-Roberts; it is a reboot of the King Kong franchise. The plot follows a group of scientist and soldiers as they travel to the uncharted Skull Island and find creatures beyond imagination, including the legendary Ape King Kong, who is the last of his species.

Though it may not be the most popular opinion, I believe of all the Monsterverse films thus far this is by far the best. My absolute favourite thing about this film is its soundtrack, it is absolute 70’s perfection, Jefferson Airplane, Credence Clear Water Revival and Black Sabbath all grace the soundtrack of this film and it is magnificent.

The style of this film is further compliment to the soundtrack, this is a very stylised film, this is clear in multiple ways and I believe unlike something like the Babysitter that is overly stylised, this is just the right amount as such it gives the film a fantastic sense of identity and uniqueness.

Crucially what this film does that makes it better than the Godzilla side of the Monsterverse, is it maintains the balance between human action and monster action; neither one takes focus from the other. The human characters are on screen enough to be developed, but they aren’t focused on to the point where we don’t get to spent time with Kong. We get plenty of time with the great ape himself, his origin is slightly different from what we have seen in the past, but it is still well done.

My two favourite human characters in any of the Monsterverse films are in this film. Firstly, we have Brie Larson’s character of Mason, who is an anti-Vietnam war photographer, she is a very interesting character and I like how they almost give her the human, monster relationship with Kong that we have seen in previous films, but then subvert it at the last minute. The other character I really like is Hank (played by John C. Riley), he is a pilot that has been stuck on Skull Island since World War 2, so for 28 years. Riley in this is fantastic, perhaps the best I have ever seen him, he has great comedic moments, but he also has great emotional dramatic scenes. The scene at the end of the film when he returns home after he has been away for so long is tear inducing, it is almost impossible to not cry when this scene comes on.

Overall, this film manages to achieve something that few other monster movies do, it strikes a harmony between the human and non-human characters, making all of its character interesting. The style and the soundtrack of this film also helps it to be exceptional, I hope that Godzilla Vs. Kong can be as good as this!

Pros.

The soundtrack.

The style.

How it handles Kong.

How it handles its human characters.

Cons.

The strange skull creatures.

4.5/5

Reviewed by Luke