THE BOOK THIEF

The Book Thief is one of my all time favourite books, and when I heard that it was being turned into a film I was apprehensive - how could it work? Could cinema truly capture the soul and heart of Markus Zusak's bestselling novel?

I first watched The Book Thief last year at a press screening, with a friend who had also read and enjoyed the book. Both of us absolutely loved the film, which is why I went to another screening a week ago. This time I went with two different friends who had also read the book and one who had not. Again, we all loved it and left the cinema emotionally moved and singing the film's praises.

You might ask why I am starting my review with these seemingly mundane details, but the reason is simple; I have seen too many negative reviews of this film. Each one has referenced how it is an adaptation of Zusak's brilliant book but I am lead to believe that not a single one of those critics had read Zusak's brilliant book, because as far as adaptations go The Book Thief is faultless.

Criticism has been thrown at the film for not depicting the war enough, for the image of war being too white-washed, how the story doesn't seem dramatic enough. Well, that is the crux of Zusak's novel; it is the  telling of World War II when following a young German girl called Liesel (Sophie Nelisse). The story is not and has not ever been about war, it is all about Liesel. So if you were going into this film, or the book, with the expectation seeing emaciated bodies in Nazi-driven concentration camps then I'm afraid your expectations will not be met and you can stop reading now. Instead, The Book Thief is a heartwarming and charming story of one girls experiences throughout the war whilst living with foster parents in a small German town.

Now that I have got that out of the way, read on for my five star review.

The Book Thief is narrated by Death (Roger Allam) himself and follows Liesel, a young girl who is sent to live with a foster family during World War II. Liesel finds solace from the brutal reality of war by indulging in stolen books and sharing them with others. However, when Max (Ben Schnetzer), a Jew, comes to Liesel's foster family for sanctuary and protection, Liesel's life changes forever.

Markus Zusak's story is innovative and inspiring and has beautifully re-created by director Brian Percival for the big screen. The aesthetics alone are hauntingly beautiful; a snow-covered, war-torn German village that perfectly encompasses the scenery described by Zusak in the book. The perfectly cast characters allow the audience to immerse themselves fully into the story of Liesel's life and root for her the entire way.


Aged just 13 years old in their feature debut, Sophie Nelisse and Nico Liersch, who plays Liesel's best friend Rudy, are outstanding as the protagonists. Nelisse plays the complex character of a feisty yet heartbroken girl who has lost everything in the war and she leads the film with a charm and charisma that is second-to-none. Her relationship with Max, the hidden Jew, is perhaps the most important element of the story and she plays it with such tender emotion it is impossible for your heart not to ache as she tries to bring the outside world to the confines of the basement where he is hiding.

Emily Watson also shines as Liesel's stern but devoted foster mother, Rose; perfectly portraying her character's many layers by maintaing a strict and brash exterior whilst keeping it clear that she loves both Liesel and her husband Hans more than anything. However, Hans is arguably the star of the show; played by the brilliant Geoffrey Rush he is perhaps one of the most beloved book characters of the last 10 years and Rush, with the help of Percival, somehow manages to add even more warmth and charm to his live-action counterpart in a flawless embodiment of the character. In particular, Hans relationship with Liesel is nothing short of heart-warming and will have you both laughing and crying throughout as you desperately will for nothing bad to happen to either of them.

In addition to the lovable characters and heart-breaking narrative, the most captivating aspect of The Book Thief comes from its narrator: Death. Prominent throughout the film in the form of an elusive voiceover, he offers great perspective as, in his own words, nobody served the Fuhrer as loyally as he during the war. Death's fascination with Liesel is the crux of the story and leads to his conclusion that after following Liesel's life so intimately he is in fact haunted by humans.

As mentioned before, the critics who have been slating the film make it obvious that they had not only failed to read the book but they also failed to research the story to know what they were going into. You do not need to read the book in order to enjoy the film, that is a fact. However, I would say that you need to know going in that this is not your typical war film, so if you are expecting brutality and disturbing shocks, you will be left disappointed.

In reality, when a best-selling book is adapted into a film it very rarely goes so right. The combination of a breathtaking cast, astounding direction and author Markus Zusak's incredible narrative, The Book Thief is the one to watch for 2014. Emotionally charged and beautifully told, it will capture your hearts within moments.

★★★★★

The Book Thief is in cinemas nationwide now!

An interview with the cast of The Book Thief.

Stay tuned for more reviews and follow me on twitter if you fancy it :)

Love,

DALLAS BUYERS CLUB

I'll admit, pre-award season I hadn't paid much attention to Dallas Buyers Club. The fact that it isn't released in the UK until February, a whopping three months after it's stateside debut, meant that trailers have only just started to air and before the Golden Globe nominations had been announced I don't think I had even heard of the film.

As a result, this film almost flew right over my head, and I am unable to decipher whether it was the trailer or the hype that became the main reason for my delayed excitement and desire to see the film. Although, one thing that I can say with absolute certainty is that the fact Jared Leto is surprisingly receiving the long-awaited attention that his acting capability deserves was definitely a factor.

Despite the fact that Leto is a fantastic actor, his performance in Requiem for a Dream fourteen years ago is more than enough evidence to show that, I didn't think that we would ever see the day that the front man of a popular rock band will be nominated for an Oscar, let alone be favourite to win. After his Golden Globe triumph I was hellbent on seeing what all the fuss is about for myself - he is a great actor, but could his performance really be any better than that of the drug-addicted Harry Goldfarb in Requiem for a Dream? That masterpiece didn't warrant him any Academy attention, so what is so special about his Dallas Buyers Club performance? Well, I can safely say that now that I have seen the film, I completely understand the fuss.

Matthew McConaughey gives a career-defining performance

Set in 1985, Dallas Buyers Club tells the true life story of Ron Woodroof (Matthew McConaughey), a homophobic rodeo cowboy from Dallas Texas who is diagnosed with HIV and given just thirty days to live. After the medication Ron receives in US hospitals makes him even more ill, he travels to Mexico where he meets with a doctor who gives him medication that isn't approved in the US, despite the positive effect that it has on HIV sufferers. It soon occurs to Ron that he can make money from this miracle drug, so he smuggles it into America and with the help of a HIV+ transgender woman (Jared Leto) he opens up a Buyers Club, where those suffering with HIV and AIDs can buy a membership in order to receive the medication.

Everything about Dallas Buyers Club is strong, but nothing more so than the incredible talent. McConaughey and Leto both give career-defining performances with McConaughey creating somewhat of a charming anti-hero in the form of Ron Woodroof. Initially, the Southern hick is quite an unlikable character; he drinks, he does drugs and he has dirty casual sex, all on top of his unforgivably homophobic intolerance of the fellow HIV patients that he encounters once he has been diagnosed. However, Ron's response to his diagnosis is nothing short of heartrending and admirable in equal measures as upon hearing his short life expectancy he utters 'There ain't nothing out there that can kill Ron Woodroof in 30 days' before he goes out there, reads up on the disease and then does everything he can in order to get the treatment that he needs whilst also hustling up some money by making an illegal business out of it.

The themes throughout are quite positive despite the film's difficult subject matters of the trauma of HIV and AIDS alongside the injustice of the American healthcare system at the time. Although the tone of Dallas Buyers Club teeters slightly more on the upbeat and heartwarming side of cinema, it certainly isn't without it's fair share of heartache and tragedy and director Jean-Marc Vallee ensures that whilst watching you do not forget for a second the gravity of the subject matter and it is by no means 'easy-viewing'.

Ron Woodroof's character development is perhaps the most insightful and endearing aspect of the film, and a testament to Matthew McConaughey's heartfelt performance. It is satisfying as a viewer to watch how this rodeo, cowboy hustler grows as his illness develops. From the way he copes with being ostracized by his so-called friends and finds solace and friendship in a queer person whom he mocked and insulted when they first met in neighboring hospital beds, to the change in his attitudes towards gay people and societal injustices in general; it is clear throughout that Ron Woodroof is becoming a better person but without losing any of his mischievous charm or lust for life. A character that is initially quite difficult to watch quickly becomes a character that you can't help but love and can't help but root for throughout the film.

Despite McConaughey's incredible performance and the heart he gives Ron Woodroof, the undeniable

Jared Leto steals the show as Rayon

scene-stealer of Dallas Buyers Club is Jared Leto as transgender woman Rayon. Rayon is a complex and intriguing character that is simply mesmerizing to watch, and I found that I couldn't take my eyes of Leto no matter what else was going on in the scene. I was pleased to see that Rayon was given depth and layers and although she starts out being the fun and sparkle that eases Ron into understanding the LGBTQ community a little better, she also gets the chance to display her vulnerability and raw emotion as the film goes on - taking full advantage of Leto's astounding range as he is pushed to the limits but doesn't even come close to breaking. Instead, he gives a consistently strong and heartbreaking performance, giving Dallas Buyers Club the edge that it needed in order to take it to the next level of cinema.

All in all, Dallas Buyers Club is a must-see film that showcases two incredible actors in their prime. A lot of the time I find myself questioning whether the films that get masses of attention from the big awards shows are really worth their acclaim, but in this instance I am thrilled to say that Dallas Buyers Club is not only worthy of every nomination it has received but every inevitable win too. A film that remains entertaining whilst dealing with a delicate subject matter is hard to come by, especially one as thought-provoking as this, yet the incredible combination of Vallee, Leto and McConaughey ensures that Dallas Buyers Club is nothing less than flawless in execution as together they strike a perfect balance of entertainment, sensitivity and heartache. 

★★★★★

Dallas Buyers Club is out nationwide from February 7th!

 Stay tuned for more reviews and follow me on twitter if you fancy it :)

Love,

MONSTERS UNIVERSITY

On Sunday I had the privilege of attending an advanced screening of the Monsters Inc prequel: Monsters University (Or 'Monsters College' depending on what side of the Atlantic you are reading this from). The fact that I willingly woke up at 7.30am on a Sunday morning in order to make the 10am screening is representative enough of how excited I was to be seeing this film. Despite liking Monsters Inc it isn't one of my favourite films from my childhood - i always watched it when it was on TV and thoroughly enjoyed it but to me it is no Toy Story and it is not even a film that i feel compelled to add to my 300+-strong DVD collection. I do enjoy it, i just don't love it - if you know what i mean?

Director Dan Scanlon introducing the film

The prequel really appealed to me because it is set in a University and i thought that they would be going down the Toy Story 3 route of appealing to the original film's audience at the age that they are now. Monsters Inc came out in 2001, a scary thought but that is now 12 years ago, much of the original audience will be either at University or have already experienced it and i thought that just as we said goodbye to our toys and our childhood when Andy did, we would be going to University with Mike and Sully.

Although i think this was, at least in part, the intention of this particular plot I am a bit saddened to say that it does not succeed on the level that Toy Story did. Sure, as a post-grad i could relate to the look of the campus and the experience of going off to find yourself but i didn't feel the same nostalgic connection that i did when Andy said that last goodbye to his childhood. I promise i will now try to keep the Toy Story comparisons to a minimum, i just wanted to get across what i was expecting from this film in the hope that as you read on you can understand why I was a bit disappointed by it.

Mike & Sully introducing the film

I've realised I have not sold this film too well in those last couple of paragraphs and that seems pretty harsh, don't get me wrong it is good. There is plenty going right for it - the way the University references (registration, meeting your new roommate, sororities etc.) were worked into the script were very clever and witty and the friendships and basic storyline of how Mike and Sully became the Mike and Sully we know and love was truly heartwarming. We are introduced to some fantastic new characters, my personal favourites being the band of misfits that Mike and Sully eventually join forces with and there are scenes with these characters that are genuinely laugh-out-loud funny. The personal highlight for me though was the inclusion of other characters from Monsters Inc. The brilliant Steve Buscemi reprises his role as Randall and we actually get an insight into why he is so mean and bitter towards Mike and Sully in the first film and  i thought this was a very welcome nod to the original. Other well-known characters also make cameos and this familiarity gave the film some heart and warmth, even though the children in the audience will not understand the sentiment.

I miss Boo :(

One character who was sorely missed was, of course, little Boo. Obviously as the film is a prequel to Monster's Inc it would be totally implausible to include Boo but as she is mine, and many others, favourite character you really did feel her absence. I feel the inclusion of sweet and innocent Boo in a World where monsters thrive on scaring children is what makes Monsters Inc so great, no children play a central role in Monsters University and although if they did I would probably accuse them of being unoriginal, it did seem like something wasn't quite adding up.

I was also shocked to find out that Monsters University is only 110 minutes as it felt like a lot longer. I think because so many twists and turns are crammed into the basic narrative it makes the film drag - at the end of the day, it is a children's film and it is simply not necessary to include so many sub-plots. There were a lot of instances where i thought the film would be ending yet it somehow managed to carry on and the children in the cinema were becoming restless (which ultimately makes watching the film a much less pleasurable experience for the grown-ups!) As well as the constant changes in the plot being inappropriate for children, there is a sequence towards the end of the film that had near enough every five-and-under child in the audience sobbing and screaming out that 'they don't like it'. With all the wit that the film contains it is sometimes easy to forget that the basic premise of Monsters Inc is pretty much terrifying for children; it's an institution where monsters sneak into children's rooms at night in order to scare them! There was a scene where monsters were scratching along the bedposts and jumping out of shadows to make the children scream as loud as possible as well as other scenes where the monsters are being as creepy as possible because this time they need to scare adults... When you think about it there is no wonder younger children were getting so scared and with the absence of Boo, a child just like the children in the audience who is cared for and safe with Mike and Sully, the monsters lack the compassion seen in the original film.

I was also disappointed that the scene i remembered most vividly from the film's trailer, where Mike is turned into a disco ball, was cut from the final edit. That scene intensified my presumption that the film was going to be about Uni pranks and parties and all the fun and mayhem that comes with it, although there were glimpses of some parties the Uni essence was nowhere near as prominent throughout the film as it's trailer made it out to be.

This band of misfits make the film

All in all, I do think it is worth watching as i did enjoy it there just seemed to be something really off-point for me and I can't exactly figure out what it was. There were definitely some really great, funny moments but i think all of the subplots that are squeezed in means that the great moments get mixed in with the not-so-great moments, eventually making the whole film underwhelming. The script is reasonably strong and the characters are well rounded, i think introducing the misfit monsters a little earlier on would have benefited the film greatly as they carry most of the humour and when they are not onscreen you can feel their absence. Definitely be prepared for some fidgety children towards the end of the film and be wary about taking under five's or sensitive children as the last thing you want is your kids having nightmares about the scary monsters hiding under their bed!

 Monsters University is a watchable film, definitely miles away from the rubbish side of Pixar sequels (Cars 2, i'm looking at you) but not even close to the realm of Toy Story 3. Maybe someplace in the middle alongside Toy Story 2... I wouldn't watch it again but i'm glad i did watch it, and if they make a third Monsters Inc I will give it a go, but only on the condition that they include Boo!!

All in all I award Monsters University: ★★★✯ ☆
                                                                                 (three and a half)

Monsters University is out nationwide from July 12th!

Stay tuned for more reviews and follow me on twitter if you fancy it :)

Love,

Amazing Randall balloon

My name is Stephanie...

...And i'm a DVD-holic

#Can'tBeTamed

WORLD WAR Z

 

World War Z is one of those films that i kind of wanted to see but knew i would never actually get around to, so you can imagine my delight yesterday afternoon when i was invited along to a screening of it after work!

The film started with a whole lot of promise; you are introduced to the central family in the midst of their morning routine and the audience is immediately able to get a sense of what a normal, happy and loving family they are. Another pro point was that within fifteen minutes of starting the film, the action and the main storyline (mystery virus is turning civilians into zombies) is well and truly underway.

When the zombies start attacking and the film becomes a fight for Jerry's (played by Brad Pitt) family to survive I really did think that it was a great film - the family dynamics added that extra layer of  emotion to what would have otherwise been just another action sequence and I felt true tension and panic as I helplessly sat and watched, praying they would all get to a safe place unharmed.

Yep, in that first half hour or so I was well and truly invested in the film. Then it all kind of goes wrong...

You see, (and this is by no means a spoiler - it is mentioned within minutes of the film's opening) Jerry happens to be some kind of ex-member of the United Nations. He has contacts and after one night of he and his family running away from zombies he is collected by the UN and his family are dropped off on a safe boat whilst Jerry is faced with no choice but to go back into the scary, zombie-ridden World to try and get to the bottom of this mystery virus and ultimately save the day. This is the true plot of the film and one that I feel was actually a lot weaker  than your basic 'zombie-survival' story... After all, you now know that his family literally face no danger and this seems like a bit of a cop-out. When the terror first began I was convinced that civilians uniting together to survive a zombie attack and a father's struggle to reassure his two young daughters whilst protecting them would have me in tears at some stage (I have this weird thing with unity - a bunch of strangers joining forces for the greater good is always a cue for me to start weeping), I was genuinely preparing to at least shed a tiny tear or get a lump in my throat but the fact is that this film very quickly turns from a drama/ action to a full on action and if you are looking for the level of emotional connection that similar films such as 28 Days Later or Independence Day give you then you will be horribly disappointed.

Now, obviously Brad Pitt is going to be the protagonist. He is. after all, our big bucks Hollywood stud; the guy who the film is about; the reluctant soldier who is convinced to get back out there and fight for the World one last time - of course i expected him to be a huge hero. However, though he might be a hero Jerry is definitely still human (unless the tiny matter of him being invincible was accidentally left out by director Marc Forster) and as time creeps on he survives outrageous, horrific, dangerous event after outrageous, horrific, dangerous event and to be honest, you just start to get a bit tired of it all.

 I know that it is fiction but it still seems a little insulting to the audience when you can pretty much do everything possible to kill a character with him not actually dying and hardly ever losing his momentum. There is also an awful lot of convenience that strikes throughout the film - a complete, unavoidable and unaccounted for disaster can happen and Jerry will conveniently end up being walking distance away from the exact destination that he was planning to go to. Literally, Forster could have dropped Pitt's character from a space shuttle a million miles above Earth and have him land on his own front doorstep completely unscathed and it would not have seemed out of place in this film. The smallest things kill any other character but put Jerry through every trauma possible and he will still come bouncing back, ready to save the day!

As well as that, the zombies were generally quite comical in both appearance and behaviour and there were times the zombies would be shown and the entire cinema just burst out laughing and i don't think this was the intended impact of the film. I also found the 3D to be unnecessary for much of the film - only really serving a purpose when a zombie suddenly appears on the screen, which admittedly did cause me to jump out of my skin, but i actually found for the rest of the time the 3D hindered my experience as the scenes tended to be so fast paced with so much happening onscreen that the gratuitous 3D just made it all seem a bit too over the top and actually made me feel a little nauseous at time.

After a strong start World War Z definitely found itself on a steady decline but the real plummet came with the ending. You have no idea how difficult it is to explain this let down of an ending without spoiling it but it really is just so inconclusive - and inconclusive in a bad and offensive way. I am all for film endings being open to interpretation - a lot of the time i actually prefer it to a concrete ending being forced upon me - but this was beyond a simple case of leaving it to the audience's imagination, this was literally Forster coming up with a vague idea for the ending but being too lazy to iron out all of the new issues that it raises and thus completely failing to execute the idea properly. After investing two hours into this film the ending is less than satisfactory and it genuinely felt as though they ran out of time or money to make the rest of the film so had to end it about fifteen minutes earlier than the script had planned; and this is purely because so much needless time is invested in showing how awesome and great and heroic Brad Pitt is. Which, let's face it, most of us already know.

In all honesty, the 'twist' ending creates more problems than it solves and Forster just could not be bothered to address these problems or come up with a new idea, so just kind of stuck it out hoping the audience will be too blown away by the rest of the film to notice... And judging by the bewildered silence that encased the cinema when the credits came up and everybody realised that we weren't going to be getting any more of a solution than that, i don't think that i was the only one to notice!

All negatives aside, the acting was great, the opening half an hour was incredibly strong and if you are willing to leave all logic and disbelief at home for the night then who knows - i am sure you could enjoy it! I just know that I definitely would have enjoyed it more if there was more focus on family and unity and less focus on how fantastic, resourceful and invincible regular human Jerry is.

All in all I award World War Z: ★★✯☆ ☆
                                                                                 (two and a half)

World War Z is out nationwide from June 21st!

Stay tuned for more reviews and follow me on twitter if you fancy it :)

Love,

THE GREAT GATSBY

I am going to start this review of by saying something controversial: I read the book The Great Gatsby and if i am being totally honest... I didn't love it.

No, wait, come back! I promise I have stuff to say that you might agree with and won't strike your literary soul with horror the way my opening statement did. I just didn't realise when i first picked up the book that ultimately, The Great Gatsby is a love story. The tale of unrequited love and, well, a pretty great man who throws some pretty great parties whilst being in love. Other than love and parties not a lot really happens and even though it is a pretty short book, it dragged.

Now, onto the film. Despite not loving the book i was super excited to see the film... The excitement came around the time the words Baz Luhrmann were uttered in the same sentence as it and was even more intensified when Leonardo Dicaprio and Carey Mulligan were announced to play Gatsby and Daisy. An element of doubt set in when Tobey Maguire (seriously, what?) was cast as Nick but all in all, despite the bad reviews i was hearing, i was excited. 

To start with, as i expected, the film is visually stunning. The luxury, picturesque buildings, the extravagant parties and the beautiful 1920s fashion... Aesthetically i was in love. The beauty of the scenes combined with Luhrmann's trademark directing technique made it a joy to look at and i think even if i hated everything else about it, the pure beauty of the film would have been enough to make me enjoy it at least a little bit. Luhrmann is one of my favourite directors and this is because i love the fast-paced, carnivalesque nature of his films. I think any other director even thinking about making Gatsby into a film is, quite frankly, unacceptable. If anybody was going to bring those fantastical parties to life it was Baz and he delivered 110%.

Carey Mulligan is beautiful as Daisy

Onto the casting. Carey Mulligan has been a firm favourite of mine since i saw her in An Education four years ago. She is simply beautiful and such an elegant, graceful woman in every role i have seen her in and she floated into Daisy's shoes in a similarly elegant manner and with such amazing beauty that shone through the screen. However, in the book i found Daisy to be quite a one-dimensional character. I had absolutely no feeling or emotion towards her and i am sad to say that this translates into the film as well. I don't think it is by any means a reflection of Mulligan or Luhrmann; they did everything right but, for me, Daisy just isn't a character i can bring myself to care about. There just isn't enough there for me to relate to as she doesn't really have a lot of dialogue and we are told very little about her life, aside from her relationship with Gatsby. I think Daisy's transparant character is more a reflection of the expecations of women at the time of Fitzgerald's writing above anything else. Saying this, the scene where Daisy is preparing to marry and the string of pearls breaks as she is screaming did bring a lump to my throat when watching. Carey Mulligan might not have been able to breathe life into a lifeless character but everything that she did do was beautifully acted and for that, i can not fault her.

Tobey Maguire's comical facial expressions introduced us all to a new Nick Carraway

Tobey Maguire as Nick Carraway... Where to start? I can't even begin to tell you how shocked i was when Maguire was announced to play the character who ultimately carries the novel. The story may be about Gatsby but in every sense of the word it is Nick who is the protagonist so casting somebody who had pretty much disappeared since his last big film almost a decade ago did not seem a wise choice for me. Tobey Maguire is Spiderman. To me and to many other people this is all he is known as... Could he really carry the film adaptation of one of the biggest literary classics to exist? As soon as the film started, i was wary. He was definitely not how i imagined Nick to be when reading the book, he was just too awkward - too much of a wallflower, i know Nick is the one who observes the whole story but he doesn't just blend into the background the way that Maguire did. As well as this new awkward personality that Maguire introduced to Nick, it was distracting that he seems to only be able to do facial expressions that border on comical, it is difficult to take him seriously. His facial reactions and the way he responds to other characters almost seemed like a caricature but i have to say, after about half an hour this grew on me. The small essence of slapstick comedy that Tobey Maguire embossed into every facial expression eventually worked for me and i will be completely honest and say that they only worked because of Baz Luhrmann's directing technique. The whole film was very bizarre, very carnivalesque, very caricature and once the parties and the fast-paced nature of these scenes got into the swing of it Maguire's silly face blended in naturally with the rest of the carry-on around him after initally sticking out like a sore thumb. Similarly to Luhrmann's other great films like Moulin Rouge and Romeo + Juliet, a lot of the shots were sudden close-ups of the character's faces and although Maguire definitely does not portray the Nick Carraway in the book, which i can see would annoy fans, he does portray an acceptable and watchable Nick Carraway. I did need time to get used to him but in hindsight i think he was a good, not great, choice.

Leonardo Dicaprio: A truly great Gatsby

Oh Gatsby... As with most people my age i have been a huge fan of Leonardo Dicaprio for as long as i can remember, he was one of my first 'favourite actors' having watched The Basketball Diaries at a young age and even then i remember thinking how astounding he was at acting - my love of him is not just down to his sexy good looks. Therefore i could not have chosen anybody else to play the iconic literary character of Jay Gatsby. He did say 'Old Sport' a hell of a lot but all in all he made a pretty great Gatsby (i didn't even mean to make that lame little pun there but i am leaving it in because it's true) He has the charisma, the depth, the look of Gatsby. He was so close to how i pictured him to be when reading the book and i actually connected with film Gatsby a LOT more than i did with book Gatsby. Something about the sad, painful look in his eyes and the hidden anguish he portrayed so well. In the book i was somewhat unaffected by the ending but in the film i was edging towards tears. It just broke my heart to see Gatsby fall apart the way that he does and personally i truly believe that Dicaprio brought Gatsby to life in ways that the book could not. My ultimate favourite scene in the film is when Gatsby is throwing all of his shirts over the stairs; he just looks so happy, so carefree - Dicaprio's entire face transforms, he had the youthful, fresh, innocent look that he did in his early days. It looked like a genuine transition of emotion, not just your bog-standard actor putting across that emotion, you can see that Dicaprio really did feel it and it is little things like that that make the film and fully engross you into the storyline and lives of the characters.

On top of this, there are many other pro-points to the film: The on-screen chemistry between Leonardo Dicaprio and Carey Mulligan was out of this world. They really looked like they were in love with eachother and the relationship between Daisy and Gatsby was enchanting, even if Daisy as a character was not. The supporting cast was amazing and i couldn't fault anything about any of them and very little of the main narrative was changed in the transition from book to film, which is a rare feat nowadays and must have made fans of the book pretty happy. There genuinely were a whole lot of plus points to this movie but the biggest negative was that i found it around about half an hour too long. There was a section in the middle where it all just seemed to drag and the audience had already understood the pain and anguish at unrequited love but Luhrmann seemed keen to reinforce that as much as possible... And this was too many times for my liking. As i said, the book is pretty short and i had already wondered how they would make it into a feature length film at all, let alone a two and a half hour one. However, similarly to Les Miserables, the prolonged middle section of the film was more than made up for by the incredible ending. The last fifteen minutes had me hooked and the very, very last scene - though really predictable - sent shivers down my spine.

As i wasn't a huge fan of the book i will actually congratulate The Great Gatsby for, in my opinion, being a film that is actually slightly better than the book. Other than cutting down some of that middle section i couldn't think of anything more they could have done in order to improve it. And my love for Baz Luhrmann may be slightly responsible for this but i like to think it is a film that will be enjoyed by most!

All in all i award The Great Gatsby with ★★★★☆

Stay tuned for more reviews and follow me on twitter if you fancy it :)

Love,

EPIC

 

Thanks to MSN Entertainment  I had the utter privilige to see the newest Blue Sky animation EPIC this evening.

As a huge fan of all things magical and all things tiny, a film about the magical adventure of a girl, MK (Amanda Seyfried), who is shrunk so that she can enter (and help to save) an enchanting World of the miniature society that inhabits a forest was definitely right up my street!

Beautiful Aesthetics

The setting is absolutely stunning and the 3D is simply breathtaking - from the moment the opening scene appeared onscreen a resounding 'wow' echoed around the cinema and the audience were noticeably taken in by the utter beauty of the film throughout.

Although animated films are always technically 'children's films' i found that Epic was a true delight for children and grown ups alike! The characters are diverse and well-rounded, not the simplified kiddy characters that you might find in some children's films, and the humour was clever and at times laugh-out-loud funny. It has one of the best voiceover casts that i have ever seen; Josh Hutcherson, Colin Farrell and Christoph Waltz gave stellar, meaningful performances alongside Amanda Seyfried as the lead cast whereas Chris O'Dowd and Aziz Ansari provided great comic relief as the snail/slug duo Mub and Grub. Music artists Beyonce, Pitbull and Steven Tyler of Aerosmith shined as the supporting cast and the whole team seemed to fit together flawlessly.

Obviously as a children's film it is not without its flaws, but in this case the flaws are mostly down to plotholes i.e. the distorted notion of time in order to convenience the plot, but this is a magical world that we are talking about and my suspension of disbelief can be extended to something as mundane as a time scale. Other than that i have no complaints - it moved at exactly the right pace to keep you interested and the bright, colourful, beautiful scenes were perfectly juxtaposed with the drab, decaying scenes that showed us where the bad guys inhabited. Before the three World's (the real world, the 'good' magical world and the 'bad' magical world) are linked together i found that the narrative flowed effortlessly between them; making the audience familiar with each aspect of the film before the time came for the Worlds to merge. This was not what i expected - from viewing the trailer i thought that we would be following MK and our first introduction to the magical Worlds would be once she has shrunk and been forced to enter them; seeing all three from the get-go was definitely the better option! There wasn't one moment of the film where i was bored or clock-watching or waiting for a scene to end, and i think that is all down to the charming cast, fast-paced narrative and, of course, the breathtaking aesthetics.

Epic Pug

AND if that wasn't enough, there is an adorable chubby three-legged pug. A misfit animated pug in 3D - What more can you ask for than that?!

One thing that i will say is that i found certain scenes with the 'baddies' a little bit creepy when thinking of it in the eyes of a younger child; there are parts where they appear from the bark in the trees and jump out to the camera and this might be a little bit scary for more sensitive children.

All in all i award Epic ★★★★★ and thoroughly recommend it to both adults and children; a cinema trip for all of the family!

Stay tuned for more reviews and follow me on twitter if you fancy it :)

Love,

PAN'S LABYRINTH

 

I'm not too keen on fantasy films. Harry Potter, Lord of the Rings, Chronicles of Narnia... Nopes, just don't like them. I love fairies and goblins and magic and wonder to look at but as far as the narrative goes the only fantasy film i love, and i mean love, is my childhood favourite Peter Pan.

I hate the Disney version of the story but from Peter Pan the book, to Hook, Finding Neverland and the 2003 live action adaptation that had pre-teen girls everywhere falling in love with Jeremy Sumpter, that fantastical story held me captivated throughout childhood and even to this day every time i open the book or put on one of the films i get swept back to my childhood, where evil pirates, mischevious fairies and beautiful mermaids ruled my imagination.

Peter Pan (2003)

  I did enjoy fantasy films when i was younger but as i grew up i found this genre particularly unappealing and aside from Peter Pan and other nostalgic films from my childhood, i've found that fantasy films just aren't able to maintain my interest and i've generally avoided them.

Pan's Labyrinth was different though. I've mentioned my love of Guillermo Del Toro previously and it is this love and this faith i have in him as a director that finally convinced me to give this film a chance. I knew it was very highly regarded and i also knew that Del Toro dabbles in the darker side of fantasy, making his very own, unique fantasy-horror hybrid that i found appealing. The beautiful aesthetics of a fantasy film combined with the darkness of a horror mixed in with the emotive narrative's that Del Toro is also reknowned for made me think i would actually be in for a cinematic treat.

I am pleased to say that i was right.

Pan's Labyrinth is set in fascist Spain during 1944 and Ofelia, an 11-year-old girl played by the wonderful Ivana Baquero, is sent with her pregnant mother to live with her new stepfather - the evil captain of the Spanish army. One night Ofelia meets a fairy who takes her to a secret labyrinth where she meets a faun who tells her that she is really the princess of the fantastical underworld but to prove herself and to gain entrance to this World she must complete three tasks before the next full moon.

Although the main concept of the film is fantasy and the beautiful aesthetics throughout really reinforce that, i feel the reality side of things; the brutality of the Spanish cival war and the cold blooded nature of Ofelia's stepfather, are a perfect juxtaposition that makes the fantasy all the more magical. It isn't a film that follows true fantasy conventions; the fairies aren't pretty, floaty Tinkerbell's and the Faun looks more like a villain than a saviour and i could never quite tell if he was actually nice or really just a calculating chancer who was using Ofelia to complete tasks for his own gain. The tasks that Ofelia is given are gruesome and in some instances terrifying and in addition to this there are quite a few scenes of graphic violence that had me grimacing.

The real world was scary and violent and traumatic but the fantasy world wasn't much better, something that most definitely sets Pan's Labyrinth apart from other such films. And, just as i suspected, there was your fair share of heartache as Del Toro stuck to his usual style of creating a strong emotional bond between the protagonists and the audience before putting his protagonist through a heartbreaking trauma. As well as scares and grimaces there were plenty of opportunities for tears too.

I enjoyed this film because fantasy wasn't it's focus; it wasn't the be all and end all of the film  and the main essence actually ran a lot deeper than great CGI and make-up. It is a heart-warming, heart-breaking, bittersweet story of a young girl living through the true horror of war. There was also an air of mystery surrounding the film - i couldn't guess what the next task would be, what would happen next or even if the faun was good or bad. I could never tell what was around the corner and that is a rare feat in film nowadays and i think that is why it managed to captivate me in such a way; the film doesn't patronize the audience and i like that.

There was one aspect of the film that did lose me a little bit and up until this point i was thinking 'Wow this is amazing' and following this particular scene the thought process got downgraded to a simple 'Wow, this is pretty good'. As i am not giving away spoilers on this blog, i will say for those who have seen it that the temptation during the second task and Ofelia's reaction to it did make me lose a bit of the love that i had for her as a character. It just seemed too unnecessary and i know originally Ofelia was going to be an 8-year-old girl and maybe in that sense it would have been more understandable but as the film stands, with Ofelia as 11, it just seemed like unjustified stupidity on her part.

Other than that, Pan's Labyrinth is a great film and i do recommend you watch it. Guillermo Del Toro is fast becoming one of my favourite directors.

All in all Pan's Labyrinth loses a star for the second task, so i award it: ★★★★☆

Stay tuned for more things film and follow me on Twitter if you fancy it :) 

Love,

ARGO

 

Over this awards season i have really grown to love Ben Affleck and his scraggly beard. Sure, before i had always kind of liked the guy - after all we do have him and Matt Damon to thank for one of the greatest film's of all time: Good Will Hunting - and he seemed decent enough as a person but not many of his films really struck me as anything special so i never had a real passion for him. However, seeing his reaction to winning the prestigious Best Director BAFTA combined with his beautiful wife Jennifer Garner's reaction as she practically burst with pride as her hubby took to the stage with his acceptance speech...It made it hard not to fall in love with them as a couple and want him to succeed even more so that we could be treated to some more adorable displays of pride and affection. 

Jennifer Garner after husband Ben Affleck is announced as the Best Director winner

So when the Oscar's came around i had everything crossed that Ben Affleck and Argo would win big and was probably almost as proud as Jen was when Argo was announced as 2013's Best Picture.

(Oh, to be clear as a sidenote i hadn't actually seen Argo by this point, this is a minor factor.)

I've never really held the Oscar's decisions in high regard. After the monstrosity of 1999 where Shakespeare in Love beat Life is Beautiful to the Best Picture Oscar whilst American History X wasn't even nominated... I kind of just gave up on the award nonsense then. I already knew that the 2013 Oscar's weren't doing much better than 1999 with awarding the most deserving nominee after Jennifer Lawrence won Best Actress for Silver Linings Playbook over the absolutely incredible, out of this World performance from six-year-old Quvenzhane Wallis in Beasts of the Southern Wild. I get angry about this particular injustice every day and with such examples i ironically didn't have heightened expectations of Argo, despite it's Oscar win.

I finally got round to watching Argo last week and even though i wasn't expecting anything terrific i was still slightly disappointed. Ben's scraggly beard had let me down and i really wasn't prepared for that! Don't get me wrong, the most frustrating thing about Argo is that it isn't bad... It just isn't... good. As the true life story of how America rescued a group of hostages from Iran by pretending they are filming a Hollywood movie, Argo,... I kind of expected a bit more action? As i said in my last post, i am not the kind of person who needs big explosions and drama to enjoy a film but not a lot really seemed to happen in Argo. A basic plot summary would be:

1. The hostages are captured
2. The CIA wonder how they can free them
3. Ben Affleck suggests the fake movie
4. They get to work on the fake movie
5. Ben Affleck goes to Iran 
6. Ben Affleck frees the hostages
7. A bit of drama at the airport
8. The hostages arrive home and are safe

I don't know about you but i just expected a little more action inbetween points 5 and 6, it all seemed way too easy. The scenes towards the end of the film where they are in the airport trying to get through security without being identified as the hostages were great, i will hand Affleck that. They were really high tension, even if they weren't high drama and the tension is more than satisfactory for a film of this stance but twenty minutes of tension from a two hour film is most definitely not satisfactory for the film as a whole and nowhere near enough to carry the rest of the boring film.

I know this was based on a true story and for all i know maybe they did get the hostages that easily, with that little drama or confrontation. But since when has Hollywood been wary of dramatizing and exaggerating true stories?! Argo has already faced criticism from Canada and Iran for it's distortion of the truth so it isn't as though they were desperate to maintain complete accuracy... There just could have been something more.

It was well directed though. The story was boring but the direction can't be faulted i guess.

I award Argo  ★★★☆☆  because, as i said, it wasn't bad. It just wasn't good.

Stay tuned for more things film and follow me on Twitter if you fancy it :)

Love,

LITTLE CHILDREN

My favourite kind of film tends to be those 'slice of life' films. I know in my last post i said that i love horror films but trust me, if i love horror films i am pretty much married to 'slice of life'. You know the ones - a little two hour snippet of what appears to be the completely plausible, normal, everyday lives and the darkness that consequently lies behind those perfect suburban doors. Think Revolutionary Road or Closer or Magnolia or Lost in Translation (Which, ironically, i hate). My all time favourite 'slice of life' film is Another Happy Day, which is also one of my all time favourite films and stars one of the greatest young actors of this generation (Ezra Miller).

Little Children is exactly one of those kind of films, it's an insight into the four seemingly normal lives of your average, every day people; a married man and a married woman, a disgraced police officer and a man who has recently been released from prison after exposing himself to a minor. Four lives that are interconnected in ways that will become clear and four lives that are actually a lot more sinister once you scratch the surface.

Now let me get something clear - this isn't a very dramatic film. Not too much happens and compared to a film like American Beauty it might just fall a bit flat but the concept behind it is very relatable and fascinating to watch; but as these kinds of films are my favourite there is a chance that i am being a little biased. But what does happen to a perfect neighbourhood when, well, a paedophile is back on the streets? What does happen when you fall for somebody who isn't your spouse? How do you deal with the gossip surrounding your affair? It is a simple film but it is so beautifully acted and beautifully composed that i think the simpleness of the narrative  adds to the overall essence rather than have any kind of negative impact.

I have to warn you that i you are the kind of person that needs action, explosions, guns and shouting to make it through a film then it may not be for you but if you prefer exploring the complexities of life and relationships then sit back and enjoy, you are in for a treat!

Also bare in mind that as this is a Kate Winslet film there is, needless to say, a lot of nudity. Alongside some pretty graphic sex scenes so maybe don't watch this one with the 'rents.

All in all, i award Little Children ★★★☆☆

Stay tuned for more things film and follow me on Twitter if you fancy it :) 

Love,

MAMA

Okay, before I start can i just get this out of my system: Am i the only person who's inner fourteen-year-old is unleashed at the sight of the word 'Mama'?! Literally, i can't read the word without hearing this gem in my head:

Right, now that is out of the way let's get back to the topic at hand!

One thing you should know about me is that i love a good horror film - i love to jump and be scared and then hide under the covers at bedtime because i don't want the scary monster to get me. However, these days finding a good horror film is pretty much impossible. They are a rare breed and this is because a good horror film has to be more than just scary. There needs to be the right amount of scares, quality acting and, most importantly, have a really great plot.

Y'know, a plot?! One of those coherent things that drive films? Something that has a clear beginning, middle and an end? No massive, gaping plot holes? No amazing twists but with no explanation? Okay, good - you guys know what that is and that already puts you one step above most horror film makers! Just last year i saw the film 'The Pact' in the cinema, which was pretty good - it was kind of creepy and the story was sort of making sense as well as scaring me but then it committed that great horror film offence of an amazing plot twist making the audience gasp but then...... The credits rolled. Seriously, they had this amazing turn of events that ended so suddenly there was pretty much no explanation, no detail given, nothing! It was very disappointing to say the least and it made all the positives of the film - like the fact it made me jump and was scary in places - just disappear. Horror film scares are nothing without a plot!

Needless to say, i am quite cautious when choosing to invest time in a horror film because i know it will probably end up being disappointing. However, when i saw Guillermo Del Toro had a new film, 'Mama', coming out i was super, super excited! I have seen a few of his other films and i know that if there is one thing that i can trust Del Toro with, it is providing the audience with a good, coherent narrative. I was quick to Orange Wednesday'd it and was scared before the film had even started - apprehensive of the terror that would soon be engrossing me and the fact that i was seeing it late at night, meaning that i would be going straight home to bed in the dark afterwards, made it all the more terrifying.

I am so happy to report that the film is captivating from beginning to end. For those who don't know, 'Mama' is the story of two young girls that have been found living feral in the woods five years after they disappeared. They go to live with their Uncle and his girlfriend but are constantly talking to and about 'mama' and ~weird things~ start to happen. Typical to Del Toro's usual style the audience is a lot more emotionally involved with the characters than your usual horror movie. Within ten minutes i was close to tears at the sight of the two young sister huddling together for warmth having been abandoned in the forest and although i didn't cry at the end i know plenty of people who did shed a few tears!

Also executive producer of films like 'Pans Labyrinth', Del Toro is definitely more inclined to go down the more fantastical horror route than traditional, sinister horror. The ending of 'Mama' has been compared by many to something straight out of a Tim Burton movie and there are lots of fantasy elements throughout the film that make me think 'horror' isn't the most accurate genre-label for it. Mama herself is very fantastical looking, she is definitely not your typical horror villain and i have to be completely honest and say that i found her appearance somewhat laughable. Her face was just so big and her hair was so far receeded that she resembled a potato and the sounds that she was making sounded more like a cow moo-ing than anything terrifying. However.... THIS IS NOT A BAD THING!!!!

I was so worried when i went in that i'll be seeing her face in the shadows when i went to bed that night, so her face not being scary at all was definitely something that worked in my favour at least! And, most importantly, just because the villain herself wasn't scary to look at it doesn't mean there aren't any scares in the film! From things lurking in the shadow and the traditional aspect of things suddenly jumping out at you... I was hiding behind my coat for a little bit of it i have to admit.

The storyline was exactly what I had expected from Del Toro – an emotive and well-explained back story that leaves no real questions unanswered; there were downsides though. There was an incredibly obvious deleted scene which disorientated the story arc a little bit and I cant for the life of me work out why it was deleted, the time scale was also a bit messed up – it would be light outside one second then pitch black the next and we would then be shown the exterior of the house in complete darkness but once inside the house you could see daylight shining in through the windows. These are more goofs than plot holes though but they seem like pretty major goofs to have been missed.

One thing that definitely CAN NOT be ignored though is the absolutely outstanding performances from the two young actresses who play such an incredibly central role in the film. Like most, I am always a bit wary of films that are focused on a child playing a main role because, whether we like it or not, a lot of children can not act. One major film from last year, whose title I wont say because I don’t want to be slagging of a kid, was utterly ruined for me because of the distractingly bad performance from the child actor. These girls were extraordinary and their performances aided the emotional connection that I had with the film rather than hinder it, as has happened in the past. Congrats to them!

All in all I did thoroughly enjoy 'Mama' and although it had a few flaws and the CGI wasn’t up to scratch it had a decent storyline and was a captivating watch. I don’t feel it fits comfortably within the horror genre but rather flits somewhere between the horror/ fantasy hybrid that Del Toro is creating. It is definitely more horror and scarier than his previous film, The Orphanage (which is also amazing and you should check it out) but it has a heavier focus on emotion and character development than most horror films. And to those who are wary of watching it because you don’t want to have nightmares and aren't a fan of horror films i'd say… give it a go. You will probably jump a few times but there is so much more to the film than horror so i don't think it will do any lasting damage :)

I award 'Mama': ★★★★☆
Stay tuned for more things film!

Love,