#4 - "Batman Begins" (2005)

Aaaaahhhhh Batman....my favourite DC super hero.

When I heard that Batman was getting  re-boot there was going to be a new trilogy of films I was super excited. So, back in 2005, when I was, well, a lot younger(!!) I couldn't wait to see how Christopher Nolan was going to bring the Dark Knight into the 21st Century.

Now, its probably worthwhile mentioning that I am a big fan of all of the Batman films, I recently watched the original...you know the one....Jack Nicholson plays an immensely insane Joker. Watching that has made me appreciate a lot o things about Nolan's Gotham, but it has also made me see a few things, which in my eyes are not so great.

So...some friends of mine decided it was time to get together and watch the whole Nolan trilogy on Blu-ray in one day, suffice to say I was in uber Batman heaven!

To start I will link to the Wikipedia article about the film so that you can read up and get your spoilers:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman_Begins

Here is the IMDB link too:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0372784/

I really enjoyed this film, I thought it was great that we got to see Batman's origin story and I think in showing a lot of Bruce Wayne's childhood you get a real sense of genuine sympathy for the character. That said, I'm not 100% sure that Christian Bale was the perfect Batman, at times he is perfection but sometimes, for me, there is just something missing. I'm not a huge fan of his Batman 'voice' it grates on me a little bit, and the more of the film I watched, the make-up around his eyes when he was in the Bat-suit was getting me a little bit worked up - so much so that I am going to put in  little photo of said make-up just to prove how wrong it looks.

See....well, you might not see but for me, it makes his eyes look wrong.

after putting a bit more thought into it, maybe bale isn't quite suave enough to carry off Bruce Wayne, I think as the trilogy goes on, he improves greatly but for now, I am talking batman Begins and in this film, he didn't always do it for me.

it must be really difficult for any actor to play such an iconic character with such a diverse fan-base, I don't think you are ever going to be able to please everyone. Something I loved about Bale's Batman was the Bat-Suit....it looks AMAZING, the more modern style of the suit is great, I also loved the back-story about where the suit and all of Batman's gadgets came from. Now is probably a good time to say...Morgan Freeman as Fox, what a legend!

Michael Cane is perfect for the role of Alfred Pennyworth, he has wit (all of his comedic lines are delivered with impeccable timing), charm and  an unconditional love for Bruce Wayne which you can see in his eyes all of the time. My housemate made the comment when we were watching that Bruce Wayne is sorted having Alfred and Lucius Fox watching his back!

Liam Neeson as Ra's Al Ghul is perfect...he is EXACTLY how I have always imagined him to be, he has an air of sophistication about him. There is something irrevocably believable about Neeson's Ra's, nothing too over-the-top but a perfect villain for Nolan's Batman World. Complimenting Neeson is Cillian Murphy as the Scarecrow....he is a little more eccentric than Neeson which is exactly what the part calls for, my only problem with the Scarecrow character was that he only wore the mask with his suit and to me, it looked a little wrong.

Having said that, the hallucinogenic sequences were really well done and definitely had me feeling a little queasy!

The only character who really lets the side down for me is Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes, she is as dull as dishwater. There is nothing sassy about her, in fact, the character doesn't really have much about her at all. I felt at times as if I was having to endure the film rather than enjoy it because some of the scenes with Holmes really lack pace.

So, as you can see, I definitely don't think the film was perfect, elements of it certainly were but there was a lot of scope for improvement over the trilogy.

Nolan's Gotham is dark and gothic, his storyline equally dark and gritty with an underlying vibe of fear throughout. Being a big fan of comic books and super hero films, I don't know if this one quite hits the nail on the head - it is almost too real for my liking, I know that was kind of Nolan's point, and I salute that but the Batman universe has some brilliant Villains (Clayface, Killer Crock and Penguin but to name a few) and some equally comedic goons and henchmen. I think Nolan could have still achieved his dark, gritty 9although unfortunately in this film sometimes seemingly muddy-brown) world with the inclusion of a more eccentric villain (obviously as we all know, he was definitely saving this for the next film!)

Batman Begins was definitely a film that brought batman up to date and made it more realistic than a comic-book world.

It set the scene and told the origin story well but there was just something missing for me.

#3 - "Les miserables" (2012)

Well, what can I say.

This was (and still is) my favourite musical of all time.

I'll never forget the first time I saw it in London at the tender age of 10...I was mesmerised by the spectacle of it all.

Having seen the musical 11 times, when I heard that they were making the film....I wasn't sure what to think....would they ruin it? would it be easily transferrable from the stage to the screen?

Let me assure you, they didn't ruin it...the film is a triumph.

Now, I am trying to do this review with as few spoilers as possible, and will probably add a further blog post in the future going into more depth, but as this only came out today (and yes, I took the day off work to watch it!!) I am very aware that a lot of you are yet to se it. So I promise you....I will not be doing any big plot reveals.

If you are genuinely interested in reading more about the plot and the characters, here is the Wikipedia link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Les_Mis%C3%A9rables

This link is to the Wikipedia article about the original novel by Victor Hugo, from there you can find links to articles about both the stage show and the film.

I'll also give you the IMDB link for further information about the film:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1707386/

So.....Where to begin.

Yes its a film where more of the dialogue is sung rather than spoken, and I understand that this may be a slightly daunting prospect, but it is done so sympathetically and with such beautiful cinematography that sometimes, you forget that the actors are singing because you are drawn into their world.

There are three actors who really stood out for me, and that's not to say that anyone was bad, the whole cast was excellent.

I can't review this film without first talking about Hugh Jackman as Jean Val Jean. For anyone who knows anything about the stage show, he has some pretty big shoes to fill. He is following in the footsteps of true stage icons such as Colm Wilkinson and Alfie Boe (to name only two). It would have been very easy for Jackman to have become a carbon copy of any of the previous Val Jean's - and had he done this, I fear he would have been a complete flop. However, he didn't, Jackman is as much Jean Val Jean as Colm or Alfie has ever been , but in his own way. With Jackmans Val Jean we see more of the tortured soul through his facial expressions than his voice, which is obviously easier to do on the screen than the stage. All in all, his performance was excellent and he definitely deserves his Oscar nomination for Best Actor, however, having now seen the trailer for "Lincoln" (review to follow once I have watched it) I think it will be a tough race between Jackman and Daniel Day Lewis.

Russell Crowe...Russell Crowe...Russell Crowe...this is really going to shock anyone who knows me but I LOVED HIM!!! He will not be to everyone's taste as Javert, and whether he was amazing because he is a wooden actor who has finally found  role into which he fit or whether it is because he is a very talent actor, I don't know (and I am not letting past performances or my general dislike of him cloud my judgement here). I had very low expectations of him after seeing trailers for the film and I felt sure that he would be the one person that I had a lot (of negative things) to say about him, but I can't fault his performance. He played the character in a way I have never seen Javert played before and I loved that, he was quietly menacing with the right balance of hatred and pompous authority with a dash of something almost akin to regret and grace thrown in for good measure. I really did love the way he played the character and this performance has really changed my opinion of Russell Crowe.

The person who completely stole the show for me was Anne Hathaway as Fantine. From her first moment on the screen right up until her very last I was mesmerised. there really isn't much else I can say without talking about the plot other than I was (and still am) in complete awe of her! She is a VERY strong contender for the Best Supporting Actress Oscar - in fact, I have told my housemate that if she doesn't win, I am never watching another film ever again (which might mke this blog a little difficult!!).

I should also Mention Samantha Barks as Eponine, who made the transition from the West End and 25th anniversary concert to the big screen like a complete pro!

I wish I could mention every single person and I am sure, once I have watched it again I will have to do an edit of this post and add some more but I came out of the cinema feeling emotionally drained and all cried out.

It is not very often a film comes along with the power to evoke such strong emotion in me, or even to move me to tears, but suffice to say Les Miserables definitely moved me.

I would recommend it to anyone, whether you know everything about it already or nothing.

This has been a particularly hard post to write without referencing any part of the plot or scenery but I hope when you see it that you will love it as much as I did.

 

#2 - "Battle Royale" (2000)

I'm quite the fan of world cinema and Battle Royale was recommended to me by numerous friends - and as it was only £5.00 in HMV a little while ago,  I thought I'd give it a try. This isn't the first time I have watched it but I made a short-list of films that I love (which will all be watched and reviewed on here I would imagine).

How to summarise Battle Royale in a few sentences......

Well, for a start, its BRUTAL.

42 students are taken to a deserted island and given three days to fight to the death until only one is left standing. If more than one student is left remaining at the end of the three days, they all die. The "Battle Royale" was brought into legislation by the government to try and put an end to the delinquent behaviour of the youth.

Class B - The lucky bunch of fresh-faced ninth graders are taken on a bus ride, gassed and carted into a facility where the rules of the Battle Royale are explained to them. The first two deaths take place in that very room at the hands of the Teacher who is trying to teach the children a valuable lesson...that the Battle Royale is not something which should be taken lightly.

One-by-one, the students are handed a bag which contains simple food rations and a random weapon (anything from a rather useless paper fan to some rather heavy artillery) and sent out onto the island where the games begin.

Some of the students instantly take to the game turning into ruthless, blood-hungry murderers in the blink of n eye while some decide that they want to try to get off the island without resorting to violence.

The first thing I would say when watching Battle Royale is that if you have seen "The Hunger Games" it is almost impossible not to draw comparisons between the two films. Both deal with pretty much the same subject matter. But what I like bout Battle Royale is that it is more believable. 

There is no fantasy world and the focus is not put on the people outside the games watching and placing bets on who the victor will be.

The definite difference between "Battle Royale" and "The Hunger Games" is in the editing - the deaths are not made easier on the eye by placing them in a montage, they all feel very real and are at some moments, hard to watch.

(That said, I would like to add a side note that this is not a dig at "The Hunger Games" in any way - I enjoyed the book very much and there were plenty of things that the film got right.)

The students in Battle Royale receive no form of combat training and it is really interesting to watch the story unfold and to see how the director (Kinji Fukasaku) believes that a group of children would react if they were placed in such a situation, it a carries nuances of Golding's "Lord of the Flies" in as much as it is shocking to see how quickly a group of children can turn on each other when put in a situation which is out of their control.

It would also be easy when watching and reviewing this film to spend a lot of time contemplating the politics surrounding the storyline. However, the film is set in a alternate timeline where Japan has become and authoritarian state. As the timeline of the film is supposed to be alternative to the reality I try not to get too bogged down in the politics and like to think of it as a necessary part of the story arc.

Perhaps one of my favourite things about Battle Royale is the scoring, the opening sequence (Verdi's - Requiem Mass - Dies Irae) is so powerful that right from the offset you know that  the film is going to pack a punch. The music is both dramatic and sombre in all the right places and helps to stir emotions inside that make you feel the tension of the piece as it is mounting to its conclusion.

The teacher (Kitano-Sensei) is by far my favourite character, he conveys the right amount of authority and anger without being overly sadistic. We also see his softer side when it becomes apparent that he has respect for Noriko and has been rooting for her to win the Battle Royale
I have tried not to give too much of the plot away with this one because, although slightly dated now, it is a really interesting look into what could potentially happen if any group of people were put into a situation like this against their will.

Definitely a film I would recommend.





 

#1 - "The Village" (2004)

I had never watched this before because I had been warned off by numerous friends who advised me that it wasn't worth wasting the 1hr 45mins of time which I would never get back.

So...on a rather chilly new years day after a rather heavy new years eve we decided to watch a film, the only stipulation being that it was a film that we had never watched before.

and after watching "The Village" - I am actually impressed, whether this is because it is a genuinely good film or whether my expectations of it were so low before we started is by-the-by.

Yes, it is full of M Night Shyamalan's predictable trademarks; the use of bold colours (think the use of the colour red in "6th Sense") the twist ending - which I will come back to later - and his tendency when filming scenes of dialogue to just film one party to the conversation.

The film starts with a rather long-winded visual sequence where the audience is treated to artsy shots of trees (obviously to symbolise the woods and the underlying theme of the piece) alternated with the names of the cast and backed by some tribal-esque music, which at the time I thought was a little bizarre but actually, having seen the film and knowing its conclusion - tribal music was quite fitting.

The film itself is set in Ye Olde Philadelphia and focuses on a  quaint village, surrounded by woodland which, if the elders will have you believe, is home to some unspeakable creatures which will not come into the village as long as none of the inhabitants of the village enters the woods. As the film progresses it becomes apparent that all is not as it seems, first we learn that the creatures actually do not exist and were created by the Elders of the village to cause fear and to encourage all of the villages inhabitants to stay in the confines of the village.

If that is not already enough, we then learn that actually, the village itself was created some time in the 1970's by Edward Walker (one of the elders) and a group of people that he met in a grief counselling group after the death of his father. The village is supposed to be an "ideal" place and in a way, it is a way for them all to start a fresh after their various bereavements.

Bryce Dallas Howard is superb as blind Ivy Walker, who has been raised in the village and knows nothing of the outside world. Joaquin Phoenix is suitably brooding as almost-mute Lucius Hunt and Adrien Brody plays the art of Noah Percy with a sensitivity that makes you feel for him even though he is responsible for stabbing Lucius and almost attacking ivy.

The film is in no way perfect but is an interesting look into the "cult culture" and the effects that can be gained by planting the seed of fear.

If you have not already seen it, I would definitely recommend it as it is totally not what I expected it to be.