I’ve not written on my blog for quite a while. I went off the boil writing for 2 reasons. First, I was trying to concentrate my efforts on building my own webpage. Second, I didn’t have as much time to spend going to the cinema. Which meant a lot of the time I was watching films that had been and gone from the cinema, so writing about them felt like retreading old ground.
Recently however, I have been having conversations with a friend about films and books, and he’s remarked about how animated and passionate I get about the subject. He’s right, I do, and I am, and as a result of these conversations I feel like it’s the right time to pick it back up.
I still want to create my own site, I like the idea of having that level of control over the way I display my content. Ultimately, for now, I’m just going to write and chat shit about films and books just because I like doing it.
My only hope is that regardless of the audience, how large or small it is, it sparks someone else’s interest. Maybe even sparks further discussion.
After an indefinite halt to production, then a working title of 'Malestrom' and a posted picture by cast member John Boyega of the script followed up by set photos. A quiet press release from Legendary Pictures has confirmed a new title for the film 'Pacific Rim: Uprising' and a release date of February 23 2018.
With the adventure taking place after the events of the first film, we already know John Boyega's character plays the son of Stacker Pentecost.
As for what the new title tells us?
Some think it adds credence to the exploration of the idea of what the world does with Jaeger tech once the Kaiju menace has been dealt with. A war between humans with Jaeger tech the weaponry of choice? A class war with the disenfranchised having to scavenge and salvage from the battlefields of old in order to piece together Jaeger tech to battle the elite? Could this lead to us seeing things like Jaeger 'jacking' or 'hacking'? Tech savvy revolutionaries hijacking physically or systematically the Jaegers of their opponents.
As interesting a prospect as this is, I'm not entirely sure how I feel about a Pacific Rim without Kaiju. The monsters versus mecha action of the first film was terrific, and made a great spectacle. Could it be that a reduced production budget means this time round we'll be treated to a grittier, human driven story? With Steven S. DeKnight (Marvel's Daredevil TV) at the helm, what ever happens, it's in good hands.
Who knows, they might just stick with the original plan of a Kaiju origin story!
This post retains it’s original title, “Suspend my disbelief”. That’s how it started life. It just got lost when I started to make comparisons between Marvel and DC’s TV shows, whilst forgetting 2 of Marvel TV’s biggest and best.
So let’s get back to suspending our disbelief.
This is something that I assume all fans of American or science fiction TV shows are familiar with. Throw comic book adaptations into that mix, and that is where I’m at. I’ve gone deep down the DC TV rabbit hole, and in doing so have found my disbelief suspension limits.
At the start of series 3 of Arrow, episode 2. A bad guy’s laying in a hospital bed a little worse for wear. Team Arrow needs information from him that will lead to his boss, the big bad guy. Needless to say, the big bad guy isn’t keen on this happening, and in order to shut him up assassinates him whilst he’s recuperating in hospital.
Here’s where I reach my limit.
The hospital bed that our soon to be dead guy is laying in is perpendicular to the window (every bad guy needs a room with a view after all). Big bad guy stands on the roof top of the adjacent building and shoots him in the chest with an arrow, through the window.
“Where’s the problem here?” I hear you ask.
The problem is that the arrow sticks out of the guy's chest at an angle that indicates he’s been shot face on. No angle at all. Yet the window is perpendicular to the bed. A right angle, not parallel to the end of the bed.
The last time I checked you can’t bend it like Beckham when you shot an arrow. There’s some basic physics here that’s being ignored.
But hang on a minute. This is Arrow, right? Where we have:
Mirakuru
The Lazarus Pit
Magic herbs that Oliver eats to cure himself of…..well, anything.
and a bow that The Arrow can bludgeon people with during fights, yet it never breaks?
That’s not to mention lots of jumping, flipping and flying that I’m sure also flies in the face of basic physics. The list gets longer when you start to think that this is in a universe where we also have The Flash and Legends of Tomorrow.
Yet in all of this, the simple misrepresentation of the trajectory of an arrow is what brings the house down.
I'm going watch the Legends of Tomorrow travel through time in order to calm down.
I was writing a post lamenting my inability to overlook ignorance of basic physics. This in relation to TV shows that I have been watching recently adapted from comic books. The majority of these being from DC Comics.
I’ve been watching a lot of The Flash, Arrow, and most recently Legends of Tomorrow. For the most part I have been enjoying them immensely. More so than Marvel Agents of SHIELD, where I have just finished the third series. I began comparing the franchises, against each other and their big screen counterparts. Drawing a conclusion that while Marvel are champions of the big screen, DC had the edge on the small. For me Agents of SHIELD has become peppered with filler with the purpose of forwarding the overall series long story arc rather than that of the current episode. The result being episodes that go off the boil. In this DC have a knack of making solid episodes, entertaining in their own right, while still furthering the series long story arc.
Having put the finishing touches to my post, I hit save and slept on it. Something I like to do is read with fresh eyes and a clear head the morning after as a final part of the editing process, It was while laying in bed that night that it occurred to me that I had recently started watching the second series of Daredevil. This in turn reminded my of Jessica Jones. Both Marvel franchises that are bloody brilliant. Very different to Agents of SHIELD, The Flash, and Arrow, but just as good and arguably better.
So with this in mind. I’ve realised that the difference in the quality of Marvel’s and DC’s TV shows isn’t so clear cut, and that I need to go back to the drawing board on that post.
It seems that Captain America: The First Avenger wasn't everyone's cup of tea. I thought it was great, and I was REALLY looking forward to Captain America: The Winter Soldier. The return of one of my favourite characters within the MCU, coupled with elements from one of his best comic story arcs.
With everything that Marvel Studios has going on at the moment, they could almost be forgiven for leaning (not resting, just leaning) ever so slightly on their laurels.
Wrong.
(Before reading any further, please go and see the film. Spoilers ahead!)
Through the various trailers in the build up to The Winter Soldier's release we were fed tidbits of information that hinted at the potential demise of Nick Fury. Boy does that story element turn out to be small fry! Marvel Studios go one step further and tear down S.H.I.E.L.D altogether. To me this shows that they aren't afraid to tackle big, bold story themes that shake things up, and reminds me very much of comic book type story telling.
Alongside this all out action, you have an overall film feel that harks back to the spy classics of yesteryear. With suspense, tension, and great characters alongside the action that you would come to expect from a Marvel blockbuster. With Robert Redford in particular playing his part brilliantly.
All of this doesn't even include my two favourite elements to The Winter Soldier!
The first is the introduction of Falcon. The MCU has introduced us to Gods, Alien Superpowers and Enhanced Super Soldiers. The closest to a non super hero is Tony Stark. Although a genius, playboy billionaire and creator of The Iron Man Suit isn't my idea of non super. Even Black Widow and Hawkeye exhibit some extraordinary abilities, and if Marvel Studios decide to explore their backstories further in stand alone films, I wouldn't be surprised to find some kind of genetic modification or enhancement being introduced by way of differentiation to us mere mortals. Falcon, however, changes all this. Before donning his wings we first meet Falcon as Sam Wilson, jogging around The Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool. Here he is repeatedly lapped by Captain America, each time Rogers calls 'on your left' to alert Wilson to his passing. On each pass Sam gets more and more frustrated. Catching his breath post run, we also see that Sam Wilson is not supporting the trim, muscular physique of Rogers. From the very beginning we are shown that Sam Wilson is a man, a soldier like many others around the world. Doing his duty in the hope of making the world a safer and more just place for us to live. This makes his later heroics all the more special. You don't need to be superhuman to be a hero in the MCU.
Second is the now familiar Marvel end credit sequence. Although the word is already out that we will be seeing Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch in The Avengers: Age of Ultron, I really like how they've been introduced at the end of The Winter Soldier. Their captivity (at one can only assume to be the hands of Hydra) is sympathetic to their 'children of Magneto' backstories. Is the possibility of an introduction of X-Men into the MCU too much to dream of at this point?
This TV show would have to have done something very wrong for me not to have liked it. That said, prior to the mid season break, the field was still very much being set. Since it's return to Channel 4 a few weeks ago, it doesn't seem to have stopped for breath!
I still have this week's episode to watch, but with Skye in a very bad way and Deathlok's introduction I can't wait to see what's going to happen next.
In the last episode we see Skye get shot and Deathlok make his first official appearance, did anyone notice The Incredible Hulk name drop?
When arguing with Ward, Agent Coulson threatens him with cryo-cell guard duty. Who's cryo-cell, I hear you ask? Well for those of you who didn't pick up on it, it was Blonsky.
Remember him? The Abomination was born from a combination of Emil Blonsky and a serum adapted by the military to try and make a super soldier following Bruce Banner's accident and the birth of The Hulk. In the end he was beaten into submission by Hulk and is now, it would seem, chilling out in a cryo-cell courtesy of S.H.I.E.L.D.
Knowing that Mark Ruffalo is contracting to more appearances as Bruce Banner and The Hulk, is this the first seeds being sown of a stand alone Hulk movie? Too much of a stretch you think? Only time will tell.
A film that, looking at my local cinema's screening schedule, isn't having a big release. Although I believe it is set to be another cult gem in Terry Giliam's already well adorned crown.
Directed by the man who brought us Brazil, The Fisher King, Twelve Monkeys, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, and The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, I wasn't surprised to be one of the select few in the cinema when I went to see it. It would be quite easy to take The Zero Theorem at face value and wonder quite what the hell is going on. Whilst it isn't as painfully stylised as the likes of Only God Forgives, it is sure to prove divisive to any watchers. You will either love it, or hate it. Little to no middle ground exists here.
I am a big fan of Terry Gilliam's work. In this way, I had some understanding of what I was letting myself in for. After seeing it, I later read that Gilliam described it as the final part of an Orwellian triptych the started back in 1985 with Brazil, and now has 1995's Twelve Monkeys sandwiched between it and The Zero Theorem. If you are familiar with either of the other two films mentioned above, you will get a good idea of the type of world The Zero Theorem is set in.
Christoph Waltz plays Qohen Leth. A very eccentric, and reclusive computer genius he works for a very large corporation. Tasked with 'crunching numbers' and solving formulae all day, Qohen cannot understand why he is unable to work from home. He believes in this way he can not only be more productive, but he can also await his precious phone call. This phone call is one that he has been waiting for all his life. One that Qohen believes will instruct him as to the meaning and purpose of his existence.
Qohen finally gets what he wants when Management agrees to let him work from home, with one condition. He has to work on The Zero Theorem. A theorem notorious for breaking people, the idea behind the theorem is to prove that '0 must = 100%', many would advise against taking on such a task. As it gives Qohen the chance to work from home though, he gladly accepts. Things then start to go wrong as Management tries to distract and manipulate Qohen to keep him on track.
You can most likely tell even from the paragraph above that the stand out theme of the film is the question, "what is the meaning of life?" if it has any. There's no subtlety, and thankfully it makes no attempt to give us an answer. The best part of the film for me was the way the film explored what this very fundamental theme meant to each of the characters, and how it shaped their lives. Then of course there is you and I, the viewer. What does it mean to us?
The film approaches these things in a way that, whilst oddball and wacky, is relevant to the technological, and somewhat disconnected age in which we live now. I enjoyed it very much, and will undoubtedly be seeing it more than once. My only advice is take as many people with you as you can, then afterwards go to the pub and talk about it over drinks.
Although they are certainly nothing more than rumours at this point, there are lots of stories out there saying that Warner Brothers are gearing up for a return to The Matrix.
Whilst it can be argued that the trilogy got weaker as it went on. It wouldn't be that surprising that Warner Brothers are trying to reignite a franchise that has earned over $1.6billion at the box office. Even the least commercially successful of the franchise, the final instalment 'The Matrix Revolutions', made a tidy profit of just shy of $300million.
As a huge fan of the first film, I was very forgiving of the trilogy. What the second and third films lack in story, they more than make up for in spectacle.
Most interesting will be where they decide to go with any future films. Smart money would have to be on a prequel (or series of). Either looking at the origins of The Matrix itself, or the original escapees and their story.
I can't even begin to imagine what craziness The Wachowskis could muster up now, with SFX at their current standard.
I look forward to further developments on this one.
It's the final countdown once again. Predictions have been made, bets have been placed. One thing's for sure though, I wouldn't like to be one of the 6,028 members of The Academy who've had to pick between this bunch:
That's just for the Best Picture category too!! They've got another 23 to decide on as well.
Here's an interesting graphic for you though:
Best Picture nominees and their box office takings. Granted there are a couple in there that haven't been out for very long, but will you just look at Gravity!!
Either way, I have my fingers crossed for 12 Years a Slave. For Best Picture, and for Steve McQueen for Best Director.
This isn't the first we've heard of the new Star Wars Episode VII, and it certainly won't be the last. Especially with principal photography due to start anytime soon. So we should be hearing lots more casting news over the coming weeks.
The latest of this is the potential big bad being Adam Driver.
Known most recently for his role in the TV Show Girls, and a big screen outing for Inside Llewyn Davis, Driver may be a relative unknown to many. With names such as Hugo Weaving and Michael Fassbender also being linked to this project, many may wonder how Driver got a shoe in.
Some think that this is an indication that we may be in for a number of bad guys. I think it may just be a wise and inspired decision for revitalising the franchise.
What better way than to bring in relatively new blood as opposed to more 'household' names. It may simply be a move for longevity of character. If we're to expect more Star Wars episodes in future, and our bad guy is set to star across a few, aging will then start to become a factor.
Most likely he was the best man for the job, and all of these musings will be forgotten once he makes his first appearance.
Never the less, there's likely to be much more news to follow.
So it looks like the speculative talk has started again following an interview in which Karl Urban said talks were happening about bringing a Dredd sequel to production.
Much has been made of the hash job that was the marketing prior to the films cinematic release, which was the films ultimate downfall. Then came the fans, who propelled the film up the DVD sales and download charts. Something that I'm sure would give any potential investors pause for thought. DVD and Blu Ray sales alone have brought in half of what the film made at the box office....worldwide!
It's no surprise then that talks are ongoing. What is important is that the people with the money, who make the decisions see that the strong following isn't going anywhere. There are several ways you can do this:
If you haven't already, buy a copy of the film! Blu-Ray, DVD, Digital, whichever.
Buy a copy of the one-shot follow up comic. Let's send a clear message that we want to see more Dredd. Go to your local comic book store, or pick up a digital copy from Amazon.
I don't want to live in a world where rubbish franchise after rubbish franchise can get churned out at the cinema.
I want to live in a world where the public can speak up, the fans can be heard, and we can see a great character brought back to the big screen where he belongs!!
What better way to start than by letting you watch this glorious trailer (again)...
After getting their first full length trailer aired on Jimmy Kimmel Live on Tuesday night, you'd be hard pushed to still be in the dark about Guardians of the Galaxy.
Scheduled for release later this year, Guardians of the Galaxy represents the first significant step into the unknown since the MCU gained centre stage back in 2008 with the cinematic release of Iron Man. I'm aware that all characters within the MCU require a certain suspension of disbelief. Also that this was tested, some might say, to it's limit when Thor took us on a whistle stop tour of his nine realms in The Dark World. There we were subjected to multiple alien races, fighting wars on far off planets. Even Aether toting Dark Elf Malekith, played by Christopher Eccleston.
One thing all of them has shared up to now, is an Earth in peril, and a hero/team of heroes fighting to save our bacon. It's safe to say that we're going to need to be a little more open minded on this one. The clue might be in the word galaxy.
Even though the appearance of Benicio del Toro gives us our tie back into the MCU as we currently know it, I for one am very keen to see where Marvel Studios runs with this one. If Guardians is a hit, the world (or galaxy) becomes Marvel Studios' oyster. Forget The Avengers and Phase 3, this has the potential to go way past that.
Glean what you will from the trailer, as many already have. I just intend to sit back and enjoy the ride!
I'm no film critic. I enjoy watching films, and I enjoy writing. Writing my blog is a nice outlet, and has the added bonus of helping me to write more regularly.
The upshot being that I can decide on the films I want to watch at the cinema. If I don't like the look of something I can avoid it, and then catch up with it when it arrives on Blu-Ray or an on demand service. The only time I try and make sure I see all releases, regardless of their genre, is Oscar season. I really enjoy watching the awards ceremonies, The Oscars and The BAFTAs. Like some, I love to make predictions on who and what will win. Congratulating myself when I get it right, telling myself how wrong the judges are when I don't. In order to do this, I am currently living at the cinema. As I do at this time every year. Sometimes this sees me having to sit through films that I'd rather not, to put it mildly. Other times, I uncover some gems that I would have otherwise avoided.
It's almost like the studios planned the whole thing out. Crazy right?!
August: Osage County was very much the latter. Even though it didn't look like the high octane, explosion riddled adventure that usually catches my eye, the more than impressive cast list made it difficult to ignore. Lead by Meryl Streep, there are also Chris Cooper, Ewan McGregor, Juliette Lewis, Benedict Cumberbatch and a stellar performance from Julia Roberts.
Osage County was adapted for the big screen by Tracy Letts, who also wrote the play from which it was developed. I was completely unfamiliar with the stage show, so I had no idea what was in store for me. Whether it has changed much, for better, or worse, I am not sure.
I'd be wrong if I didn't say that Meryl Streep steals the show with her depiction of Violet Weston. The matriarch of a dysfunctional family, all brought back to their childhood home in Oklahoma after a family tragedy. Her performance is mesmerising, and one that could very well see her claim her 4th Oscar win. That isn't to say the supporting cast doesn't do their bit. In particular Julia Roberts, playing daughter Barbara Weston. You could even argue that they share lead roles on screen together. The strength of the assembled cast is showcased in one of the best scenes of the film, a family dinner that sees them all gathered at once around the dinner table. Anyone who's endured an awkward family meal may well be watching that scene from behind their hands.
With great performances all round, August: Osage County is well worth a watch. Whether Meryl Streep wins her fourth Oscar from this remains to be seen. Whoever wins it, one things for sure this year. With the calibre and strength of the films this year, they'll be worthy winners.
Having burst onto our screens in 2004 as Kate Austen in Lost, Evangeline Lilly didn't seem to focus on turning small screen success into big screen roles.
Following the shows finale in 2010, Evangeline starred in Real Steel as Bailey Tallet (2011), having previously had a small part in The Hurt Locker (2008) as Jeremy Renner's wife. It seems, however, that the aim has merely been quality rather than quantity. Last year she made a welcome return to our screens in The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug. Here she played Tauriel, and Elven warrior. A character who will make a return this year in the final instalment, The Hobbit: There And Back Again.
Now, the rumour mill has fired up with news of meetings and talks with Marvel Studios. The thinking being that she will be joining Paul Rudd and Michael Douglas in Ant-Man. Slated for 2015 this is the start of Marvel's MCU Phase 3, and is being helmed by Edgar Wright.
We know that Michael Douglas is going to be Hank Pym, and Paul Rudd will be Scott Lang/Ant Man. Which led initially to the thinking that she would play Janet Van Dyne, aka Wasp. This would fit nice and snug with the Ant-Man story, as well as giving us another member of The Avengers in time for the 3rd Avengers film.
When Ant-Man was first announced and Edgar Wright was unveiled as director, there was speculation that Mary Elizabeth Winstead may join the project, and that she may have taken on the role of Wasp. Nothing further came of it, and this may now be dead in the water.
Another rumour is that we could see the introduction of Spider-Woman. As a character who has ties, not only to Ant-Man, but to S.H.I.E.L.D and HYDRA, this might not be so far off the mark. Talk of rights ownership immediately surfaced due to Sony owning the rights to Spider-Man. I can't imagine it being an issue though, even though similarly named, they are different characters. Unless their rights are somehow tied together in a way that we don't know about.
Either way, it looks as though Evangeline Lilly may be the latest addition to the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
Sorry about the last post. I am currently in the process of getting my blog verified with Technorati. One of the few things I am trying to do to increase my blogs visibility. I've also had a play around with the formatting, and I'm currently in the process of trying to set up a bespoke site for the blog. Trying to wrap my grey matter around HTML and CSS may take a little while though, but we'll see how it goes.
In the meantime, I would love to hear any thoughts or suggestions on the way it looks. I want to make sure it's easy enough to read, so if there are any issues in that department let me know.
Remakes, reboots, and re-imaginings have long been a hot topic, and the flames will be fanned once more with the recent release of RoboCop. Starring Joel Kinnaman, Gary Oldman, Michael Keaton and Samuel L. Jackson, this is a remake of the 1987 film of the same name.
It's safe to say that your opinion of this film will be greatly influenced by whether or not you were around for the original. I was, and when I first saw and heard that a remake was in development and being filmed, I was dismayed. The original RoboCop was simple, and brilliant. Even a massively troubled production and the compromises made to even receive an R rating in the States didn't stop it. The original film was heavily cut for both film and television, if you watch the director's cut you will get a real taste of Verhoeven's vision.
For those not familiar with the RoboCop story, the main element remains unchanged. Detective Alex Murphy is mortally wounded and brought back as our metallic titular character.
The Man vs. Machine element is obviously still present. It would be impossible for it not to be, this is RoboCop after all. This time around however, it has a more global feel. Unmanned drones are being used to bring an American brand of peace to the Middle East, but the idea of unmanned drones on American soil is one the public and politicians are not keen on.
We still have to massive corporation in the form of OmniCorp, with an OCP name drop towards the end to hint at further franchise action. They're still as corrupt, and it's still left to RoboCop to sort things out. The difference being that Murphy is aware of who he is. He is still very much controlled by OmniCorp, but his humanity is something they are using to further their agenda with integrating unmanned drones into the U.S.
Elements like Murphy's awareness, and OmniCorp's global reach are nice refreshing changes. It's nice to see that they've put a stamp of their own on this remake. Modernising and making it relevant to audiences today, the media spinning and cover ups being a very topical theme. All whilst keeping the core elements of the original. There are several places where new pays respect to old ("I wouldn't buy that for a dollar"), which certainly made me very happy.
Two very special mentions to Samuel L. Jackson and Hocus Pocus by Focus. Firstly, Jackson's character Pat Novak. Novak is a talk show host who has the opening and closing scenes of the film. His commentary throughout the film is, for me, what gives a satirical edge very similar to that of the original. It almost seems like Novak's journey through the film is a little poke of fun at some of the more Republican views of the U.S.
Secondly, the use of Hocus Pocus during a great action sequence, during which RoboCop is given a final test against a great many drones is just genius.
Overall, I have to say that RoboCop has to be one of the best remakes I have seen to date. One to watch whether you were around for the original or not.
Lone Survivor is a military action thriller telling the story of the doomed Operation Red Wings. Directed by Peter Berg, it stars Mark Wahlberg, Taylor Kitsch, Ben Foster, Emile Hersch and Eric Bana.
Before going to see the film, I'd heard lots of positive things about it. There were two things that I was concerned about though. Peter Berg in the director's chair, and the American military source material. Peter Berg's last directorial outing that dealt with the American military was Battleship. A dire film that contained one of the most ulceratingly jingoistic scenes in recent memory.
I understand that my being British, and not of military background means my perspective and opinion on the above scene is skewed. However, the entire film is a 131 minute tribute to the American Navy. Making the above 3 minutes completely unnecessary. A view that I am not entirely alone in having:
Anyway, I digress, so before I go off on a Battleship hating rant, let's bring it back to Lone Survivor. Where were we, yes, my reservations, as above. To my delight, my reservations were unwarranted. The film has the correct level of American heroism (they do not sweep all before them in a fiery wrath of hi tech weaponry), and even includes some non American heroism. It even manages to have a strong, multicultural, moral theme.
Based on actual events, and a book of the same name. Lone Survivor is a dramatic retelling of Operation Red Wings that took place on June 28, 2005. The aim of the mission was to locate, capture and kill a Taliban bad guy by the name of Ahmad Shah. Aiming to be quickly and quietly in then out, a small recon team of 4 was selected. They would be dropped off by helicopter several kilometres away, before hiking to the target area to locate Shah. Once Shah had been located and killed they would then radio for extraction.
Everything was going according to plan, right up until they reached the compound where Shah was hiding out. Then events took a turn for the worse, and 2 things mess up the whole operation. Firstly, the mountainous terrain stops them from using their radios to communicate with the base. Secondly, goat herders come across their location. They capture the goat herders, but then have the moral dilemma of whether to kill them and continue the mission, or release them and run.
Earlier in the film, during their mission briefing, the Seals talk about the Rules of Engagement (ROE). For U.S. Forces, the rules of engagement state:
"When U.S. Forces are attacked by unarmed hostile elements, mobs and/or rioters,
U.S. Forces should use the minimum force necessary under the circumstances, and proportional to the threat."
Two of the four Seals say they should eliminate the compromise and continue with the mission. The target has killed other Seals and they believe he should be eliminated at all costs. A third believes that the only thing to do is to follow the ROE and release the herders. Even if it means abandoning the mission. The team captain is conflicted, but finally agrees with the third Seal and they release the hostages.
One of the herders immediately runs to the Taliban to alert them, and they make short work of catching up to the Seals. The Seals are still struggling to make radio contact with their base so are left with no choice but to engage in a gun battle of four against many times their number. Severely outnumbered, the Seals get their arses kicked in a very brutal and graphic way. Imagine Black Hawk Down to the power of ten. Like Black Hawk Down, Lone Survivor still has an element of behind the scenes logistics hindering a rescue attempt, helicopter's being redeployed etc. However this plays a less prominent role. The focus in Lone Survivor is very much on the four man Seal Team on the ground.
As the title would suggest, there comes a point where only one of the Seals remains. Badly injured, and struggling to evade capture the Lone Survivor comes across a group of people who he assumes are Taliban. They are in fact Pashtun villagers, who take him in and protect him against the Taliban until he can be rescued by the Americans.
The film opens with actual footage of Seals in training, and closes with text explaining the code of the Pashtun Villagers which requires them to protect someone against their enemies no matter what the cost. A code similar to the ROE the Seals adhere to. This nicely encapsulates the strong morale theme of the film, a morality shared by both cultures. Following on from Battleship, this is a nice, and unexpected element from Peter Berg's film.
The film had been in development for quite some time, and with a budget of $40m, is not quite the heavyweight in budgetary terms of other films of it's type. If we again take Black Hawk Down as an example. A film made 13 years earlier that had a budget of $92m.
To ensure it went ahead, Mark Wahlberg, Peter Berg and several other members of the production team gave $1m each of their own money to get things started. To help further reduce production costs, Peter Berg took only the minimum salary allowed as director, in accordance with the Director's Guild of America. Many of the cast and crew also lowered their asking prices for wages as well. It's great to hear that in a world where budgets can be inflated by wages to the detriment of the production, that so many of the people involved were willing to make this sacrifice in order to tell this story.
Whilst there are undoubtedly dramatic embellishments on the actual accounts of what happened within the film, it doesn't go overboard. There are even differences of opinion in the real life account of events. In the heat of combat, such things are sure to happen. Regardless of this, the film that they have made as a result is compelling and a must watch. I also encourage anyone watching the film to also read up on the actual events of Operation Red Wings. A great example of morality being upheld even during war.
Late in 2013 came the terribly sad news that we had lost the fantastic Tom Clancy. Starting with his novels, he went on to create Red Storm Entertainment who were responsible for groundbreaking titles such as Rainbow Six and Splinter Cell (although this title was released under Ubisoft who by that time had bought Red Storm Entertainment). Clancy was a historian as well as an author, and this introduced a level of detail and military realism to his fiction never before experienced by many.
Tom Clancy's work had been brought to the big screen as early as 1990 with The Hunt for Red October. A film that also introduced film goers to the character of Jack Ryan, someone who features heavily in Tom Clancy's literature. With the release of Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit, Ryan has been played by 4 different actors including, Alec Baldwin, Harrison Ford and Ben Affleck. Chris Pine is latest in that line, and is also the first to star in an original film not based directly on a Clancy novel.
Shadow Recruit is something of an origins film. Portraying Jack Ryan's induction into the CIA. At the beginning of the film we join Jack in his studies at the London School of Economics. The opening sequence shows Jack, among others, discovering on the news of the Twin Tower attacks of 9/11. As a result, Jack drops out of school and joins the Marines where he is badly injured when his helicopter is shot down during a tour of Afghanistan. During his time in the Marines his analytical abilities are noticed, and whilst in medical rehab he is visited by Thomas Harper (played by Kevin Costner) who recruits him into the CIA. He also meets his future fiancee Cathy (played by Kiera Knightley).
Ryan is sent back to school to finish his PhD before being sent undercover to work as a compliance officer at a brokerage on Wall Street. There he will use his cover to search for suspect market trading that would indicate terrorist activity. Some such activity leads him to Moscow investigating transactions of a company faced by Cherevin (Kenneth Branagh, who also directs). An attempted assassination on Ryan forces him to turn from analyst to field operative. A transition made even more difficult when Cathy arrives in Moscow to check up on Ryan as she suspects he is cheating on her.
I am a huge fan of Tom Clancy, and grew up reading his books.... a lot. As a fan of his books I can honestly say that the film is a success. It was as thrilling to watch as his books are to read, and even though the story of the film is in itself original. They remain sympathetic to Jack Ryan as a character, and Chris Pine does an excellent job. This film will give you exactly what it sets out to give you. An edge of your seat, espionage thriller. Even more importantly, it sets up the prospect of a franchise (Kevin Costner has apparently been signed on a 2 film deal with him set to star in Without Remorse, a film currently in development. More on that another time), without leaving a raft of unanswered questions along with a cliffhanger that runs the risk of never being resolved. The prospect of seeing more Jack Ryan on our screens in the near future is one that fills me with excitement.
With box office takings currently around the $80 million mark, it has already made back it's $60 million budget. So further films seem very likely.
Not to be confused with the 2009 straight to video slasher film, Hit and Run is a romantic road trip, comedy released in 2012, starring Dax Shepard, Kristen Bell and Bradley Cooper.
A friend of mine asked me the other day if I had seen this film, and whilst I remember it being released, I hadn't had chance to see it at the cinema. Though through the majesty of Netflix that was soon remedied. My friend was wanting my opinion on the film. After watching it he felt that it had potential but he that it was missing something, and that something was what would make it great.
I agree that Hit and Run has great potential, and there are some very good moments in it. Many sources list it as an action comedy, but I think the romantic element is it's most affable quality. This is Shepard and Bell's second film together since they became a couple in 2007, the first being 'When In Rome'. With Shepard being writer and director for this latter outing I feel it allows their natural chemistry to shine through. The film experiences most of it's success in the exploration of their relationship, falling in love, and how that can be effected by what you do or don't know about a person.
Shepard plays Charlie Bronson, who lives in the middle of nowhere under witness protection having been witness to an armed bank robbery. There he meets and falls in love with Bell's character Annie Bean, a teacher who gets the job offer of a lifetime in LA. Charlie however, moved away from LA as part of the witness protection program to avoid our bad guy Alex Dmitri, played by Bradley Cooper. Although Charlie was a witness against Alex, Alex avoided a long jail sentence due to Charlie's involvement as the getaway driver. A fact that Annie doesn't know about to begin with. Knowing the job offer is the opportunity of a lifetime, Charlie takes Annie to LA for her interview. Soon, however, both end up on the run from Alex after he finds out that Charlie has arrived back in town. As the film, and the chase, goes on, Annie uncovers more about Charlie's past. Beginning to question if she can still love a person she realises she doesn't know much about.
Shepard does a great job of making the film fun. I think this is in large part due to the female lead being his now wife, and the multitude of fast cars and car chases. A petrol head and motorcycle racer, Dax must have loved all of the car chase scenes in the film. Getting the rare opportunity to have his cake, and eat it.
My only real criticism of the film is when we uncover the true nature of the relationship between Charlie and Alex, Alex as a bad guy becomes less sinister. Although this in turn makes the focus more on Charlie and Annie's relationship issues. While this is where the films strength lies, it also highlights the fact that the film would be much improved if we got to explore that changing relationship further. Many of the films highlights come from the dialogue between Charlie and Annie.
Definitely watchable if you haven't seen it already. Especially for a date night.
