Man Of Steel

In this battle of cinematic superhero dominance a clear divide has been made between the wildly different Marvel and Dc universes. The exuberant world of Marvel is a financially successful one appealing to everyone both old and young, expressing a softer more fabricated view on ‘superhero life’. Dc however couldn’t be more different, finding success in its beloved Dark Knight trilogy being extremely dark, gritty and realistic with its director Christopher Nolan being still undoubtedly clutched to, to aid the company to produce films of quality. With hope to replicate the trilogies success and widen the Dc universe to match Marvels ever expanding one, notorious superhero, Superman has now returned in Man of steel, seeing him fight his classic rival, General Zod with a gritty screenplay and the disposal of his kitsch red pants.

 Prior to even his arrival on earth we are treated to Superman’s origins story seeing him blasted into the universe in an act of defiance from his parents as his planet Krypton comes under attack from the repressive General Zod (Michael Shannon) who opposes the natural birth of Superman (Henry Cavill) in favour of his more orderly system. Soon enough Superman lands on earth as the plot unfolds and he undergoes a journey discovering his purpose on earth. Whilst many superhero movies like to elaborate and over indulge in origin tales, here we are given the bare bones without the cheese and whimpering drama working heavily in the films favour as it fairly quickly gets it out of the way to make room for the more exciting, more important story at hand. Strong for the most part the film’s opening provides the energy necessary to fuel the rest of the explosive film, showing vast areas of Krypton unprecedented in the Superman franchise with huge amounts of money being spent on smooth CGI yet perhaps not enough on simple tripods to hold the cameras steady in scenes of much shaky annoyance.

 These scenes of action are by no means only seen in the first act, oh… no, this opening sequence is simply the foundations by which the film builds its story and fantastic action set pieces. Used perhaps a little too much towards the end of the final act becoming quickly formulaic and contrived, these scenes were mostly hugely enjoyable seeing hovering battles between the two foes carried out with style and a fantastic soundtrack. Following in the footsteps John Williams is by no means an easy task; however Hans Zimmer does an excellent job in matching the films enormous scope with a soundtrack which makes you giddy with excitement every time it’s heard painting a rather huge smile on the faces of the audience. Perhaps expectedly the soundtrack however can barely compete against Williams original and this is certainly unaided by the sheer amount of times it’s used throughout the film, even in times when it doesn’t fit the action on screen it’s clumsily thrown in to almost comic effect. This is simply an irritating feature however in amongst truly riveting action scenes where a prominent sense of realistic peril is felt for each and every character both minor and major leaving you on the edge of your seat.

 Consistently counterbalancing its successes throughout, Man of Steel lets itself down with a fairly poor script with thin character development for everyone but the protagonist. This leads for the love between him and renowned love interest Lois Lane (Amy Adams) to feel totally fake and subsequently disinteresting. The script is saved for the most part with terrific acting performances from the lead, Henry Cavill, filling the boots of Superman both visually and charismatically being suitably witty yet overwhelmingly confident with an impressive American accent to disguise his English origins stamping the seal of approval. Michael Shannon who fills the role of General Zod also does an impressive job but is undoubtedly burdened by his lack of screen time and poor script making him feel like an underused utility especially considering his outstanding acting credentials.

Is Superman super? Well no, not quite, but he’s certainly not a disappointment either being the superhero that Dc needed to kick-start their new set of films to rival Marvel after the conclusion to the Dark Knight series, being suitably dark yet extremely enjoyable.  Yes the script is weak and yes is burdened with minor mistakes however Man of steel ultimately proved to be hugely entertaining despite its lack of a sustainable plot; it is quite simply bags of fun.

7/10- If you are able to brush past the films weaknesses a spine tingling and wildly epic tale of Superman can be found from his realistic origins to his action packed adolescence.

Calum Russell

Mud

After finding success with 2011’s critically acclaimed ‘Take Shelter’, director Jeff Nichols is back with a more linear narrative than that of his ambiguous previous hit; surrounding the story of Mud, a rugged fugitive taking residence on an island when two teenagers cross his path and vow to help him in his quest for love.

Being comparable to such engrossing and explorative tales of the novelist ‘Mark Twain’, Jeff Nichols’ storytelling is just as wildly impressive being immersive, believable and lovingly nostalgic throughout. Usually used as an irritating device to infuriate audiences and do little but play up to typical childish personas, both children in ‘Mud’ are the exact opposite being loveable and engaging, acting as mature and hugely realistic protagonists. Tye Sheridan leads as Ellis, a teenager in the limbo between childhood and being a teenager facing the relevant issues of this age such as parent troubles as well as the more foreboding issue and theme of love. Used subtly and tentatively throughout, this theme is well defined and used effortlessly to run parallel to the films central narrative. This creates for an unexpected yet undoubtedly welcomed ‘coming of age’ tale of two boys with a powerful friendship as they learn the realities of adulthood in a situation that they don’t quite understand.  These strong themes and general explorative tone of the film hold strong for the majority of the film, sagging slightly in the third act where the film slows slightly and coincidently produces some inconsistent tones that feel jarring in amongst a film of a very different message.    

Similar friendships are shown throughout as the film juggles plenty of differing themes shown through a plethora of acting talent. Matthew McConaughey, plays protagonist Ellis’ rock of support throughout the film whilst also focusing his efforts onto pleasing himself with the reuniting of him and his lover. Following in his fairly recent emergence as a serious and wildly talented actor, Matthew McConaughey is fantastic as the title character, Mud,  effortlessly adapting to his changing situation with realism and style. As the plot progresses the film becomes ever more engrossing, introducing a well-developed handful of characters that are used intelligently to enhance the story instead of bogging it down. Mud’s relationship with one of his old friends of the town,Tom, (Sam Shepard) is especially notable as it feels genuine and heartfelt being very much comparable to the relationship of the two boys which shares just as much passion.

Mud sails at its own breezy pace being tentative and insightful throughout its journey, reminding audiences of the joys and confusions of childhood within a mesmerising setting of rural Mississippi. With excellent acting across each and every character, Mud easily immerses its audience through its fantastically written script and neatly woven characters that are overwhelmingly enjoyable to watch and engage with.

8.5/10- An uplifting tale of childhood disguised within a thrilling drama.

Calum Russell

The Hangover Part III

If an above average original film surprises audiences and scoops up plentiful box office treasures you can be assured to see the film stem sequels hoping to replicate the originals success. Seen in 2009 after ‘The Hangover’ thrilled audiences with its sudden surprising success and low budget, a sequel was released two years later to worse reactions helming a plot identical to that of its predecessor. Completing the franchise is this year’s ‘Hangover part 3’ which instead boasts a different plot with the ‘wolf pack’ back to handle the totally hilarious issue of Alan’s mental illness, and this time fails to include an actual hangover as well as any elements of surprise and also any genuine humour.

Alan (Zach Galifianakis), the staple character of the previous two films is the initial centrepiece of this films narrative, being taken by the loveable group of friends to a mental home in order to recover. Being boasted in the films vast advertising campaign ‘This time, there's no wedding. No bachelor party.’ Instead we begin with an undoubtedly bleak funeral which certainly sets the tone for the film which proves to be just as unenjoyable. Being a camp, fun loving comedy necessity in the previous two films, Alan seemingly transforms over a short period of time into an immensely irritating man with the presence of an annoying ten year old child reluctantly being towed along by friends Phil (Bradley Cooper) and Stu (Ed Helms). This leaves Mr Chow ( Kim Jeong) in the comedic driving seat, used only sparingly in the previous films but now used and abused until his brutishly insulting humour smothers every corner of the screen, only occasionally to good comic effect. This leaves nothing but the non-existent humour of Cooper and Helms to entertain the audience, consistently resulting in overwhelming auditorium silence due to the films poor screenplay.

So with the lack of jokes what better to fill the film with obnoxious action scenes and totally irrelevant and uninteresting scenes of drama between characters we don't even cared about? Believing it’s something much bigger and better than it clearly is ‘The Hangover part 3’ consistently delves into the deeper lives of characters we do not wish to know about resulting in awkward scenes of drama which lead to nothing and hold no comedic value or even dramatic impact. The lack of effort here is blatantly obvious being arrogant and in your face, with the opportunity to mix up the series and put a fresh spin on the franchise we thought we knew, director Todd Phillips instead prefers to stick to linear guidelines creating no comedic opportunities.

Disappointing is an obvious word to use to describe this film however this is almost expected of Hollywood that simply solely care about box-office intake rather than audience satisfaction. The fact is that ‘the Hangover part 3’ is a very boring and dislikeable film that holds very few redeeming qualities. It’s very rarely funny, rarely thrilling, and in no way surprising. It’s just depressingly unfunny.

3/10- As much fun as a hangover.

Calum Russell 

Star Trek Into Darkness

Following the success of 2009’s addition to the star trek universe we’ve witnessed director J.J Abrams announce moves to bigger and arguably better prospects already taking the mammoth task of reanimating the rival franchise Star Wars in 2015. With all the buzz surrounding the director however word has been forgotten of the continuation to the sequel of his 2009 success, Star Trek Into Darkness newly warping onto our screens. Whilst this recent instalment sees the whole cast returning with further added thespian delights such as Benedict Cumberbatch being thrown into the fray, it lacks the trepid adventure of its predecessor feeling more like a family blockbuster as oppose to an intelligent sci-fi.

This isn’t to say however that Star Trek Into Darkness is a bad film, in fact it’s quite the opposite helming an exciting narrative which maintains attention throughout with the help of its fantastic performances. Continuing on relatively soon after the previous film, this instalment sees the crew of the enterprise being met by a seemingly unstoppable force from within the organisation (Cumberbatch) and after a terrorist act on the headquarters, Captain Kirk (Chris Pine) and his team set about on a one man hunt to capture him, but not is all as it seems when he follows all too willingly. Proving himself on various acting occasions in the past, Benedict Cumberbatch is equally as impressive here, being the psychotic and wildly powerful villain that acts as the catalyst to send the team into disarray. With further less obvious villains however showing to be at work throughout the film, Cumberbatch isn’t given a sufficient amount of screen time and narrative impact despite his dominating presence which is a disappointment yet in hindsight perhaps an intelligent cinematic move. Upon his arrival the film kick-starts its campaign to stun the audience with its spectacular action set pieces which become increasingly audacious and interesting as the film goes on, looking undoubtedly worse at the hands of 3-D which is at little fault of the film.

A change in tone midway through the film allows a space for further characters to take to the stage which some do more than others, with Spock ( Zachary Quinto) most notably taking his opportunity in the limelight to great effect as we witness an exciting side of his character which is rarely expressed.  This however does lead to certain characters missing out, with members like Bones (Karl Urban) rarely making an appearance aside from the occasional humorous ‘side-gag’. In amongst all of Star Treks excitement at its flashy set-pieces, it failed to address even the most simple of plot points creating for a second act which was far more convoluted than necessary. This proves to be evident following the climactic action sequence which seemingly forgets the existence of its surrounding narrative, wrapping up the story almost instantaneously to leave a poorly wrapped present with a lack of aesthetic presentation.

Being an exciting and naturally humorous blockbuster, Star Trek Into Darkness is an extremely strong and certainly worthy addition to the Star Trek franchise. Focusing mostly on story as oppose to the wild futuristic world surrounding it, this film is a delightful throwback to the past series in many ways than one.

8/10- A blockbuster standing proud over its cinematic opposition being entertaining and appropriately dark.

Calum Russell

The Place Beyond the Pines

Following the success of 2010’s Blue Valentine, director Derek Cianfrance has taken a three year break in recovery before deciding to direct and release The Place Beyond the Pines, a story very dissimilar to that of his previous romantic hit. With Ryan Gosling returning in the leading role, Cianfrance shows to continue his notable poetic style of storytelling but seemingly forgets to mould the finished product leaving a cumbersome conclusion of a plethora of loose themes.

 With a confident and ambitious story at the helm, The Place Beyond the Pines does little to prove its worth juggling too many balls that all inevitably come tumbling down. The film follows Luke (Gosling) a motorcycle stunt rider who soon turns to robbing banks to provide support for his new born child, this choice puts him on a collision course with rookie cop Avery (Cooper), whose actions cause repercussions for the following story to unfold. Being very much the chronicle of protagonist Luke’s life the film is almost innately an epic drama that is undoubtedly let down by a totally underwhelming second act that does little to relate to the previous story; acting as a divided sub-plot that was totally unnecessary. The story was ambitious and engaging prior to this act however as further characters are introduced with further sub-plots, you find yourself being detracted from the quality story at hand in order to be diverted to a plot boasting very little but which holds frustrating importance to the proceeding act which proves to be just as devoid of emotion.

 With actors of excellent quality helming the lead and supporting roles, this proves to be the films saving grace always providing realistic performances that are believable throughout. The protagonist Luke, despite being largely dislikeable with few relatable qualities, is acted with brilliant enthusiasm and flair by the increasingly impressive Ryan Gosling.  Clouding his performance however is arguably the supporting performance of Ben Mendelsohn whom despite having a relatively small role acts with e

vident passion that aids his character, Robin, to become immediately involved within the story as new found friend of Luke. Both these characters being engrossing and interesting are prominent mostly in the first act making it by far the best of the well-defined three which could’ve stood alone (with some added tweaks) as a fantastic 90 minute drama. However as the film progresses holes appear and plot points are left untied to the frustration of the audience who simply want to revisit the simplicity and enjoyment of the first act.

 Starting fantastically the film fizzles out to a small, yet still respectable; third act which is as unnecessary as it is cumbersome. Boasting humongous talent and a magnificently ambitious story, this film could’ve been so much more impressive but instead decides to confuse itself by trying to do too much and ending up doing very little at all.

7/10- Performances are fantastic but the threadbare plot provides a heavy burden.

Calum Russell

Iron Man 3

After the recent worldwide billion dollar sensation of Marvel’s ‘The Avengers’, Disney is keen to duplicate its success by rolling out the second phase in the ever growing marvel universe. With four films hoping to reel in some ‘petty cash’ before the presumable box office behemoth ‘The Avengers 2’ hits theatres in 2015, we begin with Iron man three, the third addition to the relatively bland trilogy of Iron man. Being evident that Disney learnt something from their previous outing however, Iron Man three shows to be the strongest of the trilogy being painfully witty and surprisingly spectacular despite its lingering issues.

In keeping with the recent depiction of ‘run down alpha-male heroes’ we are introduced to Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr) straight after the events of ‘The Avengers’ as he suffers from post-traumatic stress, seeking comfort in the technology of his own mansion whilst he recovers. During this time the very real threat of terrorism is plaguing his world led by the ruthless Mandarin (Ben Kingsley) who vows to crush Iron Man, forcing him out of recovery to partake in ‘good old fashioned revenge’. Alike every Marvel movie, ignoring their inconsistent plots, Iron Man Three is tremendously fun, displaying spectacular action sequences and frequent witty one-liners to maintain the interest of the audience. Differentiating itself from the crowd however is the films plot, being simple initially it soon becomes interesting after a huge plot twist which will have some groaning in frustration whilst others gasping with enjoyment. None the less the twist provides a fork in the otherwise wholly predictable narrative that was hugely welcomed to a film usually stereotyped as ‘box office Hollywood fodder’ .Used often throughout the film to enhance the stunning action set pieces, Iron Man’s seamless CGI aids in the overall polished tone of the film helping to make even the most unrealistic battle look magnificent (which is undeniably hindered by the optional use of eye gouging 3-D).

A regular theme of the Iron Man series is its use of comedy, usually used to varying degrees of success by challenging ‘Tony Starks’ egotistical views which quickly become monotonous. No doubt glimpses of that humour are present in this addition however for the most part this film uses a quick-witted script and the perfect comedic timing of Downey Jr to show its lighter side. Occasionally however the film gets carried away using humour when perhaps it wasn’t needed leading to some moments of puzzling ‘sketch-show awkwardness’ which runs parallel to some incoherent plot strands and lack of narrative explanation. Throwing comparisons to the enemies seen in ‘The Avengers’, the overly supernatural opponents present here are totally glazed over despite their unrealistic properties that are in need of a sufficient explanation. This is a disappointment as they show promise in comparison to the mundane primary weapon of blue energy seen at the hand of the previous two films’ antagonists. Led by the Impressive performance of Guy Pierce as the mandarins right hand man, his superficial cronies feel like targets for the protagonist with very little development and explanations for their actions.    

If it wasn’t for Iron Mans genuinely hilarious humour and heavy dosage of pizzazz, the latest addition to the Marvel universe would be comparable to its predecessors showing just as much narrative inconsistency and scenes of unbearably sugar coated events. Little threat is felt throughout with the overall tone being harmless to kids of all ages, showing to be both the franchises hindrance and also its formula for success, however overall Iron Man Three is magnificently enjoyable, displaying a brave step forward for the franchise as it boldly enters the realm of phase 2.

7.5/10- Hollywood in black and white, flashy, fun and destined for box-office success.

Calum Russell 

Evil Dead

Evil Dead’s not coming at the best time with horror remakes being Hollywood’s favourite area of decapitation, reminding us of old classics before insulting audiences with blatant lack of care and low grade performances. Hollywood’s newest ‘victim’, the reboot of cult classic 'The Evil Dead' however is bulked with encouraging crew members, Sam Raimi and Bruce Campbell, who previously helmed the original as director and beloved protagonist . With aims to transform the recent malnutrition of horror remakes, Evil Dead steers clear of its humorously dark original instead choosing to follow a far more sadistic narrative aimed to shock rather than entertain.

Differentiating itself from the off, Evil Dead provides a meaning for the characters presence at the, now iconic, ‘cabin in the woods’ being that, Mia, a drug addict is attempting to escape her old ways through a weekend of ‘cold turkey’ treatment. With a pact to keep Mia at the cabin in order to fully carry out her promise to quit, her four friends including her brother, David, encounter a strange smell upon arrival and discover that the source of the pungency is a flesh lined book riddled with a sadistic curse that once read unleashes evil onto the helpless Mia and her subsequent victims. Whilst this recent remake may be similar to its 1980’s counterpart in many ways, it also proves to be wildly different pouring not only a consistent flow of cash into the production but also an excess of blood, guts, sick and bile. Done primarily through practical effects, the film heavily benefits from this feature with every slaughter being whimsically graphic and intense, leading to most of the film being viewed with a quivering hand near to the irritable mouth. Despite this however a huge lack of genuine terror is felt with gratuitous violence seeming to take its place to a frustrating degree. As the film progresses and enough red liquid has splattered onto the screen to last a lifetime, boredom begins to seep in as eagerness to escape the intense theatre clouds your viewing ‘pleasure’.

With a huge influx of violence in comparison to the original, the comedy element has all but vanished being scarcely seen and is ill-managed when it eventually appears. Seen as an intelligent device in the old to balance on screen violence and personal enjoyment, the film suffers from a lack of this rarely poking fun at itself, simply turning to further violence to express its comedic ‘funny-bone’.  That said there are moments of hilarity, despite their clever disguise behind the red veil, with the film more laughing at its genre than its own narrative, working on a contextual level that undoubtedly momentarily entertains.

Being notably more successful than recent horror flops (*cough cough* Texas Chainsaw 3-D) Evil Dead certainly maintains the ‘video nasty’ reputation that the original proudly held, despite its clear faults. The gratuitous, almost slapstick type violence allows for breathing space in-between scenes of conscious decapitation and facial disfigurement, with the intriguing storyline playing out at the hands of satisfactory performances. Evil Dead is at its best, disgusting, dingy and disturbingly realistic, encouraging viewers to undergo a through wash prior to viewing, despite its lack of humour and simple enjoyment.

6.5/10- Furiously demonic Evil Dead is a fun enough ‘slasher flick’ that undoubtedly holds very little re-watch value.

Calum Russell