Hacksaw Ridge Review

Hollywood is a curious place filled with equally curious people, every now and then one of those people becomes more highlighted than the others, they succumb to a public downfall and everyone tells us that we have to hate this one person, despite the fact that they're probably no worse than 70% of the people around them who share their weird and wonderful choice of career. Mel Gibson went through one of the more frequently publicised of these downfalls, he did say and do some questionable things but as with any of the other freaks and weirdos that dwell in tinseltown, you have to be able to separate the art from the artist.


It would be all too easy to forget that before all that, Mel Gibson was doing some truly exceptional work behind the camera. An Oscar winner for his work on Braveheart few would expect the change in style that came from the double punch hit of The Passion of the Christ and Apocalypto, both were challenging pieces of cinema that really explored new depths of our capacity as an audience to experience violence of such an intense and visceral nature, more importantly than that was both made money and in the case of his wince inducing Christ tale, it smashed the whole damn box office.

After a 10 year hiatus, Gibson returns behind the camera to bring us a stunning true life story of immense bravery in the face of harrowing circumstances. Hacksaw Ridge is the story of Desmond Doss (Andrew Garfield) a charming, deeply religious American man who wants to serve his country in WWII, but refuses to compromise on his beliefs by killing and will not carry a weapon. The film focuses on the conflict he faces with his own military and the eventual conflict he faces overseas with the enemy.

Hacksaw Ridge is almost presented as three distinct acts, and what is very evident is how each part is more impressive than the last. The first part is by far and away the weakest of the three, it follows Desmond around in his home life in his idyllic hometown, as he develops a relationship with nurse and Desmond's future wife Dorothy (Teresa Palmer). None of this is particularly offensive and there is a sense of who Desmond is being offered, but the level of sacren and sugary nonsense that is lumped on the screen runs the risk of inducing a diabetic coma. Fortunately Gibson has the presence of mind to move things on and the film heads on to Desmond in basic training. It's here when we are introduced to a plethora of supporting characters that will feature for the rest of the film, most of them are instantly forgettable, but It's a credit to Vince Vaughan that he does enough with his performance as Sgt. Howell that you can almost begin to forget every sub-par comedy you've had to endure him in for the last 10 years, same too goes for Sam Worthington as Captain Glover, who isn't given much to do but does it well enough. It's in these scenes though where Garfield really comes into his own, all his beliefs are put to the test, and Garfield completely sells this mans unwavering commitment to his faith and courage in the face of those who think he's just a coward. By the end of this section you're completely on board with Desmond's reasoning no matter how mad he might appear to be for doing what he wants to do.

So, then it's off to war, and a chance finally for Gibson to get his teeth stuck in and doing what he does best. The first set piece on top of the titular Hacksaw Ridge is a reminder of everything we've been missing out on from Gibson, his slow tense build leads to a full on frantic and monumentally bewildering battle that is a complete affront to the senses. It really does take you aback and by attacking you in such a manner it can become quite an emotional experience, reminding yourself that in the midst of this chaos is an unarmed combat medic called Desmond. There are moments where it strays from harrowing to borderline absurd, but they are only ever cautionary steps that are followed by hasty retreats.

In the midst of all this though is Andrew Garfield, his performance is a difficult one to tackle, with so much going on he always manages to make you invested in Desmond's experience of war, with little room for dialogue his expressions say so much whilst doing very little, it's definitely not a performance that you would say betters his in Silence, but few could argue that he didn't deserve his Oscar nomination.

It isn't as revolutionary as Gibson's last two features, in terms of its style it definitely feels closer to his earlier work on Braveheart, but it's an effective film with some challenging depictions of violence in wartime. If Hacksaw Ridge confirms anything though its that Gibson is someone who's work we should want more of.


(Low 4 Stars)

Logan Review

What feels like a lifetime ago, it was announced that the new Wolverine spin off movie was to be directed by Darren Aronofsky, it eventually didn't come to anything as Aronofsky ended up stepping aside. However the thought that came to everyone's mind was Darren Aronofsky, him of Requiem for a Dream and The Wrestler, what could have interested him in a comic book character like Wolverine? Years later, and James Mangold's Logan answers that question.

Set many years into the future, Logan sees Logan (Hugh Jackman) now old and haggard, he's still a physically imposing person but he's clearly wearing the weight of all his life's scars. Logan lives with Charles (Patrick Stewart) in a derelict waste site of a home with fellow mutant Caliban (Stephen Merchant). Charles, now in his 90s, is beginning to deteriorate, and with a brain as powerful as his this proves potentially catastrophic. Logan plans to get away with Charles but things are then complicated when a young mutant a lot like Logan enters their life in the form of Laura (newcomer Dafne Keen).

The greatest strength of Logan is that it doesn't feel like it is has to fit in with anything that has come before it nor anything that may follow on after this, it feels like an entirely self contained film, and yes it wouldn't carry anywhere near as much weight if we hadn't seen these actors in so many of these films prior to this, but it's never straining to tie everything together and the ambiguity in its references to greater things that may have happened only ever add to the films strength.

Once the character of Laura is introduced the film essentially becomes a road movie as Logan, Charles and Laura travel across the country to reach a safe place with the bad guys hot on their tails. It's this road movie sensibility where James Mangold's skills really become apparent. Mangold feels like he is connected to the classic american model, his remake of 3:10 to Yuma remains one of the best westerns in modern times, and here he adopts and re purposes similar practices to exceptional results. In previous films Logan has been akin to the masterless samurai, and here Mangold compares him to Shane from the 1953 classic which features heavily in the film. Logan is a man of violent practices who just so happens to help those who might need it, often reluctantly. But the film offers the view that maybe he's never been entirely comfortable in this role, 'there's no living with the killing' being quoted from Shane.

In the past, the reason many have commented on for us not having the definitive Wolverine film was that we've never been able to see the full violent rage that is enshrined into his character, opting for a 15 certificate over the usually targeted 12a, it has finally given the necessary leeway for the character to breathe. It is an unflinchingly and spectacularly violent film, but it never feels unnecessary or exploitative, there is pain and there is suffering and it is never depicted as anything other than that. It is also impressively nihilistic, in one particular scene at a farmhouse it is genuinely shocking and upsetting, but it importantly never threatens to derail the film.

The reductive quality of people isolating comic book films from other films is that more often than not the performances are tragically overlooked. On the antagonist front in Logan it is a little underwhelming, yes this film is more interested in Logan's internal battles but Richard E Grant's Dr. Rice is unfortunately a cardboard cut out evil doctor character, and whilst Boyd Holbrook's Donald Pierce is initially engaging he's sadly sidetracked towards the end to make room for a physically more daunting foe that is introduced to Logan. However on the good guy side of things, this films takes it to another level. Dafne Keen is exceptional as Laura, mute for at least two thirds of the film she provides a stunning physical performance both in her body language and facial expressions in the quieter moments and an immense fierceness when she's cutting up baddies when it all kicks off. If the academy are going to look for a performance in a comic book film to nominate, one hopes that they have long enough memories to recognise Sir Patrick Stewart for his exceptional performance, its a serious and sensitive portrayal of an old man approaching the final period of his life, he's often angry and he carries the weight of something awful he's done that he frustratingly can't remember, often there are moments you forget the source material, his performance would be equally at home in a Still Alice like drama.

There really is only one man this film is about though and that is Hugh Jackman. Now it is impossible to separate the actor from this character, yet 17 years ago few would believe that an Australian unknown more commonly associated with musicals would turn out to be the perfect choice. He's been in some good films as Wolverine such as X2 and Days of Future Past and some not so good such as X-Men Origins: Wolverine and X-Men: The Last Stand. The title of this film says so much, he's not wolverine anymore he's just Logan, and Jackman carries the weight of all the films prior to this, yet it strips away everything that made those films about Wolverine, here his healing factor is a curse not a superpower. Logan has lived for so long and lost so much along the way, he's a man who just want's to lay down and die, but he cant fight the good in him, and if he's going to die he's going to die for something worthwhile. It might have been possible to picture someone other than Jackman in the role before this film, but now its an inconceivable task, because Jackman has experienced everything with Logan and we've seen what it's done to him, they're enshrined forever now, and what Jackman does with his performance here
is the definitive version no matter what follows.

If this film does anything, hopefully it will be to allow more filmmakers to tell the stories about these characters that they want to tell. Approach them with maturity and treat them as films rather than just comic book films, because as the results show here, something really special can be produced.

(High 4 Stars)     

Kong: Skull Island Review

It's not hard to see why there's a revival coming of all the monster movies, with every studio desperately looking through their records to see what properties they own that could potentially start a shared cinematic universe, it was almost guaranteed that we were going to see Godzilla and King Kong back on the big screen pretty quickly, probably with Mothra and all the other beasties not too far behind. It all kick started off back in 2014 with Gareth Edwards solid, if perhaps unremarkable Godzilla and now we see a return to the big screen of cinemas biggest Monkey in the new feature Kong: Skull Island.

Clearly keen on young independent filmmakers, Jordan Vogt-Roberts was handed the reigns of this latest outing, tasked with creating something very different from the Peter Jackson version we saw 12 years ago, and also keeping in mind that this has got to fit in with future sequels down the line. So the first thing Vogt-Roberts has made sure to do is to make Kong much bigger, a hell of a lot bigger in fact, because if he's got to fight Godzilla in future then he's not going to last long if he can only get shots in around his shins, but that's not the only thing that's different.

The film focuses on an exploratory mission to Skull Island lead by government agent Bill Randa (John Goodman), he recruits some assistance from former British Special Forces James Conrad (Tom Hiddleston) photographer Mason Weaver (Brie Larson) and a Military escort in the form of a Vietnam War Helicopter Squadron led by Lieutenant Colonel Packard (Samuel L Jackson). After napalming the island to map its geographical structure (or something along those lines that makes even less sense) they awaken a collection of creepy creatures on the island and run into another one in the form of Kong.

There are some genuine pleasures to be taken from this film. Vogt-Roberts is clearly an enthusiastic and passionate guy, he seems to revel in its 70s setting and although a lot of it are cliches that have been in a thousand films before, there is still some enjoyment to be taken from them. He is also a very cineliterate director, and he litters the film with intertextual references, obviously to vietnam war films but also many beyond that. Similarly to Gareth Edwards Godzilla it suffers from all the same problems. Visually Gareth Edwards was able to create some moments of real beauty but as a film it didn't really hold up, and yes you will come out of this and remember the stunning shot of Kong stood with the sun setting as the helicopters approach, but it's not enough to have good moments, you can watch them in a trailer.

It is also, objectively, one of the most poorly written blockbusters this year. Its characters are so poorly formed and one note that it is genuinely impressive they managed to assemble such a good cast to give a good old stab at selling this tripe. Samuel L Jackson's military man is a  bit angry, John Goodman's government guy is a bit untrustworthy, John C Reilly's crash landed pilot is a bit crazy and Brie Larson's photographer likes taking pictures. As poor as those characters are, nothing comes close to the staggering dullness of Hiddleston's James Conrad. For starters, it is the most miscast role in recent memory and he sticks out like a sore thumb for the whole film, there is never a reasonable explanation given as to why there's a need for him to be there in the first place. He's introduced in a bar shooting pool and getting in a scrap, so we guess he's a bit of a rogue and he's not going to listen to the rules. He gets to the island and it becomes genuinely exhausting to try and figure out what he's offering other than occasionally bending down, looking at the floor then standing up and saying "it's so many clicks this way" or "we need to go so many clicks that way". Hiddleston is a talented actor, but this is perfect example of why not to shoehorn an actor into a film just because they're a big star. 

The real star of this film, as should always be the case, is Kong himself. For the most part the redesign of the character is a fairly successful one. After Andy Serkis provided so much personality and warmth to Kong in his last appearance there was always a risk that this was going to completely eschew that level of effort. However despite Kong being physically much larger and theoretically much younger, there is some effort to give him a personality that can be developed going forward, helped ably here by Toby Kebbell's performance capture. If there's a problem its with Vogt-Roberts' direction. There's almost a lack of respect shown towards the character in the way that he is presented. A character of Kong's caliber needs to have a slow build reveal, teasing the audience before eventually having a hero shot that shows him in all his glory. Here however, Vogt-Roberts opts instead to blow his load in the opening prologue scene, there may be something to the notion that this is a refreshing approach, but you're then left feeling more impatient with the earlier scenes knowing that we've already seen the big star.

Godzilla: King of the Monsters is set for release in 2019, after a very slow start with these first two films, hopefully they can take note that the visual spectacle of a giant monster is less engaging when there is no well formed human characters selling it. There are promising moments, but there needs to be more than that to result in promising films.

(3 Stars) 

Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2 Review

Marvel Studios are the undisputed daddies of the box office at the moment, so much so that now with each new release people tout as the film where the bubble bursts. Back in 2014 Guardians of the Galaxy was singled out as their biggest risk by far. It was a comic that even comic book fans weren't big followers of, it features a talking raccoon and a walking tree alien, it was to be written and directed by James Gunn alumni of Troma Entertainment, and its leading man was the chubby one from Parks and Recreation. A haul of almost $800million at the box office and Marvel once again could do no wrong. The Guardians will join up with the Avengers next year, but before then James Gunn returns to bring us volume 2.

After the events of the first film The Guardians have essentially been working as guns for hire, in a really charming title sequence the now baby Groot dances to ELO whilst in the back ground Peter Quill/Star Lord (Chris Pratt), Drax (Dave Bautista), Gamora (Zoe Saldana) and Rocket (Bradley Cooper) battle with a giant space slug. Whilst on this mission they upset the sovereign race. Fleeing across the galaxy the Guardians run into a charismatic individual named Ego (Kurt Russell) who turns out to be Quill's father, but he may be much more than that.

Right from the off Gunn sets the tone that this film wants to have, its freewheeling and animated, its fun and its incredibly daft. The interplay between the guardians grows here, there is a really fractious relationship forming between Rocket and Quill, there is a romantic relationship possibly forming between Gamora and Quill, meanwhile Drax is getting used to being part of his new family. Stylistically it is filled with colour and explosions and it really is one of those fun sci-fi films that zips here there and everywhere offering brilliant vistas and new worlds. As with the first one, Gunn also punctuates the film with a brilliant soundtrack of classic tracks aptly named 'awesome mix vol 2'.

The problem however is that after about half of the film has passed you realise that nothing has really happened yet in terms of consequence, and then it feels a bit later like the film realises this and reacts by remembering it needs a plot and a villain and quickly throws one at you. It's sad that all the enjoyment of the silliness and hijinks feels perfunctory by the end. It's nice that this feels like the closest you'll get to an MCU film that doesn't connect with all the other films, but as a side effect of that it also feels a bit superfluous.

It does however show a level of maturity towards the end that really stand outs in the context of the rest of the film, which gives Michael Rooker in particular some really good stuff to do. Plus you wont be able to listen to Cat Stevens at the end and not come at least vaguely close to shedding a tear.

(3 Stars)

Alien: Covenant Review

Now that the dust has settled and the furious film fans stabbing away at their keyboards making sure that everyone online knows that Prometheus was a terrible, awful, abysmal film, we can look back and say that it's probably not quite as bad as people remember. Ok, Prometheus isn't great, it is riddled with clunky errors and missteps, but there is also a lot of good to take from it, not least the fact that it really is swinging for the fences. Now Ridley Scott brings us Alien: Covenant, on the face of it is a sequel that looks a lot more like an Alien film, but it may not be quite the film people expect.


The Covenant of the films title refers to the colonization ship heading towards a new planet. The ship is being monitored by android Walter (Michael Fassbender), when a neutrino storm hits resulting in the loss of some of the colonists including the ships captain, and waking the rest of the crew out of stasis. The crew come to terms with where they are and after receiving a distress signal from a nearby planet they decide to take a detour to investigate. Needless to say this is an Alien film and it isn't long before things start to go horribly wrong.

It really is an impressive improvement on Prometheus, Scott has returned to a lot of the leaner and intense fear of the earlier films, the slow build of dread the moment they land on this planet escalating to a gloriously violent climax to the first act is peak Scott, a director that people forget that when he operates in his best form, there are genuinely few around as good as him.

It's at the end of that first act where the film completely flips with the re-introduction of Fassbender's android from Prometheus, David. David has been living on this planet for a while and although he seems pleasant to the crew at first, something has changed in him and too much time in his company becomes deeply uncomfortable. It essentially becomes Fassbender's film, and what follows is a series of bizarre, uncomfortable and creepy scenes featuring David talking about life and creation and engaging in conversation with his newer self Walter, playing flute and even kissing. What's amazing about this section of the film is how fascinatingly compelling these scenes are, Fassbender is absolutely extraordinary as the deranged David playing off an equally good performance from himself as Walter. The film doesn't stay in that mode forever, David has been working on something, and that something provides a descent into a traditional gory alien showdown.

There are problems in how Scott approaches this film, the beginning is Alien the middle is Prometheus and the end is the mutated alien offspring of both of them. Whats great is how well those aspects work individually, but when put together there is some tonal jarring that becomes noticeable, its a credit to the film that they work well enough on their own that the jarring never completely compromises the film. Much has been commented about how the crew make some of the stupidest decisions ever, but in the context of the film they make sense, the crew are all paired into couples and its an interesting spin in how this affects their judgement. Also as people operating under intense fear and panic their judgement isn't always going to be at optimum levels, they're also going to have no idea not to look into a facehugger pod, because guess what? These characters don't exist in a world where they have seen the original Alien film, of course you'd be curious.

It is absolutely bewildering to think where this might go next, the ending of this outing could take whatever is next in a very interesting direction. Lord knows how this links up, if it does at all, with Alien, but how amazing it is to see a director like Ridley Scott at his age just turning up and making the films he want's to make, and so long as they have lots of Michael Fassbender in they will always be worth watching.

(High 4 Stars)