Transformers: Age Of Extinction

What I am about to write, and what you are about to read may prove controversial. In fact many of you will undoubtedly disagree but I feel that it has to be said. There was a constant implication of this but we all dismissed it, thinking that it would be impossible for the fourth Transformers film to actually do this. But here it goes, Age Of Extinction is WORSE THAN Revenge Of The Fallen.

Where on earth do I start with this film, normally I aim for roughly five hundred words to write. But here I may exceed that with the problems that this film has hidden away behind a horrible mix of flashing images and loud noises. To start with there’s the cast. As I stated in my review of the franchise, I quite liked Shia LaBeouf in this series. He had a part that went quite well with the (admittedly small) talents he has as an actor. His character was definitely rubbing everyone the wrong way by the third film, but in my opinion this is more due to Michael Bay neglecting to make us care about him at all. But anyway, Bay has now hired a completely new set of actors, without any reference to the old cast at all. Firstly this means we have to waste time with a human backstory that is identical to that of the first film. Secondly Bay still fails at making us connect with these characters, and lastly it highlights his paper-thin commitment to his own story, having spent nearly ten years to at least try and develop a character.

As well as this there is the underlying problem of the fact that we are no longer so impressed with the special effects that they disguise the weak story. As the film drones on it becomes less and less interesting, to such a point where I found myself wishing that the film would end in a climactic battle more than ever because that would serve as a much better memory of an emotionless film. The story is as dull as the effects are exciting.

The worst thing is that the amount of fun and flashy nature of the series has now been sacrificed to try and make room for a story. This would be a nice step forward if the plot and character development was decent, but it isn’t. As a result there is even less to distract you from it, so anything that made the other films remotely enjoyable has now been sucked out and replaced with something much worse.

Also I am knit picking here, but what does the title Age Of Extinction actually refer to? Cleary it’s not the Dinobots because they’re not wiped out at the start. It’s not the Decepticons because, surprise surprise, they’re back again. And it doesn’t refer to the Autobots because although we are initially made to believe that Optimus might be the only one left for some reason – oh, no don’t worry they’re back, nothing has changed that would require another lengthy film to describe it to us. Humanity, no. True there is some amount of death in the film, but nowhere near extinction level. In fact the attack is less damaging than the one we witnessed in Dark Of The Moon. So what this really means is that as well as having an irrelevant title, the fourth Transformer film fails to take the franchise to any new levels.

The dialogue is cringe worthy and the battle sequences have lost all originality. As well as this they have still failed to address the problem of knowing who everyone is, it is genuinely difficult to distinguish between Autobots and Decepticons. So we have no clue as to whether anything that we witness in these scenes is significant to the plot at all.

In short then, this is by a long way the worst film of the series. But annoyingly it is not long enough. Face it, this franchise had been stretched to its maximum after the first film. I have lost all faith in any hope of saving the series now, as you can imagine I am ‘thrilled’ that a fifth and sixth instalment is in development. Let’s hope that it won’t come out for a long time.

Result: 1/10       

Cold In July

A fitting title for a film released at this time of year, but then again, it takes it directly from the novel upon which it is based. With a spectacular plot that would not have been exceedingly difficult to translate to the big screen, it is surprising that this is the only adaptation since the books release in 1989. So there is nothing to compete with apart from other films of this genre, and Jim Mickle is no stranger to this genre either as well as Don Johnson Michael C Hall that form a rather impressive cast.

Like most of the best thrillers, its protagonist is an ordinary citizen who enjoys his own life and has no desire to be drawn into a world of action. But sadly that is exactly what happens to Richard Dane (Hall) after he kills an intruder in his house. From then on he becomes involved in a dark and gruesome underworld. It really is a case of normal one minute, and hectic the next. This transition has an excellent pace, but still manages to maintain all of the tension and nerve shredding suspense that any good thriller should have.

The character development is basically a downfall story. Like I said before this is a normal man who is slowly drawn into a dark environment in which he not only survives, but thrives. Eventually of course he becomes comfortable and at ease with these horrible acts he performs. The true hero of this film though, has to be Sam Shepard, who introduces some much needed charisma and strong willed persona into the film. Without him it would feel very empty and uninteresting although it does have enough of that on its own anyway but it is Shepard who brings most of it straight through a set of steel doors and forcing his way into the foundations of the film.

Now we move onto the plot, undoubtedly the film’s strongest factor. It’s ripe with twists and turns yet manages to keep the viewer up to speed with everything. It may just be me, but this plot feels vastly complicated, yet it is easy to keep up with. Don’t ask me to fully explain it or how they do it, but somehow they have, and the results are fantastically enthralling. Instantly the plot is sent in an unexpected direction, if you think you know everything about the plot you’re about to be very surprised as you watch this film (unless you read the entire summary on Wikipedia). It is Dane who is traumatised by his own violent actions, as anyone would be, but it is heavily emphasised throughout the film to make the transition more obvious.

Though there are a few problems with the actual narrative, they are easy to ignore amid this brilliantly engineered and often hilarious as well as horrifying story. It never lets go either, so if you admire films that give you a moment to breathe then maybe this one isn't for you. Normally I would complain about this myself, but it suits the style of the film very well, so I remain highly impressed as well as surprised with this.

Result: 7/10

Jersey Boys

Though he will always be remembered for his cold and impassive stare, accompanied with a voice as smooth as sandpaper that made the man with no name so memorable in the Dollars Trilogy, Clint Eastwood has undoubtedly built up an admirable career as a director. This biographical-musical-drama is a step out of the ordinary for him, but then again, no great director has built a career around the same format over and over again, so how has the ageing icon fared with his latest release.

Make no mistake, just because this is a musical does not mean it is all happy and upbeat. In fact the musical scenes are the only ones that are consistently up-beat, but I mean that in a good way. It helps that it is about a band, also they can include music despite the fact that the scenes that do not involve music make sense when compared to them. As well as this, there are clear elements of classic Eastwood themes. To explain quickly I’ll describe the opening narration, where Tommy DeVito explains that if it wasn’t for him, he and his friends would be lying in a car trunk with bullets in their heads, rough stuff for a group of swinging sixties singers. We watch s these four boys battle their way out of the New Jersey community to stardom, forming the highly successful Four Seasons group, amid gambling and loan sharks.

So you should be asking yourself, what kind of film is this? Despite my best efforts, I can’t properly explain. I can only register my own opinion of what this film is, and in my opinion it falls in-between music and drama. Regrettably I would struggle to refer to it as a biography, as it is rife with historical inaccuracies and leaves out key facts, like one of the main characters dying just ten years after the point at which the film ends, I really was surprised not to see at least a short paragraph to state what happened to these people next. True, it does tell the story of real people, famous ones at that, but without a great deal of real historical context it feels a bit too dramatized. As well as this there are a few too many clichés and true history makes clichés irrelevant. But in this context it feels like more like a commonly used plot point.

However, that does not make the film bad. To sum this film up in a phrase, as ridiculous as it sounds, it’s ‘What if Martin Scorsese did a musical?’ The story even features Joe Pesci, and the start feels remarkably like a light hearted Goodfellas, it even has the narration to accompany it (and serious fans of the mobster masterpiece will spot a subtle reference later in honour of Pesci’s involvement). There are some great performances as well, Christopher Walken delivering as he always does. As well as this the Four Seasons do feel genuine, maybe not historically, but as characters in a film they are nicely layered. Their friendship and eventual fallout all feel genuine, and either they are very good actors or they genuinely are enjoying portraying this iconic band and that makes it feel real.

The film also has a very impressive look as well. Maybe it’s because we admire the sixties in a nostalgic nature, but the film really is a visual feast. It’s richly coloured and (ironic for Eastwood) contains a smooth sound. As well as the fact that the music is fun and uplifting, contrasting well with the harsh nature of the plot, it is a welcome release of tension. However this may hinder it slightly, on more than one occasion it jumps from serious to singing too quickly to let the emotional impct sik in, or to enjoy to music. It may fail to convince us that these people really existed, but it does offer an appealing take on the slum to success story.

Result 5/10   

22 Jump Street

I hope you’ll forgive me for overlooking this comedy sequel for some time now. I didn’t see it as anything to be excited about, I may have enjoyed 21 Jump Street but comedy sequels usually disappoint on so many levels. This one however is far bigger in budget, scope and star factor. And it has worked brilliantly.

Having successfully broken a high school drug ring, our two favourite undercover cops Schimdt and Jenko are assigned to infiltrate a college and to bring down the latest drug craze. It sounds like a carbon copy of the first film, and yet somehow 22 is able to take the comedy a step further whilst echoing the original, which is what a sequel should do. As well as this the film has some fairly decent action sequences (no, seriously) which help remind the viewer that the characters are apparently in real danger.

So then, what is different? Well to start with the makers have obviously been more adventurous when developing this film. Every element feels like it would have been left out of the first film due to the less ambitious scale of it. In this case that is a very good thing, like I said before a comedy sequel needs to reflect the old one in some form and that is a good way to do it, through repetition and sticking to the formula that made the first film good, the jokes become funnier and funnier. To put this opinion simply, it’s the same as the last one, just bigger and as a result, better.

Somehow, amid all of the extra elements a bit of character development is included. The plot isn’t up to much when compared to more elaborate espionage films, so I won’t claim that this film works as a comedy and a standalone action film, it doesn’t. It is a comedy, and nothing else. But that is by no means a bad thing, I would rather have an excellent comedy than a bad mix of more than one genre, because if you fail at one you fail at all of them. By keeping their intention of making a comedy very clear the producers have kept their eye on the goal and scored in brilliant fashion.

The cast remains at the heart of the film. Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum have now come to form one of the most hilarious on screen double acts of the last decade. Maybe it’s because I associate it with them now, but as soon as I see them standing side by side brandishing pistols I immediately start laughing yet still taking them seriously in a small and completely necessary way.

It’s not perfect; there are a few jokes that are repeated once too often, losing their effect as a result. And it lacks the pace and tightness of 21. This is a large problem as it is essential for this kind of film to keep the audience laughing at all times. There are a few moments, however rare they are, where I found myself desperate to get back into the action of the story. But luckily when the film does reach its moments of silliness, it goes full on. There is a good time to tell if you are reaching a five minute segment that lacks pace, if the pace you have just witnessed shows any signs of slowing at all, you might be able to afford to get a few refreshments, you won’t miss much.

Overall though, 22 Jump Street is by a long way the best comedy sequel of all time. That does seem to be quite a bold statement, but right now nothing else springs to mind that has matched and bettered the original on such a scale (if you disagree leave a comment). If the writers can keep this up, I see a 23 Jump Street on the horizon.

Result: 8/10  

Transformers: The Franchise So Far...

With the impending release of Transformers: Age of Extinction, this seems a good time to bring out another franchise perspective. It has been filled with hits, and far too many misses. Age of Extinction has to try and salvage something and prove that Transformers is not quite a dead horse yet. Michael Bay has taken the definition of a modern summer blockbuster (that does not mean it has to be good, just profitable) and made not just one, but three versions of them. Without any further delay I’m moving into the start of the series.

The start is also the highpoint, the worst thing any franchise can do. But focussing on the first Transformers as a standalone film, I must say that it was quite impressive upon its release. Admit it, you were blown away by the amazing CGI used to bring these iconic toys to life, I know I was. This was an area that Michael Bay actually succeeded at, he made them look very mechanical whilst keeping an element of organic nature about them. Fans of the animated show were obviously split right down the middle over the redesign, but I felt that this was an effective way to utilize the effects, which would be needed to distract us from the many problems.

The film was one of those instances where you felt as if the part of you that respects true film art should hate this feature. But you don’t, it is a rather stupid plot, with many holes and parts that could only have come from a script, not to mention the rather flat dialogue between the humans. Mind you, and what I’m about to say may be a bit controversial, but I really liked Shia LaBeouf in this film. This time he had a part to suit him, a socially awkward, smart but underappreciated by everyone character, who could also rise to any challenge that comes his way even if that involves saving the world. For once, his part perfectly suited his range as an actor. However, it is still very difficult to connect with these humans, because of the fact that many have weaker personalities than the robots they’re helping. So far from perfect, but then you see explosions and giant robots and you think ‘who cares’.

So the sequel was eagerly awaited as most science fiction sequels tend to be better that the first, the backstory is out of the way and you can now expand on the world you have created and set up the long term plot for the other films. Oh, how wrong we all were. To describe the flaws of this film, I find myself quoting from the Youtube channel Screen Junkies’ Honest Trailer segment. Revenge of the Fallen contained way too many racist and sexual parts of dialogue for a film based on CHILDREN’S TOYS. Kids are going to want to watch this film and yet this is the image they are presented with, nasty, that’s all I can say. Shots are reused from both the first film, and earlier parts of the same film, and we still have to endure the humans that have no personality or character of any kind. Not to mention wasting more time with Sam’s parents, because that is what everyone was asking for (!).

More problems include that fact that we’d all gotten over the initial excitement of seeing the CGI Transformers, and now that they were being used in huge battles there was no way to distinguish between the good side and the bad side. Every time we see a Transformer die it is difficult to know if it is even relevant to the plot because we have no idea who it is. The first may have had plot holes, but this one goes above and beyond. Just a few unanswered questions are; why does the all-spark bring Megatron back to life if it’s what killed him, and if it brings him back why not just use it on Optimus, why is the roommate included, why does the military not use the Decepticon gun until the last five minutes, and why do the Decepticons not utilize their human transforming abilities to a more useful task than just seducing Sam, and many, many more.

Now onto Dark of the Moon, and immediately there are problems. I’m no fan of Megan Fox, but if you create a character for a film that keep that character rather than just use a terrible excuse to explain their absence. Luckily the effects are minimalized due to the fact that we don’t care about the character anyway. Anyway, I digress as Dark of the Moon was a lot better than Revenge of the fallen, but that is still a lot worse than the first film. It was better mainly for the fact that the story was improved and this time the Transformers were partially distinguishable from each other. The acting however is worse than ever, even more characters are introduced and they all still fail to connect with the audience. But what’s more is that this really should have ended a trilogy. I have no doubt that the next film will make more money, but I’m struggling to look forward to it. 

Chef

John Favreau directing and starring, with Robert Downey Jr and Scarlett Johansson, but this time it’s less Iron Man and more Iron Chef (it took me a long time to think of that joke, so if you wish to comment please be kind). But rather than take on a supporting role in this film, as well as directing Favreau takes the helm in more ways than one as the main character. Chef Carl Casper’s reputation is destroyed overnight by a ruthless blogger (gives us a bad image). With nothing else left he takes to the streets in a food wagon and tours the country, assisted by his son and ex-wife.

I am trying not to be mean as I say this, but John Favreau looks completely at home in the kitchen, slicing his way through ingredients and stirring them together like it is nobody’s business. He has recently hit a trend for bigger blockbusters, but like his central character of the film he goes back to basics with a smaller, independent plot. Food in films is often used as a metaphor, and in this case it is used to describe many things, love, success, responsibility and desperation. But in this case not all of them are made obvious, you have to look rather close, and have a good understanding of cooking. I like that, trusting the viewer’s intelligence and sticking closely to its subject matter, for a comedy that is a sign that there is always going to be a hint of drama, rather than dumbing down the subject to compensate for the masses, they instead want the audience to thoroughly connect with the plot.

For story then, initially it gets off to a good start. But I will not try to cover up the fact that the plot is rather predictable. Think of any other film in this kind of genre, and the plot will be nearly identical, in a phrase it is ‘get knocked down, but get up again slowly’. That is a bit of a spoiler, but do not panic, the real charm behind this film lies far beyond the overall plot.

The characters are well developed and believable, as well as the impeccable acting from this star studded cast. Like I said before food is used as a metaphor frequently. The plot of this film involves much more than mere cooking. When Casper’s career crumbles he reconnects with the life that he sacrificed for it, the family life with his son and wife (Emjay Anthony and Sofia Vergara) as well as confronting her new husband, a wealthy idiosyncratic hedonist (Robert Downey Jr at home, not a huge jump from a ‘genius billionaire playboy philanthropist’).

The wide variety of set pieces offered from travelling the country in a food wagon are used to great effect, as well as the cultural music from each area to represent the ever changing tone of the film. Perhaps at times there is a distinct element of too much drama instead of time that could be used to see more food related comedy. Normally this would not be too much of a problem, but due to the fact that this is marketed as a comedy film, and not a comedy-drama, we are expecting a lot more comedy than drama (if you have understood that then well done).

But the film is able to keep a light tone, so the effects are as minimal as they can be. It is good natured and pleasing to the eye, so if you want to be entertained and sweetened then this is a very promising film to satisfy those parts of your taste.

Result: 6.4/10

X-Men: The Franchise So Far...(Part 2)

To the prequels, spinoffs and reboot/sequel/prequel/crossover, part two of this franchise has further expanded and delved deeper into the world of mutants, with varying degrees of success. It has undoubtedly helped set up the scenario for Days of Future Past to ensure a better understanding of the characters. I would like to think it has all been part of some grand plan to lay the foundations of the next chapter in this film series, but whatever the case, it would be better to look back at all of the films first.

Originally, Origins: Wolverine was planned to be the first instalment of a whole series of Origins films. WE can only be quite glad today that the series did not go down that road, especially if this was the platform on which it would have been launched. The biggest problem is that it takes away any of the mystery and depth behind Wolverine’s past. Everything that happened as a backstory was exactly what the viewer could have guessed, he fights in wars, used to work in a rogue team of mutants and has his memory wiped. It feels as if this is too, ordinary for Wolverine, he should be an exceptional mutant who has been built from centuries of torment, not from one event that barely qualifies as a story anyway. It also tries much too hard to match up its narrative with the events leading to the first X-Men film. The events there do not take place for another twenty years after the events of this one, Wolverine could have changed slightly during that time, but no, he obviously did nothing, as the character at the end of the film is exactly the same one that we are introduced to originally. As well as this the film ruined comic favourites like Gambit and Deadpool, and a frightening CGI Patrick Stewart.

Luckily the quality soon picked up again in First Class. Younger versions of the original X-Men are tasked with preventing World War Three, and at the same time we watch as friends Magneto and Xavier are slowly turned against each other. A strong cast and a much better thought out plot, as well as leaving room for expansion in terms of chronological story, it was the ideal X-Men prequel. You could argue it is slightly light hearted compared to other X-Men films, but that seems to suit the youthful attitude of the characters. But very little of the dramatic messages are left out. Unlike the previous film, First Class was able to maintain the themes of discrimination that lay the foundations for the entire X-Men story. Best of all it does not feel the need to explain everything about the characters. Look at this example, in one scene Magneto is a child in the death camps, and in the next he is a grown man hunting down Shaw. Do we need to know what he spent doing in those years, no? Is the young Xavier perfectly shaped into the version that we see in X-Men, again no, and that is good, if he was Days of Future Past would not seem as well-crafted and thought out.

Despite the failure of the first Wolverine film that did not discourage their hopes to make another. One thing I did not mention earlier is that originally Origins was going to portray a Wolverine traumatised by various wars and suffering from PTSD, as well as battling the usual mutant enemies. That sounded like a much better film, and thankfully that concept was moulded into The Wolverine. This was certainly a much more personal and emotionally challenging film for the series’ main protagonist than any other. Since Days of Future Past leaves little room for personal emotions for a lot of characters, this was another good setup for it. It’s difficult to write a great deal about this film as it is much easier to treat it as a standalone project that shares just one central character. So with all of the good action we have come to expect and an underlying personal theme, this is the Wolverine film that fans have been asking for.

But of course, all of this is made irrelevant by the latest film. So what now, does this mean the events we witnessed for over a decade are all rewritten, on the surface it would appear so. But then again, this is a problem that Bryan Singer has to deal with, it will be up to him to answer any questions remaining in the next chapter, roll on X-Men: Apocalypse.