THE GREATEST SHOWMAN REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

​Hugh Jackman started 2017 with his final performance of the clawed mutant, Wolverine, in Logan. He then ended the year by giving an energetic performance as P.T. Barnum in the musical, The Greatest Showman. While critics have had mixed feelings about the film, audiences have praised it. In the month since its release, I’ve seen endless tweets from people who loved the film and even some who have watched it at the cinema three times. However, is it as great as audiences and its title make it out to be or is it a disappointment?

The Greatest Showman tells the story of Phineas Taylor Barnum (High Jackman), the low-born son of a tailor. After working a series of conventional jobs and making a small amount of money, he marries his childhood sweetheart, Charity (Michelle Williams). Unfortunately, he becomes jobless after the shipping company he works for goes bankrupt, however, this leads to him finally pursuing his dream. Although Charity is happy with their life and their two daughters, Barnum wants more. Barnum takes a walk on the wild side and buys a museum. When attendance is poor (there’s not a lot of interest in wax figures and the work of taxidermists), he replaces inert attractions with a show featuring human oddities: The Bearded Lady, Lettie Lutz (Keala Settle), a dwarf, Charles Stratton who goes by the stage name of Tom Thumb (Sam Humphrey), a trapeze artist, Anne Wheeler (Zendaya), and others of their ilk. Barnum’s low-brow production becomes an overnight sensation and he recruits a partner, the younger and well-connected Philip Carlyle (Zac Efron), who arranges an audience with Queen Victoria. While in England, Barnum meets singer Jenny Lind (Rebecca Ferguson), the “Swedish Nightingale”, and convinces her to embark on a tour of the United States.

It’s no secret that, while The Greatest Showman claims to tell the tale of P.T. Barnum, who gave his name to a circus during the 19th century, the majority of the narrative is fictional. Those who have done their research on the real Barnum will know that he only used his 'odd' performers for self-gain and didn't treat them with the respect that they deserved. At first, I was confused at why anyone would make a film celebrating the life of a man who mistreated unique individuals and animals in his production. Jackman, who portrays Barnum and also produced the film, said that Barnum’s belief was that ‘what makes you different makes you special’, however, the real life Barnum was not exactly a crusader for social justice. He was more interested in exploiting people than empowering them. While I think that The Greatest Showman is thoroughly entertaining and features some empowering and energetic songs, written by the award-winning duo Benj Pasek and Justin Paul (who wrote the songs for La La Land), I think people should know the truth about Barnum before watching.

Aside from that, The Greatest Showman is worth a watch. There are solid performances from the cast. Although Jackman doesn’t resemble Barnum in the slightest, he gives a very good performance and it’s obvious he cares about this production as he puts his all into it. However, it’s not his best performance. As we saw towards the beginning of 2017, Jackman gave his best performance as Wolverine in Logan and he was better as Jean Valjean in the 2012 musical, Les Miserables. Williams is good as Charity, however, she isn’t given much to do but she does have a stand-out scene where she sings ‘Tightrope’. Efron and Zendaya provide the romance aspect of the film and their performance of ‘Rewrite The Stars’ is one of the highlights of the film, as is ‘This is Me’ which is sung by the Bearded Lady and the rest of the performers who finally are accepting of themselves and their differences. It’s a powerful song and is currently nominated at the Academy Awards for Best Original Song. Ferguson gives a good performance as Jenny Lind, however, her singing is dubbed by Loren Allred as Ferguson felt that, while she can carry a tune, Jenny Lind is considered the best singer in the world and that dubbing her voice would be in service of the film. However, in order to get into the role, Ferguson insisted on singing the song in front of the extras while filming.

One of the main reasons to see The Greatest Showman is its songs, written by Pasek and Paul. The song-writing duo won their first Oscar last year with their Original Song, ‘City of Stars’, which featured in the musical, La La Land. From early on in pre-production, the decision was made to have the musical style of The Greatest Showman to evoke more that of contemporary musical genres like pop and hip hop rather than that of a traditional, classical musical style that would accurately evoke the film's 1800s setting. As Pasek said, "The choice was to express not just the characters' feelings, but also how ahead of his time P.T. Barnum was. He wasn't bound by the world in which he lived; he wanted to create one." Like I mentioned earlier, the songs are the best aspect of the film. For me the stand-outs were ‘This Is Me’, ‘Rewrite The Stars’ and Lind’s powerful ballad, ‘Never Enough’.

The Greatest Showman marks the directorial debut of Michael Gracey, after having spent twenty years as an animator, digital compositor, and visual effects supervisor. Jackman and director Michael Gracey met on a commercial shoot. Jackman told Gracey he wanted to make a film with him, and Gracey thought he was joking. Jackman later called him and said he wanted him to direct The Greatest Showman. It’s an impressive debut and captures the energy that comes from a musical and is thoroughly entertaining.

Overall, The Greatest Showman is an enjoyable musical, with energetic and powerful songs and solid performances from its cast, however, it's far from an accurate biopic of P.T. Barnum.

7/10

JUMANJI: WELCOME TO THE JUNGLE REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

It's been over twenty years since Jumanji was released. The film focused on the titular board game that brings chaos to those who dare rolled the dice. In 1969, a young boy was sucked into the game where he had to remain until a player rolled a six or an eight on the dice. Unfortunately, it look twenty six years for that to happen, with the help of the two children, Judy (Kirsten Dunst) and Peter (Bradley Pierce), who had move into his house. Now an adult, Alan Parrish (Robin Williams) has to complete the game to get rid of all the destruction that the game has caused. Despite being critically panned, it was still a hit at the box office, earning over $260 million. Now, twenty two years later, a sequel has been released with the subtitle Welcome To The Jungle.

When four high-school kids, nerdy Spencer (Alex Wolff), football player Fridge (Ser'Darius Blain), popular, self-obsessed Bethany (Madison Iseman) and shy Martha (Morgan Turner), discover an old video game console with a game they've never heard of - Jumanji - they are immediately drawn into the game's jungle setting, literally becoming the avatars they chose: Spencer becomes a brawny adventurer, Dr Smolder Bravestone (Dwayne Johnson); Fridge loses (in his words) "the top two feet of his body" and becomes zoologist, Moose Finbar (Kevin Hart); Bethany becomes a middle-aged male professor, Professor Sheldon 'Shelly' Oberon (Jack Black); and Martha becomes a badass warrior, Ruby Roundhouse (Karen Gillan). What they discover is that you don't just play Jumanji - you must survive it. To beat the game and return to the real world, they'll have to go on the most dangerous adventure of their lives and change the way they think about themselves - or they'll be stuck in the game forever.

Before Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle, I did have my doubts. I didn't think there should be a sequel to the original 1995 film as it works well on its own. However, the filmmakers and the actors involved said that it was a 'reimagining' of the first film and a tribute to the late Williams who tragically passed away in 2014. If I'm being honest, I think that this was just an excuse as Williams' character, Alan Parrish, is only briefly mentioned once in the middle of the film. I think that the film would've worked better if it was based on a different video game instead of associating it with Jumanji. 

However, despite this, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle is still fairly entertaining and works as a fast-paced adventure with a lot of humour and action. The problem is that it pales in comparison to the original which is one of my favourite films. 

The performances from the four leads are all solid. Johnson is known for his wrestling alter-ego, 'The Rock' and for appearing in action films such as the Fast and Furious franchise. However, recently, he has transitioned to more comedic roles in films such as Central Intelligence. Initially, I was a bit skeptical about his performance but, surprisingly, he gives a convincing performance as a young, nerdy boy trapped in a muscular man's body. His Central Intelligence co-star Kevin Hart also gives a good performance. However, for me, Karen Gillian and Jack Black gave the best performances of the four. Gillian is best known for appearing as Amy Pond in the sci-fi series, Doctor Who from 2010 until 2012 and has recently appeared in both of the Guardians Of The Galaxy films as Nebula. Gillian proves that she's capable of handling comical roles as she embodies that of an awkward teenager stuck in a body she's not familar with. However, no one does comedy better than Black who has the toughest challenge: convincing audiences that he's a teenage girl stuck in the body of an overweight, middle-aged man. Fortunately, he succeeds and gives the most memorable role. He and Gillian have a great scene where he teaches her how to flirt. Nick Jonas seems out of place at first, considering he's a famous pop star, however, he soon settles in naturally to his role as Alex, someone who's been stuck in the board game.

One of the weakest aspects of the original Jumanji was the special effects but, for me, they were easily overlooked as it was the mid 1990s, a time where technology wasn't as advanced as it is now, and the crew were working on a tight budget. This is why I think that the criticism towards the effects in the original is unfair. The computer-generated imagery is obviously an improvement over the original and the set design is impressive. Because Jumanji is now a video game, the players are sucked into the game and end up in the jungle. We finally get to see what the world of Jumanji is like. Visually, the sequel looks a lot better than the original. 

The characters in the game all have different abilities and weaknesses, just like they would in a normal video game. Those who have played games will understand the frustration of completing a level and having characters repeat their dialogue. This is cleverly shown in Welcome To The Jungle. As Spencer, who is an obsessive gamer, explains, the game characters all have lines that they're programmed to repeat until the character says the right thing. Each character also has three lives which makes the task of completing the game even harder. The stunts involved, especially with Ruby's 'dance fighting' are over-the-top but they're supposed to be as it's meant to be a video game. There's also an exhilarating sequence that involves the characters inside a helicopter, piloted by Alex, that is being chased by a stampede. A lot of films inspired by video games have failed, including Assassin's Creed which was released at the beginning of this year, however, despite being based on a fictional game, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle succeeds at being entertaining.

The main villain of the original Jumanji was a hunter, Van Pelt, who returns in this sequel, albeit portrayed by a different actor, Bobby Cannavale. Unfortunately, while Van Pelt was a menacing villain in the original, in the sequel, there's not enough scenes to make him conflicting enough. Sure, he looks evil so we know he's the villain and he's given a bit of a backstory, however, he's fairly weak. This is why the ending feels a bit anti-climatic. The task for the four characters is to return a jewel, that Van Pelt had stolen, back to a mountain. There isn't any sense of danger in this final scene and it's all resolved fairly quickly which led to me thinking: oh, is that it? The majority of the film was entertaining so I guess the writers, Chris McKenna, Erik Sommers, Scott Rosenberg and Jeff Pinkner just failed to come up with a satisfying ending.

Although Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle works well as a fast-paced adventure, it suffers in comparison to the original. I think that it would've been better as a stand-alone film that's based on a different game. This is what I liked about Zathura, the 2005 film that's based on a book by Chris Van Allsburg who also wrote Jumanji. It was described as 'Jumanji in space' but wasn't a direct sequel as they're two different films by the same writer. 

Overall, with four strong performances from its leading actors, Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle is a fast-paced adventure film that is a solid follow-up to the 1995 original.

7/10

JUSTICE LEAGUE REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

I remember, back in late 2015, I was really excited when I discovered there was going to be a Batman v Superman film coming out in March of 2016. I was a little disappointed that Christian Bale wasn't going to be portraying Batman as I thought that he was great in Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight trilogy. However, I still wanted to see it. Come March and Batman v Superman is critically panned which put me off watching it. I wasn't expecting it to be received so negatively. Despite the criticism of BvS, I watched the following film in the franchise, Suicide Squad. Like BvS, it too received a lot of criticism, however, I think I enjoyed it more than most, purely because of the characters, including Will Smith's Deadshot and Margot Robbie's Harley Quinn. So far, the DC franchise wasn't doing too well, fortunately, the release of Wonder Woman restored hope and is the only film in the franchise, so far, to receive a 'Fresh' rating on Rotten Tomatoes. Because of the success of Wonder Woman, there was potentially a chance that Justice League might actually be good.

Fueled by his restored faith in humanity and inspired by Superman's (Henry Cavill) selfless act, Bruce Wayne (Ben Affleck) enlists the help of his newfound ally, Diana Prince (Gal Gadot), to face an even greater enemy. Together, Batman and Wonder Woman work quickly to find and recruit a team of meta-humans to stand against this newly awakened threat. But despite the formation of this unprecedented league of heroes - Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman (Jason Momoa), Cyborg (Ray Fisher) and The Flash (Ezra Miller) - it may already be too late to save the planet from an assault of catastrophic proportions.

Justice League isn't without its faults, there are a lot of them, including a weak villain and the CGI does need improving as it looks artificial, however, I was surprised at how much I enjoyed it. I was expecting to be disappointed but Justice League beat my expectations. Critics have been attacking the DCEU (DC Extended Universe) since the release of the first film, Man of Steel, which was released in 2013. In my opinion, I think that Man of Steel introduced us to Cavill's Superman really well. What I've noticed is that, with critics, if the films in the DCEU aren't as good as the ones in the MCU (Marvel Cinematic Universe), they're 'bad'. I'm going to be honest here and say that I'm not a huge fan of the Marvel superhero films. I studied a few of them for my Film Studies GCSEs a few years and ago and they've gotten a bit boring for me now. I remember watching Captain America: The First Avenger and being disappointed. I enjoyed The Avengers on my first watch but, after the release of Age Of Ultron, the sequel to The Avengers, I'm no longer interested. I do understand why everyone loves them. This is majorly controversial I know but I've always been more of a DC fan, especially with Nolan's The Dark Knight trilogy. I think that the characters in Justice League are more likable and the chemistry between them is effectively shown. 

With only two of the characters having solo films, Superman and Wonder Woman, they're the only ones with a background. Sure, Affleck's Batman appeared in BvS but that wasn't an origins story. He just turned up and we just had to accept that this was Batman. A Batman solo film has been planned, titled The Batman, but it is unclear when it'll be released. It's because of this, that the writers of Justice League, have to quickly give each of the characters, including Aquaman (who is due to get his solo feature next year), The Flash and Cyborg background. The Flash, also known as Barry Allen, is a young adult whose father, Henry (Billy Crudup), is in prison. Cyborg, also known as Victor Stone, has been hiding away in his apartment after his father used an experiment on him in order to save his life. 

After being persuaded by Batman and Wonder Woman, Aquaman, The Flash and Cyborg all team up to defeat the evil that is Steppenwolf (Ciarán Hinds) who, thousands of years ago, attempted to conquer and remake Earth through the combined energies of the three Mother Boxes before they were foiled by an army of Olympian Gods. After repelling Steppenwolf's army, the Mother Boxes are separated and hidden in locations around the world. After the events of Batman V Superman, Steppenwolf comes back after sensing the humans' fear and becomes even more determined to find the three Mother Boxes and destroy Earth. Like I said earlier, the villain is one of Justice League's weakest aspects, however, I don't think that it ruins the film. Because of his strength, the five members of the Justice League are struggling to defeat him and his army. This leads to them reawakening Superman using one of the Mother Boxes. It's not really a spoiler to say that he comes back to life as it really wouldn't be a Justice League film without him. Unfortunately, the plan doesn't work out as expected with Superman having lost his mind and fights against the other superheros. This leads to his true love, Lois Lane (Amy Adams), reuniting with him and bringing him back to reality. After returning to his home and reuniting with mother, Martha (Diana Lane), Superman becomes his old self, joins the Justice League and helps them defeat Steppenwolf and his army.

Like most superhero-based features, there's a lot of action throughout. A favourite includes a sequence near the beginning when Wonder Woman stops a bomb from going off in a bank. Justice League shows off her fighting skills and strength really well. Gadot further proves why she's the perfect choice to portray Wonder Woman. 

I was expecting to be disappointed by Affleck's performance as Batman, but he wasn't as bad as I thought he was going to be. Both Momoa and Fisher are great as Aquaman and Cyborg, however, Miller stands out as The Flash. He brings comic relief to the role why also proving why he's one of the most diverse actors working today. Since his breakthrough performance in We Need To Talk About Kevin, he has given memorable roles in films such as The Perks Of Being a Wallflower and last year's Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Solid supporting roles come from Jeremy Irons as Wayne's trusty butler, Alfred, and J.K. Simmons as Commissioner Gordon.

I think that those who have enjoyed the previous installments in the DCEU franchise won't be disappointed with Justice League. Those who didn't enjoy Batman v Superman should give this a miss as it has the same tone and style, due to it being directed by Zack Snyder, who is known for his darker tones in his films. Justice League is far from perfect but it's definitely a highly entertaining feature that is full of action and interesting characters, all of whom I can't wait to see more of in future installments.

7/10

A BAD MOMS CHRISTMAS REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

Christmas can be one of the most wonderful times of the year. Unless your parents are visiting. That's the case for the three moms from the 2016 comedy, Bad Moms, Amy (Mila Kunis), Kiki (Kristen Bell) and Carla (Kathryn Hahn). Amy's mother, Ruth (Christine Baranski) desperately wants her daughter and grandchildren to have the perfect Christmas but proves to be controlling of her daughter's life. Kik's mom, Sandy (Cheryl Hines), refuses to give her daughter any space and even watches her in bed with her husband. And Isis (Susan Sarandon) only turns up when she's in desperate need of money from Carla, however, she insists she wants to spend Christmas with her daughter this year. Because of the arrival of their moms, Christmas quickly goes from the most wonderful time of the year to the worst.

When Bad Moms was released in the summer of last year, it was a surprise hit with audiences and at the box office, making over $183m. This lead to a sequel being announced just four months after it was released. Many sequels can be disappointments but I think that A Bad Moms Christmas is just as good as its predecessor. It's not a perfect film but, then again, neither was the original. However, both films are highly entertaining and fun to watch. I really enjoyed seeing the main characters' relationships with their moms, each had a different relationship. Amy has a difficult relationship with her mother because of her controlling behaviour. As soon as she turns up, Ruth reveals that she's invited over 100 people to her house for a Christmas party, much to Amy's annoyance. This leads to a big falling out between the two towards the end of the film. Kiki finds her mom obsessive and finds it hard to explain to her that she needs space. Carla worries that Isis has only turned up to borrow money but the two end up becoming the closest they've ever been. I think that a lot of people will be able to relate to the characters' relationships with their moms in some shape or form and the stress of Christmas, including buying presents and having the perfect tree and decorations.

The tone of A Bad Moms Christmas is similar to that of The Hangover which probably isn't a coincidence considering Scott Moore and Jon Lucas (who wrote and directed this) wrote that. The three moms, in a funny sequence that takes place in a shopping mall, get drunk and steal a Christmas tree. 

I think that the actors that portray the new moms were all well-chosen. I've seen Baranski in many films, however, I mainly see her as Leonard Hofstadter's mother from the popular sitcom, The Big Bang Theory, and her character, Ruth, is similar to her role in the TV series. She's great at portraying the controlling mom who wants everything to be perfect, however, we only see her from Amy's point of view. It isn't until towards the end of the film, we discover why she acts so controlling. I've only seen Hines in one or two films but I know she's great at comedy. She captures the obsessive nature of her character, Sandy, who rarely leaves her daughter's side. Sarandon gives a solid performance as Carla's mother and the two share a memorable scene when they dance with a stripper dressed as Santa. Kunis, Bell and Hahn share chemistry as the three friends who have a lot of fun together.

Like I mentioned, A Bad Moms Christmas is far from perfect. Despite its attempt to be dramatic, there's no tension as it's pretty obvious how things are going to end: with three characters improving on their relationships with their moms and everything ending happily. However, all of this is to be expected with this type of comedy. I also agree that there was probably one too many slow-motion montages. Despite its flaws, however, I really enjoyed watching it. It could've been better but, then again, it could've been a lot worse. It's harmless and its only intention is to get its audiences in the mood for Christmas and entertain them and, in my opinion, it has succeeded.

7/10

WONDER REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

For a lot of people, school can be a difficult experience, however, it can be harder for those who are different and stand out from others, because of either their mental or physical disability or a facial disfigurement. Stephen Chbosky's latest feature, Wonder, tells the story of August 'Auggie' Pullman, who has a facial disease called mandibulofacial dystosis, also known as Treacher Collins syndrome. This has caused Auggie's face to disfigure and, throughout his life, he has been in and out of hospital and had many surgeries because of it. To prevent being bullied at a young age, he is home schooled by his mother, Isabel (Julia Roberts). However, Isabel and Auggie's father, Nate (Owen Wilson) decide it's finally time for him to attend middle school. The main worry for Auggie's parents is how he'll be treated by the other children. Wonder details Auggie's life at school and also shows the point of view from other characters such as his older sister, Via (Izabela Vidovic) and his friend Jack Will (Noah Jupe).
Chbosky is best known for adapting his best-selling novel, The Perks Of Being A Wallflower to the big screen, with Logan Lerman and Emma Watson leading the roles. It was a deep and moving coming-of-age drama that documented a teenager's life as he went through high school. While Wonder isn't as deep, it's thoroughly entertaining from start to finish. This is based on R. J. Palacio's New York Times bestselling novel of the same name that was published in 2012. While I have heard of this book, I've never read it so I didn't know what to expect from the feature film adaptation. Fortunately, I was pleasantly surprised at how much I enjoyed it.
Wonder isn't a perfect film, however, I judged it based on the audience's reaction from the screening I was in. Because of #WorldKindnessDay on 13th November, the production company, Lionsgate, showed Wonder at various cinemas across the UK and the tickets to see the film were free. So, of course, my local cinema was packed full of families and children with their parents. I definitely think that the overall reception from the audience was positive as I heard laughter throughout and, after the film had finished, I noticed children telling their parents that they had enjoyed it and that's why I think Wonder is mainly a success.
Wonder spreads its main message of 'Choose Kind' really well. Whenever someone bullies Auggie, the film focuses on his reaction and we see him crying and wishing he had a different face. It's heartbreaking to see a boy so young call himself ugly. No child, or anyone for that matter, should ever have to feel that way. I think that Wonder is the sort of film that should be shown in schools, to educate children on why it's so important to be kind to others and not bully. I highly recommend that parents take their children to see this as, not only will it keep them entertained for around two hours, but they'll fully understand why bullying isn't acceptable.
The performances from the cast are all solid. Both Roberts and Wilson share a lot of chemistry and are convincing as Auggie's parents. Wilson, who is best known for his comedic roles, has a few one liners throughout the film that are all worthy of a laugh or two. As Auggie's older sister, Via, Vidovic gives a very good performance. I liked that we saw her point of view and her struggles at high school. However, it's Jacob Tremblay that stands out. Just two years ago, he made his breakthrough performance at the age of eight in the Oscar-nominated drama, Room. He captured the innocence of Jack and the same can be said for his portrayal of Auggie. He is almost unrecognisable underneath his incredible make-up. It's crazy to think that, at only the age of 11, Tremblay has already established himself as one of the best child actors. His witty humour makes him instantly a likable protagonist.
In terms of quality, Wonder isn't the best film ever made and it's not going to be nominated at the Oscars, however, it doesn't matter. Its goal was to entertain children and educate them on their message to be kind and, with that, I think they have succeeded. Children will certainly enjoy this more than adults but that doesn't mean it's any less of a film. I doubt those who enjoyed Palacio's book will be disappointed with Chbosky's adaptation as I think it overall captures the lighthearted and inspiring tone.
7/10

MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

First published in 1934, Murder On The Orient Express has gone on to be one of Agatha Christie's best-selling and well-known novels. It was the book that certified her legacy as one of the greatest mystery/crime authors that ever lived. Since its publication, it has been adapted into two feature films (one in 1974 and this latest adaptation) and two TV series, in 2001 and on an episode of Agatha Christie's Poirot in 2010. With so many adaptations, was there really any need for another one? In my opinion, yes, as a lot of today's generation of viewers, including me, have probably never read the original book or seen the 1974 film. Kenneth Branagh's adaptation of Christie's famous novel has a modern look to it and features the best actors, from both Britain and Hollywood. These include Branagh himself, as the famous Belgium detective Hercule Poirot, Michelle Pfeiffer, Dame Judi Dench, Penelope Cruz, Daisy Ridley, Josh Gad and many more. However, is Murder On The Orient Express a successful adaptation or one of this year's many disappointments?

In 1930s Europe, famed detective Hercule Poirot boards the legendary Orient Express for a small break in between cases. While on board, he meets an interesting assortment of characters. One fellow passenger, Samuel Ratchett (Johnny Depp), implores Mr. Poirot to assist him while on the train as he fears for his well-being, though Poirot respectfully declines. The next morning, Ratchett is found dead. With the train halted due to snow build up on the tracks, and with the evidence and suspects piling up, Poirot finds himself diving into a case that could be his biggest yet.

Because I hadn't read Christie's book or seen any of its adaptations prior to seeing Murder On The Orient Express, I had no idea what to expect and, fortunately, I was pleasantly surprised and thoroughly enjoyed Branagh's take on the classic novel. The main problem with this latest feature is that a lot of older viewers will have read the book or seen the 1974 film and will already know what to expect which can leave them disappointed. Those who haven't experienced Murder On The Orient Express in any way will probably enjoy it more. In comparison to other adaptations, it's probably not that good, however, it works as a stand-alone mystery drama. 

Where Murder On The Orient Express succeeds is in Branagh's fast pacing and the suspense he maintains throughout. The majority of the film takes place on the Orient Express and, by using certain camera shots, it has a claustrophobic feel to it. The corridors are tight and the rooms are small so there's nowhere for the murderer to hide. What I found most impressive was Branagh's choices of camera angles and shots. The scene where Poirot, the conductor and the doctor discover the dead body is shot using an overhead angle which I thought was an interesting way to shoot a scene. We don't see the body itself until later in the film, what we do see is the shocked reactions of the characters. 

While the majority of Murder On The Orient Express does have a dark tone and chilling atmosphere, Branagh does sprinkle a few lighthearted moments throughout. His portrayal of the famous detective, Poirot, sparks a few chuckles, due to his lighthearted and likable personality. Poriot has been portrayed by many actors throughout the years, with many regarding David Suchet as the best portrayal in the 1989 drama series. Because of all the previous portrayals, there was a lot of pressure for Branagh to get the character just right and I think he has succeeded. He further proves why he's one of the best actors working today as he puts his all into his performance. It must have been a tough challenge to act and direct at the same time but, nevertheless, he has achieved it. 

Because of its star-studded cast, there's not a bad performance to be found. Michelle Pfeiffer was impressive as the widowed Mrs Hubbard and has a stand-out scene towards the end of the film. Daisy Ridley is currently best known for appearing as Rey in the latest Star Wars films, however, as the Governess, Mary Debenham, she proves that she's capable of handling dramatic roles outside of the famous sci-fi films. I was also impressed by Josh Gad who, in the past few years, has become better known for his comedic roles, however, as Ratchett's assistant, Hector MacQueen, he gives a good dramatic performance. Despite being given less screen time, every actor gives a solid performance. 

As for the mystery itself, I had no idea how the film was going to end. I was unsure of who the murderer was and was completely surprised by the ending. I can now understand why Murder On The Orient Express is one of the greatest mystery novels of all time. Like most good mysteries, it's full of clues, pieces of evidence and red herrings to keep audiences guessing. Each viewer will have a different opinion on who the killer is, however, they'll definitely be shocked at who it turns out to be. The twist leads to a thought-provoking climax about justice and revenge. After solving the murder mystery, Poirot must make the hard decision about whether or not to turn the murderer in. After a short while, he decides not to. This is because, earlier in the film, he made a dark and disturbing discovery about Ratchett, which lead to Poirot's understanding of why the murderer killed him. It was all about getting justice and Ratchett finally getting the punishment he deserves. 

Murder On The Orient Express isn't a perfect film and I'm sure that, once I read Christie's book or see the 1974 adaptation, I'll think less of it. Despite this, my first thoughts are that it's a thoroughly successful adaptation that features a star-studded cast and great directing from Kenneth Branagh who gives a fresh portrayal of Hercule Poirot.

7/10

BREATHE REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS* 

Andy Serkis is best known for his motion-capture performances and bringing characters, such as Gollum in the Lord Of The Rings films, to life through this impressive technique. So, it was a big surprise to many when it was announced that his directorial debut was a drama that's based on the true story of Robin Cavendish who, at just the age of 28, is paralysed from the neck down after he is struck down by polio. However, the main reason Serkis chose to direct this is because Robin's son, Jonathan Cavendish, is a producer at The Imaginarium Studios along with Serkis. Of course, this is a story that meant a lot to Jonathan and it's understandable why he wanted to create a feature about his father.

Breathe is an inspiring true love story between Robin (Andrew Garfield) and Diana Cavendish (Claire Foy), an adventurous couple who refuse to give up in the face of a devastating disease. When Robin is struck down by polio at the age of 28, he is confined to a hospital bed and given only a few months to live. With the help of Diana's twin brothers (Tom Hollander) and the groundbreaking ideas of inventor Teddy Hall (Hugh Bonneville), Robin and Diana dare to escape the hospital ward to seek out a full and passionate life together - raising their young son, traveling and devoting their lives to helping other polio patients.

You'd be right in thinking that the tone of Breathe looks like a lot of other films about paralysed or disabled characters, including last year's Me Before You (starring Sam Claflin and Emilia Clarke) and 2014's The Theory Of Everything (which won Eddie Redmayne his first Academy Award for his performance as Professor Stephen Hawking), However, this doesn't mean it's any less inspiring. Before watching, I had noticed there was a lot of criticism towards this feature and, while I do notice its flaws, I still thoroughly enjoyed watching Robin's story as I had never heard of it prior to seeing this film. Most dramas, that involve a character with a life-debilitating disability, are dark and depressing and hard to watch. While that's not necessarily a bad thing, I think that the uplifting tone works for Breathe. Jonathan obviously wanted his father's story to be told in an uplifting and celebratory way and that's why Breathe is a success. In the beginning, we do feel sympathetic towards Robin as he loses the ability to move his body and talk within a matter of hours. He can't even hold his new baby son and refuses to look at him, due to his depression. At first, he wants to die, but his wife, Diana, refuses to give up on him. She soon learns how to work his respirator machine and, with the help of Robin's doctor and nurse, sneaks him out of hospital and brings him home where he begins his new life and is able to watch his son grow up.

In the beginning, I did feel like that Robin and Diana's love story, including how they met, was rushed, however, I think this is because the majority of the film focuses on Robin's life after contracting polio. Within the first half hour, Diana is already pregnant with their baby son. Fortunately, I think that this can be overlooked as Diana's unconditional love is shown throughout the film as she cares for him and is determined for him to live as long a life as possible. However, it does become difficult for her towards the end as Robin becomes more ill and Diana must come to terms with her husband dying. It's in these scenes that leads to us thinking if it's fair to force someone to live in pain so we don't have to live without them. While the majority of Breathe shies away from the darkest parts of Robin's disability, towards the end, it shows the gory side. Because it's a 12A, not too much is seen, but there is a sudden scene that involves Robin's respirator machine breaking which leads to him losing a lot of blood. It's a difficult scene to watch but it's also crucial as we can see just how difficult Robin's life is and we feel sympathetic towards Diana, who has to stop the bleeding and clean up his messy stained clothes and sheets. 

For his cast, Serkis has chosen the best of British which includes Andrew Garfield and Claire Foy in the leading roles. Last year, Garfield gave an effective performance in Hacksaw Ridge as a soldier who refused to hold a weapon in battle. This lead to him being nominated for an Academy Award earlier this year. While Garfield's performance is highly effective and he captures the highs and lows of Robin's life, it's hard to say whether he'll be nominated again next year, however, I'd be very happy if he was nominated. Foy is probably best known for portraying Queen Elizabeth II in two series of Netflix original series, The Crown, however, as Diana, she proves she's capable of handling dramatic roles on the big screen. The likes of Tom Hollander, Hugh Bonneville and comedian Stephen Mangan give solid supporting roles. 

In all honesty, I think that the criticism towards Breathe is a bit unfair. It's an impressive directorial debut, especially for Serkis. His hope was to bring the story of his friend's father's battle with polio to the big screen, in an uplifting and celebratory way with an emotional climax. And I think with that he has succeeded.

8/10

BLADE RUNNER 2049 REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

In 1982, Ridley Scott released his second science-fiction feature, Blade Runner, starring Harrison Ford as the titular character, Rick Deckard, whose job involved finding and killing Replicants, androids that looked and behaved exactly like humans. Over 30 years later, it is now known as a cult classic to many, especially those who first saw it in cinemas back in the early 1980s. I recently watched it and this lead to me having high hopes for its sequel, Blade Runner 2049. However, is it a good follow-up or a major disappointment?

A new blade runner, LAPD Officer K (Ryan Gosling), unearths a long-buried secret that has the potential to plunge what's left of society into chaos. K's discovery leads him on a quest to find Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford), a former LAPD blade runner who has been missing for 30 years.

Development for a Blade Runner sequel began almost 20 years ago when British filmmaker, Stuart Hazeldine, wrote a sequel based on K. W. Jeter's novel, The Edge Of Human, and it was titled Blade Runner Down, unfortunately, it was rejected. It wasn't until 2007 that Scott, who directed the original, announced he was considering developing a sequel to his 1982 sci-fi feature. Now, over thirty years after the original, the much-anticipated sequel has finally been released, with Ford returning to his role as Deckard and Ryan Gosling also starring. Denis Villeneuve replaced Scott as director due to Scott being busy directing his sequel to Prometheus, Alien: Covenant. In answer to my earlier question, yes, Blade Runner 2049 is just as good as its predecessor, maybe even better, in my opinion. Fans of the original will not be disappointed.

Blade Runner 2049 has a visually impressive look, giving the setting its unique and futuristic look. The city is filled with bright, neon holograms that stand out from the dull and grey backdrop of Los Angeles. It's one of those science-fiction films, like Christopher Nolan's Interstellar and Alfonso Cuarón's Gravity, that needs to be seen on the big screen. I didn't see it in 3D, however, I can tell that some scenes would've looked a lot better if I'd been wearing 3D glasses. I'll be very surprised if the special effects aren't nominated for an Oscar at next year's Academy Awards as the computer generated imagery is very impressive and a huge improvement on its predecessor.

When Scott failed to return to direct, the production company searched for other directors wh were capable of making a sequel that lived up to the standard of the original. At first, Christopher Nolan was rumoured to be directing, however, this proved to be untrue. However, Denis Villeneuve was soon hired. In the past few years, Villeneuve has proven himself to be one of the best directors working today. Prisoners, Sicario and last year's Arrival have all been successful films in their own right so it's understandable why he was chosen. After he was hired, Villeneuve knew he was under a lot of pressure from fans of the original to make a sequel that is just as good. Fortunately, Villeneuve has yet to disappoint and makes Blade Runner 2049 a thrilling watch that results in an emotional impact. He knows how to create exhilarating action sequences and balances this out with a touch of drama and mystery throughout. The majority of the film follows Gosling's detective as goes on a quest that leads him to former Blade Runner, Deckard. Blade Runner ended with Deckard and Replicant, Rachael (Sean Young), forming a relationship. To those who wondered what happened to the pair, this sequel answers those questions. 

Those hoping to see a lot of Ford in his role as Deckard will be disappointed to learn that he doesn't make his comeback until halfway through the film. Because the film is set thirty years later, Deckard has changed a lot, both physically and emotionally. He lost both Rachael and their child which has caused him to live as a recluse in a hotel, set in the middle of nowhere. When K turns up wanting his questions answered, Deckard reluctantly opens up about what happened. He was forced to leave a pregnant Rachael behind with the Replicant freedom movement to protect her. Unfortunately, this lead to her death and their child being sent away to an orphanage. This is where most of the emotional impact comes from as we can see Deckard feels guilty for what happened to Rachael. 

Because the majority of Blade Runner 2049 revolves around his character, K, Gosling has a lot to live up to, fortunately, he doesn't disappoint. Like Deckard, he's fierce and isn't afraid to do what's right. Despite being a replicant that is forced to work for the LAPD, K has been having vivid memories of himself as a child. At first, he thinks that this is merely an implant in his mind, however, he soon discovers the memories are real. This leads us to wonder if K is actually a human or if he has someone else's memories living inside his head. Supporting roles come from Jared Leto, Robin Wright, Ana de Armas, Sylvia Hoeks and Mackenzie Davis who, despite their limited appearances, give solid performances.

Overall, Denis Villeneuve's Blade Runner 2049 is a successful follow-up to the original. In many ways, it's an improvement, especially in terms of narrative and special effects. Both Ryan Gosling and Harrison Ford give great leading performances.

8/10 

BATTLE OF THE SEXES REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

In the wake of the sexual revolution and the rise of the women's movement, the 1973 tennismatch between women's World #1 Billie Jean King (Emma Stone) and ex-men's-champ and serial hustler Bobby Riggs (Steve Carell) was billed as the 'Battle of the Sexes' and became one of the most watched televised sports events of all time, reaching 90 million viewers around the world. As the rivalry between King and Riggs kicked into high gear, off-court each was fighting more personal and complex battles. The fiercely private King was not only championing for equality, but also struggling to come to terms with her own sexuality, as her friendship with Marilyn Barnett (Andrea Riseborough) developed. And Riggs, one of the first self-made media-age celebrities, wrestled with his gambling demons, at the expense of his family and wife Priscilla (Elisabeth Shue). Together, Billie and Bobby served up a cultural spectacle that resonated far beyond the tennis court, sparking discussions in bedrooms and boardrooms that continue to reverberate today.

Battle of the Sexes comes from the married filmmaking duo Jonathan Dayton and Valeria Faris who are best known for directing the heartwarming drama, Little Miss Sunshine, which also starred Carell. The pair are known for creating a drama that can be entertaining by adding small bouts of comic relief throughout, however, it still has an emotional touch. The same can be said for Battle of the Sexes. Its tone is lighthearted and is an easy watch. The issues featured, including sexism, are handled with deft assurance. Women's liberation, sexual freedom, equal pay for equal work are all themes that feature heavily within the film. Battle Of The Sexes opens with King demanding why the prize money is eight times less than it is for men to which former tennis player turned advocate, Jack Kramer (Bill Pullman), replies 'it's important that the men get more money' which doesn't make sense. There's a fine line between preaching the gospel and dictating it, however, Dayton and Faris use humour and whimsy like a balm to sooth the serious scenes. Of course, the pair want to send out messages that hit home. They show the characters and their flaws with an even hand. It's the definition of comedy and drama.

The actors are all well chosen, especially Stone and Carell, who, by changing their appearances, resemble the characters they're playing. Stone, in particular, stood out as Billie Jean King as she captures all of her mannerisms and embodies her passion for tennis. However, she soon develops a relationship with her hairdresser, Marilyn (Andrea Riseborough) that she has to hide otherwise it could jeopardise her career. Although she never comes out in the film, at the age of 73, she is now open and honest about her sexuality and is an advocate for LGBTQ+ rights. The real King was impressed with Stone's portrayal of her and said that she managed to capture her fierce determination to prove that women deserve equal rights. The relationship with Marilyn is effectively shown and both Stone and Riseborough share a lot of chemistry. Despite the love she has for her female partner, King felt conflicted as she was still married to Larry (Austin Stowell). Despite knowing her affair with Marilyn, Larry remained faithful and supportive of Billie throughout her career. I wouldn't be surprised to see Stone, who earlier this year won her first Academy Award for her performance in La La Land, nominated for an Oscar next year.

Carell's portrayal of Riggs proved to be a challenge, due to the former champions player dying in 1995. His portrayal is similar to that of the Riggs that was shown in the media, a 'male chauvinist pig' as he described himself. While Carell, unsurprisingly, brings comic relief to the role, Riggs is seen as more as an antagonist because of his many sexist remarks. Despite Carell giving one of his best performances yet, Riggs is seen as a caricature. King, on the other hand, is shown as a genuine human being. I think this is due to the writing from Simon Beaufoy. He may have failed at making Riggs a likable character, however, he has written an engaging film that avoids the pitfalls of simplicity. The build up to the big match between King and Riggs is viewed with a wide perspective.

Battle of the Sexes captures the 70s really well through the clothing the characters all wear, the setting and the music. It really made me feel like I was experiencing the 70s, not just seeing it. I think a lot of people who grew up in this era will feel a sense of nostalgia. 

All of the drama involving the character's public and personal lives all leads up to the big tennis match that takes place at the end of the film. Of course, because of the way the characters are portrayed, we want King to win, mainly so that she can finally prove that women are worthy of their rights. For those, like me, who hadn't seen the original match from 1973, will find this scene very intense as I had no idea what the outcome was going to be. Fortunately, the end result was powerful and uplifting.

Overall, Battle of the Sexes is a well-made biopic as it recaptures the titular tennis match really well and it represented Billie Jean King's character in an effective way, making us feel for her. It also shows how hard women had to work to prove themselves worthy and is an important film that needs to be seen, especially by those who still think women don't deserve equal rights.

8/10

MOTHER! REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

Director Darren Aronofsky is known for his psychological horrors such as Black Swan and Requiem For A Dream, and his latest film, mother! may be his most controversial work yet. The film premiered at the Venice International Film Festival in early September and received both cheers and boos. While most critics went on to deem it a 'horrific masterpiece', some were not so appreciative of what Aronofsky had created. However, it is those films that were initially deemed controversial and disturbing that have gone on to become iconic and known as masterpieces, including Stanley Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange and The Shining, Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho and Roman Polanski's Rosemary's Baby (which Aronofsky found inspiration from for this film). I think that, because of this, we should be giving mother! a chance and congratulating Aronofsky for having the guts to make something directors would be too scared to even try and make into a film. Yes, it is violent, disturbing and hard to watch at times but the same can be said for the aforementioned films. mother! isn't suitable for all audiences but those who love and appreciate dark, disturbing thrillers such as The Shining and Rosemary's Baby will find something to appreciate in mother!.

The plot follows a young woman, 'mother', (Jennifer Lawrence) whose tranquil life with her husband, 'Him' (Javier Bardem), at their country home is disrupted by the arrival of a mysterious couple, Man (Ed Harris) and Woman (Michelle Pfeiffer). Their personal family drama spills over into the house leading to the death of their son and a memorial service held at their house. After the guests leave, the couple who own the house end up at the center of a cult that turns their home into a warzone.

I think it's best to go in to mother! totally blind as that is what Aronofsky wanted for his audience. He barely gave any details about the plot and even the trailer raised more questions than answers. However, I think that this was a good strategy as it intrigued audiences and persuaded them to see it. Another marketing scheme included uploading mother!'s posters to Aronofsky's Twitter account. The first poster was a painting and showed Lawrence's character holding out her heart. However, Aronofsky soon pointed out there were hidden Easter Eggs and clues in the poster, vital to the film's plot. Those who are interested in watching mother! should think twice as it involves a lot of violence, especially in its third act. It's one of those films that is definitely not for the faint hearted. 

For his cast, Aronofsky has chosen four of the best actors working today including Jennifer Lawrence, Javier Bardem, Michelle Pfeiffer and Ed Harris. Both Lawrence and Bardem have received Academy Awards in the past for their impressive performances, Lawrence for Silver Linings Playbook, Bardem for No Country For Old Men. Both Pfeiffer and Harris have also been nominated for Oscars in the past. All four actors give impressive performances but none more so than Lawrence. I have supported Lawrence and seen her films ever since she gave her breakthrough performance in The Hunger Games in 2012 and she is yet to give a disappointing performance. Her ability to become her characters amazes me and the same can be said for her role as mother. mother! is shown from her character's point of view and the camera follows her around the house. This was achieved by having a cameraman walk closely behind her which meant that all the actors had to rehearse every step and movement. We feel mother's pain of having strangers in her house and we are also annoyed at her husband for not sending people away. Their house goes from being a peaceful paradise to a claustrophobic, living hell as more and more guests turn up, eating their food and literally breaking and destroying their house. This is all shown brilliantly in the third act as mother desperately walks through the house. She can barely breathe as she is surrounded by people and, because we have developed a connection with her, we can barely breathe either. It's incredibly intense. 

The main reason why the characters are all unnamed is because they're all religion-based. As Aronofsky explained, the husband is named Him in the closing credits and is the only character with a capital letter in his name because he's meant to be God. This is proven in the climatic scene when he says 'I am I'. Religious people will know that this is a line God uses in his scripture. The title, mother!, refers to Mother Nature, whom Lawrence portrays and the other characters are based on biblical characters. The couple are Adam and Eve and their sons are Cain and Abel. The house itself is Earth and we see mother's connection with it as she see visions of a beating heart. Although I'm not religious, I really appreciated Aronofsky's metaphors and allegories for how we're treating Mother Nature. As of right now, the world is in a bad state and I don't think we're doing enough to help save it. Many people may be offended by the violence aimed at mother but I can definitely see Aronofsky's message. Mother Nature has given us this beautiful world but we're destroying what she created through climate change and pollution. Hearing mother cry, 'I gave you everything! You gave it all away' is heartbreaking and it truly made me think about how we're destroying the only home we have.

mother! has been one of my most anticipated films of this year and it certainly exceeded my expectations. The evening before its release last month, I accidentally saw a spoiler which put me off watching it. However, I knew I had to watch it, mainly for Jennifer Lawrence's captivating and intense performance. Although I normally don't like these type of films, I thoroughly appreciated all the hard work that went into creating it. This is the second film of Aronofsky's I've seen (the other being Black Swan), however, I can definitely say that he is one of the most creative and visionary directors working today. I'd say that the the intensity and disturbing tone of mother! is similar to that of Requiem For A Dream. Overall, mother! is a thought-provoking product of a singularly ambitious artistic vision. 

9/10

KINGSMAN THE GOLDEN CIRCLE REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

Back in 2014, Matthew Vaughn's spy-based comedy, Kingsman The Secret Service was a huge success, both at the box office and with critics and audiences alike. This lead to Vaughn directing his first sequel, The Golden Circle, however, is it just as fun and entertaining as its predecessor?
Kingsman: The Secret Service introduced the world to Kingsman - an independent, international intelligence agency operating at the highest level of discretion, whose ultimate goal is to keep the world safe. In The Golden Circle, our heroes face a new challenge. When their headquarters are destroyed and the world is held hostage, their journey leads them to the discovery of an allied spy organization in the US called Statesman, dating back to the day they were both founded. In a new adventure that tests their agents' strength and wits to the limit, these two elite secret organizations band together to defeat a ruthless common enemy, in order to save the world, something that's becoming a bit of a habit for Eggsy (Taron Egerton).
This isn't the first time Vaughn has directed a comedy. Back in 2010, he released Kick-Ass, which was based on the superhero comic book of the same name. It proved to be highly successful. Despite this, Vaughn didn't return for the sequel which lead to Jeff Wadlow being hired to direct the follow up. Kick-Ass was a thoroughly entertaining and funny superhero film, unfortunately, the 2013 sequel was nothing more than a mess. Because of this, when a Kingsman sequel was announced, a lot of the fans were worried, however, they all breathed a sigh of relief when Vaughn confirmed that he would be directing it and I doubt they'll be disappointed with his end result. The tone of The Golden Circle is similar to that of its predecessor and those who loved the over-the-top violence will love this film.
The majority of The Secret Service was set in England, however, with the headquarters being destroyed in the first part of the film, both Eggsy and his trainer, Merlin (Mark Strong), travel to Kentucky in America to visit the Statesman, a secret American organisation. It's here they're introduced to the agents including Tequila (Channing Tatum), Ginger Ale (Halle Berry), Whiskey (Pedro Pascal) and Champagne "Champ" (Jeff Bridges). It is also here that they discover that Harry 'Galahad' Hart (Colin Firth) is actually alive despite being shot in the previous film. Unfortunately, he has amnesia and has no recollection of anything. Meanwhile, a notorious criminal mastermind, Poppy Adams has laced every drug with a toxin causing everyone who has taken drugs to fall ill before leading to a violent death. This leads to Eggsy, Merlin and the Statesman working to stop Poppy before millions of people across the world are killed.
The performances are just as solid as in the previous film. In The Secret Service, Eggsy was a troubled teenager, however, he is now a fully trained Kingsman agent. In some ways, he is now like a young James Bond as he spends the film fighting villains, flirting with women, drinking with alcohol and using new gadgets, such as a baseball hand grenade. Egerton gives one of his best performances yet since playing the titular character in the 2015 drama/comedy, Eddie The Eagle. Unfortunately, despite the impressive cast list, the majority of them are underused. Don't get excited about Michael Gambon, he's practically dead before the first half an hour. More could've been done with Tatum's Agent Tequila and Bridges' Champ, however, they're not in it that much but they still give a good performance and make the most of their limited scenes. Berry is great as Agent Ginger Ale, who is pretty much the female version of Merlin. The two work together to help Eggsy and Agent Whiskey find out more about Poppy in order to stop her. Pascal gives an impressive comedic performance as Whiskey and I wasn't expecting the twist involving his character. A memorable scene from The Secret Service showed Galahad fighting a group of men in a pub and there's a similar scene with Whiskey taking over the fighting using a lasso that can sever people.
The main villain from the previous film was Samuel L. Jackson's Valentine who, thanks to his lisp and phobia of violence, was a very entertaining villain to watch. As Poppy, Moore is less successful, however, she still gives a strong performance. Despite her sweet smile, Poppy proves to be incredibly evil. In her first scene, she drops a character into a mincing machine and, literally, makes him into a burger. This further proves why you don't want to get on the wrong side of Poppy.
A lot of people may be surprised to see Sir Elton John make an appearance and most of the comedy comes from his performance. In the beginning, he is kidnapped and ordered to perform for Poppy.
The fight sequences are just as exhilarating as they were in The Secret Service. The opening shows Eggsy fighting his nemesis, Charlle (Edward Holcroft) in a taxi through the streets of London. Other fight sequences are just as thrilling to watch and the camera thoroughly captures the action.
Kingsman The Golden Circle was certainly one of the highly anticipated films of this year and, fortunately, I wasn't disappointed. I walked into the cinema expecting a sequel that is just as entertaining and fun to watch as its predecessor and that is what I got. I think that the current percentage rating on Rotten Tomatoes is a bit harsh. The quality of the sequel may not be as good as The Secret Service, however, Vaughn has managed to re-capture what made the first film so entertaining to watch. Judging from the films I've watched in the past month or so, Kingsman The Golden Circle was the most enjoyable to watch.
7/10

WIND RIVER REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

Taylor Sheridan is best known for writing the screenplays for Sicario and Hell Or High Water, both of which were successful in terms of reception, box office and at the Academy Awards. However, for the first time in his career, Sheridan directs and his latest feature, Wind River, is a very impressive debut. I doubt those who have seen and liked the aforementioned films will be disappointed as the tone of Wind River is very similar. It's dark, grim and, at times, disturbing. While all three films can be described as crime thrillers, they're more concerned with deeply flawed and wounded characters. 

A rookie FBI agent, Jane Banner (Elizabeth Olsen), teams up with a local game tracker with deep community ties and a haunted past, Cory Lambert (Jeremy Renner), to investigate the murder of a local girl, Natalie (Kelsey Asbille) on a remote Native American Reservation in the hopes of solving her mysterious death.

Wind River begins by stating that this story was 'inspired by true events'. This makes the film all the more difficult to watch, however, it never fails to lose our attention. Every scene is just as intense as the one before it as we follow both Banner and Lambert as they work together to find out what happened to Natalie. The whole narrative is heavily driven by the two and are developed into three dimensional characters over the course of the film. This is mainly thanks to Sheridan's expert writing but also because of the two strong performances both Renner and Olsen give. Prior to their appearance in Wind River, the pair are best known for appearing in the Avengers films, however, it doesn't take us long to forget about Hawkeye and the Scarlet Witch once we first meet their characters. Renner's Lambert is a caring father but is still haunted by the death of his daughter three years earlier. Natalie's death effects him as his daughter was best friends with her and he becomes determined to find out what happened to her. This leads to him helping FBI agent, Banner, who is unprepared for what lies ahead. Despite this, she remains brave and fierce throughout. Both actors give what is probably their best performances in their career so far. Renner's best scene occurs when he talks about his daughter's death to Banner. We feel his heartbreak and makes us more sympathetic towards him.

Sheridan's screenplay has everything a murder mystery fan can expect: red herrings, belligerent witnesses, unhelpful friends and family, romance and sex and an element of personal danger for the investigators. A few gun shoot outs appear every now and again, but those hoping for a James Bond type action are better off looking elsewhere. Wind River is more of a slow-burn thriller and is focused on a gradual build up of tension until the pressure is released in a sudden burst. The narrative isn't that unpredictable and those who enjoy this genre probably won't be surprised with how things turn out in the end. However, the story is skillfully told and, in the end, there isn't any ambiguity about the crime. The revelation is told via a flashback and us, as a viewer, are privy to more information than the characters. This flashback may be difficult to watch as it features a graphic rape scene so I would hesitate before watching this. Another triggering scene shows Banner walking in on Natalie's mother self-harming. Those who are triggered by rape and self-harm may want to give this a miss. 

Admittedly, having not seen Sicario or Hell Or High Water, I wasn't sure if I was going to like this. Fortunately, Wind River proved to be better than what I expected and has now made me want to watch the aforementioned films. Sicario was directed by Denis Villeneuve and Hell Or High Water was directed by David Mackenzie, however, Sheridan proves himself to be just as capable as either of the two directors in realising his vision - the bleak, cold, snowy setting is effectively crafted and Wind River crackles with intensity when the need arises. Its narrative matches the character-based aspects with the mystery/thriller ones for a late summer experience that is compelling and moving. I can definitely see this being acknowledged by the Academy next year, it's too good not to go unnoticed.

Wind River grabs its viewer's attention by luring them into a character-driven mystery-based narrative with smart writing, two strong leading performances and a skillfully rendered setting that delivers the bitter chill promised by its title.

8/10

AMERICAN MADE REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

I hadn't heard of American Made until just last month when I saw the poster in one of my local cinemas. In all honesty, I wasn't that interested in seeing it as I thought that it looked like an average comedy. However, after it started receiving mainly positive reviews from both critics and audiences, I decided to give it a watch. American Made proved to be better than I thought it would be and proved me wrong. American Made is a biopic based on Barry Seal (Tom Cruise) who, between the late 1970s and the mid-1980s, began working for the CIA as a drug runner. People may wonder how his life was interesting enough to be made into a biopic, however, as those people will soon find out, Seal had a very interesting life. He earned a lot of money and in order to avoid jail time, he approached United States government officials and served as an informant for the DEA. 

Because I hadn't heard of Seal or his story before watching American Made, I had no idea how it was going to end. This made for a very compelling and unpredictable watch. Mainly because it was Cruise playing him, Barry Seal was an interesting and charming character to watch. Despite his previous two films, The Mummy and last year's Jack Reacher: Never Go Back being disappointments, Cruise gives a decent performance. In the late 1980s and 1990s, Cruise was better known for his dramatic roles in films such as Rain Man and Jerry Maguire. I think in both of these films, Cruise gave a very good dramatic performance and, fortunately, that's the same case here for his latest role in 'American Made'. It's not his best performance, however, it's definitely one of his better roles as of late. Solid supporting roles come from Sarah Wright as his wife, Lucy, who always stands by Barry and Domhnall Gleeson as Monty Schafer who is the CIA agent that hires Barry.

The story is told from Barry as he documents his life using a video camera and narrating certain scenes. I think that narration helps the audience to connect with Barry and hear his point of view.

As I mentioned earlier, I thought that American Made was a comedy, however, I was wrong. While there a lot of funny moments throughout, it's more of a drama-based biopic. Director Doug Liman is based known for his action thrillers such as The Bourne Identity, Mr. & Mrs. Smith and Edge Of Tomorrow (which starred Cruise). However, Liman proves that he's capable of making dramas that can be entertaining which also comes from Cruise's charismatic performance as Seal. I think that what I liked most about American Made was how enjoyable it was to watch. Most biopics are serious dramas which can make for a difficult watch. While Seal's story does end tragically, it's not sad. I didn't see Seal's death coming and it was came across as more shocking than upsetting. American Made proves that money may bring you a bigger house, cars and a better life, but, it doesn't bring happiness. Because of his death, his wife, Lucy, was forced to return to her job at KFC and look after their three young children. 

I don't know how much of Seal's story is true, however, I wouldn't be surprised if the writer, Gary Spinelli, made changes in order to create a better film as this happens with most biopic-based films. After looking up Barry Seal online, I soon discovered that Cruise doesn't bare any resemblance to the man he's portraying. Despite giving a solid performance, he was clearly hired for his star power. However, I do understand why the filmmakers made this decision as I doubt anyone would see a film with an actor that looked like Seal.

After being hired by the CIA, he soon begins working for the Medellín Cartel which was a ruthless, highly organized and much-feared Colombian drug cartel. In order to earn more money, Seal became a drug smuggler and began transporting numerous shipments of cocaine from Columbia and Panama to the United States. By successfully achieving this, Seal was earning himself as much as $500k per flight. Despite smuggling drugs into America, Seal isn't portrayed as a bad person, just simply, a flawed person who makes the wrong decisions. He just wants to give his family a good life and have a lot of money (who wouldn't?). He was eventually arrested, however, instead of a 10 years jail time, it was decided that Seal would work with the government as an informant in Columbia and Panama. Unfortunately, after his picture was publicly released, a member of the Cartel, Max Mermelstein was instructed to either kidnap or murder Seal, with a kidnap rewarding in $1m and a murder rewarding in $500k. This lead to Seal's tragic death as he was shot in his car whilst on his way to community service. 

Despite the shockingly sad ending, Doug Liman's American Made is a solid and entertaining biopic featuring Tom Cruise in one of his best dramatic performances.

7/10

LOGAN LUCKY REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

After the release of his dramatic thriller, Side Effects, in 2013, director Steven Soderbergh announced he was retiring from making feature films. During his retirement, he was the main creative force behind the TV Series, The Knick, which he directed, executive produced, shot and edited himself. However, he soon cut his retirement short and has released his first feature film in four years. However, is 'Logan Lucky' a return to form or a sign that he should continue his retirement?
Logan Lucky is a comedy-caper film about the heist of a large number of bills from the 'secure' vault at a North Carolina speedway during a major NASCAR event. The people hoping to succeed in stealing the large amounts of money are the Logan brothers, Jimmy (Channing Tatum) and Clyde (Adam Driver). However, they can't do the heist alone so they come up with a plan to break out explosions expert Joe Bang (Daniel Craig) out of prison. Also helping are their sister, Mellie (Riley Keogh) and Joe's dim-witted brothers, Fish (Jack Quaid) and Sam (Brian Gleeson).
The tone of Logan's Lucky is similar to that of Soderbergh's well-known Ocean's trilogy starring George Clooney, Brad Pitt and Matt Damon. Fans of the Ocean's films will not be disappointed and, even those who haven't seen them will find something to enjoy here. The chemistry between the characters is believable, thanks to the actors' performances. It's a fast-paced heist film and one of the most entertaining films we've had this summer, in my opinion. While the characters in Ocean's Eleven stole money for their own selfish gains, Jimmy has a more personal reason for stealing the money. He loses his job in the opening of the film and his ex-wife announces she's going to be moving away with their daughter. Distraught, Jimmy plans to hire a lawyer with the money he steals from the vault. The majority of Logan Lucky focuses on Jimmy's determination to get the money, however, the ending surprised me a lot. Despite successfully stealing a large amount of money, Jimmy decides to return the majority of it which makes him a more respectable and likable character.
Both Tatum and Driver give solid performances as the the titular brothers, especially Tatum. I've never really thought much of Tatum as an actor, however, he recently impressed me in Side Effects (which he worked on with Soderbergh) and he has proven his ability to handle comedic roles in 21 Jump Street. Despite his plans to break into a vault and steal money, he's not a bad person and is shown as a loving father and caring brother. Driver recently shot to fame as the villain, Kylo Ren, in Star Wars: The Force Awakens in 2015 and gives another strong performance as the one-handed bartender, Claude. Despite both Tatum and Driver giving solid performances, it's Daniel Craig's performance as the eccentric Joe Bang that stands out. For the past eleven years, Craig has been best known for his role as the famous spy, James Bond. It's clear here that he had a lot of fun playing a over-the-top character like Joe and his performance adds to the entertainment of the film.
Actors such as Katie Holmes, who plays Jimmy's ex-wife and the mother of their daughter, Katherine Waterston and Hilary Swank are, unfortunately, underused. These three actresses give solid performances in their limited scenes, however, I would've liked to have seen more of them, especially Waterston's character, who is a nurse and is seen as a potential love interest for Jimmy, unfortunately, she's not seen again until towards the end of the film. Seth Macfarlane's scenes as a an arrogant British business-man could easily have been cut from the film as he came across as more irritating than funny but that's probably because I'm not a huge fan of the actor.
The scenes involving the break-out of Joe Bang and the character's attempt to break inside the vault are where the film is at its funniest. At first, the Logan brothers expected Joe to use a stick of dynamite, instead, he opts for an improvised explosive device that includes packet of gummy bear sweets mixed with bleach. After noticing the brother's confusion, he proceeds to explain the science behind his IED by using chalk to write on a wall. Another funny scenes involves Clyde's prosthetic arm gets sucked up by a vacuum tube.  It's because of these scenes and others why Logan Lucky succeeds as comedy.
A lot of debate has been made about the screenwriter whose name is Rebecca Blunt as a lot of people to believe this to be a pseudonym for Soderbergh. Whether it really was him who wrote it or not (I've seen a few people suggesting it might be his wife, Jules Asner), he/she has written a thoroughly entertaining and fast-paced screenplay.
In answer to my earlier question, Logan Lucky is a return to form for Soderbergh. His previous film, Side Effects, was a dark thriller filled with twists and turns, however, Logan Lucky is a highly-entertaining heist-based comedy. Soderbergh further proves why he's one of the most versatile directors. I certainly hope that he doesn't announce he's retiring anytime soon as I would love to see more films directed by him.
For those looking for a high-octane fun film that is smartly assembled without putting on any airs, I highly recommend that you give Logan Lucky a watch. It's not Soderbergh's best film, in my opinion, I enjoyed Side Effects and his 2011 thriller, Contagion, more, however, it's certainly one of his most entertaining. Although I wasn't the biggest fan of Ocean's Eleven or Ocean's Twelve, I enjoyed Logan Lucky a lot more than I thought I would. I was pleasantly surprised at Craig's natural ability to portray such an eccentric character.
7/10

ATOMIC BLONDE REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

Earlier this year, the sequel to the 2014 action-packed thriller, John Wick, was released and received critical acclaim. While I've seen the first film, I'm yet to see Chapter Two. David Leitch, who was an uncredited director on John Wick, debuts with his first feature and the results are impressive. Atomic Blonde is the female-driven version of John Wick we didn't know we needed. Of course, audiences might be a bit apprehensive because it was only a few months since John Wick: Chapter Two was released, however, there's no need to worry as, while the two films share similarites, Atomic Blonde can stand up well on its own without the comparision.

A high-stakes, global action-thriller that takes place in the city of Berlin, on the eve of the Wall's collapse and the shifting of superpower alliances. Lorraine Broughton (Charlize Theron) is a top-level spy for MI6 and is dispatched to Berlin to take down a ruthless espionage ring that has just killed an undercover agent for reasons unknown. She is ordered to cooperate with Berlin station chief David Percival (James McAvoy), and the two form an uneasy alliance, unleashing their full arsenal of skills in pursuing a threat that jeopardizes the West's entire intelligence operation.

The narrative is far from original as it concerns an agent tracking down a list of agents which has been used in the first Mission: Impossible film and Skyfall, the 2012 James Bond film. Fortunately, the two leading performances and the action and stunt sequences make up for the weak plot. Like in John Wick, Atomic Blonde features some visually stunning imagery that makes each scene stand out. However, the contrasts are shown clearly in the streets of Berlin, where the colours are mainly bleak and grey to represent the mood of the Cold War. 

As the leading protagonist, Theron gives a committed performance and makes Lorraine a fierce individual. She spent five years developing this film and is credited as one of the producers. To prepare for the role, she even trained with Keanu Reeves, who plays John Wick, as he was training at the same time for the sequel. All the hard work has paid off as Theron gives one of her best performances since her Oscar-winning role in the 2003 film, Monster, and in the action-packed remake, Mad Max: Fury Road, in 2015. While Lorraine is fierce and isn't afraid to hold back from a kick or a punch or a gun shot, she has her weaknesses. You beat her, she'll bruise. Despite this, she always manages to get back up, which makes her a respected individual. Atomic Blonde is worth watching just for Theron's performance. James McAvoy gives a great performance as David Percival, who we're rightfully suspicious of from the beginning. After filming wrapped for Split, McAvoy started filming on Atomic Blonde straight away. Despite injuring his hand on the set of Split, he still had to endure all his action scenes. Solid supporting roles come from Sofia Boutella (as a love interest for Lorraine), Toby Jones, John Goodman and Eddie Marsan.

Because this is directed by David, who is best known for his stunts in films such as The Bourne Ultimatum, X-Men Origins: Wolverine and two of the Matrix films, it should only seem fitting that the stunts featured in Atomic Blonde don't disappoint. Fortunately, Leitch has succeeded. The film is at its best during its fight sequences as they feature impressive stunts. He doesn't hold back on the violence which is why Atomic Blonde is rated 15 (R in the US). Each fight is choreographed perfectly and, by using a stable camera, Leitch fully captures the gory violence. Atomic Blonde is not for the faint hearted.

Atomic Blonde isn't the best action-packed thriller to ever be released, however, it's still worth a watch for Charlize Theron's fierce and strong performance as the main protagonist. It has a weak beginning, however, once the action kicks in, the thrills never stop until the end credits. Each scene could've done without the soundtrack blasting, however, it doesn't damage the scene and I can understand why Leitch opted to use songs rather than scores. If you're looking for a film that features a powerful individual that's full of action and thrills and impressive stunts and visually stunning imagery, look no further than Atomic Blonde.

7/10