CAN YOU EVER FORGIVE ME? REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

For most of her career, Melissa McCarthy has become known for her comedic roles in films such as Bridesmaids, The Heat, Spy, Identity Thief and the 2016 all-female Ghostbusters remake. In her latest role, she makes the transition from comedy to drama and proves that she's capable of handling dramatic and serious roles. 

Lee Israel (McCarthy) made her living in the 1970's and 80's profiling the likes of Katharine Hepburn, Tallulah Bankhead, Estee Lauder and journalist Dorothy Kilgallen. When Lee is no longer able to get published because she has fallen out of step with current tastes, she turns her art form to deception, abetted by her loyal friend Jack (Richard E. Grant). An adaptation of the memoir, Can You Ever Forgive Me?, relays the true story of the best-selling celebrity biographer (and friend to cats).

I think that a lot of people will be surprised by McCarthy's performance in Can You Ever Forgive Me? as they're so used to seeing her in comedies and giving over-the-top performances. As Israel, she [plays the role mostly straight and it doesn't take us too long to forget that we're watching McCarthy. Grant gives a solid supporting role as her friend, Hock, and, because he's only mentioned briefly in Israel's memoir, it proved to be a challenge, nevertheless, Grant succeeds and makes Hock a charming character who brings humour. Both actors are currently nominated at the Academy Award and they are, without a doubt, the strongest aspect of Can You Ever Forgive Me?.

In the beginning of Can You Ever Forgive Me?, we see Israel struggling with paying rent and treatment for her sick cat. Her biographies aren't selling well so she takes desperate measures and sells a personal letter she received from Hepburn. While conducting research for a novel about Fanny Brice, Israel finds a letter from Brice in a book and she sells it to a book dealer who says that she would've given Israel more if it had interesting content in. This leads to Israel forging and selling letters by deceased writers, playwrights, and actors, lacing them with intimate details to command a higher price. She succeeds and begins making the most money she's made in a while but things take a sour turn when the book dealers become suspicious. Despite committing a crime, Can You Ever Forgive Me? doesn't portray Israel in a negative light as she was desperate to make money. We understand why Israel did 

Because Can You Ever Forgive Me? is set in the early 1990s, I wasn't aware of who Israel was, however, I found her story to be very interesting. Prior to watching it, I didn't know what to expect, fortunately, I was pleasantly surprised and found Can You Ever Forgive Me? to be a compelling and unpredictable watch. McCarthy's on-screen chemistry with Grant is a big highlight as it's essentially a two-character piece, with 50% of the dialogue being between their characters. Unfortunately, their friendship meets a bitter end when Hock stays in her apartment to look after her cat whilst she travels to a library to steal authentic letters and replace them with fake ones. When Israel returns home, she is shocked to discover that Hock has failed to look after her cat and ends their friendship. The scene where Israel discovers her dead cat is a heartbreaking scene as we know how much she cared for it. It also changed how we perceived Hock as he went from charming and funny to breaking Israel's trust. Although Israel is furious at Hock, she continues their partnership out of necessity. 

Can You Ever Forgive Me? is directed by Marielle Heller, whose previous feature was The Diary of a Teenage Girl, an indie drama starring Bel Powley, Kristen Wiig and Alexander Skarsgård. She makes New York City into an intimate place and manages the challenging task of exploring the subject of writing, which isn't an inherently cinematic thing, without boring her audience. With a runtime of 107 minutes, the film moves at a brisk pace and doesn't drag, which is a problem with a lot of biopics that run at over two hours. Israel's story is one that can be told effectively in under two hours. 

Can You Ever Forgive Me? succeeds mainly because of Melissa McCarthy, who, after a career of starring in comedies, gives her most impressive performance yet. The entire film is worth watching just for her portrayal of Lee Israel and her on-screen chemistry with Richard E. Grant is a highlight of the film.

8/10

VICE REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

Adam McKay can be described as a ‘Marmite’ director, meaning you either love his films or hate them. In the early 2000s, he became widely known for his comedies starring Will Ferrell, including Anchorman, Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby, Step Brothers and The Other Guys. However, in 2015, McKay made the transition from directing comedies to drama, with his feature, The Big Short, focusing on the financial crisis in America in 2005 and starring an ensemble cast that included Christian Bale, Ryan Gosling, Steve Carell and Brad Pitt. With The Big Short, McKay proved to have a unique way of telling the story and explaining the definitions of terms used in the film. For example, one memorable scene featured a cameo from Margot Robbie who, whilst in a bathtub, explains what a ‘subprime loan’ is. While his directing style received mixed reviews from critics, praise went to the acting, with Bale leaving a lasting impression with his portrayal of Michael Burry. It went on to be successful at the Academy Awards in 2016, with McKay’s screenplay, which he co-wrote with Charles Randolph and was based on Michael Lewis’ book of the same name, winning him his first Oscar. He also received a nomination for Best Director, Bale was nominated for Best Actor and the film received a nomination for Best Motion Picture.

Because of the success of The Big Short, there were high expectations for his latest feature, Vice, which stars Christian Bale as Vice President, Dick Cheney, however, since its release in America last year, it has received mixed reviews. Despite this, Bale has been praised for his portrayal of Cheney and, at the time of writing this, he has recently won the Golden Globe for Best Actor, is currently nominated at the BAFTAs and at the Academy Awards. Bale has been known to go to extraordinary lengths to portray his lengths, including weight loss and gain. In order to portray Cheney, Bale gained 40lbs and said that he achieved his hefty physique by eating a lot of pies. It is one of his most committed performances and is, undoubtedly, the strongest aspect of Vice. While it's Bale who leaves a lasting impression as Cheney, there are solid supporting roles from Amy Adams as his wife, Lynne, Sam Rockwell as George W. Bush and Steve Carell as Donald Rumsfeld. It's been revealed that Adams stayed in character during filming, especially keeping her character's distinct voice. She would even have political debates with McKay while maintaining the voice. Adams revealed that it was the first time she stayed in character throughout filming. While, in my opinion, I've seen Adams give better performances, including in Arrival which she was unfairly overlooked for at the Academy Awards in 2017, in her role as Lynne Cheney, she continues to establish herself as one of the most talented actors.

Vice is currently nominated for a total of eight awards at the Oscars this year, including Best Picture, Best Director for McKay, Best Leading Actor for Bale, Best Supporting Actor for Rockwell, Best Supporting Actress for Adams, Best Original Screenplay for McKay and Best Makeup & Hairstyling. Those who hated Vice will have trouble understanding why it's nominated for so many awards, however, I think it deserves to be nominated. Vice is the type of feature that gets recognised by the Academy, ones that are based on real people and events with strong performances and a film that overall leaves a lasting impression. It's a film that provokes discussion amongst its viewers about why they liked or hated it. Out of all of the nominations, I think that Bale is the most likely to win his award as he's the reason why most people are seeing Vice in the first place. However, I could be wrong as there are some strong contenders this year.

While I enjoyed McKay’s The Big Short, I can understand why Vice is receiving a lot of mixed reviews. However, while I prefer The Big Short, I liked Vice. If McKay had told Cheney’s story in a conventional and subtle way, it wouldn’t have made a lasting impression. It’s because of McKay’s unique directing style why it’s being spoken about a lot. That’s why I’m describing him as a Marmite director as he divides audiences, as there are those who like Vice and those who hated it. While I don’t think it’s amazing, I still appreciated McKay for what he had created. At the time of its production, he probably knew that Vice wasn’t going to be received well, however, he went ahead anyway and I respect him for that. Those who didn’t enjoy The Big Short won’t be impressed with Vice as it has a similar tone and it balances drama with political satire. I won' t say that I loved Vice, however, I don't think it's a bad film as it features a strong cast who all give impressive performances with Christian Bale leaving a lasting impression with his portrayal of Dick Cheney.

7/10

STAN & OLLIE REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

Starring Steve Coogan and John C. Reilly as the famous double-act known as Laurel & Hardy, Stan & Ollie takes an affectionate look behind the scenes into their personal lives whilst showing audiences why they were and still are known as one of the greatest double-acts in history.

Stan & Ollie is the heartwarming story of what would become the pair's triumphant farewell tour. With their golden era long behind them, the pair embark on a variety hall tour of Britain and Ireland. Despite the pressures of a hectic schedule, and with the support of their wives, Lucille (Shirley Henderson) and Ida (Nina Arianda), the pair's loves of performing, as well as for each other, endures as they secure their place in the hearts of their adoring fans.

Prior to watching Stan & Ollie, I didn't know what to expect as I hadn't watched any of Laurel & Hardy's short films or any of their sketches, however, I knew who they were and that they were considered one of the greatest double-acts and this feature shows the reason why they were so popular. At first, I was concerned that this feature would only appeal to die-hard fans, who have watched every one of their features and sketches more than once, fortunately, that wasn't the case and I was pleasantly surprised.

Throughout its 97 minute runtime, viewers are given an insight into the lives of the two comedians off-stage and when they weren't making audiences laugh in front of a camera. There are some things revealed in this feature that even die-hard fans will be surprised to discover. I'm not sure if any of what happens in the film is true, however, I can't imagine the director, Jon S. Baird, and writer, Jeff Pope, would want to make anything other than a faithful tribute to Laurel & Hardy. 

In a lot of drama films I've seen, the tone is dark, however, the tone for Stan & Ollie is lighthearted and is an easy watch. In the second half of the feature, we see Hardy struggling with his health and unable to perform on stage with Laurel. I think a lot of people in Hardy's situation would've given up, however, Hardy continued to perform with Laurel, despite doctor's concerns, and I thought that was very respectable of him and his decision showed how much he loved performing. The film ends with Hardy giving his last performance on stage with Laurel and it's quite an emotional scene. 

Finding actors to portray the famous double-act was always going to be hard, however, from the beginning both Baird and Pope said that Coogan and Reilly were their first choices. Both actors are known for their comedic and dramatic roles and, in their performances of Laurel and Hardy, they blend the two together and give impressive performances. Both Coogan and Reilly share chemistry and their friendship seems genuine. While Coogan gives a strong performance as Laurel, it's Reilly who leaves a lasting impression as Hardy. He thoroughly captures Hardy's love for performing and resembles the character really well. He's currently nominated at the Golden Globes for his performance. Also notable are Henderson and Arianda who portray the wives of Laurel and Hardy, Lucille and Ida. The latter, like her husband, is very driven and has a tough side that clashes with the former's more easy-going, but no less tough, attitude. Both women reflect their husbands' personality dynamic, however, while the men are in a physical gag comedy, the women are playing in a parallel, verbal screwball comedy. I liked this approach to their characters as it would've been boring to see wives who were one dimensional and were only there to support their husbands. 

Most biopics focus on their characters' rise to fame, however, the majority of Stan & Ollie focuses on their lives during their farewell tour in Britain and Ireland. I think that this was a smart choice as a lot of people, especially fans, will already know their story and how they became famous. We see Coogan and Reilly recreate some of their most famous sketches and performances, including 'Boiled Eggs and Nuts'. However, despite being successful in the beginning of their career, they are struggling to sell out theatres and Laurel soon discovers that there's no money for another feature. From an outsider's perspective, it can seem like Laurel and Hardy had perfect lives, however, this feature shows that their lives were far from perfect, especially with Hardy's health deteriorating. However, what I found most respectable about the pair, was that they still carried on and entertained the few audience members who were in the theatre. Despite a brief falling out midway through the film, the pair are are able to overcome their differences and forgive themselves. 

With impressive performances from both Steve Coogan and John C. Reilly as the beloved double-act, Stan & Ollie is a lighthearted biopic that captures the highs and lows of their careers. I can imagine Laurel & Hardy gaining a lot of new fans after viewers see this feature as it shows why they were so successful and popular at the peak of their career and why they're still considered one of the greatest double-acts today. 

7/10

MARY POPPINS RETURNS REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

After its release in 1964, Walt Disney's Mary Poppins went on to be a big success, both at the box office and at the Academy Awards, earning Julie Andrews her first Oscar for her performance as the titular magical nanny. Because of its success, a sequel would be released a few years later, however, the author of the books Mary Poppins was based on, P. L. Travers, was unimpressed with Disney's adaptation, she refused to give the rights for a sequel. After the author passed away in 1996, the Disney producers began thinking about the possibility of a sequel. It wasn't until 2014 when the President of Walt Disney Pictures, Sean Bailey, pitched his idea for a sequel to director, Rob Marshall. With approval from Travers' estate, Disney greenlit the project with the film taking place 20 years after the first, featuring a standalone narrative, based on the remaining seven books in the series. Marshall was hired to direct.

Making a sequel to Mary Poppins over fifty years after its release was always going to be a challenge. The original film has been deemed a classic and one of Disney's best features. The special effects were really impressive at the time too as it mixed live action with animation really well and the performances have all left lasting impressions. This lead to high expectations for Marshall's follow-up.

Mary Poppins Returns is set in 1930s depression-era London (the time period of the original novels) and is drawn from the wealth of material in P. L. Travers' additional seven books. In the story, Michael (Ben Whishaw) and Jane (Emily Mortimer) are now grown up, with Michael, his three children, Annabel (Pixie Davies), John (Nathanael Saleh) and Georgie (Joel Dawson), and their housekeeper, Ellen (Julie Walters), living on Cherry Tree Lane. After Michael suffers a personal loss, the enigmatic nanny Mary Poppins (Emily Blunt) re-enters the lives of the Banks family, and, along with the optimistic street lamplighter Jack (Lin Manuel Miranda), uses her unique magical skills to help the family rediscover the joy and wonder missing in their lives. Mary Poppins also introduces the children to a new assortment of colorful and whimsical characters, including her eccentric cousin, Topsy (Meryl Streep).

While Mary Poppins Returns isn't as good as its predecessor, it's still a great sequel and it met my expectations. It's fun, lively and there's hardly a dull moment to be found in its 130 minute runtime. The sequel features an impressive ensemble cast, who all give strong performances. While I prefer Andrews' portrayal of Poppins, Blunt does a great job and, by not attempting to copy Andrews, she makes the character her own. Miranda is a scene stealer as Jack, a lamp lighter who is friends with Poppins. Whishaw and Mortimer give solid performances as the now grown-up Michael and Jane. Walters brings comic relief to her portrayal of Elaine, the Banks family's maid. While she only appears in one scene, Streep makes an unforgettable appearance as Poppins' eccentric cousin, Topsy. Colin Firth is best known for portraying likable characters, however, he plays against type as the main antagonist,  William 'Weatherall' Wilkins, the current president of Fidelity Fiduciary Bank. Cameos come from Dick Van Dyke, who portrayed Bert and Mr. Dawes Sr in the original and returns as Mr. Dawes Jr, and Angela Lansbury who appears at the end of the film as a Balloon Lady. Originally, this part was offered to Andrews, however, she turned it down as she didn't want to steal the limelight away from Poppins, which is a very respectable decision. I think Lansbury was a great choice for this cameo as, like Andrews, she appeared in a Disney classic, Bedknobs and Broomsticks, which also combined live-action with animation. The ensemble cast is definitely one of Mary Poppins Returns' biggest highlights. 

While I really enjoyed Mary Poppins, I didn't think that there was much of a story to it, the narrative focused on Poppins taking Jane and Michael Banks on various adventures, which was very entertaining. However, the sequel's plot deals with an adult Michael who is struggling with debt and is heartbroken over the recent death of his wife and mother of his children. Two lawyers turn up at his house and declare that, if he doesn't pay back the money he owes the bank within seven days, he will lose his home. The majority of the sequel focuses on Poppins returning and taking the children on exciting adventures, with the climax featuring a race against time as the characters work together to save the Banks family home. While over two hours may seem a bit long for a family film, there's hardly a dull moment to be found and the feature is full of adventure and energetic songs. Mary Poppins Returns will undoubtedly appeal to children, however, I'm sure it will be enjoyed by older viewers, too, especially those who liked the original. The story doesn't offer anything new and it is predictable, however, that doesn't prevent it from being as entertaining as it is.

One of the most impressive aspects of Mary Poppins was its combination of live-action with animation. Since its release in the early 1960s, special effects have improved a lot, and the same can be said for the sequel. While it would've been easy to use computer generated imagery to create the special effects, Marshall chose to use hand-drawn animation, in order to pay homage to the original. The Disney executives, on the other hand, initially wanted the film to have computer animation for its animated sequences, which infuriated Marshall. He then fought hard to convince the Disney executives to let him use hand-drawn animation, and he also argued why it would be the right choice to use for the film. Ultimately, the Disney executives gave in and allowed Marshall to use hand-drawn animation for the film. The hard work paid off as the live-action/animated sequences is one of the most entertaining scenes from the sequel.

The songs in Mary Poppins were memorable, catchy and emotionally touching, especially the ballad, 'Feed The Birds'.  The music and score for the sequel was composed by Marc Shaiman, with song lyrics written by Scott Wittman and Shaiman. The score includes musical references to the songs and score from the first film written by Richard and Robert Sherman, with the former serving as a music consultant, with Shaiman stating that "if he had something that he thought should have been different or changed, he would have said so. But lo and behold, he didn’t. He was loving what he was hearing, and he really loves the new movie". I think that the new songs are just as memorable, with 'Trip Little Light Fantastic' and 'The Place Where Lost Things Go' being personal favourites. I also really enjoyed 'Can You Imagine That?', a song that takes place inside the children's bath tub and is a fun sequence. 

Mary Poppins Returns ends a year of great films on a high and, while it's not as good as its predecessor, it's still very enjoyable and is the true definition of a family film and will appeal to viewers of all ages.

7/10

GREEN BOOK REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

Green Book is a serious Oscar contender at a time when issues of racial interaction hold a significant spot in the daily news cycle and is an Odd Couple-structured feature with an overlay of social conscience. Because of its 12A rating, it's limited to how graphic it can be. It adds some comedic moments into an otherwise tense observation of injustice and prejudice in the Deep South during the early 1960s.

Set in America in 1962, Green Book tells the heart-warming true story of Tony Lip (Viggo Mortensen), a working-class Italian-American bouncer who takes on a job as a chauffeur for Dr. Don Shirley (Mahershala Ali), a highly-educated African-American classical pianist. The mismatched pair embark on a two-month tour of concert venues in the racially charged deep south and discover they're on the road to a meaningful and unique friendship.

While Green Book has recently been released in the US to critical praise, it's not due to be released in the UK until the beginning of February next year. However, I was fortunate enough to see Green Book at an advance screening and, because it was shown at a 'Secret Screening' where audience members are unaware of what they're about to watch, I was pleasantly surprised. I'd heard a lot of good things about Green Book so I was looking forward to watching it. Fortunately, it didn't disappoint and is a delightful feature that showcases the acting talents of Viggo Mortensen and Mahershala Ali. 

Since the release of Peter Jackson's The Lord of the Rings trilogy 17 years ago, Mortensen has become best known for his portrayal of Aragorn. Since the trilogy ended in 2004, he has continued to impress and has been nominated at the Academy Awards for his performances in films such as Eastern Promises and Captain Fantastic. By gaining 40-50lbs and adopting a New York accent, Mortensen is almost unrecognisable in his portrayal of Vallelonga. At the time of writing this review, he is currently nominated at the Golden Globes for his performance and I wouldn't be surprised to see him get recognised by the Academy. Ali received his first Academy Award after he appeared in Barry Jenkins' drama, Moonlight, and he has given another strong performance that could see him nominated once more. The majority of Green Book focuses on Vallelonga and Shirley and I'd say that it's worth watching just for the performances of both Mortensen and Ali.

The screenplay was written by Farrelly, Brian Hayes Currie and Vallelonga's son Nick Vallelonga, based on interviews with his father and Shirley, as well as letters his father wrote to his mother. After Shirley finished his tour, both he and Vallelonga went their separate ways but remained friends. As a child, Nick visited Shirley in his studio in Manhattan and heard stories about their trip. He remembers thinking that's an "unbelievable movie" and that he was going to make their story into a movie one day. In his 20s, Nick interview both his father and Shirley about how these two men from starkly different backgrounds navigated the racism they encountered. However, Shirley stated that he didn't want the story told until after his death. Both men passed away in 2013, and those conversations, along with letters Lip wrote his wife, form the basis of Green Book. It's a great insight into what the world was like more than half a century ago. While a lot of things have changed since then, racism is still, unfortunately, a major issue.

Green Book is a mature and heartfelt drama so it may surprise people when they learn it's directed by Peter Farrelly, who is best known for his immature comedies such as Dumb and Dumber, There's Something About Mary, Me, Myself & Irene and several others. While I haven't seen any of the features he's previously directed, I found it impressive that he was able to create a film that doesn't rely on toilet humor or gross-out gags to be entertaining. Most of the comedy comes from pieces of dialogue and Vallelonga and Shirley's mismatched relationship. A funny scene shows Shirley trying fried chicken for the first time and him forcing Vallelonga to drive back and pick up a plastic cup he throws out of the window. Balancing two tonally different genres such as drama and comedy can be tricky but Farrelly succeeds. We could be in hysterics during one scene and then feeling for the characters the next.

While character development and interaction are among two of Green Book's strengths, subtlety isn't. The feature is replete with instances of overt racism in many southern locales, from white bullies being violent towards Shirley to bigoted police officers demeaning him and 'liberal' benefactors insisting that he uses an outhouse (rather than the 'whites only' bathroom). It's these scenes that often echo to similar ones from other films. This is a repetition that speaks to how pervasive and common such instances were in the early 1960's. While I did learn about racism during the 1960s in high school, I was still shocked by how bad it was. In one scene, after Vallelonga is violent towards a police officer, both he and Dr. Shirley are sent to prison even though the latter did nothing wrong. And, despite being the main performer, Dr. Shirley is prevented from dining at the restaurant, with the manager stating that it's a 'tradition' which is an absurd excuse. During these scenes, I really felt for Shirley and I respected his character as he rarely complained. On the other hand, Vallelonga doesn't hold back and defends his boss.

Looking back at this year, in terms of films, it's been filled with a lot of sequels, remakes, which aren't necessarily a bad thing, however, I appreciated Green Book for its originality and telling a heartwarming story. It also showcases the acting talents of Viggo Mortensen and Mahershala Ali.

8/10

SPIDER-MAN: INTO THE SPIDER-VERSE REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

When I first saw the trailer for Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse a few months ago, I was, initially, doubtful and wasn't intending on seeing it as I thought it looked like it was going to be your average animated superhero film. However, after seeing the critical acclaim it has received and because it's currently nominated for a Golden Globe for Best Animated Feature, I decided to watch it. At first, I wasn't sure what to expect but, fortunately, I was pleasantly surprised and Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse really is as great as everyone is making it out to be.
The narrative introduces its viewers to Miles Morales (voiced by Shameik Moore) who, after being bit by a radioactive spider, suddenly develops spider-like powers and abilities. After discovering his powers, he meets the current Spider-Man, Peter Parker (Chris Pine). The two meet whilst Spider-Man is trying to defeat a crime lord known as Kingpin (Liev Schreiber), unfortunately, tragedy occurs and Morales must team up with other Spider-People, including Peter B. Parker (Jake Johnson), Gwen Stacy (Hailee Steinfeld) also known as 'Spider-Woman', Spider-Noir (Nicholas Cage), Peni Parker (Kimiko Glenn) and Peter Porker (John Mulaney), in order to stop the evil Kingpin from achieving his plan.
The stand-out aspect of Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is its unique animation style. Producers Phil Lord and Christopher Miller wanted the film to feel like you "walked inside a comic book", and were excited to tell the story in a way that the live-action films couldn't. With this, they have succeeded as I definitely felt like this was a comic book brought to life via the big screen. The computer-generated imagery animation was combined with "line work and painting and dots and all sorts of comic book techniques" to make it look like it was created by hand, which was described as "a living painting". A lot of effort and hard work has gone into making Into the Spider-Verse one of the most visually stunning animated films. I also saw Into The Spider-Verse in 3D and, with a lot of films, this added feature is wasted and is merely used as a way to get audiences to pay extra for 3D glasses, however, this wasn't the case here. While I'm sure it looks just as visually stunning in 2D, I'd recommend giving Into The Spider-Verse a watch in 3D.
What I liked most about Into the Spider-Verse was how well it works as a stand-alone superhero film. It does make several references to previous Spider-Man films, including the various live-action adaptations that were released between 2002 and 2017, however, these are fun references and add to its self-deprecating humour. During production, the writers had to to decide why this film needed to be made, and the answer for the creative team was to tell the new and unique story of Miles Morales, who had yet to be featured in any film. Morales is an interesting character. He is still in high school when he becomes Spider-Man so a lot of viewers, especially those who are around the same age as him, will find him relatable as he has all the normal worries, including passing exams and impressing the girl he's attracted to. He's a great leading character who is also brought to life through Moore's impressive voice acting.
With its PG rating (suitable for ages 8+), Into the Spider-Verse will appeal to the whole family as it works as a thoroughly entertaining superhero adventure. The majority of the feature has a lot of exciting action sequences and isn't too scary or violent which means children will enjoy it too. Unlike most of the previous Spider-Man features, Into The Spider-Verse has a light-hearted tone and is also very funny. Both Lord and Miller have experience working on comedies, including animated features, Cloudy With A Chance Of Meatballs and The Lego Movie and also on 21 Jump Street. The comedy mainly comes from witty lines of dialogue.
What's most impressive about Into the Spider-Verse is how fresh it feels, despite a year filled with superhero films, including Black Panther, Avengers: Infinity War, Ant-Man and the Wasp and Incredibles 2. It doesn't follow the typical narrative path that most superhero films tends to. For those new to the superhero genre, there can be a few unpredictable moments, however, comic book fans won't be surprised by outcomes, however, this doesn't mean they won't enjoy it.
Spider-Man: Into The Spider-Verse is currently nominated at the Golden Globes for Best Animated Feature alongside Incredibles 2, Ralph Breaks The Internet, Isle of Dogs and Mirai no Mirai. While I thoroughly enjoyed Incredibles 2, I would like to see Into The Spider-Verse win and I won't be surprised if it also gets recognised by the Academy next year.
Overall, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is, not only one of the best animated films we've had this year, but also a great superhero film, with visually stunning animation and is thoroughly entertaining.
8/10

RALPH BREAKS THE INTERNET REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

At the time of Wreck-It Ralph's release in 2012, Walt Disney Animation Studios were best known for their animated features starring princesses and based on fairy tales, such as Beauty and the Beast, Mulan, Tangled and The Princess and the Frog. While this isn't necessarily a bad thing, it's refreshing when the studio releases features based on original and innovative ideas, inspired by the modern day world. Wreck-It Ralph was an example of that. By focusing on a world that existed within video games, the animated feature proved to be thoroughly entertaining for the whole family. While the story focused on original characters, including the titular Ralph (John C. Reilly), the villain of the video game he appears in, the film made references to classic video game characters such as Sonic the Hedgehog, Pac-Man and Q*bert. After its release, Wreck-It Ralph proved to be a success, receiving critical acclaim and impressing at the box office. This lead to a sequel being announced and released six years later, titled Ralph Breaks The Internet. However, is it just as entertaining as its predecessor or a disappointment?

Ralph and best friend Vanellope von Schweetz (Sarah Silverman) leave the comforts of Litwak's arcade in an attempt to save her game, Sugar Rush. Their quest takes them to the vast, uncharted world of the Internet where they rely on the citizens - the Netizens - to help navigate their way. Lending a virtual hand are Yesss (Taraji P. Henson), the head algorithm and the heart and soul of the trend-making site "BuzzzTube" and Shank (Gal Gadot), a tough-as-nails driver from a gritty online auto-racing game called Slaughter Race, a place Vanellope wholeheartedly embraces - so much so that Ralph worries he may lose the only friend he's ever had.

Fans of Wreck-it Ralph will be happy to discover that its sequel is a great follow-up as it's entertaining and funny. Because the majority of the narrative takes place in the world of the Internet, many of the viewers will be able to understand many of the jokes and references. On their adventure, we see Ralph and Vanellope visit eBay and we briefly see social media sites such as Instagram, Twitter and Google. In this modern day and age, a lot of people, young and old, are using social media and the Internet so I can understand why the writers, Phil Johnston (who co-directed with Rich Moore) and Pamela Ribon, chose to have their main characters explore the universe that exists within the Internet. Over the course of its 114 minute runtime, we see Ralph go viral on BuzzzTube and Vanellope becomes enamoured by the racing game Slaughter Race and she begins to wonder if she wants to return to Sugar Rush. This all makes for a thoroughly entertaining animated feature.

Because the creators behind Ralph Breaks The Internet know that the majority of its audience will be young children, they've sent out an important message about friendship. In Wreck-it Ralph, Ralph and Vanellope's friendship is what drove the film and was a highlight as it was so unlikely, with him being a large antagonist that wrecks things and her being a sweet little race car driver. However, in this sequel, we see Ralph worrying about losing his friendship with Vanellope so he does everything he can to prevent that from happening. When Vanellope considers staying in the Slaughter Race video game, Ralph sends Insecurity Virus that replicates any flaw it finds. Unfortunately, things don't go according to plan, and he almost loses Vanellope in the process. This is when Ralph learns that he can't hold Vanellope back from her dreams and what she really wants to do. Many viewers, especially children, will have friends and, through its story, it teaches them that, in order to keep friends close, you've got to let them go sometimes. In the beginning, we learn that Ralph and Vanellope spend every evening together, hanging out in other video games, however, while it seems fun at first, it's only natural to want to spend time apart every now and again. By trying to keep Vanellope, he almost loses her. I think that this message was executed really well.

When the trailer for Ralph Breaks The Internet was released earlier this year, one of the scenes that stood out was when Vanellope meets a group of the Disney princesses including Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Belle, Ariel, Anna, Elsa, Tiana, Pocahontas, Mulan and many others. This was the scene that I, and many others, was looking forward to seeing and, fortunately, I wasn't disappointed and it is one of my favourite scenes. At the end of Wreck-it Ralph, it was revealed that Vanellope is the Princess of Sugar Rush. However, as we clearly see in this memorable scene, she's not your typical princess, as she wears a hoodie instead of dresses, doesn't sing songs or talk to animals, which makes the other Princesses doubtful until she says that people assumed all of her problems get solved because a big, strong man showed up. It's a really fun scene and made me wish for a spin-off that focuses more on Vanellope interacting with the various Princesses. 

While Ralph Breaks The Internet shows the highs of the Internet, the film proves that it's not all fun and games. This is shown in a scene where Ralph discovers the comment section after he goes viral on BuzzzTube. After a few positive comments, he soon notices a lot of negative and cruel comments which, unsurprisingly, hurt his feelings. Users of the Internet and especially social media will have encountered at least one cruel comment from an anonymous and faceless person. While it may be hard, Ralph learns from Yesss that he shouldn't pay attention to any of the negativity and it's a lesson everyone should learn. I really appreciated the writers for including this scene and for including the message of friendship within their story as they didn't want viewers, especially parents who have children and are worried about them using the Internet, walking away thinking that it's all fun and games as it isn't. If a person receives ninety-nine positive comments and one nasty comment, what they're going to remember is the latter, which is unfortunate. While people should be thinking more about what they say online, those who receive the comments need to learn to ignore it.

While there is a lot to like about Ralph Breaks The Internet, it's not a perfect feature. Vanellope's song, 'A Place Called Slaughter Race', didn't fit in with the rest of the film and it felt out of place. I understand that she was trying to sing spontaneously, like the other Disney princesses, however, it didn't work for me and Vanellope could've expressed her feelings without singing. The climax also felt like it was dragging. Because there was no main villain, I think that the writers struggled coming up with a way to end the film, so they decided to make Ralph's insecurity the main villain, which seemed like a good idea, however, I just didn't think it was necessary. Despite these small criticisms, I still enjoyed Ralph Breaks The Internet and think that it's a great follow up to Wreck-it Ralph. 

7/10

BOHEMIAN RHAPSODY REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

Not long after its World Premiere a day before its release in the UK, Bohemian Rhapsody received mixed to negative reviews from critics. This was a shock because it was one of the most anticipated films of this year. While I was disappointed by the critical reception, I still went into my screening of Bohemain Rhapsody with high hopes. However, was it as bad as the critics are making it out to be?

Bohemian Rhapsody is a foot-stomping celebration of Queen, their music and their extraordinary lead singer Freddie Mercury (Rami Malek). Mercury defied stereotypes and shattered convention to become one of the most beloved entertainers on the planet. The film traces the meteoric rise of the band through their iconic songs and revolutionary sound. They reach unparalleled success, but in an unexpected turn Mercury, surrounded by darker influences, shuns Queen in pursuit of his solo career. Having suffered greatly without the collaboration of Queen, Mercury manages to reunite with his bandmates, Brian May (Gwilym Lee), Roger Taylor (Ben Hardy) and John Deacon (Joseph Mazzello), just in time for Live Aid. While bravely facing a recent AIDS diagnosis, Mercury leads the band in one of the greatest performances in the history of rock music. Queen cements a legacy that continues to inspire outsiders, dreamers and music lovers to this day.

One of the issues critics had with Bohemian Rhapsody was that its story was formulaic. To be honest, after viewing Bohemia Rhapsody, I don't really know what they're talking about as I thoroughly enjoyed watching it. As a viewer, I'm easily pleased. All I wanted from Bohemian Rhapsody was a film that told Mercury's story and showed the highs and lows of Queen's career. That's what I got. The film begins with Mercury meeting May and Taylor, who were already in a band called Smile. After their lead singer quits as he thinks the band is going nowhere, Mercury soon joins the group and they change their names to Queen. It's from here that we see their rise to fame and how they became the legendary rock band they are known as today. The story shows that it wasn't all plain sailing for Queen. Their most successful song, 'Bohemian Rhapsody', was, at first, refused by their producer, Ray Foster (Mike Myers) as it was too long and full of nonsense. This lead to Queen quitting and proving Foster wrong as 'Bohemian Rhapsody' went on to become one of their most successful songs. The story also gives us a small insight into Mercury's personal life, including his six year relationship with Mary Austin (Lucy Boynton) who continued to support him after their relationship ended. I disagree with the critics who are describing the film's story as formulaic and I do find it a bit hypocritical, especially when many of the same critics gave Bradley Cooper's A Star Is Born a higher rating. Now, I'm not saying A Star Is Born is a bad film (I loved it), but it is a third remake of a film that was first released in 1937. Bohemian Rhapsody is a biopic that shows the highs and lows of Queen's career and gives viewers an insight into Mercury's life. I've seen people complain that the film handles Mercury's sexuality poorly but, in my opinion, I think that, just because he was a world famous musician, doesn't mean we're entitled to know everything about him. Mercury did identify as bisexual and we do see him forming relationships with Jim Hutton (Aaron McCusker), however, I don't think Mercury wanted his personal life splashed across newspapers and broadcasted on television. I think he wanted to be remembered for his music, not who he went to bed with, and that's what Bohemian Rhapsody is about. It shows how talented Mercury was as a musician and how much he loved performing. 

One of the biggest highlights of Bohemian Rhapsody is, undoubtedly, Malek's performance as Mercury. At first, I was unsure about his casting, however, he exceeded my expectations. He doesn't just act, he embodies Mercury's eccentric personality and thoroughly captures the energy he had on stage. By donning a fake moustache and teeth, he does really resemble the late singer. I'd be very surprised if Malek doesn't receive an Academy Award nomination for his acting next year. It's a very impressive performance and it's his best yet. The supporting cast all give good performances. Boynton shares chemistry with Malek and gives a strong portrayal of Austin. Lee, Hardy and Mazzello are all great as the other three members of Queen. Because the film chooses to focus more on Mercury, we don't see a great deal of their lives outside of Queen. However, I don't think May and Taylor, who were executive producers of Bohemian Rhapsody, were bothered about the film not showing their personal lives. I was impressed by Myer's performance as Foster as he was completely unrecognisable. I knew Myers was in the film, however, I didn't know who his character was until the credits were rolling up. While the supporting cast are all good and there isn't a bad performance from the cast, it's Malek who leaves a lasting impression.

Bohemian Rhapsody is at its best when Queen are performing some of their greatest hits. These scenes further prove why they were. and still are, the greatest rock bands of all time. Over the course of its 134 minute runtime, we see the stories behind their most legendary songs, including 'Bohemian Rhapsody', 'Killer Queen', 'We Are The Champions' and 'We Will Rock You'. Bohemian Rhapsody is worth seeing on the big screen just for the LiveAid sequence alone. The LiveAid concert is known as one of Queen's greatest performances. The footage of their performance is available to watch on YouTube so it's easy to compare the two scenes. The set designers built an impressive replica of the Wembley Arena, where Queen performed. For those who, like me, didn’t get to experience Queen or see their LiveAid performance, this scene gives you that experience. The scene frequently cuts to the audience at the concert and those watching the television broadcast. These cuts show how universally loved Queen were. Bohemian Rhapsody also further proves how universally loved and popular their songs are to this day, almost 50 years after they first formed. It is disappointing to see a film receive negative reviews, especially one that you were looking forward to seeing, however, no one should let another’s opinion prevent them from seeing a film. I went in expecting Bohemian Rhapsody to be a disappointment, however, I came out with a newfound respect and appreciation for Queen. I knew little about them going in and, while I don't claim to know everything just because I've seen the film, I now fully understand why they're known as one of the best rock bands in history.

​While I thoroughly enjoyed Bohemian Rhapsody, there's no denying that production wasn't easy. While Bryan Singer, who is best known for directing four of the X-Men films, is credited as the director, his on-set behaviour was shocking. It has been said that Malek grew tired of Singer's 'erratic' behaviour, which saw him routinely showing up late to set or disappearing altogether. In 2017, after Thanksgiving break, Singer disappeared from filming for three days straight, at which point cinematographer Newton Thomas Sigel had to step in and direct during Singer's non-showings. Reports claimed that Singer left because of a family matter. A couple of days after this report, 20th Century Fox fired Singer from the film due to his erratic behavior on and off set and clashes with production personnel. He was soon replaced by Dexter Fletcher who directed 16 days worth of filming and oversaw post-production. However, the Director's Guild of America states that only one director can be credited and, despite his behaviour on-set, Singer received sole credit. Tensions between cast and crew members can effect the quality of a film, however, I still found Bohemian Rhapsody to be a great film.
Bohemian Rhapsody may not be a perfect film, however, I'd say it's worth watching just for Malek's impressive portrayal of Freddie Mercury and Queen's exhilarating LiveAid performance.
8/10

FIRST MAN REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

Following the success of their six-time Academy Award-winning smash, La La Land, Oscar-winning director Damien Chazelle and star Ryan Gosling team up once again for First Man, the riveting story of NASA's mission to land a man on the moon, focusing on Armstrong (Gosling) and the years 1961-1969. A visceral, first-person account, First Man will explore the sacrifices and the cost - on Armstrong and on the nation - of one of the most dangerous missions in history.

​For the portrayal of Armstong, Gosling is surprisingly a great choice. Armstrong is described as introverted, quiet and diligent by those who know him best and Gosling is the best choice to bring that to life. He delivers an elegant and thoughtful performance that should put him right in contention for awards season next year. The supporting cast are on great form too. On the surface, this might look like Gosling's vehicle, but there are plenty of roles for the supporting cast too. Since appearing in the Netflix series, The Crown, where she portrayed Queen Elizabeth II, Claire Foy has continued to impress. Last year, she gave a strong dramatic performance as Diana Cavendish in Breathe and earlier this year, she starred in Steven Soderbergh's thriller, Unsane. Foy further proves what a talented actress she is and she gives a memorable performance as Armstrong's wife, Jan, who is caring and supportive but can be fierce when she needs to be. Corey Stroll is excellent as the awkward and blunt Buzz Aldrin and Jason Clarke is on top form as Armstrong's friend and fellow astronaut Ed White.
Despite its 140 minute runtime, there are plenty of thrills in First Man. The opening sequence, in particular, is pure heart-in-mouth action and there are plenty more of those sequences throughout the runtime. The majority of the narrative, which is written by Josh Singer and based on James R. Hansen's biography of Armstrong, does focus on his personal life, including his relationship with his wife and children. Some may think that this is boring, especially those who are only watching First Man for the breathtaking sequence when Armstrong lands on the moon. That sequence doesn't occur until towards the end of the film. Fortunately, I found Armstrong's life to be very interesting. The narrative focuses on the important events that happened in Armstrong's life from 1961 up until the moon landing in 1969. He experiences tragedies, including the deaths of his young daughter and his fellow astronauts. Experiencing these deaths, we understand Armstrong's motivation and determination to get to the moon. A concern I had, before watching First Man, was how they were going to create an story and how do you end it? I was expecting the film to end straight after Armstrong's walk on the moon, however, Chazelle chose to end it with Armstrong reuniting with Janet. I'm glad it ended this way as their relationship was an important part of the narrative and it was very touching to see them reunited.
Aside from the casting and the narrative, another impressive aspect of First Man are the lunar sequences, which are stunning. A lot of the drama is grounded in the astronauts' lives, but when it does, quite literally, take flight, it does so breathtakingly. The sequences up in space are incredible with stunning cinematography by Linus Sandgren and perfect sound design by Justin Hurwitz, a frequent collaborator of Chazelle's who also scored La La Land and Whiplash. Hurwitz's score is powerful and captures the tone of First Man. Because of this, I recommend that First Man be watched on the big screen as I think that the impact of the special effects won't be as great on a smaller screen.
The period detail featured in First Man is impressive, including the look of the clothes, the cars, the outfits, and, in particular, the spacecrafts. There's so much rich detail to take in. Also, some of the voices heard in the film are actual recordings from the space program. For example, when Apollo 11 lands on the moon, the reply from Houston is the original. It's the voice of astronaut Charlie Duke, who had the job of communicating with Apollo 11 during the landing. Neil Armstrong (Gosling) says "Houston, Tranquility Base here, the Eagle Has Landed", then Charlie Duke says "Roger, Tranquility, we copy you on the ground. You've got a bunch of guys about to turn blue. We're breathing again. Thanks a lot." Most biopics aren't as faithful to its original source and tend to feature more differences than similarities, however, Chazelle wanted his feature to be as authentic as possible.
The directing by Chazelle is also very impressive. His previous features, Whiplash, and La La Land have both been successful, in terms of critical reception and at the Academy Awards, with Whiplash being nominated for a total of five Oscars and winning three, including Best Supporting Actor for J.K. Simmon's performance. La La Land received a total of six Oscars, including Best Leading Actress for Emma Stone, Best Director for Chazelle and Best Achievement in Cinematography for Sandgren. I have no doubt that his latest feature First Man will feature similar successes. It showcases the iconic moon landing and is a great tribute to Neil Armstrong, a man who will always be remembered for making history.
8/10

A STAR IS BORN REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

Most remakes fail to capture what made the original so successful. Some people see remakes as 'unnecessary'. However, every once in a while, there are remakes that are actually as good as the original and that's where A Star Is Born comes in. The original A Star Is Born was released in 1937 and starred Janet Gaynor and Fredric March. The story surrounded a young woman who goes to Hollywood with dreams of stardom, but achieves them only with the help of an alcoholic leading man whose best days are behind him. It proved to be a huge success and, in 1938, it won the Academy Award for Best Writing, Original Story and was nominated for another six, including Best Picture, Best Director for William A. Wellman, Best Leading Actor for March and Best Leading Actress for Gaynor. 17 years later, a remake was released with Judy Garland and James Mason in the leading roles. While it didn't win any Academy Awards, the 1954 remake of A Star Is Born received a total of six nominations, including Best Actor for Mason, Best Actress for Garland and Best Original Song for 'The Man That Got Away'. Over two decades later, another remake was released in 1976, starring Barbra Streisand and Kris Kristofferson. While the quality failed to match that of its predecessors, it still received an Academy Award for Best Original Song for 'Evergreen'. Now, over four decades later, Bradley Cooper makes his directorial debut with the latest remake of A Star Is Born. However, is it a successful remake?

This new take on the tragic love story surrounds seasoned musician Jackson Maine (Bradley Cooper) who discovers — and falls in love with — struggling artist Ally (Lady Gaga). She has just about given up on her dream to make it big as a singer... until Jack coaxes her into the spotlight. But even as Ally's career takes off, the personal side of their relationship is breaking down, as Jack fights an on-going battle with his own internal demons, including an addiction to alcohol and drugs.

A Star Is Born has been my most anticipated film of 2018 ever since it was announced last year. This is because the premise sounded interesting to me and I liked the idea of Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga working together. It had its world premiere at the Venice Film Festival on August 31, and, since then, it has received a mostly positive reception from critics. Because of this and the quality of the trailer, I had high hopes. Fortunately, I wasn't disappointed and I thoroughly enjoyed A Star Is Born. Because I hadn't seen any the original film or the other two remakes, I had no idea what to expect, however, it was a pleasant surprise. 

What stood out for me we’re the performances of the two leads. Cooper gives a strong performance as Jackson Maine, a famous singer who struggles with his alcohol and drug addiction. He has a passion for music and Cooper clearly shows that. Unfortunately, his alcohol and drug addictions are taking over his life, ruining his career and relationships. What I found most impressive about Cooper's performance was his body language. When he's intoxicated by alcohol and drugs, his head is constantly looking down and he fails to stand up straight or look anyone in the eye. When he's sober, he's able to have a better posture and look at people in the eye. It's like he's a different person when he's drunk and Cooper captures that. 

While Cooper is great, it’s Lady Gaga who impresses as Ally, a shy, insecure young woman whose dreams come true after meeting Maine. The two fall in love and the story showcases the highs and lows of their relationship and Ally’s rise to fame. Cooper and Gaga share chemistry and are convincing as a couple. You can tell that Maine is in love with Ally by the way he looks at her. In the beginning, Ally isn’t sure about Maine but soon realises that she’s in love with him. What I liked most about Ally’s character was how fierce she was and how she was able to stand up and defend herself in certain situations, including a scene near the beginning when a fan of Maine's tries to take a picture, leading to Ally punching him in the face. Since Gaga started her career a decade ago, she’s become known for her extravagant and over the top make up and costumes. However, without all the vibrant make-up, we see the real Gaga and she transforms into Ally. We can see that Gaga relates to Ally and understands how she feels and that’s why she’s perfect for the role. This is definitely Gaga’s best acting performance yet.

Another aspect of A Star Is Born that impresses is the songs that feature. The soundtrack is integral to the plotline and many of the lyrics are about wanting and longing for change, but noting the struggle. Some express the great love and beautiful bond the booze-addled rock star, Jackson Maine, and singer/songwriter, Ally, have for each other. The songs are timeless, emotional, gritty and earnest. They sound like songs written by artists who, quite frankly, are supremely messed up but hit to the core of the listener. The songs also showcase the impressive vocals of its leading stars. While it's no surprise that Gaga's vocals are powerful as she's had a successful career as a singer, she still continues to amaze. Her stand out songs are 'Shallow', 'I Don't Know What Love Is' and 'I'll Never Love Again', with the latter being an emotional and heart wrenching ballad that she sings at the end of the film. I was very impressed by Cooper's vocals and thought that his best song was 'Maybe It's Time'. A Star Is Born succeeds as a musical as it features a lot of memorable songs that are powerfully sung.
The narrative for A Star Is Born is similar to the original, however, several changes have been made to give the film a more modern feel. These were good changes as it't not a direct copy of the original and it can stand on its own. I think that A Star Is Born will appeal more to those who haven't seen any of the original and are fans of Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga. Those who have seen the original and/or the remakes will find something to enjoy, however, they may find the plot predictable as they know what to expect.
A Star Is Born thoroughly captures what it's like to be famous and gives us an insight into the realities and what goes on behind the scenes. From audiences' point of view, being rich and famous may seem great, however, the story proves that being in the spotlight constantly can be difficult and put pressure on the celebrities. Jackson Maine is a famous singer, however, he uses alcohol and drugs to cope with the pressures. In the beginning, Ally is an ordinary young woman who soon becomes one of the most famous singers. After performing on stage with Maine, her singing career begins to rise and she's soon in the studio, recording her own music and winning an award. Unfortunately, as Ally's singing career becomes more and more successful, Maine continues to struggle with his alcohol and drug addictions and he is soon sent to a rehabilitation facility to try and recover. This is where most of the drama and conflict comes from as Ally struggles to balance her relationship with Maine and her singing career. I liked that A Star Is Born showed the difficulties that come from being famous as too many people think that it's easy just because you have a lot of money and fans.
A Star Is Born proves that remakes can be good and capture the quality of the original whilst being able to stand on their own. Bradley Cooper proves that he's a man of many talents as he gives a strong performance and co-writes and directs. Lady Gaga impresses in her best acting performance and amazes with her strong and powerful vocals. Overall, A Star Is Born is one of my favourite films of this year.
8/10

CRAZY RICH ASIANS REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

As of late, some romantic comedies have struggled to leave a lasting impression, due to how predictable and unoriginal they've become. The films either had too much romance and not enough comedy or vice versa. They would follow the same narrative path, making them boring and predictable. Another problem with romantic comedies is that the leading actors don't share chemistry and fail to convince as romantic partners. However, despite this, there are some romantic comedies that succeed where others have failed and that's where Crazy Rich Asians comes in.
Crazy Rich Asians focuses on Rachel Chu (Constance Wu), an NYU economics professor who discovers her seemingly normal boyfriend (Henry Golding) is actually 'crazy rich' during a trip to his native Singapore. Chu inevitably meets her boyfriend's esteemed family, only to be met with instant disapproval by her would-be mother-in-law, Eleanor (Michelle Yeoh).
It's a simple premise that has been done several times. However, Crazy Rich Asians is far from boring and is thoroughly entertaining. There's never too much romance or comedy and both feel natural, with characters falling in love and other characters dropping witty one liners. There's drama, of course, that mainly comes from Eleanor who disapproves of Rachel from the moment that they meet. Rachel also struggles to impress the rest of Nick's family with only his cousin, Astrid (Gemma Chan), being friendly towards her. Because of this, Rachel feels like a fish out of water in a country she's never been to and in homes the size of a palace and we feel for her.
One of the best aspects of Crazy Rich Asians is its ensemble cast. Prior to watching the feature, I was only familiar with a few of the actors that appear, including Michelle Yeoh who gives a strong performance as Eleanor, Nick's mother who disapproves of Rachel from the moment she meets her. Awkwafina previously appeared in Ocean's 8 alongside Sandra Bullock and Cate Blanchett and, as Rachel's friend Goh Peik Lin, she continues to impress with her witty one liners. Ken Jeong is best known for appearing in the Hangover trilogy, however, while he only makes one small appearance, it's memorable. Gemma Chan was also a familiar face due to her appearances in the Channel 4 series, Humans, and in an episode of Doctor Who. Recently, she's made her transition to the big screen and, as Astrid, she gives a good supporting role. While the supporting cast all give strong performances, it's the two leads that stand out. Constance Wu is perfect as Rachel and makes her a likable protagonist. She tries her hardest to appeal to Nick's family, even if they don't approve of her. She's honest about her background and isn't ashamed of it, which I thought was very respectable. Henry Golding brings a natural charm to Nick and proves himself to be the ideal boyfriend as he stands by Rachel. Both Wu and Golding share chemisty which makes their relationship all the more convincing.
As I've mentioned earlier in my review, romantic comedies can be very predictable as they tend to follow the same narrative path. While this may work for some films, after a while, it becomes boring. Crazy Rich Asians is probably one of the best romantic comedies we've had recently as it doesn't stick to that 'romcom' formula. Because Crazy Rich Asians is aware of what type of film it is, the film's producers use that to their advantage. They know that most romantic comedies contrast the life of one ordinary soul with the extravagant life of another, and, in Crazy Rich Asians, they take it to the extreme, pushing palatial settings, expensive finery and bountiful buffets to the forefront of every scene in an attempt to overwhelm you with the extravagance of it all. There are a few twists and turns in the story that keep it from being boring and predictable. All of this is why Crazy Rich Asians stands out from average romantic comedies.
Crazy Rich Asians may be a light hearted romantic comedy, but its cultural significance can't be understated. Not only is it the first American-made film since 1993's The Joy Luck Club to feature an all-Asian cast, it also boasts more than 70 speaking roles for Asian actors and shows characters speaking their native dialect, which is a rarity in Hollywood films. Quite rightly, the film and its producers have earned praise from critics and audience members alike. Now, just because a film breaks new cultural ground doesn't mean that it's automatically worthy of praise. But films like Crazy Rich Asians and Black Panther help promote a fairer, more inclusive Hollywood.
Crazy Rich Asians stands out from other romantic comedies as it's fully aware what type of film it is, and it uses that to its advantage. The film's producers know that a lot of romantic comedies contrast the life of one ordinary soul with the extravagant life of another, and here they take it to the extreme, pushing palatial settings, expensive finery and bountiful buffets to the forefront of every scene in an attempt to overwhelm you with the sheer extravagance of it all. All of this makes it a feast for the eyes, too, as Chu and cinematographer Vania Cernjul ogle a smorgasbord of mansions, yachts, skyscrapers, restaurants, planes, boats and cars. There are a few scenes that show the main characters eating traditional Asian food so it's best not to watch this on an empty stomach.
The main reason why I enjoyed Crazy Rich Asians is because it's a very enjoyable film that is likely to leave you with a smile on your face. However, I also liked it because of it offered a thoughtful commentary on key issues such as wealth inequality and racism. The film makes a point to contrast the Young family's incredible wealth with the working class support staff who make their meals and clean their houses; yet at the same time they acknowledge the fact that the Young family need their wealth to defend themselves from outside threats. I noticed that one reviewier of Crazy Rich Asians pointed out that, while money can't solve racism, but it can help solve the problems racism might throw up in your path. Balancing the film's inherently fun nature with its social commentary can't have been an easy feat, but it seems the filmmakers have pulled it off with ease.
I'd only heard about Crazy Rich Asians a few weeks ago after its impressive success in America. It's being released in the UK later this month so, if you enjoy romantic comedies, I highly recommend you see this as it's one of the best I've seen recently.
8/10

INCREDIBLES 2 REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

Those who know me will know that The Incredibles is my all-time favourite Disney/Pixar feature. Because of this, you can imagine my excitement when the director, Brad Bird, announced in 2014 that he would be releasing a sequel to his superhero-based animated feature. Fourteen years after its release and the wait is finally over. 

Everyone's favorite family of superheroes is back in Incredibles 2 - but this time Helen (voice of Holly Hunter) is in the spotlight, leaving Bob (Craig T. Nelson) at home with Violet (Sarah Vowell) and Dash (Huck Milner) to navigate the day-to-day heroics of "normal" life. It's a tough transistion for everyone, made tougher by the fact that the family is still unaware of baby Jack-Jack's emerging superpowers. When a new villain hatches a brilliant and dangerous plot, the family and Frozone (voice of Samuel L. Jackson) must find a way to work together again - which is easier said than done, even when they're all Incredible.

While it's been released to impressive results in the US, Incredibles 2 isn't released in the UK until next month, on July 13th. I was expecting to see it then, however, my local cinema announced they were holding a 'Secret Screening' of a film, which meant audiences wouldn't know what they were watching until the film started. As I sat down in my seat, I wasn't expecting it to be the sequel to one of my favourite films so I was so incredibly happy (no pun intended) when Incredibles 2 popped up on my screen. With a lot of sequels, they tend to disappoint, due to it lacking quality of its predecessor. Fortunately, this can't be said for Incredibles 2 which lives up to expectations and is just as action packed and entertaining as the previous film.

Sequels that are rushed and released within a few years of the first film tend to disappoint, however, because Bird took his time with the sequel for The Incredibles, the overall result is successful. Over the years since its release, Bird has discussed ideas for a sequel but didn't want to rush it and wanted to make sure he had the perfect story. He didn't want to retread the first film, instead, he wanted to pick the film up from where it had left off, with the family of superheroes fighting the Underminer, who makes his appearance right at the end of the first film. This was a good idea as it doesn't feel like fourteen years have passed since we last saw the superheroes. 

The plot for the first film involved Mr. Incredible returning to his superhero lifestyle and he got the most of the action, whilst Helen was the stay-at-home mother, looking after the children. After Mr. Incredible gets into trouble, we do eventually get to see Elastigirl in action as she uses her super stretching abilities to save her husband. Those who wanted to see more of Elastigirl in action will not be disappointed with this sequel. In the first film, superheroes are deemed illegal due to the many lawsuits they faced and the damaged they caused. After failing to capture the Underminer, the family are forced to resume their ordinary lives and, due to the events of the first film that led to their home being destroyed, live in a motel. However, Mr. Incredible, Elastigirl and Frozone are contacted by Winston Deavor (Bob Odenkirk), the owner of DEVTECH, who is also a big superheroes fan. He proposes a publicity stunt to regain the general public's support of supers. Because Elastigirl is considered to be the least destructive of the three, she is selected to undertake the stunt by openly fighting crime in New Urbem. This means that Mr. Incredible will have to be the stay-at-home parent and, in the beginning, he finds this very difficult, due to Violet's boy troubles, Dash's maths homework and the new found discovery of Jack-Jack's powers. This is where the majority of the humour comes from and I'm sure a lot of parents will be able to relate to Bob's struggles as a single parent.

Meanwhile, Elastigirl is enjoying being a superhero once more, however, she soon discovers that there is a villain, known as the Screenslaver who is causing chaos with mind controlling abilities. This becomes her main focus as she is determined to find out who is behind the Screenslaver's mask. Unfortunately, things go wrong leading to Elastigirl succumbing to the Screenslaver's mind controlling powers. This leads to Mr. Incredible, Frozone, Violet, Dash and even Jack Jack teaming up to defeat the Screenslaver. The sequel also introduces us to new superhero characters, including Voyd (Sophia Bush), who can create voids where objects can appear and disappear; Krushauer (Phil LaMarr) who has the power of telekinesis; Helectrix (LaMarr) who has the power of controlling and projecting electrical currents and Reflux (Paul Eiding) who is an elderly Super who has the power of heaving hot lava. While these new superheroes don't get as much screentime, I would like to see them in a future sequel as they each are interesting and have unique superpowers.

We're only six months into 2018 and we've already had our fair share of superhero films released with Marvel dominating the genre and box office with their releases of Black Panther, Avengers: Infinity War and Deadpool 2. However, Incredibles 2 proves that there's still room for animated and family friendly superhero films. At the time of writing this review, Incredibles 2 has been released in the US for less than a week and it's already made close to $300 million. With its release in the UK approaching, I'm sure it'll continue to become more successful.

A problem with many animated films is that they are aimed more at young children which mean that adults, who are watching the film with them, may find it boring and predictable. However, one of the praises that most Disney/Pixar films have receive is its ability to appeal to the whole family. They are the definition of family films as there's something for everyone to enjoy, including humour, action and a story that's easy to follow. The same can be said for Incredibles 2. Teenagers will be able to relate to Violet and her relationship issues with Tony Rydinger (Michael Bird), a boy she's had a crush on since the first film. Children will find Dash's energetic behaviour and Jack Jack's powers funny and parents will be able to relate to Bob's struggles of looking after the children alone. 

Despite the impressive success Incredibles 2 has received, it's hard to say whether a third film will be released. The film ends with the family preparing to save the city once more as they don their black masks which could be a hint that there's more to come. A post-credits scene also shows that the Underminer is still at large so, if a third film was to be released, it could focus on the Incredibles defeating him once and for all. While I'm unsure about a third film, it's definitely something I'd be happy to see.

Overall, featuring plenty of action and humour, Incredibles 2 is a sequel that lives up to expectations and doesn't disappoint. 

8/10

A QUIET PLACE REVIEW

*MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS*

If you know me, you'll know that I'm a wimp when it comes to horror films. However, when I saw the trailer for A Quiet Place, I knew I had to see it. The trailer showed a family who lived in silence, in order to hide away from monsters who hunt by sound. The thought of having to live in total silence really interested me as we live in a world that is filled with sound. It's hard to imagine a world without sound, however, John Krasinski's directorial debut helps us to picture it. At the time of writing this review, A Quiet Place has received positive reception from both critics and audiences. Could this really be one of the best horror films?

Two parents, Lee (Kransinski) and Evelyn (Emily Blunt) Abbott  do what it takes to keep their children, Regan (Millicent Simmonds) and Marcus (Noah Jupe), and soon to be newborn safe in a world full of creatures hunting every sound they can hear. Not a sound can be heard from the family hiding in silence, but all it takes is one noise and everything can go wrong. The family are mourning the loss of the youngest child, Beau (Leon Russom), who, after discovering a loud toy rocket, is tragically killed in an instant by an monster. With a newborn baby on the way, the family must take extra precaution in order to keep themselves safe.

Although I haven't seen many horror films, I have to say that A Quiet Place may be the best yet. A lot of criticism I've heard aimed at horrors is that they show 'too much violence and gore' rather than focusing on its story. They're more interested in scaring its audience rather than making a good film. Fortunately, the same cannot be said for A Quiet Place. The premise is simple and easy to follow. Make a sound and you'll be killed. The story focuses on the family of four, soon to be five, which includes teenager, Regan, who is deaf. Lee spends a lot of time trying to fix her hearing aid so she can listen out for the monsters. Because of Regan's hearing impairment, the family are able to communicate through sign language and they've come up with various ways to prevent noise: walking barefoot slowly on sand and using lettuce leaves as plates and eating with their bare hands. Lee has also discovered that, when covered by the sound of waterfall, they are able to speak normally without the monsters hearing them. This makes them a respectable family as they make smart decisions and have learnt how to live without the monsters discovering them. A lot of horror films tend to feature characters that stupid decisions and, because of this, we find it hard to root for them. In the beginning, when poor Beau is killed, I did wonder why Evelyn didn't carry her son home, however, she questions herself later on in the film. A few people did question certain aspects of the film, however, I think that's what I liked most about A Quiet Place as the story was so thought provoking. I'm sure a lot of viewers were wondering if they would be able to survive in a world without sound, I certainly was.

Like I mentioned earlier, this is Krasinski's directorial debut and it's an impressive one at that. Since it began in 2005, he has become best known for portraying Jim Halpert in the 'mockumentary'-based comedy, The Office. I was a fan of the series when I first began watching it a few years ago and, to be honest, I never would've guessed that Krasinski would be a talented horror director. He knows how to grabs an audience's attention and never let it go until the end credits. The story is unpredictable throughout and we never know who is going to survive and who isn't. As well as directing, Krasinski gives his best dramatic performance yet. Although he has managed to protect most of his family, he is still terrified and works hard to make sure everyone is safe.

As well as Krasinski, the performances are all great. Blunt is one of my favourite actresses and I'm yet to see her give a disappointing performance. I do think that her this may be her best performance so far. We learn early on in the film that she's pregnant and, of course, the thought of going into a painful labour and bringing a crying baby into the world is a scary thought. Her best scene is when she's in the bath tub and, although she's in excruciating pain, she is trying her hardest not to make a sound. It's an incredibly tense scene and works because of Blunt's brilliant performance. It's not surprising that both Blunt and Krasinski work well together and make a convincing couple, considering they're married with two children in real life. The two share a heartfelt scene where they slowly dance to music that's playing in their earphones. Both Jupe and Simmonds are brilliant as the two children, especially Simmonds who, like her character, is deaf in real life. I'm glad Krasinski chose a deaf actor as it makes the performance all the more convincing. 

A Quiet Place is not for the faint hearted. There's jump scares throughout and the film has its fair share of violence and gore. A scene involving a character and a nail that's sticking out on one of the stairs is painful to watch. If you're squeamish, I'd suggest giving this a miss. Because I'm not the biggest horror film fan, I did find A Quiet Place tough to watch. My heart was racing throughout, however, that's the sign of a great horror film. Because its only 90 minutes long, it moved at a brisk pace, however, it ended very quickly. At the time of writing this review, a sequel has been announced. Whether it'll be based on the same family or a different set of characters, I'm not sure. In all honest, I hope it focuses on the same family as the ending leaves us questioning. I would also like to see Krasinski return to direct as he really captured the dark and intense tone and I don't think any other director will be able to create a sequel that is half as good as what he's achieved here. 

Overall, A Quiet Place is probably one of the best horror films we've had in a while as it features a compelling and thought-provoking premise, smart characters and strong performances from its cast. John Krasinski proves he's more than a character from a popular sitcom and showcases his talent as a director and an actor.

8/10