Sunday, 29 September 2024

Shaun of the Dead (2004)

 The first part of the Cornetto Trilogy is an ‘homage’ to the horror films that were made by George Romero. Having not seen the ‘of the dead’ series of films all the references that are littered throughout this film are lost on me. The setup of the film is that Shaun (Simon Pegg) and his friends are trying to survive a Zombie Apocalypse and get his girlfriend back who has recently dumped him. 

The film is funny because the film doesn’t take itself too seriously. There are plenty of references to George Romero films that most people would get and that is perhaps another reason why people would like this film. Having not seen these films, I still find the film entertaining and that shows why this film is so good. 

The performances are really good with Simon Pegg being a notable highlight. Even though he isnt the most successful person in the world. There is a likeable quality about Shaun, he does try to do the right thing but just seems to find being next to Nick Frost’s character as the easy approach. Nick Frost is funny in this film but he is one of those people that can be annoying at times. His character is suppose to be a stoner waste of space and yet becomes quite useful as the film progresses. When he turns into a Zombie it is handled quite well and nobody plays a monkey as well as Nick Frost. The other performances are all work and no one lets the film down.

Shaun of the Dead is a funny and entertaining film. Whether it’s the best film in the trilogy is something that is open for debate. Personally I think that Hot Fuzz is the better film but this is still a great film with great performances and shows that you can do horror comedies well. Admittedly the film hasn’t aged that well in some respects but in terms of humour and pacing, this film continues to be an entertaining film.

Monday, 16 September 2024

Speak No Evil (2024)

Be careful of remakes. Especially if the remake is of a film that only came out two years ago. I saw the original when it came out and liked it very much so my eyes rolled into the back of my head when I heard this film was coming out. Also the fact it was a Blumhouse production didn’t fill me with confidence because they aren’t known for subtle horror. I rewatched the original to try and be able to compare the two which might be unfair to both but I felt it was needed.

In the original a Danish couple are invited to a Dutch couple house after they became 'friends' on holiday and things go wrong pretty much straight away. In this version, a British couple invite an American couple to their isolated farm and things go strange very quickly.

GOOD POINTS

Good Performances from the adults

The central performances were really good with McAvoy being the best of the four adults. Never thought he was great as Charles Xavier in the X-Men films but he showed another side in this film. Mackenzie Davis was good as someone who felt like she wanted to do the right thing but seemed restricted. Scoot McNairy was also good as the husband who didn’t want to rock the boat or stand up to McAvoy’s character. All four of the performances work well together and this adds to the tension that runs throughout the film even from the very first scene.

Fixing the Bunny Rabbit Problem

The reason for the family returning after sneaking out always bothered me in the original but they fixed it in this film. In the original it seems like it is a normal toy but in this version it’s the daughters emotional support so it can’t really be replaced providing a decent reason for returning.

Enough mix of original and new

I always think if you're going to remake something then do something different and there are enough different things in this film that make it feel new but enough of the elements from the original to feel like it has done something new but not rubbishing the original and that's not an easy thing to pull off. I was happy that there were things that I recognised but not too much. 

Isolated Setting

I’m always a fan of isolated settings and the change from the original is moving the story from a cabin to an isolated farm. Simple idea but it’s used effectively and felt very claustrophobic in the third act. Apart from the opening part in Tuscany (?) and a scene at a resturant, the film takes place largely in one location and there is always something tense about the country that this film uses well.

Nice Atmosphere

The whole atmosphere and vibe was really good. It wasn’t as dark and grim and the original (more on that in the bad points) but it still had the same atmosphere they you would expect in a horror film and that with the performances help create a film that stands on its own compared to the original.

BAD POINTS

Disappointed with the ending

The ending was too upbeat for me. Having seen the original which has the nice couple stoned to death and the daughter becoming part of the psycho family minus her toy he whereas in this version they all drive off into the sunset.

This is probably harsh on the film as most people probably haven’t or won’t see the original so on its own merits it’s a fine ending but I think that horror films work better when they have a more downbeat ending.

OVERALL

I was sceptical when this was announced as Hollywood remakes of foreign language films rarely turn out better than the original but I did like this more than the 2022 version. I still like the original but found things just worked better for me. James McAvoy is a bit of a hit and miss actor for me but I thought that he excelled in this role. I hoped that he would be good based on the trailer that I saw and he didnt disappoint. It's not been as good as year for horror films as I would have liked but Speak No Evil manages to be as of writing the best horror film of 2024. Well acted, well structed and well directed.

Wednesday, 11 September 2024

The Critic (2023)

This was a preview screening and the last time I attended a preview screening it was 'Fly Me to the Moon' which had a decent crowd. The number of people attending this screening at 7:45pm on a Tuesday night? 3. Not the best indication of how many people are interested in this film. The set up of the film is that Ian McKellen plays Jimmy Erskine who is a theatre critic and when he gets sacked from the newspaper he works at, he hires an actress who he has routinely rubbished to seduce the editor of the newspaper so he can blackmail him and get his job back.

GOOD POINTS

Good Central Performances

Ian McKellen is always worth the price of admission alone and despite my issues with the characters, I thought he was fun to watch. Gemma Arterton was perfectly fine as Nina but I do wonder what she saw in the role that made her agree to do it, The thing about Nina was that she was a likeable person but she could have put up more of a fight against Erskine. Mark Strong is another actor that can always be relied upon to deliver a solid performance.

Looks Very Nice

This film looks very nice and I believed that we were in the 1930’s. It feels like a lovely world to be in even though this time period has been done to death but the cars are lovely to look at, the costumes are very nice  the interiors are all very much of the period but this is me struggling to find things to add in the good section,

Alfred Enoch (almost) steals the show

He’s not one of the biggest names in UK film or television but Alfred Enoch gives a very good performance as Tom who is the secretary/lover of Erskine. He appears and then disappears for a while before coming back to be the person that almost steals the show. He works very well with McKell

BAD POINTS

Too Slow

The film has a slow pace and normally I don’t mind that but I have to feel like it’s building up to something and the film took way too long to get to that. The film had a running time of around an hour and 40 minutes and yet I don’t think it was until the hour mark that the film felt like it was heading to something.

Average Plot

Aside from the slow pace, the plot is the biggest weakness. The idea of someone blacking their boss and using an adversary as an ally could have been a good idea but it’s sort of used as sub plot to deal with the fall out. Again if the plot had been structured better then it would have worked out better and if the film had been given maybe another 10-15 minutes then things might have worked out better. 

Rushed End

I read in the IMDB that they reshot the ending and it shows. In no time at all, Tom admits what he and Erskine have done and Erskine is in a prison cell writing a letter to Tom saying that he is being left out of it and gets to live in Erskine’s house and become his beneficiary. There is no time to take in the downfall of a figure like Erskine and thats a shame. Again if the plot were better then we would have got a more satisfying ending 

OVERALL

I wanted to like this movie more than I did. I think that if this film were on at Christmas on TV then I would say it was very good but I found myself wondering just what this was doing in a cinema. I thought that it was one of the more disappointing films that I have seen at the cinema this year.

Sunday, 8 September 2024

Beetlejuice Beetlejuice (2024)

This film is easily my most anticipated movie of the year. This is also the third part of my ‘Film coming out in 2024 where the previous instalment came out at least 20 years ago. The previous films in this series are Beverly Hills Cop: Axel F and Twisters. It was nice to see the screening quite full with about 70 people in for a 1pm Saturday showing. Easily the best attended film I have sat through this year.

36 years after Beetlejuice, we see Lydia who is now a drug dependant TV star who presents a paranormal show when she gets word that her father has died and takes her daughter Astrid back home and things go strange from there. 

THE GOOD POINTS

Michael Keaton

Keaton feels like he is having the time of his life playing Beetlejuice this time. Having watched Beetlejuice the day before seeing Beetlejuice Beetlejuice it was obviously the same performance with the same enthusiasm but it seems like he is having fun playing it this time. There are a couple of musical moments from Beetlejuice which made me chuckle the first time and in the church it was a surprise.

Other Central Performances

Winona Ryder manages to make the Lydia we see in this film the older version of the one we saw in Beetlejuice. The relationship between Ryder and Ortega is a nice one as its believable that there is friction between the two but at least there is a relationship that doesn't feel too dissimilar to the one between Lydia and Delia. Jenna Ortega was perfectly cast as Astrid and she's written in a way that makes her sceptical to her mother's day job but doesn't make her come across as an unlikeable.  Ortega probably got cast because of Tim Burton's involvement in 'Wednesday' but I still think that she's a very good actress and there were a couple of times when she smiled and I thought it was a weird to see her not have a dour look on her face but she manages to hold her own with memorable characters and also Beetlejuice.

Catherine O'Hara is very good as Delia. Like Ryder, she seems to be playing an older version of Delia instead of a new interpretation. She's not quite as vain as she was in the first film but she's changed enough to still seem like the original Delia. When she is introduced she is in some horrible looking art gallery so has managed to carve out a career which didn’t seem likely in the first one. Justin Theroux is ok as Rory but does seem to be just there as people are running around. He has things to do but compared to other characters, he doesn't seem quite as good. Monica Bellucci is the villain Delores and while she doesn't have much in the way of dialogue, she still comes across as a decent baddie and something to drive the story. Willem Dafoe is always great in whatever he is in. I think this is the third time I have seen in 2024 and each performance is really different to the other and equally as impressive. He is one of those actors that can deliver a great performance in whatever he is in.

Practical Effects

I had heard that Tim Burton wanted to use practical effects instead of relying on CGI. This is always a good way of making movies because practical effects more often than not age a lot better than CGI. Rewatching the first film, it’s amazing how the effects stand up. The effects used in this film are really good and even though there are special effects used they are kept to a minimum (I suspect) and the practical effects have their day in the spotlight. 

Seemed like they cared

Sometimes when a film comes back after a prolonged period of time, it’s easy to see the film as basically a cash grab. Trying to squeeze a few dollars/pounds out of a nostalgic crowd but whilst that might be the case with the executives at Warner Brothers, it does feel like everyone involved in the production cared about what they were doing. Tim Burton cared about this world and that is whilst there are enough references and nods to the previous film, things have been updated for a modern audience.

Wedding Scene

The whole wedding portion of the film is probably my favourite of the entire film.  There have been a few films recently where the film just sort of ends and doesn't have a big final confrontation but we definitely get that in this film with all the main characters converging on the church. The use of MacArthur Park was used in a superb way. 

Soundtrack

Its something that has stood out to me more a lot recently and even though the songs used is kept to a minimum they are good enough for me to buy the soundtrack. Always happy to hear Tragedy in any form, Right Hear Waiting by Richard Marx is funny when it comes out of Michael Keaton's mouth and as I just wrote, MacArhtur Park is the best song in the film. 

Right amount of Beetlejuice

One of my genuine worries going into this film was whether they would overuse Beetlejuice. He was only in the first one for about a quarter of an hour in a 92 minute film. I feared that they would stick him in way too much just to please a new audience but thankfully even though I think he is in it for way longer than was in the first film, it always feels like he is there for a reason. 

Charles (a.k.a The Elephant in the Room)

The absence of Geena Davis and Alec Baldwin was to be expected because of Alec Baldwin's legal troubles and although I though that there was a chance we could get a Davis cameo. It was always interesting to see how they would deal with the absence of Jeffrey Jones. They deal with it in a creative way. They killed him off but they could have just had a throw away line but instead of this they went to animation to show the death happen and then his body appears throughout the film. Not sure who did the voice but I thought the fact they incorporated it into the story like they did was a big plus point.

Beetle Baby

This felt like vintage Tim Burton. Its fair to say that Burton hasn't quite been on the sort of form that he was on in the 1980's and 1990's but he is back in this film and the peak of this is the Beetle baby (not sure what the correct term would be). It's genuinely a creepy baby and the way its introduced into the story is nightmare fuel. The return at the end was unexpected and also reminded me of how creepy the doll was. The unexpectedness along with the appearance works to make it just as effective.

Bob

R.I.P Bob. I was quite sad when Bob has his souled sucked away. Despite not having any words, he is a likeable character and I wish he would have survived to the end.

THE BAD POINTS

Some plot strands didn't work

So there was the Astrid falls for Jeremy and there is his plan to use Astrid's soul so that he can get back to the living after killing his parents and slipping which led to his death. This plot end abruptly like it didn't really matter. There was the Delores plot strand which whilst it did seem the most important because it featured in the trailers. There was Beetlejuice trying to marry Lydia again and Lydia trying to rescue Astrid before she boards the soul train. A lot going on and it could have been cleaned up a bit. Maybe just having Lydia trying to rescue Astrid would have been the best singular plot.

Pace slowed a bit

There was a part in the middle for about 10 minutes or so where I felt the film wasn't working for me and it was just because it felt like it was plodding a little bit. My mind did wonder a little bit but thankfully it wasn't too long before my attention returned to the film.

Film sort of ends.

Perhaps my biggest issue with the film is that the film sort of just ends. After Beetlejuice is defeated there is a rushed montage of events where Lydia and Astrid go travelling, Astrid falls for some guy playing Dracula and then has a baby which turns out to a fake out and then the credits start. The previous one has a upbeat clear cut ending, this ending suggests that there could be another one. I think that the film would have been better had they come up with a clear cut ending.

OVERALL

I was so happy when this film turned out to be as good as I hoped. I tried to keep my expectations in check but when Beetlejuice is one of your favourite films then its hard to keep expectations at a reasonable level. The film delivers something that might be tipping over to nostalgia but I don't care. I think that despite the few minor flaws with the film, this is a very good Tim Burton film and I hope there aren't any more because I am not sure that they could get away with it.

RATING - 4 out of 5