IT (2017)

IT is one of those novels that people hold in quite high regard. Never read the book but only aware of it because of Tim Curry’s version of Pennywise the Clown from 1990. The film explores the group of friends known as the losers as they are haunted by a creepy looking clown. The film does a good job in establishing each of the kids with a fear. This is the way that Pennywise can get involved in their lives.

The bullies are all completely unlikeable as they should be. Most times they start off evil and over the course of the film either get their comeuppance from the good guys or they meet a grizzly ending but on this occasion they never get much comeuppance but that gets dealt with in part two but in 2017, there was no guarantee that this would have led to a sequel so it was a brave thing not to have the bullies meet a definitive end.

There are some good effects mainly the blood bathroom scene where Beth gets drenched in what appears to be blood. That scene looked incredible and the idea that her father cant see it and fair play to the actor for pretending that there is no blood. There are some other good effects but they mainly take place inside Pennywise’s lair.

The performances from the kids are quite good. I thought that they all worked well with each other although I thought Mike was the least fleshed out and I never really thought that he was as involved in the group as the others. I think that Mike has a greater role in the second one. Bill Skarsgård is really good as Pennywise. Of all the roles that you could take on, there are less daunting ones that Pennywise which is arguably one of the most well-known roles in horror. It reminds me of Jared Leto after Heath Ledger played the Joker, but Skarsgård manages to pull of the seemingly impossible. It’s a very different version of Pennywise to what Tim Curry did and yet its still creepy. There is more of a child-like vibe in his performance compared to Curry’s.

I really liked this film when I first saw it. Having watched it again, I don’t think it’s as good as I first thought. I still enjoyed it and think that its better than the second one but my opinion has changed in just a few years. The final act of the film was very good but that’s because everything went completely crazy and still holds up. Chapter One is the better film.

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016)

Rogue One was the first of the spin off films made by Disney after it brought the rights and the warning signs for what was to happen in Solo were right here in the production. Gareth Edwards was chosen to be the director having done well with Godzilla but there were reports that there were some issues during editing and so it was amazing that this film turned out to be as good as it was. How would a film set in the Star Wars universe work without following the known narrative.

This tells us how the rebellion got the plans for the death star in Episode IV. Its funny how a single line spawned a movie. One of the things I liked about this film was that it tried really hard to tell its own story but doing enough to make sure it tied in with the events of Episode IV.

Guy Henry is used to help with the recreation of Governor Tarkin who was played by Peter Cushing. Henry has most recently been in a show called Holby City in the UK and its obvious as to why they chose him as his mannerisms are quite similar to Cushing’s. The effects used to recreate Peter Cushing isn’t always a success. They use the same technology to give us a younger Leia which does work but its only brief.

Mads Mikkelsen pops up at the beginning as Galen Erso. I liked the character because he is forced to design something evil and gets his own back on the Empire by building a flaw in it that will be used. Mikkelsen is always good in what he does and continues it here. Donnie Yen plays Chirrut Imwe and I think he’s really good in the Ip Man films. Despite Darth Vader being the most notable villain in this film, he’s not really the most interesting. I thought that Ben Mendelsohn was really good as Orson Krennic. He has ambition and is trying to impress the Emperor yet is almost butting heads with Tarkin.

Felicity Jones is the lead of this film and does very well. I think had her character not been so important to the overall story of the Rebellion then her death would have been the wrong way for her story to end but as it is the sight of her standing in the water just as the explosion blast is about to overwhelm her is the perfect way to end.

What makes this film stand out against Solo is that its more anchored into the Star Wars universe and features the Death Star and Darth Vader. Whilst its not a perfect film, I think there is a lot to like and a perfect addition to the Star Wars chronology. Its got good characters both on the good side and bad side of the force and its very well directed and shows that Gareth Edwards can handle big budgeted films just like he did with Godzilla although I think Godzilla is a better film.

Jason Bourne (2016)

Matt Damon returns to play Jason Bourne after wrapping up the trilogy in 2007. The studio thought they could get along without Damon and what we got was a very boring Bourne Legacy. Thankfully Matt Damon and director Paul Greengrass have returned and it was always going to be interesting to see how Jason Bourne would be nine years after the last film. 

Damon’s first scene sees him arrive in the middle of a fight, take one punch at someone and then leaves. It pretty much shows that Jason Bourne is back within five minutes. Then we meet Julia Stiles’ Nicky who I was never a big fan of. I don't think she’s a bad actress but I just dont think there is much to her. It seems that they only bought her in so they could kill her off. Despite having very little dialogue, he does his acting by just using his face and at times his fists. He can still do the fight scenes well enough and the film is far more interesting when he is on screen.

Riz Ahmed plays Aaron Kalloor who is a Steve Jobs/Mark Zuckerberg type figure who has this technology. He appears like he wants to do the right thing but is being forced to put his morals to one side for the sake of national security. It’s a different way of portraying a rich tech guy but it never feels like it works despite Ahmed’s best efforts. Alicia Vikander is the one that is tasked with tracking down Bourne along with her boss Tommy Lee Jones who spends the entire movie looking like he would want to be anywhere but in this movie. Vikander is very good and does a better job of working with Matt Damon’s Bourne than Nicky ever did. 

The entire Athens scene was great and shows that Paul Greengrass still knows how to put together action scenes. In fact there are a lot of scenes that show how good Paul Greengrass is and if I was being harsh then I would say that the main issues with this film is that you have seen this film before. The great scenes are worth the price of admission but when the story moves to Las Vegas then it does become generic action film. I remember when Bourne was effectively responsible for revitalising James Bond and the reason why we got Daniel Craig instead of more Pierce Brosnan.

It won't be a shock to say that this is way better than The Bourne Legacy in every way imaginable but it isn't as good as any of the original trilogy. You have seen this sort of thing done better in the previous film but if this turns out to be the last time that we get a Bourne film then at least it will have ended on a good if not great note. It does seem to end with the possibility of another one but to be honest I think that this should be it. We now live in a world where The Bourne Legacy isnt the last Bourne film and we should be grateful for that.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)

The film starts during the big fight from Man of Steel but we see it from Bruce Wayne’s perspective which I thought it was quite good because it sets up why the two biggest names in the DC Universe are fighting each other.

This is the first appearance for Ben Affleck as Batman and to be honest, I thought he was quite good and thought that it was a brave thing to introduce a new Batman during one of the most important films for DC. It also introduces Wonder Woman, Aquaman and The Flash for the upcoming Justice League film. It does feel at this point that they are rushing through their version of the Avengers films which is worrying.

As well as introducing a new Batman, they introduce Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman. Quite why this film is called Batman v Superman when Wonder Woman plays just as important a role in this film as the other two. Gadot is sidelined for most of the film until the final act and this relates to my point about DC rushing these stories because Gadot would get her own film the year after BvsS came out and I think that would have made me care more about Wonder Woman a bit more but here even though she’s quite involved in the story (sort of) there is no information about her just questions.

Like Man of Steel, this film is frustrating. I’ll be honest that my expectations weren’t as high as for those who have been waiting this for years to see Batman and Superman go at it but whilst they were met the one thing that ruins this film is Jesse Eisenberg. Now every single time he is on screen he is annoying and ruins any goodwill that most people would have to this film. For some reason they asked him to play Mark Zuckerberg but with more personality and forgetting he needed to be a credible villain. That’s not the only reason. There are other frustrating decisions made such as why the big fight between Batman and Superman is ended when they discover they discover their mothers have the same name.

Then there is the big monster that they have to fight which just looks like a CGI mess and all the destruction that occurs just looks a giant mess that I have no interest in.

The decision to kill Superman was an odd one to me because no one is going to believe that they are going to kill one of their key characters off and the very last shot before the credits roll is of the dirt on his casket rising which even though it’s a brief moment, completely eliminates any questions about whether he is dead or not.

This film has a lot of ambition, not only does in introduce Ben Affleck as Batman but it introduces several key characters and tries to set up the story arc and tries to do it all in 2 hours and 20 odd minutes. If Man of Steel could be accused of stretching things out to fill the running time, then this one can be accused of the opposite. Too much means that there is little time to properly introduce things and give it a satisfactory conclusion. I didn’t hate BvS when I first saw it and I still don’t hate it, I just find it frustrating in different ways to Man of Steel.

10 Cloverfield Lane (2016)

I remember seeing Cloverfield in the cinema and thinking that it was really good and always hoping that a sequel would happen. As the years progressed, those hopes started to go away thinking it would never arrive but then out of nowhere it did and eight years after the first one, we get a sequel of sorts. The story follows Michelle who gets in a car accident and is rescued by Howard who is keeping her in his bunker because an attack happened outside. What the film becomes is a question about who is the monster, whats outside or whats inside the bunker.

The film largely works as a three hander because all we have is John Goodman (who is brilliant), Mary Elizabeth Winstead as Michelle who is just trying to get out of the bunker and is also very good especially when she is against John Goodman. The third person is John Gallagher Jr as Emmitt who does feel like the third wheel but does freshen things up although he is slightly expendable.

The problem with this film is that the ending feels bolted on. From what I have read online, the original story was just the bunker stuff and then JJ Abrahams’ production company got hold of the story and added the Cloverfield bit onto it. He would do this with the Cloverfield Paradox to less successful results but in the case of 10 Cloverfield Lane it does feel like they just about get away with it even though I cant get rid of the feeling that the ending is bolted on.

10 Cloverfield Lane would still be a very good film even without the Cloverfield stuff and that is how good I found the film. The performances were really good and also the directing made certain moments of the film feel tense.