Bloody Bond; Kingsman: The Secret Service.

You can watch my youtube review HERE!!!

Kingsman: The Secret Service is the latest film from Matthew Vaughn based on a comic by Mark Millar (like Kick-ass). The film stars newcomers Taron Egerton and Sophie Cookson with Colin Firth, Samuel L. Jackson, Mark Strong, Sofia Boutella, Michael Caine, Mark Hamill Corey Johnson and Jack Davenport. The film follows young hoodlum 'Eggsy' as he's introduced to the world of the Kingsman, a debonair spy organisation his father was a part of who must stop world famous Billionaire Richmond Valentine from cleansing the world of its human virus.

Kingman is what your get if you take the insane ridiculousness of the Roger Moore and Pierce Brosnan Bond films, gave it a more adult rating and if it actually made a lot of sense. Matthew Vaughn's latest like all this films is bombastic, full of energy, wit with a touch of the sadistic and a whole lot of style. With his latests Matthew Vaughn embraces the tropes of his genre and manages to make it feel fresh and a whole lot of fun.

Now the cast of the film is excellent. Newcomers Taron Egerton and Sophie Cookson prove to be talents to keep an eye on and I particularly like how Cookson's character manages to sidestep the tropes that generally go with her archetype. Colin Firth is as good as ever and it's rather delightful to see Mark Strong not playing a bad guy though I would have liked to have seen him in more action scenes. But MVP of the film is Samuel L. Jackson who delivers a pitch perfect performance as the hilarious yet threatening Richmond Valentine who happens to have a lisp.

Now the film isn't perfect. With it's B-movie premise its logic is questionable but the way Vaughn handles the material makes you forget and gets you wrapped up in the insane fun of it all. The film is fantastically shot and edited with one of the best actions scenes of the past few years (If we don't include the Raid films) along with a great soundtrack. With a great sense of sadistic wit, style and a solid character arch, Kingsman is a film that has me looking forward to a possible sequel!

4 out of 5 stars.

Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.

More like 50 shades of nay (no): 50 Shades of Grey

You can watch my youtube review HERE!!!

I don't think 50 Shades of Grey needs much introduction but if you have been living in a hole for the past few years or actually living a fulfilling life I'll give you a quick briefing. 50 Shades of Grey started as Twilight fan fiction, then one day E.L. James transferred her fantasies into a book (with some name changes) and it exploded like an atomic bomb that attracts money and kills brain cells. The book now adapted for the screen under director Sam Taylor-Johnson with the lovely Dakota Johnson in the lead and Jamie Dornan as every woman's abusive fantasy.

The main draw of the novel of the was James' description which I can't say was well written, in fact I'd say is rather insane but for some reason the women of the world found to be exciting. But the thing is, when to take written text and transfer it to a visual medium you lose all that description that stimulated the imagination. So with that out of the film does it really hold up? 50 Shades as a film has always been rather gimmicky to begin with; you can basically call it the BDSM movie or Porn for people who don't know how to find their way around the internet. I'll comment on those scenes briefly but really I'm just going to talk about hos it actually works as a...movie.

Once you take away the sex scenes and the fact that the movie is called 50 Shades of Grey it's really just a very simple romance story; a rather unoriginal, dull and mediocre romance story but a romance story nonetheless. The film follows college senior Anastasia Steele (Johnson) as she meets and develops a relationship with young billionaire Christian Grey (Dornan) who has a dark past and even darker pleasures. There really isn't anything special about this story, it really could have been any romance script with just some added BDSM, the fact that it's called 50 Shades of Grey really just gets butts in the seats.

Now the film is actually well made, Sam Taylor-Johnson knows how to put things together with Seamus McGarvey who is a great cinematographer and Danny Elfman's score is quite fantastic while being very different from what he has done before. Dakota Johnson is actually quite good in her role even though the dialogue is quite terrible and cliché but Jamie Dornan on the other hand is as bland as a block of raw tofu. There has been much debate as the whether the film and book are misogynist; it's written by a woman, it's biggest fans are women but it features a rather abusive relationship. When you take the ending of the film into account I don't think it really is misogynist but the character of Christian Grey is still an abusive man...and that is apparently appealing to women.

I actually think if the film wasn't trying to be faithful to the source material and had a script that took the basic outline and actually explored the idea it could have been a decent film. Really it just needed to be fresher and have much better dialogue. I was expecting this to be absolutely terrible and was hoping for another Showgirls situation but I was surprised that I didn't hate it. I definitely don't think it's good in fact I was bored throughout the whole film save for some comedic moments  both intentional and unintentional. Really, having seen the film I just don't really get what the big deal is from either points of view; it's just a well made but boringly told film that really has nothing going for it especially when you can find much racier things in foreign films.

2 1/2 out of 5 stars.

Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.

Fantastic Mr: Foxcatcher

You can watch my youtube review HERE!!!

Sorry that there's been a bit of gap between my written reviews again, I've been a bit busy organising a video shoot which I just completed while also editing lots of videos for my youtube channel. If you do enjoy my reviews check out my youtube CHANNEL which is always up to date with reviews (unlike my written reviews) along with other videos I do.

Foxcatcher is the latest and third (fictional) film from American auteur Bennett Miller (Capote, Moneyball). The film is based of the harrowing true events between Mark and Dave Schultz and John Du Pont and stars Channing Tatum, Mark Ruffalo and Steve Carell with small roles from Sienna Miller, Anthony Michael Hall and Vanessa Redgrave. Now it has been about three or four weeks since I've seen the film so I hope I do it justice since it's not as fresh in my mind, that being said it has stayed with me for quite a bit of it.

Struggling financially, Olympic gold medallist Mark Schultz accepts an offer from John Du Pont to train at his estate to qualify for the next Olympic games; both men are trying to rise above the shadows of family members they find themselves under. Bennett Miller's film examines masculinity, the disillusionment of the American dream and the psychology of broken men, one who happens to be rather disturbing.

What stands out the most from Miller's film is the atmosphere; it's dark, cold, oppressive and unnerving. Bennett Miller directs the film with a gentle touch which makes every gut punch all the more powerful. With gorgeous cinematography from Australian cinematographer Greig Fraser who frames stunning compositions and a hauntingly atmospheric score from Rob Simonsen and West Dylan Thordson. But the power of this movie really comes from the actors and the three leads are absolutely fantastic though I'm still confused why Carell was nominated for best actor when he really is supporting and Tatum is the lead.

The actors are the core of this film. Channing Tatum is fantastically subdued (like most of the film) as Mark Schultz and though he is incredibly subtle you're able to see everything that is going on in his head and what a broken person he is underneath all that muscle. Carrel's role is a lot more showy than Tatum's hence more recognition and though it still deserves the praise I don't think Tatum should be overlooked the way he has been. Ruffalo is also brilliant, being the heart of the film you feel his absence when his not on screen and I'm sure that reflects the feeling of the characters too.

Foxcatcher is a film that washes over you and stays with you for hours. Though you see a lot happen there's a lot more implication and mystery than what is shown on screen and you're left trying to piece together what people in real life weren't even able to do. This film is strangely unnerving and a puzzle you want to solve but will never be able to; it's something that can't be made up but you'd never think could happen but it did and that's what makes it all the more frightening and chilling. If you don't know what happened if real life I'd recommend going into the movie without knowing as it'll be even more effecting than it already is.

4 out of 5 stars.

Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.

I Will Walk 500 Miles And I Will Walk 500 More: Wild.

You can watch my youtube review HERE!!!

In 1995 a young woman decided to walk more than a thousand miles on the Pacific Crest Trail as a way of healing life's hurts. This young woman is Cheryl Strayed and she recounted that journey in her memoir which would become the basis of the film Wild. Wild is the latest film from Jean-Marc Vallee (Dallas Buyers Club) produced by and starring Reese Witherspoon with Laura Dern, Thomas Sadoski, Gaby Hoffmann and Keene McRae in supporting roles.

When we first meet Cheryl Strayed we find her at an unknown point in her journey; she takes out one of her toe nails and loses a shoe down a mountain, life hasn't exactly gone her way. We then flash back to the start of the journey where she was recently divorced and still hasn't gotten over the loss of her mother before that; life hasn't exactly gone her way. With Wild we explore someone who has been beaten down by life and herself with a lot of this is shown (quite well may I add) through flashbacks which inform greatly on our protagonist's current circumstance and the battles in her mind.

Reese Witherspoon gives an incredibly layered and broken performance aided by fantastic editing that brings Vallee's vision together perfectly. The cuts between the action and flashbacks work to make Witherspoon's performance even stronger basically putting the Kuleshov Effect to good use. There's a very interesting article on the film's editing on Film School Rejects so I'll attach the link HERE!  Laura Dern is also fantastic, filling her character with a warmth and sincerity that is incredibly infectious.

There's a great advantage to this film being set in the wild (pun slightly intended) and that is the gorgeous locations caught even more gorgeously by Yves Belanger. Belanger has stated that around 95%  was shot with natural lighting only really using film lighting for several interiors; this was a technique Belanger and Vallee used for Dallas Buyers Club though though more for economic reasons than the creative reasoning behind this film. But like I said it looks gorgeous with some of that praise going to the natural beauty of the locations.

As things go I have to say this was one of the most emotionally engaging films of 2014 with several moments of beautiful honesty, but with the lack of a narrative driving the story the pacing is rather slow. This does hinder the emotional experience at times and also the fact that our protagonist is an incredibly flawed character who kind of dug her own hole but in the end we're all flawed, some just more than others. As emotionally affecting as Wild is it didn't completely grab me and blow me away, I'd definitely call it a pretty great film but not an amazing one.

4 out of 5 stars.

Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.

Sniper No Sniping: American Sniper.

You can watch my youtube review HERE!!!

American Sniper is the latest film from Clint Eastwood, starring Bradley Cooper and Sienna Miller. The film is based on Chris Kyle's biography of the same name and explores his exploits as America's most lethal sniper with the most confirmed kills. We see Chris Kyle over several tours in Iraq along with his home life once those tours are over and the post traumatic stress disorder he begins to deal with.

Now American Sniper has been a polarising film both critically and politically (mostly politically). Since I am not American (or well educated in politics) I won't really dig into that aspect of it. Critically it has been met with mostly favourable reviews but there's a divide between those who think it's amazing and those who think it's rather standard fair...I am a member of the latter group. Don't get me wrong I think Clint Eastwood can be a brilliant filmmaker but his last great movie was Gran Torino...and that was in 2008.

As things go, Chris Kyle himself was a rather controversial figure. He was what you would call a hardcore patriot; someone who would give their left nut and life for their country and would see the enemy as alien and not one bit human. Because this film is portraying Chris Kyle as who he was it may seem like the film is saying it agrees with his beliefs; the truth is it doesn't. Clint Eastwood approaches his subject with a very clinical and procedural approach that I wouldn't really call inspired but it in no way glorifies the subject's stand beyond portraying how he viewed the world.

With politics out of the way let's get into the actual film. Like I stated earlier I fall into the group that sees this film as a solid one but in no way deserving all the buzz it currently has. With all the praise it had going into the cinema I was expecting a deep look into the psychology of a man and the toll war took on him (a la the Hurt Locker) but instead I found it to be only skin deep; interested in only presenting the man an not really exploring him. To compare it to another recent film I would have preferred if Eastwood handled the film with the same touch Bennett Miller used for Foxcatcher (review will be up soon) because he knew how to really dig beneath the skin and into the minds of his characters.

Bradley Cooper is the MVP of this film, delivering a fantastic performance that makes this decent yet uninspired film worth the ticket price. He is able to bring out in his performance what Eastwood's filmmaking is unable to do though if they were both at the top of their game it could have been even better. The film is well shot with good cinematography and even better editing which keeps the pacing moving; even though the film is over two hours I didn't think it felt long all. The script was well written but like Eastwood's direction I felt that there was a lot more it could have explored and said that it didn't end up doing. Also the rather contrived and not entirely true rivalry with an Iraqi sniper didn't really work for me.

For me I don't think this is a bad film at all, I liked it and think it's a step towards a return to form for Eastwood (depending on how many years he has left). I think with all the fuss being made about the film it should have been something a lot more substantial; when I get into a conversation about it with a friend there really isn't that much to talk about, all I say is that it was good...but not great.

3 1/2 out 5 stars.

Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.