I know, I know! I cannot believe I haven't been to the cinemas in ages! Alright, y'all need an explanation and I think this meme explains it the best:
Yes, I'm part of the small percentage of new graduate teachers around the world who have just received a real taste of full-time work. Although I am thankful for the work, I have been a little upset that I haven't seen a movie for/with you guys in a while. Here's a list of trailers of movies I wish I saw when they came out:
GUARDIAN OF THE GALAXY
LUCY
THE HUNDRED-FOOT JOURNEY
And here's a list of movies I'm hoping to see in SEPTEMBER:
IF I STAY
THE GIVER
THE MAZE RUNNER
Realistically speaking though, I'll probably only see one of these...but who knows? I mean, I DO get school holidays as well! Hahaha!
Aiight, I hope the update was enough for y'all - I will get to the cinemas, I just don't know when! But y'all know when I update my reviews!
Everyone knows the legend that is wrapped
in one name: Hercules (Dwayne Johnson). Son of Zeus; Hated One of Hera; Sport
of the Gods; Strongest of all men. His twelve labours match no man’s
achievements. They testify to his strength and his prowess as a demigod.
But what if the legend is all that he is?
What if the legend is merely a story? What if Hercules is only a mere whisper
to the ear?
Did such a myth ever truly exist?
The Story
The premise of this retelling of the Grecian
hero is that Hercules was a simple man who achieved many things. His glory was
achieved by many men (and a woman) rather than on his own. In this story, we
see that the twelve labours are not what they seem, just as much as Hercules is
not who he appears to be. In the process of serving a striving ruler, Hercules
and his might warriors find themselves in the middle of a civil war that has
the past, present and future colliding. Suddenly, in his darkest hour, Hercules
completes the twelve labours that reality spawns from myth; here, Hercules is turns
legend into truth.
I enjoyed watching this movie a lot! The
first reason is that it’s not at all the myth of Hercules, in fact is about how
the myth was birthed and prolonged – and ideally how it came to be true. I
loved the fact that Hercules was not just the name of one man, but rather the
name of many men. From the get-go you realise that it’s not about a hero, but
the fact that anyone can be a hero. The second reason I loved this movie is there’s
no love interest. Taking from the original text, this film picks up somewhere
in the middle where Hercules had and lost his wife and children – creating a
mystery as to how he lost them in order to add to the legend. The third and final
reason I love this film is for its simplicity. It didn’t try to portray a man
larger than life, but rather a man getting by in life.
I also liked that Hercules struggled with
anxiety from the trauma of his loss. I liked that this weakness was framed in
the context that it’s a personal labour that he must conquer – something that
he must gain closure for. I’m a bit at odds with whether the military formation
was more Roman than Grecian, but in saying that, I really enjoyed seeing
ancient military tactics that I read about back when I was in high school.
The Cast
Dwayne Johnson was a great
Hercules. He was believable in his seriousness and light-heartedness, even in
his spurts of comedy. Much like his character, Johnson was well supported by Ian
McShane, Rufus Swell, Aksel Hennie, Ingrid Bolsø Berdal and Reece Ritchie.
McShane being the wise seer of the pack, along with Ritchie’s youthful antics
and powerful “wordsmanship”, provided much of the comic relief with their
little quips about death from the former and witty retorts from the latter. Boslø
Berdal and Swell were the serious and sarcastic additions to the pack who kept
Hercules intact. Although Hennie only had one intelligent line the entire film,
when he did deliver it, it was powerful and meaningful in the father-son-like dynamic
between Hercules and Tydeus.
John Hurt and Joseph Fiennes play
very interesting characters as they portray two fairly similar rulers. Both
were believable and incredible contrast to each other and to Johnson. The power
dynamic between these three characters is incredible.
Rebecca Ferguson also did an
incredible job of being the wife and mother that Hercules’ lost. Not that their
was any interest projected by the two characters, but rather a common ground in
the loss of loved ones and a hope that comes with overcoming such tortures.
Ferguson portrayed a friend and sister – if anything an added member to the
comrades – rather than a possible love interest.
Aussie, Stephen Peacocke, receives a
special mention for his sound performance in his first motion picture. Though
his accent was a little unclear, he delivered his lines with conviction and
even with a slight hint of humour. Kudos mate!
Overall
It’s a well-written, well-executed and beautifully
casted film. There’s enough action to keep you buzzing, enough emotion not to
miss a side-line love story, enough comedy to have you smirking and enough
heart to have you swelling with communal pride. I recommend it for all ages –
but if you get a little sick with the sight of blood, be prepared to shut your eyes
tight. It’s one for the history nerds – represent!
Annie (Cameron Diaz) and Jay (Jason Segel)
have been happily married for some time now. But living a happily married life
isn’t the same as having a happy and active sex life. When they find themselves
in a rut in that particular level of intimacy, a night of passion turns into a
night of possible permanent public humiliation. With Annie’s prospects of an
awesome job on the line, will Jay have what it takes to save both their
reputations and their marriage?
The Story
This film opens with flashbacks of the
evolution of Jay and Annie’s sex life via Annie’s narration as she blogs. The
premise of the film is the struggle of keeping the fire alive after children
enter the picture. This evolution sees Jay and Annie go from a burning bush to
a dwindling flame and eventually, ashes of the campfire. The trouble begins
when Annie and Jay try to revers the clock by lighting a match and throwing it
into the ashes when they record themselves making love. But instead of bursting
into gentle flames, they spark a bushfire as Jay forgets to delete the video.
In a panic to save their reputation – and Annie’s career prospects – the couple
set out to erase their video from estranged iPads given to friends, family and
the mailman. But with a mysteriously conniving “text-assassin” is thrown into
the mix, the stakes rise to a whole new level.
I personally thought that the movie opens
and closes very boldly in the sense that it was borderline pornographic – but of
course you’d expect that from a film titled “Sex Tape”. Yet, regardless of how
it starts and ends, I thought the in between was realistic in its portrayal of
the loss of passion after the your marital status goes from “husband and wife”
to “mum and dad”. As the film progresses, you know, just much as Annie and Jay
do, that a sex tape won’t fix the bigger issue; you feel for the couple both in
their endeavour to reignite their passion and in their pains as they go through
damage control.
As the two go about their demolition
hunt, and have their true feelings about the issue come out into the open in
the process, other elements come into the mix that have you laughing and
cringing along with the characters. I enjoyed how writers, Kate Angelo,
Nicholas Stoller and Segel himelf, portrayed a marriage that was strong but not
getting the much needed intimacy – both through verbal communication and sexual
passion – through the business that comes with life, rather than just focussing
on the fact that Jay and Annie haven’t ‘done it’ in a while. I also loved portrayals
of other couples and their marriages along with how children shake up their
previous lives. These dynamics are then used as set-ups for twists that occur
later on in the film. I also thought the interlocking of the porn-industry was
very clever. I particularly loved that they don’t make excuses for the industry,
but instead make a powerful statement about why it exist.
The Cast
Cameron Diaz and Jason Segel carry
their chemistry from Bad Teacher
straight into this film. There is no denying that they completely compliment
one another in both the comedic aspects as well as the more serious elements of
the film. There’s an ease to their exchange in dialogue and their physical
theatre – especially with the endeavours that they attempt for this film.
Rod Corddry and Ellie Kemper
heighten the comedic element of the film as they produce even more comic relief
beside the existing quips delivered by Diaz and Segel. The four of them support
each other so well that you can believe that they are the perfect
couple-friends that will go through everything and anything together – even if
it meant you couldn’t look at them in the eye ever again.
Overall
Although I thought the story was well
written, I thought there were a lot of risqué scenes in this film. I do
acknowledge that this film gives a fair warning with its title, nevertheless, I
really don’t think they needed to show us some of the snippets from the actual
sex tape that was created – not just because they were borderline vulgar, but
the angles were unrealistic if the iPad was propped from a single position (no innuendo
intended) and the video was unedited. This film is definitely and adults only
film. Although the film has a family unit, it is in no way G-rated – so do not
watch this with children under the age of eighteen present in the room.
Being diagnosed with cancer isn’t everything in life
– well, at least not for someone who’s dying anyway. Hazel (Shailene Woodley)
never saw herself as extraordinary or even slightly special. She’s a teenager,
who so happens to have cancer – bummer, but that’s life – her life. But when Augustus Waters (Ansel Elgort) comes along,
suddenly having cancer isn’t so bad; suddenly there’s a little more living in
dying.
The Story
Based on the bestselling novel by John Green, the
film is pretty much accurate in terms of plot. For readers, some things like
Gus’s ex-girlfriend and extended family members are edited out, but otherwise,
everything else that you love about the book is in there.
For those who have never read the book, think of it
as an amalgamation of Twilight (minus
the vampires and werewolves) and My
Sister’s Keeper – so, it’s a tear-jerking cancer story with a slice of
romance intertwined. Thus, if you cry easily, take a box of tissues with you
(but believe me, it’s NOT at all as tear-jerking as My Sister’s Keeper).
I know a lot of people say that the story is not
completely centered on the fact that the characters have cancer, but let’s face
it, without the fact they have or have had cancer, they a) would not have met (in
the way they did anyway), b) would not have a ‘unique’ story and c) John Green
would not have a popular book. Let’s face it, the biggest “cancer perk” of this
book-film is the fact that the Romeo and
Juliet aspect of this film is cancer. I don’t mean to rant, but truth be
told, the story is great because of it’s simplicity – two kids with cancer,
they fall in love regardless of their circumstances and they embrace their deal
in life, no matter how short it is.
Since the film is so close to the book, I have to say
that the reason why I think The Fault In
Our Stars works is not at all
about the “falling in love” aspect of the book – had Hazel and Augustus been just
friends I still this the book would have been great! The greatness of this book
comes from the raw nature of how each of the characters you come across, along
with their little quirks, deal with the concept of having cancer. As a mother,
father, child, friend, author, doctor, stranger – they all come face to face
with the question of, “How would you react if you had or knew someone with
cancer?” This book answers that question in various ways, which is makes
cancer, living and death so profound in its scope. So I urge you to remember
that when you watch this film, it is
a movie about cancer just as much as it’s a movie about two teenagers falling
in love. Cancer is not who they are, it’s what they have – just as much as love
in its various kinds.
The Cast
Shailene Woodley unfortunately missed
the mark for me in this film. Although her portrayal of Hazel was believable
most of the time, I felt she could have done so much more for Hazel in the
parts where she was supposed to be quirky and sharp. Woodley’s spritely
attitude off-screen should have transpired a little more on-screen in order for
her to give Hazel a different level. Hazel, in the novel, knew she was dying,
but she knew she was living just as much and lived it as much as she could. Woodley’s
portrayal made you think she was going to die ASAP, which is not the case at
any point of the story. Since this important to the plot, I thought Woodley
fell short.
Ansel Elgort was a great Augustus, he
unfortunately overshadowed his leading lady, but in his defense, Gus was a
stronger character on the page than that of Hazel. Although Elgort was great
and I did think that he and Woodley had incredible chemistry, his overpowering
nature did not leave room for others to match his on-screen presence. Kudos to
a job well done though! I thought Elgort portrayed Gus accurately.
William Dafoe is another amazing actor
who portrayed Van Houten perfectly. He understood the uncanny and unwavering
nature of a downtrodden writer who is wallowing in self-pity, and to that I tip
my hat to him.
Nat Wolff gets a special mention for
being an amazing source of comic relief and for his tremendous portrayal of
Isaac. He was funny in all the right parts and just as witty when he needed to
be.
Overall I thought the movie was ok. It’s definitely
for all you guys and gals who like to cry in a good film. Those of who liked
the book will enjoy the film, and those of who (like me) only liked bits and
pieces of the book, I don’t recommend seeing the film. Look, unlike Divergent, I have to say you should
choose whether to want to read the book or watch the film. Personally, I recommend
the book rather than the film, The Fault
In Our Stars is one that cannot easily be portrayed on-screen due to the
wittiness of Green’s words.
We’re all familiar with the story; we all know how it
goes. Once upon a time a princes gifted with grace and beauty is trapped with a
curse to sleep for all eternity. A jealous witch is at the foot of the damned
castle, determined to prolong her curse until the end of time. With only truelove’s
kiss to save the princess, the impenetrable wall of thorns is not the only
barrier for anyone who dares to break the spell cast by Maleficent.
But what if such a tale was simply a fragment of the
truth? What if the story was not at all as we have been told?
The Story
This adaptation of Charles Perrault’s, The Sleeping Beauty, takes a different
turn by titling it, Maleficent, rather
than Disney’s first adaptation with
the original title. Like many retellings of beloved fairytales, many writers
like to take from a different point of view, and writer, Linda Woodverton, has
done just that.
Woodverton gives a deeper meaning to Maleficent’s
jealous rage, while simultaneously recreating a villain that is more relatable
than the one we were introduced to in the animation back in 1959. This version
sees Malifecent’s childhood and ascent to power, while also portraying King
Stefan just as vicious as the dragon that we’ve read and seen in the original
tale.
The story has Aurora sitting idle rather than being
the centre of attention. She becomes leverage for both ends, and is the soul
key to the humanity that Maleficent lacks in the animated feature. With the
princess sitting as the film’s damsel in distress rather than the token
heroine, the concept of “truelove” is questioned.
Since the success of Disney’s new direction (story and concept wise)initiated in Tangled,
which continues here with Maleficent,
it’s an exciting time for fairytales that we thought we knew and loved. I can’t
wait to see what Disney will do with
their upcoming Cinderella.
The Cast
Angelina Jolie is magnificent in this
film. She embodies Maleficent in such away that gives the character a
repulsing, yet relatable compulsion that leaves you curious and jaded. She
allows audiences to feel what she’s feeling and even carries a hint of humour
every now and again. In one word, Jolie is: compelling.
Sharlto Copley similarly portrays a
different Stefan as we see his greedy assent to the throne. With a retelling
where the villain is unclear, Copley brought a madness to the character that truly
allowed you to never really connect with him from beginning to end. He was
brilliant in capturing the tortured nature of a king under threat.
Elle Fanning’s portrayal of a beloved
princess was brilliant. She was perfect for the role in the sense that she not
only looked sixteen, but she also had
the liveliness and optimism that comes with youth and innocence. Through her we
see the purity of humanity and imagination that Maleficent and Stefan lose in
their adulthood.
Sam Riley’s unlikely character addition
is a brilliant new take on Maleficent’s beloved pet. Diaval is Maleficent’s
raven who gains a central role in this retelling. Riley character becomes a
source of wisdom and hope for Jolie’s character. He balances and supports her
well and is never overshadowed. Here, Diaval is Maleficent’s best friend rather
than just her pet.
Imelda Staunton, Lesley Manville, Juno Temple play the pixies who guard Aurora. In this adaptation, they’re mainly
the source of comic relief. They’re dynamics is amusing and they worked well as
a trio who are giddy, submissive and, well, down right stupid.
Aussie, Brenton Thwaites, lands the role of Prince
Phillip, who is also an added comic relief in this film. Although he and
Fanning did have an uncanny chemistry, it’s unfortunate that he doesn’t have
the central role that the animated Phillip had back in 1959. Nevertheless, he
did a brilliant job portraying a realistic sixteen-year-old who is just as
unsure about truelove as any one in this entire film.
Graphics
and Special Effects
I have to talk about the brilliant portrayal of The
Moors – a.k.a. Maleficent’s kingdom – in this film. When you’re creating a
fantasyland, such as The Moors, it is imperative that you create a land that is
both familiar and mind blowing. The special and visual effects teams need to
pat themselves on the back and win an Oscar for bringing The Moors to life. The
characters and riches that reside in such a magical place are worth the human
envy that this film dwells upon – it is beautifully enchanting.
***
Overall, I am loving Disney’s current movement away from the typical love stories that
their past animations have portrayed. It’s been a slow, yet stead progression
that I’ve loved watching since I was a little girl. If you love their TV
series, Once Upon A Time, you’ll LOVE
this film. Like Aurora’s curiosity over the spinning wheel, entice your
curiosity and prick you sense with an enchanting retelling of epic proportions.
