Best and Worst of 2017

Alright bring it in, 2k17 let's have it. We're listing our highest and lowest rated movies of the year. Thought it was worth going back and seeing what we thought of a film on the first viewing experience and seeing if it's changed. Now just to be clear we only just started our blog this year! So we're not awful people for not including La La Land but we're just going through what we've already reviewed. 
So let's smash through them, our best and worst of 2017, ending with a couple of honourable mentions!

BEST 

Get Out (2017)
Widely appreciated by critics and audiences, bold social commentary and exceptional directorial debut by Jordan Peele. 
8/10

Beauty and the Beast (2017)
Surprisingly great adaptation, gorgeous set pieces and costumes, happy film.
Luke Evans is a dish
8 or 9/10 

Logan
Great acting, great story, great send of to an iconic character. 
Hugh is a dish. 
8/10

Baby Driver 
Edger Wright proves his style, Ansel Elgort excells and the soundtrack is one of the best of the year.
John Hamm is daddy af.
9/10

It (2017)
Incredible cast, incredible adaptation, actually scary.
8.5/10

WORST

The Mummy (2017)
A chaotic, and untidy film. A poor story, is met with a weak cast, a disappointing first installment to the Dark Universe series. 
4/10

Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2017) 
An unorganised, plot hole-filled addition to the Star Wars Universe. They could have at least let Carrie Fisher go peacefully...
But, Adam Driver is a dish.
4/10



Emoji Movie 
Poo emoji, poo emoji, Sir Patrick Stewart.
2/10

Snatched 
Amy Schumer shouldn't be given more than 15 minute slots, massive plot holes, bad characters.
3/10

Transformers: The Last Knight 
Absolutely exhausting. Confusing, and boring. However, if I can make it through this film, I can make it through anything. 
3/10

HONOURABLE MENTIONS

2017 really was a great year for film, but some of them didn't seem to quite make the cut for our best of the year. There are a couple, that we personally feel deserve a special mention. They are brilliant in their own way, and incredibly memorable for us.  

First up, The Disaster Artist (2017) deserves its own place. I have not stopped thinking about this film since first seeing it. The Room has its own place in my heart. But The Disaster Artist just reminded me of how great this film really is, for a handful of reasons. The Franco brothers did Tommy Wiseau and his film a huge justice, and I recommend watching this if you have not already. This film also 100%, has one of THE most memorable scenes of the year for me. Brilliant tribute, brilliant film.
OH, AND JAMES AND DAVE FRANCO ARE DIIIIIIIIIISHY.
7/10.


So Call Me By Your Name (2017) I'm so pleased there has been so much positive feedback from so many different people. I think they handled love with such sincerity it was relatable and sexy and heartbreaking all at once. The cast were great and the shots were picturesque. Having not read the book I can only assume it's a wonderful adaptation, a gorgeous film, with a beautiful story. Timothée Chamlet is a stone cold cutie and Armie Hammer is a 6'5 dish.
7/10

And there we have it, it's a been a great year for film all round really, managed to watch 75 films in the cinema this year, so let's see what we can do with a full year! Bring on 2018 and let us know your favs of 2017!

CINEMATES 

Star Wars: The Last Jedi (2017)

I just don’t know how I feel. 

I am certain that needing to see a film twice just to get a firm opinion means it wasn’t great, especially when you don’t feel much different after the second time of watching it.

SO, the story – in case you aren’t aware. Rey has discovered she has abilities, and now that she has found Luke Skywalker, she is able to begin training to develop her skills. She is also battling the relationship she has with Kylo Ren, who appears to be getting stronger under the rule of Supreme Leader Snoke. Meanwhile, the Resistance are preparing for battle with the First order, and Finn, Rose and Poe are doing everything they can to make sure everyone in the Resistance survives, alongside Princess Leia.

Do you want the actual plot now? The plot that does not use any words from the Star Wars universe, that make The Last Jedi sound like it’s going to be a SICK film… One ship follows the other at close proximity, but never quite catches up. Two people try and find a man who can help them but they dick around doing it, while one other person uses the force to talk to another person, and has wet hair a lot.

I really don’t want to be the one that won’t let it go that Disney have ruined Star Wars, and it because of this - doesn’t make sense that this film especially, has been getting such high ratings. But I am going to have to be that one person still, because Disney have ruined Star Wars, and the internet does not make sense in relation to this film

I’m going to put aside all the issues I have with this film, because I am a fan of the extended universe. I have wasted hours of my life reading the books, comics, all the pieces of the internet I never thought existed, and it is painful to watch anything to doesn’t run alongside this perfectly. There are issues with this as a Star Wars film yes, like technicalities. For example – Snoke should be a true Sith, so therefore a) his eyes should be a different colour, and b) he 100% would not die how he did. Next up, why on earth did Maz show up? ALSO, someone explain the lack of consistency with Luke’s lightsabers? Lastly, when are Rey and Ben going to realise that their names are wrong, and they are brother and sister so that this shitshow can start to make some logical sense…?

Ignoring all of that though, it was a bad film. Forget that it is Star Wars, just for a minute and think about how disjointed this film was! There was no consistency in the plot. We skipped from different perspectives CONSTANTLY, which was at times frustrating, because a moving ship is not a good transition when you’ve already used it 3 times in a row. For what could be considered an action film, the action was honestly, appalling. Tell me a time that we had one good battle, this didn’t make you feel dizzy. Similarly, the effects in The Last Jedi this weren’t fantastic, the action and the effects together were on occasion extremely messy, and these things made the film seem so much longer the second-time round. The pacing was just so off, we spend ages doing one thing that was really not interesting, which meant there were certain points that lacked attention – such as, the fight scenes.

On a positive note. The score was great. It really redeemed this slightly catastrophic film. It is not only something needed to set the mood, but where there are 2 different ‘settings’ its necessary, just so that you know where you are in the universe. Especially in a plot hole filled film.

I do, however, have some problems with the cast. I am going no further with members of the original cast that – Mark Hamill sucks. But I have extremely warmed to Adam Driver. I really think he is doing a great job as Kylo Ren now, and we are really getting both sides of him. There are occasions when he is a whiney baby, but that’s more just a character fault, than something that is Adam Driver’s problem. He’s doing it well is what I’m trying to say, and he’s made me crave more Kylo Ren on screen. I’ve never been a fan of Rey, or Daisy Ridley, (sorry internet) so for now, I still nothing our new Jedi. Do I need to say much about John Boyega? He’s John Boyega, he’s great at what he does, and he again, plays a character with flaws very well. I don’t care all that much for Finn, but he’s doing his thing and it’s not horrible to watch.

Don’t get me wrong, it wasn’t as bad as The Force Awakens, and I am not just being bitter because this was another Star Wars Film, that was not a great Star Wars film. I genuinely believe there were a lot of faults in this as an actual film. If I wasn’t a Star Wars fan, I believe I would still find this problematic. I was positive I would rate this film lowly before I even saw it, but I just don’t understand how the average person, Star Wars fan or not, can watch this film and not leave with questions.

I sincerely hope this gets cleared up in the spin-offs, because watching it twice in the cinema has not done anything to change my opinion. As it stands… I still just don’t know how I feel.

Good luck with the Carrie Fisher CGI Disney. I hope you do it well.

4/10

CINEMATES - S

The Greatest Showman (2017)

Let me preface this baby with the fact that I love musicals. I bloody love a good musical. When I heard our Hugh Jackman was gonna be singing and dancing, I was in. When I heard Zac Efron was doing the same, I was so in. Beautiful men singing and dancing? OKAY. It's the story of PT Barnum, played by Jackman, a showman, politician and businessman but for this film, creator of the circus. 

Now you have to give into the theatrics a little as expected, it's a circus, it's the in 1800's and not entirely awful, so they obviously glaze over some things. We follow Barnum as a poor child, working hard to get any money he can, in love with the daughter of a very wealthy family. They grow closer, have children and he wants to give her everything she had before and lies his way into a loan for a museum that turns to a circus. 

Jackman starts out open minded and amazed at whoever turns up to his flyer for unique people, then exaggerates their features. Makes the tall man taller, the fat man fatter etc. We meet some great characters, follow Barnum around as he finds different people, he appears earnest to meet them and have them on his team but it has a fine line of just wanting to catch the biggest fish to get the trophy. His seemingly opened mindedness to these differences become fueled by fame and money as opposed to curiosity and wellbeing. Something that is shown quite well through Jackman though the writing was a bit shaky on the development.

As I mentioned we don't see that many bad things considering the time and the topics. Subtly mention the difficulties that Zendaya and Yahya Abdul-Mateen II characters face, being a black brother and sister in mid 19th century. Didn't go into the real difficulties because its a PG musical but I have a feeling that a lot of young kids will watch and not understand why Zefron didn't want to hold pretty little Zendaya's hand in front of people. We also ignored how they got (CGI) elephants and how they would have been trained/mistreated in the circus. 

But that's expected! It's a fun showstopping musical. It has already gain three nominations for the 75th Golden Globes, Best Motion Picture Musical or Comedy, Best Actor - Comedy or Musical and Best Original Song. I was happy as soon as it started, though apparently I'm a sucker for large groups of people stamping their feet to music at the same time. The songs were great, well done and wonderfully choreographed. The costumes were fascinating, the set pieces large and bold. The use of CGI was noticeable but it felt somewhat forgivable due to the nature of the film being a little bit extraordinary. 

The cast hold themselves well enough considering there's so many faces it's hard to give anyone a personality outside of 'bearded woman'. Jackman was good, his wife Charity Barnum, played by Michelle Williams came across genuine with their children. Zac Efron was great musically as he can sing and dance, though I think he's a semi decent actor this character didn't quite have the development or depth for him to show off. Zendaya did well in only her second feature length, Spiderman Homecoming (2017) being the first. Rebecca Ferguson plays a famous opera singer with a high level a grace that feels almost misplaced with the story even though it really happened. 

I watched this film 7 days ago and I still have the songs in my head. A tad bit empty but a lot of fun. Wouldn't stand on it's own as a drama, the music holds this feature, don't think too hard, it's feel good. 6/10, 7 if you fancy Hugh Jackman and Zac Efron or if you're big on musicals.

CINEMATES - A

The Disaster Artist - video review!

THE DISASTER ARTIST

Wonder (2017)

Wonder, is the story of young boy August Pullman, who until fifth grade is home schooled by his mum. He suffers from a genetic disease which causes his facial differences. The story explains the difficulties he faces as a child who isn’t quite ordinary, and the effect this has on his family and others in his life.

The trailer for this film shows you everything already, right? No, it doesn’t. I was definitely happy about this for starters. The way the story is split definitely helps give this story some further depth. So, for example it’s not just a story from the point of view of August. We start of learning about him, then how this affects his sister, Via – here we get to learn more about her experiences past and present. Next we move on to Via’s best friend Miranda. After this we learn about Jack Will, another young boy who is in the same form class as August at school, and so on. There is a nice chunk of character development throughout this film, which means it straight away reduces the risk of the story becoming disjointed.

To be fair, it is well written. It is paced fine, though for a film of this genre – seems to be quite long. I can’t say that this is a bad thing though. I really think this level of development is crucial for it to have any effect on the audience. It is a touching story, and the way it is structure is good.

The cast in this film do deserve serious credit. As well as the team of make-up artists, whose work although not breath-taking, was pretty damn good.

There are numerous moving moments, and if you are even the slightest bit emotional, you will cry at least once. Again, something that shows this film has done it’s job, you leave feeling disappointed that people can actually treat people in a way August is treated. This is because you have truly connected with the characters on screen. The chemistry between Owen Wilson and Julia Roberts was perfect. You could tell that they had a strong bond as parents because of all they had been through with their family and their child. You could see the strains the past, and current events were putting on relationship’s such as Robert’s character, as the mother, and her daughter. As well as this, you could see the August was a young boy who just had difficult things going on – like kids do, and he wanted his dad to help him out of it.

Of course, the way certain characters are portrayed is dramatized, and in some scenes it got too much. For example, the way children were shown as being incredibly mean – yes, I am completely aware things like this do happen in society, but not to the extent that it was emphasised in this film, necessarily. By that – I don’t mean, people just are mean in such a way, I mean it as there are 5 or 6 kinds of people in the world, and events don’t always occur in the way they do in Wonder.

But, whatever, if you want nit-picking, that’s my criticism. It’s a fictional story – admittedly, it claims to be based on a true illness etc. but there are, from what I’m aware, no true events on which this film is based.

I liked this film. I think it is moving, inspiring, and it made me feel all sorts of things. I recommend this film, and I’m sure I’ll be watching this again.

6.5/10

CINEMATES - S

Suburbicon (2017)

I honestly don’t know where this review is going to go, because I am just so confused. You know when you head into a film screening, having read the synopsis beforehand… but come out even more curious and clueless that you were to begin with? Suburbicon is one of those films.

Before going in, I was sure this was a film – BASED ON WHAT THE INTERNET DESCRIPTIONS SAID, about a family who had to deal with a lot, due to difficulties arising in Suburbicon, and Matt Damon played a ‘Liam Neeson in Taken-esque’, super-dad that kicked ass. I HAVE NEVER BEEN MORE WRONG.

I honestly can’t say that this was a bad surprise though, because I can’t think of a film that I have experienced, which is anything like this. I’m going to try and keep this review as generic as possible because of the fact that the synopsis seems to do the same (This film can be spoiled in a second, so I am going to attempt to skip detail where I can).

Suburbicon is the story of an all-white American town/community living situation, in which everything is very calm, and running like clockwork. Nothing bad happens in Suburbicon. Everyone lives in perfect little houses, with a white picket fence, a back porch, a decent sized garden - you get the drift. Then suddenly, things begin to go downhill in the town, and the Lodge family are the ones that are suffering because of this.

The thing that I took away from this film was the awfully random, ill-fitting, unexplained part of the story involving a black American family moving into the town. It was a story about a town of racists in parts. I understand that due to the era this film was meant to be set in, and it being an all-white living area, it makes sense that the event of a black family moving in, will cause conflict. Yes, you can assume that the reason the horrific events that occur, supposedly (from the point of view of the citizens) occurs as a direct result of 3 black people suddenly moving in to the area. But this is just such a disjointed part of the plot, and honestly brings nothing to the story whatsoever, and in fact just confused the plot. As well as it confusing the story, it’s just such a bad depiction of such an event. We have tonnes of films incorporated this theme, and doing something creative with it. The creativity that seemed to be attempted was a giant flop.

The story itself, obviously ignoring this part was gripping. I liked the theme that was chosen, I like how dark it was, and I liked the (possibly) unintentional comedy. Matt Damon plays an awkward Psycho, and his performance surprised me, as it was one that I enjoyed. 

The progression of the story was quick, which was both good and bad. It was good, because it meant it was well paced, overall. I didn’t feel like the film was too long, or too short. It certainly lacked detail, but it was still fine to watch. The setting, at the start of the film, reminded me of the beginning of Edward Scissorhands, so at that point made me feel a bit worried, because that setting can be used badly. In this case, I think it was used well, and it complimented the story… Especially as I thought I was going in to see a TOTALLY different film. But it gradually started to impress me.

The greatest fault that this film has, besides the story, is the script. The script in this film was boring. It was not ‘meaty’, for lack of a better word. I would have written this film off had it not been for the cast, who - on the whole, did the job. This was also the case for the score. Although the score is DEFINITELY not noteworthy, there was one, and it worked with what we were seeing on screen.

Suburbicon is a film that starts off incredibly slowly, and then increasingly becomes more tense, more gritty, and more worth the watch.

5.5/10

CINEMATES - S 

The Florida Project (2017)

I went into this as an Odeon screen unseen, I had never heard of it at this point. Going in completely blind. The opening was bright and sunny and had natural seeming kids running around. The first thing I noticed was how often the name Sean Baker came up on screen. I do preemptively judge a film if I see that one person has an unmatched level of involvement. As many independent filmmakers, Baker directed, produced, wrote and edited The Florida Project. He also did the same for Tangerine (2015) a film that made a mark due to being shot entirely with iPhones. I believe this can affect the showing of a story sometimes, like tunnel vision, having a secondary opinion can make a difference.

This for the most part was ignored until the end. The 'story' if you want to call it that, follows Moonee a 6 year old girl who lives in a motel room with her mum and runs around over summer making friends and causing trouble. The film doesn't have much of a narrative, more a social commentary of Florida's lower class residents. It plays like a memory or a diary of someone who grow up in those conditions. Because I think you do find yourself wondering not just how it will end but when. It's hard to pace something that isn't necessarily going anywhere.

The cast was great, the only big recognisable face was Wilem Dafoe, the motel owner, and father to the building. I have always thought he's a wonderful actor and he does make a point of choosing quite dissimilar roles. He has the fine balance of being at wits end with the children and protecting them dearly. Moonee is played by young Brooklyn Prince, sweet and annoying in equal measure just like a normal 6 year old. She sporadically uses language and attitude as if shes in her twenties, a clear notation of how much time she's spent with her mother, who treats her like a friend more than her daughter. Bria Vinaite, the mother, Halley, is again a natural. Being her first feature length and first film in general its easier to see her as the character as we don't know anything else. It seemed so genuine that I would struggle to see her in any other way with any other accent. The rest of the cast are similar, the children young and real but still showing the traits of their respective parental figure.

The cinematography was gorgeous. Natural lighting was apparent from the get go, lots of sunrises and sunsets colouring the frame with warm reds and orange evenings. The motel was a giant purple building, a man made backdrop to a lot of scenes. Moonee and her friend Jancey have free reign of outside but inside we only have a few rooms as motels do. The few locations mimic their lives of having a bedroom and a bathroom and nothing else. The sound does the same, no score or music in the film until the final scene. Everything gives a raw documentary feel to it.

My only beef was the end of the film. And I'm sure many others feel the same. People in the cinema laughed out loud then asked amongst themselves, is that gonna be the end? Then when the credits rolled there was audible groans. It's the first piece of music we have from the film and its a dampened down version of Cool and the Gang's 'Celebration'. No spoilers but the film ends in Disney World and you can tell this not just due to the iconic castle but due to Baker obviously not wanting to pay for consent to film professionally. The footage goes from smooth wonderfully coloured shots to jagged phone footage. It's abrupt and kind of undercuts the visual world that had been created.

Subtle social commentary on the poor people living so close to the money making Disney World and it's ever coming tourists. A definite eyeopener to the status that some people live though somewhat disappointing ending. If you're open minded and like your artsy films, a solid 7/10 otherwise you might find the lack of conclusion frustrating.

CINEMATES - A

CINEMATES

Don’t forget that we post video reviews too! Take a look at our channel!

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNCkVejuT_gVByC9eh3yG0g

Call Me by Your Name (2017)

From the first time I saw this trailer, I was genuinely excited about this release. I feel there hasn’t been a decent looking feel good film for a while, and Call Me by Your Name seemed to be one with a refreshing story to get me even more excited.

Call Me by Your Name is a film set in 1983 about the Perlman family, who every year have doctoral student stay with them every year. This year, Oliver comes to stay with them and work with the Father of our main character, Elio – a seventeen-year-old boy. Over the time they spend together all summer, they discover a mutual passion which is seemingly something new for Elio.

First things first, this film is beautiful. It’s such a great film to look at, Guadagnino has certainly realised the ticket to this film’s success and taken full advantage of it. There is so much focus on the beauty of the Italian buildings, the relaxing family breakfasts, the views out in the countryside when Elio and Oliver are out on a bike ride, the lunchtime banquets in the garden, the massive group games of volleyball – you get the picture, it was summer, and it is what makes this a feel good film. There’s something about seeing these kinds of scenes on the big screen that taps into so many different emotions for me.

The score was beautiful, it was probably one of my favourite aspects because it tied in so perfectly with the different things the characters were going through, and the events that you were watching. It really connected all the events on screen together. The only way I can describe this feeling, is by saying that it felt like I was part of the experience with Elio. It perfectly helped the transition between scenes, and I do not think this is a feature that was overused.

There really was attention to detail in this film, and the script in part was surprising. It was filled with comedy, sadness and drama. Conversely, there are a great deal of silences – some of these filled with the great pieces of music, but some that are just truly chilling. For this to work an excellent cast is needed, and that is definitely what this film has. Excluding Hammer, I was clueless about the rest of the cast, but went home desperate to find out what else I might see Chamalet in.

This is definitely a must see film. Not in the sense of – ‘I couldn’t keep my eyes off the screen, so much is happening’, but the opposite. It’s easy, it’s pleasant, it’s an extremely emotional story that will make you feel all kinds of things. I will be seeing this again, and encourage others to do so too.

7/10.

CINEMATES - S

The Death of Stalin (2017)

The Death of Stalin is quite simply, a political comedy… if there even is such a thing. The story walks us through Stalin’s last moments alive, and the challenges the rest of his cabinet faced after his death, with a nice dose of comedy.

We caught the Death of Stalin before its release at an Oden Screen Unseen, and it has taken me until now to face writing this review. This isn’t because it was a bad film, it was enjoyable – but it was a bit of something and nothing at the same time. So, I can already tell it’s going to be a short review.

I really think this film will be appealing to certain audiences, while others may find this if not boring, perhaps offensive, but this genuinely depends on your sense of humour. This film takes a serious event, and basically takes the piss out it, which comes with strengths and weaknesses. The film jumps straight in and sets the scene, which is perfect because it’s something people shouldn’t really need much of a back story for. Which is emphasised right at the beginning when we see characters who seem to be incredibly paranoid that they are at risk and are being watched. If you are going into this film blind, not knowing anything about Stalin, you get the idea that there are some bad things going on…

The cast in this film were the redeeming quality. The performance of Steve Buscemi was probably the most noteworthy. This was the only person I distinctly remember being in this film. His character really brought across the fact that while we are dealing with something very dark, there is still room for a little chuckle. 

While I don’t want to comment on the historical accuracy of this film, it is obvious in certain scenes that events are painfully dramatized, and I do remember sighing because I got bored of the cheap satire. The only way I can describe some of the comedy, is by calling it ‘Dad comedy’.

There is nothing unbelievable about the tools used in this film, the lighting in this film was consistently dull, which suited the atmosphere that was being displayed, which was great. The score… I know there was one, but it’s nothing to write home about. Honestly, the production was fairly average.

All I can really say is that this film is entertaining. It is definitely funny, but also serious. It uses classic British comedy to lighten a difficult subject, and that is something I enjoy.

However, I don’t think it’s everyone’s cup of tea, and I doubt I’d ever watch it again.

5.5/10

The Mountain Between Us (2017)

This film sounds more dramatic than it is overall, but the story captures you regardless.

Alex and Ben (Winslet and Elba), are complete strangers who meet because they have share the need to get to the same place, but a storm is going to prevent them from doing this. Alex then comes up with the idea that they can hire a tiny plane and someone to drive it. Unfortunate events result in them crashing and only having their dead pilot’s dog for company. They need to figure out how to survive on a completely snow-covered mountain, whilst debating whether to leave to attempt to find help, risking Alex’s health – as she injured her leg in the crash or battle it out, and risk their lives by staying there.

OOOOOH DRAMA.

 

I feel like in recent years we’ve had a few films like this with the undertones of survival in them, and I’m not mad about it. They aren’t getting repetitive, because although there are going to be obvious similarities, the cast, and intricacies of the story vary. This film was no different. This is what initially intrigued me with this – the cast. Both fantastic actors, both with some big titles under their belts, and both bloody British (yaaaaaaaas!), but was there going to be chemistry? They were really, the only two actors we saw throughout this whole film, so they HAD to be good together for this film to be even slightly successful.

My god, there was chemistry – they both worked wonderfully together, and I must say Kate Winslet – your American accent isn’t infuriating. As soon as the film starts we are left with just the two of them, and very, very early on in the film the plane crash happens. At this point I really thought, there is no way this is going to be good. There is no way they can be amusing for nearly 2 hours. I was so wrong. We really got to understand the characters, and over those few weeks they were together we got to learn about them, and share a journey with them – the experience really was as corny, yet thrilling as I’m making it sound.

There were some thrilling moments, like the very real (for them, anyway) danger of going for a walk right at the top of a mountain, slipping, and almost falling off the edge of a mountain. The struggle of being stuck with either just yourself, or someone you barely know and might not like. The fear that you could get attacked by a Cougar. It was all captured well, of course dramatized, but not to the point of it being uncomfortable to watch.

The story was well paced, and set in a beautiful location – it’s hard to believe tonnes of effort was needed for this to be shot well – but then again, what do I know about shooting a film at all, let alone in the snow? The film only had one slight downfall for me. This was the fact that a love story was introduced. I cannot say it wasn’t powerful, because of the connection that Elba and Winslet had, but it at the end of the film because kind of cringe because of the conclusion to the story. I will not deny that the situation they were in couldn’t happen in real life, it was just a perfect example of oh, for god sake does everyone HAVE to fall in love and live happily ever after? Couldn’t one get killed by a bear and the other tell their story?

It was heart-warming, heart breaking, shocking, and pleasant all at once. It was everything I wanted from it, and I would recommend it – and say it’s worth more than some of the ratings I have seen so far.

7.5/10 

The Ritual (2017)

You might have read other reviews where I've mentioned Odeon Screen Unseen, but let me remind you. Once every month or two Odeon previews a film at a discounted rate. For the second time this year they had Scream Unseen, a preview of a horror movie. That is how I saw The Ritual, completely blind, no trailer, no idea.

I think that made it better, watching the trailers now it feels a little try hard. So the story follows 4 friends camping in Sweden as a send off to the 5th friend who was killed before the trip was booked. British lads, British film, European location, our man Andy Serkis producing this adapted novel by Adam Nevill.

If you can, go in without seeing anything. The murder of one of the friends happens almost immediately and is just the crutch to start the journey. That scene was jarring, maybe more so to me because the trailers hadn't ruined the visuals for me. But it was abrupt in a normal everyday setting and I think the contrast is a bit shocking. Soon after we're thrust into the woods. And it's the best part of the film. The first and second act are captivating. Then like many horrors, especially ones with a hidden monster when the monster is revealed it goes downhill a little. 

Cinematography was what it needed to be. The shots made me nervous. The gorgeous woods with long thin trees covering darkness. It slowly zooms as if to direct your eyes to something hidden, you find that you brace yourself, getting tense about something you may or may not even see. The aesthetic is somewhat interesting with the heavy use of wood and folklore. The main character Luke, has dreams mixing the woods with his memory of his deceased friend. We get some great images of a convenience store dripping into the woods, fluorescent lights against the natural woods, the tiled floors with the dirt on the ground. Quite interesting to see, great symbolism for Lukes growing guilt with his increasing fear. 

The cast is great, natural as mates, Luke played by Rafe Spall, is the protagonist. I feel he has a good balance of showing his guilt and not wanting to admit there's a reason to be guilty in the first place. He remains somewhat level headed as things get stressful. There's a creepy scene in which each of the characters wake up all of which in peculiar ways and they each deal with it differently. Poses the question of, how would you deal with this, how would I deal with this situation? Good British ensemble, can't say how it relates to the book, whether the characters are brought out well enough, whether they match how they're written. 

The tag line 'they should have gone to Vegas' seems an odd tone to me, the film is funny, but not overtly. It's an odd angle to sell as it's definitely not prominent in the story. It does have it's scares, it does get uneasy. The sound helps this, as you can imagine in a forest lush with trees and a possible monster the silence was imposing. Nothing but cracked sticks under feet and grown men chatting. Both the shots and the sound leave empty space and let you build your own expectations as to what may fill it. 

As I mentioned before the first two acts are very good, the final act is kinda whatever. Once the mystery is gone it's kinda meh. The risk is a little less though a they try to have little moments of what's next but it doesn't have the same oomph. And the end is also rather lackluster, though I will say it's a beautiful shot though abrupt. 

Good film, worth a watch but it feels as if the small marketing matches the quality, can't decide how funny to be but the cast are natural together 6/10

Goodbye Christopher Robin (2017)

Goodbye Christopher Robin is the story of English writer A.A. Milne and his life post WW1, and how he stumbled upon the idea of his later success which was of course – Winnie the Pooh. There isn’t anything else to this story…

THAT ISN’T A FAULT THOUGH!

The film begins and we jump straight in to Milne’s life right after he comes back from the war and meet his wife, and begin to gain insight into the private life of him and his wife, and how his time away affected them both, and off we go on their journey. They move out of London, as the hustle and bustle is badly affecting Milne mentally, and productively, meaning he is unable to write. His wife falls pregnant and we then meet the inspiration behind his most famous work – their son, Christopher Robin.

The issue I have with films of this nature as always, is how true are some of these events, and how much are they exaggerated for dramatic effect? We won’t know, no one experienced this other than the characters that are being portrayed. So, I suppose the most important thing for this film is, how good were the cast? Could I connect with these characters? OH, GOD YES. 

I cannot fault the cast, I really believed there was a difficult father/son relationship there between Milne and his son, and I really felt for them both in many scenes. I could relate to the idea that a childhood had been stolen, and a Father didn’t understand or appreciate this at the time, and that a child couldn’t explain this when it was happening to them. Domhnall Gleeson was the absolute star of the show, without a doubt. His performance was incredible. I believed his struggle with quite obvious PTSD, I believed he struggled to look after a child, when he was suddenly asked to do this, I believed that the success he had brought him both joy, and sadness. It was a convincing performance and it did the ‘character’ justice, in simple terms. The performance of Margot Robbie in this, though also convincing and enjoyable, somewhat average. 

It was a truly enchanting story, it made me laugh, cry and generally entertained me. It made me realise why I enjoyed Winnie the Pooh so much as a child, yet also made me remember why I didn’t so much as I got older. It was heart-warming, and beautifully made. I just hope that it was somewhat a true representation of these non-fictional characters.

Daphne (Robbie) appeared to be was sickening, she infuriated me, which is good, if that is what you are trying to be, right? But something about it I didn’t enjoy. I feel like the intention was for her to be more powerful and more controlling, and I feel like Olive, Christopher Robin’s Nanny was more powerful. It’s like she was almost there… and then though nah that’ll do I’ll calm down. She was portrayed as a very selfish character, but there was nothing to explain this. Nothing that Milne did seemed to spur these actions on, so in a way it’s like her character should have made much more sense. Now, Will Tilston. Let’s talk about little Will. What a gem, I love it when a child is better at acting than an adult, and all I can really say is not only was he cute as a button, but he made me cry, and this kid is going to go far. There’s not much to say other than he was perfectly casted, I was really impressed by him.

The score in this film was as to be expected, it fitted beautifully, and if memory serves me correctly we obviously had original music made for Winnie the Pooh. The location helped a great deal with making this film look good, but I honestly don’t think that this would have made a difference to the story. I mean it made sense, it was nice to look at but there is nothing much more to say about that.

7/10 

CINEMATES - S 

Flatliners (2017)

Flatliners is the story of 5 medical students, who all take part in an experiment, to find out what happens to us in the afterlife, or if there is even such a thing. To do this, they take it in turns to stop their hearts for long enough to have their own experiences, but come back and tell their stories. However, this isn’t as simple as they might have imagined when their ‘sins’ come back with them and start wreaking havoc in their everyday lives. Resulting in serious complications for some of them. This idea to me was still quite refreshing, and the aspect of supernatural beings and life experiences being brought into this is what really hooked me in, well… and Ellen Page… and the 4% Rotten Tomatoes rating (oh and I love giving remakes a go).

As I mentioned, the cast was mostly what hooked me in with this remake, Ellen Page is a gem, and I was excited to see her in this because she takes on different characters and plays them well. This role for her, was no exception. You did understand the determination possessed by Page’s character from the beginning, and by the end you genuinely did fear for her, and in some parts empathise with what she was having to deal with as a consequence of her experiment. This hooked me when the film began. This part of the story was complimented wonderfully by Diego Luna’s character, who was concerned about what was going on because it was such a stupid thing to do, and frequently raised the incredibly real point that getting into a good medical school, and training to be a doctor is hard, don’t ruin all your hard work. Oh and, living is great, why are you all essentially committing suicide?

I don’t want to focus on the fact that this is a remake too much, so I don’t want to say the reason this film got bad is due to the choice of cast, the cast weren’t bad, it’s just the performances aren’t exactly memorable, but I guess this is possibly due to the writing. This was extremely poor in some areas, and I got a few eye-rolls in. The story was reasonably strong up until the point of shoving 2 new romances into an already busy film, it wasn’t needed, and took away some of the potential for originality. Similarly, the end is basically given away at the start. You are made aware of what is going to haunt Ellen Page’s character within the first 3 minutes, which again got a massive eye-roll.

There is really nothing much to say about it, and this seems to be the general consensus from those that have seen it. It was fine, it was well made from the point of view that it encorporated some comedy, some drama, it was a thriller, and possibly could be at a huge push a horror, and I would recommend that it is something you watch if you have either seen the original, and want to laugh at the attempt to make another average film from an already reasonably average film, or if you just want to see it, because it wasn’t bad, it just wasn’t great. I mean, I would watch it again, just maybe don’t get too excited about it.

5.5/10

Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

Right, Blade Runner 2049. Here we go. Gorgeous film but it needs to settle before discussing. Young blade runner, K played by Ryan Gosling uncovers a secret that leads him down the path of Deckard, Harrision Ford's blade runner, who has been missing for 30 years. 

The thing I was most excited about when this film was announced was the crew. My man Roger Deakins back to his old tricks being 13 time Oscar nominated for his cinematography. Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch there for original sound, edited by Joe Walker and of course directed by Denis Villeneuve. Taking Blade Runner (1982) out of the equation that's a pretty impressive line up for a sci fi film, half of which have worked together before on the likes of Arrival (2016) Prisoners (2013) and Sicario (2015). 

Those aspects do not let you down. The sound was naturally industrial. It's the only way to describe it, it feels organic alongside the environment. In general it rises, it's subtle and not overtly there but as it builds it becomes a vital part in many scenes. The editing is good but to be honest a second thought, but that doesn't make it bad. It's in no way distracting, it compliments the wide shots by giving them room to breath. Pacing matches the tone but on more than one occasion  I felt myself conscious of the run time. 

It is stunning. We knew that from Deakins name, let alone the trailers and posters. The world isn't just created it's maintained from the 1982 original. The bleak dystopian back drop has been done many times but the mixture between high tech and low nature is beautifully done. There's contrast between empty barren lands which once held life and the damp overrun cityscapes. There's a clever mix of dulled colours with neon and life. IMAX was a great choice, and I highly recommend it if you have the opportunity. Gorgeous wide shots which could have any frame a picture. And if you consider the amount of sfx that would have been added then you have an even higher admiration for those getting the base shots. 

Everything in the frame, every shot emphasises the themes. Visually water played a big part, you can read into this as much as you'd like. Reflection, ripples, memories being be lost in time like tears in rain. There's multiple shots through rain, through weather soaked windows, with light bouncing off moving water. It's calming and thinking about it is the most natural thing in the entire film, or I guess the world.

The other more commonly discussed theme from Ridley Scott's original is what defines humanity, what makes you human, can a replicant have a soul? Gosling's K, a Nexus 8, struggles with the idea of retiring (executing) something that has been born. He is then challenged with the idea that he himself may have been born. He's been told he does well even though he doesn't have a soul yet also been told that people forget that he isn't human. He has memories implanted in him that he knows aren't real but is also certain they are. He has feelings for Joi, a programmed hologram that says what you want to hear, but really how many steps above her is he, is it just the physicality that separates them? Gosling is fantastic, a great canvas to paint a replicant onto.

Joi, his love interest is played by captivating Ana de Armas, who is beautiful and loving. Her special effects are wonderfully done, her hologrammed nature is never overstated but it used to its full potential. A scene with K and natural Mackenzie Davis (who you might recognise from Black Mirror's Emmy Award Winning San Junipero episode) is so incredibly done I didn't want it to end. It's a very interesting scene and shows the individuality that Joi appears to have by trying a unique way of making K happy with Davis' character Mariette. Though unique to us that's only due to us not being accustom to the technology available. 

In general the cast were great. Robin Wright was great as expected as Lieutenant Joshi, one of the few humans we actually interact with. Dave Bautista was great though far more brief than I expected. Jared Leto was a bit weird as always, I think almost every scene he was in his voice echoed and reverberated back to us. I think we got an odd amount of the character, didn't get as much development that could have been interesting but also his on screen presence wasn't vital in every scene.

Though, I may be in the minority here, but I think the same about Harrison Ford. Without spoiling it, he didn't need to be in the movie. His on screenpresence was just not necessary. Yes he has a great scene with Leto and yes he seems to work with Gosling fine but at this point it's hard to see him as Deckard and not just Harrison Ford. Ford was arguably the weak spot, that doesn't make him bad just not as good as every other outstanding element. The direction is great, Villeneuve is killing it but it didn't feel like a one of his movies, it felt like a Blade Runner movie. For me his name is becoming a reason to watch a film so to forget that he did it after watching was not quite disappointing but odd. Shows his versatility. 

Must see for any Blade Runner fans, any Sci-fi fans, any Roger Deakins fans any fans of cinema really. Some will like more than others, and more than I did. 7.5/10 Will be Oscar nominated.

CINEMATES - A