danhall86 Reviews

Terminator: Dark Fate (2019)

'The real sequel to T2' they said...

[5/10 · 25 October 2019]

It's not. Atleast not the one I ever wanted.

It's barely any better than the other failed sequels that have come since 1991. I might actually prefer some of the others, as much as I disliked them at the time.

Looking at it objectively, it's not an awful movie. But they built it up so much with the return of Cameron and saying it was a 'return to form' etc that I think the disappointment has hit twofold. It is a very, very average film.

I'm conscious of some 'gender politics' attached to this movie, or how it's perceived. Please understand that I was fully okay with having three female leads. Terminator has been the tale of 'the mother of the future' all along after all. Let's be clear that it was just a fairly poor film, regardless of gender.

There are still only two films as far as I'm concerned - T1 & T2. If you want the real follow up, get hold of copies of the comics 'T2: Cybernetic Dawn' and 'T2: Nuclear Twilight.' (Read them in that order). They wrapped up the story tidily and respectfully. This film achieved neither of those things.

Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018)

Simple Summary: Watch it!

[8/10 · 26 May 2018]

Let's keep this short and simple so you can read it and get on with booking your tickets.

Best Things:

• The relationship between Chewie and Han is on point
• The music by John Powell is the best Star Wars music in a very long time
• It's more fun than anything made since the original trilogy and has that pulpy adventure vibe
• The characterization was accurate to the Han we know and love

Worst Things:

• A derivative sequence which channels Star Trek a little too much, but that doesn't really bother me
• The droid was a bit annoying, but I think it (she?) was intended to be.

This is now my fourth favourite SW movie, after the original trilogy. I really liked it that much. And if you're wondering, yes ESB is my no. 1

Ignore all the anti-Kathleen Kennedy hatred and the negative buzz around this film. It's everything a SW film should be (unless you really can't live without the force/jedi in a SW film).

The Dark Tower (2017)

Is it as bad as the critics and fans say?

[7/10 · 22 August 2017]

In short, no. (BOOK SPOILERS AHEAD)

To be absolutely clear, I knew this film was coming so picked myself up the book set (all 8). I read the first book and got partway through the second before watching the movie. But I also knew about lots of upcoming events in the books and also knew how book 8 ended (I knew about the horn of eld, the cyclical nature of the series and Roland's doom to keep reliving the same journey until he finally gets things right.) So I went into this film KNOWING it is technically a sequel to book 8, and this is the most important factor to acknowledge before viewing this film. It's the next time round the wheel, so things will undoubtedly be different. It's not an adaptation. It's a follow-up.

How is the film then, with those things considered? It's good. I actually thought it was very good. Characters were right on the money (Elba isn't white - big deal/get over it - he was just 'right' for this character) and McConaughey is literally the visualisation of how I imagined the man in black. It felt like part of the book world, obviously excising the violence and adult themes. Oh and the gunplay was fantastic - the shootout near the end with it's tonally perfect score by Tom Holkenborg was a cracker. So many subtle references to the Dark Tower world and the interconnected works of King. It was FUN to watch, so hardcore fans of the books might not like that transition from dark, borderline horror fantasy stuff to 12A vibes. 12A or not though, lots of people get killed.

There are negatives of course. The man in black's little minions were a bit irritatingly cliché, but they served their purpose. The ending was a little abrupt, but I think this affects the whole film. It could have done with being longer (hoping for a director's cut on bluray).

I would try harder to convince others of the under-appreciated merits of this film, but I quite enjoy being one of this film's few actual fans. I will be watching again at the cinema, finishing the books, then watching it again.

Alien: Covenant (2017)

Best of the bad lot

[6/10 · 17 May 2017]

After Prometheus, I definitely checked my expectations when it came to the pre-release anticipation for A:C. But Prometheus wasn't solely responsible for that lack of enthusiasm. Years of franchise fatigue played into it too, from my initial disgust at the death of my favourite sub-characters in Alien 3, to the mind boggling, almost self-parody that was Resurrection. Let's not mention the AVP films that never actually existed (forget I mentioned it).

So basically, there have only ever been 2 genuinely good films in this franchise. The impeccable, groundbreaking horror Alien and the equally remarkable, progressive action-horror Aliens. Despite the aforementioned dislike of narrative choices made in A3, I find it an oddly fascinating and beautiful film, especially the Assembly Cut. So we'll say 2.5 genuinely good films in this franchise. Yet there are 7 films set in this universe. That's not good odds really is it?

So Covenant. Where does it sit in comparison to the others?

Well it's not bad, but it's not great either. It's just kind of meh... I enjoyed watching it at the time, but I also could have done without it. I also could have done without the even further demystification of the Xenomorph and its origins. Ridley's reasoning for not including the Xenomorph in Prometheus was that 'everyone knows what it is, it's not scary anymore.' Yet he brings it back in Covenant only to even further explain where it came from, and perhaps more puzzlingly, it's illustrated in full daylight, in big open spaces, wandering around and running over things as a blatant CG model. There's no Alien stalking people through dark, claustrophobic spaces here unfortunately. Technology makes directors lazy.

It's not all bad. There's gore galore and the new Neomorph is quite vicious. It's introductory scene was actually quite suspenseful and felt like it was leading somewhere, but alas. It was probably the best scene of the movie. The characters were better than Prometheus in that they actually felt like people this time around. I was reluctant to take Danny McBride seriously, but I think he nailed his role better than anyone else in Covenant. And the visuals. Perhaps excluding the overuse of a CG Xenomorph, Covenant looked wonderful in the same way Prometheus did.

But it wasn't enough. Even disregarding a number of silly decisions and awkward dialogue (the whole cinema burst into laughter at 'you blow, I'll do the fingering,') the ending was underwhelming and the edgy ending just seemed to think it was a lot smarter than it was (I predicted it about 20 minutes earlier) and was obviously setting up an inevitable sequel.

It's may be better than Alien 3. I don't know. Only a repeat viewing will tell me for sure. But based on my initial reaction, I won't be in a hurry to pick it up on Bluray. I'd still much rather see Neil Blomkamp reuniting with Ripley and Corporal Hicks. Take note Fox!

Independence Day: Resurgence (2016)

Contender for worst film I've ever seen

[3/10 · 7 August 2016]

ID4 was a knockout film back in 1996 (I was 10 years old). Yes it was big and dumb, but it also had suspense, humour, a genuine heart and a wonderful music score by David Arnold. It was a B-movie on paper that turned out to be an earnest blockbuster, not just because of its scale and special effects, but because of the cast of relatable characters and a shred of believability.

The only aspects Resurgence manages to recapture are the 'scale and special effects' and the 'big and dumb.' Dialogue is cringeworthy, characters are brought back and then disposed of haphazardly, everything feels implausible, it feels rushed like the whole introduction of the movie is missing, acting is questionable, the inferior music is a clichéd pro-American march throughout, global destruction is predictably satisfying, but the story and characterisation was so shallow I didn't care for a fraction of a second. Did I mention the plot is really, really stupid? It feels like a full-on B-Movie this time around, and not in a good way. Imagine if 'The Asylum' made their usual low budget rip off of the original Independence Day - that's almost what this feels like. I'm dreading Roland Emmerich revisiting (and subsequently ruining) the Stargate franchise too.

Suicide Squad may not be the greatest success this year, but Will Smith did well to choose that over this.

Star Trek Beyond (2016)

Best Trek film in 20 years

[8/10 · 3 August 2016]

Star Trek: Beyond is not a perfect movie, but it's the best Trek film in 20 years. Yes, better than either of the previous reboots/alternate universe films, and better than anything else that's appeared since 1996's superb Star Trek: First Contact. It isn't by any means as good as the high points of the series (in my opinion, Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country, and the aforementioned Star Trek: First Contact), but it is up their in the category of 'solid' Trek films. It also shows that the JJ-verse is giving us high quality odd numbered films, rather than the even numbered film theory of old.

So why is Beyond worth an 8/10? Quite simply, the writers (Pegg, Jung) understand what makes Trek work. The rapport between the characters here is absolutely spot on. Bones and Spock in particular have a fantastic on screen chemistry, and it just feels like the characters are finding themselves as much as slipping into the roles we're so familiar with from their 1966 TV counterparts. It feels like Star Trek again, and the big silly stunts and hand to hand fights feel like what the original show would have allowed for with a bigger budget and modern technology. It played out like a direct adaptation of a TOS episode, and while some may complain about that 'episodic' feel, it was exactly what was needed to course correct the series.

It's not all perfect. The villain has a solid motive and an intriguing backstory, but there just isn't enough explanation. It feels like an extended cut could flesh out Krall so much more, and I'd be scoring this a 9/10 instead of 8. Blowing up the enterprise again is also an interesting choice, but it works for this particular story. Despite these flaws, you have to give it credit for treading new ground and not just rehashing old stories poorly (Into Darkness).

Being the 50th anniversary film, there are also some excellent tributes to the late Leonard Nimoy, an NX class ship akin to the Enterprise TV Show starship and numerous other references dotted throughout. It was just enough to let me know the filmmakers cared, and not enough to be classed as re-treading or rehashing. It was just right.

If you're a fan of blockbuster action, this is a solid, recommended summer flick. If you're an old school Trek fan and you're totally against everything in the JJ-verse, I'd still recommend giving this a try. It's the purest Star Trek experience we've had for quite some time, and it may be the best we get for quite some time to come.

Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (2015)

Is this a galaxy far, far away, or somewhere we've already been?

[8/10 · 20 December 2015]

You don't need to trawl too far into the internet to realise this film has polarised fans. People are either defending its magnificence to their last breath, or calling it a 'remake in all but name.' A 'bland rehash of already overused ideas.' It doesn't take a genius to realise that Star Wars: The Force Awakens does indeed borrow heavily from A New Hope, and some elements from The Empire Strikes Back. Entire story beats, set-pieces and locations are lifted from the original and moulded into this new story, or even given new names as if we wouldn't notice (Tatooine/Jakku).

If you were looking for a bold new direction for the Star Wars story, there will no doubt be a tinge of disappointment. It seems J. J. Abrams and team tackled this from the angle of 'history is repeating itself in the Star Wars universe,' and no doubt wanting to ignite nostalgia in fans by replicating so much from Episode IV. To put this into perspective, if you haven't seen any of the original trilogy in years, that sense of nostalgia might well work for you. But if you're one of those who likes to binge watch the Star Wars saga in chronological order, Force Awakens may feel like too much of the same too soon.

So you may now be wondering, with all of that said, why have I scored it an 8/10? Because, despite its flaws, Star Wars: The Force Awakens was the most satisfying experience I've had at the cinema for a very long time. I laughed, I was excited and I was moved. At no point did I feel disappointed. And more than that, for everything that this film lifts from ANH, it has something fresh and original to counter it with. I was peripherally aware of the similarities to A New Hope as the film played, but I was also aware of some fantastic new characters, emerging mysteries and an interesting plot line for the franchise to continue which was (in true ESB fashion) left on a cliffhanger for us to ponder until the sequel arrives.

What's most important to me though, is that J.J Abrams clearly understood the core and soul of what makes Star Wars what it is. It isn't the titular 'wars' themselves, or space politics or CGI saber-fests. It's the characters themselves and their relationships. Abrams has preserved this for another generation. If you consider that George Lucas himself failed to deliver that core and soul in his own Star Wars prequels, it becomes clear what an accomplishment this is.

Dark City (1998)

An underrated sci-fi/noir masterpiece

[9/10 · 15 December 2014]

I sat down to watch this film (Director's Cut) with my girlfriend just last night. I've seen it numerous times, but I was curious what her reaction to the film might be.

It's hard for me to talk much about DC itself without giving much away. It's one of those films that's best appreciated when going in with no knowledge of the film at all, for Dark City will throw you some ingenious red herrings, some delightful moments of foreshadowing and some jaw-dropping twists throughout its running time.

As I expected, for the first 20 minutes of the film, she seemed genuinely uncomfortable with it. Those rapid cuts, the vague production design that gives no specific idea of time or setting, the slowly growing impression that you're watching a detective thriller and then *BAM* - the first twist hits, and you have no idea what you're watching again.

That is ingenious, edge-of-the-seat film-making.

Dark City is marvellous. It takes the viewer on a journey quite unlike anything I've ever seen. And all a year before The Matrix came along and scooped up all they credit (they even used the same sets!)

The acting here - while having received some criticism - is all top notch in my book, and by the time the credits roll, you'll be amazed at the total transformation the characters and story have made since those opening shots. It has suspense, action, mystery, horror, romance and pretty much everything in between. The only negativity I could draw attention to is the weak final fight, which feels like it needed more budget to become fully realised.

She seemed quite surprised as the film came to a close with those beautiful sunny shots that contrast so starkly with the rest of the film. Dark City was actually pretty damn good.

Interstellar (2014)

Not perfect, but Nolan is certainly getting better...

[9/10 · 12 December 2014]

I've scored Interstellar a 9 out of 10, and that's because I genuinely enjoyed it as piece of cinema. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a die- hard 'Nolanite' or whatever they're called now. I find a lot of Nolan's work dull, emotionally sterile and quite tiresome.

The Dark Knight was a beautifully shot action picture with that wonderful symbiotic relationship between the Joker and Batman, but it didn't move me in the way it wanted to. Inception tried terribly hard to make me feel something for Cobb's emotionally unstable dream- hopper, but instead i just shrugged and felt more like 'ooh this all looks very pretty.'The Dark Knight Rises was a fun film, but ultimately a bit of an incoherent mess.

And then onto Interstellar, which is not perfect either by the way. But it's certainly the closest Nolan has gotten to this ideal.

The film has some odd pacing and some narrative inconsistencies which are probably inexcusable, if you were to spend too much time thinking about it. But oh boy, the SCIENCE!! This isn't proper hard sci-fi, and it isn't as far 'out there' as 2001: A Space Odyssey, but in our current cinematic climate, this is a very brave movie and most likely the best 'true sci-fi' we're going to get. Let's not underestimate the importance of that.

And in terms of the grand, cinematic experience, there were definitely a few scenes that made me think 'wow' to myself. Then there was one sequence in particular that made me exclaim 'oh sh*t' aloud in the cinema. Now that is what we pay entry for - to be amazed, and this film did that for me.

This is also the first Nolan film that's emotionally moved me. It may be the choice of particular themes resonated with me on a personal level, or it may be because Mr. Nolan is starting to understand the artistry involved in crafting a tale which moves its audience. Either way, I tried to be a man and not shed a tear in my screening of Interstellar. I sort of succeeded.

Bottom line is, this is Nolan's best film. Yes it's not perfect, but it's the film I identified with the most, so i'll excuse it those minor problems. It's a story of hope and paternal love against the backdrop of space. If that sound's like your thing, then Interstellar will no doubt impress.