2013 - an obligatory review of the year..!

Seeing as Christmas is looming, and New Years is not soon after, as it seems customary for those of a film-going disposition - here's a 'Review' of 2013. It's usually the case that people will try and assemble a list of what they thought were the 'best' films, or order them by preference - I'm just going to pick out my favourites, in no particular order; I'll also pick out other film-related things which have had an impact on me this year.

First, here (in no particular order) are My Five Favourite Films of 2013 - to start with, 'IRON MAN 3'.

This film deserved to be the most successful blockbuster of the year - not just financially, but critically too - as it was a tremendously entertaining action-comedy-thriller, which managed to be smart, and occasionally subversive, too.  I know more than a few comic fans were really put out by the portrayal of The Mandarin in this film - however I don't think anyone would argue that getting a comic-faithful take that would not look either racist or anachronistic to the rest of the Iron Man films would have been nigh-on impossible.  Along with some great action sequences, funny dialogue, and a non-nauseating pal-up with a kid, this was one of the master-strokes which proved that Marvel Studios have still got plenty to offer after the success of 'The Avengers'.

Next up is 'THE WORLD'S END' - it's a shame, though perhaps understandable, that this didn't get the same level of Box Office success as the same team's previous cult-classics 'Shaun of the Dead' and 'Hot Fuzz'; the humour in this is more low-key (though no less effective) than those films, and the ending less likely to leave you with a glowing feeling (it's pretty down-beat).  However, I really believe that this represents the team's most intelligent and thought provoking work - not only in the portrayal of friendships, addiction, growing up, but also bigger sci-fi themes such as technology and collectivisation vs the individual.  This is a film, I believe, really needs more than one viewing to appreciate - I'm hoping I get a copy in my stocking this Christmas so I get the chance to do that!

My next choice is 'GRAVITY', which has deservedly won many plaudits as one of the best films of the year.  A remarkable technical feat (you'd be forgiven for thinking they DID actually film it in space!), visually stunning, tense and thrilling - this is an important and entertaining piece of film making.  It's rare that technical wizardry is married to an intelligent approach to theme and visual metaphor, so this film is truly special.  Alfonso Cuaron's technical achievements with this film are not the only reason this film should be held up as one of the year's most important films - respect should be given to Sandra Bullock too, whose central performance sells the drama, terror and tension of the situation, and pulls of a believable arc for the main character.

The most flat-out fun I've had at the cinema this year was 'PACIFIC RIM'; this film totally wears it's heart on it's sleeve, and has no pretension as to what it is about - an entertaining block-buster featuring giant freakin' robots fighting enormous frikkin' monsters!  Yeah, the script could have been better, the characterisation given more depth, perhaps a tighter plot line - but to be completely honest, if you're wanting those from a film then this isn't the place to look!  Some have complained that the film could have been darker and more mature, but Guillermo Del Toro stated he wanted to make a film kids could watch, to give them the same experience he had as a child watching Japanese 'Mecha vs Kaiju' movies.  I think kids who watch this film, and continue watching it as they grow up, will realise there are suggestions of deeper, more serious ideas (rationing, social divisions meaning the rich can escape the Kaiju while the poor can't) which will resonate more with them over time.  But as it is, this was just pure fun, and with 'The Battle for Hong Kong' it had my favourite action sequence of the entire year.  Seriously, this sequence was so good, that I genuinely believe if the film had been the box-office success it deserved it would have made Michael Bay re-think his involvement with the Transformers franchise.  And as an aside, can you imagine what those films would have been like if he had brought the same amount of passion and just pure LOVE for the subject, as Del Toro did to Pacific Rim?  It does make you wonder...

Finally, I round out my Five Favourite Films with 'THE CONJURING'.  My expectations were quite low for this movie going in to seeing it, so I was pleasantly surprised that not only did it turn out to be far more than an uninspired tread-through of Horror clichés - it is in fact a masterfully crafted thrill-ride of jumps and chills - but that it was so much fun.  Kudos to James Wan for making what, I think at least, will be regarded as a benchmark for future haunted house movies over the next few years.

Obviously, it isn't all good any year at the cinema - whilst the bad films have been so obviously bad that they don't warrant attention (though, sadly, in some cases it's not been an obstacle to box office success), sometimes a highly anticipated film can really let you down.  I must say that for me the most disappointing film of the year was 'STAR TREK: INTO DARKNESS'.  Now don't get me wrong, I'm not a die-hard Trekkie who is hating on Abram's take on the franchise - his reboot was tremendously entertaining, and the cast he assembled have slotted in to their characters masterfully.  And it must be said that, for the most part, 'ST:ITD' was also a fun, energetic, briskly paced romp - up to a point.  The part which, for me, and I realise I'm not alone in taking this view, lets the film down is a couple of decisions taken near the end which try to pull off the same type of moment as the franchise's benchmark 'Wrath of Khan'.  Only, in this film not only is it kind of sign-posted, it also comes off as a pretty misguided story-telling decision on the part of the writers.

I can understand why they wanted to harken to 'Khan' - not only, as stated, is it the best 'Trek' film, the ending is regarded as one of the most powerful in any franchise.  But the way it has been aped in 'ST:ITD' comes across as slightly disrespectful perhaps at worst, but it shows that the writers don't truly have confidence in the franchise - they seem to feel that they have to harken back to specific moments in order to do 'justice' to Star Trek.  And that is a real shame - as a friend of mine put it, you show respect to Star Trek by making a good Star Trek film.  This rebooted franchise shouldn't need to try and emulate previous high-points in the franchise - they've got a great cast who really pull off their roles, the visual look is spot on (though perhaps not so much of the lense flare, ok?), and the potential for exciting and entertaining stories is tremendous - next time, if the writers just try to write the best story they can to suit the characters and the actors portraying them, then they can make a much better Star Trek film.

Finally, I'd just like to close this post with my favourite piece of movie score this year; whilst Steven Price's 'Gravity' score was the perfect match to the visuals, tension, terror and drama portrayed on screen, and Ramin Djawadi's theme for 'Pacific Rim' was something of an ear-worm for me - my favourite single piece is 'Flight', from Hans Zimmer's score to the (partially successful) Superman reboot, 'Man of Steel'.  As we look forward to 2014, hopefully there'll be many great, memorable and entertaining movies that soar as high as Kal El did to this theme.

Till then, Merry Christmas/Happy Hanukkah/Season's Greetings & A Happy New Year!

Trailer Reaction: The Amazing Spiderman 2

If you're of a film-watching persuasion (you must be, you're reading this!), then you'll no doubt have noticed that yesterday saw the premiere of the first trailer for The Amazing Spiderman 2.  If not, here it is:

This trailer has prompted no small amount of discussion amongst fans of Spiderman, comic book movies and blockbusters in general.  A lot of this has been devoted to 'Easter eggs', background details which have suggested future villains Spidey will face in the next films (Sony are looking at making this a four film series - AFTER WHICH THEY'LL ALLOW MARVEL STUDIOS THE RIGHTS TO INCLUDE HIM IN AN AVENGERS MOVIE - sorry, I don't know what came over me then!).  Immediately clear are Dr Octopus' arms, Vulture's wings, there's also tiny, tiny details referring Venom and Morbius.

These have been discussed in detail in other places (like here, here, and Empire‘s excellent breakdown here) so I just want to pick out some other things which struck me about the trailer.

Firstly, the visual look is much brighter.  The first Amazing Spiderman movie was mostly set at night - I think this was probably the studio executive's idea of making the film 'darker', because they apparently wanted to match the serious and dark tone of Nolan's Dark Knight Batman Trilogy.  Whilst that approach worked for that character, Spidey ain't Batman - not to say you can't get a serious portrayal of the character - outside of his villain show-downs, Peter Parker's life could be lifted out of a soap opera/drama!  Bright doesn't have to mean more 'comic', in a negative sense - but bringing Spidey out in to the light of day will benefit the character.

Secondly, it looks like the plot will be more coherent than its predecessor.  Watching 2012's reboot, you could tell that it was a film the director and writers were being 'interfered' with right until the final cut.  Story-lines were set up, and then abruptly left; entire characters went missing without explanation.  It is clear they wanted to set up an over-arching story involving the disappearance of Peter's parents, however by the final act of the film this had been forgotten (apart from a mid-credits stinger).  Not to mention the hunt for his Uncle Ben's killer, supposedly the trigger for his heroic, do-gooding vigilantism, which was also forgotten!  This sequel looks to be heavily based around the death of Peter's parents though, so while it probably won't resolve the entre plot until the fourth film, hopefully it'll handle the development of this narrative thread more effectively.

Thirdly, there'll be three villains - can this film balance them more effectively than others have?  The 'failure' of Sam Raimi's Spider-man 3 was largely blamed on the inclusion of three different villains (although I think the over-all lack of narrative and tonal coherence was more at fault), also it's seen as one of the biggest problems with the late 1990's Batman films (again, they had WAAAAAY more problems than that..!).  In this case, seeing as they're clearly wanting to build to a series-concluding showdown with the villain team Sinister Six, having more than one villain makes sense - it's how much is devoted to each which will be the issue.  Apparently Electro is the main villain (although you'd be forgiven for thinking otherwise from this trailer) - which makes the inclusion of Rhino and Green Goblin an interesting prospect as to how they'll be handled.  Although sometimes it is important to give villains depth and breadth in their narrative development (especially as many of Spiderman's foes are 'dark reflections' of what could have happened to him, and in most cases are themselves victims of tragic accidents/circumstances), this isn't always the case.  A murderous thug with a grudge against Spidey, who gets his hands on some military grade armour, is pretty self explanatory!

Fourthly, this film feels more like a proper 'Spiderman' film than its predecessor did.  While Andrew Garfield's portrayal of the sarcastic, loved-up, teenage Peter Parker is widely accepted as a more realistic and better acted portrayal than Tobey Maguire's (although I think Maguire has done some solid acting work in Raimi's films and others he has been in), Raimi's films just seemed to capture the character and stories (in the first two films anyway) better than the prequel.  The only moment in the 2012 film where I really felt like I was truly watching a Spiderman movie was the (superbly executed) high school-set fight against The Lizard.  The way Spiderman crawled over objects and fought was in some-ways closer to the comics than many of the scenes in Raimi's films.  Aside from that, there just seemed something missing from the portrayal - more of that type of action.  It almost seemed that, in the attempts to make a 'darker' or more 'grounded' Spidey movie, they were actually embarrassed about making it a Spidey movie!  From the looks of this trailer though, the second film is a lot clearer about what it wants to be - that is, an unashamed Spiderman movie.  And that is very welcome!

Finally - and this is my biggest reservation - I still don't feel like they've done enough to justify the complete series reboot.  Despite embracing the character and trying to build an ongoing story with him, I'm still not convinced that there was any need to start from scratch with his origin story; the only problem from Raimi's films was his unfortunate tendency to kill off villains, so that seems the only justifiable reason for taking this approach.  Of course, the producers wanted to ape the tone of the Nolan Batman films (as stated above), but it's clear they've realised this doesn't suit Spidey - making it a bit redundant, really.

Because of this, and the concerns about rushing to include three villains in this film, I must admit I'm worried that Sony don't really know how to properly treat Spiderman.  There is part of me that wishes Disney/Marvel would simply buy the rights back from them - seeing how well the Marvel Cinematic Universe has been developing, they clearly know how to get their characters spot-on; so imagine what they'd do with Spidey!  Beyond this, there'd be so much more cross-over potential - and I'm not just talking about Spidey appearing in an Avengers movie!  You'd have Norman Osborn and Oscorp tussling with Tony Stark and his company, as well as him hiring a rogue's gallery of Marvel villains to take on the Avengers.  It's a real shame that no one though of this potential when different studios bought the rights to various characters, instead of the Marvel Universe as a whole...