A walk among the Tombstones (2014)

"I was off duty one day in this bar in Washington Heights. 

The cops didn't have to pay for their drinks."

In a world where there is actually going to be a 'Taken 3’, it’s hard not to go into a Liam Neeson movie with low expectations these days. Not that I don’t enjoy watching Liam Neeson breaking necks for an hour and a half but I always believe there’s more to him as an actor. When I think of Liam Neeson I don’t think of him in ‘Taken’, I think of him in 'Schindler’s List’.

Having a Cineworld Unlimited card, I went to see ‘A walk among the Tombstones’ on a whim. Slowly but surely, I was extremely glad I did.

This slow, brooding, dark drama starts with it’s hands clasped round your neck and starts to tighten it’s grip and doesn’t let go until the end.

Liam Neeson plays private investigator Matthew Scudder who is hired by a drug kingpin to find the men who kidnapped and murdered his wife. With a strong opening and great set up, you begin to find that everything else falls away as you are sucked into a moody neo-noir world that is slightly reminiscent of a David Fincher film.

Scott Frank directs this film beautifully and really stamps his style onto it.

Even from the opening credit sequence we know this film is going to be a ride as we focus on what appears to be a tender love making scene. There’s touching, heavy breathing, soft skin and a glancing eye. However, as it unfolds we realise that there is definitely something more sinister about this sequence that we didn’t initially realise…

The pace of the film may put a lot of audience’s off. It’s deliberately slow and really takes it’s time to build the story brick by brick. We hold on static shots for what many would consider an uncomfortable amount of time and it forces us to pay attention to the dialogue. This style is right up my street and I love it, there’s no rush to get anywhere and it gives the audience the chance to do their own detective work. Although the pacing is slow, the film is anything but boring or dull. That slow pace that the audience becomes so accustomed to begins to pick up a little steam with each new turn in the plot. It steadily cranks the pressure up gear by gear as the stakes rise until we reach the climax and all hell breaks loose.

Along with rocking a bad-ass goatee, Liam Neeson gives a strong performance in this film and I was so glad for it. It was like he was given the freedom to actually act and dive into the character, this really comes across in his performance. There wasn’t one moment in the story that I didn’t believe in him as the damaged ex-cop or doubt his capabilities as the man who was going to get the job done. We are invested in him as a character and we discover the clues with him as the plot develops.

What I enjoyed about this film was it’s unflinching look at crime and violence. It doesn’t glorify violence and we really feel the impact of every decision that is made for the better or worse. For instance, the gunshots in this film are few and far between but when one is let off by god you’ll know about it. As an audience member I often feel immune to gunfire in films, it almost feels like a normal occurrence. However, in this film when a gun is fired... you can feel it. It’s noisy, it’s realistic, it’s devastating and it’s violent. When someone is hit by a bullet, it’s not just another casualty to forget about and move on from, there are consequences and damages to account for. I felt this concept was really thought through and my hats off to director Scott Frank for this.

A strong supporting cast consists of a chilling duo of David Harbour and Adam David Thompson as the horrifying Ray and Albert. There’s an interesting dynamic there that I can’t go into too much detail about without risking spoilers.

A likeable performance from newcomer “Astro” otherwise known as Brian Bradley, I saw him in 'Earth to Echo’ but wasn’t that impressed but he’s changed my opinion after playing TJ. 

Finally Dan Stevens as kingpin Kenny Kristo, who has recently starred in ‘The Guest’ which I have not seen yet but after seeing his performance in ‘A walk among the Tombstones’ I can only expect good things.

It’s no secret that I’m an avid fan of the noir genre and I revelled in the fact that the cinematography in ‘A walk among the Tombstones’ really pays homage to the great noir classics like ‘Double Indemnity’ and ’Sunset Boulevard’. Cinematographer Mihai Malaimare Jr. paints a dark picture full of contrast and shadows.  A dark world that Matthew Scudder inhabits is created along with the uneasy feeling that the darkness is closing in on him. This film could almost have been shot in black in white despite the modern setting.

Liam Neeson get’s his share of aggressive telephone action which is always a plus. I don’t know what it is about Liam Neeson’s voice but if I heard him whispering threats down the line I’d give him whatever he’s wanting. The villains in this film have clearly never seen ’Taken’. 

Overall ‘A walk among the Tombstones’ is definitely worth a watch. I always judge a film by whether or not I would have been happy paying the admission ticket if I didn’t have a Cineworld Unlimited pass and ‘A walk among the Tombstones’ is worth every penny of the admission. 

Not the "white-knuckle" ride that you’d expect from the reborn action star but despite the slow pace you’ll be shocked, intrigued and thrilled.

Maybe ‘Taken 3’ won’t be that bad after all… 

The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

 "You don't fear death... You welcome it. 

Your punishment must be more severe."

Over time, the Nolan batman trilogy has become one of this generations most loved comic book movies and made Batman cool again.

The Dark Knight Rises was a film that I anticipated ever since the end credits of The Dark Knight back in 2008.

When the time came that The Dark Knight Rises was to be released, I was ecstatic to say the least. I was first in line on the day of it's release at the IMAX and I was not disappointed. I was thrilled at the spectacle and swept away by it's action and scope.

On my return from the cinema I was reading reviews and could not fathom the bad reception the film was getting. I decided it merited a second viewing and to my surprise, I wasn't as thrilled as I was the first time. I saw it in a regular cinema and was able to take it in on a second viewing. I was able to actually look at it from another point of view, rather than the excited man child I became on my first viewing.

You have to admire the film's scope, vision and the massive technical undertaking but despite this, The Dark Knight Rises but then starts to dip the more you think about it...

I started to notice all the major flaws in the film and the real lack of substance that I was trying so hard not to see.

The main problem I have with the movie is the extreme pacing issues. The film's opening hour or so is a very well thought out, slow build up. However when the pace is cranked up a gear, I couldn't help feeling that the film was in too much of a rush to squeeze everything in. It doesn't settle on any plot point to let the film breathe before rushing ahead of itself to get to the next spectacle. On a first viewing you can't help but get swept up by it but on return it starts to crack. For instance, the stadium scene was a major focus point of the movie but it was over before I felt it had even started. It leaves you breathless but not in a good way. Important struggles and major plot points (especially deaths) were too quick and on the verge of being comical. 

The plot holes and logical flaws are endless in the movie, granted it is a comic book movie so it doesn't have to be totally realistic but some of the issues I have are just common sense. For instance - spoiler alert - sending an entire police force underground is a severe lack of forethought and quite frankly a convenient plot device for the writer to get to the conclusion that he wanted.


This then ties in with some editing choices that I started to notice on repeat viewings. There had obviously been some structural issues with the plot which had to be solved in the edit, therefore some scenes feel completely out of place in terms of pacing and in terms actual story telling.

In a film that's nearly 3 hours long, we only really see the hero for around 30 minutes. This worked great with The Joker but it seems to be a movie more about Bruce Wayne than of Batman. Which would be great if it had went another way. Batman's character arch from the 1st Batman movie to now is an interesting one, the battered and out of touch hero who has been deserted by his people could have been so interesting to watch in this ending to the trilogy but just wasn't.

It seems that there were a lot of issues that needed resolved in the script that were swept under the rug to just try and stagger through the obligatory finale to the trilogy.
To it's credit though there are good points to the movie to balance this wildly spiraling out of control movie.

Bane's a great villain, despite being slightly hard to understand at times, he's menacing and his sheer power and dedication is to be admired and his character is quite well thought out. Tom Hardy brings a lot to the table as well and pulls off a good performance despite nearly his entire face being hidden. I enjoyed his part in the movie but in the end it felt a little anti-climactic if I'm honest.

Anne Hathaway is smart and seductive as Catwoman which surprised me. She brings a certain quality to the role and pulls it off better than you would think. No longer is she stuck in run-of-the-mill romantic comedies as she suits up to kick some ass. Quite refreshing to watch a female character who doesn't really need a man to fight her battles, just a big cannon attached to a bike apparently.

Overall The Dark Knight Rises is a fairly spectacular piece of filmmaking, which inevitably would not please die hard fans and didn't quite live up to the hype. How could it? Having to follow the success of the Dark Knight was always going to be a disaster.

I wanted to love this film so much but every time I watch it I can't help but feel a little let down.