Southpaw (2015)

"A fighter knows only one way to work."

I would not like to stand in a ring with Jake Gyllenhaal after seeing 'Southpaw'. Hell, I wouldn't want to be near him after seeing 'Nightcrawler'... or even 'Prisoners'. 

He's a pretty scary dude. 

After losing his wife in a tragic accident, boxer Billy Hope reaches out to ex-professional trainer Tick Willis to help him turn his life around and get his daughter back from child services.

I was excited to see this film knowing that Jake Gyllenhaal was starring with Forest Whitaker in a film written by Kurt Sutter about boxing. It sounded like a great combo and I was sold on the trailer.

This film is a very dark and quite depressing film. You are in it for the long haul but it's definitely a film that delivers on everything you invest in it.

'Southpaw' starts off well with all the set up and action that you need to be sucked into Billy Hope's world. You really understand his character within the first few scenes and from there you are on board with his journey. The opening feels a little long at the time but, as the film goes on, you realise how long the film actually is and how deep you are going into his world so, in hindsight, it benefits from the long first act. You need that backstory and the build up to appreciate the struggle and the development of Jake Gyllenhaal's performance. 

Jake Gyllenhaal is the glue that holds the film together. He gives a transformative performance as the boxer Billy Hope and it's not only a physical transformation but a mental one as well. He's built like a bear and fights like an animal too. Much like 'Nightcrawler', he completes engrosses himself in the role and it's impressive to watch as he becomes the character. You forget pretty quickly that it's Jake Gyllenhaal that you are watching and you believe that it's Billy Hope. Straight from the opening scene you know Jake Gyllenhaal has done the work. He moves and fights like a boxer and that adds to the realistic nature of this film. He has clearly done his homework alongside some serious training to throw himself into the boxing world to give a believable and harrowing performance. 

Alongside Jake Gyllenhaal's stellar performance, we have Forest Whitaker, who also delivers a great performance as his trainer Tick Willis. There are several moments with the pair bouncing off each other that go from comedic in one scene to heart-breaking in the next. They work well together and I thought some of the best scenes in the movie were the scenes with the pair of them. 

The rest of the cast all support the film well and there's not a weak link in the chain. For being such a young actor, Oona Laurence delivers a strong performance as Hope's daughter Leila. It's nice to see some young talent standing toe to toe with the more experienced actors and giving a good performance. I'd even go as far to say that 50 cent is passable in his role, which is a miracle in itself. 

The story itself is relatively predictable but, as cliché as it sounds, it's about the journey, not the destination. You are invested in the characters and are going through their hardships with them. If you are looking for an all out fighting film then 'Southpaw' may disappoint. Granted, the boxing and the training that you see on screen is some of the most realistic that I've ever seen but this isn't 'Rocky'. It's a film about an extremely unstable man who is dealing with the loss of his wife in the only way he knows how. Billy Hope may not be the most likeable character but he's one that we can relate to and end up caring for. His physical transformation as an actor before the film is impressive but it's his transformation as a character that is the most impressive to watch. 

'Southpaw' is a hard film to get through at points. It seems to go from bad to worse and then from worse to rock bottom... then at rock bottom there's six feet of shit. 

There are some heartbreaking scenes that will really hit you where you live and tug at those heart strings. You care for the characters which makes all the difference in a film like this. You can relate to a lot of the struggles that each of the characters are going through and the climax of the film is like a large exhale of stress and emotions. 

Overall, 'Southpaw' is an emotionally draining film but well worth seeing. It's brutal and heartbreaking but also exhilarating and impressive. It's nice to see a film that's not based on a comic book or is a sequel or a prequel to another franchise. It's a film that stands totally on it's own. The smallest details in the film have a lot of attention paid to them, even the tattoos have their own meanings for each of the characters and it's a refreshing change from the usual tattoos = thugs in movies.

There are some great references to classic boxing films like 'Rocky' and 'Raging Bull' which was nice to see, I don't think it's possible to make a boxing film and not pay homage to the greats that have come before in one way or another. Jake Gyllenhaal is barely recognisable as Billy Hope and is an actor who I'm excited to see. He's grafting out some very strong performances of late and I would see anything that he is in, going by his track record. 

Still wouldn't want to meet the guy in a dark alleyway though...

Ant-Man (2015)

"Sorry I'm late, I was saving the world. 

You know how it is."

Batman, Superman, Iron Man, Spider-Man and now we have Ant-Man. Do they not have any names that don't end in "man"? 

No? Okay...

Armed with a super-suit that allows the wearer to shrink in scale but increase in strength, con-man Scott Lang must become the Ant-Man and help his mentor, Dr. Hank Pym, plan and pull off a heist that will save the world.

After hearing about the endless production problems on 'Ant-Man' and seeing the disappointing  'Avengers: Age of Ultron', I can't say I was particularly excited for 'Ant-Man'. Despite my trepidation, I had heard a lot of really positive reviews so wasn't sure what to expect. 

Not since 'Guardians of the Galaxy' have I actually enjoyed a Marvel movie. 

I can't say I'm suddenly a converted Marvel fan by any stretch of the imagination but I was surprised how much I liked 'Ant-Man'.

The best part of 'Ant-Man' is Paul Rudd as Scott Lang. He has so much personality and natural charisma that it's impossible not to like him. He's funny, likeable and holds nearly the entire movie on his shoulders. You can tell that he's having a blast being a superhero and is making the most of the opportunity. I would not have imagined Paul Rudd in the Marvel Cinematic Universe but it works. He's well cast and reminds you of Robert Downey Jr. with his naturalistic acting style and comedy timing.

We also get a solid performance from Michael Douglas, as the genius inventor Dr. Hank Pym, which was refreshing to watch. He's a great actor and, despite some of the more ridiculous lines he had to pull off, manages to make you believe everything you see. He and Paul Rudd have some good comedy chemistry and they were an enjoyable pair to watch on screen.

For me, 'Ant-Man' took a while to find its feet in the first half. It was a little jumbled with a lot of jumping around which made it feel very clunky and expositional, however when it started picking up steam around the halfway mark it became really entertaining.  

The action in 'Ant-Man' was unique and exciting. We've never seen anything like it before and it's fun to watch Scott Lang train and get to grips with his new powers. When the action kicks off it's interesting and thrilling seeing the possibilities of the suit and how it can be used in a practical way. The CGI is also pretty good which helps a lot in a film like this, it looks cartoon-like but in a way that isn't distracting. 

Corey Stoll, who I've only ever seen in 'House of Cards', as Darren Cross/Yellow Jacket was a decent bad guy as far as comic book villains go. He was pretty pantomime but the film itself realises it's a little campy and a bit silly so it plays on that and doesn't take itself too seriously. Huge epic moments are deflated by comedy to lighten the mood so that it doesn't come across as melodramatic. This helped me get involved in the film a lot more, it knew the limits and took great care not to overstep the mark. It was very self aware and they made it work. 

The plot is relatively predictable and simplistic. You see the entire plot in the trailer but in a fun film like this it doesn't matter too much. It's not like there are any huge surprises, a guy gets super powers from a super suit and has to fight a villain with a better suit, it's more in the delivery and the fun that it has doing it that makes 'Ant-Man' enjoyable. 

There were a lot of scenes that made me laugh unexpectedly and I was worried about how they'd balance the humour with the action but it actually works well. There's a fun supporting cast that give some good comic relief when Paul Rudd's not there to provide it himself. 

I was disappointed that there was a love story crow-barred in between Scott Lang and Hope van Dyne, played by Evangeline Lilly, but it's always going to be on the cards in a movie like this. She's a strong female (with daddy issues) but still can't resist the charms of our leading man. It's a small complaint but I do feel that Marvel need to get with the times a bit more on these issues. It would have been funnier if the advances were always rejected but c'est la vie.

Overall, 'Ant-Man' is a fun movie that packs a lot of action and intrigue into what could have been a pretty bland superhero movie. It took a while to get going but once it got into it I was well on board. I wouldn't mind watching Paul Rudd interacting with the Avengers and he's definitely a superhero that I can get on board with. 

I wonder who else we could get into a superhero movie... *Cough* Owen Wilson *Cough*.

Just saying Marvel, make it happen. 

I would definitely watch that film.

Evil Dead (2013)

"You're all going to die tonight."

Seeing as the trailer for the TV series 'Ash vs Evil Dead' was dropped a couple of days ago, I thought I'd go back and talk about the 2013 remake of the original classic.

All I can say about this film is if you're squeamish, don't watch it...

A group of five friends head to a remote cabin in the woods to conduct a DIY rehab for their friend Mia, but the discovery of a Book of the Dead leads them to, unwittingly, summon evil demons.

This film is an absolute punch in the face from the get go. 

I'm a fan of the original 'Evil Dead' franchise but they've become pretty campy and entertaining over the years so this was a remake that I was actually excited to see. It was the perfect opportunity to bring a breath of fresh air to the franchise and bring it into the 21st century. It certainly does that and more.

'Evil Dead' skips to the chase in this no nonsense horror. 
It follows the basic plot from the original film but with a few more twisted little additions.
The book of the dead is opened and read from and all hell is released. It knows exactly what it is and what you want so it doesn't beat around the bush getting there. Straight from the opening scene you know this film is going to be a hell of a ride and the pace doesn't really let up. All the exposition and character relationships are done and dusted in the first 10 minutes which would be awfully clunky in any other film but 'Evil Dead' knows the audience and what we want so it gets it all out of the way nice and early.

Before you know it you're grabbed by the throat by this bone crunching horror, there's demons on the loose with all the gore and thrills you can shake a stick at... Or an electric meat knife. 

Although the story is basic, a group of friends in the woods have to survive an evil demon attack, it is the execution of 'Evil Dead' that makes it so special. It manages to stand on its own two feet while capturing the style of the original and respecting the source material. It is hardcore horror at its finest while still being entertaining and fun.

The film knows the plot holes and the flaws of the original so actively solves the gaping problems with clever story points. For instance, why don't they just leave the cabin? 

When shit hits the fan, and I mean really hits the fan, they can't leave the cabin because they believe that Mia is just reacting to the withdrawal symptoms of the rehab. It's nice that they acknowledge these basic issues and address them so that the plot has a little more logic.

It's nice to have an adult horror film. This isn't a horror film that is aimed at teenagers, it's not diluted down to a 12 or a 15 certificate for a younger audience. This is a straight up, hardcore 18 and rightly so. It's the perfect balance between brutality, thrills and scares. It'll make you laugh in places that you really shouldn't laugh and make you want to throw up at the same time. 

The acting is functional for the plot but you don't expect Oscar worthy performances in a film like this. You're more interested in whether or not they're going to survive the demons tearing them apart rather than the subtle nuances in their performances. Jane Levy is decent as our drug addicted heroine and carries the film alongside the rest of the passable performances.

This film is a war. It's a fight for survival and you have no idea if anyone's going to make it out in one piece... Literally.

The gore in the film is all practical, there's little to no CGI and the film benefits from it hugely. Everything is real and gritty. The make-up is phenomenal and really makes the difference, if everything was CGI in this film then I can guarantee that wouldn't have had the same effect. When there's an injury or a hard hitting piece of violence, you really feel it. Every flesh wound looks like it hurts and it draws you deeper into the film.

It takes no survivors and pulls no punches.

What I really love about the demon in this film is the fact that it's exactly what an evil demon should be. This thing isn't banging doors or going about saying "BOO!", this demon is malicious and doesn't waste any time. It wants these people dead and it wants them dead now. Those guys from 'Paranormal Activity' had it easy compared to what this group go through.

This remake restored my faith in modern horror in 2013 and is the reason why I still wade through the mass sewage of bad horror films that are released. When you find a little gem like this, it makes it all worth while. 'Evil Dead' got it right and I am still waiting for another film that can take up the gauntlet.

Overall, 'Evil Dead' is a great piece of modern horror that will knock the wind out of you. It's violent, it's scary and it's fun. If you're not a fan of horror then I think this will be a step too far for you but if there's an ounce of a horror fan in you then you'll love this. It all culminates to a huge finale that's literally a bloodbath and you'll be left breathless and gasping for more at the end. 

I'm actually really forward to the TV series now and suggest everyone watch 'Evil Dead' first. Hopefully there'll be just as much horror and just as much blood! 

"Promise, you'll stay till the end."

Terminator: Genisys (2015)

"The timeline John sent you to no longer exists. 

Everything's changed..."

Genisys? How do you say it? Is it just genesis?

Let's just call it what it is... It's Terminator 5.

In 1985, James Cameron gave us the unforgettable 'The Terminator'. I am a huge fan of 'The Terminator' and 'Terminator 2: Judgement Day'. They're by a director who had enough youthful energy and genius to pull off the low budget original, who then returned for a sequel with more money and made a film that was just as amazing. We can ignore the last two Terminator films in the franchise as James Cameron endorsed 'Terminator: Genisys', calling it the "official" third instalment in the franchise. I was beginning to think that this could be the film we've all been waiting for.

Unfortunately, this bloated and unnecessary sequel/prequel takes everything you love about the first and second films, erases them so that they never happened and gives us an inferior film to replace them...

'Terminator: Genisys' isn't as smart, isn't as thrilling and just isn't as good as the original two Terminator films.

It started off well with the apocalyptic future that we all know and love and I was digging the vibes that they had going. We saw the original events preceding the first movie and it was interesting to see the lead up to it. They managed to capture the future as the originals portrayed them. It had potential if it was to continue the way it was going but it quickly disintegrates. 

If every major plot point wasn't ruined by the trailers then it might have had the element of surprise on its side but you know the entire story from the trailer. Any tension that the film tries to create is deflated because you know what's next. I wouldn't waste two hours watching it, just watch the trailer and you'll get the whole film. 

The plot is convoluted and, at the end of the day, a bit clunky. It seems to have been made just for the sake of being made. There are plot holes within plot holes which is hard to avoid in time travel movies but this movie really unravels when you pull certain threads. What really bothered me about it is the fact that it makes a point of erasing the original two stories. This is a risky move because we all know and love the original films so they'd better have a fantastic excuse or a mind blowing retelling of the story to make that sacrifice worth it but, in the end, it's just not worth it. 

In terms of living up to the first two films 'Terminator: Genisys' isn't even in the same league. 

It has all the explosions and action that you'd like to see in a big budget hollywood adventure but without any of the tension, heart or power that it should have had. What made 'The Terminator' so heart-pounding was the danger and mystery of it all. When it steps up to 'Terminator 2: Judgement Day', the action is escalated to a whole new level and you feel like you're going into a warzone. 'Terminator: Genisys' has neither heart nor stakes. You don't care about anyone involved and you don''t feel like there's any danger so no matter how much money or CGI you throw at it, that fact still won't change.

It just goes to show that a talented directors vision can make all the difference.

Although he is a bit of a parody of himself in this film, Arnold Schwarzenegger is the best part of 'Terminator: Genisys'. He sits back into the role as the terminator comfortably and clearly has a lot of fun revisiting the character. He seems to be the only link left to connect people to the original films and he still has it, like he says in the film - "Old, but not obsolete".  He proves that he can still play an emotionless robot...

I thought Emilia Clarke as Sarah Connor was good. 
Despite wearing an extremely low cut v-neck t-shirt to a battle with a terminator instead of a bullet proof vest, she is relatively badass. Granted, she doesn't come close to the immense badassery of the original Sarah Connor, played by Linda Hamilton, but she does fill her shoes sufficiently. What actually really surprised me was how much she looked like Linda Hamilton too. A mixture of great make-up and clever acting helps you believe that she's the real Sarah Connor. Bravo Emilia Clarke.

This being said, the romance between her and Kyle Reece is pathetically written and quite hard to watch at times without cringing. They have zero chemistry. 

Jai Courtney is absolutely useless as Kyle Reece and doesn't come anywhere near to what Michael Biehn did with the character in the original. His performance was stiff and he could have been taken out of the movie and I wouldn't have missed him at all. 

He too proves that he can play an emotionless robot...

The CGI walks on a shaky tightrope, constantly balancing between abysmal and great. There are certain scenes that look worse than the CGI in 'Terminator 2: Judgment Day' which was 24 years ago. The fight between old Arnold and young Arnold and the opening apocalypse scenes are particularly bad. Although, the quality does pick up later on and you can see where the money was spent. 

I did enjoy the parallels to the original film but it all felt pointless in the end. Re-living scenes that you've seen in a better film is no way to enjoy a movie, I'd rather just watch the original classic and be done with all these remakes. 

Overall, 'Terminator: Genisys' started off with some potential but that hope is hastily shattered and it becomes insulting to the original two films. I am a die hard fan of the James Cameron films so it inevitably had a lot to live up to. Despite being associated with the terminator franchise, I think if you look at it as a stand alone film it still doesn't stack up too well. If it had stuck with the feel and the direction it was going in the first act then it could have been a decent sequel/prequel that I wouldn't have walked out of feeling cheated. 

I really wish that these terminator movies will be terminated and sorry Arnie but I hope that you won't be back...

"You're terminated, fucker."

Minions (2015)

"Banana!"

A film about the characters that you love in the film but are sick of seeing everywhere else...

Seriously, if I have to see one more Minion meme...

Minions Stuart, Kevin and Bob go on an adventure to find their tribe of minions a new evil master and end up being recruited by super-villain Scarlett Overkill, who is plotting to take over the world.

I am a huge fan of 'Despicable Me' and I always thought the Minions were the best part of the film. I was relatively excited to see the 'Minions' movie and had patiently waited months for it's arrival. In the lead up to the release, I was slightly put off by the over saturation of the minions. You couldn't enter a shop or go online without seeing the minions somewhere or another and the 40,000 trailers for it didn't help either.

On arrival at the cinema, I think that there might have actually been more adults going to see 'Minions' than children, a welcome sight to know that I wasn't the only one!

Critiquing 'Minions' is a relatively hard thing to do. It doesn't take itself too seriously so if I take it too seriously then I feel like I'm missing the point so I'll try and keep this light.

'Minions' wasn't great but it wasn't awful either. There were parts of the film that had me laughing and it's not a bad film at all. 

It is funny, it's just not as funny as I would have hoped it would be. 
It has it's moments.

There are some great characters that are totally unexpected and there are some really memorable moments that will take you by surprise. 
You'd barely recognise Sandra Bullock's voice as Scarlet Overkill in the beginning but you soon realise it's her as the film goes on. She's good as the villain alongside Jon Hamm who plays her husband Herb. Watching the constant battle between Scarlet and the minions was one of the better aspects of the film with their clumsy nature that seems to be foiling her chances of taking over the world. 

Unfortunately, most of the funniest parts of the movie were shown in the trailers so when it actually came to the jokes, they just weren't as funny. You'd already seen it so much that the punchlines were expected and this sort of ruined a lot of the comedy for me. The jokes were funny but funny in the way that a joke from 'Friends' is funny, they make you chuckle but it's not like you're seeing them for the first time. I really wish that they'd made a separate trailer for the film that had very little from the actual plot so that it came as more of a surprise in the film. Pixar's 'Monsters University' had the perfect balance with their trailers, they released random scenes that they created especially for the trailers so that when the film was released you hadn't seen everything already.

I can't help but feel that the personalities of the minions had been diluted for children. In 'Despicable Me' they are a lot more mischievous and naughty compared to 'Minions' where they are more "cute" and accidentally evil to please a younger audience. I definitely think that 'Minions' was more of a kids film than 'Despicable Me' was and it does detract from how much freedom they have to make the jokes they were able to make in 'Despicable Me'. 
It does just feel like a film designed to sell happy meals from McDonald's...

'Minions' suffers from what I like to call the "Vince Vaughn effect".

Vince Vaughn is fantastic in small doses. He's amazing as the secondary character in a supporting role, he comes along now and again and delivers some cracking scenes but then promptly leaves so you can get back to the main plot. 
However, seeing too much of Vince Vaughn is counterproductive. In a lead role, he's not as funny. Vince Vaughn in 'The Break Up' is nothing compared to Vince Vaughn in 'Old School'. Seeing too much of him ruins the craving we get for his little gems and I think 'Minions' is the same. What made them so funny in 'Despicable Me' was the fact that they were so random and so chaotic at times that you couldn't help but laugh. They were a nice addition to the plot but didn't detract from it and in 'Minions' I feel like the intrigue about the minions is slightly ruined. It's like The Joker in 'The Dark Knight', he's phenomenal because he's so rarely on screen so when you do see him he just blows you away. This being said, a whole film where The Joker is the lead character would be overkill. Much like what I thought 'Minions' felt like.

Despite this, there are some fun details in the world that 'Minions' creates.

The time period is great. There's some awesome music to be heard in 'Minions' from Jimi Hendrix to The Doors. They capture the time period really well and make fun of it in good humour too. It's funny to see the lead up to that time through the Minions' travels to find a suitable master. Seeing 60's London is fun and there are some fantastic references to the culture of the time with the likes of The Beatles etc.

Overall, 'Minions' is a good time but not as great as I was hoping it was going to be. 

It will make you laugh and it's fun to see some of the little references to 'Despicable Me'. There are some fantastic actors that do the voices in the film and Sandra Bullock does well as Scarlet Overkill. Kevin, Stuart and Bob are likeable and it's fun to go on their adventure with them. I was happy how they linked it to 'Despicable Me' and was pleased that Gru makes a small cameo.

At the end of the day, I'd rather just watch 'Despicable Me' and I can't say I'd rush back into the cinema to see 'Minions' again. As a novelty it works but I personally think it wears thin after a while. 

Hopefully this yellow font hasn't given you a headache already but it felt fitting for the movie!

BANANA!

Insidious: Chapter 3 (2015)

"If you call out to one of the dead... 

All of them can hear you."

'Insidious: Chapter 3'... 
Because we all need more prequels right?

After attempting to speak with her dead mother, teenage Quinn Brenner finds herself being haunted by an evil demon so she recruits the help of a gifted psychic to help get rid of the entity.

'Insidious: Chapter 2' was the only film that I've ever walked out of in the cinema so that fact alone should give you an idea of my mindset going into 'Insidious: Chapter 3'. I was adamant that I wasn't going to see the third instalment in this overrated franchise but, after hearing some relatively positive reviews, I decided to give it the benefit of the doubt on a quiet Sunday afternoon. 

'Insidious: Chapter 3', on it's own, manages to epitomise everything that is wrong with modern horror today. If someone was teaching a class on why modern horror has gone so far down the pan, I'd expect to see this film on a viewing list. 

What is even more frustrating about 'Insidious: Chapter 3' is that it had the potential to be a decent horror film which, in many ways, is even worse than if it was just a really bad film.

The biggest problem I had with this film was the jump scares... 

Jump scares everywhere.

What's that behind that door?
It's a jump scare.

What's going to happen here?
Oh wait, a jump scare. 

Is this actually going to be a scary scene?
No... It's just another jump scare.

True horror isn't built on jump scares. 
The fear of getting a fright isn't the same as fear itself, a fact that these filmmakers failed to grasp. A 5 second scare from a hand grabbing someone doesn't even come close to a torturously scary 2 minute scene that just won't let up. The difference is vast and it's an important difference. 

There isn't one scene in 'Insidious: Chapter 3' that is genuinely scary because every moment that has genuine potential is ruined by a jump scare. You know when it's coming and you are always guaranteed to jump because who wouldn't jump out of their seat when a loud noise screeches through a cinema? 
The film doesn't give you the opportunity to be scared because every time you settle into a scene, there's another freakin' jump scare. It really puts into perspective how dangerous the demon is because halfway into the film you can't help but think that all it is really doing is grabbing people and making noises... This is so infuriating because it did have some really interesting moments that could have been great but they were completely ruined by the same old "BOO!" moments. 

Therein lies the problem with modern horror. The film is rated 15 to allow for younger teenagers to see the film. I can't speak for this demographic but it doesn't seem like they're interested in the horror experience or the slow burn approach that makes us scared but rather the instantaneous scare from the popcorn flick that's going to make them jump out of their seats. Even on the slow Sunday showing that I went to was full of giggling teenagers that were still probably too young to see the film.

There was no explanation for anything that needed explaining. Granted, a lot of what makes things scary is the unknown but the demon that was haunting young Quinn was interesting enough that we could have delved a little deeper and not lost any of the intrigue. Unfortunately, all we get is a two-dimensional demon who wants to haunt a young girl. There's no substance or weight to it.

The characters are boring and you don't care about anyone involved. Stefanie Scott in particular as the lead is mundane and lifeless, if we're meant to care that she's being haunted then it's not working. I think she's just there as the misunderstood teenager so that the misunderstood teenagers in the audience will relate to her, plus the fact that she practically has her ass out for the whole movie helps the teenage boys in the audience too...

Characters are even forgotten by the film itself until they become useful. There's one character whose only job in the film is to provide the jump scare that is in the trailer... That's it.
We have Dermot Mulroney who plays Quinn's dad who, despite playing a two dimensional character, still manages to pull off a half decent performance. 
Lin Shaye gives a reasonably functional performance as the psychic ass kicker who, despite promising to never talk to the dead again, seems totally incapable of sticking to anything she says. She somehow successfully delivers some of the absolutely horrendous pieces of dialogue so hats off to her, she really holds the film together. 

I always judge a horror by it's ability to keep me thinking about it long after I've left the cinema or turned off the TV. If it makes you turn on a light or makes you see something in a shadow then it's done it's job and 'Insidious: Chapter 3' did not succeed in that. 

I would struggle to even class 'Insidious: Chapter 3' as a horror because it's really more of a thriller. The component parts that make a horror film a horror film aren't there.
I enjoy a good jump scare when it's necessary or if it's unexpected but when the entire film is built around it then it just becomes tiresome. 

I imagine, in the right circumstances, that putting on 'Insidious: Chapter 3' would be a good laugh if you've had enough to drink. It would make everyone jump and you don't really need to pay that much attention to the story.  

Overall, 'Insidious: Chapter 3' is a piece of horror trash that will make you jump but pretty much nothing else. The best ideas in the film are either ruined by cheap scares or not explored enough to be of any value. There are endless plot holes and problems that you could pick apart for days but it's not even worth the effort...

'Insidious: Chapter 3' isn't designed to really scare an audience and unsettle them, it's job is to provide a few cheap jump scares with no substance to sell tickets and popcorn. 
If you are looking for a film to make you jump then you'll probably really enjoy this but I genuinely hope there won't be a "Chapter 4"...

Jurassic World (2015)

"We have an asset out of containment!"

Something tells me that the 'Jurassic Park' franchise should have just stayed a fossil...

22 years after the events of Jurassic Park, Jurassic World is now a fully functioning theme park. In order to bring in new customers, a new dinosaur is created which backfires horribly.

I was totally surprised at the hype that was suddenly upon us with the release of 'Jurassic World' with it being 22 years after the original film, with a sequel that wasn't as good as the first and a third film which should never have been made in the first place. I'm pretty sure I could have happily lived the rest of my life without a 4th Jurassic movie and after seeing the film? I'm still sure I could have happily lived the rest of my life without seeing a 4th Jurassic movie.

What I actually really enjoyed about the film was the park itself. It was very well thought out and was exactly how I imagined the park would look when I originally saw 'Jurassic Park' when I was young. It feels like a Disney theme park and, if it was to happen in reality, Disney would probably own it... 
It had the merchandise stands, the food stalls, the attractions and the rides that you'd want in a Jurassic themed park. It is all geared towards the experience, much like Disneyland, and you really get that it's a worldwide phenomenon. Kudos to the filmmakers for this vision of the park, they nailed it in that sense. Although, being that the events of 'Jurassic Park' still happened before 'Jurassic World' I don't understand how, legally, the park could still be opened... Just saying...

I thought some of the humour in the film was good and some of it really reminds you of the spirit of the original. The entire audience was laughing which was nice. Chris Pratt had a lot to do with this and he's altogether decent as the leading man. He's become very popular lately and there are rumours that he is to play Indiana Jones in yet another reboot. After seeing him in this, I can understand why. He's a good hero, he's got charm and humour with the action abilities to go with it. He even managed to do the slide under the closing gate, perhaps this is a glimpse of what is to come?
I would like to see him play something other than his character from 'Guardians of the Galaxy' but I don't see that happening anytime soon, he does it so well.

Unfortunately that's about as far as my praise can go with 'Jurassic World'.

The plot of the film is totally predictable, generic and as cliché ridden as you like.

One of my main issues with 'Jurassic World' is that the trailer revealed way too much. There are some pretty significant plot points that are revealed in the trailer that completely ruin parts of the film. You know exactly what is going to happen in the big scenes because you've already seen them in the trailer. This then ruins all of the tension and the drama that they try to create in these scenes which really takes you out of the movie. 
With such a big blockbuster there should be little doubt that there will be people filling the seats without seeing 20 odd trailers first.

Alongside huge plot points being ruined in the trailer, you already know a mile off what's going to happen and how it's going to play out. It isn't subtle and you can guess it from the start. Predictability is a massive flaw in any film and, when compared to the original, there's just no contest. The original 'Jurassic Park' had bucketloads of tension, drama and thrills which is poorly imitated in 'Jurassic World'. I guessed it about 20 minutes in and it played out to what I thought. This definitely indicates some poor writing, there could have been other (and better) plots that could have taken the franchise in a fresh direction or in a more unexpected direction at least.

There are a lot of references to the original film which was fun at first but only a handful would have been sufficient. Instead, you are constantly reminded that you are watching a film and are taken out of the story with the amount of "subtle" references and winks to the audience. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the first few but they become tiresome when you're an hour and a half into the movie. I would have loved to have had them all out of the way in the first 20 minutes so that I could sink into the story and forget that I was in a cinema. If I wanted to be reminded of the original film, then I would just watch the original. I understand that it's a sequel so you don't need to bludgeon me to death with it. 
Combine the references with the unlimited supply of product placement and it becomes very hard to actually get into the plot with all of the distractions. Mercedes were the only cars available in 'Jurassic World' apparently, alongside Beats headphones and the trusty Coca-Cola ads. Chris Pratt even manages to take a moment out of a scene to take a big sip of Coke before he continues with his lines. For me, all this just blocks me from actually getting into the plot but if you can get past that then fair play to you.

Bryce Dallas Howard as Claire is just an embarrassment as a 21st century female character. She plays the manager of the park who is asked to look after her nephews who have come to visit the park. She's a poorly written female co-lead whose main worry of the film is about her own maternal instinct. 

She's ridiculed when she tries to be strong and is undermined by her inability to avoid falling in love with Chris Pratt. She inexplicably manages to run away from a T-Rex in heels... She also trudges through a prehistoric jungle in them for the duration of the film, I've seen women on a night out in Glasgow that couldn't last pre-drinks in their heels so how she managed it in 'Jurassic World' is nothing short of amazing. 
Poor show from a film that had the perfect opportunity to have a strong female lead like Ellen Ripley in 'Alien' or Sarah Connor in 'Terminator'. I would have liked to have seen the roles reversed, to have Chris Pratt as Claire's character and have Bryce Dallas Howard as the badass dinosaur keeper/trainer who has to save the day.

There was a harmonious groan from the audience when the on-screen kiss took place and it was a testament to how ridiculous it really was, because all you really need in life is a good man to take care of you right?

It's not a good sign for a film released in 2015 when the effects in 1993 look better than today. The best parts of the effects in 'Jurassic World' were the practical effects. 

Why is that? 

It's because they're real! They look believable! 
The rest of the CGI in the film, in comparison to the practical effects, look very fake because you just don't believe it. Granted, the big fish that eats the shark in the trailer looks great and obviously couldn't be done practically but what was so great about the original 'Jurassic Park' was that the CGI was only used when the filmmakers couldn't do the effect practically. Unfortunately this philosophy is long extinct now and has been replaced by CGI everywhere. It's sad to see because it was spawned by a film that opened the doors with the use of CGI. If it had used more practical effects and less CGI then it could have been a fitting homage to the original and still look great. Technology has come a long way in 22 years and I'm pretty sure a lot more of the CGI could have been done practically.

What I find ironic about the film itself is the fact that it centres around the parks issue of bringing in more customers to the park by creating this super-mega-ultra dinosaur. Everything has to be bigger and better and it backfires on them. This seems to be the case with 'Jurassic World' because after the first three movies, instead of coming up with something original and innovative, they just opt for a bigger dinosaur than the last in an attempt to bring in cinema goers. It's a slap in the face to the audience when the park-goers are demeaned for coming to a bigger attraction which is exactly what the filmmakers have done with the film. It is now a slippery slope because it has had one of the biggest opening weekend ever at the box office, so far it's just $2.8 million shy of 'The Avengers' in 2012. This could well take over 'The Avengers' but nonetheless this means that the door for another sequel has been opened (which was announced literally just after the opening weekend) which I'm sure will sprawl into another 3 or 4 movies... 
How much bigger does it get? 
Will it be an even bigger Indominus Rex than before? Where does it end?

Money, money, money.

Ultimately, 'Jurassic World' is generic. It's a relatively good time as far as blockbusters go but I wouldn't look too deep. It has some laughs and there are enough dinosaurs to keep you occupied but as far as being on the same level as 'Jurassic Park', it isn't even in the same league. There's not much of an attempt to do anything spectacular with the film to make it different or unique. Instead, there's a big dinosaur that is set loose in the park with an excessive amount of CGI. The actual park was the best part of the film and Chris Pratt saves it. This was a fantastic opportunity to breath life into a dead franchise and return it to the glory of the original film, to capture some of that magic with technology they didn't have in 1993. They could have taken it in so many different directions with the park being opened up but instead they go the easy route of just having a big, DNA spliced, CGI dinosaur to wreck havoc. 

I always attach the trailer at the bottom of these but, in this case, I'd recommend you don't watch it unless you've already seen the film...