Tomb Raider (2018) review

Since its inception on the Sega Saturn, PlayStation, and MS-DOS in 1996, Tomb Raider has become one of the most enduring franchises in the world of video games. The adventures of archaeologist Lara Croft have sold over 63 million copies worldwide, while Lara herself has become an iconic video game heroine along with becoming rather notorious for her initially curvaceous figure that became the subject of much publicity. This overt sexuality, however, eventually ended up being underplayed in future installments of the franchise, including the source material behind today’s review, its 2013 reboot. Reimaging Lara as a college student who ends up trapped on a mysterious island, this gritty take on the Tomb Raider franchise was a major critical and commercial success. This, of course, brings us to the latest installment of the often-maligned genre of films based on popular video games, Tomb Raider. While directly inspired by the 2013 reboot, this is also the second major incarnation of Lara Croft on the big screen. Previously, Lara was portrayed by Angelina Jolie in the 2001 film Lara Croft: Tomb Raider and its 2003 sequel, The Cradle of Life. And while both films ended up receiving the usual critical derision that usually strikes a video game film adaptation, they are often regarded by audiences as some of the better entries of the genre thanks in large part to Jolie’s excellent performance in the role of Lara. As you might have guessed, this puts quite a bit of pressure on this new take on Tomb Raider to work just as well with audiences, with Alicia Vikander taking on the role of Miss Croft this time around under the direction of Norwegian filmmaker Roar Uthaug. So, does this film manage to buck the long-running curse of films based on video games? Well, not exactly, but that doesn’t mean that it didn’t at least try.

In the city of London, Lara Croft (Alicia Vikander), daughter of businessman Richard Croft (Dominic West), struggles to cope with his disappearance several years prior. Because of this, Lara lives a generally carefree life where she often struggles to get by financially while also distancing herself from her family’s legacy. However, when Richard’s old business partner Ana Miller (Kristin Scott Thomas) encourages her to claim her inheritance before her father’s estate is sold off, Lara begins to learn more about what her father was doing when he disappeared when she comes across some of his old research. Specifically, Richard was investigating into a mythical queen known as Himiko, who allegedly possessed the ability to kill anyone she touches and was buried on the remote island of Yamatai. Despite her father’s request to burn his research for fear of his enemies getting ahold of it, Lara embarks on an adventure to Yamatai with the aid of Lu Ren (Daniel Wu), a ship captain whose father aided Richard in his own journey there back in the day. However, their ship ends up getting capsized during a violent storm and the two of them end up stranded on the island. Almost immediately, they are taken captive by a mysterious organization known as Trinity led by their zealot leader, Matthias Vogel (Walton Goggins), who claims that he knew her father. And as soon as Lara learns of Vogel and Trinity’s plan to find Himiko’s tomb and acquire her power for their sinister intent, she immediately begins fighting back so that Himiko’s devastating powers won’t be unleashed upon the world.

Unlike the previous Tomb Raider films, which launched audiences straight into the action (i.e. the opening of the 2001 film in which Lara battled a big robot), this film is more about building up Lara’s reputation like its direct video game counterpart did. However, in the case of the film, this means that it starts off on an extremely slow note. And it also doesn’t help that the plot is a very basic origin story about a young woman who learns major secrets about her father’s past; in other words, you can quite often tell where it’s going to go from a narrative perspective. Thankfully, though, the film does manage to somewhat pick up the pace as it goes on. Once Lara ends up on Yamatai, that’s when the film starts to really improve in terms of its action set-pieces which, like the game, see Lara overcoming various death-defying odds. And while some of these action sequences do suffer from a bit of frenetic editing here and there, the film surprisingly manages to have some teeth to it despite being rated PG-13 in contrast to the M-rated video games that it’s directly inspired by. Ultimately, though, I think that many will agree that one of the key things that should define a ‘successful’ video game film adaptation is its ability to properly capture the spirit of their source material. Regarding this new take on Tomb Raider, I am aware that there is some controversy over the film’s decision to have Lara’s overall characterization be directedly tied to her connection to her father to the point where it influences several of her actions, resulting in some ‘questionable’ bits of decision-making. Overall, though, I’d say that the film does succeed at matching the gritty tone of the most recent games.  

Just like her predecessor in the role, Alicia Vikander’s casting as Lara Croft initially drew some skepticism from those who weren’t sure if she was a good choice for the role. And in Vikander’s case, the highly positive feelings that many fans still have of Angelina Jolie’s turn in the role no doubt put some additional pressure on her as well. But overall, Vikander ends up being just as good as Jolie was as Lara. To put it simply, these two actresses succeeded at portraying Lara in the ways that she was being portrayed in the video games at the time of their films’ respective releases. The Lara of the Jolie era was defined heavily by her confidence and seductive nature, whereas the franchise’s current iteration of Lara is defined more by her tenacity, vulnerability, and ability to persevere when going through the challenges that she regularly goes through. And despite the previously mentioned controversy surrounding the script’s overt focus on Lara’s relationship with her father, Vikander does do an excellent job with the material that she’s been given. Meanwhile, Walton Goggins is the other big headliner in this film’s cast as the main villain, Vogel, who, like the film’s pacing, falls victim to not really getting a lot to do at first. This also manages to improve somewhat as the film goes on, but not quite enough to make Vogel that much of an intimidating threat, especially after the film begins to build up the mystery surrounding his superiors. At the very least, though, Goggins proves that he can be a great villain when given the right material due to his strong screen presence.

In conclusion, I can’t really say that this new take on Tomb Raider ended up being the film to break the dreaded curse of films based on video games. While it does boast a higher RT rating than other video game adaptations (which usually end up with an RT score in the mid-20’s), that rating is still technically in the ‘rotten’ category. However, at the very least, and even though it’s clearly not saying much, it is marginally better than its competition. Oh sure, it’s not perfect by any means, namely because of its initially sluggish pacing. But once it does get going, things manage to improve in terms of both the action sequences and the plot even though it’s not exactly enough to keep the film from being your run-of-the-mill action-adventure flick. It is worth noting, though, that Alicia Vikander does give it her all as Lara Croft. Simply put, she excellently personifies the Lara of this current era the same way that Angelina Jolie did as the Lara of the early 2000’s. And while I’d still consider Jolie’s first Tomb Raider film to be better than this one, as a fan of the Tomb Raider franchise (having played almost all the main games), I will say that I was decently satisfied with this new film. I mean, at the end of the day, considering some of the other major film adaptations of popular video games that have been made over the years, it’s safe to say that this could’ve turned out a heck of a lot worse.   

Rating: 3/5

Jason Bourne (2016) review

In 2002, Matt Damon took on what would arguably become his most famous role to date, Jason Bourne, in The Bourne Identity, loosely based on the 1980 novel of the same name by Robert Ludlum. Directed by Doug Liman, the film followed the titular amnesiac assassin as he tried to remember his past while staying on the run from his former employers at the CIA. The film was a solid critical and commercial hit but Liman did not return to direct the next two films due to creative conflicts that he had with Universal during its production. Instead, Paul Greengrass took over as director and the series ended up becoming even more successful, resulting in a solid sequel in 2004’s The Bourne Supremacy and culminating in the highly acclaimed third installment of the franchise, 2007’s The Bourne Ultimatum. That film provided a pretty darn conclusive finale to the original trilogy and for quite a long time Damon and Greengrass made it clear that they weren’t planning on doing another film after that. But there was still talk about a potential sequel and so, under the direction of the series’ head writer Tony Gilroy, 2012’s The Bourne Legacy took the series in a different route, focusing in on a different character, Aaron Cross, played by Jeremy Renner, but still taking place within the same timeframe as the other films. Sadly, the film proved to be highly disappointing for fans of the series and it seems as if plans to continue that specific part of the franchise have dissipated for now. And yet, just a few years ago, an unexpected development occurred when it was announced that Damon and Greengrass would indeed return to do another Bourne film. And so, here we are with Jason Bourne, which continues the story of its titular assassin as he begins to uncover even more about his past.

Over the course of the original trilogy, former CIA assassin Jason Bourne (Matt Damon) struggled to remember his past after a failed assassination mission resulted in him getting shot twice in the back and dealt with an extreme case of amnesia. By the end of it all, Bourne learned that his real name was David Webb and that he himself volunteered for the government program that he was once a part of, Treadstone. He then proceeded to expose many of the government’s black ops operations before going off the grid. This new film opens up a decade after the events of Ultimatum, as Bourne is shown to have been participating in illegal fight rings to make a living while at the same time managing to overcome the amnesia that had been affecting him for so long. Meanwhile, Bourne’s former Treadstone ally Nicky Parsons (Julia Stiles) hacks the CIA’s servers in order to expose their newer black ops programs, specifically one known as ‘Iron Hand’ that is set to utilize assets from many of their former programs like Treadstone and Blackbriar. During this time, she also comes across more information about Bourne, specifically in regards to his late father Richard (Gregg Henry). The CIA, led by director Robert Dewey (Tommy Lee Jones), catches wind of this intrusion and appoints the head of their cyber ops division, Heather Lee (Alicia Vikander), to the job of going after Parsons, who meets with Bourne in Greece to relay the information to him. Sure enough, this soon results in Bourne once again being pursued by the CIA as he begins to investigate this new black ops program and, more importantly, find out the truth about why he volunteered for the Treadstone program in the first place.

After the fairly lackluster affair that was The Bourne Legacy, the return of Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass to the franchise is most certainly a welcome one. This of course means that the action sequences are all done in Greengrass’ trademark handheld style that utilizes a lot of fast cuts. As with the previous Greengrass-directed Bourne films, this is a style that you either love or hate and as for me, at the very least I will say that Greengrass’ latter two Bourne films have done much better jobs at controlling this shooting style, as well as the rapid editing, compared to his first, Supremacy. As a result, the action sequences are intense and keep you at the edge of your seat from beginning to end. However, there are a few problems that emerge from the writing, which this time around was handled not by Tony Gilroy but by Greengrass and his long-time editor Christopher Rouse. Maybe this is just the consequence of the fact that Ultimatum pretty much concluded the whole mystery surrounding Bourne’s past but the new additions to Bourne’s backstory, which in this film primarily revolve around his father, feel just a bit tacked on. I’m not saying that they’re absolutely ‘terrible’ plot developments but at this point we’ve already gotten a pretty clear sense of who Bourne used to be before he joined Treadstone. Also, the primary plot revolving around an impending social media platform known as Deep Dream created by Aaron Kalloor (Riz Ahmed) is pretty darn undeveloped as well. Sure it does its job of maintaining the series’ ‘grounded in realism’ feel, especially when taking into account how much time has passed since Ultimatum, but at the end of the day the stuff with Bourne is what really matters more.

Even after nearly a whole decade since Ultimatum, Matt Damon is once again excellent in the role of Jason Bourne. In the months leading up to the film’s release there was quite a bit of talk over a report that claimed that he would only have about 25 lines in the new film and sure enough, that does seem to be the case as he doesn’t say that much in this film. Still, he does get across all of the emotional turmoil that Bourne has gone through over the years just as well as he did in the previous films. As Nicky Parsons, Julia Stiles is the only primary member of the previous trilogy’s cast to return. She too does a good job as well though without giving too much away, her role in the film is very minor. Instead, Alicia Vikander takes over as the film’s new female lead and she’s excellent as is her character’s whole motivation and how she works off of, and in some cases with, Bourne. The same goes for Tommy Lee Jones in the role of CIA director Dewey but for me one of the best additions to the cast is Vincent Cassel, who plays one of the CIA’s assassins, referred to only as ‘the Asset’, that is brought in to go after Bourne. This series has seen plenty of memorable CIA-backed assassins over the years, from Clive Owen’s ‘Professor’ in Identity to Karl Urban’s Kirill in Supremacy. And yet Cassel actually manages to be arguably the most layered of the bunch. It’s established that due to Bourne’s actions in Ultimatum, the ‘Asset’, who was a member of the CIA’s Blackbriar program, had been captured and tortured due to the program being leaked, giving him quite a personal grudge towards Bourne. And, again, without giving anything major away, we come to learn that Bourne has his own reasons to hold a grudge against him, resulting in one excellent conflict between the two.

Jason Bourne is a pretty solid return to form for this franchise, and that of course is primarily due to the return of Matt Damon and Paul Greengrass. Some might argue that this film wasn’t really necessary due to the finality of the ending of The Bourne Ultimatum but at the very least their return is much appreciated, especially after the lackluster attempt at a spin-off a few years ago that neither of them were involved with. As a result of their return, the series very much returns to its roots, namely in regards to its unique though still very much polarizing handheld shooting, fast editing style that produces some incredible and tension-filled action sequences. Admittedly the writing isn’t as strong this time around which, again, could just be a result of Ultimatum wrapping everything up pretty neatly, but the film makes up for it with an excellent ensemble cast and the aforementioned technical mastery of Greengrass’ direction. So in short, I wouldn’t necessarily call this film the best of the series. If I were to rank this film alongside the other three Damon films (not counting Legacy in this case because, well, it’s not really worth bringing up at this point), I’d probably rank it above Supremacy but below Identity and Ultimatum. Still, while the film may not necessarily reach the same amazing heights as its predecessors, it’s still a very entertaining, fast-paced, and overall still very engrossing spy thriller that gives audiences another opportunity to go on an adventure with one of cinema’s most badass action heroes.  

Rating: 4/5

88th Academy Awards: Winners + Recap Post

BEST VISUAL EFFECTS: EX MACHINA

BEST EDITING, COSTUME DESIGN, MAKEUP/HAIRSTYLING, PRODUCTION DESIGN, SOUND EDITING, AND SOUND MIXING: MAD MAX: FURY ROAD

BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY: THE REVENANT

BEST SONG: WRITING’S ON THE WALL- SPECTRE

BEST SCORE: THE HATEFUL EIGHT

BEST ANIMATED SHORT FILM: BEAR STORY

BEST LIVE-ACTION SHORT: STUTTERER

BEST DOCUMENTARY SHORT: A GIRL IN THE RIVER: THE PRICE OF FORGIVENESS

BEST DOCUMENTARY FEATURE: AMY

BEST FOREIGN FILM: SON OF SAUL

BEST ANIMATED FILM: INSIDE OUT

BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY: THE BIG SHORT

BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY: SPOTLIGHT

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: ALICIA VIKANDER- THE DANISH GIRL

BEST SUPPORTING ACTOR: MARK RYLANCE- BRIDGE OF SPIES

BEST ACTRESS: BRIE LARSON- ROOM

BEST ACTOR: LEONARDO DICAPRIO- THE REVENANT

BEST DIRECTOR: ALEJANDRO G. INARRITU- THE REVENANT

BEST PICTURE: SPOTLIGHT

THOUGHTS ON THE SHOW

I’m just going to cut right to the chase: This has been the best Academy Awards ceremony that I’ve seen since I’ve started this blog back in 2012. That’s saying a lot considering the obvious elephant in the room that was the non-diverse list of acting nominees for the second straight year in a row. It was already a controversy last year but this year it became a full-blown scandal with numerous celebrities from Jada Pinkett Smith to Spike Lee boycotting the event. And like I said last week in my ‘Predictions’ post, while I do completely recognize the issue at hand, I do think the boycotting was rather ridiculous and, to quote Whoopi Goldberg, ‘a pain in the butt’. At the end of the day, while the Academy definitely could’ve done a better job at recognizing minority performances, and they have made it clear that they’re going to work to do better next time, it is not all their fault. At the end of the day, they’re just the ones who are picking nominees. This whole diversity issue is not just an Academy thing; it’s also an industry and society thing as well. And that really is a perfect analogy to what this year’s show was about. It was a call for all of us, not just the Academy and the film industry, to do better and not just in regards to combating racial issues. Whether it was Leo’s speech about combating climate change or the Vice President encouraging a call to action against sexual assault, this whole Oscars was a complete takedown of the growing cynicism of our society and if you ask me, that was very much appreciated.

Right from the get go and throughout the entire show, Chris Rock did not hold back when it came to addressing the whole diversity issue and he did it with class. He wasn’t overly harsh or anything; he just pointed out the truth in regards to how minority actors are just looking to get better roles in film and the same opportunities as white actors. At the same time, he also poked fun at some of the more ridiculous elements of the controversy, like the plain old fact that there are quite frankly bigger issues at hand than the nominations that come from a simple awards show. And of course, his entire gig was full of hilarious moments, like when he said “Ah We’re Black” after a commercial break or when he joked that Rocky is like a sci-fi film given how it, and its most recent entry Creed (aka the ‘Black Rocky’ as he puts it), take place “in a world where white athletes are as good as black athletes… There are things in Star Wars that are more believable than things that happen in Rocky”. Obviously Rock’s unfiltered nature of humor is not going to fly well with everyone and I completely understand. I did see some people online say they thought he was “annoying” and there were some articles online that posed the question of whether or not Rock could potentially drive some audiences away with his commentary on the whole diversity issue. But at the end of the day, he did a fantastic job and it helped make an Oscars ceremony that was completely mired in controversy one of the best in recent memory. Because at the end of the day, the Oscars isn’t meant to be all about who wins and who doesn’t. All it is meant to be is a celebration of film and this past year gave us some really excellent films… and let’s just say I was very satisfied to see my #1 favorite film of the Best Picture nominees, Spotlight, take home the top prize this year. So instead of complaining about snubs and upsets, I was just enjoying the excitement and pageantry of it all.

And now, here are my best/worst moments from this year’s event. And to be perfectly frank, this year’s event saw a lot more ‘best’ moments than ‘worse’ ones.

BEST- CHRIS ROCK’S MONOLOGUE

In regards to the opening ‘2015 in film’ montage: “Hey I counted at least 15 black people in that montage.”

WORST- THE ‘THANKS’ TICKERS, TRIVIA POP-UPS, AND PLAY-OFF MUSIC

This year, as a way of ‘streamlining’ acceptance speeches, the Academy had its winners list all of the people they intended on thanking in their speeches and had them displayed on a ticker at the bottom of the screen. I do understand why they did this but ultimately I don’t think it turned out as well as they hoped. From what I hear, those attending the event didn’t see them and quite frankly it was hard for me to see them at times either because I didn’t watch the event on an HDTV. Plus, there were still numerous instances where the winners were being played off by music, in this case by “Ride of the Valkyries” (remember that time the Jaws theme was the play-off music?), right in the middle of their speeches. It wasn’t all bad, though. When ‘Inside Out’ won Best Animated Feature, the ticker let director Pete Docter’s kids know that they could get a dog. And when cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki won his third straight (!) Oscar for The Revenant, he thanked the Beatles and MEXICO! Another new thing this year was the inclusion of anecdotes about the presenters that popped up on-screen from time to time. While I do appreciate things like this, they just ended up being distracting and, as already noted, hard to see due to the limitations of my TV. In short, I don’t really have anything against these two new aspects of the ceremony but I do feel that they need improvement.

BEST- THE ‘BLACK ACTORS IN WHITE ROLES’ FILM MONTAGE

I always love the segments where a montage of scenes from films are played but they add in other celebs to make them humorous and this year’s parodies in particular were really hilarious in which black actors were put into films that have a predominantly white cast. Whoopi Goldberg video-bombed Joy Mangano’s QVC presentation in Joy, SNL’s Leslie Jones took over the role of ‘the bear’ in The Revenant, and Tracy Morgan took over Eddie Redmayne’s role in The Danish Girl while enjoying a good Danish, girl! Though ultimately the funniest of these clips was the parody of The Martian, in which Chris Rock became the stranded astronaut on Mars and yet Jeff Daniels and Kristen Wiig’s characters kept acting like they were ignoring him.     

WORST: THE JACK BLACK/ANGELA BASSETT BIT

One montage that didn’t work, though, was the one involving Angela Bassett and Jack Black. At first it seems like the segment is going to honor Will Smith, who of course didn’t attend due to boycotting after he was snubbed for his performance in Concussion, highlighting his work in films like Enemy of the State and Shark Tale and for being part of ‘an iconic musical duo’. Ultimately, though, Bassett wasn’t referring to Will Smith but his co-star in both of those films, Jack Black. Quite simply, this one just fell flat for me even though I do get the joke.

BEST: THE BEAR FROM THE REVENANT MAKES AN APPEARANCE

I’ve seen some people say this bit was stale but I loved this part of the show, during which a guy in a bear costume, clearly meant to be the bear that attacked Leo in The Revenant, made an appearance in the crowd. This moment was truly memorable once the camera cut to Leo’s reaction. It made me wonder if that bear was going to charge onstage if Leo won… thankfully it didn’t.  

WORST: STACEY DASH’S APPEARANCE

Clueless star Stacey Dash made one of the more controversial statements regarding the Oscar diversity issue back in January by criticizing the ‘Oscars So White’ hashtag, the BET channel, and the idea of a ‘Black History Month’. In other words, this whole diversity issue wasn’t made any better by her quite racist remarks. So it was rather confusing to see her come out on stage introduced by Chris Rock as “the new director of our minority outreach program” and exclaim “Happy Black History Month!” In other words, this was the most awkward moment of the night.

BEST: THE GIRL SCOUTS

A moment that arguably topped the moment during the 86^th Academy Awards when Ellen literally ordered pizza for the audience was when Chris Rock had a bunch of Girl Scouts come out and sell cookies, noting that all of this preparation for the show has basically kept him from helping his two daughters during Girl Scout Cookie season (Oh No!). I know some will argue moments like this are staged but come on, how can anyone not smile at something sweet like this? Plus, that troop of Girl Scouts ended up grossing over $63,000 in sales. Though I must say my favorite part during this bit was when Chris Rock urged Leo to contribute; “Leo you’ve made 30 million this year, come on!”

BEST: TOY STORY CELEBRATES ITS 20^TH ANNIVERARY

There was quite a big smile on my face when Woody and Buzz made a special appearance to honor the 20^th anniversary of ‘Toy Story’, complete with Buzz reminding Woody that “he tried to terminate him” and Woody remarking that if it wasn’t for him he’d still be left thinking he’s an actual Space Ranger. Also, “BUZZ LOOK AN ALIEN!” “WHERE?”

Also, Pixar characters presenting Best Animated Film to a Pixar film? Coincidence? I Think Not!

BEST: DAVE GROHL AND THE ‘IN MEMORIAM’ SEGMENT

No matter what, the ‘In Memoriam’ segment is guaranteed to make you feel sad and this year was no exception, especially considering some of the greats we lost this past year like Alan Rickman, David Bowie, and Leonard Nimoy. And let me tell you, major feels were abound when the video ended with Nimoy as Spock saying “I have been and always shall be your friend.” This tribute was made even more poignant by Dave Grohl’s excellent performance of the Beatles’ ‘Blackbird’.

BEST: LADY GAGA’S PERFORMANCE

Last year’s best musical performance came from John Legend and Common with their powerful song ‘Glory’ from Selma, and this year that honor went to Lady Gaga for her equally powerful melody ‘Til it Happens to You’ from the documentary The Hunting Ground. Not only was her bit introduced perfectly by Vice President Joe Biden, who encouraged us all to take the pledge to combat sexual assault on campus, but the performance was made even more emotional by the appearance of numerous survivors of sexual assault onstage with Gaga. Even though it didn’t win Best Song, there’s no denying that this was one of the best moments of Oscar night. Now on the note of it not winning…

 

WORST: THE INEVITABLE BACKLASH TOWARDS UPSETS

Yes, I’m not talking about anything that actually happened during the show. Instead, I’m referring more to the annoying backlash that came from the internet whenever a big upset happened. The first big upset was when Mark Rylance won over Sylvester Stallone for Best Supporting Actor. Clearly a lot of people wanted Stallone to win and yes, he was my #1 pick as well. But that shouldn’t take away from the fact that Mark Rylance was outstanding in ‘Bridge of Spies’ and very much earned that award. But I have the feeling that the most controversial upset of this year’s Oscars was with Best Song. Even after the aforementioned emotional powerhouse performance that was Lady Gaga’s ‘Til it Happens to You’, the award for Best Song ended up going to Sam Smith’s Bond theme for Spectre, ‘Writing’s on the Wall’. As I’ve made it clear many times already, I am an unapologetic fan of that song despite all of the criticism that it has gotten mostly due to unfair comparisons to Adele’s ‘Skyfall’. And yes, my vote for that category was for ‘Til it Happens to You’. But just because it didn’t win shouldn’t take away from either Lady Gaga’s great performance that night or its powerful message. And even though he didn’t win Best Supporting Actor, clearly Sylvester Stallone is still ‘the people’s champion’. At the end of the day, this is just a simple awards show and just because one song or one performance doesn’t win the big award doesn’t mean they didn’t deserve to get nominated. That trophy is just that… a trophy. So no, ‘Writing’s on the Wall’ winning Best Song is not ‘a travesty’. Calm down, internet!

Geez if this was how bad the internet got in regards to these upsets, imagine how furious the internet would be if Leo didn’t win Best Actor? Thank God he did!

BEST: BASICALLY ANYTHING INVOLVING JACOB TREMBLAY

The young star of ‘Room’ has quite frankly become one of the coolest kids in the industry. First off, he wore ‘Star Wars’ socks to the event… like a boss! And of course when C-3PO, R2-D2, and BB-8 came out on stage at one point, the ‘Star Wars’ fan eagerly got out of his seat to get a better look at them, plus he posted this awesome photo on Instagram of him with the droid trio. Admit it, you’d do the same thing if you were in his situation. And finally, when he and Beasts of No Nation star Abraham Attah came out to present the award for Best Live Action Short, and after Chris Rock came out again to provide them with boxes for them to stand on so that they’d be tall enough to reach the mic, Tremblay thanked him and added “I loved you in Madagascar!” Seriously can Hollywood just put this kid in everything now?

WORST: NO LOVE FOR STAR WARS?

Like I’ve been saying before, I don’t get too worked up over snubs and how certain categories are decided anymore because I feel that it’s pointless to argue over who/what wins and who/what doesn’t. Still, I wish the Academy would’ve given SOMETHING to Star Wars: The Force Awakens. Like I said in my Predictions Post, I’m disappointed it didn’t get a Best Picture nomination. I know it wasn’t going to win anyway but this film was a genuine critical and commercial hit so I was hoping that it’d least win one technical award. But ultimately almost all of the main technical awards from Editing to Sound Mixing/Editing went to Mad Max: Fury Road while Ex Machina beat out Fury Road to win Best Visual Effects. For the record… I have nothing against either of those films. In fact, those two films very much deserved those awards. In the end, though, I do wish The Force Awakens could’ve been given at least one award.

BEST: GREAT SPEECHES

As always, the Oscars have been full of great acceptance speeches no matter how many times the play-off music butts in to spoil the moment. A lot of the best speeches this year were, unsurprisingly, the ones that encouraged us all to be better; Leo’s Best Actor speech, Joe Biden’s introduction of Lady Gaga, and the Spotlight crew highlighting the necessity of investigative journalism and the call to action against the sexual abuse that formed the basis of its story just to name a few.

And those are my thoughts on this year’s Academy Awards. In conclusion, it was a terrific outing this year that took the high road when it came to addressing the controversy of the need for a more diverse group of nominees. Until next year’s Oscars, Thanks for following along!

And of course be sure to sound off in the comments below with your thoughts on last night’s show

The Man from U.N.C.L.E. (2015) review

2015 has been a banner year for the spy genre and what’s even more impressive is the fact that all of the major spy films that have been released this year are all very much different in regards to execution. The year kicked off with ‘Kingsman: The Secret Service’, which embraced the campier/over-the-top atmosphere of the genre that had been abandoned in recent years. Then in June there was ‘Spy’, a comedic flick that was surprisingly well-shot for a film of that genre. And just a few weeks ago, the ‘Mission Impossible’ franchise returned with a bang with yet another excellent installment in the form of ‘Rogue Nation’. Of course we have the next Bond film, ‘Spectre’, coming out later this year but for now we come to the latest 2015 spy flick, ‘The Man from U.N.C.L.E.’. Like ‘Kingsman’, it harkens back to the old-school era of the genre. In fact, this is actually based off of a TV series of the same name which ran from 1964 to 1968 on NBC and starred Robert Vaughn and David McCallum as American agent Napoleon Solo and Russian agent Illya Kuryakin, respectively, polar opposites who find themselves working together as part of the international espionage organization known as the United Network Command for Law and Enforcement (U.N.C.L.E.). Henry Cavill and Armie Hammer take on these famous roles in director Guy Ritchie’s modern-day adaptation. And while the film may ultimately lack the depth of the other spy films we’ve seen this year, it still manages to be a pretty darn entertaining action flick, mainly due to Ritchie’s talents as a visual director.

In the midst of the Cold War in 1963, CIA agent Napoleon Solo (Henry Cavill) helps German mechanic Gabby Teller (Alicia Vikander) escape from East Berlin in order to get her to help him and his superiors track down her father, a Nazi scientist who had recently been working for the U.S. government. But during their escape, they find themselves being pursued by KGB agent Illya Kuryakin (Armie Hammer), who they barely manage to get away from. The following day, Solo and Kuryakin suddenly find themselves being paired together by their superiors in a joint venture in order to investigate the owners of an Italian shipping company for whom Gabby’s uncle Rudi (Sylvester Groth) works for, Alexander (Luca Calvani) and Victoria (Elizabeth Debicki) Vinciguerra, a couple with ties to former Nazis who are using Gabby’s father to build them an atomic bomb. Despite their obvious contempt for one another, as well as the fact that they’re each given private instructions by their respective superiors to steal a vital piece of computer data for their governments and kill their partner if necessary, Solo and Kuryakin are forced to work together with the help of Gabby, who poses as Kuryakin’s fiancé, in order to prevent the Vinciguerras from getting the chance to use their nuke.

The film’s visuals are easily its biggest strength. Obviously the film’s production design is excellent in its period style, very much capturing the look and feel of the spy films of the 60’s just like how ‘Kingsman’ did a great job in harkening back to the more over-the-top tone and plotting of those films. Compared to some of the other spy films this year, this film is much simpler as far as the action sequences are concerned. In other words, you won’t be seeing anyone hang onto the side of a plane as it takes off from a runway or an all-out brawl break out inside a church. But Guy Ritchie more than makes up for that with his solid direction. The film moves at a solidly energetic pace and never drags at any point. Ritchie’s knack for visual flair also translates into the action sequences. Slick and kinetic, well-paired with a pulsating score by up-and-coming composer Daniel Pemberton, and from what I can tell mostly practical with both Cavill and Hammer doing a lot of their own stunts, these action sequences more than do their job in regards to thrilling the audience and for the most part make up for some of the film’s shortcomings as far as the writing is concerned.

Because admittedly, this film is sort of a major case of style over substance. In this case I’m not saying that this is a bad thing but it does mean that the film doesn’t have as much depth as something like ‘Kingsman’ or ‘Mission Impossible’. Each of the main characters get only very simple beats of character development (e.g. Solo’s criminal past, Kuryakin’s family history) and overall the story is generally straight-forward, not really pulling any major fast ones on us in terms of twists. But even with that said, the film definitely benefits from having an excellent ensemble cast. While Solo and Kuryakin spend most of their time bickering with each other, Henry Cavill and Armie Hammer have excellent camaraderie and the scenes of them going back and forth with each other are definitely one of the film’s major highlights. Both of them also prove to be very charming leads, with Cavill in particular showcasing off charm that would’ve made him a pretty damn good James Bond. Their leading ladies are even bigger standouts with both Alicia Vikander, in the midst of a breakout year having already garnered much acclaim for her performance in this year’s ‘Ex-Machina’, and Elizabeth Debicki, following her breakout turn as Jordan Baker in Baz Luhrmann’s ‘The Great Gatsby’, evoking classic Bond girls and femme fatales, respectively, with their performances. The film also features noteworthy cameos by Jared Harris as Solo’s CIA handler and Hugh Grant as Waverly who, minor spoilers for those who haven’t seen the show, becomes the head of U.N.C.L.E.

Unfortunately, it looks like this film is going to become one of the summer’s under-performers at the box-office, having only grossed $13 million during its opening weekend. It may not have been made on the type of budget that we see for superhero films nowadays, but that’s still not a solid number for a film that was made on a budget of around $75 million. And that’s sad because this film is pretty damn entertaining and is a prime example of pure film escapism. Sure it may also be a major example of a film that is style over substance but Ritchie’s style is so good that I can ignore that for the most part. The film is a fun thrill-ride from beginning to end thanks to its exciting action sequences and its solid cast, headlined by the charming trio of Henry Cavill, Armie Hammer, and Alicia Vikander. Like ‘Mission: Impossible’, I’ll admit that I went into this without having seen any episodes of the TV show that it is based on but having now seen it, I’m now encouraged to check out the show in the future. Obviously because of this, I can’t really say anything about how much this film stays true to its source material, and for the record this is basically a prequel to the TV series, but I will say that I had a lot of fun watching this film and if you’re looking for a nice simple spy action-adventure flick, then I think you’ll like this film as well.     

Rating: 3.5/5