THE DARK TOWER - Movie Review

Title: The Dark Tower
Running Time: 95 min
Director: Nikolaj Arcel
Writers: Nikolaj Arcel, Akiva Goldsman, Jeff Pinkner, Anders Thomas Jensen
Starring: Idris Elba, Matthew McConaughey, Tom Taylor

Review:

Stephen King adaptations are always a mixed bag. "The Green Mile", "The Shawshank Redemption" and "The Shining" are considered to be some of the best movies ever made. "Maximum Overdrive", "Sleepwalker" and "Thinner" ...not so much. It seems that King's enthralling source material is not a guarantor for a good film. So when it was announced that his beloved eight book epic "The Dark Tower" was being adapted for the big screen, people were rather cautious in their excitement. But how exactly does the movie version of this dark sci-fi fantasy action western hold up?
"The Dark Tower" is a cool and fun summer movie that just misses the opportunity to be a great one. There is a lot to like about this film: First of all, it has a slick and stylistic look to it. The color schemes, the visual effects, the set-design, the costumes. They all help establishing this fantastical and mysterious world that you can immediately buy into. As a result, there is no need for too much exposition. Instead, you find out and get curious about this world the same way Tom Taylor's character does. The young actor makes Jake relatable enough to be the audience's way into the story, without making the character too bland. Along side him is Idris Elba who is as brilliant as ever. The 44-year-old Brit has an on-screen presence of a true movie star and it was about time that he got the chance to step further into the spotlight. Hollywood really needs to utilize his talent more, as the actor can sell drama and action with the greatest of ease (check out Luther to see him shine completely). And when he's in action, it looks pretty bad-ass. Re-loading in high-speed, curving bullets, shooting in mid-air. The use of a revolver has rarely looked so cool. It's pretty rad! In addition, the film doesn't only have some great humor placed at points, but it also goes to some pretty dark places too.
Unfortunately however, the film doesn't take enough time with its more dramatic moments and the consequential personal development of its characters. Conversations are cut short and possible inner conflict is resolved too quickly. Therefore the movie sometimes fails to create emotional impact and depth, although not for a lack of opportunities to do so. Furthermore, the movie shies away from getting deep into the very weird parts of its source material and offers a more conventional interpretation of the novels. Establishing the base for a possible franchise within only one-and-a-half hours just might be a little too ambitious, and so the film often feels rushed. The movie's score on Rotten Tomatoes however is by no means justified. While critics treat it like a horrible film, it is actually quite entertaining. It is a shame really. Because the general criticism of "not getting enough" often means that there was a good amount of awesomeness in a film, that made people wish for more. The independent studio that produced this movie, Media Rights Capital (MRC), has a great philosophy when it comes to making films. In order to be able to take risks, they keep their film's budgets at a minimum. "The Dark Tower" for example cost about a quarter of the production of  "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.2". Therefore the studio does not need to have huge financial successes. In my opinion, this is an approach that should be rewarded, as it gives us the opportunity to get more original content in between all of those big Hollywood franchises. So if you just want to have a little fun at the movies and tickets are at a discount, go check out this film! I would love to see what they could do in a sequel.

For Fans Of:
Book of Eli (2010)
Solomon Kane (2009)
Wanted (2008)
King Arthur: Legend of the Sword (2017)

Click Here To Watch Trailer!

WAR FOR THE PLANET OF THE APES - Movie Review

Title: War for the Planet of the Apes
Running Time: 140 min
Director: Matt Reeves
Writer: Mark Bomback, Matt Reeves
Starring: Andy Serkis, Woody Harrelson, Steve Zahn, Karin Konoval, Terry Notary, Toby Kebbell

Review:

Reboots, remakes and prequels of prestigious films often miss the mark. "Star Wars", "The Hobbit", "Total Recall" and most recently "Ben Hur" all failed to really satisfy the general public. The more beloved the original, the harder it gets. Somehow however, 20th Century Fox managed to take the absolute sci-fi classic "Planet of the Apes" and re-imagine its origins in a way that struck a chord with audiences and critics alike. In addition to great story telling, the first two installments enthralled viewers with astonishing visuals. Instead of actors in chimp masks, we got state-of-the-art motion capture technology. Half of the cast was digitally transformed into incredibly realistic looking apes with none other than Andy Serkis, the godfather of motion capture performance, leading the way. The actor who rose to fame through his portrayal of Gollum gave the leading ape Caeser a sense of sincerity and humanity that got everyone invested in this chimpanzee's story-line. Now, the third chapter of this new franchise hits theaters and his journey comes to a final conclusion.
With "War for the Planet of the Apes" this prequel series does not only become one of the greatest of all-time. It also makes it a perfect trilogy with three equally amazing movies that can each stand on their own while simultaneously creating a well-rounded overall story arc. We open with written text recapping the first two installments and filling in the time gap between this film and the last one. It almost has a Star Wars opening crawl feel to it, but with a much darker tint Then, we get images that are heavily inspired by great anti-war classics like "Apocalypse Now" and "Full Metal Jacket", setting the tone for what's to come. When we meet Caeser he is still a strong leader, but you can tell that the struggles of yesteryear have left their mark on him. His mind seems raddled, his body exhausted, and he is haunted by the ghosts of the past. As the film goes on Caeser has to battle his inner demons  and answer the questions of whether he wants or even can be the leader his people need him to be. Despite this very personal perspective the film takes, the larger implications of the events in the franchise are not lost. This still is a series that explores universal themes such as humanity, forgiveness, and what one can sacrifice for the greater good.
Andy Serkis gives one of the best performances of his career. The actor who seems to have the most expressive eyes of any other performer working to date, is so good that he elevates everyone around him. The cast members are at their best when they are able to play off of him.  A recognition of his abilities by the Academy of Motion Pictures is long overdue. Every wrinkle of his face tells you something about his character.
The face, of course, is a computer generated chimpanzee face. But is it really? By now the effects have become so outrageously marvelous that the difference is less than marginal. Especially when the orang-utan Maurice is on screen it is almost impossible to comprehend that what you are watching is not the real-deal. In addition to its outstanding visual effects, the film also has gorgeous cinematography and set design. This really is one of the best looking movies of the year.
Overall, it is also one of these rare films that transcend genre. Its sci-fi, drama, anti-war, thriller, action and post-apocalyptic elements are so well balanced that it is hard to pigeonhole this movie. It is also a reason why this series so great. They even find time for some humor through the addition of Bad Ape (a new character portrayed by a fantastic Steve Zahn).
"War for the Planet of the Apes" really is a perfect conclusion for this mature blockbuster movie franchise that might just be the best trilogy of this decade. If you are a fan of the first two installments, you will absolutely love this film. But even other viewers should definitely check this film out, because it is simply an amazing movie. Hopefully, it will manage to overcome the prejudice against visual effects heavy blockbusters and be a strong contender at next year's Oscars.

For Fans Of:
Planet of the Apes (1968)
Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)
Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014)
Apocalypse Now (1979)
Gandhi (1982)

Click Here To Watch Trailer!

DUNKIRK - Movie Review

Title: Dunkirk
Running Time: 106 min
Director: Christopher Nolan
Writer: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Fionn Whitehead, Tom Hardy, Mark Rylance, Aneurin Barnard, Kenneth Brannagh, Cillian Murphy, Harry Styles, Jack Lowden, Tom Glynn-Carney, Barry Keogahn, James D'Arcy

Review:

Since the turn of the millennium, Christopher Nolan has established himself as one of the most renowned directors of our time. Next to his critically and commercially successful Batman trilogy, he has put audiences in awe with mind-bending and sophisticated movies such as "Memento", "The Prestige", "Inception" and "Interstellar". Nolan movies are an event, and whether they like the film or not, people sure love to discuss and talk about their execution and construction. But what happens when a director that is so well-known for his high-concept fiction tackles an historical drama?
Well, with "Dunkirk" Christopher Nolan has once again created a unique cinematic experience, albeit for different reasons than people have come to expect. This is a true story. There is no big twist, no philosophical exploration of our perception of reality and basically no room for interpretation. But Nolan still sets this film apart from other war movies through the way he chooses to tell the story. First of all, there is no real main character, and instead we follow different people at different points during this historic evacuation.We also don't get any kind of backstory for them. This is mostly due to the fact that (especially in the first half) there is extremely little dialogue. A fact that is especially interesting considering that one of the biggest points of criticism concerning Nolan's past work was his extensive use of expositional dialogue. It does not seem however as if this was a response to critics, but rather a deliberate film making choice. By removing the personal perspective from the film, the event itself gains center stage. Imagine watching just the finale of "Titanic" without having seen Rose and Jack before. It creates an atmosphere with an emotional coldness to it, that at the same gives the film a sense of objective realism. Therefore, the film truly becomes a snapshot in time.
By now I have mostly defined this movie by the things it doesn't have, so let's get into the things it does. Because from a technical standpoint, this film is an absolutely masterful piece of cinema. For one, the areal shots of the beach and the ocean are breathtaking. Nolan captures the landscape in a way that gives this yawning void a bittersweet beauty. As though this gorgeous emptiness was already an in-between state of life and death. At other points, he creates a claustrophobic atmosphere that immediately builds up the tension. He taps right into the human fear of drowning or being trapped. Furthermore, he stages most of the action in camera with practical effects making them real and impactful. It should be noted here that this film works without a bunch of gory scenes and manages to display the horrors of war without spilling a lot of on-screen blood.
Something that is rarely talked about in films, the sound design, is another element that contributes to the total immersion of the audience. When bombs drop you feel it, when shots fire you flinch, and when fighter jets nosedive out of the sky, their screech makes the hair on your neck stand on end. Hans Zimmer underscores this with an oppressive atmospheric soundtrack that refrains from large melodic movement. Lastly, Nolan interconnects the three perspectives of the event in a clever way that at some points cements the feeling of inescapability.
"Dunkirk" is a film that has the capability of completely sucking its audience in. It does however ask you to be emotional invested simply because of what happens, and not because of who it happens to. So if you are a viewer who needs a personal connection with a main character to really get immersed in a story, you might not get the same experience as others. And while Nolan tries to make the film at least a little more personal during the last ten minutes, it does not work 100%. But despite this debatable point concerning the writing, Christopher Nolan has once again proven that he is a masterclass film maker when it comes to directing. An actual Dunkirk veteran was moved to tears during a screening of this movie, because he felt like he was there again. Whether you want to learn more about the events of WWII or about the artistry of cinema itself, "Dunkirk" is worth watching. Worth watching on a big screen. A definite recommendation.

For Fans Of:
The Revenant (2015)
Saving Private Ryan (1998)
The Impossible (2012)
Interstellar (2014)

Click Here To Watch Trailer!

PS.: To all the "One Direction" haters, I am sorry to inform you that Harry Styles actually did a good job in this film.