PHANTOM THREAD - Movie Review

Title: Phantom Thread
Running Time: 131 min
Director: Paul Thomas Anderson
Writer: Paul Thomas Anderson
Starring: Daniel Day Lewis, Vicky Krieps, Lesley Manville, Brian Gleeson

Review:

Paul Thomas Anderson has been an acclaimed director for over twenty years now. Daniel Day Lewis can call three Academy Awards, three SAG Awards, two Golden Globes and a knighthood his own. After these two artists had already collaborated on "There Will Be Blood", they now teamed up for a second time. And if that wasn't intriguing enough, Daniel Day Lewis announced that he would end his acting career after this final film.
I wish he had chosen another project, because to me, "Phantom Thread" is a very frustrating movie. Let's get the positives out of the way first: The cinematography is gorgeous. This movie's shots look like part of photo exhibition at an art gallery. Then there is the sound mixing and the editing that really make sure this quiet films comes alive. Daniel Day Lewis' and Vicky Krieps' acting is on point as well, and it seems that making these characters feel real is a task they master effortlessly. Also, since this is a film about a fashion designer, the costumes are also beautiful to look at.
But then there is the plot of the movie. This story is one of a self-entitled rich old white man whose talents let him to believe his needs are more important than everyone else's. I guess he is supposed to be interesting and suave, but I found his arrogance and lack of empathy less charming than infuriating. Throw in the uncomfortably apparent Oedipus complex and you've got yourself an incredibly unrelatable character. Even the hints of post-war trauma can't help to redeem this entirely unsympathetic man.
The other half of the couple is a woman that doesn't stop admiring him despite his constant disrespect for her. The fact that she talks back to him a couple of times doesn't make up for her constant need of his approval. Their conversations are so very often immature and the more the movie progresses the more toxic their communication becomes. In addition, the film leaves out some important information about them and so it is hard to understand where exactly their affection comes from.
How this movie holds 91% at Rotten Tomatoes and an Oscar nomination for Best Picture is beyond me. This is not a complex love story, this is the romanticization of highly dysfunctional behavior - the relationship dynamics of "50 Shades of Grey" repackaged for a pseudo-sophisticated upper middle class. If you look up "pretentious" in a dictionary, you might just find the plot summary of this movie in there.

For Fans Of:
Elle (2016)
mother! (2017) - if you sympathized with Javier Bardem in that film
The Tree of Life (2011)
Carol (2015)

Click Here To Watch Trailer!

THREE BILLBOARDS OUTSIDE EBBING, MISSOURI - Movie Review

Title: Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
Running Time: 115 min
Director: Martin McDonagh
Writer: Martin McDonagh
Starring: Frances McDormand, Sam Rockwell, Woody Harrelson, Caleb Landry Jones, Lucas Hedges, Abbie Cornish, Peter Dinklage

Review:

Martin McDonagh is a genius. Like man film makers he started his career with a short film. But unlike most of his colleagues he immediately got critical recognition for it and won the Academy Award for Best Live Action Short Film. He followed this with the now cult classic "In Bruges" as well as the movie everyone tells me they still really want to see, "Seven Psychopaths". All of these works were able to gain critical success despite being full of cussing and violence. Does the next entry in his filmography follow that trend?
Most certainly. "Three Billboards outside Ebbing, Missouri" is a darkly comedic yet thought-provoking movie full of intriguing characters, witty dialogue and fantastic performances. In that way, it is very much a McDonagh film. It might however be his most accessible work, because the message and themes of this movie are much more straightforward than usual.
In "Seven Psychopaths" Christopher Walken's character quoted Gandhi by saying "An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind." and it seems as if McDonagh set out to construct his latest film in honor of that statement. This movie is about seething anger, the urge for revenge and about how hatred only generates more hatred. The small-town setting is perfect for this story, as it naturally connects the characters and gives each of them an individual history with someone else. The driving force in this film is the character of Mildred Hayes, a grieving mother haunted by the unsolved murder of her teenage daughter. When she puts up the titular billboards in hopes of provoking the police in such a way that they re-open the cold case of her daughter, she sets the ball rolling. From that point on, McDonagh lets the events escalate continuously. His characters don't care for etiquette and when they clash you can be sure to hear some abusive language and aggressive behavior. And the film feels more real because of it. Somehow, people that curse just seem a little more honest. Additionally, the film gains genuinenes by taking its time to insert a few more quiet and sincere moments in between all the turmoil to give the characters as well as the audience room to breath and absorb everything that's been going on.
This great writing becomes even better through the actors. This is a fantastic cast and everyone is on the top of their game. Fraces McDormand gives such a furious and yet vulnerable performance that you are invested in her fate for every second of this film. Also Sam Rockwell manages to bring out the humanity in a seemingly unredeemable character and Woody Harrelson shines as the unlikely moral anchor of the film.
"Three Billboards outside Ebbing, Missouri" is a cleverly written, perfectly acted movie that with all its obscenities, has a kindhearted message at ist core - an absolutely fantastic time. Catch it in theaters as long as you still can!

For Fans Of:
In Bruges (2008)
Seven Psychopaths (2012)
Fargo (1996)
Adam's Apples [orig.: Adams Æbler] (2005)
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang (2005)
Pulp Fiction (1994)

Click Here To Watch Trailer!

STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI - Spoiler Review

 Hello there puny humans,

it has been four weeks since I released my spoiler free review for Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi. But since you guys demanded my spoiler filled opinion on this divisive film in an online pole, I sat down once more to gather my thoughts. I actually took the time to rewatch every single Star Wars movie including this one. Then, after overthinking how to structure this post, I decided to just write things down as they popped into my head. And so, here we go:

1. WASTING INTRIGUING SIDE CHARACTERS
I love Domhnall Gleeson. In my opinion, he is one of the finest and most diverse actors working to date. Even though he played kind of a stereotypical faschist in The Force Awakens, it seemed to me like there were more layers to him. Especially his relationship with Kylo Ren felt like the relationship of two rivaling brothers desperately fighting for the approval of their father figure (in this case Supreme Leader Snoke). As a result, I was a little disappointed to see him be ridiculed in a few scenes. This role (especially played by this actor) had much more potential than to simply become a punchline. We see shades of this when he briefly thinks about murdering Kylo or when he demonstrates a great strategic intelligence. But after seeing him made fun of by Poe and thrown through the room by Kylo, it's hard to take him seriously.
Then there is Captain Phasma. She was already criminally underused in The Force Awakens and even though The Last Jedi brought her back, her appearance was once again extremely brief. I mean, you've got Brienne of Tarth in bad-ass chrome armour. There's got to be a better use of her!

2. THE DISNEY STAMP
There have been some complaints that Star Wars changed after Disney took over. The Porgs for example were accused of only being in the movie to sell toys and some people said that they were totally overused. Though it's probably true that their creation was part of a marketing idea, they had only like three or four moments in a two-and-a-half hour film. So this didn't bother me, because in such a small dose they worked for me. I mean, they were cute after all.
Another problem people had was that there were too many jokes. I agree that Disney has a particular kind of humor that they also use heavily in their Marvel movies. In The Force Awakens it worked well, but in The Last Jedi I also felt like a few of the jokes didn't land. But to me, the emotional moments in this movie were strong enough to completely compensate the few misplaced gags.

3. LEIA, POE & THE RESISTANCE
I liked a lot of the stuff here. From scene to scene the Resistance got smaller and smaller, and so for me this story-line was able to continuously keep up the stakes of the film. A lot of people have criticized the "Leia-floating-in-space"-scene. Admittedly, I was also startled for a second, but then the scene totally worked for me. Leia has always been described as being strong with the Force and I actually thought it was cool that she got a chance to show it off.
Poe's personal journey from talented hothead to capable leader also made a lot of sense to me. The only problem I had here is that I felt that Admiral Holdo could indeed have given more details about her actual plan to Poe and therefore prevented a whole lot of complications. Maybe a little change in the wirting could have made her secrecy a little more understandable. Her kamikaze attack still looked freaking cool though.
Another thing I enjoyed was that the character of Rose introduced us to another side of the Resistance. Her first encounter with Finn didn't only show us that therer are more people working on this rebellion than heroic fighter pilots, but it also mentioned deserters for the first time (but more on that later).

4. THE CANTO BIGHT CASINO STORY-LINE
Speaking of Rose, she and Finn go on a journey to find a codecracker that helps them infiltrate Snoke's ship. And it leads them to a Casino on the planet Canto Bight. That sequence didn't quite work for me. I already said in my spoiler free review that this place didn't feel like it belonged in that galaxy far far away. It simply looked like a futuristic casino on earth. But Star Wars takes place a long time ago and (in my mind at least) when people dress up, they do it in weird fancy ropes. These guys were wearing black and white tuxedos. Furthermore, they were playing games that were almost indistinguishable to the ones played in casinos today. Sure, there probably were some alterations, but you never got a good enough look to really notice it.
The second problem I had with this sequence was that I felt the social commentary was a little too on the nose here. This was also where the character of Rose became a little too contrived for me. Furthermore, if I remember correctly, Finn and Rose only got arrested for a parking violation, not for entering the casino. So could the failure of their mission have been avoided simply by parking properly?
I respect the film makers for trying out something new, but it didn't speak to me as it felt more like Episodes I-III. Even the action, especially the Fathier horse chase, looked kind of prequel-esque.

5. THE YODA CAMEO
There is actually not a lot to say here. I loved it! Especially the fact that they made him look and act like the Puppet-Yoda from the original trilogy. It was a fantastic cameo that wasn't only there for fan service, but actually made sense in the context of the film and created a great cinematic moment. "Read them you have? Page-turners they are not." is one of my new favorite Yoda lines.

6. MARK HAMILL AS AN OLD LUKE

In contrast to Canto Bight, almost everything that happened on Ahch-To, was a blast to watch. First and foremost the Jedi-Master that went into exile on this sacred planet, Luke Skywalker. This was Mark Hamill at his best. While I wasn't 100% on board with him throwing the lightsaber over his shoulder (and thereby retroactively demystifying one of the best moments of The Force Awakens) I do not agree with the #notmyluke criticism. First of all I absolutely loved that Luke started of as kind of an oddball in his interaction with Rey. It paralleled the relationship between Yoda and Luke in Episode V, where Yoda also started of as this tiny green weirdo. Whether exile makes Jedi quirky or  is just a technique to test the patience of potential students is unclear. But nonetheless I felt it fit perfectly. And when he finally opened up and became her trainer, I loved to see this broken down and ambivalent version of our hero. He explained the Force beautifully to Rey and at the same time he criticized the Jedi Order as we saw it in the prequels (rightfully so). And his past with Kylo? I thought it was brilliant! Seeing the breach of their relationship in three different perspectives was reminiscent of Akira Kurosawa's "Rashomon", and I for my part found Luke's reaction very much in line with his character. When Vader teased him by talking about how he would hurt Leia, Luke went apeshit and swung his lightsaber at his father like a berserker. Here, he only ignited it once out of shock (who knows, maybe he had a vision of Han dying) and then immediately regretted his moment of doubt. He never really wanted to kill Ben, but it becomes clear how it would look like that from Ben's perspective. So my idea of the character of Luke is still intact. And then the movie even gave him an epic heroic moment during the final fight. Mark Hamill was such a strong presence in this sequence that I didn't at all get that he was in fact a...

7. EXPANDING THE WAYS OF THE FORCE
... Force-Projection! Damn, what a cool moment. The visual Force connection was also an exciting concept to play around with. To me, these powers both felt like an extension of things we've already seen before. Acoustic Force connections have already been established 40 years ago in the very first film, so why shouldn't it be possible to "upgrade" to visual connections. The same goes for the Force Projection, which probably works like a pre-death Force ghost. And here, it was made very clear that using this power seems to be so difficult and draining that it may kill you. I hope they dive deeper into these new elements in the future.
Star Wars has always been expanding the lore concerning the Force. The Phantom Menace introduced Force Speed as well as Midi-Chlorians and if I am correct, the Clone Wars series had an episode where a physical incarnation of the Force appeared. Compared to the that, The Last Jedi's new inventions were almost conservative.

8. REY & KYLO

The two individuals connected through the Force as mentioned above were of course Rey and Kylo Ren (aka. Ben Solo). Their relationship is arguably one of the most interesting parts of the movie. There are a lot of parallels and contrast between them. Kylo had a heroic mentor that he felt betrayed by. Rey had ruthless parents that she kept believing in. He stands on the dark side, but doesn't fully buy into it. She stands on the light side, but is not afraid to explore what the darkness wants to show her. Both are incredibly strong with the force. And while Ben wants to kill the old ways and start off new, Rey wants to turn the legends of the past into truths. These characters are not black and white. When Ben reached out to Rey in order to sway her, I almost wanted her to accept the offer. With these two main characters the Star Wars saga has gained new unpredictability. I have no idea how the story will continue. Is Kylo Ren redeemable? Or will he have to die through Reys hand? Is there a possibility that they will rule the galaxy together after all? They seemed pretty in sync when fighting Snoke's Royal Guards....

9. BATTLE SCENES & VISUALS 

While we are on the topic, may mention how absolutely insane that lightsaber battle in the throne room was? Truly awesome. The way that Rey dropped the lightsaber, the way she later threw it to Ben. Genius! Choreography-wise, this was maybe the best fight scenes in the entire saga. But also the opening bombardment of the First Order capital ship is a pretty epic space battle. Even though you didn't know most of the characters, their desperation and the destructive power of the First Order made you really feel for them!
In general, this film is just incredibly good looking. The finale on the salt planet is so gorgeous, I want these wide shots on canvas! The color scheme is brilliant, the cave vision looked cool, Reys training sequence on the island was beautifully shot and the throne room fight I mentioned before is also visually stunning. The way the vibrant red curtains caught fire and burned away during the fight - amazing!

10. SNOKE, REY'S PARENTS & AN UNCLEAR VISION OF THE TRILOGY(?)

Of course the throne room fight I am praising so much was bookended by two moments that were controversially discussed by fans. Snoke got killed off and Rey's parents were revealed to be no one. Now, I am a little torn on these two things. From a mere story-telling perspective, those moments make perfect sense. It doesn't really matter who Snoke is. At least not to our main characters. If he had turned out to be Darth Plagueis it wouldn't have changed anything for Rey or Ben. When the original trilogy came out, nobody knew who the Emperor was either. He was just some evil dude. Giving him a backstory would not have enriched the films at all.
Rey's parentage on the other hand would probably have made a bigger impact. Director Rian Johnson stated that he thought about it for a long time and had cards with character names on the floor, shuffling them around to see what would work best. He decided that Rey's parents being no one would be the most interesting, and quite frankly I agree. Her heritage being irrelevant really spices things up. First of all it moves the saga away from the old-fashion idea of blood-line being important. Second of all it has a big impact on Rey as she has to give up the idea that her parents are coming back and that she is somehow destined to be a hero. So story-wise I am totally on board. However:
While I don't think film makers should be bound to fan's expectations or fan theories, it is not like all this talk about Rey's parents and Snoke came out of nowhere. In The Force Awakens J. J. Abrahams deliberately set up mysteries. The ominous huge hologram with which Snoke was introduced, Obi-Wan's voice calling Rey's name in her vision, lines like "A good question, for another time." and many other similar things were specifically designed to keep us guessing. So when someone gives you a puzzle and after you have put a lot of effort in trying to solve it, you're told that the answer to that puzzle doesn't matter, it is understandable that someone gets pissed.
Furthermore this implicates that there is no pre-planned vision for this new trilogy. The afore mentioned statement of Johnson proves that he didn't have the answers to the questions Abrahams put out there in Episode VII. This I find too bad, because sequels that are constructed together can make for pretty cool overarching themes and stories (think Back to the Future Part II & III). Then again, the original movies hadn't mapped out everything from the get-go either.

11. THE THEMATIC THROUGHLINE & DECONSTRUCTION OF STAR WARS

Even though these three new movies might not have a completely shared golden thread, there is no denying that thematically The Last Jedi is incredibly well-rounded. Firstly, there is the theme of having to give up certain things in your life to achieve greater things. Finn finally gives up his urge to run when things get hopeless, Poe gives up being an action hero to become a true leader and Rey gives up believing in her parents. Even Luke has to give up his self-imposed exile/punishment to become the hero the galaxy needs. And how does every character learn this? Well, Yoda actually explains it: "The greatest teacher, failure is." Luke and Rey both failed to win Ben over. Poe, Finn and Rose failed to save the Resistance. But in the end, every one of them gains strength from their failures.
A second theme that was very apparent in this movie was the grey area between the dark side and the light. In the movies at least, Star Wars has always been about duality. The bad guys were all really bad and the good guys were all really good. And if someone switched sides, they didn't stay in the middle for too long. Even Anakin goes from arresting Palpatine to killing younglings in less than half an hour. This time we were shown that there is more to this series than binaries. On the side of the First Order, we had Kylo who killed Snoke and the General Hux who wanted to kill Kylo. On the side of the Resistance we heard about deserters for the first time and even witnessed attempted mutiny. We heard about the arms dealers on Canto Bight (appropriately dressed in black and white) that sold weapons to the Resistance and the First Order alike. And then of course there was DJ, a character that didn't care for good or evil and just did what was best for him. In that sense, the film deconstructed what we thought we knew about Star Wars. It turned this space opera into a more grounded science-fiction fantasy epic.
The refusal to make Rey's heritage meaningful combined with the "broom kid" using the force in the very end just stress that point even more. The Force is not exclusive to chosen ones. It belongs to everybody.

And maybe that is exactly what Rian Johnson did with the Star Wars series as a whole. He took it away from the fanboys and gave it to everybody. Basically he has asked us to do the same thing that Yoda asked of Luke in Episode V: "You must unlearn what you have learned."
I understand that this is a lot to ask from fans of a saga that has been running for 40 years now, and this is most likely the reason for all the controversy. If you really take a close look at The Last Jedi you'd think there is something for every type of Star Wars fan in there: The opening battle had a war movie touch similar to Rogue One; The Canto Bight sequence reminded a lot of people of the prequels; Lukes relationship with Rey as well as Yoda's cameo were reminiscent of The Empire Strikes Back and then there was enough new stuff for people who only started to get into Star Wars after The Force Awakens. But I guess this also meant that every type of Star Wars fan could also find stuff to hate....

Anyways, these are my spoilerific thoughts on Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi. Apart from a few gripes, I actually really enjoyed this film. If you want to see how it ranks in the overall saga for me, check out this list I've made on Letterboxd. But what did you think about Episode VIII? Do you agree or disagree with my observations? Feel free to comment below!

Sincerely,
Your Cinemartian

STAR WARS: THE LAST JEDI - Movie Review

Title: Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi
Running Time: 153 min
Director: Rian Johnson
Writer: Rian Johnson
Starring: Daisy Ridley, Mark Hamill, Adam Driver, Carrie Fisher (†), Oscar Isaac, John Boyega, Domhnall Gleeson, Kelly Marie Tran, Laura Dern, Benicio del Toro, Andy Serkis

Review:
'Tis that time of the year again. No, not Christmas. Star Wars! There is no need to explain this movie franchise's significance in pop culture. In the night from Wednesday to Thurday many Star Wars fans (myself included) waited in line for the midnight premiere. Gatherings like this have a magical atmosphere, and yet there is this saying "Nobody hates Star Wars more than Star Wars fans" and it is somewhat true. The people who debate the quality of these movies most passionately and fiercely with each other are people whose common ground is their love for the original trilogy. "The Force Awakens" was a critical an financial success, but that didn't keep it from starting brisk discussions. The same applies to "Rogue One". So is the eighth episode of this saga the movie to unite the fans?
Probably not. "Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi" is a cinematic event that in order to take this franchise in a few completely new directions, takes a few risks. Some might not be pleased by this, others might love it, and some others might be torn. The film can basically be divided into three story-lines that of course cross paths and come together in the end, but stay separate for most of the movie. One revolves around Poe Dameron, Leia and the other members of the resistance fighting (or rather running from) Generl Hux and his ruthless First Order fleet. One sends Finn and a new character, Rose, on a mission to a different part of the galaxy. And the final one follows Rey and Luke on the very same Island on which we last saw them.
The latter story-line could be seen as the main plot, and it is here that the movie works best. Mark Hamill is joyfully excellent as this older version of Luke and his performance was definitely worth the wait. In it, you can see the young Jedi we saw in the original trilogy, but also how he has grown and his worldview has changed. At points it even felt like Hamill was channeling Yoda, another Jedi master whom we met long after he went into exile. Everything concerning him, Rey and also Kylo Ren is absolutely absorbing. It is here where Rian Johnson takes most liberties with the source material, deepens the lore and pushes the boundaries of what is possible in this universe. On the other side is the resistance's story (benefiting from a charismatic performance by Oscar Isaac, as well as Carrie Fisher and Lara Dern as graceful leaders) that cranks up the tension through the entire film. Doom is imminent and Johnson really manages to make you feel like the stakes are high.You also certainly can find shades of  "Rogue One" in this.
The Finn and Rose story-line is the one where the movie stumbles. The place they travel to is something audiences haven't seen before in a Star Wars film. While I respect the film makers for trying something new and expanding the universe, this particular sequence was too close to our own world to me. Instead of being transformed to a long time ago in a galaxy far far away, it felt like I was watching my own planet a hundred years from now, which didn't work for me. In general, that plot thread felt a little disjointed from the film, like it was just tagged on to give characters something to do. As an in-universe short film it would have probably worked much better.
Thematically however, all these three stories fit perfectly together as they all explore the grey areas in this tale about the Dark Side and the Light. In that sense, Rian Johnson deconstructs the Star Wars saga, in which the bad guys have always been all very bad and the good guys all exemplary human beings. Yes, there have always transitions from one side to another, but no one ever stayed in between for long. It's an immensely interesting field to explore and the film dives into it head first. If after "The Force Awakens" you thought this story was going to go in a certain direction, Johnson will surprise you with more then one unexpected turn. On the one hand it makes this movie feel absolutely fresh and it fills it with multiple awesome "Holy Shit!"-character-moments. On the other hand it becomes clear that Rian Johnson wasn't interested in every mystery J.J. Abrahams put out there and cherry picked the parts he thought to be relevant. As a result, some big questions from the previous film stay unanswered and some eager theorists will be left frustrated.
Another thing that might put some people off is the humor. It is the first time that you can feel Disney's influence a little bit, as they have created a formula in which they put in unexpected jokes to break the tension. It doesn't work every time and even feels misplaced at points. But since this film builds up so many strong and emotionally charged moments, these missteps are not nearly big enough to tear them down.
The one big thing that is probably indisputable however is that this is one of the most beautiful Star Wars films ever made. The images are gorgeous. Rian Johnson treats Jedi in this film like the Japanese cinema treated Samurai. Staging them in a heroic and dignified way. The colors, the contrasts - everything works. He opens with one of the best space battles seen on film and then graduates to giving us maybe the best and most creative lightsaber fight in Star Wars history. In the end he tops it of with an action sequence that, thanks to its setting, is worthy of being put on a canvas. He definitely knows what he is doing.
In the end, "Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi" might not be without its lows, but its highs are so high that that doesn't really matter. It is a nonconformist blockbuster that subverts expectations and puts twists and turns on a lot of things you thought you knew about this franchise. Controversy between fans is inevitable, but even if you don't agree with Johnson's ideas, this film is worth watching just to explore them and be part of the vivid discussion. And of course for the ass-kicking visuals!

Since I had a hard time writing this review while pussyfooting around potential spoilers, you will find a Spoiler-Review on this blog soon.

For Fans Of:
Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016)
Looper (2013)
Hero (2002)
Films by Akira Kurosawa

Click Here To Watch Trailer!

IN THE FADE (AUS DEM NICHTS) - Movie Review

Title: In the Fade (orig.: Aus dem Nichts)
Running Time: 106 min
Director: Fatih Akin
Writer: Fatih Akin, Hark Bohm
Starring: Diane Kruger, Denis Moschitto, Numan Acar, Samia Muriel Chancrin, Johannes Krisch, Hanna Hilsdorf, Ulrich Brandhoff

Review:
Fatih Akin is one of the most renowned directors in Germany. The award-winning film maker of Turkish parentage is known for being the cinematic voice of people with a migration background as he has often put their reality of life on screen. Thus, it comes to no surprise that a series of murders of nine immigrants committed by the far-right German terrorist group NSU (National Socialist Underground) inspired the story of his latest project. Especially when you take into consideration that the investigation and trial let to the conclusion that the NSU's network spans into government authorities.
"In the Fade" is a fantastic blend of personal drama, trial film and revenge thriller. It tells the story of Katja Sekerci whose Kurdish husband and son are killed in a racially motivated bombing. Akin starts his story with Katja and Nuri marrying... in prison. It's somewhat cute, but first and foremost a clear statement by the director. You should empathize with these victims, even if you don't sympathize with them. Nobody deserves this. The protagonist is imperfect and Akin refuses to manipulate the audiences through dramatic music cues or other similar cinematic tricks. As a result the movie has a coldness to it at points. This, as well as the fact that this is a rather quietly told film, add to its somber atmosphere.
But Akin's directorial voice is loud and clear. Because he has perfectly internalized the famous rule "Show, don't tell".  His images hold more explanatory power than any piece of dialogue could. Katja crying her lungs out in the brightly colored bed in her deceased son's bedroom, says everything about the deepness of her mourning in a single frame. Her getting a tattoo in an incredibly painful spot without even flinching, expresses her emotional numbness better than any variation of the phrase "I feel so empty." would. A courtroom with Katja sitting in the background, fighting the urge to burst into tears while a medical specialist quotes the autopsy report with brittle professional detachment, chokes you up. And then there is a particular tracking shot through a bathroom that will chill you to the bone. It is excellent craftsmanship.
Of course, leading lady Diane Kruger is the pivotal element in all of these shots. While I have found her acting a little superficial in the past, she is a revelation in this movie. Displaying unbridled raw emotions and embracing her characters flaws, she gives one of the strongest and authentic performances of this year, as well as the best of her career. She and Akin are a fantastic pairing.
However, the film is not exempt from possible criticism. If you were looking for a nuanced exploration of the NSU's structure and a differentiated look at their place within the system of government, you'll come away empty-handed. Akin has no interest in making this a film with documentary qualities. Nor does he want to provide moral guidance. It seems that primarily he wanted to vent his anger and express how infuriating such a mindless and hateful act of violence is. In that sense, it is not a rationally designed movie, but one driven by emotion. As a result, one could argue that in the third act, the film undercuts its own message. But it is likely that Akin wants to present chaos rather than order, and thus, doesn't care for making sense of it all. To show the senselessness of such an atrocity is the message itself.
So even though "In the Fade" is not the investigative movie some had hoped for, it is not one bit less powerful. On the contrary, it is one of the most thrilling films of the year that will captivate you from its first minute to the last. This ingeniously constructed piece of cinema surely leaves an impression and will stick with you long after you've left the theater. A movie that is most definitely worth your time and money.

For Fans Of:
Taxi Driver (1976)
Prisoners (2013)
Léon: The Professional (1994)
The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2009)
Head On (2004) [orig.: Gegen die Wand]

Click Here To Watch Trailer!

JUSTICE LEAGUE - Movie Review

Title: Justice League
Running Time: 120 min
Director: Zack Snyder
Writers: Chris Terrio, Joss Whedon
Starring: Ben Affleck, Gal Gadot, Ezra Miller, Ray Fisher, Jason Momoa, Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, J.K. Simmons

Review:
Here we are. After four years of establishing their cinematic universe, DC is finally bringing their big superhero team-up to the silver screen. It's been a weird and rocky road so far. "Man of Steel" was deemed 'okay' by most people. Despite a small and vocal fan-base, "Batman V Superman" and "Suicide Squad" were shred to pieces by the media. "Wonder Woman" on the other hand was a critical and commercial smash hit. Then, "Justice League" was produced. Just before filming was finished, Zack Snyder dropped out due to his daughter's tragic death. Joss Whedon took over to direct the rest of the film and Warner Bros. Studios ordered extensive reshoots to match the final product with the lighter tone of "Wonder Woman" rather than Snyder's much darker vision. So with all this trouble in the forefront, how did this movie turn out?
The short version would be: Fine. The long version is a little more complex. A lot of the movie going experience depends on ones expectations. If you were afraid to see a "Batman V Superman" level clusterfuck, you will be pleasantly surprised. If you've loved all of the DC movies so far, you'll probably love this too. If you were expecting something completely innovative in superhero movies, you will not find it here. There is some stuff that works and some that doesn't.
The whole "getting-the-team-together" part actually works quite well. The reason these heroes come together certainly seems dynamic, and it is always fun to see a recruitment dialogue. In general there are some cool exchanges between characters. Wonder Woman making clear to Cyborg that she outsmarted him. Batman telling a self-doubting Flash, that he should just save one person. Aquaman being involuntarily vulnerable. It's like an extension of the one good piece of dialogue we saw in "Batman V Superman", where Bruce Wayne and Clark Kent have a conversation in which they both insinuate to know each others secret identity. The conversations especially work because of the great cast. Each one of the actors fits their role well and gives a more than convincing performance. Especially Jason Momoa managed to get quite a lot out of one of the most laughed at superheros. And then there are some incredibly cool shots that look like they are taken straight out of the comic book panels. Flash's use of the speed force is great and when Superman fights him despite of it, it makes for a pretty memorable sequence.
But the movie certainly has flaws. A minor gripe is that it kind of ignores some of the things that were presented in"Batman V Superman". Although it is understanable that the film makers wanted to distance themselves from that disaster, it is odd to see believes or character traits contradicting what came before. Most noticable is the lack of care for secret identities (Aquaman for example casually identifies Bruce Wayne as Batman in front of an entire village). Other than that, though the film brings up a lot of intriguing plot threats and themes, it doesn't take the time to explore those thoroughly. A two hour run time for a superhero film might be refreshingly short, but when a movie has to set up so much, it is not enough. Another big issue is the way the film handles its female team member. Gal Gadot is once again fantastic in the role. But next to the unpleasant feeling that her skirt got a little shorter, there are too many low angle camera shots that very obviously only there to showcase her butt. And a quick Flash-fell-inot-her-cleavage joke wasn't missing either. In the wake of the #MeToo-debate it is especially painful to witness this recent cinematic female icon become sexualized after all. Too me, this was more upsetting than the final battle being so CGI-heavy.
But in the end, there is fun to be had with "Justice League". While other DC outings have almost been offensively bad, this one is not worth having strong feelings about. It's fine. Imperfect and yet showing some good approaches to steer this cinematic universe in a better direction, you should watch this if you've loved DC so far; if you want understand upcoming continuity; or if you want to see some superheros do some bad-ass superhero fighting.

For Fans Of:
Man of Steel (2013)
Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015)
Batman Forever (1995)
Superman III (1983)
Transformers (2007)
Suicide Squad (2016)

Click Here To Watch Trailer!

MURDER ON THE ORIENT EXPRESS - Movie Review

Title: Murder on the Orient Express
Running Time: 114 min
Director: Kenneth Branagh
Writer: Michael Green
Starring: Kenneth Branagh, Daisy Ridley, Johnny Depp, Judi Dench, Josh Gad, Michelle Pfeiffer, Willem Dafoe, Penélope Cruz, Derek Jacobi, Olivia Colman

Review:
After Sir Arthur Conan Doyle had retired his famous Sherlock Holmes novels, there was another writer to seize the mantel and please the public with murder mysteries and detective stories. Agatha Christie's classic whodunits have inspired film makers multiple times before. This time, Shakesperean director and Gilderoy Lockhart himself, Kenneth Branagh has taken it upon himself to bring one of her novels to the big screen. And while the same story had already been adapted in 1974, it looks like Branagh spiced up his version with 21st century visuals.
"Murder on the Orient Express" is a solid piece of film making, that might not quite live up to its full potential, but will entertain you nonetheless. Branagh is a master in self-staging. His arrogant and slightly quirky Hercule Poirot takes the spotlight, while the rest of the stellar cast takes a back seat. It makes sense of course, because in murder mysteries it is typical that the suspects are merely chess peaces to serve the story. And having almost every character being played by a renowned actor prevents a premature casting-based solving of the mystery. But if you were expecting an ensemble acting tour de force, you will not find it here. Branagh's One-Man-Show however is so enjoyable that it makes up for that. Every time he directs himself, he takes the opportunity to pick out the role he really wants to play. Thus, he puts a lot of heart and enthusiasm in his performances, that perfectly translates to the screen. It's an absolute blast to see him act.
His directing is similarly joyful. Next to his trademark Dutch tilt, he uses some other lesser used camera angles every now and again. Things like the God's view shot and the POV shot combined with long takes add to the mysterious atmosphere of the film. Furthermore, this film simply looks great. The colors are vibrant; the contrasts are strong; the sets, costumes and props look cool; and of course Branagh's moustache is magnificent. The whole movie is visually slick.
But while the film doesn't have any problem in that area, it is the script that misses some opportunities to have a greater impact. The film's emotional punchline is that Poirot's believe system is challenged to an extent that he struggles to hold on to it. However, the set up of this believe system isn't strong enough. Poirot mentions it ones or twice in the first third of the film, but it isn't really reinforced. Even when it starts to crumble, the film doesn't take its time to show Poirot in solitude, doubting himself and the values that he stands for. He's constantly busy solving the case. It is only in the finale that he pours his heart out. And though Branagh's acting is terrific in that moment, it would have been more effective if we saw more cracks in his faҫade before it breaks.

Secondly, the film does not give the viewer the complete satisfaction of piecing things together themselves, even retrospectively. Poirot jumps to a lot of conclusions off-screen and so the audience is often presented with the solution without knowing how exactly we got there. The story also focuses on motive rather than the exact details and the timeline of the crime and so the events are not entirely reconstructable for the viewer either. 

In general however, this is a perfectly enjoyable film. If you have the spare time and money, watch it in the theater to enjoy its visual style. Otherwise, you can easily pop it in on a DVD night with some friends, preferably on a big TV.  Rewatchable for Branagh's performance alone and certainly arousing interest for possible sequels, this solid murder mystery is definitely good fun. 

For Fans Of:
Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011)
Murder on the Orient Express (1974)
The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014)
The Da Vinci Code (2006)

Click Here To Watch Trailer!

THOR: RAGNAROK - Movie Review

 Title: Thor: Ragnarok
Running Time: 130 min
Director: Taika Waititi
Writer: Eric Pearson, Craig Kyle, Christopher Yost
Starring: Chris Hemsworth, Tom Hiddleston, Tessa Thompson, Cate Blanchett, Jeff Goldblum, Mark Ruffalo, Idris Elba, Anthony Hopkins,

Review:

Although Marvel has never released a truly terrible movie, there have been some missfires in the past. "Thor: The Dark World" was one of them. In fact, with the exception of Captain America, none of the other Marvel solo movies have managed to equal the critical success of their first installment. But with Kiwi director Taika Waititi at the helm and the addition of The Hulk, the trailer for the Norse god's third outing looked promising. So can this sequel deliver?
Yes and no. "Thor: Ragnarok" is a fun and flashy blockbuster that will entertain you for its entire two hour run time. Not more and not less. Taika Waititi surely steered the ship in a new direction. This Thor is much more comedic and much more colorful than its predecessors. Visually, this movie is closer to the "Guardians of the Galaxy" than to previous films about the god of thunder. And yet it makes sense. Asgard still looks like the fantasy realm we came to know. When Thor accidentally strands on the garbage planet Sakaar however, he has obviously landed in that weird edge region of the galaxy, where Peter Quill and his gang easily could go about their business. But Waititi doesn't rest on the shoulders of what James Gunn already created. Instead he lets out his own unbridled creativity and gives us some awesome set pieces that suck you into this crazy, iridescent world. Despite all the flashiness, Waititi manages to shoot the action sequences in a way that they don't feel agitated, but you can fully enjoy their grand scale. He also seemed to have created a positive atmosphere on set, as all the actors seem to be enjoying themselves. Tessa Thompson is a great new addition as this bad-ass warrior, although her introduction entails that the film completely ignores the existence of Jaimie Alexander's Lady Sif (Is a movie only allowed to have one heroine?). Also, Jeff Goldblum shines as a character that is basically a heighten space-version of himself. The real scene-stealer, however, is Mark Ruffalo. His gentle performance of both, The Hulk and Bruce Banner, elevates the material and it is the scenes when he is on screen that are the movie's best.
As I mentioned before, the humor was also an element that was really amped up in this movie. Unfortunately, this is where it runs into its biggest problem. Although the larger amount of the jokes do work, the immensely unserious tone of the film robs it of carrying any emotional weight. Everything becomes a knee-slapper. Yes, Thor is funnier than ever, but he has also never been so indifferent. The betrayal, the lies and even the deaths of the people around him, seem to effect him not one bit. He keeps his cool no matter what. As if abnegation and minimisation replaced all of his healthy coping mechanisms. When your main character constantly goofs around like that, it's hard to really feel the threat of pending doom that the movie presents. For a film about the complete annihilation of our hero's home, the stakes feel astonishingly low. But not only Thor has become a sitcom-version of himself. Loki, who was first introduced as a maliciously scheming, complex and intelligent villain, has become a walking punchline. The ease with which he can be overpowered is Marvel's latest running gag. He is a character deprived of real personal growth, doomed to run in circles. Inevitably, the two brother's relationship changed as well. Once a tragedy of Shakespearean caliber, it has now transformed into a "Dumb-and-Dumber"-esque routine. Even the resolution of Bruce Banner's personal struggle is played as a joke in the film's finale. "Sharknado 5" had more emotional moments than this (I'm not even kidding).
The other problems with the film (what exactly was Karl Urban's purpose in this movie?) are forgivable, but when everyone becomes the comic relief, there is no tension left to be relieved from.
It is a shame, really, because within the story of "Thor: Ragnarok" lies great dramatic potential and even the possibility to make a statement about postcolonialism (a thanks to B.A. for pointing that out). But it all gets lost in the laughs. The cool new characters and the zany visuals can't help over the fact that this is ultimately a frothy live action cartoon. Artistically great, yet emotionally empty, this film is good for a DVD night with friends in order to have some fun or catch up with the cinematic universe. If you've never had a problem with Marvel's joke quantity or even enjoyed it, you might even love this film. But if, like me, you need at least a little bit of pathos in your superhero movies, this film might disappoint you.

For Fans Of:
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol.2 (2017)
2 Fast 2 Furious (2005)
The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (2005)
Suicide Squad (2016)

Click Here To Watch Trailer!

BLADE RUNNER 2049 - Movie Review

 Title: Blade Runner 2049
Running Time: 164 min
Director: Dennis Villeneuve
Writers: Hampton Fancher, Michael Green
Starring: Ryan Gosling, Harrison Ford, Jared Leto, Robin Wright, Ana de Armas, Dave Bautista, Sylvia Hoecks

Review:

Late sequels to old classics are a mixed bag at best. While some film makers manage to reinvigorate a series like Ryan Coogler did with "Creed", too often we get lifeless rehashs that fail to capture the original's spirit (think "Indiana Jones 4", "Die Hard 5" or whatever the hell Ridley Scott is doing with his Alien franchise). 1982's "Blade Runner" was one of the few old gems that had stayed untouched. Then however, a sequel was announced with none other than up-and-coming director Dennis Villeneuve attached. So has the creative mind behind critically acclaimed films like "Sicario", "Prisoners" and "Arrival" managed to give us a worthy continuation of this beloved sci-fi classic?
"Blade Runner 2049" is indeed an excellent piece of film making that can be enjoyed by fans of the original and newbies alike. Although a knowledge of the first movie certainly enhances the experience, Villeneuve managed to create a film that completely stands on its own. Including an omission of Hollywood's bad habit of setting up a possible franchise. Instead, he trusts the material he was given and displays his thorough appreciation for the original. This truly feels like the same dystopian version of 2019 that Harrison Ford wandered through, with the only exception that technology has advanced over the past three decades. But Villeneuve and his team don't only develop the concepts of the original further. They also broaden this world by going beyond the gloomy neo(n)-noir urban core of Los Angeles, and they explore new and never before seen aspects of it. As a result, many different sci-fi ideas, themes and elements are touched upon. Our relationship with technology, the ethics of our scientific evolution and the question of what makes us human.

Guiding us through it all is Ryan Gosling's short-named protagonist "K". Though this Blade Runner is much less cynical than Rick Deckard, he is just as efficient at his job as a detective/assassin. Gosling is perfectly cast, since he has proven time and again that he especially shines when playing ass-kicking introverts. We follow K‘s path as he tries to solve a mystery that leads him deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole. It is a puzzle that seems to get bigger with every piece he finds. It is only at a much later stage that Harrison Ford steps into the picture. And although this might be his best performance in the past decade, the movie is wise to focus mostly on Gosling’s character. Because in true Blade Runner fashion, our protagonist‘s journey is not only a search for the truth, but also a road to self-discovery. 

This series stays ‘the thinking man’s science-fiction‘. And Villeneuve stages it with poetic beauty. Just as he previously did with „Arrival“, he puts you in awe as you marvel at everything that unfolds on screen. His cinematographer Roger Deakins delivers breathtaking shots. Long, wide, and each of them distinctly colored. You could put this movie on mute and it would still be an absolute joy to watch. Then however, you would be missing the grandiose score by Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch. Reusing the synth sounds from the '80s and adding Zimmer‘s trademark drums creates a soundtrack that goes from meditative to vibrant whenever the story demands it.
Everyone involved is contributing to make this movie the artistically precious blockbuster that it is. The set- and costume designers, the lighting technicians, and of course the stellar supporting cast. Thanks to "House of Cards", Robin Wright has become the go-to actress for strong female leaders and so she seems to be playing her part with the greatest of ease. Ana de Armas shows that she is ready to get her big break in Hollywood, and even former wrestler Dave Bautista gives a performance that is unexpectedly vulnerable.
All this makes "Blade Runner 2049" one of the best movies of the year. Although it has a considerable length of two hours and 45 minutes, the masterful execution makes this film worth while. A magnificent piece of intellectual sci-fi that is as thrilling as it is thought-provoking. Watch it on the largest screen you can get your hands on to be fully engulfed by its elegancy. If (like me) you can't get enough after watching it in theaters the first time, watch it again (seriously, it is criminally underperforming), or fill in the gaps between 2019 and 2049 with the three in-universe short films that Warner Bros. Pictures released on YouTube.

For Fans Of:
Blade Runner (1982)
Children of Men (2006)
Inception (2010)
Her (2013)
Ghost in the Shell (1995)
Minority Report (2002)
Ex Machina (2014)
12 Monkeys (1995)
Macbeth (2015)
Arrival (2016)

Click Here To Watch Trailer!

IT - Movie Review

 Title: IT
Running Time: 135 min
Director: Andy Muschietti
Writer: Chase Palmer, Cary Fukunaga, Gary Dauberman
Starring: Bill Skarsgård, Jaeden Lieberher, Jeremy Ray Taylor, Sophia Lillis, Finn Wolfhard, Jack Dylan Grazer, Chosen Jacobs, Wyatt Oleff, Nicholas Hamilton

Review:

Stephen King's books have been the source material for many film makers for a long time. Just two month ago, I reviewed the cinematic attempt to bring his "The Dark Tower" novels to the big screen. This time one of his most famous characters, Pennywise the endlessly creepy clown, makes a comeback in this 21st century update of an old horror classic.
2017's "IT" isn't a shot-for-shot remake of the original, but rather approaches the story from a few different angles. Firstly, the story is set in the late 1980's, updating the film for younger audiences and riding on the current nostalgia wave of that particular time-period. Secondly, the adults take a back seat and the movie focusses solely on the kids' perspective.
As a result, the success of the film rests on the shoulders of an incredibly young ensemble. Fortunately, this group of child actors seems to have had a lot of fun on set, because their chemistry translates to the big screen. Additionally, each of them (with maybe the exception of Wyatt Oleff's character) is essential to some part of the film, be it thematically, story-wise or concerning the atmosphere. Finn Wolfhard (hot of "Stranger Things") shines as the comic relief guy, while Jaeden Lieberher and Sophia Lillis carry the more dramatic parts of the film. But also Jeremy Ray Taylor and Jack Dylan Grazer bring a sincere genuinity to the Losers' Club. These guys seem like a real group of friends and at a few points in the film we can see them simply hanging out. It gives the movie a coming-of-age/adventure film vibe.
Don't be fooled, however. "IT" does earn its R-rating for 'violence, bloody images, and language'. On the one hand, the kids cuss and swear, which doesn't only add to the authenticity, but is also good for some laughs. On the other hand, we have, of course, the stuff that every horror fan came for. Because 'It' turns into everything that you fear, and so you get everything from torn-off limbs to waves of blood, plaque-infested hobos, and creepy little kids. It all unfolds in traditional horror movie fashion. And of course, there is the creature's favorite form: The gruesome clown Pennywise, played excellently by Bill Skarsgård. His portrayal is in no way inferior to Tim Curry's. And although some old-school film buffs might enjoy the 90's practical effects over the CGI touch-ups this new version gets at points, there's absolutely no denying that Skarsgård nails the the part when it's just him in make-up. His smile is super creepy, his eyes are insanely big and he barely ever blinks. It's a genius performance. 
Some of the main character's parents also come in as secondary villains, filling up the small town of Derry with threats left and right. Nicholas Hamilton joins in as well as the violent bully Henry. While he already had the most punchable face in the "Captain Fantastic" cast, here it is complemented through a mullet in such a way that it gives Jack "Joffrey" Gleeson a run for his money*.
The only real problem with the film is that it goes on for a little too long. Once the kids have forged out a plan of how to overcome the blood-thirsty antagonist, the viewer gets the idea of how things will play out. The script however throws in a few obstacles and complications here and there, that don't really add to the experience as a whole. Instead of creating extra tension, it makes the finale drag a tiny little bit.
But apart from that, "IT" is a really entertaining ride that proves once again, that horror works best when it is paired with elements of other genres. The fun sequences in which you get to know the gang, make it all the more impactful when the tide turns and their lifes are in danger. Stepping into the territory of an 80's coming-of-age drama and yet being more brutal than its predecessor, 2017's "IT" will leave you curious about what's next. And since the movie hasn't touched on the grown-up portion of the story yet, you can be damn sure that you will find out...

For Fans Of:
IT (1990)
Stranger Things (TV Series 2016- )
Stand By Me (1986)
Super 8 (2012)
E.T. (1982)
Gremlins (1984)
Scream (1996)
Krampus (2015)
The Goonies (1985)

Click Here To Watch Trailer!

*Fun Fact: Game of Thrones actor Jack Gleeson and my humble self actually share the same date of birth!

MOTHER! - Movie Review

Title: mother!
Running Time: 122 min
Director: Darren Aronofsky
Writer: Darren Aronofsky
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Javier Bardem, Ed Harris, Michelle Pfeiffer, Domhnall Gleeson, Stephen McHattie

Review:

Whether you are a fan of his work or not, Darren Aronofsky is an intriguing director at the very least. He has tackled many different topics and genres including surrealism (" π"), sports drama ("The Wrestler"), fantasy ("The Fountain"), psychological thriller ("Black Swan"), biblical epic ("Noah") and more. Nevertheless, he still fills his films with personal trademarks and has made a name for himself for being controversial and disturbing at times. Now, the director dives into the horror genre to get audience's hackles up.
His latest film certainly is a unique cinematic experience, although it really isn't a film for everyone. While the trailers promised a "haunted house vs. home invasion" type movie, you get much more than you bargained for. The story of a couple living alone in a house, that suddenly gets a dubious visitor, seemed simple enough. But "Mother!" is a grande metaphorical horror film, that is as disturbing as it is strange. Getting weirder with every minute, it slowly builds up to a complete escalation in its finale.
Aronofsky proves that he is a master of the craft as he takes you through this mysterious journey. The horror genre is often considered to be cheap, because scaring people is incredibly easy (even your regulare house cat can make you jump every now and then). To frighten someone to the core however, is a wholly different story. Aronofsky for example refrains from using the typical musical cues that notify you of an upcoming scare. In fact, he doesn't use any music at all. Instead, the noises of the house take center stage. Squeaking floorboards, muffled footsteps and rattling furniture. Everything becomes alive to create a truly haunting atmosphere. Additionally, the director follows his protagonist with an extensive use of close-ups and tracking shots, trapping us in her perspective and making the movie all the more claustrophobic.
This is also where Jennifer Lawrence' splendid acting comes in. After kind-of phoning it in in "X-Men: Apocalypse" and "Passengers", she shows once again why she is an Oscar-caliber actress. Her sincere and empathy prompting performance draws you into the movie and makes the things that happen to her all the more uncomfortable.
Because content-wise, this is a really uncomfortable film. The story equals a fever dream, where there seems to be no reason behind the string of events. In nightmarish fashion strange and (towards the finale) very disturbing imagery unravels. Some people will find this unnecessarily harsh and the chaos of this movie appalling. Others might relish this uncensored unraveling of Aronofsky tormented artistic mind. Because within this turmoil of weird incidents, a lot of  themes are touched upon. The metaphorical storytelling allows many different interpretations. Maybe one will stick with you. Maybe you'll have none and only after digging into others people's analyses it will fall like scales from your eyes. And maybe you'll find this film so bloated and pretentious that you just don't care. But Aronofsky surely put a lot of his thoughts and grand questions about human nature and our world in general into this film. Whether you will enjoy this ride certainly depends on your affinity for the Kafkaesque. Either way, it will be unlike anything you have seen in theaters lately.

For Fans Of:
Franz Kafka
Requiem for a Dream (2000)
Rosemary's Baby (1968)
Only God Forgives (2013)

Click Here To Watch Trailer!

AMERICAN MADE - Movie Review

Title: American Made
Running Time: 115 min
Director: Doug Liman
Writer: Gari Spinelli
Starring: Tom Cruise, Sarah Wright, Domhnall Gleeson, Alejandro Edda, Mauricio Mejía, Caleb Landry Jones

Review:

I used to say that Tom Cruise has never made a bad film. Since this year's "The Mummy" I might have to asterisk that. Still, the actor whose full name is Thomas Cruise Mapother IV, is one of the last true movie stars. He manages to get people into theaters and deliver great performances, in spite of his more than controversial private life (Mel Gibson probably really wants to know his secret). For his latest film, Tom takes on the role of Barry Seal. A talented pilot who has worked not only for the CIA and the DEA, but also for the infamous Medillin cartel. The later of which has become particularly populare in mainstream media through Netflix's "Narcos". Surely, the film makers hoped to wanted into that.
"American Made" is biographical crime film that chooses fun action over personal drama. And even though it would have benefited from doing both, it surely is an entertaining ride. The story alone puts you in awe. You'll be rubbing your eyes in disbelief when you see what this real-life person got himself into and out-of, how the government took part in all this and how much money was involved in all of these operations.
Tom Cruise sells it all. Though better looking than the real man, he is the perfect guy to make you believe that he could actually pull these things of. He also gives Barry all of his charm, making you forget that this is a man who helped one of the most dangerous drug cartels gain power. Director Doug Liman has worked with Cruise on "Edge of Tomorrow" before - an immensely entertaining sci-fi action film - and he proves once again that these two are a great duo. His quick and restless directing style matches perfectly with Cruise's high energy. The movie never really slows down, and even during dialogue scenes, the camera never stays in a still shot for long. Ironically so, this fast-pace makes the film feels a little longer than it is. Not because it's boring, but because so much happens that you can't help but wonder how much longer this guy actually could get away with it. An actual problem of the movie's tempo however is that it never takes the time to really explore the personal drama of Barry Seal's story. The elements concerning his family life seem more like sprinkles across the film rather than actual side-plots. As a result, the film doesn't have the emotional depth it could have.
Nonetheless, "American Made" is a clever and cool-looking bio-pic with a strong leading performance by Tom Cruise. With its fresh directing style, as well as a talented supporting cast (including underrated chameleon Domhnall Gleeson and a convincing Mauricio Mejía who took on the role of Escobar for the third time), it is as enjoyable as it is intriguing. Surely a good time!

For Fans Of:
Lord of War (2005)
The Infiltrator (2016)
Blow (2001)
American Gangster (2007)
Wolf of Wall Street (2013)
The Iceman (2012)

Click Here To Watch Trailer!

ATOMIC BLONDE - Movie Review

Title: Atomic Blonde
Running Time: 115 min
Director: David Leitch
Writers: Kurt Johnstad
Starring: Charlize Theron, James McAvoy, John Goodman, Toby Jones, Sofia Boutella

Review:

In the last couple of years, Hollywood has taken a few large steps towards gender equality when it comes to prominent blockbuster roles. After "The Hunger Games", we got two female-led Star Wars movies, Scarlett Johansson as an ass-kicking cyborg and "Wonder Women" topped the box office. Now, Charlize Theron, who has proven her affinity for action (and cars?) with "Mad Max: Fury Road" and  "Fate of the Furious", gets her shot at a bad-ass leading lady. She's paired with stuntman-turned-director David Leitch, who is heavily involved in the "John Wick" franchise.
Surprisingly so, "Atomic Blonde" is not as action focused as the ad campaigns might have made you believe. Instead, it really goes into spy film territory, with shady characters, different agencies interfering with each other and multiple double crosses. Unfortunately, this part of the story isn't the movie's strong suit. Although the premise seems simple (once more the plot revolves around a list containing agents' identities - as previously seen in "Skyfall", "Mission Impossible" and many others), Kurt Johnstad's script sometimes gets convoluted. There is a lot happening between the different parties involved. And while it is not that hard to follow their actions, their motivations stay unclear. Thus, the conversations between the different players don't hold as much weight as they need to keep you fully engaged. To me, it was hard to put a finger on the screenplay's exact problem. Maybe it just tried to be too clever for its own good. But too often I found myself hoping for the conversations to wrap up, so that another action set-piece could kick off. Because when the action hits, it is absolutely fantastic.
David Leitch sure knows how to stage, choreograph and shoot fight scenes. Every time our main character goes into combat mode, it is a complete blast. Especially during the finale of the film, the film makers present you a fight sequence that puts you in awe. In an incredible long-take, Charlize Theron takes on group of hitmen that she beats, kicks and shoots through an entire building. Not only is most of the action in frame, but it is rough, blunt and realistic. No punches are pulled, and there were audible gasps in the audience during the scene. It might be one of my favorite fist fights in American cinema.
Additionally, the film has a great visual style. With its bright green, pink and blue lighting, it often has a very cool neon look. Also, it uses rousing tunes of the German new wave and other music of the time, to really give you that late 80's Berlin vibe. The editing is on point as well. This film simply looks damn awesome.
However, all this makes it just all the more upsetting, that the story itself can't completely grab you. The movie could have easily been 20 minutes shorter. I really hope the film makers get to make a sequel, where they can shift the focus to the action. Because this movie actually had the potential to be absolutely dope. It's still worth watching on a movie night with your friends though, be it just for the fight scenes.

For Fans Of:
Spectre (2015)
Skyfall (2012)
TRON: Legacy (2010)
The Bourne Legacy (2012)
The Man from U.N.C.L.E. (2015)
Stereo (2014)
Unknown (2011)

Click Here To Watch Trailer!

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!