The Thin White Dude's Movie Of The Month: June 2014 - Edge Of Tomorrow

Edge Of Tomorrow might not be a masterpiece, but it ain't too far off it! Alongside The Dark Knight Rises and Pacific Rim, it's one the most consistently entertaining and engaging summer blockbusters of the past few years. It does so many things right, with terrific lead performances from Tom Cruise and Emily Blunt, an extraordinarily well-established mise en scene (from a design standpoint, the film is leaps and bounds ahead of the pack), stunts and visual effects getting across the outright chaos of war, strong cinematography and editing, ingenious use of the central concept, a solid score and tactful direction by Doug Liman, that what it does wrong can oftentimes be excused.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 8.6/10

Runner-Up: X-Men: Days Of Future Past - James McAvoy's delivers another great performances, Singer's return to the helm is more than welcome; overall, a very enjoyable action-packed experience.

Second-Most Deadly Disease: A Million Ways To Die In The West - A misfire on the part of Seth MacFarlane, who despite a few good ideas, fails to ignite with a second-rate Woody Allen by way of Jimmy Stewart routine.

Avoid Like The Plague: God's Not Dead - "Characterisation by caricature," nothing this dull and poxy deserves to capture anyone's time and attention. 

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - Edge Of Tomorrow

Directed by: Doug Liman

Produced by: Erwin Stoff

Tom Lassally

Jeffrey Silver

Gregory Jacobs

Jason Hoffs

Screenplay by: Christopher McQuarrie

Jez Butterworth

John-Henry Butterworth

Based on: All You Need Is Kill by Hiroshi Sakurazaka

Starring: Tom Cruise

Emily Blunt

Bill Paxton

Brendan Gleeson

Music by: Christophe Beck

Cinematography by: Dion Beebe

Editing by: James Herbert

Laura Jennings

Studios(s): Village Roadshow Pictures

RatPac-Dune Entertainment

3 Arts Entertainment

Viz Productions

Distributed by: Warner Bros. Pictures

Release date(s): May 30, 2014 (United Kingdom)

June 6, 2014 (United States)

Running time: 113 minutes

Country: United States

Language: English

Production budget: $178 million

Box-office revenue (as of publication): $351, 054, 547

Alright then, five long, hard weeks of the first leg of EventSec's festival circuit have paid off, and now I have (I think anyway) some well deserved time off to relax and put my feet up. It has been exhaustive, sure, and the Magical Mystery Tour well resume in August, but it'll be nice to say that I can actually spend the weekend in my own bed (that sounds like a euphemism, but trust me it ain't. I listen and embrace the feelings of way too many songs from the 1980's about isolation and loneliness to have been sleeping around!). Anywho, in that context, I shall be getting some reviewing done, with this being my last review for the month of June, which will be followed by a belated review of the month, and then I shall commence my reviews for July with one for Tammy, the new Melissa McCarthy vehicle. So, for all the latest and greatest regarding the movies, keep your eyes posted!

Today's film up for review is Edge Of Tomorrow, released back at the start of June, a big-budget science-fiction film starring Tom Cruise and Emily Blunt. Based on the Japanese light novel (young-adult) All You Need Is Kill by Hiroshi Sakurazaka, published in 2004, the film adaptation has been in development by Warner Bros. and Village Roadshow since 2009, with a lot of hirings and firings, fights and rewrites before principle photography began in June 2012. It has since been released to critical acclaim, has widely been cited as an exciting, thought-provoking and thematically dense action film (it's Cruise's highest-rated original work on Rotten Tomatoes' Tomatometer since 2002's Minority Report), but it could be argued that the film has under-performed at the box-office, having made $350 million off of it's huge $178 million budget. Set in the midst of a near-future war between humanity and an invading alien race known as Mimics, who have taken over continental Europe, Cruise stars as Major William Cage, a Public Affairs officer in the United States army, who gets cold feet when United Defense Forces General Brigham (Brendan Gleeson) orders him to cover combat in an offensive known as Operation Downfall landing on the beaches of France. After threatening portray the General unfavourably, he wakes up in handcuffs at a base at Heathrow Airport, where he is confronted by Master Sergeant Farell (Bill Paxton), who has received a letter from Brigham stating that Cage is a Private and deserter who will attempt to impersonate an officer. Cage is assigned J Squad, a squad of rejects, and in the landing in France, as part of the first wave, Cage uses a Claymore to destroy a large 'Alpha' Mimic, and when he destroys it, it's blood douses him, and he wakes up in Heathrow again, gradually realising that every time he dies, he must repeat the same day over and over again. In one of these time loops he saves legendary soldier Sergeant Rita Vrataski (Emily Blunt), known as the 'Full Metal Bitch' and 'Angel Of Verdun,' who tells him to come find her when he "wakes up" again, so he can train under her, for she recognises that what's happening to him is the key to ending the war with the Mimics. That sounds long-winded, but hey, this is words, not moving pictures, so I have to make due with what I've got in this medium. Shall we dance?

To start with the good, I'll bring up the performances of the principals involved in the film. Tom Cruise has in the 2000s made some interesting choices for films that could do with a lend of his star power. As such, we've seen films as diverse as Minority Report, Collateral, Valkyrie, Jack Reacher and Oblivion, movies which are all the better for his having been in it. The case is the same here, as we see Cruise display the fullness of his range. He begins the film as, for all intents and purposes, a real scoundrel, using his natural charisma to dial up his comedic side, delivering an awkward comedic touch that is not dissimilar to the brand of humour that Ricky Gervais might bring to the table. As such, it makes Cage's transition into a battle-hardened 'veteran' all the more emphatic. We know Cruise can do characters with true grit, but here it helps to even to lend his Cage a certain poignancy in later scenes in the film. Emily Blunt, not the natural choice perhaps given her previous roles, is also in fine form as Rita Vrataski. A consummate badass who provides a good foil to Cage's initial douchebaggery, Blunt, who has also got into great physical shape for the part, is never less than credible in the part. Also, I know a lot has been made in the press about this (better articles have been written on it than I could manage!), but Blunt's Vrataski gives Edge Of Tomorrow a fresh feminist slant which, I would argue, makes the film more accessible from an audience's standpoint, especially in the male-driven militarism and science-fiction and action genres. Strong in supporting performances also are Brendan Gleeson and especially Bill Paxton. I haven't seen him in a big movie in a while, but Paxton is always a welcome presence onscreen in my books, and his Master Sergeant Farell provides often humorous interludes in the midst of all the wanton chaos going on throughout the film. Right down to quizzical expressions of confusion, Paxton has this schtick nailed down. Also, there's a lot more to Edge Of Tomorrow than just the performances, so get ready, because you're about to hear a good spiel here. As I mentioned in my preemptory paragraph, the film has a huge $178 million budget, but in fairness to the filmmakers, not only is it up there onscreen, but there is also a huge display of innovation and creativity involved. Last year, we saw Matt Damon don an exoskeleton in Elysium, and if anything the work from a design standpoint in Edge Of Tomorrow has exceeded that of the previous film. Throughout the history of cinema, stories are abound of how troublesome puppets and props have been. Just take a look at anything anyone has to say about 'Bruce' the Shark in Jaws, which Steven Spielberg himself labelled a "Great White Turd" regarding it's difficulty to work with. However, in Edge Of Tomorrow, the production designer Oliver Scholl, lead builder Pierre Bohanna, costume designer Kate Hawley and all their various teams have truly reached a standard of excellence. The physical fluidity of movement in these suits is a marvel to behold in and of itself, but that we're getting to see big battles in numbers en masse is another thing altogether. For this also the stunt team and visual effects deserve to be credited. In the 1980s, one of the things you took away from a great action movie were the great stunts that came with them, whereas today most action movies have stunts so similar to each other that they cease to be anything but anonymous. In my memory, despite having been hammered with an insane amount of work hours lately, I can take whole parts of the movie and replay them in my head. Aesthetically, the thing's hard, heavy and clunky, but also very violent in it's own way, the beach landing playing out like a 12A Saving Private Ryan at times. This is also due in part down to the cinematography and the editing at play here. Dion Beebe's digital photography is really something. When the movie gets really hard and heavy, Beebe's adept hand throws us into the proverbial deep end, and as such ranks this up there as among the most intense of summer blockbuster/action movies I've seen in a while. Beebe's made his name with digital work on films such as Collateral, but this was so nerve-wracking at times it reminded me of the late Tim Hetherington's documentary work in the likes of Restrepo. Also, the film's tagline is 'Live. Die. Repeat.' As such, you'd like to think it would be able to keep up to the task without getting boring. Earlier on I mentioned the fluidity of movement in the battle suits, believe me, the fluidity of movement in the film's montage is another of it's many marvels. Ingenuity is at play here, with James Herbert and Laura Jennings constantly playing around with our expectations, keeping the film fresh while also adhering to the central concept. The closest thing that reminds this reminds of tonally is Contra, the classic side-scrolling arcade video-game series, all of which are notoriously hard to beat, and I can say that this is the closest I've had to watching a film that was able to replicate what it feels like to play a video game. Herbert and Jennings' work is splendid from a technical standpoint, but also aesthetically it helps to serve up a dish with a particularly unique flavour and feeling. Working in unison with the editing is the intelligence with which the screenwriters have implemented the use of the film's central premise. Going in, you might think, as I did, that this could get very repetitive very quickly, but the screenwriters, smart enough to realise this, did their best to keep us on our toes. Conversations and dialogues are replayed, with Cruise getting ever more tired, repeating bits and pieces to the other characters before they have ever said it themselves, surprising lapses in concentration that lead to a blackly humorous death for the main characters, I didn't find myself ever getting overly bored with it. Also, in a score that was originally meant to be composed by Ramin Djawadi, Christophe Beck exceeds himself and delivers what might well be his strongest score to date. Perhaps it's the comedy genre work that he has to do that is holding him down, after all, his work on last year's Frozen was good too, because he is put to the test here and puts up a grand, glorious score that ranks up there with the best of them. Combining tribal beats, strings and industrial pulses heavily distorted by synthesisers, it's a score that's highly appropriate for the chaotic war-torn atmosphere of the film. There's nothing nice and pretty about it, and that's the way it's meant to be. Finally, although he has never been cited previously as an auteur by any stretch, this is a terrific bit of directorial work from Doug Liman. Beginning his film career with comedies such as Swingers and Go, he directed the first film in the Bourne franchise, though if anything Paul Greengrass, Matt Damon and Tony Gilroy have always got more credit for establishing that series more than Liman. After 2005's Mr. And Mrs. Smith (most famously for kickstarting the now well-established Bradgelina), Liman hasn't had any major gigs (2008's Jumper was critically derided, while 2010's Fair Game failed to make a dent in the box-office). However, much as this is a team effort, let it not be disputed that Liman has done a superb job at keeping just about everything in control here. With all the fragile elements involved in Edge Of Tomorrow, the results could have been as chaotic in the worst way possible as the war-torn atmosphere portrayed in the film. This is an exercise in real tact and I hope that Liman gets the acknowledgement he deserves for getting this film to be as good as it is.

Now, as you can tell, I have really gushed over this movie, and I feel with good reason. Alongside Pacific Rim and The Dark Knight Rises, Edge Of Tomorrow is quite easily among the most engaging and entertaining summer blockbusters of the past few years. Does that mean it's perfect? Unfortunately no, and that does have to be addressed. The thing that I do find troublesome about Edge Of Tomorrow, and which does, I must say, deny it from being a masterpiece, are element of the screenplay. Although it is by no means a movie with an ensemble cast, the characters of J Squad are meant to be a sympathetic band of rejects, and yet I felt nothing anytime some nasty fate befell one of it's members. I felt a real, genuine sense of loss, even for the 'villains' anytime they met their demise in Oliver Stone's Platoon, a film where there exists a key human element, and their absence is truly felt, but here, you don't particularly care either way. Also, while it for the most remains consistently inventive, I feel that Chris McQuarrie and the Butterworth's bag of tricks starts to run empty at different parts in the third act, noticeably creating a bit of lag in an otherwise wholly engaging picture. 

These things being said, I will stand by what I have said in that despite some of these troublesome elements in the screenplay this is one of the most entertaining and engaging summer blockbusters of the past few years. Edge Of Tomorrow does so many things right, with Tom Cruise and Emily Blunt giving terrific performances, Bill Paxton and Brendan Gleeson rounding out the pack, and from a design standpoint the mise-en-scene is extraordinary, with the costume, production design and builders all doing an amazing job on the exoskeleton. The stunt team and visual effects artists have reached a high standard, getting across appropriately the wanton destruction and chaos of war. Dion Beebe's superb digital cinematography, the expert montage with the editing, the inventive use of the film's central concept by the writers, Christophe Beck's score and Doug Liman's tactful, controlled direction, all this makes for a great movie. Edge Of Tomorrow might not be a masterpiece, but with filmmaking this good, it ain't too far off it!

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 8.6/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Too sweet (You can thank Kevin Nash for that one!)

Edge Of Tomorrow Trailer

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - God's Not Dead

Directed by: Harold Cronk

Produced by: Michael Scott

Russell Wolfe

Anna Zielinski

Screenplay by: Cary Solomon

Chuck Konzelman

Based on: God's Not Dead by Rice Broocks

Starring: Kevin Sorbo

Shane Harper

David A.R. White

Dean Cain

Trisha LaFache

Hadeel Sittu

Cory Oliver

Music by: Will Musser

Newsboys

Cinematography by: Brian Shanley

Editing by: Vance Null

Studio(s): Pure Flix Entertainment

Red Entertainment Group

Distributed by: Pure Flix Entertainment

Release date(s): March 21, 2014 (United States)

April 18, 2014 (United Kingdom)

Running time: 113 minutes

Country: United States

Language: English

Production budget: $2 million

Box-office revenue (as of publication): $61, 824, 793

Hoy hoy hoy, everybody, my head is still pickled from working Sea Sessions. I'm not used to getting short seven hour shifts, and as such with my whole being not steadying itself towards the twelve hour shifts, it has reverted into full on lazy shite mode. I was sleeping to 2-3pm and the shifts were a gift. Now, with a couple of days off (one of which includes a trip to the cinema to see Mrs. Brown's Boys D'Movie), I shall be keeping relatively busy vis a vis the blog, so, for all the latest and greatest regarding the movies (and a bit of the usual gib gab from yours truly), keep your eyes posted!

Today's film up for review is God's Not Dead, a Christian drama film. We kind of know that going in to the thing, but there a couple of things I'd like to make clear about this before I get into it, the first being that although I was brought up a Catholic, I have not for many years practised religion and while for a few years I was a strong atheist, I now consider myself to be an agnostic. That lets you know my perspective on 'the big question' posed by this film: is God dead? The last thing I'd like to let you know is that although that is my perspective, I will refuse to let that cloud my judgement of the film's moral values or message, and that when I judge the film it will be on the basis of merits as a constructed artistic piece, objectivity where personal beliefs and opinions being the nature of the beast when it comes to art. God's Not Dead isn't getting much of a play in Northern Ireland, but for some reason it has ended up in The Strand (perhaps it caters to the heart of dogma in the East Belfast audience), and I thought it'd be something different to review. So, story follows Josh Wheaton (Shane Harper), a Christian college student who enrols in a philosophy class, which is fraught with the tension from the get go due to the demands of Professor Jeffrey Radison (Kevin Sorbo), who insists the students sign a declarative statement that "God is dead." When Josh refuses, Radison has him debate the issue with him over the course of a number of classes, with God effectively put on trial, and this is the basis for a bunch of tales involving different characters, all of whom are linked in some shape or form to the central debate of "Is God dead?" Shall we dance?

Starting off with the good, I have to flag up that some of the acting performances are decent, in as much as they can make good with the material that they have to work with. Kevin Sorbo, the erstwhile Hercules from The Legendary Journeys show of the nineties, does his best to inflect the Professor with an arrogance that masks a deeply-embedded trauma from his past, and Dean Cain, the erstwhile Clark Kent from Lois & Clark show of the nineties is surprisingly effective in his short time onscreen as an obnoxious and incredibly self-centered businessman. Also, for all the film does in trying to ram the Newsboys group down our throat throughout the film (protagonist wears Newsboys t-shirt, protagonist's dorm room features prominent Newboys poster, everyone seems to be going to their upcoming gig), they're actually not a bad group to listen to. I was dreading this climactic concert, even more so the closer we got to it, and it's a well-overused trope to bring characters together in one space. The best use of it lately was in Paolo Sorrentino's This Must Be The Place, a film which I get more fond of the more I think about it, with a Talking Heads concert the basis for emphasising the extent of lead character's Cheyenne's mid-life crisis. God's Not Dead will never be looked upon in the same light as said film, but at least it have two qualities going for it in some of the performances and the Newsboys' music.

Now, getting down to it, while I have looked out objectively for all the possible things that this movie has done right, it does way more things wrong, and frankly God's Not Dead is an early strong contender for my bottom ten worst films of the year, because it is rubbish. As I've said right from the top, I am not a religious man, indeed I was almost militantly atheist at one point, however, over the years I have developed a respect for religion and other people's beliefs. That said, God's Not Dead is doing no one any favours in promoting the Christian faith and that is because it is quite simply a bad film. I would like to direct you to a quote from Michael Gerson, columnist for The Washington Post, perhaps best remembered for being George W. Bush's chief speechwriter: "The main problem with God's Not Dead is not its cosmology or ethics but its anthropology. It assumes that human beings are made out of cardboard... It is characterisation by caricature." I can't say it any better myself, and I think Gerson hits the nail right on the head as regards to central problem(s) with the picture. We have all these people, like the intrepid reporter whose life takes a turn once she is diagnosed with cancer, the Muslim student who removes the hijab covering her face when Father's not around and is a closet Christian, secretly listening to audiobooks of the Bible on her iPod, the quiet student from the People's Republic of China (COMMUNISTS!) whose father refuses to hear anything of his budding interest in Christianity. Not only does it indicate a sneaking suspicion regarding people of other creeds, but none of the characters in the film have no true convictions and are just lost sheep waiting to be led by their proverbial shepherd. Also, structurally the script is all over the place. There's way too many characters and the film seems undecided as to which story or stories are the true centre of the piece. The philosophy debate is the visible crux, after all it's the one on the poster, trailer, marketing and title, but it seems like all the other stories are devoted as much screen-time and they just come across as a mish-mash of scattershot bits and pieces thrown together. Furthermore, while I applaud some of the performances, the writing is so ghastly that it can't help but affect some of the other performances. Shane Harper is unbearably wooden in the lead part as Josh Wheaton. He could be a good young actor for all I know, but he is just portraying one of those two-dimensional protagonists who have unwavering conviction in their beliefs, even in the face of an admittedly stupid girlfriend breaking up with him. Nothing seems to move this kid, but maybe that's just because sandpaper has rounded off all the edges that his character could possibly have. Also, the reporter diagnosed with cancer, a liberal left-wing blogger with "Meat Is Murder" bumper stickers on her car, churns out the line "I have cancer" over and over again to everyone she encounters, as though that is the endgame to all arguments; "I have cancer," the sky is blue, the cow jumped over the moon, she even manages to bring it into multimodal terms, typing it on her laptop in emails to people, really, as someone who knows people who have had and have cancer, I find it disgusting that both an illness and those suffering from illness are distilled down into such narrow-minded, simple and patronising terms. Speaking of which vis a vis scattershot and what have you, God's Not Dead contains some of the worst editing I have seen in a film for some time. Editor Vance Null obviously lives in a different planet to the rest of us (with the greatest of respect to potential extra-terrestrial readers...), to me anyway, because I don't know anyone who speaks the way these characters do, because the way he has cut these conversations does not in any way resemble anything along the lines of general conversation. It's full of things like shots lasting up to five seconds longer after a pithy one-liner, just in case the audience deems it necessary to laugh or comprehend the weight of something 'important' being said, but then there are even sharp and unnecessary off-putting shots which last about a half-second showing a reaction from one person to another which are actually rather nauseating. It just made me consistently ask myself "who the hell talks like that?" All of this adds up to as to whose fault all of this is. I'm not in the habit of playing the blame game, but I that it's a double-header in this case: Harold Cronk, the director of the film, and behind all of this the production company responsible for this mess, Pure Flix Entertainment. Usually, the director is at fault for not controlling all of the potential issues that could arise in the process of making a film, and while I don't doubt that Cronk is complicit in this here, let's face it, this film was going to get made one way or another, whatever donkey Pure Flix could get to saddle up and carry this forward to it's eventual deliverance. In the end, the only thing this seems to add up to is a congratulatory shout-out from Willie Robertson (presumably because Phil is in too much trouble right now) and once the film fades to black, as the characters do at the Newsboys concert in the film, we are given a message to use the power of social media to text all our friends that "God's Not Dead" and "join the revolution." Yes, join the revolution, Christianity is under attack from the unbelievers, I think with 31.5% of the world's population (2.2 billion people, source courtesy of the demographic study The Global Religious Landscape) you're not doing too shabby. This encouragement to text reminds me of The Devil Inside entreating me to visit their website, and it just made me go, "really, it all comes down to this?"

Okay, I'll admit I went a slight bit out of the objectivity circle and started challenging the message of the film, but I think for the most part I did a good job of maintaining relative control of my senses. In the end, despite some decent performances and music, God's Not Dead is a messy mish-mash of bits and pieces thrown together, characterised by "characterisation by caricature," people who don't seem to know anything about people or make them resemble people at all. Not only that, it is also a badly made film, with scattershot editing that is full of the kind of things that would have made my university lecturers cringe as much as it did me (the essentials of basic editing are thrown out the window here), and a director who seems to have maximum plasticity to be bent in any shape or form, if not for the will of God, then at least Pure Flix. The film has made over $60 million off of it's $2 million budget, so it is by all means a surprise hit, but my hope would be that it just goes away from whence it came, because nothing this dull and poxy deserves to capture anyone's time and attention.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 2.9/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Getting ready (week four of the EventSec Magical Mystery Tour's first leg is about to commence tomorrow.)

God's Not Dead Trailer

The Global Religious Landscape

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - X-Men: Days Of Future Past

Directed by: Bryan Singer

Produced by: Lauren Shuler Donner

Bryan Singer

Simon Kinberg

Hutch Parker

Screenplay by: Simon Kinberg

Story by: Jane Goldman

Simon Kinberg

Matthew Vaughan

Based on: Days Of Future Past by Chris Claremont and John Byrne

Starring: Hugh Jackman

James McAvoy

Michael Fassbender

Jennifer Lawrence

Halle Berry

Anna Paquin

Ellen Page

Peter Dinklage

Ian McKellen

Patrick Stewart

Music by: John Ottman

Cinematography by: Newton Thomas Sigel

Editing by: John Ottman

Studio(s): 20th Century Fox

Marvel Entertainment

Bad Hat Harry Productions

The Donners' Company

TSG Entertainment

Distributed by: 20th Century Fox

Release date(s): May 22, 2014 (United Kingdom)

May 23, 2014 (United States)

Running time: 131 minutes

Country(s): United Kingdom

United States

Language: English

Production budget: $200 million

Box-office revenue (as of publication): $696, 479, 891

Aloha folks, me again! I've a couple of days off after a long, hard five days worth at Download Festival over at Donington Park. It was a wild, crazy ride, between the twelve hours travel each way, lack of sleep due to sleeping in a tent during the day, what with this fantastic weather we've been having reducing my temporary abode into an atmospherically humid and sweaty mess, lack of nutrition (being vegetarian, I was told in a polite manner that I was on my own where food was concerned. Incidentally, ShowSec, if your briefing documents say, in print, that I'm entitled to two hot meals a day, don't give me five food vouchers for the week because we night-shift staff don't require the same standards as those on days, or so you think!), etc etc. However, me and my good colleagues made the most of it, got on with our jobs and did it rather well, if I do say so myself. Compliments were abound from our supers and I was quite happy knowing that in my work I didn't just confirm people's prejudices regarding security staff just being burly assholes who like to get heavy-handed and, in my own small way, added to the general atmosphere of joviality and celebration. Now that I'm back, as I said, I've a couple of days off before I head to Body And Soul Festival, so I think a review is in due order. So, for all the latest and greatest regarding the movies, and for the occasional update vis a vis the highs and lows of working as a zero hours contractor in private security, keep your eyes posted!

Today's film up for review is X-Men: Days Of Future Past, the seventh instalment in the X-Men film series. I was eight or nine when the first X-Men film came out, and while I have seen it since and would argue that although it ain't chopped liver, it's still pretty good, and as a kid I was completely taken away by it. To me then and now, it captured in many senses the essence of what a good comic book movie is meant to be. The series reached it's high point with the sequel X2, a marvellously handled work of watertight characterisation with a cast delivering all-round quality performances and paying off on the great spectacle that was teased in the first. Brett Ratner's X-Men: The Last Stand was resplendent with action, but aside from the Jean Grey/Dark Phoenix angle lacked the key link to the character's we had from the first two. After that we had the first Wolverine spinoff, which was decent and had a strong foil in Liev Schreiber's Victor Creed, but was otherwise underwhelming, and when Matthew Vaughan picked up the helm with First Class, that's when things started getting interesting again. An energetic feast of pulpish vivacity, First Class is for my money the most immediately entertaining origin story that we've had over the past five or six years. Another Wolverine movie later (which I confess I haven't seen) and we've come now to Days Of Future Past. This movie got a lot of hype, with a huge marketing campaign focused on the fact that it follows loosely the eponymous X-Men storyline involving time travel between a dystopian future and the 1970s, meaning that the casts of both the original films and the newer 'First Class' guard will share screen time, but also that the director of the first two instalments Bryan Singer is making his directorial return to the franchise. So, story goes that in the future, robots known as Sentinels hunt and exterminate mutants and humans that possess the genes which potential mutant offspring, a sort-of retroactive abortion (wink wink!). A band of mutants evade the Sentinels, and Kitty Pryde (Ellen Page) has developed the ability to project a person's consciousness back in time. As such, with the help of Professor Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart) and Magneto (Ian McKellen), a plan is hatched to send Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) back to the year 1973 to bring together the younger Xavier (James McAvoy) and Magneto (Michael Fassbender) so as to prevent Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) from assassinating Bolivar Trask (Peter Dinklage), for this event leads to her capture and thus her DNA is used to give the Sentinels their near-invincibility in adapting to any mutant power and is thus responsible for their reign of terror down the line. Got it? Good!

(Preemptory apologies as well if I sound like I lack my usual aplomb and enthusiasm. It seems like Blogger went as done it again, deleting about four or five hundred words of my material. As such, this review from here will be a slightly condensed version of what you would normally expect from yours truly.)

Starting off with the good about X-Men: Days Of Future Past, I have to compliment the ensemble cast, but single out specifically four performances which I have deemed noteworthy. Hugh Jackman is always a pleasure as Wolverine, and even though there isn't much meaty character things for him to explore this time, he acts as a solid cypher and marker-point for the audience to follow. Also strong is Peter Dinklage in the part of Bolivar Trask. He brings a gravitas to the part and also makes it clear that even though he is the film's closest thing to an antagonist, Trask isn't to be simply defined as a villain, but rather blinded by his self-righteousness. Also, since First Class the character of Mystique has been allocated an interesting story arc, and Jennifer Lawrence is more than worthy of being at the fore, carrying much of the dramatic tension of the film with Raven's moral quandaries while being capable of cold-hearted venom and violence. The foremost performance in the film, though, and the central driving force of Days Of Future Past is the terrific lead performance by James McAvoy. His Charles Xavier here is a soul haunted by his own doubts, insecurities and inability to live up to his own expectations. McAvoy makes you believe in Xavier's existential crisis of identity, and to see it unfold over the course of this picture is at times genuinely harrowing. The much publicised dialogue between McAvoy and Patrick Stewart's older Xavier is a moment of real transcendence. I've been a fan of James McAvoy since 2006's The Last King Of Scotland, a film for which Forest Whitaker got much of the critical attention for his portrayal of Idi Amin, but I think McAvoy deserved as many plaudits. However, it does seem in the past year, what with Filth (for which he, along with Chiwetel Ejiofor, won Best Male Actor in a Leading Role from yours truly), Trance, this and the upcoming The Disappearance Of Eleanor Rigby, it seems that McAvoy has truly come of age. One of things of the other aspects that is praiseworthy about Days Of Future Past, at risk sounding like I am blanketing many departments under one net, but the overall standard of quality control on the production is great. The visual effects are highly imaginative, and it is also nice to see effects that are specifically science-fiction and have no qualms about whether or not it fits into 'the real world,' something which a lot of films are preoccupied with these days. Also, the mise-en-scene, from the standpoints of production design and costumes, is an example not only of money well spent that is up there on the screen, but also that quality prevails where there is good hard grafting, that time and effort are ultimately what wins out. Also, Days Of Future Past is a technically astute film. Not to dismiss the work done by cinematographer Newton Thomas Sigel's team on the Arri Alexa cameras, which looks terrific, but I do have to make particular note of the editing by John Ottman. There is an immaculate sense of timing in the way that Ottman manages keep the audience (well, me anyway!) fully up to speed with two alternating storylines going on at once. Not only that though, it's the seamlessness with which it interacts both with the visual effects and the spirit of the story. The visual effects thanks to Ottman never look out of place and exist as part of the fabric of the film's diegesis. Also, it's little things that add up here. There's a scene in which Wolverine suffers the equivalent of temporal turbulence during a fight scene and jolts momentarily out of the 1970s and back into the future. It's a jarring but highly effective piece of work that lasts all of maybe thirty seconds (probably shorter because of my own sense of urgency), but the two jumps, from past to future and future to past back again are examples of fine montage. Also, although he has always been involved in the franchise even in the smallest shape or form, the return of Bryan Singer to the directorial helm is more than welcome. Out of all the people who have worked on this film franchise in it's fifteen-year existence, it is he who has that key understanding and empathy towards the subject matter, the thematic content, and how best to translate the comics to the big screen. He is a filmmaker of real tact too when it comes to the all the tangible elements, and for the most part, he is able to keep everything in control, delivering a highly satisfying piece of blockbuster entertainment.

As you can perhaps gather, I rather liked Days Of Future Past and had a lot of time for it. However, even though admittedly I went into it excited as the big summer movie I was most looking forward to seeing, even though it's a great movie, by no means is it perfect. Everyone who reads this blog must be sick and tired of me writing the same schtick every time, but to me it still rings true, all faults that emerge from a film come from it's very foundations and that foundation is in the script. Jane Goldman, Simon Kinberg and Matthew Vaughan came up with the story on this one, but the screenplay itself was a solo venture for Kinberg, and frankly their presence or that of another screenwriter shows that in this department the film is lacking. It isn't a bad screenplay, it's just that there are two problems emerging from it that could've easily been plugged: the first of these is that with so many characters, some taking centre stage, other just part of the wallpaper, it lacks the balance another screenwriter might have brought to the table; secondly, it lacks the energy, wit and vivacity that Goldman and Vaughan brought to First Class, the denser exploration of thematic content brought when Singer was a writer for the franchise or even the structural strength of David Hayter's work. That would have been okay if there was something unique, something different, something distinguishing Days Of Future Past from the rest of the franchise apart from time travel as a plot point, but there isn't anything new or distinctive. As I said, it's not bad work, but Kinberg's screenplay is a significant dent the overall tapestry.

So, while I have numerous reservations regarding the film's screenplay by Simon Kinberg, my overall experience and critique of X-Men: Days Of Future Past is largely positive. I thought that the cast, particularly Hugh Jackman, Peter Dinklage, Jennifer Lawrence and (most especially) James McAvoy were on fine form, the overall level of quality control on the production in most regards was of a very high standard. Also, it was a technically astute film, particularly with regards to the editing from John Ottman, and Bryan Singer's return to the directorial helm is more than welcome. Overall, a very enjoyable action-packed experience.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 8.0/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Pickled (so not only do I have Sea Sessions tomorrow, but also Wireless Festival and T In The Park in the next couple of weeks. Mad busy Summer I tell yis!)

P.S. I would also like to take the time to make my colleague Shawn, who just lost his grandmother, the dedicatee for this review. As someone who is extremely close to my extended family, but especially my own grandmother, I can only imagine the grief and sorrow that comes with such a loss. If there's anyone among my audience who would like to leave a comment giving Shawn well-wishes in this time of emotional trial, please by all means feel free. This one's for you, big man.

X-Men: Days Of Future Past Trailer

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - Blended

Directed by: Frank Coraci

Produced by: Adam Sandler

Jack Giarraputo

Mike Karz

Screenplay by: Clare Sera

Ivan Menchell

Starring: Adam Sandler

Drew Barrymore

Music by: Rupert Gregson-Williams

Cinematography by: Julio Macat

Editing by: Tom Costain

Studio(s): Happy Madison 

Gulfstream Pictures

Karz Entertainment

Distributed by: Warner Bros. Pictures

Release date(s): May 23, 2014 (United States and United Kingdom)

Running time: 117 minutes

Country: United States

Language: English

Production budget: $40 million

Box-office revenue (as of publication): $33, 840, 706

I've got myself slightly ahead for a change vis a vis the moviegoing side of things and not only do I have this up for review, but there will be one for X-Men: Days Of Future Past up in the next few days. I plan on seeing at least one more before I go over to work at Download Festival on Wednesday, but I'm not making any guarantees as I only yesterday got booked in for twelve-hour shift on Saturday (the joys of zero-hours contracting and the short notice that comes with it!), which also means I can't go to tomorrow's Anti-Racisim rally at Belfast City Hall, which I'd urge anyone in the Belfast area to attend. Anywho, for all the latest and greatest regarding the movies, along with the occasional gripe about work, politics and what have you, keep your eyes posted!

And now, today's movie up for review is Blended, the latest movie from Adam Sandler's production company Happy Madison, starring himself and Drew Barrymore in their third collaborative effort together in rom-coms after The Wedding Singer and 50 First Dates. For those of you who don't follow this blog regularly, I'll fill you in on a bit of context between me and Monsieur Sandler. While I was a fan of his work in the nineties like Billy Madison, Happy Gilmore and Big Daddy, he done a load of rubbish and then came to Funny People, Judd Apatow's two-and-a-half hour comedic drama in which Sandler seemed to be riffing himself, saying "screw that, I'm done with all the nonsense." After that film, which don't forget is now five years ago, in numerous capacities he has been a part of some of the worst movies of the past half-decade. Indeed, he is credited as writer, producer and lead actor on Jack & Jill and Grown Ups 2, both of which have led to his not insignificant involvement in the dubiously honoured Ed Wood Worst Film Of The Year award for the past two successive years (2012 and 2013) from yours truly. With Blended coming out and having read some of the reviews in the press for this film, I was bracing myself for more of the same negativity, to the point where I was putting my foot down and saying "if Adam Sandler stinks up again, he's going in the Hall of Shame." Over seven years, only three inductees have made it there (Michael Bay and Jason Friedberg & Aaron Seltzer), but it has gotten to the point with Sandler where I am fed up of seeing this guy who is and can be funny choose to put out such baloney. Right well, there's the context. A bit long-winded, yes, but that's how strongly I feel about this. Plot synopsis; single parents Jim Friedman (Adam Sandler) and Lauren Reynolds (Drew Barrymore) have a terrible blind date. Jim's boss Dick (Dan Patrick), who is dating Lauren's work colleague Jen (Wendi McClendon-Covey), are planning a trip to Africa, but she has anxieties about going on holiday with his children, so, with their trip cancelled, Jim and Lauren, unbeknownst of the other's activities, wrangle their way into heading to Africa in the place of their respective contacts, so the two families (Jim's three girls and Lauren's two boys) are thrown together, hilarity ensues and maybe there is a mutual attraction growing between the parents. Shall we see?

As I mentioned in the context, this has a lot riding on it given my chequered history with Adam Sandler productions, but I have to say in all fairness this was not by any means the absolute stinker I was expected. In fact, I think I'd have to go so for as to say it was a decent film, and I'll explain to you why I think it was. The first thing that is worthy to note about the film is the chemistry between Sandler and Drew Barrymore. They are exactly the right age to play their parts, and seem to use their own experience as parents to bring some sense of legitimacy to the part. Not only is there a sense of sincerity to the characters that you don't often find in Sandler's films, but they also do a fine job of engaging in dialogues over the humorous trials and tribulations that come with parenting. While I wouldn't say this is by any means an outrageously funny film, I did find myself chuckling on a number of occasions and genuinely charmed by the earnestness of the story. There is none of the mean-spirited nonsense that we're so used to that usually ends up going back on itself into hypocritically saying "there's more to life than fat jokes." It's a sweetly-toned movie that actually seems to try and tell a story about people of a certain age, parents and the things that happen over the course of a lifetime (the characters actually have a good level of density in terms of their backgrounds). As is to be expected with a film shot in Africa, it is a movie that looks the part. Some of that is down to the cinematographer by Julio Macat no doubt, but I think also the scenery and flora and fauna of the location in Sun City has a lot to with that. It's a welcome change to have a Sandler movie displaced into another country, as opposed to the 'misfits of suburbia' that is normally employed. The location shooting looks goods, but we also get the sense that they're going to some degree to make an effort to structure these comic set-pieces, and to be frank they are way more entertaining than you might expect them to be. Conclusively, it's the second-best Adam Sandler movie of the past five years (falling short of the grossly overlooked That's My Boy), but I suppose that isn't saying much.

Now, I did find a number of things to enjoy about Blended, most of all being perhaps that there were things at all to enjoy in an Adam Sandler movie of late. However, there are a number of things which deny Blended from being up there as a great or even a good movie. For starters, while I think that the script here is a lot better in terms of it's respect for characters and people as a whole, the plot still moves in ways which are wholly predictable and to be expected. There isn't really altogether much of a sense of dramatic tension, even if we care for the characters. Recently, I've been watching through Krzysztof Kieslowski's Dekalog, and for every episode, the key to the dramatic tension seems to be that Kieslowski and co-writer Krzysztof Piesiewicz withdraw part of the plot from the audience, so that there is a sense of a mystery to be uncovered and that we have a lack of knowledge of the bigger picture, getting it piece by piece as it goes along. Blended, as with most films, seem to make their audiences know too much, merely confirming their expectations. Incidentally, lots of people are getting cross about the depiction of Africans, but I think to get angry about something like this is to give it more credit than it deserves. It's not actively xenophobic or racist (unlike a certain Pastor and First Minster here in Northern Ireland!), but rather just a stupid inclusion. Terry Crews can do as many pec dances and pelvic thrusts as he pleases, it's still hard to get out of my head the moronic qualities of a hotel manager who in the course of dangerous driving on a quad bike causes an elderly woman to crash into a tree, dismissing it with a shrug of his shoulders going "my bad," and believe me, I make that sound funnier than it is! Also, what Adam Sandler movie couldn't be without the Aural-Nauseator General himself, Rupert Gregson-Williams. I founded the EHO Award for Worst Film Score/Soundtrack two years ago, and he has won it both successive years for the previously mentioned Jack & Jill and Grown Ups 2. Even he gets off easy here, but his work's still bland as all hell.

I'm sure that this review and it's relative degree of positivity comes as a surprise to some of you. Indeed, the movie came as something of a surprise to me. The last film I reviewed was A Million Ways To Die In The West, and while I would say that that movie tried to do something different, Blended was more consistently entertaining and therefore deserves a better rating. Don't get me wrong, it ain't chopped liver, as they say (I say as they say because for someone who doesn't eat meat it'd be rich to use the analogy as though I know what I'm talking about). It's highly predictable and murder-by-numbers, with plenty of stupid jokes and a bland score from Rupert-Gregson Williams. However, there is strong chemistry between Adam Sandler and Drew Barrymore (who I really wish was in more movies these days), who do a fine job at playing their characters, who on the written page are also more than just cyphers, exploring the trials and tribulations that come with parenting. Also, the displacement to Africa from the suburbia we're used to with these films is a welcome change. In conclusion, Blended is by no means the greatest thing since sliced bread, but it's a decent enough, sincere comedy that's worth taking a chance on.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 5.7/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Hungry (for food)

P.S. My respect goes out to the memory of the courage of those who seventy years ago today on June 6th, 1944 were involved in the Normandy landings. Your sacrifice is duly noted.

P.P.S. How did Blended cost $40 million and Grown Ups 2 cost $80 million? Much of this is set in a fancy resort/hotel in South Africa and Grown Ups seems to be mostly shot in Adam Sandler's house!

Blended Trailer

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - A Million Ways To Die In The West

Directed by: Seth MacFarlane

Produced by: Seth MacFarlane

Scott Stuber

Jason Clark

Screenplay by: Seth MacFarlane

Alec Sulkin

Wellesley Wild

Starring: Seth MacFarlane

Charlize Theron

Amanda Seyfried

Neil Patrick Harris

Giovanni Ribisi 

Sarah Silverman

Liam Neeson

Narrated by: Rex Linn

Music by: Joel McNeely

Cinematography by: Michael Barrett

Editing by: Jeff Freeman

Studio(s): Media Rights Capital

Fuzzy Door Productions

Bluegrass Films

Distributed by: Universal Pictures

Release date: May 30, 2014 (United States and United Kingdom)

Running time: 116 minutes

Country: United States

Language: English

Production budget: $40 million

Box-office revenue (as of publication): $30, 589, 875

Aloha there, still haven't gotten to see X-Men: Days Of Future Past (typical of me, eh?), but with most of the week off work, I imagine I shall be getting to see it at some point. Also, there's a glut of new releases in the past week or so, such as Maleficent, Edge Of Tomorrow and Blended, so keep an eye out for more reviews to be posted. On another topic, I would like to make mention that I just finished the video game L.A. Noire, a game whose development has been followed by the taint of a development cycle not dissimilar to that of Francis Ford Coppola's Apocalypse Now, only this project took longer, but with the collective efforts of Brendan McNamara's Team Bondi and Rockstar produced a work of a quality akin to Coppola's 1979 masterwork. So, for all the latest and greatest in the movies (and more), keep your eyes posted!

Today's film up for review is A Million Ways To Die In The West, the second live-action film "from the guy who brought you Ted," Seth MacFarlane. Incidentally, that's something I've disliked for a long time in the marketing of contemporary comedies, "from the guy" or "guys," as though to say "hey, they're bros, they're lads, they're a bunch of innocuous dudes who like to talk about boobs just like a rest of us (you're not fooling me!)." Anyway, I'm fond Seth MacFarlane, who after Family Guy and American Dad, made a successful transition into the film world with said Ted, a raucous hoot of a comedy. The basis for this film emerged from a joke between MacFarlane and writers Alec Sulkin and Wellesley Wild, "riffing on the idea of how dull, depressing and dangerous it must have been to live in the Wild West." Okay, so, synopsis time: it's 1882, Arizona, and Albert Stark (Seth MacFarlane), a sheep farmer who turns down any confrontation that comes his way, is down on his luck when his girlfriend Louise (Amanda Seyfried) leaves him for a wealthy businessman by the name of Foy (Neil Patrick Harris), who earns his bread running a 'moustachery.' Enter the notorious outlaw Clinch Leatherwood (Liam Neeson), whose band of outlaws split into two camps on his orders, with his wife Anna Barnes (Charlize Theron) heading to the town of Old Stump in which the film is set. In the wake of his breakup with Louise, Albert becomes good friends with Anna, who sets to restoring his confidence before a prospective duel with Foy. Got it? Good!

Starting off with what's done right here, I have to compliment MacFarlane to some extent. He is quite clearly a man of ideas trying to something original while also making a sort-of throwback/homage to the western genre. It's full of genuinely interesting references beyond name-recognition value of the Friedberg and Seltzer variety, and is obviously a well-researched movie done by someone who clearly has a passion for what he is doing. Speaking of ideas, from a conceptual standpoint it works well, given that most westerns made in the past ten-fifteen years are uber-serious or at the very least steeped in melancholia. The fact that someone has tried take this from a comedic standpoint is initially refreshing. Also, the knack for dialogue that MacFarlane and co-writers Alec Sulkin and Wellesley Wild bring to the table does lead for a couple of gags. MacFarlane must be well-liked within the acting community, because he has managed to bring together a cast that on names alone ring credibility. You've got the likes of Charlize Theron and Liam Neeson pulling together decent performances, and comedic stalwarts Neil Patrick Harris, Sarah Silverman and Giovanni Ribisi do their best to sink their teeth into their characters. The final thing I'd like to say that's good about it that it is well shot by cinematographer Michael Barrett, who has given the picture a nice crisp sheen that is easy on the eyes.

I hope that doesn't sound like I was just writing filler, trying to find things that I liked about the film. It's just that while I would say that there are things I admired about, for the most part I found it a problematic and dull experience as a film. As mentioned, I like Seth MacFarlane, but A Million Ways To Die In The West is a misfire on several fronts. Firstly, the film doesn't seem to extend beyond the parameters of it's base concept. I can deal with loose and simplistic narratives, but here there isn't much in the way of development whatsoever. We've seen these characters many's a time before, and the story itself doesn't move in any direction that would lead me to stay overly engaged. Even with the dialogue, the film's 'strongpoint,' it gets incredibly repetitious, with all oddities and eccentricities being explained off with lame recycled statements along the lines of "oh well, it's the West, this is how things happen." Secondly, MacFarlane's live-action debut as an actor failed to convince me. From a visual standpoint he doesn't fit into the film, in that it's like someone has photoshopped him into a photograph of 1880's Arizona. Also, his onscreen persona comes across as something between a Jimmy Stewart everyman and the awkward, mildly eccentric berk with a couple of neuroses that Woody Allen successfully portrayed for years, but MacFarlane doesn't do either right. His Average Joe comes across as forced and wooden, and the Funny Guy stuff, mixed the dialogue on the page, comes across too much as just a couple of musings and observations. This might have worked for a stand-up gig, but there is no additional clarity to tie this into film's story in any way. Incidentally, Amanda Seyfried is wasted in a part that could have just been written in for any pretty face and not an actor as talented as she is. Another thing that I didn't like about the film was the music. Yes, this is the first appearance of the Emotional Heartstrings Orchestra in 2014, but I think the use of the term is rather fitting in this case. Composer Joel McNeely has worked on MacFarlane's American Dad! and a glut of Disney direct-to-DVD productions, but has also conducted re-recordings of the works of Bernard Herrmann, Franz Waxman and John Barry, so he's a composer in the same vein as MacFarlane is as a director, someone who respects the achievements of those before him. However, McNeely's throwback score is not so much a parody in that it ends becoming a parody of itself, with the histrionics that the film is full of sounding wholly ridiculous and over the top at various points. Then it has the gall to underscore the histrionics with the most saccharine and artificial "feel music," conveying rather bluntly to the audience the message that "this is where you're supposed to feel for the characters" and I'm going "nope!" 

Don't get me wrong, I don't think that A Million Ways To Die In The West is all bad. Indeed, I don't even think it can be called a 'bad movie.' I do think that there are things to admire in the movie, such as the fact that Seth MacFarlane and co do at least have a couple of bright ideas and are trying to something different than much of the contemporary generic dribble we get subjected to under the name of 'comedy.' It also features a game cast delivering (for the most part) decent performances which, though hardly a notch on their belts, aren't something to be embarrassed with, and it is a well-shot movie by Michael Barrett. A Million Ways To Die In The West is however a misfire on the part of Seth MacFarlane. He fails to light the screen on fire with a second-rate Average Joe/Jimmy Stewart by way of Neurotic Jabbering Baboon/Woody Allen act, and the script by he, Sulkin and Wild, though conceptually strong, has does not follow through on the base ideas, only for a couple of stand-up gags or faint amusement while draped over a barstool on a pint or few. Amanda Seyfried is wasted and Joel McNeely's score, instead of elevating the film, ends up undercutting and becoming a self-parody of the whole thing. Not a bad movie, but a poor misfire.

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 4.4/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Sweet

A Million Ways To Die In The West Trailer (Red Band)

The Thin White Dude's Reviews - Godzilla (2014)

Directed by: Gareth Edwards

Produced by: Thomas Tull

John Jashni

Mary Parent

Brian Rogers

Screenplay by: Max Borenstein

Story by: David Callaham

Based on: Godzilla by Toho

Starring: Aaron Taylor-Johnson

Ken Watanabe

Elizabeth Olsen

Juliette Binoche

Sally Hawkins

David Strathairn 

Bryan Cranston

Music by: Alexandre Desplat

Cinematography by: Seamus McGarvey

Editing by: Bob Ducsay

Studio(s): Legendary Pictures

Warner Bros. Pictures

Distributed by: Warner Bros. Pictures (International)

Toho (Japan)

Release date(s): May 8, 2014 (Dolby Theatre)

May 15, 2014 (United Kingdom)

May 16, 2014 (United States)

Running time: 123 minutes

Country: United States

Language: English

Production budget: $160 million

Box-office revenue (as of publication): $322, 385, 665

When one cinematic monster returns to the big screen, so must another to the infrastructure by which he connects to his audience (God, that sounds like something from Star Trek!). Anywho, yes, I am back from my sabbatical. The past couple of weeks have been insane busy when it comes to work, but I imagine that there'll be enough gaps in there to see some movies. I'm really looking forward to seeing X-Men: Days Of Future Past, Bryan Singer's directorial return to the franchise. It's probably the most I've got excited for a blockbuster film since last year's Pacific Rim. Also, the 67th Cannes Film Festival is currently underway, and given that they picked the right film for the Palme d'Or last year (Abdellatif Kechiche's magnificent opus to love Blue Is The Warmest Colour), so I'll be keeping tabs on that. As I mentioned in my absence there, I've been making a stab at promoting new and classic films, so for news on that side of things, the reviews and the happenings in the film world (as I see it, of course!), keep your eyes posted!

So, with that being said, it's time to address the cinematic return to the big screen of Godzilla. Just to put things into a bit of context, I love the original 1954 Ishiro Honda Gojira from Japan, which though clearly featuring a guy in a suit eating toy trains and kicking over miniature buildings, is highly entertaining and a genuinely great metaphor for nuclear holocaust, humanity potentially bringing about their own demise, nature fighting back in the Gaian form of a rampaging prehistoric monster having been awakened by nuclear weapons testing, a real-life regular occurrence at the time. The success of this enduring classic spawned a franchise of no less than twenty-eight films (Godzilla vs. Hedorah being a personal favourite) from Toho, three stand-alone television series, a 1998 American remake from Roland Emmerich (often unfairly shat on in my opinion) and was the kick-starter for a glut of kaiju and tokusatsu productions of a similar nature. After the release of 2004's Godzilla: Final Wars, described by director Ryuhei Kitamura as comparable to a musician's "Best Of" album, Toho announced that they would not produce another Godzilla film for ten years and demolished the famous 'Water Stage' used for many of it's productions. In between this time, Godzilla vs. Hedorah director Yoshimitsu Banno (who is credited as co-executive producer on this film) tried to get up and running an IMAX 3D short film featuring Godzilla. Then Kerner Optical, the producers of that planned project, had financial troubles, and that's where Legendary Picture stepped in and green-lit this film in 2009, which has taken a whole five years with their backing to get made and released. In January 2011,  Legendary announced Gareth Edwards, who had previously made his name with the 2010 micro-budget science-fiction film Monsters, as director. So, after a long arduous process with multiple writers (including David S. Goyer, David Callihan, Frank Darabont, Drew Pearce and credited screenwriter Max Borenstein), a missed planned release date or two, it's finally here, so here's a brief synopsis: In 1999 at a quarry in the Philippines a giant skeleton and two egg-shaped pods are discovered, one of which has hatched and a trail leads to the sea. In Japan, nuclear plant supervisor Joe Brody (Bryan Cranston) sends his wife Sandra (Juliette Binoche) and a team in to inspect the core for damage. However, in an accident attributed to an earthquake, the team is unable to escape and the plant collapses into ruin. Fifteen years later, their son Ford (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) is an explosive ordnance officer in US Navy, living in San Francisco with his wife Elle (Elizabeth Olsen) and their son Sam (Carson Bolde). However, when his father is arrested in Japan for trespassing in the quarantined area from the fallout of the plant collapse a decade-and-a-half previously, Ford travels to Japan. His father, driven by guilt from the death of his wife and determined to discover the truth behind the accident, is convinced of a government cover-up which implies that "hey, things might not be as they seem!"

To start with the good of the film, I'd like to commend Gareth Edwards and co for trying to do something different with the material. Much has been made of the holding-off of Godzilla's appearance, and seeing as how this seems to occupy a space in much of the critical discussion, I'd like to give my five dimes and say that this was a positive move. For much of the film, the titular beast is absent, and as we have to wait for the character to show up, that only makes his revelation all the more impressive from a building-up standpoint in the film's structure. Lest we forget that in many ways this approach was taken in '54 original, and that to me made the destruction of Tokyo in that film shocking to a tenfold degree. Also, once chaos ensues, the crew and special effects teams are quite clearly more than capable of matching up to our expectations where the spectacle is concerned. The sheer scale of the monsters in the film is awe-inspiring, and the wanton destructive force of these beasts rampaging through the cities is a marvel to behold. Indeed, among my favourite scenes in the film are those of the last act, brilliant shot by cinematographer Seamus McGarvey, with a team of soldiers entering by way of HALO jump (to the wonderfully used haunting choruses of Gyorgy Ligeti's Requiem) the proverbial heart of darkness of a San Francisco which has only just been witness to an event of catastrophic proportions. Also, the editing by Bob Ducsay is of a high standard. If there's one place where Edwards' incarnation of Godzilla truly delivers, when shit truly hits the fan, it's realised in a stunningly-depicted atmosphere of carnage and apocalypse. Also, the score by Alexandre Desplat is a departure of sorts for the composer. Normally I'd associate his works (occasionally with mixed results) with the school of classical film scoring, full of orchestral resplendence, but here it sounds like an off-kilt Bernhard Herrmann, with a holy hell of a lot brass and thudding drums. Throughout a lot of it there are subtle and intriguing uses of electronic and synthesised music, which only add to the suspense of the buildup, and serve as a strong aural backdrop to the chaos ensuing. Considering how much I used to groan about his work, Desplat has done a lot over the past few years to convince me otherwise about my past negativity towards what I saw as saccharine scores. Finally, with a strong ensemble having been gathered to play the human parts in the film, it does inevitably come with some good performances. I think that Bryan Cranston and Ken Watanabe handle their roles with a solid level of decorum throughout, both believable in their parts. Also, though her part is a lot smaller than the former two, Elisabeth Olsen continues to quietly carve herself out as one of the most consistently engaging female actors in the movies today. And with regards to the good, that, as they say, is that!

And I do have to say that while I enjoyed the last act of the film immensely, frankly the first two acts of this film are not up to scratch. I'm going to have to bring up the whinging about the lack of Godzilla in the movie and assert that this is not the issue at hand. Hell, in the original Godzilla you don't see much of him for the first half of the movie, no, the problem is that unlike the 1954 film the drama which precedes the action in the 2014 film is not all up to scratch. For all the point that everyone is making about how the film is focused more on the human characters, as they written on paper and presented onscreen they aren't particularly interesting. David Callaham wrote the original story and Max Borenstein's screenplay is sadly absent of the subtly complex human interactions that would have made the whole film come across successfully. These are not characters, they are caricatures pulled from the stocking filler not befitting the quality of the actors portraying them. As such, while some, such as Cranston, Watanabe and Olsen get away with it, others do not. Talented female actors like Juliette Binoche, one of the screen's finest actresses of the past thirty years, and Sally Hawkins are utterly wasted, while Aaron Taylor-Johnson, who portrays the film's protagonist, fails to convince because the part written for him is that of an utter dullard whose arc is terribly predictable. I can understand what Gareth Edwards and those involved are trying to go for, and in many ways his Godzilla does hark back to his debut with Monsters, in that it's a human story that just happens to have monsters, as opposed to a monster movie with obligatory human characters. However, the script is highly unbalanced, dragging the movie out into the territory of boredom at different points. 

Godzilla is an unbalanced picture. The script as a whole is not up to scratch, in that the human drama presented to us lacks the necessary parts to make up a wholly engaging piece. Stock characters are resplendent, and even at that they are written poorly, making waste of the talented actors for which they are written. As such, I found that a good hour to eighty minutes of the film dragged on. However, the saving grace that I think tips the balance in the movie's relative favour is that the third act is a great piece of work. Throughout, Seamus McGarvey's cinematography is on the money, backing up the tremendous efforts of the special effects team, who have done a masterful job in realising the sheer scale of destruction and carnage that could be inflicted catastrophes of such proportions. When San Francisco is levelled, it brought to mind the images I saw on the news during the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami. It is during these scenes, even the quieter ones with the soldiers walking amidst the immediate fallout of the monsters' devastation, that Edwards' aesthetic, the impact that this could have on humanity and the commentary this comes with it, is truly realised. Godzilla is by no means the great movie that it should have been, but it still an admirable, good one. 

The Thin White Dude's Prognosis - 6.2/10

The Thin White Dude's Self-Diagnosis - Glad (to be back!)

Godzilla Trailer

WatchMojo's Top 10 Godzilla Movies