Review // Blade Runner 2049

Screen Shot 2017-10-05 at 00.48.52.png

The dystopian story continues as an LAPD detective uncovers a huge secret that will change the world.

We return to a bleak California where human-like robots called replicants are kept in check by Blade Runners, police who specialise in “retiring” these rogue machines. Blade Runner “K” (Ryan Gosling) is sent on a routine mission and pulls a thread that goes further than he could’ve possibly imagined.

BR2049 is a huge film on almost every scale. Decades in waiting and teased out in trailers, it delivers everything it flaunted and more. Sonically and visually it is a feast and the story is one any writer would be proud to have conceived. In a barren future, K searches for Rick Deckard, a former Blade Runner who has been missing for 30 years. During which time replicant manufacturer Niander Wallace (Jared Leto) has pushed robotics to godlike limits and the environment of earth has significantly deteriorated.

Director Denis Villeneuve was a mere 15 years old when the original was released but thankfully there are a few key people who have returned. Harrison Ford reprises his role as Deckard but arguably more important is Hampton Fancher’s return, writer of the original who has done a truly fantastic job penning 2049. The story is incredibly well written and with a run time of 2 hours and 43 minutes it really had to be. The continuity is remarkably comfortable but still easily understood as a standalone film, even if its main themes require a lot of thought.

The central performance from Ryan Gosling vindicates his position as one of the best actors working today but it is a great shame that some of the supporting cast are given little screen time to work with. Their performances are strong but the film could certainly have benefitted from greater depth or screen time for so many of the cast. Ford very naturally takes to his character and Dave Bautista shows how refined his acting skills have become in a short time. Yet while male dominated, it is the performances of the female actresses that are particularly strong, especially Sylvia Hoeks and Ana de Armas.

Villeneuve paired up with powerhouse cinematographer Roger Deakins for this undertaking but BR2049 is unlike any film either have worked on before. The scorched earth backdrop is meticulously composed and many sequences genuinely look as though they’ve been shot on another planet. The scoring process of BR2049 was not without controversy but hearsay aside it sounds fantastic and adds a lot to the film. Industrial and brash when necessary but eerily quiet and reflective at key moments. The audio and visual effects teams contribute to a wasteland nightmare we’d do well to avoid, setting the tone nicely for the cast and writing to shine.

As Mark Kermode noted in a recent blog post, the original Blade Runner is still heavily debated 35 years on. With that in mind, there are key scenes and motifs in 2049 that will almost certainly be pored over with the same vigour in coming years. BR2049 is a clever, thought provoking blockbuster, a rare beast in this day and age. The world has progressed significantly since the 1982 original but the responsibilities and repercussions of breathing life into machines has never been more pertinent than today. A fitting sequel to one of the greatest films of all time.


Spotlight // Pulp Fiction

Screen Shot 2017-08-16 at 18.22.40.png
One film, three stories, a million quotable lines. Pulp Fiction is cult cinema personified.

Despite a hugely successful career, if there’s one film that Quentin Tarantino cannot escape, it’s Pulp Fiction. His 1994 opus magnum frequents more “Best Film” lists than the rest of his filmography put together. Over 20 years later, it is still one of the most popular films ever and never ceases to be discussed or admired.

Originally imagined as a sequel to Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction was inspired by the serial nature of old horror films where several plots converged and often ended in a bloodbath. In this case mob enforcers Jules Winfield and Vince Vega find themselves held up in a diner by two opportunists, while their boss attempts to fix a boxing match using a ringer with a change of heart.

The incredibly violent script struggled to find a financier until it fell into Harvey Weinstein’s lap, who loved it so much it became the first film Miramax funded independently. Boasting several of cinema’s most treasured monologues and a briefcase aglow with mystery, the story itself was simple but Weinstein enjoyed the quirkiness in the nonlinear story and black humour. His faith paid off and it enjoyed great acclaim, oddly so for a film containing so much sexual violence, heavy drug use and racism.

Credited with revitalising the career of John Travolta, Pulp Fiction garnered him an Academy Award nomination for his portrayal of the greasy haired Vincent. Conversely Bruce Willis’ signing on required a significantly smaller pay check than he was used to. Which worked out just fine when he netted a percentage of the $214m gross and it took the Palm D’or at Cannes in 1994.

Littered with famous faces including Harvey Keitel, Steve Buscemi, Christopher Walken and Uma Thurman in her most iconic performance, it’s little surprise the film was so successful. Of course no Tarantino film is complete without a role for the man himself too, in this case Jules’ famously anxious friend Jimmie.

A landmark film that affirmed Tarantino’s status as an artistic force to be reckoned with, Pulp Fiction showcased what would become his signature tropes. Black humour, pop culture references by the dozen, anachronistic music, ensemble casts and extended dialogue. It’s a film so influential it’s genuinely hard to find someone who hasn’t seen it.

£4/5 gets you entry to our pub quiz beforehand and a free bag of popcorn to enjoy along with the film. Fetch Z’s chopper keys and meet us down in Knoxville for this classic.

Feature // How the West Was Won, Again


Screen Shot 2017-05-01 at 18.27.07.png
Clint Eastwood clutches a timepiece, “For a Few Dollars More”, 1965.

As one of the oldest genres in cinema history the western has always maintained a presence in film. From the birth of Hollywood to the 1960’s, the western steadily cemented itself as one of the most popular genres and introduced stars like John Wayne, James Stewart and Clint Eastwood to the world. Yet as the 60’s came and went, cinemagoers and critics began to express interest in other genres. “New Hollywood” directors like Steven Spielberg expanded the scope of film, allowing a much greater choice. Films like The Godfather and 2001: A Space Odyssey catered to the patient film theorists and Jaws terrified a generation, while Star Wars blew everyone away with cutting edge special effects.

By the late 1970’s cinema-goers were far more interested in the future than the past. Now that Neil Armstong had walked on the moon the public were no longer interested in cowboys. Blockbusters like Close Encounters of The Third Kind and Alien proved that science fiction had firmly replaced the historic as the nation’s favourite genre. The western was on its way out.

Michael Cimino’s colossally over budget western “Heaven’s Gate” crashed the genre in 1980. Green-lit on the back of his success with The Deer Hunter, Heaven’s Gate almost quadrupled it’s budget and was shown 11 months late to a dreadful reception. In the years following, westerns were at their least popular. 80’s culture was sufficiently distracting and the popularity of sci-fi had progressed further. The rise of the Brat Pack and explosion of American pop culture meant that America had found new icons like Patrick Swayze and Molly Ringwald. As a tired genre in need of revitalising, the western fell victim to a new generation with a greater choice.

A return of sorts was found through the release of Dances With Wolves (1990) and Unforgiven (1992). Yet if these were indeed the turning point in the popularity of the genre as many claim, they certainly had a delayed effect. Back to The Future Part III (1994), An American Tail 2 (1991), City Slickers I & II (1991/94) and Wild Wild West (1999) proved that studios were willing to invest in westerns again throughout the 90’s, but the films weren’t to be taken seriously. The big budget films like [Dances] and Unforgiven were personally produced by Kevin Costner and Clint Eastwood respectively, meanwhile independent directors like Robert Rodriguez financed grindhouse westerns on his own minuscule budget. Any support for serious western pictures was still hard to come by.

The return of critically and commercially successful westerns would have to wait until the 2000s as the 21st century brought a new era of social understanding. Cinema began to mirror the changes that were being seen in society and aligning with a more open minded audience. Brokeback Mountain (2004) was one of the first westerns to feature homosexuality between central characters as the heart of the film. The masculine sheepherders’ battle with their inner urges was uncharted (and dangerous) cinematic territory, but critically loved. The film was a huge step forward, introducing a new demographic to the world of the western while showing filmmakers that they could be artistic, provocative and most importantly, still critically acclaimed.

Screen Shot 2017-08-01 at 21.00.22.png
Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal as lovers in Brokeback Mountain, 2005.

A flurry of high profile westerns emerged in the years following. The impact of Brokeback Mountain’s denial of convention inspired filmmakers to return to the genre with fewer rules and a renewed interest. Furthering the renaissance, the Coen brothers released “No Country For Old Men” in 2007 and a True Grit remake in 2010 starring 13 year old Hailie Steinfeld. The original film (1969) cast a 21 year old for the same role but the Coen brothers’ faith in Steinfeld showed a willingness to innovate that continued to progress the genre. Within 3 years, previously undesirable traits such as homosexuality and femininity had paid off. 40 years after it’s dominion, the western was back at the forefront of cinema.

Continued box office appeal brought more commercial directors like Quentin Tarantino into the fold. Plantation revenge flick Django Unchained (2012) featured an African-American cast dealing with slavery through very dark humour. Yet that didn’t stop it being one of the biggest box office hits of the year, grossing over $400m worldwide. 3 years later he released another, “The Hateful Eight” to similar acclaim. Both westerns featured racial friction as main themes. Fans argued the provocative language and extreme violence was a way of highlighting the differences in society between then and now, while others claimed Tarantino was stirring the pot in the name of controversy. Either way, the film was a success.

A young Hailee Steinfeld,”True Grit” 2010,

Success has also been found by dipping into the art world. Northern frontier thriller The Revenant (2015) was traditional in premise, but very modern in execution. Director Alejandro Inarritu pushed the genre to it’s artistic limit, focusing heavily on landscape cinematography and minimalistic scoring. Despite featuring some of the least dialogue a mainstream film has ever seen, it was still one of the highest grossing films of the year and won countless awards. Similarly, when fashion designer Tom Ford was announced as director of Nocturnal Animals (2016) cinephiles collectively raised an eyebrow, but he crafted a fantastic if unconventional film. The fashion influenced film was exciting because of its gambles, not despite them. The juxtaposition of the Texas plains and the ivy-league art world struck a chord with audiences and critics alike. Even on a very technical level, “The Assassination of Jesse James” featured several sequences shot with lenses from the 1880’s; a rejection of modern technology in favour of authenticity to a wanting audience.

Screen Shot 2017-01-10 at 17.17.42
1880’s inspired camerawork of Roger Deakins. “The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford” 2007,

The proof is in the pudding. From their inception in 1928 to 1989, the western had only produced one Best Picture winner. Then despite Dances With Wolves and Unforgiven winning in 1990 and 1992, not one western was nominated between 1993 and 2004. Compare that to 2005 onwards where Brokeback Mountain, No Country For Old Men (Winner, 2007), There Will Be Blood, True Grit, Django Unchained, The Revenant, and Hell or High Water were all contenders. Even Crash’s 2005 win over Brokeback Mountain is largely considered to be one of the great misjudgements of the academy and director/producer Paul Haggis later said his film did not deserve to win.

1928-2004                                                     2005-2017
13 Nominations                                           7 Nominations
3 Wins (1931, 1990, 1992)                    1 Win (2007)

Of course the return of the western has been significantly aided by the increasingly casual nature of cinema, so it’s no surprise that the current top grossing films are mostly modern franchises or summer blockbusters. Hollywood’s recent formulaic success of producing billion dollar films is a huge factor. There is now a lot more money in studios to allow (relatively) smaller budget pictures like westerns. We also live in an age where the cinema is reaching more people and more frequently. Inevitably, any film released nowadays would make significantly more money than one made 50 years ago.

There are now countless films that are a cowboy hat short of being a western and the influence has never been stronger. Mad Max: Fury Road, the John Wick series, Drive, even box office behemoth Marvel has cashed in on the success recently with Logan. Modern television has not escaped either, Breaking Bad, Westworld and Deadwood among the most popular shows today. A further sign of the times, Stephen King’s “The Dark Tower” novels are currently being adapted for film, the first of which is set for release this week despite having been around since 1998. Bizarrely, critics have even begun to see Heaven’s Gate in a new light, as recent interpretations of the 1980 disaster are far more favourable. Is Hollywood’s rekindling with the genre now rewriting history? Or much like the films themselves, are we just romanticising the past?

How much further the western will develop before the cycle repeats, only time will tell. But for now, this is a genre that the public and critics both want to see, because they’re exciting, romantic, picturesque, historic. You name it, they can do it. The western is a versatile storytelling vessel that pits the good against the bad in the most basic form and continues to be loved for that reason, evidently never more than now.

Review // The Lost City of Z


On an expedition mapping the border between Brazil and Bolivia, soldier Percy Fawcett (Charlie Hunnam) finds traces of a great civilisation deep in the jungle, but is ridiculed upon return for his lack of evidence. To prove his critics wrong he returns with the Royal Geographical Society to find the lost city of wonder, dubbed “Z”.

As a film that embraces the romance of the unexplored, The Lost City of Z is an impressive piece of modern filmmaking, as it feels and looks like a classic explorer film from a long past era. It nicely strikes the balance between the romantic nature of European “New World” pioneering, while still showing how difficult and unforgiving the jungle can be.

Hunnam plays stoic Fawcett, head of a large family with varying opinions on his ambitions. Tom Holland’s portrayal of his eldest son shows an actor with a great future and Robert Pattinson’s turn as haggard fellow explorer Henry Costin is impressively unrecognisable. Their odyssey, pitted against the outbreak of the Great War, shows the struggle Fawcett faced between leaving his family in England and his battle to right his disgraced family name. It’s a story that could easily be mistaken for fiction, but it’s as true as it is remarkable.

Christopher Spelman’s score is excellent, allowing the beautiful visuals to take over and the sweeping strings in the sombre scenes are genuinely moving. The hazy camerawork compliments the dense jungle, captured in it’s claustrophobic glory. The lucid night sequences were very reminiscent of Apocalypse Now which was clearly a big influence, but thankfully the film has its own distinct character. Director James Gray’s work with “The Beach” cinematographer Darius Khondji is a winning combination, and while the film doesn’t feel like a huge Hollywood blockbusting adventure, neither it should. Sitting far more comfortably as a smaller budget film with an artistic heart.

With some sporadic pacing and a slightly one dimensional performance from Hunnam, The Lost City of Z is not without its flaws. But it’s still a wonderful film, the likes of which has not been seen for a while. The sense of adventure is very genuine and Gray successfully pulls off a very difficult task. How do you make a film about exploring that’s exciting, in an era where no stone has been left unturned?

Review // Dunkirk

Screen Shot 2017-07-14 at 21.48.49.png

The heart of British stoicism pulses like the tide in this outstanding epic, chronicling the greatest military disaster in our history.

Told from 3 different viewpoints, Dunkirk is the story of the 400,000 men left surrounded by German forces in Northern France, featuring Fionn Whitehead as a young Private stranded on the beach, Tom Hardy as an RAF pilot and Mark Rylance as a civilian captaining a drafted boat. Among these stars feature an incredibly talented supporting cast including Cillian Murphy, Harry Styles in his feature debut and Kenneth Branagh as commander of the beached forces.

The week-long ordeal is neatly split up across the three stories, each with their own climaxes and conclusion. Whitehead as the young “Tommy” is joined by Styles and Aneurin Bernard, forming a group of soldiers desperately trying to flee the beach. Tom Hardy gives a great performance almost entirely from the cockpit of a spitfire in airborne sequences that are absolutely enthralling. The civilian boat ordeal contains a sombre story, highlighting the sacrifices that everyday people made in order to rescue the stranded soldiers. In a jam packed 1hr 50mins, the film is never far from the action, avoiding politics altogether and all the better for it.

Nolan has been careful not to glorify any of the evacuation and every aspect of Dunkirk contains an element of struggle. From the constant screeching of the German bombers to the landscapes that never quite shake their misty coats, bleakness permeates every level. Hoyte Van Hoytema, cinematographer of Interstellar returned to shoot Dunkirk and the two are strikingly similar visually, having traded the heavens for the seas. Yet where Interstellar was technically contrived, Dunkirk is far simpler, allowing full cinematic freedom to be explored.

Screened in various formats including the holy grail of 70mm, Dunkirk is pure cinema at it’s finest. The production cost alone of shooting on such expensive film could only ever be justified by a director such as Nolan, and justified is the word. Having produced a film as fine as this, it would be unjust for anything other than a slew of oscar nominations to be thrown his way with a view to a clean sweep come awards season.

Dunkirk is a much a treat for the ears as it is for the eyes. A truly dread-inducing score from Hans Zimmer, complimented by terrifying sound effects bring the audience as close to war as is comfortable. It contains very little dialogue, focusing on the physical journey, allowing their exhausting movements and relentless obstacles to tell the story without unnecessary distraction. But when required, the speeches are moving and words are certainly not wasted.

In a career that has spanned more than two decades, Christopher Nolan joins the increasingly small list of directors who deal exclusively in cinematic works of art. Almost certainly his best film, Dunkirk must rank among the greatest British films and solidify his place as one of the best living filmmakers.

77 years on, there can hardly be a more terrifyingly realistic interpretation of this great disaster. Do yourself a favour and see this spectacle on this biggest possible screen and enjoy what will undoubtedly be remembered as a landmark film.

Feature // Men In Black, 20 Years On

Screen Shot 2017-06-28 at 21.14.03.png
“This little gadget is gonna replace CDs soon, guess I’ll have to buy The White Album again”

Men in Black celebrated it’s 20th birthday this month. The sci-fi classic rested on a few fault lines that have shifted in various ways. So have the two decades since been kind to the men?

One of Will Smith’s breakout film roles, Men In Black was a smart move. Perfectly tailored to his sense of comedy that brought great success with Independence Day the year before. His chemistry with Tommy Lee Jones was hilarious. Jones had recently starred in the critically panned Batman Forever, but his performance in MiB was proof that the haggard Texan even had comedy chops. Together, the agents of new and old saved the world from a threat we didn’t even know about and looked impossibly cool doing it.

In terms of performances, Rip Torn, Vincent D’Onofrio and Linda Fiorentino were all spot on too, but beyond the main cast lay some now-problematic casting issues. Faceless minorities as pawnshop owners and taxi drivers, the reveal of a border crossing alien to literally be an alien, plus uncomfortable parallels between royalty and Jews probably wouldn’t sit too well nowadays. Despite this, J in the original comic was a white blonde, so credit should be given for casting a black actor in a leading role originally written for a white guy. As another positive, Fiorentino’s character was a strong, educated woman, without whom the film would’ve lessened, and certainly had a lot less to salvage for 2017’s ethnically more diverse film industry.

Aesthetically Men in Black hasn’t aged much. The film owed a lot to the 1960’s and its oscar nominated art direction was heavily inspired by the early FBI and classic cars. Finnish designer Eero Saarinen’s work was the basis for MiB HQ and many other oddities throughout. The weapons were designed not from a 90’s point of view but were 60’s projections of futuristic weapons, campy and overblown. The monochrome palette was simple but effective in conveying the many dualities than run through the film; black and white, good and bad, de-atomiser and noisy cricket. While it didn’t win the oscar, the film had a very unique artistic character that was a huge part of its initial success.

If Men in Black was released in 2017, the black suits would probably be monopolised. A masculine MiB Gillette ad would dominate billboards and product placement would wreak havoc through the film. MiB did well to steer clear of it in 1997 but the sequels suffered. Relying on the mystique of the black wardrobe from shows like The X Files, MiB banked on black never going out of fashion. Sure, the boxy suits of the late 90’s look pretty terrible now. But so do the skinny suits of the late 2000’s. The changing nature of fashion will punish and praise the wardrobe as and when trends dictate, but the Men In Black will always look sharp.

Danny Elfman’s score was fantastic, harbouring something otherworldly in the choral swells and minor riffs as J & K pounded the streets. Great scores have always stood the test of time and MiB is no exception. Will Smith’s featured song, not so much. RnB may have been huge in the 90’s but Smith’s clean rap style would probably struggle today. Pitbull’s “Back in Time” released for 2012’s MiB3 failed to even make the top 10 in the UK or US, whereas Smith’s effort held the top spot in both for over a month. Perhaps this is more indicative of a change in music consumption, but it’s a change nonetheless.

Director Barry Sonnenfeld wanted as little CGI as possible, opting for prosthetics and costume design from acclaimed designer Rick Baker. The extraterrestrials looked great in 1997 and remarkably still do. The wormy aliens of the MiB staff room were given CGI treatment for the 2002 sequel and looked a lot less realistic. “Edgar the Bug” involved a rough looking D’Onofrio donning some serious make up, but he still looked fantastic because there was a great actor under all that. MiB proved that much like Jurassic Park a few years earlier, using as little CGI as possible always looks best because genuine effects are still very difficult to beat.

A film so reliant on technology will inevitably date, but we’re not quite there yet. Branding was kept to a minimum and everything was sleek the point of anonymity. Using little realism meant that there was nothing to compare to in 1997 and nothing to compare to now. The true power of the MiB was that they could erase memories, which would involve jumping through some serious hoops today considering nothing happens without being caught on camera. This partly overshadows modern viewings of the film, but complaining about realism in a sci-fi film is pretty unfounded. By the time MiB3 came around, the role of the neuralyser was significantly downplayed which is as good a way as any to address it.

A lot has happened since 1997 socially. In today’s Snowden era, the idea of government espionage is a lot less romantic than it once was. Knowing the American government has hidden various scandals means that where once a secret organisation walking the streets might’ve been comforting, it is significantly less so now. The missing twin towers that dominated so much of the film are a representation of how America has changed in the years since. The US edging towards war with North Korea and the UK leaving the EU are a far cry from the comparative social ease that was the 90’s. Would the public still flock to see a film about government agents operating under the radar? Probably, but it wouldn’t be without claims of propaganda and distraction tactics now.

All things considered, good humour lasts forever and Men in Black is worth a revisit to remember some great performances in a film that really stood out from its contemporaries. Somewhere between the streets of New York and the stars above there was something incongruous in the air which Sonnenfeld captured beautifully. Interestingly, the comic book company that spawned the original series (Malibu) is now owned by Marvel and with a reboot in talks, we may see J & K on the big screen again before the decade is out.

Review // Song to Song

Screen Shot 2017-07-15 at 23.45.18.png
A group of intertwined people cavort in the Austin music scene battling vices, heartbreak and derailment along the way.

BV (Gosling) and Faye (Mara) are songwriters working with music tycoon Cooke, (Fassbender) a man of great means but a penchant for control of anyone he crosses paths with (Portman). Their trials and tribulations under the Texas sun show the darker side of stardom and the sacrifices that must be made to succeed in the music world.

With four of today’s biggest stars in a web of artistic and sexual aegis, Song to Song has a hell of a lot of chemistry. But one must first indulge Terrence Malick’s many signature tropes to enjoy it. The film’s basic premise, the quest for success, is fleshed out by his typically existential dialogue and oddly beautiful camerawork. The performances themselves are as we’ve come to expect from some of Hollywood’s greatest assets; convincingly tragic. With Rooney Mara and Ryan Gosling shining in particular.

The soundtrack regularly varies from New Orleans bounce to Saint Saens. A jarring combination that much like the opening 10 minutes of the film, takes a long time to settle. While they’re modern musicians, EDM still feels very out of place when consistently juxtaposed with recognisable classical music, when interludes from the likes of Patti Smith & Lykke Li offer a far more refined musical break.

Despite the cyclical tour-based storyline, the film ticks along nicely and the cinematography from Emmanuel Lubezki is absolutely breathtaking. This is their fifth collaboration and there’s no doubt that they’ve crafted some of the most beautiful films of the last 20 years. However, their “show but don’t tell” style filmmaking has recently left audiences lacking and could definitely be argued for this venture too.

Occasionally distracted but always beautiful. Song to Song takes influence from films like Mulholland Drive and more recently La La Land, asking the age-old question. Is the suffering worth the art?