Jurassic World

Starring: Chris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard, Vincent D’Onofrio, Nick Robinson, Ty Simpkins

Directed by: Colin Trevorrow

Screenplay by: Rick Jaffa, Colin Trevorrow, Amanda Silver, Derek Connolly

Twenty two years after the catastrophe at Jurassic Park, its replacement Jurassic World is a roaring success – with the slight issue of audiences becoming bored with dinosaurs. To counter this, InGen has developed something new: the Indominus Rex, a hybrid creation that will give a thrill like no other. It isn’t long before Jurassic World is suffering the same problems that devastated its predecessor…

Surely everyone is familiar with Jurassic Park? One of the most successful and beloved blockbusters ever made, but with two sequels of less stellar reputation. There hasn’t been an instalment in the franchise since Jurassic Park III, back in 2001. We’ve had to find other outlets for our big screen beasties, such as notable recent films like Pacific Rim and Godzilla…but there’s something different about them, isn’t there? Awesome, yes, and awe-inspiring, but what made Jurassic Park special to so many was the sense of wonder. We didn’t need to see the T-Rex ploughing through everything in sight to gasp (although we do, of course). All that was necessary was the sight of a vast brachiosaurus eating leaves.

Of course, a part of the wonder in that scene was the simple fact that it could be done. Jurassic Park had ground-breaking effects that still hold up remarkably well today. That isn’t enough these days though. Outstanding effects are ten a penny – we need more. This actually becomes a rather pleasingly meta plot point for Jurassic World. The big beastie this time around, the Indominus Rex, is not a natural dinosaur (in as much as dinosaurs cloned from fragments of DNA patched up with frog DNA amongst other things can be natural). It is a hybrid, bred because the public have become bored with dinosaurs. They’re common-place now. So the hybrid needs to be bigger, badder, scarier…It takes a predictably brief time for this to go tits up.

Predictability is probably Jurassic World’s biggest problem. You will rarely be surprised by the big twists and turns, even those that haven’t been explicitly featured in the trailers. It also rarely if ever quite captures that sense of wonder from the first film – the closest it gets is perhaps the scene with the Mosasaurus leaping from its tank.

While it may not match its illustrious predecessor on that score though, Jurassic World cannot be accused of lacking in spectacle. Or quality, to be honest. The advances in CGI since our first visit to Isla Nublar allow for some truly thrilling setpieces, and the finale is one of those rare cinematic moments that actually got me stifling audible cheers of glee (and there is one genuinely shocking moment, with easily the most brutal death scene thus far seen in the franchise).

Elsewhere, the script and cast are perfectly fine without ever being particularly special. Fans of Marvel’s recent Daredevil will be disappointed by Vincent D’Onofrio’s bland performance as Corrupt Exec #6, but otherwise everyone acquits themselves well enough. The highlight for many will be Chris Pratt as Grady, military man turned raptor wrangler with a healthy dose of roguish charm, and Jurassic World should surely cement his leading man status. Bryce Dallas Howard does well with a potentially tricky role (basic tightly wound but fundamentally decent exec #7) which is perhaps not as sexist as some commentators have declared her. Finally, Nick Robinson and Ty Simpkins are surprisingly engaging as the kids in danger, although the obviousness of their plot strand works against them.

All in all then, a solidly crafted, fun filled adventure that doesn’t quite live up to the classic first instalment, but is streets ahead of the rest of the pack.

Guardians of the Galaxy

Starring: Chris Pratt, Zoe Saldana, Karen Gillan, David Bautista, Lee Pace, Glenn Close, Bradley Cooper, Vin Diesel

Written by: James Gunn and Nicole Perlman

Directed by: James Gunn

Earth, the 1980’s. Peter Jason Quill, a young boy going through a rough time, vanishes in a flash of light. Twenty years later, and he’s roaming the galaxy as the legendary outlaw ‘Star Lord’ – or at least, that’s what he’ll tell you if you’re willing to listen. Now though, he’s found himself in possession of a seriously hot property, and everyone from assassins to bounty hunters to alien terrorists to near gods want to take it from him. At a time like this, a man needs friends. Unfortunately, Quill’s friends consist of a psychotic, trigger happy raccoon, a walking, just-about-talking tree, a literal minded warrior, and a genetically modified living weapon. And none of them really like him very much.

It’s fair to say that Guardians of the Galaxy was a bit of a risk for Marvel. Once upon a time, they’d have said the same about the Iron Man franchise, citing the relatively B list character, the lead actor more famous for his drug habits than his screen presence, and the bravery of launching an entire cinematic universe. Guardians…, though, is an entirely different beast – literally, in the case of one of its main characters. For all the differences in Iron Man, we’re essentially talking a fairly familiar story: man goes through personal trauma, changes his life and kicks ass doing it. With Marvel’s latest offering, they’re asking audiences to go and see a wilfully bizarre film that flies in the face of the common theory about superhero films that grim, serious and realistic is better. Not only that, but if Iron Man is B list, then the Guardians are at least D list, possibly even further down.

It’s also fair to say this risk has paid off. At the time of writing, Guardians is doing fantastic business, raking in the third biggest opening weekend of the year (a hefty $94million). However, anyone who has sat through Michael Bay’s Transformers films will be well aware that successful does not necessarily mean good. And for the Guardians, the question of whether it’s any good depends on how you look at it.

The plot is nonsense. I’m saying this as a connoisseur of such nonsense. I’m fairly easy to please; give me a film/book/tv show/videogame that revolves around a bunch of sarcastic oddballs doing crazy stuff in the name of something vaguely heroic, and I’m probably going to enjoy myself. But Guardians plot really is nonsense, a thinly constructed piece about a ragtag bunch of maniacs trying to stop another maniac blowing things up with a glowing Macguffin. It’s the plot of dozens of blockbusters; worse than that, it’s essentially the exact same plot as the last Thor film, bar a few details. This is not a film that’s going to challenge you intellectually. Furthermore – and in another similarity with Thor 2 – the villain is particularly uninspiring. Lee Pace looms dramatically behind a big hat, a bigger hammer and some make-up that would impress Gene Simmons, but he has the character depth of a dead shrimp. This is really something that Marvel need to work on. Thus far, their films have impressed mightily, but their villains are almost uniformly weak. Lee Pace here, Christopher Ecclestone’s growling space-elf in the last Thor film, the entire alien race in Avengers Assemble…other than Tom Hiddleston’s Loki and, arguably, Ben Kingsley’s Mandarin, they have little other than action scenes to remember them by.

At least in the case of Guardians of the Galaxy though, you’ll probably be having too much fun to care. I’ve been to see outright comedies where there hasn’t been as much laughter as in the majority of this film. The script is sharp, and the performances (mostly) spot on. Particular mention must go to Chris Pratt, making the emerging characterisation of Quill surprisingly affecting, and Bradley Cooper’s sterling voice-work for Rocket Raccon, who almost steals the film with his non-stop barrage of outrageous lines, ridiculously big guns, and a light touch of tragedy. Less memorable are Saldana and Gillan, saddled with under-written, generic roles. To be fair, there was a tougher challenge here than even Avengers Assemble, which attracted a lot of concern due to having to draw together a bunch of different characters from different franchises. Here, none of them had even had so much as a DVD extra to be introduced, and it’s a credit to all concerned that even though many characters lack real depth, they aren’t quite two dimensional

In between the laughs, there are more traditional blockbuster pleasures to be had. The action scenes are spectacular, although again, it’s the fourth Marvel film in a row which climaxes with a lot of airborne destruction over a city. Chances are this won’t change that much with the Avengers sequel in 2015, although you never know. There’s some surprising inventiveness though, particularly with a scene which manages to make whistling almost terrifying. Presumably, Steven Moffat will be taking notes. And all these scenes are set against a beautifully vivid space opera background, which recalls every cheesy SF serial you’ve ever seen.

Like its lead, it’s a film that swings by on charm, wit and just enough intelligence to surprise. Hopefully, the inevitable sequel will also have learned the lesson that charm isn’t always enough…but for now, I’m just going to revel in the most entertaining film since Scott Pilgrim vs. the World.

Calvary

Starring: Brendan Gleeson, Kelly Reilly, Chris O’Dowd, Dylan Moran, Aiden Gillan

Written by: John McDonagh

Directed by: John McDonagh

“I’m going to kill you, Father.” Not the words Father James (Gleeson) was expecting to hear in the confessional booth. Torn between wanting to survive and to fulfil his priestly duties, what follows is a week of startling and troubling insight into the issues and flaws at the heart of his community, his faith, and his family.

Back in 2008, Martin McDonagh wrote and directed the relatively infamous In Bruges, a spectacularly foul-mouthed black comedy about two hitmen hiding out in Bruges after a botched job. Something of an instant cult classic, it seemed that his brother John had inherited some of the same style in 2011’s The Guard, another deeply black comedy which riffed on both Wild West films and buddy cop films, splicing many of those genre’s tropes together in rural Ireland. Given that Calvary is John’s second film, and the third of the brothers’ films to star Brendan Gleeson, you could be forgiven for assuming that it would be something similarly comic; blackly comic, perhaps, and comedy with teeth, comedy with brains, but a comedy nonetheless.

You would, as it happens, be mostly wrong. This is not to say that Calvary is not funny; it is very funny indeed, painfully so at times. One scene around the halfway mark had me almost paralytic with helpless hysterics, such was the perfection of writing and delivery. But the comedy is incidental, added spice to the burning intelligence and thoughtfulness at the heart of the drama. The film does play with your expectations in this regard, with the vast majority of the cast best known as comedians or comic actors, but laughter is not the main point of the film.

Neither is it a whodunit. Despite the impending death of Father James, there are only token efforts to solve the mystery of his would-be killer. He thinks he knows, and if you’re really good at identifying voices you might be able to work it out yourself. But the identity of the killer is irrelevant, really. The whole point is that the entire village is populated with people bitter enough with life and the church that they might contemplate such an act even before you consider the specific reasons he has for doing it (which I won’t mention, for fear of diluting one of the more shocking moments of the film – which is also its first line – but suffice it to say that it’s not a massive surprise if you’re aware of the Catholic church’s media reputation).

For all that though, Calvary is not a particularly anti-Catholic film. Catholicism comes in for a fair amount of flack, but then again so does pretty much every institution in Ireland. The most unpleasant person in the film is a die-hard atheist. And although Gleeson’s Father James is a flawed man, he is without question a good man. He drinks too much, he’s almost incapable of not skewering someone with a pointed remark, and he certainly has a temper. But he recognises his flaws, accepts them, lives with them. He is openly contemptuous of some of his parishioners, but if they turn up with a sincere request for help and guidance, he will do everything in his power to provide it. This is actually what drives the whole plot; is the right thing to do in such a situation actually to let your would be killer go through with the act, and salve his all-encompassing rage? It wouldn’t have worked if Gleeson’s performance had been sub-par, but he is majestic in the role. His first scene, with the camera relentlessly focused on his face as the off-screen confessor tells him what’s going to happen, and why, is riveting, Gleeson perfectly selling the transition between shock and anguish.

He has admirable support from the rest of the cast. Kelly Reilly is wonderful as James’ estranged daughter (he wasn’t always a priest), bruised and vulnerable and still brimming with hope. Elsewhere, Aiden Gillan is impressive as a truly vicious doctor, revelling in his black-hearted lack of faith, while Dylan Moran and Chris O’Dowd both portray outwardly happy yet inwardly troubled souls with a skill that might surprise anyone more familiar with their comic roles. On top of that, McDonagh’s script is spot on, beautifully written and planned, and never feeling contrived despite the desire to fit to a theme.

Really, the whole film is spot on. It’s a rare occasion indeed that I can’t think of a single negative aspect to something, but I’m really struggling with Calvary. It’s a perfect marriage of intelligence, passion, power and heart, with outstanding performances, writing and direction to wrap it all up. It is without question the best film I’ve seen so far this year, and I can’t imagine anything knocking it off pole position. It’s over a week since I saw it, and I’m still absorbing it all.

Amazing Spider-Man 2

Starring: Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Jamie Foxx, Dane DeHaan, Sally Field

Written by: James Vanderbilt, with rewrites by Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci

Directed by: Marc Webb

In the months after Dr Curt Conners’ biological attack on New York, Spider-Man’s (Andrew Garfield) stock is rising ever higher with the public, and his relationship with Gwen Stacey (Emma Stone) appears to be going from strength to strength. By contrast, Max Dillon (Jamie Foxx) is desperate for any sort of human connection, forming an obsession with the wall-crawler in the absence of any other friends or family. When he gets involved in an industrial accident at the shady Oscorp, the obsession starts to spiral out of control, with shocking consequences…

The trouble with putting any sort of qualifying term in a film’s title is that it inevitably creates expectations that may be difficult for the final product to live up to. So the obvious question with The Amazing Spider-Man 2…is it amazing, or simply awful?

Well…

Before we get into the meat of the matter, a little context. Once upon a time, before Marvel had hit on the idea of creating an all-conquering film production line of their own, they sold the film rights to a lot of their more popular characters. The X-Men, for instance, are owned by Fox, while Spider-Man is owned by Sony. Sony proceeded to release three films featuring the character, to various degrees of success – climaxing with the infamous Spider-Man 3, widely regarded as being a franchise killer. There were various rumours about a possible Spider-Man 4, but in the end nothing came of it until the day a Sony executive realised that if they didn’t get a Spider-Man film out soon, the rights were going to revert to Marvel, resulting in a massive loss of potential income. A totally artistically justified and necessary reboot was planned post-haste. For all the cynicism in that statement, it was actually quite good, although there was still no real need for it to exist. Still, you could probably level that criticism at 90% of all popular culture, so never mind.

So, Amazing Spider-Man 2. A lot of the strengths of the first film are still in place. Garfield is spot-on as the more modern take on Peter Parker, awkward but endearing, highly intelligent and bitingly funny, and his chemistry with real-life girlfriend Stone is appropriately electrifying; the scenes with the two of them just being cute and couply are sweet, and some of the highlights of the film. More generally, Stone gives a fine performance even in isolation, developing some subtler shades to Gwen while increasing her plot involvement at the same time. The action scenes are thoroughly entertaining, showing as realistic an interpretation as possible of a spider like superhero’s fighting style, with a barrage of gymnastics and inventiveness that’s far more entertaining than the usual blockbuster staple of guns, explosions and kung-fu.

Elsewhere though…Foxx does his best with Dillon, but he’s a tediously stereotypical Hollywood Nerd, from the awful haircut and bad glasses, through social awkwardness and up to full on obsessive creepiness. This approach does lead to a couple of nice moments, in particular a touchingly pitiful surprise when another character declares that they need him, but overall it’s uninspired. It doesn’t help that even by the standard of comic book movies, the origin of his powers is silly. While his character is daft though, he does at least get something approaching characterisation; the best DeHaan can walk away with is a certificate of entry to the noble troupe of gifted actors tasked with evil glowering and cackling in one-dimensional roles (thrillingly, ASM2 manages to bag three such performances with DeHaan, Chris Cooper and Paul Giamatti, and depending on how charitable you’re feeling Foxx might qualify too).

On top of that, the plot is a little lacklustre. Actually, in fairness, that probably depends on how familiar you are with the comics. If you have more than a passing familiarity with them, there’s a decent chance you’ll spot the vast majority of twists and turns long before they arrive, especially the biggest one. If you’re a newcomer, then there may be more surprises. Regardless of that though, there are a lot of similar beats to the previous trilogy, which doesn’t help with the view that the reboot is redundant. Further, while no Spider-Man film is complete without a little emotional turmoil, it’s of a particularly lazy and well-trod variety here.

All in all, it’s not a complete success, and not a complete failure. The overall feeling is of a blandly competent film that exists more to set up further instalments in the franchise than anything else. Far from amazing, it’s mostly just rather dull.