NEVER LOOK AWAY (2018)

When two German art students fall in love, the girl's father, who has a devastating secret, vows to end their relationship.

For such a short synopsis, this film does not rush itself by any means. I was completely unaware of the runtime of the film beforehand until I checked the time after leaving the theatre to learn that over 3 hours had passed. Clocking in at 189 minutes long, Never Look Away is longer than Avengers: Endgame but it certainly doesn't feel that long. I should have gotten an idea by how often I had to change position because my posterior kept falling asleep, and yet the film was so engaging that the thought never crossed my mind.

Having such an extensive runtime works in the film's favour as it allows so much time for character development. Nothing is rushed, in fact, a period of 40 years is covered in the film. While it certainly raised a few eyebrows during the viewing--the amount of time setting up the characters initially seemed excessive--in hindsight, the proportions of the film were still around the same. 

There do seem to be a few questionable decisions with regards to what plot points and events have been included in the film. There are several moments that appear pivotal, but end up being discarded, having no effect on the main storyline. It certainly helps with the world-building and develops the characters further, but it is also something that could have easily been cut out to trim that runtime down. That does seem to be the point of the film though, it is all about trying to display the truth in all its beauty, and that includes all of the little minor details.

There is so much to like about the film. The acting is superb, and it is all heightened by some absolutely gorgeous moments of cinematography and a well-balanced score. The score is a tad repetitive though, with characters or actions having their own unique score that you hear each time. A great example of that is in the romance of the two protagonists, where their scenes of passion are forewarned by it's repeated score.

When I say repeated score, I mean repeated score. The film could earn its M rating by the graphic nudity and the sheer number of sex scenes alone. One could estimate that you can expect at least 10 scenes, and 6-10 minutes of combined ecstasy on screen. Protagonists Tom Schilling and Paula Beer do a great job portraying the youthful couple and create some gorgeously organic scenes of passion. The lighting, the curves, the soft caress, there is a fragility and loving infatuation that draws your gaze. 

The film is split into several different sections of time and carries a wide variety of tones. The shifts do become apparent after a while, but you don't necessarily notice the transition until it has happened. And that is one of the strengths of the film. It can put forward some incredibly dark themes and then switch to a jovial setting, eliciting laughs from the audience before becoming serious again and bringing in a sense of tension and suspense. The film ebbs and flows from one emotion to another in a surprisingly cohesive fashion.

Never Look Away is a foreign language film (expect subtitles for the German and Russian), but more importantly Never Look Away is an epic exploration of art and politics throughout Germany's modern history; more specifically during the formative years of German artist Gerhard Richter, of whom the movie is loosely based on.

The film is so understated that everything catches you by surprise. The more you think about it, the more enraptured you become with what you have experienced. Never Look Away is the combination of ideology, sex, and art, that you didn't know you needed to see. Absolutely captivating, and totally unexpected.

Never Look Away is in cinemas 6th June 2019

THE PERFECTION (2018)

When troubled musical prodigy Charlotte (Allison Williams) seeks out Elizabeth (Logan Browning), the new star pupil of her former school, the encounter sends both musicians down a sinister path with shocking consequences.

The Perfection is going to be a polarizing film due to its rather unconventional structure. This 90-minute flick is split into four distinct chapters; something that gives an indie vibe to this horror thriller. What sets this film apart from the usual stock of Netflix films is its interesting choice in narrative structure, making significant use of rewinds and flashbacks. While intrinsically a unique direction to take a horror film, it can have a detrimental effect on the audience's enjoyment of the film. Disruption to the linear narrative as well as the use of chapters leads to a loss of tension and an inconsistent tone. 

But there is definitely a lot of originality in the script. The premise is an intriguing twist on a commonly used trope, but the writers don't stop there and have instead developed the backstories of their main characters in a series of succession which leads to the events of the third and fourth chapter. While there are certainly little hints here and there that something is aloof, it is actually quite difficult to predict the direction that the film will go, as they leave multiple options open at all times.

This is done quite successfully, thanks to the simple notion of not explaining the characters' motivations, instead, leaving it up to the audience to try and figure it out before the chapter ends and the big reveal occurs. 

The acting too is superb. Allison Williams carries a very similar vibe to her earlier work in Jordan Peele's Get Out, with an astonishingly gorgeous look, that still leaves you feeling unnerved. Co-star Logan Browning also puts on an immensely strong performance, making the first chapter an absolute thrill to watch. The performances combined with some great cinematography and an emotive musical score makes for an incredibly passionate opening.

The film is filled with points of difference that could be considered along the lines of "damned if you do, damned if you don't", where following the usual formula is accepted but ultimately bland, yet challenging the formula is different but also inconsistent. The chapters allow the film to be split into four main events, but it has the downside of having these points in the film where the story feels almost complete; as if the film was coming to an end. This adds a feeling of length to the film, and you really don't want people constantly checking to see how much longer the film has to go.

What I really want to talk about is the grooming in the film, but it is such an integral part of the latter end of the film, that I can't for fear of spoilers. It makes the story significantly darker and allows the film to have much more gore.

In reality, all of the ingredients are there for a great horror thriller; some great actresses, a complex plot that keeps you guessing, a surprising amount of gore and violence, some fascinating engaging cinematography and colour palettes, and a striking score with some related diegetic music. However, it is the structure that will determine whether you love the film or not. I'd prefer the reveals to occur all at the end, rather than providing several "rewind" moments, because we the audience are not idiots.

GODZILLA II: KING OF THE MONSTERS (2019)

Members of the crypto-zoological agency Monarch face off against a battery of god-sized monsters, including the mighty Godzilla, who collides with Mothra, Rodan, and his ultimate nemesis, the three-headed King Ghidorah. When these ancient super-species--thought to be mere myths--rise again, they all vie for supremacy, leaving humanity's very existence hanging in the balance.

Godzilla: King of the Monsters is the latest film in the Legendary/Warner Bros "MonsterVerse". I actually didn't even know that it was properly a thing, but yes, the 2014 Godzilla reboot, and Kong: Skull Island are all a part of this shared universe. 

For those that have read or watched reviews for the 2014 reboot, you may remember that there were some complaints that we didn't get to see enough of the titular character, Godzilla, and that the human storyline took up far too much of the focus. Well, I can safely say that the studios have remedied those comments in this latest film. There is plenty of Godzilla to be seen.

In fact, you get to see quite a lot of the big four; Godzilla, Mothra, Rodan, and Ghidorah. As far as character designs go, Mothra is exquisite and absolutely gorgeous. Godzilla just keeps getting better; still maintaining the same style as the 2014 film, the textures have improved quite significantly, and he really looks and moves like he is a huge lumbering monster god. Much like how Guillermo del Toro successfully gave the Jaegers heft and mass in Pacific Rim, Godzilla is a complete jock.

If you have come to the film to see Godzilla fight with some other giant beasts, you will not leave disappointed. Granted, some of the cinematography choices at the beginning can be annoying with a lot of close-ups and quick edits that make it difficult to fully appreciate what is going on, but as the film progresses, the scale continuously expands and wide shots are increasingly used, providing a great depth of field. What also helps with the identification of the monsters, is the colour scheme. Each one has its own colours and auras, which combined with some great lighting creates a very visually stimulating spectacle.

Of course, for a modern film, there does need to be a human element to direct the plot of the film. As I mentioned earlier, too much focus on the human side was previously considered a negative aspect of the 2014 film, and in Godzilla: King of the Monsters they have gone ahead and tried to reduce that emphasis. There is still a huge ensemble cast (Kyle Chandler, Vera Farmiga, Millie Bobby Brown, Bradley Whitford, Sally Hawkins, Charles Dance, Thomas Middleditch, Aisha Hinds, O'Shea Jackson Jr., David Strathairn, Ken Watanabe, and Zhang Ziyi) but each character has been stripped to the bare bones, which weakens the plot considerably (but we aren't here for that!). 

The human element of the story is both convoluted and yet incredibly basic, with each characters single personality trait defining all of their actions, making the plot and dialogue very predictable. Apart from the constant reminder that the plot device/MacGuffin exists, the humans' function is to provide exposition and delve deeper into the lore of the MonsterVerse. And to that end, they work really well to expand on the universe and explain away some of the questions that we have about Godzilla and Monarch.

The editing of the film is a little bit hit-and-miss, there are some great moments that have tension coming out of the wazoo, but then there are others that feel like they are desperately cobbled together from mismatched pieces, and cause a bit of confusion visually, as well as with the tone of the film. Tension is well balanced, allowing it to build organically, and allowing several moments for that release to occur before getting back into it, and the score really hits that point home.

From a film critique standpoint, Godzilla: King of the Monsters is full of plot convenience, invulnerable characters, miraculously fast (and always fully fuelled) transport options, and a plethora of unnecessary human elements and characters that nobody really cares about. 

But you don't watch Godzilla for the brilliant plot. You watch it for exciting fights and a large amount of environmental destruction. Godzilla: King of the Monsters gives you both in spades, and is an enthralling watch when the action really starts to heat up. So switch off the brain, feel a sense of awe as you take in the details of each creature, and get ready to be on the edge of your seat when the fight for supremacy breaks out.

Long live the king.

Godzilla: King of Monsters is in cinemas 30th May 2019
Originally posted to: http://djin.nz/Kr8296

RIM OF THE WORLD (2019)

Summer camp has barely begun when aliens suddenly invade the planet. In a campground once teeming with people, four misfit teens are unexpectedly entrusted with a key that carries the secret to stopping the invasion. Without any adults or electronics to help guide the way, it's clear what they must do: band together, conquer their fears and save the world.

Netflix's latest original film has been the talk of the town since the trailer was released thanks to the whole Stranger Things meets Independence Day look of the film. What the trailer didn't really convey properly, however, was the target demographic of the film, because this is definitely written more for the younger ones. Rim of the World is a good old-fashioned coming-of-age flick with a sci-fi tinge to it. 

It's reminiscent of the films that were commonplace in the 80s and 90s and even goes as far as to apply saturated colour filters creating an (albeit inauthentic Instagram-like) retro look. If this were released 20 years ago I would have loved it.

The four main characters do quite well for children actors, and while the dialogue certainly feels a little forced and out of place at times, this pales in comparison to the treatment that the adults involved in the film get. Every adult is an absolute caricature and one-dimensional character. The children, on the other hand, are an ethnically diverse cast each with their own character arc that acts as a connection between them.

The action scenes are actually quite well done. With the exception of a really obvious line stunt near the start of the film, and some pretty inconsistent physics at times, the action choreography is fast-paced and looks authentic. 

And just like that, I've run out positive things to say about the film. Mainly because this film isn't directed at me. Granted, it does try at times, but this is for young teen audiences. As far as mature audiences are concerned, the dialogue is bad (with some very noticeable ADR at times), and includes many one-liners and pop culture references that already feel dated. The writers tried to add some dark aspects into the backstories of the characters, but largely nothing comes from it, and it really messes with the tone of the film. It switches from an incredibly destructive and violent action sequence to a scene including a makeover and dance along to a 17-year old hip-hop track.

The CGI comes across as quite dated and cheap. That being said, you do get used to it after a while (the great power of suspension of belief at work). With a design that looks like a cheap xerox of the horrendous design of the latest Predator reboot. 

What is a little more noticeable is how the budget has otherwise hampered the visual style of the film. It all comes back to when I mentioned a sci-fi "tinge"; the aliens are not really all that present considering it's an alien invasion. They also only seem to have the goal of keeping the protagonists moving. Much like the big boulder in Indiana Jones: Raiders of the Lost Ark, except it lasts throughout the entire film.

Rim of the World is inconsistent in many ways that would very well make the more mature viewer decide to watch something else. Dark backstories, strong violence, suggestive phrases, and expletives are not enough to make this engaging. If you are just after a fun flick to switch your brain off and watch on a Saturday night with some popcorn, this is fine. It's fun, and it's inconsequential, poking fun where it can, and will undoubtedly get a couple laughs out of you, even if you can predict half of the dialogue word-for-word.

An average film, but it has a nice youthful energy to it. 

CAPTAIN FANTASTIC (2016)

Ben Cash (Viggo Mortensen), his wife Leslie and their six children live deep in the wilderness of Washington state. Isolated from society, Ben and Leslie devote their existence to raising their kids -- educating them to think critically, training them to be physically fit and athletic, guiding them in the wild without technology and demonstrating the beauty of co-existing with nature. When Leslie dies suddenly, Ben must take his sheltered offspring into the outside world for the first time.

As someone who has completed both an undergraduate degree and postgraduate diploma in environmental sciences at university, who also holds a strong dislike towards the idolising of vapid celebrities like the Kardashians, Captain Fantastic is a film that I vibe strongly with. The knowledge that the current education systems are insufficient, and that people have lost their connection to where their food comes from, and from nature itself, has oftentimes had me dreaming of winning the lottery so that I could purchase a property, fence it off, and live in isolation.

Captain Fantastic does just that. Disenchanted with capitalism, this former-activist couple has moved into the wilderness and raised their six children there, educating them how they see fit, ensuring they have the survival skills to catch their own meals, coexisting with nature. A scenario that feels too good to be true to those that are also disillusioned with the so-called successful results of the democratic capitalist system. 

Of course, a tragedy causes this family to venture out of the wilderness into civilization and as most fish-out-of-water scenarios go, we get a lot of laughs as the children encounter new technology and behaviours, at the same time discovering how little they actually know about the "outside" world.

The film is brilliant because it challenges the norm. As the year's pass, we are moving further and further from the hunters that the human race once was. Nowadays if social media crashes, would we have a way to contact friends? If the supermarket were to close would we know how to grow or hunt for our own meat? If power stations were to fail, would we know how to make fires without matches and lighters? Without Google, would we know the answer to any questions? There is definitely an argument to be made that thanks to the current systems in place around the world, the human race has lost its ability to be self-reliant. We rely on corporations to provide for us.

So it begs the question, is Ben Cash a good father or not? Ben has taught his children a completely different curriculum that helps them survive in the wilderness. But as his children's knowledge comes from nothing but books, there is a large portion of the civilized world that they remain ignorant to. What is the best way to raise children? In the wilderness or in a conventional school?

The film brings these questions to the audience, as it introduces the Cash family to their move conventional relatives and direct comparisons can be made to each family's style of parenting. Neither parent comes out of these exchanges with a perfect score, and Captain Fantastic does a great job balancing both parenting styles, which leaves the audience constantly second-guessing what the best choice for these children is. 

The film does well with respects to balancing tone also. There are some very heavy themes at play in Captain Fantastic and it really pushes the ideals of honesty to the extreme with the Cash family. But it is conveyed in such a stark, almost clinical manner, that it is still able to turn a dark topic into a source of comedy. 

Viggo Mortensen is the stand-out performance. Faced with a difficult task of raising six children, you can see the consternation and hesitation with every decision that he has to make, and it makes for a thoroughly authentic emotional ride.

Captain Fantastic is surprisingly earnest and endearing, and it raises a lot of questions about the systems that we accept without thinking critically about. Brutal honesty and some engaging performances from the children form the foundation of a heartwarming flick that is guaranteed to put a smile on your face.

BRIGHTBURN (2019)

What if a child from another world crash-landed on Earth, but instead of becoming a hero to mankind, he proved to be something far more sinister? With Brightburn, the visionary filmmaker of Guardians of the Galaxy and Slither presents a startling, subversive take on a radical new genre: superhero horror.

It's quite interesting to note how the synopsis is worded. Emphasis is placed on the involvement of James Gunn (the director of Guardians of the Galaxy and Slither), and yet he isn't directing the film; that role went to David Yarovesky. James Gunn involvement is that of Producer, alongside Kenneth Huang. It certainly still seems like a Gunn-led project with Brian Gunn and Mark Gunn picking up the mantle of screenwriters.

The marketing of the film overall seems rather odd. It gives the impression that James Gunn's involvement is the main drawcard of the film. You could understand this if the premise of the film was kept a secret, yet the trailers and movie posters give quite a thorough insight into the plot, and the synopsis gives everything else away. A film marketed as "What if Superman was evil?" is more than enough to bring in audiences. It's certainly what got my attention. So it seems a really peculiar decision to focus on James Gunn but still show so many of the film's set pieces in the trailers.

But back to the film itself. Brightburn is a compact and concise horror. After the opening scenes, the film feels like an unsettling drama, gradually building and developing into horror by the final act. And where the drama is concerned the acting is really well done. Elizabeth Banks and David Denman do a brilliant job as the parents Tori and Kyle Breyer. There is an authentic feel to their chemistry on screen and the way that they go about the parenting of young Brandon (played by Jackson A. Dunn). Dunn also does a great job, looking innocent and naive when he needs, to but being able to flick the switch and bring an unnerving performance when necessary.

Where the film is lacking is in the character development in the script. The premise already explains what to expect, but what I was hoping for is a much deeper look into the motivations of each character to see the gradual deterioration of morals and ethics, the twisting of one's judgement. The "what" is covered well enough, but what was missing was the "why". The film is still very enjoyable, but with a 90-minute runtime, the film seems to rush through many of the set pieces, not allowing the audience a chance to see how each event affects the titular character, Brightburn.

The tension and horror in the film are unfortunately not as high as they could be. Partially due to them showing the best parts in the trailer already, partially to do with the lack of development of the character, but tying into that, it's mostly due to the complete overpowered state of the antagonist. When you don't stand a chance, there is no tension. Which is why the setup of conflict in his moral compass is so important.

Considering the budget of the film was only 7 million, the quality of the film is exceptional. With the number of special effects and CGI involved, it is impressive that it was all done to such high quality (rated R16, the film certainly has some explicit gore). All that is really missing to make Brightburn a brilliant film, is proper development of the character's motivations. Add another half hour to the runtime and you have time to properly delve into it. The drama and relationships are already the focus of the film. The powers are ultimately a secondary plot point. The relationship between Brandon and his parents is the strongest and most engaging part of the film.

Brightburn had potential to be thought-provoking about our obsession with superheroes, but it falls short, offering little explanation to why things occur, and turning what could have set the precedent for superhero genre hybrids to come, into a slasher film that really lacked tension due to the over-powered nature of Brightburn. Fun and impressive with the budget they had, but it could have been so much more.

ONE LAST DEAL (2018)

International art dealer Olavi is about to retire. At an auction, an old painting catches his attention. Suspecting it is worth much more than its starting price, he decides to make one last deal. At the same time, Olavi’s daughter Lea – whom he hasn’t seen for years – asks him to help her with his teenage grandson Otto. Together with Otto, Olavi starts to investigate the background of the painting.

One Last Deal is a Finnish film that follows Olavi (played by Heikka Nousiainen) a man that is ever more aware that his personal career is on the downfall and he is running out of years. A man that has spent the better part of his years holding onto what he values the most; his reputation as an art dealer, and his store. So adamant that his way is the right way, that he refuses to change. A store is full of unsold works of art, using typewriters, Rolodex's and calculators, bathed in the warm yellow light of old incandescent bulbs.

The lighting in the film is superbly done and tells you a lot about the characters and environments. The stale, faded yellow of Olavi's store, the sterile white lights of the auction house, to the natural light at Otto and Lea's house, they all lean into the personality quirks and characteristics of its occupants and creates an appropriate vibe for each environment. 

What remains unknown to Olavi, are the details of his own family, and this is where the drama comes into the story. Olavi has two opportunities presented to him; to make one last art deal, and to get reacquainted with his daughter Lea and grandson Otto, whom he has kept at arm's length previously.

A straightforward plot, there are no big metaphors going on. This a simple story about a selfish man who achieves humility through a slightly unexpected source. Such an elemental film, that the entire film hinges on the humanity of our characters. Heikka Nousiainen does a brilliant job as Olavi, the man living in denial, unable to change, and suddenly faced with the futility of how little he has to show for a lifetime of work. Pirjo Lonka was a very small role as Olavi's daughter Lea, and even with minimal lines of dialogue, she portrays an immense strength of emotion through her eyes. 

The young teen grandson Otto (played by Amos Brotherus) is quite well written too. Similar to Lonka's performance, the power of Brotherus' performance comes not so much from the dialogue, but from body language, and he positions himself as the polar opposite to Nousiainen; easily adopting technology, and enough charisma to get his way.  

While the direction of the film is forecast right from the start, One Last Deal is the redemption arc at its finest. A flawed protagonist that makes you feel conflicted between feeling sympathy for him or annoyance at his selfish nature, jump from one side to the other as Olavi directs himself through the film. 

One Last Deal is a surprisingly heart-warming story of vindication and absolution with a twist of irony that leaves you with a smirk on your face by the end.

One Last Deal is in cinemas 30th May 2019

HIGH-RISE (2015)

A doctor (Tom Hiddleston) moves into a London skyscraper where rising tensions and class warfare lead to anarchy.

Here's your disclaimer: haven't read the book. That is often a big no-no as it is important when taking into consideration whether the film is faithful to the source material. There is also the flip-side of that debate. Once you know the source material, it is harder to honestly judge a film on its own merits. It's easy to subconsciously fill in the gaps for backstory or plot when you already know what is meant to be portrayed on screen. What I do know is that the book was released in 1975, and is set in an alternative dystopian timeline.

The film is quite irregular. If you try to explain the plot with broad strokes, it seems very straightforward, and yet if you look at actual dialogue and actions of the characters or the progression of the narrative, then everything becomes quite the convoluted mess.

Metaphorically, High-Rise raises many questions. The whole film revolves around this skyscraper that has distinct class differentiation, the higher your floor, the higher your status. Considering the main protagonist is a doctor and only lives in the mid 20's floor of a 40-floor building, you can imagine the elitism that is prevalent on the upper echelon, and the contempt and derision that the lower level hold towards them. One thing the film does really well is to show off the extravagance and luxuries that the upper floors have at their fingertips.

As a self-contained unit that includes schools, gyms, and supermarkets, the dangers of isolation are also an exacerbating factor in the rise of anarchy. What is ultimately surprising about this part of the story, is how relevant it is today. Despite the source material being written in the 1970s, the harmful effects of isolation from the outside world are a perfect allegory to the increasing use of social networks and "smart" devices.

High-Rise has a star-studded cast including Tom Hiddleston, Luke Evans, Jeremy Irons, and Sienna Miller, and yet the film failed to keep my interest. Perhaps due to the eclectic narrative that seemed to forget who the primary protagonist was meant to be, and just ignored Hiddleston for a reasonable chunk of the film. Or it could be the distorted, tangled web of storylines that were bandied about with little care for cohesiveness. It could be the fact that Hiddleston is more of a spectator in the film that he stars in rather than an active participant. But the biggest issue is the lack of direction and the fact that the film is comprised of unlikeable characters.

From a visual standpoint, there was a great set design with a fair amount of attention to detail given to the environments. It created some gorgeous cinematography, but you often found it would slow the pace of the film down as each scene had an incredibly long establishing shot, no matter how often we had been to the location. There was also a real lack of wide shots, which prevents the audience from properly being able to understand the layout of the building, and how the different locations are connected.

The film just didn't sit well with me. The plot was convoluted, the characters unlikeable, and while certainly comedic at times, High-Rise left you feeling unsettled more often than not. The film is just shy of two hours, and you can certainly feel that length. Without a strong narrative and direction for the film, there is little to appeal to the usual movie-goer. High-Rise will appeal more to those that wish to discuss it; to look at the degradation and distortion of social norms when placed into isolation, or the rapid descent into anarchy when wealth inequality reaches the breaking point. Or simply how little value we place on human life.

Thematically, there are some areas of interest, but they were not put forward in a way that convinced me. This is not a film I will be recommending.

ROCKETMAN (2019)

An epic musical fantasy about the uncensored human story of Sir Elton John’s breakthrough years.

Rocketman is directed by Dexter Fletcher (who took over for Bryan Singer for the tail-end of shooting on Bohemian Rhapsody and also directed Eddie the Eagle, of which Taron Egerton also starred). Despite being involved in the Queen biopic, Rocketman is its own separate beast.

[That being said, do prepare for a few comparisons to Bohemian Rhapsody]

Looking at the synopsis, I can't help but think there would be less confusion if the wording was restructured; this is not so much a "musical fantasy", instead "fantasy musical" would be much more accurate. The film itself is much less focused on the concert experience, choosing to go by another route and focus more on the emotional human story; the transition from the shy child, Reggie Dwight, to Elton Hercules John, the world-famous superstar. Rather than give a literal reenactment of a concert experience, certain Elton John songs are adapted to fit into his backstory, creating a more theatrical stage musical vibe.

In fact, the film often breaks into a song-and-dance involving all main and supporting cast as well as extras in the production each time. It feels like it was developed specifically for theatre, but decided to shoot it for the silver screen instead, without making any changes to the script. It adds a higher level of flair to the proceedings, even though it does admittedly reduce the trustworthiness of the narrative rather significantly. When you watch "five-year-old" Reggie belting out an Elton John song, it makes you question how much of the remainder of the film has been changed for dramatic effect.

Rocketman does rely on dramatics to drive the story forward, but it does so in a very cohesive way. The story jumps from one period to another, using a musical number to bridge that gap between scenes or times, and it keeps the pace flowing beautifully. The focus on the drama and human side of things do mean that it places a lot of emphasis on substance abuse and homosexuality (unlike Bohemian Rhapsody) and it doesn't shy away from these topics visually nor thematically.

Despite the film being a highlight reel of Elton John's life, the script is well-written and executed, brilliantly portraying the relationships, whether it be the brotherly love between Elton and Bernie Taupin (played by Jamie Bell) or the disdain between Elton and John Reid (played by Richard Madden, a.k.a. Robb Stark if you watched Game of Thrones). It sets up protagonists and antagonists very well, and with minimal effort.

Taron Egerton is an amazing Elton John. The fact that he actually sings the songs himself is an added bonus and you can tell he puts everything into his performance. Every part of his role is well done, from developing his backstory with his family to the flamboyant and extravagant costuming designs to his commitment to the substance abuse and gay scenes, and his dry, self-deprecating sense of humour is on-point. Admittedly, I did find his vocals to be a tad over-husky at times and it lacked that deeply resonant timbre that Elton John has. That being said, I can't think of another actor that could have done a better job (if I had to pick a role that Taron Egerton's voice would suit better, I would definitely put his name forward for a Robbie Williams biopic).

With some gorgeous cinematography and fantastical design choices, there is a lot of appeal to the film. The portrayal of Elton's home issues with his broken family and his struggles with his identity is something that many will find incredibly relatable. And in this day-and-age, such an honest unabashed portrayal is incredibly empowering to those that have been through similar experiences. 

Personally, I would have loved to have seen more instances of watching songs being written and worked on (as was the case for Your Song) but the music was supplementary to the story, not the focus, and it worked well with this style of narrative. Chock full of energy, Rocketman keeps you immersed and your toe tapping.

Rocketman will be in cinemas 30th of May 2019. 

V FOR VENDETTA (2005)

Following world war, London is a police state occupied by a fascist government, and a vigilante known only as V (Hugo Weaving) uses terrorist tactics to fight the oppressors of the world in which he now lives. When V saves a young woman named Evey (Natalie Portman) from the secret police, he discovers an ally in his fight against England's oppressors.

There are a number of factors that had led to V For Vendetta initially getting some poor reviews. Heavily marketing it as a film written by the Wachowski Brothers was clearly trying to bring in the Matrix fans, but this film is in a completely different genre so marketing in such a way would give a false impression of what to expect. The other big issue that the film had was releasing a film that effectively humanizes a terrorist, and doing so only a few years after 9/11, it was bound to trigger those people that aren't aware of the source material (which was initially published in 1982).

V For Vendetta is a superbly written film. Unlike the Matrix sequels which became an unholy mess when you look at the plot, V For Vendetta has managed to keep that pretentious quality but put it forward in a much more manageable way. With minimal use of special effects, the emphasis has been placed on creating well-developed main characters that each have their own arc, and 13 years later, the film still looks great.

What is quite impressive is the ever-increasing relatability of the storyline. For a film that was made in 2005, based on a graphic novel from 1982, the portrayal of a world victim to an oppressive totalitarian government and a corrupt police force is strikingly relevant in modern-day 2019 where we are readily trading freedom for security, and witnessing the stripping of human rights, left, right and centre in many countries around the world.

The intriguing aspect of V For Vendetta is its portrayal of V; the faceless anarchist. Here we have a personality that has publicly communicated his will to fight those in power. But his motivations are clearly explained and developed, humanizing the character, and showing the bilateral nature of media. We see a freedom fighter, where those in power call him a terrorist. Hugo Weaving does a brilliant job bringing V to life and puts forward a very charismatic performance without being overly ostentatious (ostentatious being an unnecessary synonym for pretentious).

Along with Weaver, Natalie Portman and Stephen Rea have incredibly engaging performances, with strong character development arcs. The film doesn't rely on conventional romance storylines (while there is an obvious affection) and puts forward very thought-provoking ideas. V For Vendetta serves as a reminder that the government and police forces are there to serve us, not the other way around; the masses hold the real power.

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

THE NEON DEMON (2016)

Jesse (Elle Fanning) moves to Los Angeles just after her 16th birthday to launch a career as a model. The head of her agency tells the innocent teen that she has the qualities to become a top star. Jesse soon faces the wrath of ruthless vixens who despise her fresh-faced beauty. On top of that, she must contend with a seedy motel manager and a creepy photographer. As Jesse starts to take the fashion world by storm, her personality changes in ways that could help her against her cutthroat rivals.

Wow.

The Neon Demon is visually gorgeous. An absolute spectacle. I'm struggling to come up with the words to properly describe the voluptuous, simmering experience that is The Neon Demon. The dark expanses make the rich, vivid colours pop in such a visceral and sensual way, that it is like an orgasm for the eyes. The light, the colour, the framing, the camera angles, the musical score; everything syncs together with an innate sense of majestic beauty. Fantastical and stunning.

That is what you can expect from The Neon Demon; style over substance. Thematically, it works very well considering the film revolves around the fashion model industry. This is a film that focuses very much on the commodification of youth and beauty, and as a consequence, the inevitable corruption of those assets.

Director Nicolas Winding Refn has done a brilliant job at creating a real environment. Feeding stories to the audience, not only through dialogue but through the audio-visual experience. Movements and the emotional depth of the eye--together with an ominously pulsating musical score and a variety of lighting elements--create an authentic emotional arc that conveys so much more than dialogue alone can create.

This does mean that to fully understand the film, you need to open your mind up to it. To fully immerse yourself in its splendour to reach the full potential of its story. While the story is rather straight-forward if you are expecting every detail to be spoonfed to you, you will be sorely disappointed (and likely confused). 

The Neon Demon spends much of its time setting the scene, that compared to a traditional Hollywood film, the narrative will feel dull and listless. That is to be expected if you only take in one dimension of the story. Yet through this method, you understand so much about the motivations and ambitions of each character without a multitude of scenes. The build-up is thorough, and the action is short and concise.

If you make it to the third act, it does accelerate ever so quickly, until the climax of the film is reached and it finally starts hitting the points that are expected of a thriller. The Neon Demon is unconventional by most standards. It reminds me more of the visuals to be expected at a big concert arena than a movie, and yet it feels decidedly intimate and targeted. A dazzling and luxurious look at obsession and narcissism.