Wednesday, 18 June 2014

Edge of Tomorrow Review (Non-Spoiler)

Note: For those unfamiliar with my reviews, I try not to dive too much into the plot of the film I'm reviewing. However, if you still want to steer clear of the main review just in case, I sum up my thoughts in a final verdict which avoids any specific details which might be found in the main review.  

OK, no matter what you think about the trailers for Edge of Tomorrow, you have to admit that the combination of Tom Cruise, one of the biggest action stars of all-time, with director Doug Liman (the man behind one of the great spy thrillers The Bourne Identity) is an intriguing notion. 

William Cage (Tom Cruise) is a high-ranking army official during a war against an invading alien force known as 'Mimics'. As part of a publicity stunt co-ordinated by his new superior (Brendan Gleeson), he is sent in the first wave of an attack intended to wipe out the invaders once and for all. Instead, Cage is quickly killed... only to wake up the day before the attack, somehow having garnered the ability to turn back time upon dying. In order to better understand and utilise this new-found power to continually return from the dead, Cage quickly tracks down Rita (Emily Blunt), who might help him understand his current predicament.

Edge of Tomorrow, based on Hiroshi Sakurazaka's 2004 novel titled All You Need Is Kill, clearly owes debts to films such as Groundhog Day and Aliens. Both the darkly comic and existential repetitions which Cage endures recall Bill Murray's struggles in the former film (not to mention the struggles of Jake Gyllenhaal's character in Source Code, another sci-fi variation on Groundhog Day), while the presence of a heavy military force going up against marauding aliens and Bill Paxton AKA Hicks in a scene-stealing supporting role recall the latter. Thankfully, Edge of Tomorrow manages to construct its own identity from these elements, becoming its own beast without seeming like a rip-off of superior classics.

The film's success lies heavily on the shoulders of Tom Cruise and Emily Blunt, and they succeed beautifully. The character of William Cage is unlike Cruise's usual lead roles in blockbusters, but Cruise tackles the difference courageously to deliver a likeable, relatable and human performance infused with his usual all-star charisma and an underlying darkness. Also, while Cruise can sometimes come across as a stick in the mud (water-microphone gag, anyone?), he stretches unexpected comedic chops here. Meanwhile, Blunt is nothing short of enthralling as one of the most bad-ass female leads in a blockbuster for a long time (the character's nickname, as inherited from the novel, is nothing short of awesome). Blunt has already proved that she is capable of capturing the vulnerability in a character, but her performance here blends that vulnerability with a toughness and a determination to get things done which makes her just as much of a principal hero as Cruise, if not more so. Both Cruise and Blunt share wonderful chemistry in a relationship with great dimension which refreshingly veers away from the typical romance which most blockbusters promote. With The Bourne Identity, director Liman put Matt Damon into the role of an action hero. The role of Jason Bourne wasn't one similar to Damon's previous body of work, but he excelled in it nonetheless. Here, much like Damon in The Bourne Identity, both Cruise and Blunt are placed in roles which are dissimilar to the majority of their previous work. And also much like Damon, both Cruise and Blunt seize the chance to explore different characters and do terrific work. The supporting cast is strong, with Paxton especially having a blast as a war-loving master sargeant. This feels like a play on Paxton's role as Hudson from Aliens, and Paxton has a lot of fun playing with that image. Gleeson and Noah Taylor (as a doctor who helps Cage and Rita) deliver their usual reliable work, while the actors portraying Cage's fellow soldiers all do solid work; it's particularly nice to see Jonas Armstrong (best known as the titular character from the BBC series Robin Hood) getting some big-screen exposure, although I found it a bit odd that Robin Hood co-star Lara Pulver appears in a blink-and-miss-it role.

Director Doug Liman brings the same hectic energy and intelligence to Edge of Tomorrow that he channeled into The Bourne Identity. After Liman seemed to slowly succumb to Hollywood's rules with 2005's decently entertaining Mr. and Mrs Smith and 2008's disappointingly lacklustre Jumper, he has firmly reclaimed his edginess here (perhaps because he's more comfortable with the European style found both in the Bourne series and in Edge of Tomorrow). Thanks to the film's concept, he also have a lot of fun with the ways in which Cage is dispatched. For at least the first half of the film, Cage's predicaments are shown in a more darkly comedic light thanks to the style of Liman and editor James Herbert. While this approach could have easily undermined the high-stakes of the story, Liman, Herbert, Cruise and Blunt play it just the right way. And as both the story and Cage progress, Liman delights in continually keeping the audience on their toes. Just as we and Cage think we have it all figured out, out comes the rug. A lot of kudos should also be given to Liman and Herbert for managing to avoid repetition, which is always a high danger with this concept. This is also thanks to the screenwriting team of Christopher McQuarrie (the man behind the script for The Usual Suspects) and brothers Jez and John-Henry Butterworth (who wrote the script for the upcoming James Brown bio-pic Get On Up). The dialogue between the characters is consistently intelligent and funny while exposing the character's inner selves, and the ways in which the story progresses are clever and often unexpected. Both the direction and the script passionately bring this concept to life.

As with the majority of summer blockbusters, the quality of the action sequences is an important element. Thankfully, the action sequences in Edge of Tomorrow are consistently stunning. This is made even more impressive by the fact that the major battle sequence is returned to again and again; Liman and cinematographer Dion Beebe, while using enough shots to remind the audience that this is the same scenario, still continually find new ways to portray the action from new angles. Even better, the action changes with the evolution of Cage as a character and the ways in which he and Rita choose to approach the situation. Liman applies his chaotic style terrifically to the action, while never allowing the action to get too out-of-control for the audience.

Technically, this film is arguably the most impressive blockbuster so far this year. The score by Christophe Beck (which I'm listening to while writing this review) is pitch-perfect in its playful intensity, matching the edginess of the film brilliantly. The visual effects are spectacular; major props go to the team behind the design and creation of the 'Mimics', as the creatures have a uniquely unsettling appearances and a rampaging wildness which make them legitimately threatening foes. The cinematography is suitably apocalyptic, and makes both the industrial and natural locations look appropriately battle-scarred yet strangely appealing; the main battle scenes are shot with grimly balletic beauty and appear as the equivalent of a sci-fi Saving Private Ryan. Also, it's immensely refreshing  to see locations which stand out as different from your usual Hollywood blockbusters. The use of London and France as key locations not only makes the threat more massive and globe-threatening but it also emphasises how out of his depth Cage is. The we get to the 3D presentation. Thankfully, the 3D isn't completely pointless. On the contrary, the 3D actually allows a deeper immersion into the action sequences, with debris flying in your face and inventive camera shots placing you in the middle of the action (one particular shot in the first action sequence terrifically captures the chaos and panic of the scenario from Cage's POV). However, outside of the action, the 3D doesn't seem to have much of an impact. I am slightly annoyed with this, but if a film is to be shown in 3D, I'd rather that the 3D had a positive effect on the film rather than no effect or a detrimental one.  

I only have two main issues with this film. The first is that, despite the best efforts of the actors and writers, the explanation behind Cage's predicament is convoluted and threatens to stretch disbelief. However, because it facilitates the rest of an exceptionally entertaining film, I'm willing to cut it some slack. The second issue I have is with the ending. I will just say that there were several options as to how this film could end, and the option the filmmakers went with is arguably problematic for, among other reasons, the questions it raises regarding the plot. I would have preferred an ending which didn't appear to poke holes in the plot (even though the very last scene is wonderfully played).

Final Verdict and Rating

Despite a belief-stretching explanation of the main character's predicament and a disappointing conclusion, Edge of Tomorrow is still a great sci-fi action thriller which is easily director Doug Liman's best film since The Bourne Identity. With an intelligent script, great performances, spectacular action, exceptional visual effects and a expertly executed concept which strikes a brilliant balance between dark comedy and high-stakes threat, there is plenty to make this a propulsive piece of blockbuster spectacle. Mr. Cruise, you're still a bona fide action star.

Rating: 4.5 out of 5

P.S. If you want more reasons why you should see Edge of Tomorrow, feel free to check out these videos from some of my favourite Youtube critics. Keep in mind that, as they are discussing why you should see the film, details about the film may be revealed and discussed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOixYsF4JYs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wjT6IeuoVw

P.P.S. Geek alert, but for fans of the 50th anniversary Doctor Who special, doesn't that landing space for the helicopter in Edge of Tomorrow's first scene look familar?





  
      

   

Wednesday, 11 June 2014

X-Men: Days of Future Past Review (Non-Spoilers)

For anyone who hasn’t read my previous two reviews, I would like to establish two things. The first is that I always aim to steer as far away from specific details about a film’s plot and its characters as possible. This may make my reviews seem vague at points, but I believe in letting people go into a film fresh. If you don’t wish to read my full review for fear of spoilers, you can skip to the final paragraph of the review to see my overall verdict and rating. Secondly, as this is another film with a long franchise history (much like Captain America: The Winter Soldier and The Amazing Spider-Man 2), I feel that I need to express my opinions on the other films in the franchise before beginning to fully review X-Men: Days of Future Past. So if you wish to avoid my opinions on the other films and instead skip to my views on X-Men: Days of Future Past, jump forward to the fifth paragraph and go crazy. With that being said, let’s begin…

In 2000, X-Men hit the big screen. Seeing as I wasn’t old enough to see it in the cinema (I’ve seen every other X-Men film in the cinema), I saw it on VHS within a year after its release. As a kid, X-Men changed my views on what a superhero film could be. By combining smart allegorical ideas and (mostly) compelling characters with a superhero team dynamic which allowed for a spectacular variety of powers playing out within skilfully constructed action sequences, X-Men provided me with arguably my first adult superhero film experience. Plus, it introduced me to one of the most awesome cinematic superheroes in Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine and one of the most understandably malevolent cinematic super villains in Ian McKellen’s Magneto (the fact that the next role I saw McKellen in was that of Gandalf in The Lord of the Rings confirmed my belief that this guy was beyond cool). Three years after X-Men had its release, X2 hit the big screen and upped the ante. From the knock-out opening to that beautiful tease of a final shot, X2 was more ambitious, intelligently crafted, spectacular and an overall better film than its predecessor. The action stunned, the actors continued to bring their A-game and both Singer and his writers continued to put characters and story first. While it wasn’t perfect, it was still a tremendous film which showed off the immense potential of ’comic-book’ films. Everything was going smoothly…

Until Singer jumped ship for Superman Returns, leaving X-Men: The Last Stand in the hands of one Brett Ratner. Many fans were in uproar, saying that the departure of Singer and the replacement choice of Ratner spelled doom for the franchise. After it came out, it received a lot of heated hate from fans. I’m just going to say this up front: I loved this film when it first came out. Back then, I didn’t have as much critical awareness of films as I do now, so I loved it without much question and saw it more than once in cinemas (using my Cineworld card so that I spent nothing on it). Now that time has gone on, I can understand why people have their complaints. For a film running around 100 minutes, there are too many characters and subplots, some of which get squashed in the shuffle and leeched of some of their power as a result. The delicate yet confident skill with characters and story which Singer displayed is replaced with a more brash style (see every line Juggernaut (Vinnie Jones) utters for evidence). Finally, I’m sorry if anyone disagrees, but Halle Berry’s Storm becomes a royal pain in this film. Apparently, this was due to Berry’s insistence on an expanded role and a higher salary for the third instalment. If this is true, I dislike Berry not only for her greed but also for her inability to understand that she’s not the best actress for this role. She got away with this in the first two films due to her role as a supporting character, but put front and centre, she doesn’t impress. She instead comes across as confrontational, unpleasant and high ‘n‘ mighty. With all that ranting out of the way, I still enjoy this film. Don’t get me wrong; I consider it to be the weakest film in the original trilogy, but I don’t think that it’s anywhere near devoid of merit in its entertainment value. The cast is still superb, with Jackman and McKellen nothing short of exceptional (Famke Janssen and Kelsey Grammer also do terrific work as Jean Grey and Beast respectively), the themes of the first two films are present, there are numerous nods to the comic-book crowd, the action sequences are exceptional and the pacing helps immeasurably in building momentum to a finale with a genuinely operatic punch. So, while I understand the flaws which many might find with it, I can’t bring myself to dislike X-Men: The Last Stand. On the other hand, I’m more than happy to admit my immensely negative opinion of X-Men Origins: Wolverine. This is the only X-Men film where I don’t like acknowledging its existence (and I think that 20th Century Fox feels the same). It throws in characters to please the fans instead of giving them a legitimate role in the narrative, making them and all the indignities performed upon the characters all the more offensive. It screws up the narrative of the original films and provides answers to long-gestating questions which are so anger-inducing through their laziness (as far as foolish choices in superhero films go, I think that adamantium bullets are in the top tier along with the Bat credit card, emo Spider-Man and casting Ryan Reynolds). The visual effects are awfully awkward and the action sequences make ’routine’ look ’genre-defining’. In the end, despite the best efforts of a fine cast (with Jackman and Liev Schreiber as Sabretooth doing brilliant work), X-Men Origins: Wolverine is nothing less than a stain on the X-Men legacy. Whatever the next film did would have to wash the bad taste of franchise poison away…

Cue the heroic music!

In steps Matthew Vaughn, fresh off his brilliant superhero parody Kick-Ass, to reinvigorate the franchise with 2011’s X-Men: First Class. By putting the relationship between young Charles Xavier (James McAvoy) and Eric Lensherr (Michael Fassbender) front-and-centre and by turning the story into a globe-trotting Bond-style thriller, Vaughn both reintroduced the emotional undercurrent of Singer’s films while creating a terrifically slick and fast-paced adventure. The performances (particularly those of McAvoy, Fassbender and Jennifer Lawrence as young shape shifter Mystique) were beautifully well-judged, the action was powerfully exciting, the characters were engaging and entertaining, the story was thoroughly gripping and the visual effects (with the exception of an awkward rendition of a young Beast) were fantastic. Vaughn not only washed away the stench of X-Men Origins: Wolverine, but in doing so, he arguably created the best X-Men film thus far. The next step in re-building the franchise came with 2013’s The Wolverine, the second spin-off for the character of Wolverine. With a focus on character over action (though there is some great Wolverine action) and with a significant focus on Wolverine instead of the scattershot approach to characters adopted by X-Men Origins: Wolverine, The Wolverine proved to be another strong addition to the franchise. Hugh Jackman delivered another fiercely committed and terrific performance in the role, the locations and mythology proved to be both visually interesting and important to the character, the action was refreshingly low-key for the most past and the direction by James Mangold made the character seem new and intriguing by making him the focus of a gangster thriller. Despite a final 20 minutes which disappointingly abandoned the low-key character approach for generic visual effects chaos, The Wolverine still showed that the franchise was heading in the right direction.

And now, we reach X-Men: Days of Future Past. This instalment is important for two major reasons. The first is that Bryan Singer has returned as a director. The second is that Days of Future Past combines both the cast of First Class and the cast of the original film. In short, Days of Future Past would be an essential film to see for any fan of the X-Men film series, regardless of its quality.

It is 2023. Mutants are being hunted by an imposing menace called The Sentinels. In order to prevent the apocalyptic future, Professor Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart) and Eric Lensherr (Ian McKellen) agree to send Wolverine (Hugh Jackman) back in time to 1973 to prevent the chain of events which will lead to The Sentinels' eventual domination. In order to do this, Wolverine will need the help of both the young Charles (James McAvoy) and Eric (Michael Fassbender)...

Bryan Singer, you sure know how to make a triumphant return. With X-Men: Days of Future Past, Singer has proved that, no matter what James Mangold (The Wolverine) and especially Matthew Vaughn (X-Men: First Class) excelled in during their directorial stints, he is the key director of the X-Men film series. From the very beginning, Singer takes you on a thrilling roller-coaster ride which never lets up in its ferocious pacing and action while still taking its time with character interplay and a immensely intelligent and satisfying story. Both Singer and his team of writers prove up to the task of capturing the best of the film series' previous accomplishments while moving forward in a spectacular new direction.

X-Men: Days of Future Past wouldn't work nearly as well as it does without the terrific array of performances at its centre. Front and centre is Hugh Jackman, whose star power is still overwhelmingly palpable. Jackman is still nothing less than the perfect choice for the role of Wolverine; he has the indestructible charisma, the thunderous rage, the staggering physicality and the roguish likeability down pat, allowing him to depict the character in a way which couldn't be duplicated. The day when Jackman tucks away the claws for good will be a sad day, indeed. Here, Jackman adds new shades to the character, showing that even after almost a decade and a half, there are still many interesting facets for Jackman to explore. However, unlike the other X-Men films where he has a pivotal role, Jackman doesn't walk away with the film entirely. While I found Jennifer Lawrence powerful in First Class, I felt that her work lacked the physical prowess which Rebecca Romjin brought to the role in the original trilogy. In the original trilogy, Mystique was an active participant, whether it be through infiltration or combat. In First Class, Lawrence had a touching emotional arc, but wasn't much of an active participant in the events of the story. Here, however, Lawrence's Mystique is given a much more important role in the story and is much more of an active character. Lawrence delivers arguably her most physically compelling performance to date through some thrilling fight sequences while still providing an emotionally stirring portrayal, making this the most powerful portrayal of the character to date. Fassbender is once again fantastic as a young Magneto, sharing the same kind of cruelly intense charisma as Daniel Craig's portrayal of James Bond. Not only is Fassbender excessively cool, he also creates a strong sense of sympathy and understanding for the character combined with a chilling determination which continues to make him an exceptional antagonist. Nicholas Hoult once again delivers an impressive performance as a young Hank McCoy AKA Beast, benefitting from a larger role and from much improved make-up. As Boliver Trask, Peter Dinklage (also known as Tyrion Lannister from HBO's Game of Thrones) is suavely menacing and ensnares attention every time he's on screen. Josh Helman also makes a strong impression as an associate of Trask (the character's name will not be mentioned here to retain surprise for those unaware, but if you want to know who it is, you can type in Helman's name on IMDb). Evan Peters is a scene-stealing delight as Peter Maximoff AKA Quiksilver, and he plays a pivotal role in one of the most sensationally executed action sequences in recent memory. And I haven't even talked about the returning cast member from the original trilogy yet. It is fantastic to see Patrick Stewart, Ian McKellen, Ellen Page's Kitty Pryde and Shawn Ashmore's Iceman and Daniel Cudmore's Colossus return, and all of them step back into their roles with ease (I felt a sense of indifference towards Halle Berry's return as Storm both before and after the film), and all of them step back into their roles with ease. Stewart, in particular, delivers some beautifully poignant work. Despite all of the great work from the actors across the board, the performance I found the most compelling was that of James McAvoy as the young Professor Xavier. As much as I love Patrick Stewart's interpretation of the character, McAvoy's work transforms Professor X into a much more fragile, funny and sympathetic figure. McAvoy beautifully captures all of the character's pain and conflict, but he still has some very funny moments. Whereas Stewart plays the man as a wise mentor who has experienced sorrow in his past, McAvoy's face is etched with said sorrow, allowing us to see where Stewart's Xavier was born. McAvoy rivets every time he's on screen. I am not saying that he inaguably gives the best performance in the film (there are way too many terrific, attention-grabbing turns here), but as far as I am concerned, McAvoy's work as Professor Xavier is an unerringly powerful portrayal of the film's most intriguing character. 

The script is fantastic, with numerous nods to the fan base of the comic-books and spectacularly written interactions between the characters. Also fantastically realised is the intergration of real-life events from the 1970's and how they are linked into the story in relation to the mutant struggle. Simon Kinberg, Jane Goldman and Matthew Vaughn have all done a brilliant job crafting a compelling script and story here, and I'm glad to hear that Kinberg will be behind the script for the following instalment. This, combined with Singer's effortless direction, the characters and story would be more than enough to make this film worth seeing. 

But then we come to the action. The breath-taking action sequences not only provide stirring spectacle; they also lend even more power to the characters and their journeys, while emphasising the never-higher stakes. The visual effects beautifully bring the powers of the mutant characters to life in thrilling and inventive ways; this is particularly true of the characters of Quiksilver and Blink (Bingbing Fan). The action sequences, with one exception, offer a palpable sense of threat and dread. The first and final action sequences, in particular, are dazzling, edge-of-your-seat set-pieces with a genuine sense of despair which should be applauded. For those who are coming to this film for the action, prepare to be amazed.

Technically, this film is worthy of many plaudits. Returning along with Singer, John Ottman provides wonderfully coherent editing which allows the film to unfold with intense urgency while allowing time for the characters to breathe. He also does a terrific job at reprising composing duties, reminding us that his theme for the X-Men is one of the most flat-out awesome superhero themes thus far. The sound editing and mixing is superb, while the soundtrack is brilliantly chosen (Jim Croce's Time in a Bottle is particularly well-chosen). Finally, the cinematography is fantastic, capturing an apocalyptic dread in the future scenes while making the 1970's scenes seem naturalistic without straying over-the top in referencing the period. In fact, when the cinematography does acknowledge the period, it is done in ways which only enhance the events of the story. Finally, the period detail (namely the clothing and the settings) are adeptly accomplished.   

None of the X-Men film are perfect (I doubt that any of them will ever fall into that category), and Days of Future Past is no exception. As with all X-Men films, there are characters who could have been given more to do. One example here is Ian McKellen's Magneto. McKellen is brilliant as always, but I would have liked to see more of him. His rendtion of Magneto still stands as one of the finest portrayals of a comic-book villain to date. With that being said, I can understand why Fassbender's rendition of Magneto was given more focus in this film. He hasn't had as much time in the role as McKellen, so I'm glad to see Fassbender given more time to develop his rendition of the character (especially seeing as he's proving to be just as electric in the role as McKellen). Also, while I often don't appreciate how much the marketing for films can give away too much detail, I was disappointed to find that one scene between two character with a lot of promise didn't appear in the final film. Finally, the 3D conversion doesn't accomplish much in providing immersion, only managing to diminish the film's picture brightness. This 3D conversion merely feels like a cash-grab; if you can, I'd highly recommend seeing this in 2D.

Final Verdict and Rating

Despite some problems (a cast with some given more to do than others and a pointless 3D conversion), I still adore X-Men: Days of Future Past. The cast is phenomenal, the action sequences and visual effects are stunning, the script is terrific, the story is propulsively engaging and the film is technically exceptional. This is, for me, the most accomplished of the summer blockbusters thus far this year. By acknowledging the successes of the past while bravely paving a road forward for the future of the franchise in new and unexpected ways, director Bryan Singer has returned to this series with a deafening bang. This is spectacular, emotional and intelligent entertainment of an incredibly high order. Following the pitch-perfect conclusion to Days of Future Past (as well as the usual after-credits scene), I can't wait to see how he tackles X-Men: Apocalypse.

I was simply going to offer my rating of this film here. But I thought I'd have a bit more fun with it. So here is how I would rank the X-Men films, from lowest to highest...

7. X-Men: Origins - Wolverine (1.5/5)
6. X-Men: The Last Stand (3.5/5)
5. The Wolverine (4/5)
4. X-Men (4.25/5)
3. X2 (4.5/5)
2. X-Men: First Class (4.5/5) - 2 and 3 could change based on me giving them the same rating. 

And taking the top spot as the franchise's pinnacle...

1. X-Men: Days of Future Past (4.75/5)