⭐⭐⭐ (Good)

Director: Antoine Fuqua
Starring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Forest Whitaker, Rachel McAdams, Naomie Harris, Victor Ortiz, Curtis ’50 Cent’ Jackson, Oona Laurence 
Certificate: 15
Run Time: 124 mins 

Originally intended as a continuation of the hit 2002 rap-biopic film, ‘8 Mile’ with rapper Eminem in the lead role, ‘Southpaw’ has evolved quite a long way from its inception. Eminem put filming on hold to focus on his successful music career with critically acclaimed actor Jake Gyllenhaal filling in for him. Sitting in the director’s chair is Antoine Fuqua who has delivered solid action flicks, ‘Training Day’ and ‘The Equalizer’ in the past. The fact that the film was picked up by the Weinstein Company to distribute is very promising and with their track record, it seems pretty likely that this film could very well be Awards material.

‘Southpaw’ is not Awards material in the slightest – the film is very formulaic and manipulative in its storytelling and the film has pacing issues, but where the film is triumphant is in its acting and sheer watchability. This film has been done time and time again but by the strength of the acting alone, the film is able to hold itself up and despite being overfamiliar, the film is ultimately satisfying.

Although the film can’t match his performance, Jake Gyllenhaal’s performance as boxer, Billy ‘The Great’ Hope is nothing short of transformative. Gyllenhaal is on a very strong roll lately and it’s refreshing to see him pick different types of film roles. The character of Billy Hope is completely the opposite of Gyllenhaal’s narcissistic and daring turn as the immoral Lou Bloom in last year’s ‘Nightcrawler’ – Hope is a more moral character, a born fighter that never wins until he bleeds enough. Fuqua directs many fight scenes in the film that test Hope’s physical strength to the maximum and on the verge of defeat, he is able to pull of heroic successes. It’s very easy to see Eminem’s inspiration shine through in Gyllenhaal’s performance.  Without Gyllenhaal in the role, the film would have reduced itself to be nothing more than a cringeworthy and flat television drama.

Rounding out the cast is Forest Whitaker who plays himself pretty much, Rachel McAdams as his wife who again plays herself pretty much and Naomie Harris in a small role where she doesn’t really get to show off her acting chops. Who is surprisingly good here is Curtis Jackson, more commonly known as rapper 50 Cent who is quite good at acting and his character is quite cold and self-interested. Oona Laurence plays the daughter of the Hope family and after her role in the Broadway musical ‘Matilda’, she is very good here and is most likely set to have a successful future in the film industry.

The story in the film is fairly uninspired – it’s been done time and time again but despite Fuqua manipulating our emotions, it is still an emotional journey to see Gyllenhaal’s character sink to an all-time low and then rise again. He loses everything – his mansion, his earnings and even his daughter all down to the death of a certain character. However, Forest Whitaker, who plays a ‘Mr Miyagi’ type character in the form of Titus ‘Tick’ Wills who coaches Hope back to his previous successes.

One final noteworthy feature of the film is its impressive score. Even though Eminem didn’t end up playing the main role, he helps to contribute towards the film’s soundtrack and it really fits in with the film. The late James Horner’s score is even more impressive, his first posthumous release after he died in a devastating plane crash and the score is almost another supporting character in the film, helping to guide Hope through his tough and enduring journey.

Even though ‘Southpaw’ doesn’t manage to be the smash-hit it looked to be and also the fact that it relies on an overfamiliar and uninspired storyline, it is still an entertaining watch that boasts some impressive performances. If you want a break from all the big-budget blockbusters that have dominated the box office this Summer or just want something to pass the time, this does the job very well. Just don’t go in expecting a big Awards contender.

 (Good)

⭐⭐⭐ (Good)

Director: Josh Trank
Starring: Miles Teller, Kate Mara, Michael B. Jordan, Jamie Bell, Toby Kebbell, Reg E. Cathey, Tim Blake Nelson
Certificate: 12A
Run Time: 100 mins

‘Fantastic Four’ is Marvel’s fourth attempt at bringing these superheroes to the big screen, after the 1994 failure and the cheesy 2005 and 2007 outings directed by Tim Story. This time, young director Josh Trank is at the helm after impressing with his low-budget superhero film, ‘Chronicle’ in 2012 and 20th Century Fox decided to give him a shot with this respectable material. However, production of this version has been plagued with problems. Trank reportedly treated the film crew terribly, trashed his house and ultimately was unprofessional. Fox executives didn’t like the finished film and reshoots then had to be carried out, with some reports hinting that Matthew Vaughn (Kick-Ass, X-Men: First Class, Kingsman: The Secret Service) stepped in to direct the reshoots after Trank was allegedly deemed incompetent. All this bad news culminated in Trank leaving (more likely kicked off) an upcoming Star-Wars spin-off. Fox was so sceptical of the film that the critic embargo for the film lifted on the day of its release so bad word of mouth couldn’t get out. Unfortunately when the film was released, it tanked hard at the box office and has an abysmal 9% rating on Rotten Tomatoes – the worst rating for a Marvel comic book film ever.

I realise I am in the vast minority here but I found ‘Fantastic Four’ to be a thoughtful, dark and entertaining reimagining of the iconic superheroes but unfortunately it is marred by a tonal shift in the film’s tacky and incoherent third act which undoes all the good work of the first two acts and culminates in an end battle which is utterly horrendous. It is by no means the best superhero film that has been released in recent year and with comic book films setting the bar so high, it is very hard to stand out in an already saturated market. But if someone were to ask me what the worst comic book film ever to be released was, this film wouldn’t even come into mind, not even close. When one reads between the lines during the film, it is quite clear to work out what scenes / ideas were who’s in this film (Trank or Fox) and this has culminated in what I believe another film where the studio has disowned their property – take a look at the development with Edgar Wright for ‘Ant-Man’ for example. There is a really good film absolutely screaming to be looked at here and unfortunately, it is undermined by the last minute reshoots which are so blatantly obvious – look at Kate Mara’s hair for example in different scenes and Miles Teller’s facial hair.

What has been salvaged in the final cut however, is still promising and shows off a spark of brilliance of what the film was meant to be. In early marketing for the film, Josh Trank cited inspiration from David Cronenberg filmography, most notably ‘The Fly’ and ‘Scanners’ – a sci-fi horror first, a superhero second just like last year’s ‘Captain America: The Winter Soldier’ had many traits of a political thriller.  This is something that has never been done before and sparks of these ideas have been left in the final product and it is beautiful to behold. When the Fantastic Four first wake up to discover their powers, it is chilling and they feel shock and disgust with themselves. When Doctor Doom walks through the facility and kills people, which is rather gory for a 12A I must add, again this is exactly what Trank had promised – a sci-fi horror. I also like the fact that Trank chose the film to be devoid of humour – too many comic-book films rely on cheap, dumb humour to entertain fans whereas this film cuts the humour out to make the film more dark and serious. There are still slight moments of comic relief but not consistently.

The casting here is very good. Miles Teller makes for a serious and emotional Reed Richards and Michael B. Jordan is tongue-in cheek as Johnny Storm. Kate Mara is competent as Sue Storm but doesn’t really advance the story anywhere. The only weak link out of the four is Jamie Bell as Ben Grimm who isn’t given a lot to work with and is missing from large portions of the film, surprisingly. The Fantastic Four themselves are miles ahead of the 2005 incarnations and now that they have been established, I’d be happy to watch them in future sequels. The cast is rounded off by Reg E. Cathey and Tim Blake Nelson as Franklin Storm and the sinister Dr Allen and a small cameo by the voice of Homer Simpson, Dan Castellaneta. Toby Kebbell plays the film’s villain which is horrendous. In human form, Kebbell shines but once he becomes the villain, he is a run-of-the-mill villain who unfortunately due to the reshoots is only a villain for about 10 minutes and then gets quickly killed off. With a year full of sinister comic book villains like Ultron and Yellowjacket, the iconic Doctor Doom is by far and away the worst. He lacks any motive and in terms of the CGI work is a total botch.

The first two thirds of the film are a pretty good build-up to what would appear to be a satisfying third act. The characters are fairly well established, with the exception of Ben Grimm and the pacing is suitably slow in order to set the scene but all of Trank’s good work is undone in the third act’s tonal shift which descends into a generic sub-par affair with poor visual effects and a terrible script. As mentioned, I suspect this is probably where the film was reshot as it doesn’t tie in with the dark, gritty tone of the first two thirds. The fact that the film is only 100 minutes in length is questionable as many comic book film nowadays are almost always comfortably at the two hour mark and with a good third-act, this is where it should have been. Instead it is 80 minutes set-up, 10 minutes fight, then credits. Even the score by horror-veteran Marco Beltrami and the wonderfully talented Philip Glass has a tonal shift in the film’s third act where it is awful and cluttered whereas in the first two thirds, it is quite melodic and brooding.

Overall, ‘Fantastic Four’ is a film where the first two acts suitably set up these superheroes but a tonal shift in the third act undoes all this good work. The hints of what was originally in Trank’s film are brilliant and it’s a real shame that Fox executives couldn’t allow him make the film he wanted to make. However, what is left is competent and definitely has potential that can be explored in future sequels, if a sequel will ever happen which is doubtful and even more doubtful that Trank would ever return to direct it. On the film’s release day, Trank publicly disowned his own film as he took to Twitter and tweeted:

“A year ago I had a fantastic version of this. And it would’ve received great reviews. You’ll probably never see it. That’s reality though.”

I will reiterate that it is a real shame that Trank wasn’t allowed to make his own film and like he himself is, I am confident that the film would’ve been excellent. There are moments of brilliance here and some fantastic concepts but they are ultimately watered down by last minute reshoots that Fox encouraged that allow the film to become a very standard and cliched affair. It’s a real shame.

 (Good)

⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Excellent)

Director: Peyton Reed
Starring: Paul Rudd, Michael Douglas, Evangeline Lily, Corey Stoll, Bobby Cannavale, Michael Pena, Tip “T.I.” Harris, Anthony Mackie, Wood Harris, Judy Greer, David Dastalmachian
Certificate: 12A
Run Time: 117 mins

‘Ant-Man’ is the latest addition to the critically acclaimed Marvel Cinematic Universe, a more stripped-back production after the visual effect fest (and in my opinion, a huge disappointment) that was ‘Avengers: Age of Ultron’. With a very troubled production that has spanned a staggering 8 years, it is a miracle that the film has finally made it onto cinema screens. The project was originally meant to be directed by the acclaimed and very talented Edgar Wright but last year just before filming started, he dropped out citing creative differences and Marvel very quickly found his replacement in comedic director Peyton Reed to quickly pick up the pieces. The only title Wright has to the film is a writing credit. With all this in mind, it would be easy to say that the film was going to be Marvel’s first dud – a troubled production that ultimately ended up  being a last minute botch. However, Marvel has proved again and again otherwise – take last year’s ‘Guardians of the Galaxy’ for example. Many people were sure it was going to flop but it ended up not only being successful but one of Marvel’s very best.

‘Ant-Man’ is an excellent and entertaining character-driven film that has a warm heart and innovative action sequences. Wright’s input is incredibly obvious and is all for the better and the casting is near perfect. The storyline is fun and the pacing is spot-on as well. However, one cannot stop themselves from unpacking the film when watching it to distinguish all of Edgar Wright’s directorial traits in it and ultimately ponder what Wright’s finished film would have been like. However what has remained is very, very promising and Marvel have another series to their name and rightly so.

Edgar Wright’s and Joe Cornish’s script is amazing – it has just the right blend of humour and storyline and this really shines in the finished film. Even though after Wright’s departure, ‘Anchorman’ director Adam McKay was brought in to rewrite the script, the finished product is incredible. However scripts need to be transformed onto the screen and the casting for the film is perfect. Paul Rudd was born to play the role of Scott Lang / Ant-Man and is as good as Robert Downey Jr who plays Tony Stark / Iron Man. Michael Douglas is also very competent as the former Ant-Man, Hank Pym and he clearly has enjoyed playing the part. Corey Stoll takes on the film’s villain, Yellowjacket and is very sinister in the role and ranks as one of the best villains to date in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, which is not a particularly high standard as there have been many weak ones. Granted, the character doesn’t have the best motive, but Stoll’s performance is very gleeful and sinister. Evangeline Lilly rounds out the main cast as Hope van Dyne and whilst she isn’t given a lot to work with, she plays the role well. In supporting roles, the main stand-out is Michael Pena who plays Lang’s sidekick, Luis and he brings a comedic edge to the film. There’s nothing really much to say about the rest of the cast other than they gel well, but what’s really promising to see here is the introduction of other Avengers in small scenes, just enough to connect them all together in different solo outings and in this case, Anthony Mackie returns as Falcon who has a wonderful small action scene with Ant-Man. I hope Marvel continue to use this in future films as it really works here.

The action sequences here are top-notch and the scenes where Ant-Man shrinks are enthralling yet playful and this culminates in a climactic final battle which is one of Marvel’s very best due to its clever use of size and proportion. The score by Christophe Beck is also very memorable and is not only a career best for him but also one of Marvel’s very best scores – a character actually has a theme song for once!

What separates ‘Ant-Man’ apart from the other films in the Marvel Cinematic Universe is that Ant-Man actually has a purpose. The film successfully pulls on the heart strings as Scott Lang is a character who just wants to get his daughter back and the audience are reminded of this constantly during Ant-Man’s battles. All the other Avengers do not have a purpose and this allows Ant-Man to soar above the rest of them.

Overall, ‘Ant-Man’ is against all the odds, a resounding success and despite Wright leaving the project, the exact amount of what his creative input has remained. The film has a very warm heart and the action sequences are enthralling and inventive. Paul Rudd makes the character his own. However one can’t escape the thought of what Edgar Wright’s vision would have been but what Marvel and Peyton Reed have been able to do in a year is tremendous. ‘Ant-Man’ is one of Marvel’s very best and rightly so. Bring on the sequel!

⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Excellent)

⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Excellent)

Director: Pete Docter
Starring: (voices of) Amy Poehler, Phyllis Smith, Bill Hader, Lewis Black, Mindy Kaling, Richard Kind, Diane Lane, Kyle McLachlan
Certificate: U
Run Time: 94 mins

‘Inside Out’ is Pixar’s latest addition to their catalogue of films, the geniuses behind the ‘Toy Story’ trilogy, ‘Monsters Inc’, ‘Finding Nemo’ and ‘Up’ for example, and after a couple of misfires with audiences (by misfires, the films were still very well-recieved), ‘Inside Out’ looks to buck that trend and set out to be the resurrection of what Pixar do best. On the director’s chair is Pete Docter, the mastermind behind ‘Monsters Inc’ and ‘Up’, who has come up with an extremely original concept of having the film set in the mind of an average child where personified emotions – Joy, Sadness, Fear, Anger and Disgust who live in ‘Headquarters’ (ie. Riley’s brain) guide her through life in a hard move to San Fransisco from Minnesota. Pixar have spent a long time making this film, sitting last year out in terms of films in order to make a better quality film. With Pixar having so many hit films under their belt, can ‘Inside Out’ prove once again why Pixar are the leading studio in the animation industry?

‘Inside Out’ is an expertly crafted film – it is extremely original, emotionally satisfying, humorous but at times suitably dark and enthralling but what stops it from reaching the giddy heights of their very best films is its little too familiar narrative. The voicing cast are spot-on and the film is supplemented by a fantastic score by Pixar-regular Michael Giacchino. The pacing is perfect and the characters really resonate with the audience.

Although it doesn’t reach the emotional heights of ‘Up’ in its first five minutes, Docter creates another enthralling sequence showing the development of a young girl called Riley as she grows up to her 11 year old self – it’s simply staggering and wonderful and is very promising for what is to come. Docter manages to replicate this in the film many times through some fantastic, yet heartbreaking flashback sequences. The interactions between the five emotions is fluid and the five of them make a wonderful character study. Another scene is one that has featured in the film’s promotional material, a heated exchange between Riley and her parents where it is revealed that they too have emotions that control their thoughts and actions which are realised wonderfully – the script is perfect.

For Pixar, the film is very dark in places and for the better as it really helps to propel the film’s emotional factor. As humans do, the film fluctuates in its emotions – at times extremely happy and content and at times dark and depressing. The creative team behind the film have really put the hours in to come up with the right emotional balance. When Joy and Sadness get sucked out of headquarters (this makes up the film’s plot), the decisions taken by the other three emotions as to how to keep Riley emotionally balanced is beautifully realised and due to the outstanding character development, audiences can really relate to the characters.

Unfortunately, ‘Inside Out’ doesn’t quite manage to rank as one of Pixar’s best due to its, at times, overly familiar narrative and its predictability. The story is very linear in places and the plot is a little bit overly predictable. The audience know that Joy and Sadness will need to pass through some obstacles, there will be a point of no hope, then everything will be back to normal again. It’s a little too ordinary in this respect – if the story had perhaps meandered a little more and maybe included a couple of twists, then the film would receive the full 5 stars and rank higher. By sheer coincidence, the film does mirror Disney’s ‘Wreck-It Ralph’ a little bit which does stain the film’s plot a bit in the sense that the characters have to journey through different worlds to reach their destination.

It’s also very refreshing to see that Pixar continue to have a very lucrative marketing campaign, where they don’t reveal a lot of the plot in the trailers. This makes it all the more of a worthwhile experience as you get to experience the film as you watch it, not watch it in a condensed version in the form of a trailer.

Overall, ‘Inside Out’ is another winner from Pixar – it’s emotionally satisfying, humorous and the concept behind it is extremely original. It is well worth the wait and Pixar can be proud that they have another lucrative film in their hands. It is sure to be Oscar-nominated this year and deservedly so and will almost definitely take the win. As mentioned, the film would get the full 5 stars if it didn’t rely too much on its linear and familiar narrative which make the film a little too predictable – a couple of twists would have elevated this film even more, but it is still one of the best films of the year and one that must be experienced in the cinema this Summer. It will be interesting to see how ‘The Good Dinosaur’ turns out this Winter, the second of two offerings Pixar have this year – will it be able to replicate and improve on this film’s success?

 (Excellent)

On a side note, I must also praise the short film that accompanies ‘Inside Out’ which is called ‘Lava’ is a beautiful musical number and again tugs on the emotions in a staggering 7 minutes. It is one of Pixar’s very best and I really hope it gets recognised in Awards season.

⭐⭐⭐ (Good)

Director: Seth MacFarlane
Starring: Mark Wahlberg, Seth MacFarlane, Amanda Seyfried, Giovanni Ribisi, Jessica Barth, Morgan Freeman
Certificate: 15
Run Time: 116 mins

Seth MacFarlane hit the big leagues with his feature length directorial debut, ‘Ted’ in 2012 and the film walked away being a resounding success and earned the title of the highest grossing R-rated comedy of all time. MacFarlane then went on to host the Academy Awards the same year, which garnered mixed reviews due to his risqué sense of humour. He then went on to make, ‘A Million Ways To Die In The West’ which flopped and now he has gone back to his roots to make a sequel to what propelled him in the film industry. I have to admit, I found, ‘Ted’ to be extremely crude, uneven and not particularly funny so was not particularly looking forward to a sequel. Most comedy sequels tend to rehash the first film, but then turn the crudeness up to 11. Critical reception for this film has been rather mixed, so it looks like the film has gone with the rehash route.

To my surprise, ‘Ted 2’ is actually rather tame compared to the original. It goes down the ‘Family Guy’ sense of humour route which MacFarlane is the mastermind of and the film is very watchable and has a good-enough plot. It’s better than the original as MacFarlane decides to take risks. The film is no masterpiece either as the pacing is still quite uneven, but the gags are funnier than the original. However the film does go down the deja-vu route in its ending which it practically rehashes the first film.

Seth MacFarlane has really settled into his role as the crude, immoral and drug-fuelled teddy bear and Wahlberg provides good, albeit familiar support as his owner, John Bennett, who wished for his teddy bear to come alive when he was a child. Rounding out the cast is Amanda Seyfried who takes over from Mila Kunis’ role as Bennett’s girlfriend and Seyfried seems to be having a lot of fun with the role. Morgan Freeman appears in what is more of a glorified cameo as top lawyer, Patrick Meighan and Giovanni Ribisi returns as the villain, Donny, who wants Ted for himself. The film also includes a slew of celebrity cameos, who don’t particularly enhance the film, save for a rather funny scene with Liam Neeson.

What propels the film is its warm heart and the film always has a target in sight with its clear story. The first film meandered all over the place in terms of its storytelling which made for an incoherent film. The jokes are fairly well paced as well and there are at least 5 sequences in the film that are hilarious. Yes, the film is very crude in places – that is Seth MacFarlane’s humour after all but overall, it is still very funny.

Overall, ‘Ted 2’ is a pleasant surprise that is funnier than the original, despite being toned down and the film is propelled by its warm heart and a clear narrative. It’s a real shame that no-one else seems to agree and instead, the film has been labelled as a rehash of the original and MacFarlane’s career is continuing to diminish. I myself however, would be more than happy to watch future sequels that stick to this recipe – it works.

 (Good)