⭐⭐ (Poor)

Director: Jon M. Chu
Starring: Jesse Eisenberg, Mark Ruffalo, Woody Harrelson, Dave Franco, Daniel Radcliffe, Lizzy Caplan, Jay Chou, Sanaa Lathan, Henry Lloyd Hughes, David Warshofsky, Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman
Certificate: 12A
Run Time: 129 mins

‘Now You See Me’ was a surprise hit in 2013 and ended up being very profitable grossing just over $350 million worldwide on a $75 million budget. Although reviews were decidedly mixed, audiences generally seemed to like it so enough for this film to warrant a sequel. I had some with the first film – it’s a light-hearted, silly but entertaining caper however it’s very haphazardly directed and isn’t particularly intelligent. ‘Now You See Me 2’ sees the original cast return with the exception of Melanie Laurent and Isla Fisher, the latter due to pregnancy and she is now replaced by a new female character played by Lizzy Caplan. Now alarm bells should have started ringing  at Lionsgate / Summit in terms of the crew – when you think of a good director to carry on a franchise that wasn’t particularly great to start with who could possibly improve on the first film and fix its problems, how on earth does Jon M. Chu come into the mix?! Chu is behind films such as ‘GI Joe: Retaliation’ and ‘Jem and the Holograms’ – both very negatively received and he is also behind a lot of the ‘Step Up’ films which perhaps could be the reason why he was employed based on the strength of their choreography but it is still a baffling choice.

‘Now You See Me 2’ has exactly the same problems as the first film but even more so –  its plot is preposterous and the film finds itself in a constant muddle as it overcomplicates itself. There are zero stakes for the protagonists as the viewer knows that everything will work out well for them in the end. Chu’s direction is as expected very sloppy and Peter Deming’s camera work is too choppy and grainy. The toothless action sequences are particularly badly handled and it’s very hard to make any sense of what is being portrayed on-screen. However this is not all to say that ‘Now You See Me 2’ is a ‘bad’ film – although completely unmemorable, there are a couple of sequences that are interesting and allow the film to temporarily come together and there are a couple of good performances from its cast.

The biggest problem with the film is undoubtedly its incomprehensible story that is so concerned with outdoing the first film’s story that the film falls head over heels and defies belief. This is particularly true with the film’s climax which is extremely stupid and uninspired – you’ll know it when you see it. For all the first film’s flaws, there was still a degree of ‘magic’ involved even though it turned into more of a Louis Leterrier action movie as it went along but here, any magic that the first film managed to conjure is totally bereft here. Unfortunately this is the result when studio executives get greedy and try to replicate the success of the first film.

In terms of the cast, the film bears a strong cast just as the first one did and this time, the Horseman are pitted against Walter Mabry, portrayed by Daniel Radcliffe, who is the technology tycoon / illegitimate son of Arthur Tressler who Michael Caine plays. Radcliffe gives it his all and doesn’t do a bad job at all in a villain role. Jesse Eisenberg, Dave Franco and Woody Harrelson return as the Horseman and all are great again although without going into spoiler territory, Harrelson’s character is badly meddled with in the storytelling department – you’ll know it when you see it. Lizzy Caplan unfortunately isn’t as talented an actress as Isla Fisher is and although there are some interesting feminist undertones the film attempts to develop, Caplan’s character resorts to a shouty and annoying one. Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman and Mark Ruffalo, three exceptionally talented actors are always endlessly watchable but a real surprise in this film is Henry Lloyd-Hughes who has more of a cameo here does a great job with the material that he has been given.

Unfortunately, ‘Now You See Me 2’ is a film this Summer that is one to skip as it has exactly the same problems as is the original only even more so. These films are also part of a small genre where they are dwarfed by greats such as Christopher Nolan’s, ‘The Prestige’ and Neil Burger’s, ‘The Illusionist’ – two very interesting films, Nolan’s being a masterpiece that are much more subtle and more intelligent in their execution. How these films attempt to make their own mark is by being more of an action-caper film but both films, the sequel more so are both lazily handled and the creative talent behind the camera for both films leaves more to be desired. But ultimately, ‘Now You See Me 2’ is a very lazy film that has a preposterous storyline that although at the time may seem entertaining in parts is completely forgettable and it is time for this series to be left alone. Let’s face it, it was never very good in the first place.

⭐⭐ (Poor)

⭐⭐⭐ (Good)

Director: James Wan
Starring: Vera Farmiga, Patrick Wilson, Frances O’Connor, Madison Wolfe, Simon McBurney, Franke Potente, Lauren Esposito
Certificate: 15
Run Time: 134 mins

The Conjuring 2 is the highly anticipated sequel to the 2013 original that breathed new life into the horror genre and propelled director James Wan‘s career. What the original did so well was it used well-established concepts of horror (some may argue clichés) but Wan was still able to create a frightening, intense film that also featured a wonderful cast. It was one of my favourite films of 2013. Whilst many had assumed Insidious: Chapter 2 (another great series that Wan has created) was the director’s swansong after moving on to the big-budget action sequel Furious 7, Wan has returned to direct the sequel to arguably his most well-recieved film before moving on to tackling the DC comic book superhero, Aquaman. Moving away from  Rhode Island where the Perron family were terrorised by supernatural forces, The Conjuring 2 is set in Enfield in London where this time the Hodgson family require help from the Warrens, the famous paranormal investigators that this franchise is circled around.

The Conjuring 2 isn’t as strong as its predecessor – it is overlong which severely impacts the pacing  and just isn’t quite as interesting a story as the first one was. However, Wan delivers in spades on the scare-front and the film has some truly frightening sequences and also there are some great performances from the cast. Only Wan could have made or been given permission to make this film as 134 minutes for a horror film is uncommonly long and whilst there is a lot of character development (and self-indulgence), 20 minutes could fairly easily have been chopped off and the film would almost be as strong as the original. This is definitely its main problem which is to its detriment and the film does bear many similarities to William Friedkin’s The Exorcist and there are a couple of moments where the film leaves a bit of a sour taste as it reiterates many of the clichéd elements of superior horror films. Whilst this all may sound negative, it isn’t – coming off a near-perfect original  was always going to be impossible and whilst this is still a strong film, it does have its fair share of problems.

The cast here are great again – both Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson give very assured performances but it’s the new additions to the cast that really get a chance to shine. The standout is Madison Wolfe who plays the possessed victim, Janet Hodgson to a tee – I only found out afterwards that she is in fact, American which is testament to her authentic performance and I hope she will get a lot of work due to the strength of her performance here. Frances O’Connor, who plays the desperate and genuinely terrified mother of the Hodgson family is also very good here as is Simon McBurney who plays a fellow paranormal investigator, Maurice Grosse although his performance is a little hammy but it adds to the fun and excitement.

As with its predecessor, The Conjuring 2 is also based on what is supposedly a true story – the film doesn’t try and argue why it is but I would take the story with a pinch of salt. For example, the Warren’s in fact had only been two of many paranormal investigators and it would seem as if many of the events in the film have been dramatised. The story is strong and has a nice twist in its final act, but the film does bear a lot of similarities to The Exorcist. Whilst in The Conjuring, Wan was able to build upon existing codes and conventions of the horror genre, he does do so here too but here the similarities are a little too apparent and lessen the impact of the story the film it is trying to tell. The script is a little clunky in places unfortunately and characters such as the Warren’s daughter, Judy and cameraman Drew from the first film are sidelined which is a shame. Don Burgess takes over on cinematography duties from John R. Leonetti’s sterling work on the first film and he does an admirable job – there are a couple of really creepy and atmospheric shots but unfortunately without loses some originality from Leonetti’s work. Joseph Bishara’s score is very good here and he blends old themes with some new ones here to make the film refreshing.

Although The Conjuring 2 ultimately is a little disappointing coming off the near-perfect original, it still serves a lot of spine-tingling sequences in conjunction with its great cast. James Wan has clearly shown that he has a masterful understanding of the horror genre even if the film does slide into convention at times. However, the fact remains that the film is overlong and it is to the film’s detriment as at times, it really does sidle along and there are too many filler scenes that enhance the film’s length for no added purpose. However as a horror sequel, The Conjuring 2 is very strong and for all its shortcomings, is ultimately a scary treat that successfully expands on the groundwork of the first film.

 (Good)

⭐⭐⭐ (Good)

Director: Duncan Jones
Starring: Travis Fimmel, Paula Patton, Ben Foster, Dominic Cooper, Toby Kebbell, Ben Schnetzer, Robert Kazinsky, Daniel Wu
Certificate: 12A
Run Time: 123 mins

‘Warcraft’ (or alternatively known as ‘Warcraft: The Beginning’) is the long-awaited adaptation of the immensely popular ‘World of Warcraft’ video games. Unfortunately in the film industry, video game adaptations have never received much praise however this film is directed by Duncan Jones who made ‘Moon’ and ‘Source Code’, both brilliant films and he is also a big fan of the game. Armed with a healthy $160 million budget, this is Jones’ first big budget film however with both of his previous film, they’ve always looked visually astute so the budget should just be a tool to make his film look even better. Although on paper, the cast that is assembled may not be particularly impressive and lacks significant star-power, these kinds of films are more reliant on the impressive battle sequences and the visuals so this shouldn’t be too big of a problem at least if the acting is sound. So is ‘Warcraft’ the film to redefine the video game adaptation genre or is it another failure to add to an ever-growing list?

‘Warcraft’ is a mixed bag – it is without doubt, flawed and a little incoherent at times but one cannot doubt the amount of effort and love that Jones has for this material. The film is generally fairly entertaining but unusually, there is often a lot of thought here too and this is exactly why Jones is the man for the job. Unfortunately, the film has garnered a very negative reaction from critics and fans are rather mixed but with the money it has made so far in China, a sequel should hopefully be on the cards if the fans call for it.

The cast that Jones has rounded up for this film may not look particularly impressive on paper but for the purpose of the film, it just about works. Both Travis Fimmel and Paula Patton are sound as the leads and Dominic Cooper pretty much replicates his previous performances here as the ruler of the kingdom. The two standouts however are Ben Foster who really seems to be having good fun playing the mysterious and sinister sorcerer, Medivh and Toby Kebbell who looks to be following in Andy Serkis’ footsteps with his outstanding motion capture as the lead Orc protagonist, Durotan. What makes this film shine is its very interesting characters of which some are fairly well-developed but the film is a little too short and does plough through some material too quickly.

The story is a little incoherent at times but one can clearly see that Jones is trying to juggle a lot of material here in order to impress both the fans and audience. The film begins at a rollicking pace at the beginning constantly chopping and changing between different worlds and kingdoms but it all just about makes sense and sets itself up nicely for a sequel. Jones’ direction is what really saves this film – there are many confidently embedded moments where we really care for the characters and are able to judge the conflict between characters morally something which the games apparently don’t do. I also admire Jones for having the audacity to kill off characters – in this world, no one is safe and the tables can turn very quickly and it’s game over. Jones has clearly spent a lot of time working on this and despite the film not always hitting the correct notes, one has to admire him for taking on such a hard task. As mentioned, the film is a little short in places (Jones reportedly had to cut it down from 160 minutes to just over 2 hours) and could do with perhaps another 20 minutes developing its interesting characters more and taking its time with the fast-paced beginning.

Strangely, despite having a big $160 million budget, the film does visually look a little stodgy in places and does not compare to similar fantasy films such as ‘Lord of the Rings’ in a visual regard. If this film does get a sequel and the budget gets slashed, this will only be to the film’s detriment as it’s not enough here. It’s a little worrying to try and work out where the money has been spent as it hasn’t been compensated for anything else and the cast wouldn’t have cost that much. Simon Duggan’s cinematography is fairly assured here but the battle sequences are rather choppy and short – his work on ‘300: Rise of an Empire’, a similar film to this visually, is much better. Ramin Djawadi’s score is outstanding and the film has many memorable themes and I really hope they keep him on if they make a sequel.

So the long wait for ‘Warcraft’ has mostly paid off and Duncan Jones manages to pull this off with middling results. His creative influence is ever-present in this film and the film does manage to have some heart to it. The cast are satisfactory with Ben Foster and Toby Kebbell being the standouts. It’s a real shame that this film has got such the negative reception it has but with the film making a ton of money in China, it should just about be able to be profitable and hopefully enough to warrant a sequel. However if that goes ahead, it’s imperative Jones stays as director and that the film’s budget does not get slashed – the result would most likely be in keeping with what the critics are saying about this film if that were to be the case. But if you’re on the fence with this film, I’d definitely recommend going and seeing it on the biggest screen you can as there is a lot to like here.

 (Good)

⭐⭐ (Poor)

Director: Clay Katis & Fergal Reilly
Starring: (voices of) Jason Sudeikis, Josh Gad, Danny McBride, Maya Rudolph, Bill Hader, Peter Dinklage, Sean Penn
Certificate: U
Run Time: 97 mins

The film industry is at a peak with animation at the moment to both adults with films such as ‘Anomalisa’ and kids such as ‘Zootopia’ and ‘Inside Out’ which have enough references to entertain the adult viewer today. ‘The Angry Birds Movie’ is a feature-length adaptation of the most downloaded smartphone game of all time and with all of the spin-off’s and sequels that the original game has found, making it into a film was always the next logical step to cash in on their success and hopefully expand into a new media platform. Whilst this would suggest pure greed from studio executives and Rovio, although I wasn’t overly keen on it, 2014’s ‘The Lego Movie’ proved that in capable hands, adapting a film from a game doesn’t always have to result in a bad film and the film has a great heart to it. The directors of this film, Clay Katis and Fergal Reilly make their debut here, Reilly previously a storyboard artist and Katis an animator for Disney so whilst they may lack experience, the film should hopefully look stunning in terms of the animation.

‘The Angry Birds Movie’ is a cliché-ridden cash grab that is virtually laugh-free. The script is particularly stodgy in places with the first act being especially badly written. If the film gets a sequel which I strongly suspect it will do, it desperately needs a new screenwriter. However, what saves the film is there are a couple of very good voice performances which in turn makes some of the characters very engaging and I found that I did care for some of the characters despite the film not hitting it with its ill-attempts at humour. Additionally, the animation is as expected, first-rate and the world’s that have been created are stunning.

The screenplay by Jon Vitti, who has written some great episodes of ‘The Simpsons’ in the past, is extremely problematic. The jokes are uninspired and at times, quite bizarre and a little inappropriate for a film with a U rating. I chuckled twice. The story isn’t particularly inspired but it does manage to incorporate all of the aspects that gamers have come to love in the game. The first act in particular is really badly written and there is a sequence where it seems as if the filmmakers try to get protagonist, Red, angry and as a viewer, it made me angry having to experience this. Although cliché-ridden and borrowing from many other superior films, the film does manage to improve, largely due to its engaging characters. 

And that is where the film manages to partly redeem itself. Jason Sudeikis as Red is absolutely fantastic and his character is well-developed and I cared for the outcome of his character. Danny McBride as Bomb is also great as is Bill Hader as the villain, Leonard, who is very charismatic and a worthy antagonist. However despite these great characters, there are also some real duds such as Josh Gad’s Chuck and Maya Rudolph’s Matilda who is downright annoying. Poor Sean Penn really draws the short straw and he is merely in the film to grunt here and there.

The animation is excellent here and the world-building really is stunning – both islands created for the Angry Birds and Bad Piggies are vividly realised and there is a very careful attention to detail. It would have really elevated the film if there would have been some time to have a closer looks at the world and this attention to detail be capitalised on.

Ultimately, ‘The Angry Birds Movie’ is sadly a cash grab and the jokes consistently do not land with the audience. The script is a big issue and is something that if a sequel were to go ahead, requires drastic improvements. However, the film is never ‘bad’ – it’s just very uninspiring and although being very formulaic, on the strength of its engaging characters it is increasingly entertaining as the film progresses. It’s a shame that the film isn’t any better but the fact that the film badly botches its attempts at humour is near-unforgivable with the talent involved.

⭐⭐ (Poor)

⭐⭐ (Poor)

Director: Bryan Singer
Starring: James McAvoy, Michael Fassbender, Jennifer Lawrence, Oscar Isaac, Nicholas Hoult, Rose Byrne, Tye Sheridan, Sophie Turner, Olivia Munn, Lucas Till, Evan Peters, Kodi Smit-McPhee, Alexandra Shipp, Josh Helman, Ben Hardy
Certificate: 12A
Run Time: 144 mins

(POTENTIAL SPOILERS AHEAD)

‘X-Men: Apocalypse’ is the latest instalment in this high-profile franchise and its story follows hot on the heels of 2014’s ‘X-Men: Days of Future Past’. Luckily for this film, it is once again directed by Bryan Singer who directed that and also the original ‘X-Men’ and its sequel, ‘X2’ so expectations for this film are very high. This instalment looks to crank things up to 11 following ‘Days of Future Past’ as it deals with the threat of En Sabah Nur (aka. Apocalypse), one of the X-Men’s biggest foes in the comics and this is also the first film in the alternate timeline that ‘Days of Future Past’ sets up, so the film doesn’t have too much pressure on it story-wise and this really is an opportunity for a fun X-Men film that doesn’t have to be too concerned with past films.

‘X-Men: Apocalypse’ severely drops the ball big time – it is far and away the worst entry in the entire franchise and apart from a promising first 45 minutes or so, is a CGI bore. The story is incoherent and sloppy and particularly towards the film’s climax, the film is unwatchable. Even the acting which is normally stellar is very underwhelming and there are many examples of both old and new characters phoning it in. There is some stuff to like here – there are a couple of good sequences and the film opens up rather promisingly but other than this, the film is an outright disaster.

The biggest problem this film has is undeniably its story. What made ‘First Class’ and ‘Days of Future Past’ both worthwhile were their original stories mixed in with history and pop culture which in both cases, was a great blend. ‘Apocalypse’ however almost completely does away with this, except for a mean-spirited scene in the middle when the younger characters comment on how ‘The Return of the Jedi’ is the worst film in the original Star Wars trilogy clearly taking shots at Brett Ratner’s ‘X-Men: The Last Stand’ (which I happened to quite like) when actually it is shooting itself in the foot being the third entry in the prequel trilogy. There is also another ill-natured scene part-way through the film which has the potential to annoy audiences set in Auschwitz.

The other problem which feeds into the poor narrative is the botching of the titular villain, Apocalypse, who is played by the always-wonderful Oscar Isaac but here he is made to shout whilst looking uncomfortable in a blue outfit. It is embarrassingly bad and the character’s villainous plan is so by-the-numbers. The stakes are never high enough and the character is so easily defeated, despite his mighty strength in the comics. Oscar Isaac clearly tries to do the best he can with the material but fails as the character is so poorly written.

The final action sequence and climax to the film is especially badly handled and it goes on and on for what seems like an eternity. The CGI looks unfinished and for the first time in any X-Men film, not only was I bored, I was also close to shouting at the screen for having to sit through this. The script by Simon Kinberg is ropey and at some points, laughable – I don’t think I’ve ever heard the word, ‘systems’ so many times in a film especially constantly being blurted out by Oscar Isaac’s villain!

The acting here is generally underwhelming with pretty much everyone phoning it in especially Jennifer Lawrence but Kodi Smit-McPhee’s Nightcrawler, a character so beloved and excellently portrayed by Alan Cumming in X2 is particularly awful here. ‘X-Men: Apocalypse’ has recanted a lot of the most well-known characters in a younger iteration who aren’t particularly good with the exception of Sophie Turner’s portrayal of Jean Grey who is excellent and encapsulates the role very well. What particularly annoyed me with this film is how Michael Fassbender’s Magneto, easily the standout in ‘First Class’ and ‘Days of Future Past’ is badly handled here and even his performance is mostly uninspired, save for a great scene that sends his character off hating the entire world, but particularly as the film progresses, Fassbender seems bored and unhappy.

That’s not to say ‘X-Men: Apocalypse’ is a complete waste of time – there are a couple of thoughtful sequences particularly in the first 45 minutes or so and the film begins very well with a well-crafted sequence showing the progression of time following the temporary demise of Apocalypse. I also thought that the extended cameo by Hugh Jackman as Wolverine that was teased in the final trailer is well done and demonstrates the brutality and sheer violence of the character to a tee and although Singer tries to outdo himself with another similar sequence to ‘Days of Future Past’ with Quicksilver, it’s still quite fun and there is a great standoff scene with Magneto vs the Police that for a brief period of time, holds up to Fassbender’s portrayal of the character in the previous two films. But all this is not enough to save what is a dogged and uninspired film.

Unfortunately, ‘X-Men: Apocalypse’ proves to be the low point for this franchise and as a superhero film in itself is an overstuffed and incoherent mess. It is the worst comic book film of the year so far by a big margin and over the past couple of years where there has been a strong run of superhero films, is second-worst to ‘Avengers: Age of Ultron’ which had virtually no redeemable qualities. It’s a real shame as it’s not as if it’s just a step-down from previous films – it’s a near-complete slam into bad territory. Here’s hoping ‘Suicide Squad’ and ‘Doctor Strange’, the final two comic book offerings of the year which I have very high expectations for, don’t drop the ball to this level.

 (Poor)

⭐⭐⭐ (Good)

Director: Anthony & Joe Russo
Starring: Chris Evans, Robert Downey Jr, Scarlett Johansson, Sebastian Stan, Jeremy Renner, Don Cheadle, Anthony Mackie, Paul Bettany, Elizabeth Olsen, Chadwick Boseman, Paul Rudd, Emily VanCamp, Tom Holland, Frank Grillo, Martin Freeman, William Hurt, Daniel Brühl
Certificate: 12A
Run Time: 147 mins

(POTENTIAL SPOILERS AHEAD)

‘Captain America: Civil War’ is the 3rd instalment in the Captain America franchise and the first chapter of Phase 3. Back in the director’s chair are Anthony and Joe Russo, who directed ‘Captain America: The Winter Soldier’ which is regarded as one of the best entries in the franchise thus far and a film that also allowed them the gig of directing the upcoming 2-part ‘Avengers: Infinity War’ extravaganza. ‘Civil War’, however is more of a continuation of the events from last year’s abysmal ‘Avengers: Age of Ultron’ and particularly coming hot off the heels of ‘Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice’, this needs to deliver if audiences are going to have faith in these directors of a film that will be the climax of every single film of the Marvel Cinematic Universe thus far.

‘Captain America: Civil War’ is a very solid effort from the Russo brothers and is an improvement over ‘The Winter Soldier’. It has a great cast and is one of the rare ensemble comic book films of recent times to not feel overstuffed. The film is however overlong – it takes a long while to get going and there is a lot of excess baggage that could have been trimmed but when the film does get going after 45 minutes or so, it’s very coherent and well-paced. Surprisingly, the film also features one of the best villains in the franchise, an aspect that Marvel are not good at and consistently fail at even in their best films, but Daniel Bruhl makes for a menacing and calculative three-dimensional villain.

The performances by the cast here are generally very good with the standouts being Robert Downey Jr, Chadwick Boseman and  Daniel Brühl’s villain. Robert Downey Jr is always great in these films but here we see a completely different side to him, a paranoid figure racked with guilt and he really does develop the character well and seeing him opposite Chris Evans, who is also more relaxed here demonstrates the great chemistry that both actors share. Chadwick Boseman makes his debut here as Black Panther, who will be getting his own film in a few years time and he is very good here, hopefully being able to replicate this in his own film. As mentioned, Daniel Brühl’s villain is one of the best in the entire Marvel Cinematic Universe and he is a very calculative and menacing character, always multiple steps ahead of the characters and Brühl is very committed to the role here which had the potential to be very hammy and forgettable. Unfortunately, although Tom Holland has received showers of praise for his debut as Spider-Man, I thought he was rather weak and annoying but I am interested to see how he will fare in his own standalone film – however his definitive moment is definitely not here.

The script penned by Christopher Markus and Stephen McFeely is very coherent and polished and although the film has to juggle a lot of characters, everyone gets a chance to make their mark which is simply outstanding. It is one of the first team-up superhero film that has a long run time, which although undeniably overlong, the film is not overstuffed completely reverting the incoherent mess that was ‘Avengers: Age of Ultron’ last year which is a big achievement. Both writers should be excellent for the ‘Infinity War’.

One of the main strengths that the Russo Brothers have over other their Marvel Cinematic Universe director counterparts is their ability to craft memorable and awe-inspiring action sequences. They do not fall short here. The stellar action sequences in ‘The Winter Soldier’ proved their knack for creating action and it’s refreshing that they try and use mostly  practical effects as opposed to CGI. The now infamous airport sequence where all of the superheroes battle it out is a work of art and is one of the very best action scenes in the entire plethora of Marvel films and although the last half an hour to the film is fairly low-key in terms of spectacle, it’s absolutely stunning to watch the relationships change between our favourite characters, complimented by the action.

The score by Henry Jackman is surprisingly very lacklustre and not memorable in the slightest, lazily reusing riffs from ‘The Winter Soldier’ and adding nothing new to the film. The cinematography by Trent Opalach is very sound here and there are many shots in the film that are unique and creative.

Unfortunately, through no fault of the Russo Brothers, the film cannot shake off feeling very formulaic in places and particularly in the film’s beginning, I was very worried the film would be a let-down. Even still,  the film is so unbelievably predictable in places and heavy-handed but the Russo’s manage to just about fix this with the stellar ending. Marvel also continue to infuriate me with being unable to kill off a character for good and I was very disappointed here with this trend continuing to be prevalent.

As for the future of the highly profitable and critically loved Marvel Cinematic Universe, ‘Civil War’ has started off Phase 3 very well but I really hope that the films are able to have their own identification and directors stamp, I was always aware here that I was watching a Marvel film whereas although maybe a crude comparison, Zack Snyder really does allow his personality to flow through ‘Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice’ and it feels more the work of an auteur that it does a DC film. Here’s hoping that Scott Derrickson, director of the next film in this franchise, ‘Doctor Strange’ will be able to allow his directors stamp to command the film.

Overall, ‘Captain America: Civil War’ is a very solid effort from the Russo Brothers and ranks highly in the franchise in terms of quality. Although very formulaic in places and overlong, it does pose a lot of interesting ideas and the chemistry between these characters continues to flourish and the Russo’s take a risk that pays off in having a quieter, more thoughtful climax than recent films. The film also works on the strength of its villain played masterfully by Daniel Brühl, who will hopefully reprise his role in future films. In terms of how it compares to the other superhero films this year, I think it ranks higher than ‘Deadpool’ but controversially although ‘Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice’ is a troubled film and at times incoherent, there is more of a sense of wonder about it and it is visually stunning. But ‘Civil War’ is a very good effort and I have full confidence in the Russo Brothers in being able to deliver two great films on the Avengers.

 (Good)

⭐⭐⭐⭐ (Excellent)

Director: Gavin Hood
Starring: Helen Mirren, Aaron Paul, Alan Rickman, Barkhad Abdi, Jeremy Northam, Iain Glen, Phoebe Fox
Certificate: 15
Run Time: 102 mins

In a world where we are exposed to regular terrorism and as drone warfare conflicts our consciences, ‘Eye in the Sky’ couldn’t come at a more sensitive point in time. It also features Alan Rickman’s final live-action performance (he is also in the upcoming ‘Alice Through The Looking Glass’) following his sad and unexpected passing earlier on in the year. The film also features Helen Mirren, Aaron Paul and Barkhad Abdi, the latter’s first role after a fantastic turn in ‘Captain Phillips’ which he was Oscar-nominated for. The film is directed by Gavin Hood who has a very patchy track-record, winning the Best Foreign Language film in 2005 for ‘Tsotsi’ but then directing ‘Rendition’ and ‘Ender’s Game’, both duds and the critically disastrous ‘X-Men Origins: Wolverine’ which I happened to really like. So with a lower budget and considerably less pressure, can Gavin Hood restore his talent in a film that doesn’t get mired in big budget special effects.

‘Eye in the Sky’ is a taut and heartfelt application of the effects of drone warfare that is morally conflicting and features some fantastic performances – it’s straight up there as one of the best films of the year and is just what Gavin Hood needed. It is expertly paced and runs an economical yet efficient 102 minutes, enough to make a lasting impression on audiences and poses lots of moral arguments. The only reason why it doesn’t quite earn a 5-star rating is because the film doesn’t really develop its characters too much and having slightly more of a human edge to the film wold have informed audiences more coherently as to why characters make the vital choices that they do.

The film features some very realistic and powerful performances and boasts an impressive cast. Helen Mirren as the lead is tough and uncompromising and Aaron Paul gives a surpsingly heartfelt performance as Steve Watts, a drone pilot tasked with firing a Hellfire missile. The late Alan Rickman gives one of the best performances of his career as General Benson who supervises the mission in London. Barkhad Abdi is also great here as an undercover ground agent and proves that his performance in ‘Captain Phillips’ wasn’t a one-time stint, his performance is very raw and human. An excellent cast on paper has delivered.

The film has a great story and many emotional beats – it deals with some very real life consequences of drone warfare and this makes the film all the more human and impressive. The action is very well handled as well and the script by Guy Hibbert is extremely refined. The score by Paul Hepker and Mark Kilian is also very fitting and compliments the action on-screen very well. Simply put, it’s a very well-constructed film both in its cast and crew.

Overall, ‘Eye in the Sky’ is a success for all involved and is a brilliant send-off for Alan Rickman in his final live-action performance. The film confidently handles the moral arguments to drone warfare and there are many decisions that interact with the audience very assuredly and make the film all the more engaging. This is just the project that Gavin Hood needed and this film really showcases his talent for thoughtful and confident directing and this should hopefully lead him onto a more successful career following his mixed filmography so far. But ‘Eye in the Sky’ is very good work – it’s one of the best films of the year so far.

 (Excellent)