Remake Rumble Review: Hitman

The Hitman franchise always seemed like an odd choice to be turned into a film franchise; a dark, moody third-person stealth assassin game where you play as an unstoppable killer. The game came to be from Eidos Interactive, a British games company which later became part of Square Enix Europe after the software giant purchased the company. But Hitman was one of their most successful game franchises with eight titles in the last fifteen years.

Anyone outside of the games industry would still find making not one film but also a remake of that film with this franchise a strange choice, especially when video game franchises like Max Payne and Prince of Persia only get one entry so far.

What is interesting is that both the 2007 entry and the 2015 are both directed by relative newcomers and written by the same writer.

It is a perfect opportunity for a Cinema Cocoa Remake Rumble Review!

Hitman (2007)

Hitman in 2007 is director Xavier Gens' only notable feature film, and while half of this film gives plenty of evidence why, the other half isn't that bad.

A covert group known as The Organisation trains an army of lethal assassins known as Agents, but when Agent 47 discovers one of his targets, a powerful Russian politician, survived his attack he becomes a target. With Interpol tracking him down, 47 has to finish the job he started.

This film is a conflict of emotions for me. On the one hand, it has a terrible plot, ambiguous backstory spontaneous action sequences, but on the other hand it is a decent video game movie adaptation with good action and is impressively gory. For every good moment there's another bad one to balance the film's overall neutrality.

Perhaps the most glaringly annoying aspects include lead star Timothy Olyphant as Agent 47, and the script given to him. He just doesn't look like a stone-cold killer; he appears to soft and bright eyed throughout the film, you cannot believe this guy has been raised to be the ultimate killer. He's more like someone pretending to be Agent 47. The other major issue with this film is its opening: a flashback style sequence while Ave Maria plays showing us the orphan kids in training to become Agents, only for some of them to attempt escape.
This isn't referenced again, and 47's relationship with The Organisation seems ambiguous at best in context with this opening, and add to that how the Agents in the video game weren't orphans but in fact clones. I couldn't shake the feeling I had seen this opening before... From the last time I watched this film, right?
Nope. It is footage from James Cameron's television show Dark Angel (2000). They even cite their use of the footage at the end of the film's credits.

Wow. Wow... Not only is your film's protagonist's backstory incorrect to the source material, but the backstory you decided to give is just ripped from something else?

I should condemn this film just for that.

So what could possibly balance this out? Well, it is actually refreshing to watch an action film (an action film based off a video game, no less) that actually has gore and blood squibs used in it! This film includes an action sequence that almost equals some RoboCop (1987) in terms of number of squibs used, its insanely violent. It was wisely rated R and a 15 in the United Kingdom.
Plus there's some nice nods to the game. Agent 47 walking through corridors while the director has the camera tracking behind and above him, like a game's third-person perspective, or Agent 47 breaking into a house to find people playing the Hitman game. Existential crisis there.

It is a bit of a mess. The film feels uninterested in its own plot, focusing on Agent 47 and his lack of heart for female lead Nika (played by Olga Kurylenko) who is quite annoying, reminding me of Transporter 3's female "lead". She didn't seem necessary, as if she could have been written out of the plot.

It is an incredibly throw-away action movie, but in terms of video game adaptations, it wasn't awful.

Hitman: Agent 47 (2015)

This is a remake nobody asked for, and will likely be forgotten about like its predecessor, but honestly they did alright with this remake of the popular video game.

After his project of manufacturing perfect assassins is destroyed, a scientist goes on the run and now only his daughter could possibly know where he is. She is tracked and hunted down by a mysterious, ruthless assassin known only as Agent 47, a product of her father’s work, and a new organisation called The Syndicate.
The main issue I always had with the original Hitman movie was the script and portrayal of Agent 47; Timothy Olyphant didn’t look like a genuinely ruthless and methodical killer. In this film, Rupert Friend (of Homeland fame) takes up the role of 47 and he gives a far more genuine performance, even channelling some of The Terminator earlier on; walking, not running, and forever on the heels of our heroine, Katia (Hannah Ware) and her initial protector John (Zachary Quinto) combined with the slick surroundings and Agent 47’s impeccable suit.

It is rewarding to see the assassin be a threat, and while the video game has him as the protagonist I feel a film needs to establish this man as a cold, emotionless killer, and the film opens with this perfectly. Also Katia's character is a fair few steps ahead of Nika from the original film, in that she is actually integral to the story and she progresses the plot! Agent 47 is more like a means to an end in this film, and other characters supply the story, which is how it should be.

The story progresses neatly enough, hitting all the traditional marks of an action, chase thriller with some neat little twists in there to keep you intrigued. Although there are some moments that defy belief: the police officer interrogating Agent 47 while having a sniper rifle and ammunition in the room… or some quite incredible technology that is only experimental today that will raise some eyebrows.
But these are small issues compared to the general lack of tone from the original film.

I will say though, contradicting the sleek styling the film has, the combat sequences were fairly messy with an abundance of shaky-cam. I thought we were through with this? Hitman would have benefitted more paced, methodical combat instead of frenetic chaos. On the plus side there was still buckets of gore, Hitman incredibly maintaining its 15 certificate and R rating!

While the film is a fairly by the numbers chase film, and it loses a little bit of traction towards the end with its mysterious antagonist, I enjoyed it a fair bit! It had decent acting for a video game movie, the action was decent and the character felt well portrayed.

Additional Marshmallows: Incredibly Hitman: Agent 47 is director Aleksander Bach's debut and also solo career entry on IMDB! Whether he has done more and the site has not been updated, I cannot say, but for a debut director, Agent 47 is something to be proud of!

Review: Sinister 2

James Ransone returns from the original film for this follow up story detailing more of the horror film's lore and villain; the Ghoul.

The police deputy who was aware of the horrors that befell the Oswalt family years before has become dedicated to stopping the malicious spirit that destroys whole families. His search leads to a woman on the run from her abusive husband, who hides out in an abandoned country house with her two young boys. Unfortunately, this house was once a site of one of the spirit's killing sprees...

I enjoyed the original Sinister, it did what it well; creating a grungy, visually dilapidated experience with plenty of scares and a creepy, original monster. But a sequel does feel unnecessary and it could never live up to the predecessor.

I will attempt to not spoil either film, but I recommend them both for horror fans. Sinister 2 (for those who have watched the first film, can read between the lines) follows the same sort of story line only we are viewing from the children's perspective. This makes the sequel lean far heavier towards the supernatural and attempts to explain the mystery of the Ghoul (aka the demon Bhughul, a sort of bogeyman). 
As far as the implementation of this, the film more or less succeeds; it is suitably scary and the film's final chase sequence actually explained a lot of the Sinister films' main issue.

The film itself, I enjoyed it, and I actually found myself taken by surprise by more than a few of the jump scares; something very few horrors manage nowadays because horror cinematography has become predictable over the years. So Sinister 2 actually had me jumping in my seat a couple of times, and like its predecessor when it does tension it does it well, several times I felt some distress for the characters.

Some, at least. Sinister 2 isn't without its flaws and upon inspection it really isn't a patch on the first film. I thoroughly enjoyed Sinister's investigative nature; a writer driven by his career putting his family in paranormal danger, giving a need to watch the series of murders captured on super-8 camera film. It was simple.
But Sinister 2 requires more conveniences to drive its plot along, its second act is mired with subplots that don't feel genuine but more as a means to an end. Especially when mother of two Courtney's husband returns to the film. I'd even say that the super-8 films here are not as terrifying as in the first film; they are gory yes, but somewhat more structured than the grungy aesthetic would suggest. 
The characters feel quite distanced too, I didn't feel much for any of them, although lead star James Ransone takes a comic relief character and turns it into a sort of Bruce Campbell's Ash from Evil Dead competency, which was quite fun.

I was suitably scared during Sinister 2, but I would say it feels unnecessary despite its best attempts to feel relevant. Sinister works as a perfect standalone film.

Additional Marshmallows: James Ransone's character had the name of "Deputy" in the first film, and even on Sinister 2's IMDB he is called "Ex-Deputy So-and-So".

Additional, additional marshmallows: At least the Deputy knows how to use a torch in the dark unlike Ethan Hawke's Ellison Oswalt.

Review: Apollo 13

From expert director Ron Howard comes perhaps the defining space exploration film; rooted by true events Apollo 13 still stands as a testimony to what humanity could be.

Shortly after the amazing success of the Apollo 11 lunar landing that saw Neil Armstrong walk on The Moon, Apollo 13's mission was to repeat the performance. But with public opinion apparently disinterested already, and misfortunes plaguing them even before the launch... Apollo 13's mission might be the most dangerous and fatal space flight the world has ever seen.

Add to that, "the world might ever see".
I get quite passionate when it comes to space travel; I find it intensely disappointing when people are more excited about upgrading their phone so its one millimeter thinner than the prospect of man venturing further into a world of discovery. So understand that watching Apollo 13 again, twenty years on, still has a lasting effect.

This is mostly due to director Ron Howard's excellent style of film-making that grounds everything in reality and really focuses on the time period, something he would be perfecting over his career with Frost/Nixon, Rush and others. Set in 1970 the film acquires, much like his other films, a timeless quality, making the pioneering human spirit all the more prevalent. Nearly fifty years ago we achieved this!? It is incredible.

The film itself is a solid, rewarding experience. While 2013's flashy affair Gravity is the same concept, and I was reminded of it, it was a rollercoaster experience heavily influenced by suspension of disbelief. Apollo 13 is based on reality, real events in a science that many of us do not understand and/or has been revised over the years to become antiquated. As such, the script does descend into a mire of tech talk with a room of lab coats arguing intensely. I had no idea what was being said, but I would rather have that in my moments of intensity than "movie script cliche 101".
The acting across the board is very good, America's golden boy Tom Hanks filling the role of Astronaut commander Jim Lovell (the film being based off his book) well, Kevin Bacon and Bill Paxton as his crew mates, and Gary Sinise in perhaps the most interesting role; their original crewmate who was deemed unhealthy to go on the mission. Sinise's character Ken goes through an interesting arc, and I always remember it after seeing the film.

Ed Harris completes the cast as Houston's controller Gene Kranz, who looks like he is enjoying the role's intensity. Indeed, regardless of the severity and intensity that the film implements with integrity, there's a good streak of humour that rises up when it is needed. The sort of honest levity that we need in times of crisis.

Regardless of the realistic script and focus on the technology, you would need a heart of stone to not feel something still when the film concludes, such is the nature of the story, the truth behind it and the film-making at hand. Given our recent departure from space travel, the film's ending is actually more poignant now than ever...

Apollo 13 is an important film. It shows not just the indomitable human spirit but also our need to venture out beyond what we know, because when we do it is possible for us to band together for a common cause.

Review: Pixels

On the surface, this doesn't look bad, but as a comedy it just isn’t funny and is a black mark to geek culture.

After a probe carrying a video message expressing Human culture is taken as a challenge from alien life, a trio of 1980s gamer nerds become the only hope for Earth’s survival.If you haven’t been aware, Pixels has been globally destroyed by critics having released in America earlier. Now it has reached the United Kingdom and honestly, I couldn’t fathom the hatred being leveled at it; sure, the trailer looks dumb but nothing to get frustrated about. But I have to admit I can see why.

At the turn of the millennium the appreciation of geek culture has skyrocketed, especially in the film industry what with Marvel’s dominance of the box office, regardless of which studio produced the movies. If Pixels is to be regarded in any broad sense, it can be seen as the first step of overconfidence for geek culture.

Of course, Marvel is comic books, Pixels is loosely based off numerous video game characters such as Donkey Kong (from the original Jump Man game) Centipede, Pac-Man and Q-Bert, and let’s face it, video game adaptations when they are actually based off a game with narrative, seldom work in Hollywood!

Pixels is not based off these much loved characters, but contains them. This film is about Adam Sandler, a drop out loser who’s only skills rely on arcade game sticks and buttons (he is “Second best in The World” apparently) now living the life of a house-call tech repairman. Who has a direct line to the White House Oval Office as his best friend is The President of the United States (played by Kevin James, of Paul Blart: Mall Cop fame…)

Now if you can get through this opening without asking (with cynical realism) why he can’t be gifted a better job by his best friend The President, you still have to get through Sandler’s character depicted as a moron without social skills hitting on a woman, in her own home, who he doesn’t know, after her husband leaves her. And of course they hook up by the end (spoilers).

To say Pixels does more harm than good to the blooming geek culture is an understatement. If this scenario actually happened, the aliens are screwed. We are more invested these days in video games today than we have ever been, we hold tournaments worth millions, it is an industry that is slowly matching the film industry in influence. To see this film blatantly ignoring this fact, trapping its characters in some backward 80s society where geeks are repressed and incompetent human beings is completely baffling.

So yes, I understand the hatred being directed at this film on personal levels.

But the rest of the film, the action sequences and everything not-Sandler, it is noisy but very colourful. I find myself asking questions like: “Why is this not-genuine-80s video game buxom blonde warrior woman now a good guy?”; “Why is Pac-Man the villain and the ghosts are good guys, when every other game interpretation has our heroes play the hero?”; “How did they have Mini Coopers set up in advance without knowing Pac Man would be invading?”; “Why does Q-Bert speak English when his thing is to not speak English?”
Y’know, relevant, life changing questions…

Also, why are Brian Cox and Sean Bean in this film? Come on guys, you are better than this!Possibly the only shining light in this film is Game of Thrones star Peter Dinklage, who appears to have accepted the nonsense he is in and is hamming it up endlessly. Reminds me of Jeremy Irons in Dungeons and Dragons.

Oh, and Tetris blocks destroying a building, that looked cool and made me chuckle.But everything else falls very badly to the wayside. The jokes are not written well, there are barely any punchlines and actors, especially Josh Gad, apparently thought “SHOUTING = funny” and perhaps one of the worst British stereotypes. I'm sure it'll entertain children though, this... 12A film with bad language and sexual references.

Additional Marshmallows: I've never walked out of a film, but this film coupled with the teeny-popper girls kicking my seat in my absurdly busy screening, almost convinced me to.

Additional, additional Marshmallows: Watching the pudgy Kevin James physically attempt to play Jump Man is embarrassing, considering he doesn't jump any barrels, preferring to waddle to one side of the ladders and let the barrels roll past.

Additional Marshamallows: WHY was there a random guy with a computer for a brain??

Remake Rumble: Fantastic Four

In light of the disastrous team up of director Josh Trank and film studio 20th Century Fox, I wanted to rewatch the two films from ten years previously, also produced by 20th Century Fox and directed by Tim Story (a man who has since directed little more than the comedy Ride Along) and were generally panned critically. 
The 2007 sequel killed the franchise as a financial flop, despite it being the best of the two. But with such newcomers as Transformers arriving and major comic franchises such as Spider-Man and X-Men in full swing, Fantastic Four was regarded poorly.

But despite all that, I remember finding the first two films at least entertaining and far, far better than Fox's recent disaster. So here are the three reviews for a new Remake Rumble review!  

Fantastic Four (2005)

Back in 2005 when Sam Raimi's Spider-Man 2 and Bryan Singer's X-Men 2 were the biggest things in the comic book scene, Fantastic Four was seen as a bit of a misfire. Nowadays it is regarded with absolute disdain.

Four scientists are exposed to a energy phenomenon while on board a space station and are gifted incredible powers: one can fly and turn into fire, another can stretch his body impossibly, one can turn invisible and another had his body turned into rock. While they attempt to understand what has happened to them, a billionaire who had funded their project, Victor Von Doom, was also transformed in the accident...

Fantastic Four is a product of the time; it is campy, colourful and full of ridiculous detours that really have no place to further its own narrative.
It starts fast and strong though. No time for introductions lets get into space and get these superpowers already. It is barely what we would call an "origin story" by today's standards; things just occur and we have to roll with it. But what is it in a rush to achieve exactly? Some bold, stark character development as these people are turned into freaks... not quite. 
The second act is a bit of a mess, comprising of little more than Sue Storm scolding her brother and Ben Grimm failing to pick up spoons over and over again. Rampant product placement as we get one of the team's many internal squabbles taking place outside of a stadium, and everything is played for laughs. How exactly is an invisible person going to have more luck getting the team through a crowd and police blockade than a normal person?

The third act feels a little segmented and somehow cumbersome. Victor has been very slowly evolving into the menace of Doctor Doom, but grievously too slow in my opinion. If the film wasn't so keen on showing Johnny Storm (played by lovable Chris Evans, pre-Captain America) snowboarding, stunt biking riding and numerous other needless distractions earlier we might have cared about what happens when Doom arrives. As it reaches its climax, the film feels rushed and quite careless.

But, that all said, I did find myself laughing occasionally. The film does have some good levity and humour, Chris Evans is having a riot as The Human Torch and the film embraces how ridiculous the whole premise is such as with their superhero names gifted to them through Johnny's obnoxious turn in front of the media's cameras. The cliches are rampant, Michael Chiklis' The Thing being loved by a blind woman, the lover's squabble between Reed Richards and Sue Storm, but it is all serviceable, if predictable and misfiring.

Overall it is as silly and random as I remember it, but with a team such as this I cannot imagine it being made much better. It isn't a good movie and it is overshadowed completely by its more savvy peers, but it knows what it is.

Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer (2007)

The full cast returns for this sequel to the 2005 film, and although it became a critical flop upon release, this film actually has a lot more integrity than its predecessor.

When Reed and Sue are about to get married, a mysterious being arrives from space and terrorises the world. While the team try to uncover its motives Victor Von Doom also wants to capture the creature, yet the entity might only be the herald for something much worse.

Ioan Gruffud, Jessica Alba, Chris Evans, Michael Chiklis and Julian McMahon all return for what is a pretty competent interpretation of the Fantastic Four.
Once you get over the first quarter of the film being Reed and Sue's wedding, ooft. That is a lot of time considering the film is only ninety minutes long, do we really need a mindless bachelor party scene so we can have Alba's Sue Storm looking at her husband-to-be with disgust, only to drop the matter immediately?

Certainly the film starts off poorly, but when the titular Silver Surfer arrives and literally crashes the party, the film's pacing tightens up and it has a singular focus to drive towards. Something such a clustered story of multiple characters with multiple powers and personalities really needs. Von Doom is even better here, released from the shackles of being "a rich guy" and fully invested in being a monster to be reckoned with.
The Silver Surfer too is very well portrayed, director Tim Story doing a Darth Vader and having Laurence Fishburne voice the character but creature actor specialist Doug Jones (Hellboy, Pan's Labyrinth) playing the part on set. The effort pays off for this alien creature and the visual effects are still great. The chase between Johnny Storm and the Surfer is still awesome to watch.

There is a problem with a deux ex machina by means of Evan's Johnny Storm temporarily losing his powers after making contact with the Silver Surfer, then proceeds to swap powers with his teammates whenever he touches them. This isn't explained and makes for most of the film's comedy in the second act but also provides the team's solution... somehow... before eventually correcting itself, somehow. I can forgive it though, since it gives Chris Evans more to do; I feel as though they knew from the first film that he was the exceptional actor out of the four.

It feels as though it learned some lessons from its predecessor, although issues still exist (the first twenty minutes) there are some really decent action moments and the team has good chemistry (beyond The Thing being unable to pick up spoons!) 

Fantastic Four (2015)

Fantastic Four’s 2015 reboot proves to be less than fantastic and more a victim of directorial and studio disputes, rendering it a completely mute, grey and uninspiring experience.

Reed Richards grew up from being a child science prodigy in his parents’ basement creating a working teleportation device. Hired by Professor Franklin Storm he completes the device and Reed, his best friend Ben, the professor’s son and daughter Johnny and Sue are sent through to another world. But when they do they gain superhuman powers, one’s limbs can stretch, another is now a beast made of rock, another can turn invisible and the final one can fly and turn into fire. While attempting to fix what’s happened to them, their other colleague, Victor, believed to be lost in the other dimension, returns…

This film has a good bit of talent behind it: director Josh Trank made waves with his debut film Chronicle, a gritty superhero found-footage film that graced my top ten of 2012; young actors including Miles Teller (Whiplash) and Michael B Jordan. Unfortunately what we get is not so much a mess, but a film without identity or story, or plot, or even decent editing or direction.

This film has some of the worst editing and continuity blunders I’ve seen in a long time, including example moments such as: Jordan’s Johnny Storm having a broken arm one scene, before he is suddenly welding metal one scene cut later, no broken arm in sight. Or our capital villain, Victor Von Doom, miraculously gaining a green cape from absolutely nowhere.
The list of errors and problems goes on, and this isn’t me nitpicking. The film has no structure; it is an origin story without character arcs, or conclusions. Again take the “Human Torch” Johnny Storm as an example: he is considered a rebel, not a team player, “he doesn’t take orders well”; this trait is established but never followed through, there is no conclusion for him as a character! And replicate that for every, single, character.
So for what happens, as a story, you don’t care a single iota for these characters, there is nothing to care for. The climax is rushed, the film is short at 100 minutes, there simply isn’t anything to hold on to.

The film is getting panned left, right and centre (apart from the seven-year olds) and deservedly so, I don’t suggest you pay money to see this.

But part of me is sad for Fantastic Four in light of the hatred being thrown at it. In my mind, Trank is a good enough director from Chronicle alone. He was even shortlisted to direct a new Star Wars movie because of it! But just recently… coincidentally… he has been pulled from that project. He has even been quoted to have had a better version of Fantastic Four a year ago… suggesting that 20th Century Fox pulled the rug from under him at the last moment and took matters into their own hands. Either that, or Trank simply wanted to mimic his first film and Fox, somehow, didn’t realise this when they took him on board.

It isn’t a good film, it is a disaster, there’s no chemistry and no sense of fun or intelligence, but there is a concept buried beyond recognition under so much rubble like Jamie Bell’s character; Trank had an idea. The only scene that strikes me as unique or even inspired, is the team’s transformation into their superhero personas. Trank was quoted to have used David Cronenberg films as reference, and these scenes are clearly such. These aren’t heroes being born; these are innocent people being turned into freaks, and though (one assumes) Fox twisted the film somehow into the bland, uneventful filler that now remains, that concept is unique and would directly counter the earlier campy Fantastic Four movies. A team of brilliant scientists reduced to monsters and how they can or cannot cope…

But, the film doesn’t do that, it doesn’t do anything, and will be forever remembered like theAmazing Spider-Man films, if not even worse than that. I feel terrible for Trank, if for creative differences he lost this and a Star Wars film, but for you filmgoer: you will want to skip this one.

Additional Marshmallows: And no Stan Lee cameo??



In final verdict, The Rise of the Silver Surfer is the best of the three existing films, although credit where credit is due, Trank's reboot has more convincing characters. Despite them being too young (something Trank likely championed) I did see them as scientists, were as in Tim Story's films I mostly saw glamorous actors and actresses "playing" scientists. This is due to Trank actually trying to build up an origin for Reed and Ben, unlike the 2005 film's total lack of backstory for anybody.
The visuals on Ben Grimm's The Thing also looked better in 2015 than ten years before... but that isn't wildly surprising.

But, in terms of film making... Tim Story's films are actually well constructed, albeit campy and light-hearted. They actually have character development, regardless of how cliche it is, and three act structures. Plus they know what they are; they are designed to be lighthearted and fun. 
And Doctor Doom actually looks threatening in the earlier films (especially in Rise of Silver Surfer's climax)

None of the films are spectacular though, and all hit a remarkably balanced response of "meh" across the board, the second film being an exception merely because it rose a little higher at times. It is clear that The Fantastic Four team is so diverse that making a decent film out of them is like spinning multiple plates and will take a writer/director more akin to Bryan Singer or Joss Whedon to make it light but intelligent.

Or a better studio. Cough, cough.

Review: Fantastic Four

Fantastic Four’s 2015 reboot proves to be less than fantastic and more a victim of directorial and studio disputes, rendering it a completely mute, grey and uninspiring experience.

Reed Richards grew up from being a child science prodigy in his parents’ basement creating a working teleportation device. Hired by Professor Franklin Storm he completes the device and Reed, his best friend Ben, the professor’s son and daughter Johnny and Sue are sent through to another world. But when they do they gain superhuman powers, one’s limbs can stretch, another is now a beast made of rock, another can turn invisible and the final one can fly and turn into fire. While attempting to fix what’s happened to them, their other colleague, Victor, believed to be lost in the other dimension, returns…

This film has a good bit of talent behind it: director Josh Trank made waves with his debut film Chronicle, a gritty superhero found-footage film that graced my top ten of 2012; young actors including Miles Teller (Whiplash) and Michael B Jordan. Unfortunately what we get is not so much a mess, but a film without identity or story, or plot, or even decent editing or direction.

This film has some of the worst editing and continuity blunders I’ve seen in a long time, including example moments such as: Jordan’s Johnny Storm having a broken arm one scene, before he is suddenly welding metal one scene cut later, no broken arm in sight. Or our capital villain, Victor Von Doom, miraculously gaining a green cape from absolutely nowhere.
The list of errors and problems goes on, and this isn’t me nitpicking. The film has no structure; it is an origin story without character arcs, or conclusions. Again take the “Human Torch” Johnny Storm as an example: he is considered a rebel, not a team player, “he doesn’t take orders well”; this trait is established but never followed through, there is no conclusion for him as a character! And replicate that for every, single, character.
So for what happens, as a story, you don’t care a single iota for these characters, there is nothing to care for. The climax is rushed, the film is short at 100 minutes, there simply isn’t anything to hold on to.

The film is getting panned left, right and centre (apart from the seven-year olds) and deservedly so, I don’t suggest you pay money to see this.

But part of me is sad for Fantastic Four in light of the hatred being thrown at it. In my mind, Trank is a good enough director from Chronicle alone. He was even shortlisted to direct a new Star Wars movie because of it! But just recently… coincidentally… he has been pulled from that project. He has even been quoted to have had a better version of Fantastic Four a year ago… suggesting that 20th Century Fox pulled the rug from under him at the last moment and took matters into their own hands. Either that, or Trank simply wanted to mimic his first film and Fox, somehow, didn’t realise this when they took him on board.

It isn’t a good film, it is a disaster, there’s no chemistry and no sense of fun or intelligence, but there is a concept buried beyond recognition under so much rubble like Jamie Bell’s character; Trank had an idea. The only scene that strikes me as unique or even inspired, is the team’s transformation into their superhero personas. Trank was quoted to have used David Cronenberg films as reference, and these scenes are clearly such. These aren’t heroes being born; these are innocent people being turned into freaks, and though (one assumes) Fox twisted the film somehow into the bland, uneventful filler that now remains, that concept is unique and would directly counter the earlier campy Fantastic Four movies. A team of brilliant scientists reduced to monsters and how they can or cannot cope…

But, the film doesn’t do that, it doesn’t do anything, and will be forever remembered like the Amazing Spider-Man films, if not even worse than that. I feel terrible for Trank, if for creative differences he lost this and a Star Wars film, but for you filmgoer: you will want to skip this one.

Additional Marshmallows: Also, no Stan Lee cameo??

Review: Mission Impossible - Rogue Nation

Mission: Impossible - Rogue Nation proves to be both an exciting action movie and a Bond-esque intelligent thriller at the same time. Thoroughly enjoyed myself!

The IMF squad is dissolved into the CIA in the wake of their cowboy, reckless antics that have laid waste to public and private property whenever they are involved. But Ethan Hunt remains vigilant in tracking down "The Syndicate", a shadow organisation of assassins and terrorists responsible for hundreds of deaths across the globe as part of an intelligence stranglehold operation.

I very much enjoyed Brad Bird's live action debut film M:I4 Ghost Protocol and from the outset of Rogue Nation's trailer I had my doubts it would live up to the anticipation. But I was wrong. Happily wrong.
The cast return, Tom Cruise in the leading role and still denying he is fifty-three, Jeremy Renner, Simon Pegg and even Ving Rhames returns in a more central role (the only other beside Cruise who was in the original 1996 film) and they all carry on their roles from Ghost Protocol very well. Renner playing the doubtful operative William Brandt who gives voice to the audiences own doubt about Hunt's sanity.

Indeed, with the IMF's integrity in doubt and Hunt being at the centre, the film's focus on throwing hesitation into the mix of action sequences add to the tension; the tension building from betrayals and espionage. This film involves several organisations working to outwit one another, and the audience being unsure of the motivation of the heroes is great to mix in! Writer/Director Christopher McQuarrie also wrote Bryan Singer's twist centric thriller The Usual Suspects.
As with a lot of the M:I films, the villain is somewhat underplayed in favour for the heroes centre stage of the action, but the relatively unknown Sean Harris plays a shadowy power-player extremely well. Perhaps more impressively is newcomer Rebecca Ferguson who plays Ilsa Faust, the best interpretation of a Bond girl put to film! I was afraid, from the trailer's over-glamourisation of the film, she was going to be objectified to no end and despite holding her own she would need rescuing. Not so! The part is played and written very well.

And of course, the action is great. While I still feel the franchise peaked at Ghost Protocol's terrifying Burj Khalifa skyscraper climb and nothing in Rogue Nation can come close to that achievement, this film does have one of the coolest, fastest and most exciting motorbike chases I've seen in a very long time! About time someone filmed superbike racing properly!

I am hard pressed to decide which film is better, Ghost Protocol, Rogue Nation or the original film, it is that high in my appreciation. I would say I felt the espionage and thriller aspect of this film to be more intense; the film actually dares to reduce the action for its finale in preference for a shadowy foot chase, and this may have one of the franchise's best female leads.

Definitely recommended.