Review: Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016)

Does anyone else think perfume adverts are more than a little ridiculous? Perhaps now 4DX screens are becoming a thing they have a place in the world, but has anyone really ever paid much attention to these ads? You’re probably actually wondering what the hell perfume has to do with Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. 

Well, at the cinema the other night, right before the featured trailers aired, an advert of sorts was played for what looked like a period drama movie or TV show starring Domhnall Gleeson (AKA General Hux, AKA my favourite grumpy space ginger). I got so excited I did a little dance in my seat, until I realised it was an advert for Burberry perfume. What. The. Frick?! NOT COOL Burberry, not cool. Although I might buy your aftershave for my husband now...damnit. It works.

Anyway! Harry Potter fans will be aware of the book on every Hogwarts first year’s required reading list, Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Who’d have thought all these years later it would be adapted into not one, but 5 movies?! I wish I could go back and tell 12 year old me. This movie is the story of the author of said book, Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) who travels to New York in 1926 to release one of his beasts back into the wild where he/she belongs. Whilst there, several creatures (including the ever adorable Niffler) escape from Newt’s magical suitcase.

Newt gets himself into trouble for involving a no-maj (American muggle) called Kowalski (Dan Fogler) and then not wiping his memory, so gets himself caught by disgraced Auror Tina (Katherine Waterson). Amidst all this, a dark wizard called Gellert Grindelwald is on the loose, an anti-magic cult is throwing their weight around, and a rather dapper Colin Farrell is hunting down a talented young witch. Got it? I sure all hell don’t, there’s so much going on!

Let me first say though how wonderful it is to return to the wizarding world of Harry Potter. The sheer excitement at hearing that familiar music with the Warner Brothers logo was enough to make me cry (for the second or third time that night, after so many Christmas adverts), and there are plenty of references for the hardcore fans to spot. Eddie Redmayne is the perfect choice for Newt, confident in his abilities and passionate in his subject, but terribly awkward at the same time. It’s the first time I’ve ever really loved him on screen.

The beasts themselves are indeed fantastic. The Niffler is the real show stealer, but all the creatures we are shown either bring laughs or a feeling of awe. It’s a lot of CGI to have thrown around, but it works. Almost the entire supporting cast were new to me, but their characters were played so well and even ones that have a high risk of being annoying (I’m looking at you, Queenie) were actually incredibly likeable.

Where this movie falls down is largely the messy plot. Considering this franchise is going to be dragged out into 5 movies, there was too much packed into the first installment. I’m sure I’m not alone when I say I would have been happy for the entire first movie to be an introduction to Newt and Co, chasing down the beasts across New York. Save the dark wizard stuff for movie number 2! Who is the target audience, anyway? This was far too dark for young children, but the plot was far too obvious for the older fans. It’s a shame.

I’ll always be happy for more Harry Potter movies, but I’d have liked them to go down the Star Wars route with a collection of one offs instead. Let’s have Fantastic Beasts, then how about a movie for Hagrid and how he got kicked out of Hogwarts? A Marauder’s movie would be amazing too! There are so many stories that could be expanded, without the need of dragging them out.

Review: Tickled (2016)

In between the cinema trips and desperately trying to catch up with Westworld (which I’ve done - yay!) I put some time aside to check out a documentary that I’d seen reviewed on a few blogs I follow called Tickled. I can count the number of documentaries I’ve seen on one hand, so although I was curious to add to the number, I did wonder how interesting it could be without the dramatics of a regular movie.

Tickled was funded by both Kickstarter and the New Zealand Film Commission in 2014, and is directed by journalist David Farrier and his colleague Dylan Reeve. David makes a living from looking into all things unordinary, so when he saw videos online of ‘Competitive Endurance Tickling’, needless to say his curiosity was tickled! Har har har. That’s where the laughs stop though. These videos are far from ordinary, and feature young men bound by their wrists and ankles, and then tickled by other young men.

There didn’t seem to be a sexual connotation about the videos, the young men were clothed at all times, but the ‘sport’ was certainly weird enough for David to want to look into it. The videos were produced by a company called Jane O’Brien Media, which had it’s own Facebook page, so David sent a message asking if he could conduct an interview with either Jane herself or another producer to learn more for his article.

Rather than be welcomed with open arms, or politely turned down, David was instead bombarded with hostile responses, pointing out David’s own sexuality and firmly stating that this sport is a “passionately and exclusively heterosexual athletic endurance activity”. When David persisted with his line of enquiry, Jane O’Brien Media sent legal threats and even flew out 3 members of staff to intimidate David and Dylan.

Really, that’s as far into it as I want to go in this post. This is all most other bloggers wrote about, and honestly, if that alone is enough to get you interested than you’ll find the rest of the documentary absolutely fascinating. The way it had me chuckling at how absurd the sport is to suddenly feeling shocked at what was happening is just a little bit unreal.

As I said, I watch very few documentaries so I don’t feel able to comment on how well it was filmed, edited, etc, but I was hooked from the very first minute right up until the credits rolled. Then I had to sit in silence for about ten minutes while I took it all in. If you’ve already seen Tickled, then check out the Wikipedia page for it, right at the bottom is a section about the response to the documentary from the people involved, and that in itself is quite shocking. It’s definitely a subject that I want to keep updated with!

Has anyone else seen Tickled? If you have it was probably your blog that led me down this rabbit hole! I don’t know whether to thank you or curse you, ha!

Review: Arrival (2016)

Oh boy. I know this year has been a bit of a stinker for blockbusters, but overall I personally think it’s been a fantastic year, and now a new movie has rocked up threatening to become my favourite of the whole year. November, you are awesome. This also means that I’ve been to the cinema two weeks in a row, which is honestly the first time that’s happened all year. Two Amy Adams movies in a row, too!

Arrival is directed by Denis Villeneuve, the master behind Sicario, Prisoners, Enemy and Incendies. He’s currently working on Blade Runner 2049. This man is fantastic, I can’t emphasise that enough. I haven’t watched a movie of his yet that hasn’t wowed me, and Arrival is no exception. The UK has been marketing the hell out of this flick, in fact last time I was at the cinema, during the trailers we were shown 2 different Arrival trailers in a row. It was starting to get on my nerves a tad, but only because I didn’t want to know so much before going in.

First and foremost, this isn’t a Sci-Fi in the typical sense. It’s an alien invasion, for sure, but if you’re expecting Independence Day then this isn’t the movie for you. The world is most definitely at risk here, but there’s no room-shaking action sequences or alien punching of any kind. Our main character is Louise (Amy Adams), an expert linguist recruited to work with scientist Ian (Jeremy Renner) to learn from the aliens what their purpose on Earth is. Twelve pods have descended in seemingly random locations around the world, and they don’t seem intent to blow us into smithereens. 

I never excelled in science, and I can’t speak a second language, so I was grateful for the fact that I could easily understand what was happening during the movie, and actually found myself completely in awe of the linguistic work that Louise was doing. It’s fascinating stuff! How she went about teaching the aliens (heptapods, if you’ll excuse my most likely bad spelling) simple vocabulary, to lead up to actually asking a question was something that seemed impossible at first, but when broken down into stages, actually made a lot of sense.

Louise herself is a captivating character. We are drawn to her instantly and warm to her within the first few scenes when we’re shown a tragic moment in her life. She feels so real, and relatable. I’m pretty sure if we were sent up into a pod to talk with an alien we would freak out as much as she did, rather than staying cool and calm, with our hair and make-up perfectly in tact. But I’m getting off topic now.

I’m almost trying not to talk about the movie to be honest, because I want to be really careful about what I say. The less you know, the better, because the final 20 minutes of Arrival was one of my favourite movie experiences ever. That feeling in your mind of everything clicking into place is just amazing. 

Safe to say, my husband fully forgave me for scaring the crap out of him last week when we saw Nocturnal Animals, and he’s even gone so far as to say this might be his favourite movie of all time! It’s definitely threatening to become my favourite of the year.

Review: Sausage Party (2016)

When I posted my ‘2016 Comedy Special’ mini reviews, I thought I’d seen all of the big comedy releases of this summer. Then I spotted someone’s review of Sausage Party in my blogger feed, and I let out a long sigh. There was one I had missed. When Seth Rogen and James Franco are together, they are so hit or miss for me. I’ve never seen one of their movies and thought ‘eh, that was alright’, it’s always one extreme or the other. And I really wasn’t sold by the trailer.

Of course, this animated movie is Seth Rogen’s baby that just so happens to feature James Franco, but I find Seth like that one guy in your friend group or school that's completely lovely and funny on his own, but when he’s with that particular friend, he turns into a complete ass. I sound really bitter, don’t I?

Sausage Party is like every other animated movie you’ve seen starring inanimate objects, with one difference. It’s rude. Like, extremely rude. Sexual jokes, racist jokes, down right dirty jokes, fly left right and center here. The stand out example here is in the opening scene, when a jar of german mustard announces his wishes to eliminate the juice. Say it out loud, and it’ll soon click for you. The ‘f’ in his logo is expertly designed to look like a very infamous symbol, too. That’s when you do that nervous kind of laugh where you know you shouldn’t find it funny, but it’s downright hilarious.

I actually had quite a bit of hope to begin with. If you’re not aware of the plot yet, the movie is about a bunch of groceries in a supermarket, living their lives, waiting to be chosen by the Gods to be taken to the ‘great beyond’. In this particular store, the groceries start each morning with a song all about it, and how certain they are that absolutely nothing will ge wrong should they be chosen. Sorry, but it’s still not quite as funny as Olaf the Snowman wanting to see what summer is all about!

Frank the sausage (Seth Rogen) is the star of the show, alongside his lover Brenda (Kristen Wiig), a hotdog bun. The two get chosen to leave but everything goes wrong, leaving them with the mission of getting back home to warn everyone else. It’s a simple enough story, but my biggest problem with it is that it doesn’t know what it wants to be. Is this a simple, ‘fart jokes’ comedy, or is a comedy with a hidden, deeper meaning? It’s both, which is confusing as hell.

But what really ruined it for me was the scene outside, with the zombie corn. If you’ve seen the movie, you’ll be shuddering right now because you’ll know exactly what I’m on about. A giant, cartoon-rendered turd on the floor being eaten by zombie corn. And it gets worse, because next on screen is a talking, used condom. I mean USED. Ugh.

I don’t know what I expected really. In some ways, Sausage Party was better than I thought it would be, but it’s still largely unfunny, and downright gross. That’s just me though, I know plenty of people will absolutely love this, because it’s the kind of humour they enjoy. At least I can now say I’ve seen all the big 2016 comedies! I think?

Review: Nocturnal Animals (2016)

I don’t remember ever going into the cinema as blind as I did last week for Nocturnal Animals. I’d heard a lot of buzz surrounding the name, I’d watched the trailer (once) which didn’t give much away at all, and I knew Jake Gyllenhaal was in it. That was enough for me, and I somehow convinced my husband to come along too. I don’t know how I did it, but I have a feeling it may have been something to do with the ever beautiful Amy Adams.

Before I go into an actual review, I have to share a funny moment with you. Tuesday and Wednesday showings have a silly amount of adverts before the movie, because of the wildly popular ‘Meerkat Movies’ 2-4-1 deal. This poor couple in front of us were already there when we arrived, sat through the whole slog of ads, the 5 trailers (although we were shown the Arrival trailer twice in a row, odd) and when the BBFC ratings screen came on with ‘Nocturnal Animals’ emblazoned on the left hand side, they realised they were in the wrong screen. I hope they didn’t miss too much of Doctor Strange, because that opening scene was awesome.

Anyway! Nocturnal Animals is a dark movie split into two narratives. First we have Susan (Amy Adams), an art gallery owner living a seemingly-perfect life in her mansion of a house adorned with staff, and a husband who sadly, is hardly ever at home. One morning she receives a parcel from her ex-husband Edward (Jake Gyllenhaal), a manuscript for a book he’s written that he wants her thoughts on. The book turns out to be dedicated to Susan, but is a dark and twisted story, which haunts her.

Whenever Susan starts reading the book, we get to see it played out, by Jake Gyllenhaal himself and his book-wife (Isla Fisher). Their story isn’t for the feint-hearted, it’s a cruel and violent tale. Some scenes are particularly difficult to watch, and I get the feeling they were deliberately made as long as possible to make the audience uncomfortable. If that is the case, it definitely worked on me. I kept thinking to myself ‘Oh that won’t actually happen though, they wouldn’t show us that’ and then they did! I’m getting the shivers just thinking about it.

So, whilst we see Edward’s story played out in snippets, we also go back to Susan often to learn more about her, and more importantly, what happened all those years ago between her and Edward. There’s a theme of revenge here for sure, and we know that Susan left him, but not why, or under what circumstances. It’s really well edited in these sections, the way something happens in the book that then takes us back to real life, and editing isn’t something that I normally take notice of.

Of course, I won’t give anything away, but I love an ambiguous ending. One that’s satisfying enough when taken at face value, but when you start to analyse every little detail, you begin to come up with different theories about certain elements. 

I really loved this movie, but I will NOT forgive that jump scare. You can witness it for yourself, I’m not going to warn you, but it scared the crap out of the entire screen. Then I had to watch the next ten minutes from the corner of my eye in case something else happens. My poor nervous wreck of a husband now labels Nocturnal Animals as ‘that piece of sh*t movie that scared me’. He liked it of course, but he’s a bigger scaredy cat than me!

So yes, big seal of approval from me. Just...skip the opening credits if you can...trust me.

I Sat Through Lawrence of Arabia (1962)

Gather round ladies and gentleman, it’s story time. I come from a movie-loving family, as you well know by now. I grew up watching National Lampoon’s Vacation every Bank Holiday. Nowadays, every Sunday the talk over the dinner table is usually themed around what movies we’ve seen that week, and once every couple of months we all get together on a Friday night for a family movie night which involves take out, and far too many pause breaks.

Our Whatsapp group will ping like crazy before these nights, with suggestions thrown in for which movie we should see. Our audience ranges from very young (under 10) to very old (sorry Grampy) with all ages in between, so finding the perfect choice is difficult. But you can guarantee every time, my Dad will suggest Lawrence of Arabia. Why? It’s his favourite movie, apparently! For years we’ve put up with this, and in turn he’s had to put up with us laughing at him. It was his birthday on 1st November though, and I suggested that we all give in and watch it together for his birthday. So we did!

Suddenly, one part of the family were ‘busy’ so our numbers were diminished. This might have had something to do with the fact my Dad announced he had a remastered version on DVD which included an interlude, bringing the runtime to just under 4 hours. Good Lord! Nonetheless, pizza was ordered, and we started the movie. Well, we started Disc 1 of the movie, because the thing is so big it won’t fit onto one disc.

Oh, were you expecting an actual movie review here? No, sorry, that’s literally impossible for me. I don't know how to review this I’m afraid. I will announce a spoiler alert from here on out however, because I truly don’t know what can be considered a spoiler in the tale of Lawrence of Arabia.

We start out with a message from the composer, who said something about his music being so bloody fantastic that any visuals would distract us, so we were greeted with a black screen and almost 10 minutes of music before we even started. Following that, confusion as we see Lawrence get his motorcycle gear on and go out for a ride. We were fairly sure a desert was involved in this movie. After that? Um. Well. He died! I mean, spoiler alert movie, GAWD.

To begin with, we all got quite invested in the story. Lawrence was a bit of a full of himself guy, but we liked his spirit and we look a liking to the guide that was with him in the desert. I think we were gearing ourselves up for a road-trip-buddy kind of movie, but then the guide got killed and we all felt a bit sad for him for a while. Who knew wells were so important in the desert? We mourned the guide collectively until we came across the two young lads that eventually worked for Lawrence. Our favourite moment was when one pompous guy shooed the pair away, and they retaliated by shoving their stick up his camel’s butt. That moment killed me!

So, some more things happened, lots of talking, some war, and the oldest of my two little brothers announced we were well over half way though the movie. Great, we thought! This hasn’t seemed so long after all. Then approximately thirty minutes later, the screen went black and asked us to insert Disc 2 to commence the interlude and the second half. WHAT. At this point our enthusiasm was shattered, my youngest brother fell asleep, and we sat quietly through the rest of the story. Even the dog had enough at that point. Let me tell you, much rejoicing was done when the credits finally rolled.

On a more serious note, the story of Lawrence of Arabia is quite fascinating, as we learnt that the whole time he was just being used by both sides, his passion taken full advantage of. The music was beautiful, and fit the moods perfectly. The visuals were a sight to behold (my youngest brother shouted out ‘hashtag silhouette goals’ so you know these visuals are on point). It was just at least 2 hours too long for me, for any of us, other than my Dad of course.

Our next family movie night is in 2 weeks time, and my Dad has stayed unusually quiet in the Whatsapp group. We’re all on the edge of our seats waiting to find out what his next suggestion might be.

So, to finally finish, I do recommend Lawrence of Arabia, but watch it over a couple of days.

Review: Swiss Army Man (2016)

Oh boy, I’ve been looking forward to Swiss Army Man for so long now, it feels like forever since the trailer was released. I’m surprised I managed to find myself a cinema buddy for this one. When I first saw the trailer I felt a mixture of shock and disgust, but a second viewing really opened my mind to the possibilities.

The easiest way to describe Swiss Army Man is: Paul Dano is lost on an island, ready to end his life out of desperation and loneliness, until he spots Daniel Radcliffe’s flatulent corpse washed up on the beach, and uses him to try and find his way back home. No exaggerations, there. You thought The Lobster was the weirdest movie you’ve ever seen? Think again!

Paul Dano and Daniel Radcliffe are an absolute delight. I’m not sure just how much acting Radcliffe had to do here, but nonetheless, he really pulled off the dead-guy demeanor. I don’t know enough about movie awards to know Swiss Army Man’s Oscar chances, but Paul Dano would be in my nominations list for sure. This can’t have been an easy role to take on.

If you’ve seen the trailer, you’ll know what to expect, but a few things did shock me whilst I was watching. First and foremost is just how gross this movie was. Flatulence is one thing, we all have it, let’s be honest. I’ve never had it quite so badly that I could propel myself and another person across the ocean, but still, that’s not the worst part. Hank (Dano) uses Manny (Radcliffe) as a water source by quite literally squeezing the liquid out of him. Hurck. The most useful thing Manny can be used for is a compass. How? His boner leads the way. Yep. That’s about it for grossness, but Manny can also shoot things from his mouth and chop wood. Swiss Army Man for sure!

The best part of the movie is the mystery of it all. I started to wonder whether Manny was even real, especially when Hank seemed to talk through his issues with him. Was Hank ever even lost, or had he just ran away? Hank has a fascination with a girl he saw on the bus, and re-enacts scenes with Manny by dressing up and even recreating the bus out of whatever he can find in the woods. It’s really quite incredible. I also thought Manny got more and more lifelike the more Hank started to find the root of his issues. He’s clearly a very troubled man.

Of course, there are also several laugh out loud moments. The boner scene was pretty funny until it got a little too much, and the first moment Manny spoke just to be punched in the face had me crying. Hands down, the best line in the movie is spoken by Hank: “If you don’t know Jurassic Park, you don’t know sh*t.” That line, coupled with the use of the Jurassic Park soundtrack, is nothing but pure genius, and is the real stand out moment of the entire movie.

I just don’t know how to feel about the ending. I mean, I don’t know how I wanted it to end myself, I guess I just couldn’t picture it. The movie itself is like nothing I’ve ever seen before, but the ending reminded me of Safety Not Guaranteed, and I never fully knew how to feel about that ending, either.

Swiss Army Man will be ‘too weird’ for many, but in a world full of superhero movies, sequels and remakes, this is a breath of fresh air for me.

Review: Doctor Strange (2016) Spoiler Free

I spend so much time complaining about how long the UK has to wait for a lot of theatrical releases, so when it was announced that we were getting Doctor Strange early I made sure to take full advantage and see it in the first week! That said, I wasn’t sure how to feel about the movie before I went. There’s no escape from superhero movies lately, and I knew quite literally nothing about Doctor Strange. Turns out I just need to accept the fact that Marvel doesn’t make bad movies! I promise to keep this spoiler free.

Dr. Stephen Strange (Benedict Cumberbatch) is a fantastically skilled neurosurgeon, albeit fairly arrogant and cocky. A horrific car accident leads to Stephen damaging the nerves in his hands, leaving his career and mind in tatters. He learns of a miracle case where a man paralysed from the waist down learned to walk again, which brings Stephen to leaving his love interest Christine (Rachel McAdams) behind and travelling to Kathmandu. Here he meets Mordo (Chiwetel Ejiofor) and the The Ancient One (Tilda Swinton), who teaches him the ways of mystic arts.

First of all I have to say, if you get the chance to see this in IMAX, go for it. It’s rare that I even bother with 3D but I heard on the grapevine that Doctor Strange had some intense visuals, and I was so glad I listened. It’s mind bendy as hell, guys. I want to use the words ‘visually stunning’ but that’s normally my get out clause for a bad movie. You know, ‘the plot wasn’t great, but it was at least visually stunning’. Whatever the next level up from stunning is, this is it. I honestly feel like it’s a game changer in that department. I spent the whole of the opening sequence with my jaw on the floor.

Doctor Strange himself is a difficult character to warm to, he’s often rude and disrespectful, like a cross between Tony Stark and Benedict’s own Sherlock Holmes. That’s his nature though, and you really do see his character develop throughout the movie. Tilda Swinton is another stand out star here, there’s a lot of depth to her character and she surprisingly has quite a few funny moments. I haven’t seen much of Chiwetel Ejiofor but he shines on screen too, and you feel the moral struggle that he goes through. Mads Mikkelsen is a fantastic bad guy, but really, what did you expect?

Another reason I was wary of Doctor Strange was that it didn’t seem to have the potential for the amount of humour that Marvel packs into it’s movies so well (take note, Suicide Squad). However, although it isn’t the funniest movie in the Marvel universe, there were plenty of laugh out loud moments that were unexpected. The ever stone faced Wong (Benedict Wong) brings a lot of laughs, but oddly enough it’s Doctor Strange’s Cloak of Levitation that steals the limelight here!

I found the plot quite complex (I have a simple mind, though) and it had a few twists that I didn’t see coming. I’m certainly looking forward to seeing it again to fully get my head around the spiritual-ness of it.

My only real criticism would be the speed that the movie moves through the section of Strange training in Kamar-Taj. It can be forgiven, as this is an origin story with a lot of content to go through, but it looked so much fun. You still felt the passage of time through the changing outfits (which were all stunning), but I’d have loved more time during that part.

As always, stay till the very end of the credits when you see this. It pains me to see so many people getting up and leaving as soon as the credits roll, and then another wave leave after the mid credits scene. You’ve sat there for 2 hours guys, 5 more minutes won’t kill you! 

I am VERY excited about the mid credits scene, my mind wanted to explode at the possibilities of where Doctor Strange fits in with the other Marvel characters. Very excited indeed!

Halloweenie Review: Psycho (1960)

October is coming to an end, but I felt like I still had enough nerves in me to go out with a bang. I started a modern classic, It Follows, and thought, why not end with a classic classic? That sparked me to check the IMDB Top 250 list which I’ve largely ignored for a few months, and on there spotted a movie I knew I needed to see. Psycho! I don’t know the time limit on spoiler alerts, but I’m going to discuss the entire plot in this post, so beware.

I’m fairly certain I’m not the only person out there who has never watched Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho (1960), but everyone in the world knows about that famous shower scene. I’ve seen it parodied countless times, most notably in National Lampoon’s Vacation when Clark scares Ellen with a banana whilst she’s showering. In fact, if you check out the references section on IMDB, it has over 1,000! That’s pretty impressive.

So the funny thing is, despite this movie being 56 years old, I actually didn’t have a clue what it was about! All I really knew was that it ended with our heroine being tragically murdered whilst having a shower. Turns out, I was even wrong about that.

Marion Crane (Janet Leigh) is fed up with her life. She has to meet her partner in secret, and they aren’t able to get married because he’s had to give up his money in alimony. When tasked at work to deliver $40,000 in cash to the bank, Marion uses the opportunity to run away and start a new life. When the weather takes a turn for the worse, she is forced to spend the night at Bates Motel, a deserted little place ran by an oddball by the name Norman (Anthony Perkins) who is dominated by his mother.

I can count the number of black and white movies I’ve seen on one hand, they’ve never really had much appeal to me. That said, I’ve enjoyed every one I have seen! I think what makes them great is that there’s no glitz and glamour to distract me, the focus is on storytelling, and the storytelling in Psycho is spot on. The first half an hour or so is dedicated to building up Marion’s character, showing us why she’s taking such drastic measures. It also builds up suspense in a very successful way, when Marion is stopped by the police and the whole ordeal at the car garage, I was on the edge of my seat.

Shock number 1 for me was when that pivotal scene happened only half way through the movie. Shock number 2 was that it was Norman’s mother that did the deed, rather than Norman himself. I’d always thought it was him! The scene was still difficult to watch, despite knowing what was coming. I can’t imagine the reaction when it was first released. If only time travel were real!

The second half of the movie turns into a crime solving story, as more clues are thrown out, and more questions raised about Norman and his mother. The moment when it’s revealed that Norman’s mother had been dead for 10 years gave me goosebumps. But who was it in the window upstairs?! The final scenes got too suspenseful for me, I hid behind my blanket, poking my head out every now and again, but what an ending! 

This movie is a huge two finger salute to the trailers of these days that give the entire story away. Almost the whole of Psycho was a complete surprise to me, despite it being one of the most famous movies of all time. Not my genre at all, but a bloody fantastic watch. Is the Bates Motel show worth a watch? I’m tempted.

Review: The Nice Guys (2016)

Have you ever seen a movie trailer for the first time and get the feeling that you know it’s going to be brilliant? Like, no fear of disappointment or anything because you know you’re going to love it? That’s what happened to me and my husband in January this year. We were at the cinema to see Spotlight, and after having a bit of a movie/blog hiatus over Christmas all of the trailers were a surprise to me. Cue a 70’s looking Ryan Gosling wrapping fabric around his knuckles, punching through a window, and then gripping his wrist, bleeding everywhere, followed by Russell Crowe accepting $30 to beat up a little girl’s friend, and I was practically dancing in my seat.

Of course, like every other movie I’ve been looking forward to this year, it got released in the cinemas during my wedding/honeymoon weeks, which meant I missed it. 

There was a game I used to play on the Xbox 360 called L.A. Noire, it’s possibly still one of my favourites games of all time. You play as an LAPD Officer called Phelps, trailing Los Angeles for clues and interviewing witnesses to solve cases. That’s just what The Nice Guys is like, only it’s side-splittingly hilarious at the same time. In The Nice Guys, Holland March (Ryan Gosling) has been hired by a worried mother whose daughter, a porn star by the name of Misty Mountains, has been missing for days. She was last sighted 2 days ago by her mother herself. The only issue here? Misty died in a car accident 4 days ago…

Holland’s search puts him in the line of fire of Jackson Healy (Russell Crowe), who has been paid to stop Holland from nosing around. And so our pair meet, which as you can probably tell from the movie poster, ends badly (and painfully) for Holland. If I had any doubts about the chemistry these guys might share on screen, they were fizzled out by their performance at the Oscars earlier this year. They bounce off each other so well! 

I’ve been so used to watching Ryan Gosling play a tough guy (Drive, The Place Beyond The Pines, Only God Forgives) that this completely threw me off balance. I’m really not joking when I say he screams like a girl, and it didn’t matter how many times it happened, I laughed till I cried. He’s just a bit of a doofus, but a very good detective at the same time, which means when he does slip up and does something stupid, it comes without warning. His character Holland also has a young teenage daughter, Holly (Angourie Rice) who is constantly trying to help. Characters like Holly normally get in the way and get annoying, but in some cases, she actually saves the day, and she’s a delight to watch. 

It was just so much fun to watch, and I’ll be watching it again and again over the years, I’m sure. If there were only one movie this year that deserves a sequel, it’s this, because I could watch Ryan Gosling and Russell Crowe work together solving cases for hours on end. In fact, I don’t even know why I’m scoring this a 9/10, I can’t think of a fault to pick at, but I hate giving out full marks!

Halloweenie Review: Orphan (2009)

When I thought up the ‘Halloweenie’ idea for this blog over October, I didn’t expect to enjoy it as much as I have so far. Really, I was just looking for an excuse to watch It Follows and The Babadook without having to try and write a proper review for them, but having knocked those two out of the park early on, I found myself on Sunday night actively looking for another good Horror movie to watch. That’s how I came across Orphan (2009). I came across a list of ‘The 25 Best Horror Films of the 21st Century so far’ and didn’t get any further than the first one on the list.

“An original chiller co-produced by Leonardo DiCaprio”

“...it ramps up to a rare (and essentially unguessable) twist”

Oh, I’m sold.

The orphan in question is a young girl named Esther (Isabelle Fuhrman), who is adopted by troubled parents Kate (Vera Farmiga) and John (Peter Sarsgaard) who already have 2 children younger than Esther, one of which is deaf. I’m still not sure why, or how that’s important to the plot, but okay. At least it made me keep my eyes on the screen to read the subtitles whenever she was signing.

It’s quite a long movie, but it never really dragged. The characters are all well introduced, we learn about the struggles Kate and John have had, Kate’s drinking problem, John’s infidelity, their miscarriage. I question whether it’s the right time for them to adopt, but then so did they, so I can accept that. Esther is an instantly likeable character, she’s quiet and doesn’t like like to play with the other children at the home, but she enjoys music and art, and she’s very smart. She’s a little odd, with her dress sense, ribbons and the way she talks, and that only gets worse as the movie goes on.

Esther quickly takes a liking to her new younger sister and her new father, but doesn’t like Kate much at all. She manipulates the whole family in such a way it’s frustrating to watch at times. I haven’t seen many of Peter Sarsgaard’s movies but I always find his character unlikeable, and I can’t explain why. I couldn’t stand him in this either. Would you really trust the word of your newly adopted and down right weird daughter over your wife?

I’ll keep this post spoiler free for anyone who hasn’t seen the movie yet, but I can’t argue with the second point that sold the movie to me in the first place. I did NOT see that plot twist coming. Personally, I try not to work it out anyway, because I love the thrill of the twist when it comes, but I couldn’t help but laugh at this one. I mean, really?!

I feel so conflicted. The movie felt well written (almost), well made, well acted, but so much made so little sense. It felt like so many details were thrown in to throw the audience off the scent, but really, the clues were there from the very beginning. I’m going to have to mull over this one for a while I think!

Review: Hunt for the Wilderpeople (2016)

I’ll give any movie a try, within reason. I don’t listen to critic reviews, but I place a lot of faith into bloggers’ opinions. Bloggers review movies for fun in their spare time, you know you’re going to get nothing but their own opinions from their reviews. Hunt for the Wilderpeople only came into my radar a few weeks ago, and every blog review I read had nothing but praise for it. That was enough to convince me to add it to my watch list, but once I realised that it’s directed by Taika Waititi, the genius behind What We Do in the Shadows, I made it my mission to watch it as soon as possible.

Hunt for the Wilderpeople is based off a book by Barry Crump called Wild Pork and Watercress. It has that book-adaptation feel to it (don’t ask me to explain that feeling - I can’t) anyway, and it’s broken up into Chapters which sum up the ongoings well. In fact, I’d really love to give the book a go, I hope it’s as funny as the movie.

Ricky (Julian Dennison) is a troubled young boy, moving around different foster homes. He’s dropped out at the farm belonging to Bella (Rima Te Wiata) and Hec (Sam Neill) as a last chance. If he screws this up, he’s going to end up in Juvy. Ricky struggles to settle in his new home, despite the love and attention given to him by Bella, and so he runs away into the bush. Hec goes out to find him, and the result is a national manhunt for the pair as it appears that Hec has kidnapped Ricky.

It’s a funny coincidence that I watched this in the same week as Swiss Army Man, because they both have a lot of similarities!

Waititi’s style is clear in this movie. It’s got that same sense of humour as What We Do in the Shadows, and it’s quirky from start to finish. Julian Dennison absolutely shines as the child star of the movie, and his delivery of the witty lines is perfect. He’s just like a lot of other 13 year olds, thinking he’s a gangster because he’s shoplifted a chocolate bar, played GTA and listens to rap music. Yet he’s such a likeable character!

Every time I watch a movie set in New Zealand, I’m taken back by the beauty of the country. I’m sure a lot of work went into the cinematography, but honestly, the setting does half the work itself, it’s gorgeous to look at.

The movie walks that line of Comedy and Drama perfectly without throwing the tone all over the place. It has some horrendously sad moments that had me sobbing quite openly, although I won’t discuss why because of spoilers, but it’s also one of the funniest movies I’ve seen all year. The dialogue is brilliant, thanks in part to the chemistry Julian Dennison and Sam Neill share. 

I’ve been trying to balance this review out with a few negatives to warrant the 9/10 score I wanted to give it, but I’m really struggling. Originally I thought the roles of the Child Protection Officer and her Policeman companion were too campy, but actually, they fit the overall feel of the movie perfectly, especially when I try to compare it to What We Do in the Shadows. I very rarely give perfect marks to any movie, I think there’s always room for improvement, but I can’t find it here!