Tag Archives: Critic

Kick-Ass 2 (2013)

Posted on by
Reply

kick-ass-2-justice-foreverRoze-Rating: 4 / 5

Three years on following the success of Kick-Ass, we are reunited with superheroes Kick-Ass (Aaron Taylor-Johnson) and Hit-Girl (Chloe Moretz). Growing bored of living in the real world Dave Lizewski decides to suit up again and train with Hit-Girl hoping to become a legitimate superhero. Still mourning over the death of his gangster father, Chris D’Amico (Christopher Mintz-Plasse) obsesses over the fantasy of killing Kick-Ass. After accidentally killing his mother D’Amico reinvents himself as the “Mother-Fucker” swearing to avenge his fathers death.

The first Kick-Ass was a huge success because it was such a new concept to the superhero genre. It’s a parody to how the like’s of Batman, Hawkeye and Black Widow would fair in the real world if they suddenly decided to get up and become a superhero. It was fresh, funny and stylish. The action was bad-ass and the violence shocking which made it a comic-book movie classic.

When I heard there was going to be a Kick-Ass two I was quite excited but was pretty sure it couldn’t improve on the first because all that freshness and shock value would be gone. That may have been the case but it indeed improved in some ways, compared to the first film.

I didn’t really enjoy the first half of the film as it seemed really out of place, it turned into this mean girls slash watchmen hybrid as we saw Kick-Ass and Hit-Girl go through their own journey’s; Hit-Girl to puberty and Kick-Ass to adulthood. It was entertaining but felt off as jokes were limited and not well executed. I felt comedic timing and editing probably had something to do with that as I was aware of the jokes but they didn’t come out as well as they could. For example a scene where The Motherfucker robs a store and an old man is told to get on the ground, he struggles as his arthritis kicks in forcing him to go down very slowly. I only noticed it second time round as the camera was panned back. Luckily the second half of the film did not disappoint as it was a lot funnier and provided loads of action.

The bar was set pretty high for action sequences after the first film which is why I was happy to see that the crunching punches and hits remained present. Overall the sequences were well choreographed and thought out as we were given some slick moves and executions to feast our eyes on. It was good that they really strived for original action sequences as it only pumps us up even more, although it was missing the stylish edge that made the first film ultimately pretty to look at. Little things that the camera did in first that it didn’t do in the second.

New additions to the cast meant new superheros and super villains, some of them were awesome and some felt like they shouldn’t be there. Jim Carrey plays Colonel Stars and Stripes, ex mafia con man who starts a superhero team in the name of Justice Forever. He may not be as funny as we hoped him to be but he sure plays the part well. As for the rest of the team we have Night Bitch (Lindy Booth), Battle Guy (Clarke Duke), Doctor Gravity (Donald Faison), Insect Man (Robert Emms) and two parents who are looking for their missing child. They make for entertaining additions to the cast except I didn’t see the need for the parents, they didn’t really offer anything comedically and seemed to get in the way. Overall the group of super villains were much more badass, but again they weren’t all utilized making some of them seem out of place.

Kick-Ass 2 may take awhile to get going but the last acts are worth waiting for as they are adrenaline filled scenes of epicness. Not as coherent as the first as it knew what it wanted to be, a violent parody to the superhero genre. Kick-Ass 2 takes on a more serious tone which continues on from the D’Amico vs Kick-Ass saga. Definitely worth the watch.

Masters of Sex (Pilot)

Posted on by
Reply

Masters of SexRoze-Verdict: Its premise will attract viewers for all the right reasons, it’s a 50’s period piece exploring social themes of that era, with Mad Men coming to an end soon this may be the perfect series to turn to for our 50s – 60s cravings.

The series follows protagonists Dr. William Masters and Virginia Johnson who we know in present day as the pioneers of human sexuality. Based on the biography by Thomas Maier “Masters of Sex: The Life and Times of William Masters and Virginia Johnson, the Couple Who Taught America How to Love”, we are taken on their journey as the duo risk their reputation and careers for science.

Starring;

  • Michael Sheen as William H. Masters
  • Lizzy Caplan as Virginia E. Johnson
  • Caitlin Fitzgerald as Libby Masters
  • Teddy Sears as Dr. Austin Langham
  • Nicholas D’Agosto as Dr. Ethan Haas
  • Beau Bridges as Provost Barton Scully
  • Allison Janney as Margaret Scully, Scully’s wife

The premise is entertaining, exploring a subject that almost everyone is curious about except it is taken from a time where sex was taboo, only meant for love and creating life. This makes it a hell of a lot more interesting and thought provoking as we get a genuine insight on the ideologies that society had given women and men about family, love and sex.

The title itself would attract enough viewers to make this successful because sex sells I suppose, as we all have our inner pervert. I’m happy to say that my genitalia did not have any input in watching the pilot (a first). I wasn’t surprised to find that it was a great pilot keeping me interested and entertained til the very end. It has a lot of potential and I’m looking forward to binge watching the rest of the season once it ends next month.

Michael Sheen and Lizzy Caplan look brilliant together, they seemed to gel really well in the pilot. It wasn’t just an instant connection but they gradually grew into this team who played off each other’s passion for the science of sex believably. Of course we’re left wondering where the next episodes will take us and what formula will be used but there’s a lot of potential for quite an entertaining chemistry between the two assuming they don’t take too much of a serious approach. Sheen performs as a cold, emotionless, egotistical doctor passionate about his work. He’s not a bad person, just too absorbed in his research. Caplan plays an unfamiliar character for her, as we see her cast as party girls and rebellious women, so this character should be a great challenge and way to push her acting abilities to its limit. her character is a strong woman driven by what she wants. Different from the women in those times who knew their place in society. A scene where she retaliates when getting hit by a man says a lot about her personality.

The pilot gave us a look at a few of the themes they may explore during the season. We get a glimpse of racial discrimination, pressures of having a family and the opinions of sex during the 50s. Most of all, I think the main theme will be women. As we hear both main characters explaining how their research will benefit women the most, for medicine and recreation. It’s an exciting time for women as they have just been given the right to vote and now the truth about female sexuality can overshadow society’s preconceptions on the matter.

Great pilot, only negative I think was the music. It felt out of place since it was quite modern but that is just my opinion. I like how Mad Men would stick to their time periods music, it really made you feel like you were there.

Trophy Wife (Pilot – Episode 6)

Posted on by
Reply

Trophy wife ABCRoze-Verdict: Nothing new in terms of sitcom formula, but there are enough hilarious characters to carry the somewhat unique premise. Give it a go.

Kate was a party girl until a night out at a karaoke bar sends her and future husband Pete to hospital where she meets his two ex wives and kids, all in one night. This doesn’t startle her as we meet her almost a year into their marriage trying to fit in to the crazy family dynamics.

Starring;

  • Malin Åkerman as Kate Harrison
  • Bradley Whitford as Pete Harrison
  • Michaela Watkins as Jackie Fisher
  • Natalie Morales as Meg Gomez
  • Ryan Lee as Warren Harrison
  • Bailee Madison as Hillary Harrison
  • Albert Tsai as Bert Harrison
  • Marcia Gay Harden as Dr. Diane Buckley

Didn’t expect much from this sitcom even with the addition of Malin Akerman as the lead but after watching a few episodes I’m glad it’s not tainted with dated laughing tracks which seems to be the sign for cheesy comedies nowadays. The premise is pretty original and provides the show for a lot of potential in terms of future story arcs and episode plots. Once again I find that having a large cast with characters possessing varied personalities leads to a successful sitcom. So far within the six episodes they’ve utilized their large cast extremely well providing loads of laughs while exploiting the characters strengths. If a comedy makes you laugh then it succeeds in my opinion and this show definitely kept me laughing.

The characters are all likable and have their own crazy characteristics which gives us a load of different jokes to giggle at. For example we have Dr. Diane Buckley who is incredibly arrogant, competitive and controlling. Characteristics we’d all be able to relate to, from mother’s to wives, even though their not great personality traits she’s probably one of the funniest characters as we get heaps of smart ass comebacks and insults. Eventually we end up rooting for her because she is simply a badass. Another character we get to indulge in is Jackie Fisher a hippie like character with little knowledge of the modern world and… most things, we don’t love her because she is just pure weird but because of the relationship she has with her adopted son Bert who is THE MAN. I hate to say it but their chemistry is so real that it exudes cuuuuute. The other characters have their own traits which make them likable and relatable which is why this show succeeds for me.

Malin Akerman may not steal all the laughs but she makes for a charming lead that we can root for. I thought with such complicated family dynamics there would be some drama in there, what if Pete falls in love with one of his ex’s again as they spend way too much time together. Once seeing the chemistry between Akerman (Kate) and Whitford (Pete), they seemed inseparable and if that story arc ever happens it would probably complicate the show as the different family bonds makes the series enjoyable.

I would say Trophy Wife is a cross between modern family and cougar town except with much crazier family dynamics. It’s weird, crazy and pleasant all at the same time.

Warm Bodies (2013)

Posted on by
Reply

warm_bodiesRoze-Rating: 4 / 5

R (Nicholas Hoult) is a zombie who thrives for more despite being dead. He is aware of the zombie epidemic but still feels there is still hope for them. It takes saving a girl from being devoured by a group of zombies to slowly feel again.

I was expecting this to be more of a parody of zombie films like Shaun of the Dead but was pleasantly surprised by the charm and unique approach to the Romeo and Juliet story. Right from the go we get to know R as being a lot different than your average zombie as he listens to old classics to feel, it’s refreshing to see a zombie film from the zombie’s perspective; definitely original. R’s opening monologue is funny and takes a few amusing stabs at modern society making some similar comparisons between zombies and people today, we’re not too different unfortunately. Straight away my preconceptions of the film were wrong so I sat back and enjoyed probably the most charming film of the year.

It took me a while to notice the Romeo and Juliet similarities (cause I’m slow like that), but when I did I let out quite a loud “ooooooooh” and mumbled “R is Romeo and Julie is Juliet!” was quite happy with my self at the time. It added this whole new originality to it which I loved, as if it wasn’t unique enough. I like how the film doesn’t present us with generic zombies, they give us zombies that can gain memories from a human’s brain once eaten, we also get “boneys” who are ultra zombies that have given up on “life”. Little details which make the story interesting and different.

It’s a pretty beautiful story which is totally held up by the filming style and music. It’s artsy but down to earth really tapping into the emotions of the characters and without the score it wouldn’t have made as much of an impact. It really is a zombie film with heart.


Hello Ladies (Season 1)

Posted on by
Reply

stephen-merchant-shines-as-desperate-casanova-in-hbo-comedy-hello-ladies

Roze-Verdict: If you’re a fan of Ricky Gervais and Steve Merchant projects then this awkward, cringy-worthy piece of comedy will find a place in your heart.

Hello Ladies follows Stuart Pritchard an Englishman hoping to find the woman of his dreams in the city of Angels, only problem is that his standards maybe too high for his own good.

Starring;

  • Stephen Merchant as Stuart Pritchard
  • Christine Woods as Jessica Vanderhoff
  • Nate Torrence as Wade Bailey
  • Kevin Weisman as Kives
  • Kyle Mooney as Rory

I was pretty psyched when I came across this show on the world wide web, finally a show where Steve Merchant isn’t cast behind Ricky Gervais’s shadow (despite his height). Seemed like it was a bout time that he got a chance to star in something as the lead. Merchant has this typical British brand of humor which I can’t get enough of, he’s charismatic and incredibly witty which comes through in this comedy. Although maybe not as confidently as his British shows, which is fair enough due to a new target audience. It would be completely understandable if an American was to hate this show because this form of awkward, cringy, comedy with and anti-hero is quite unusual. I just hope it gets the chance for at least a second season.

It’s more than just a comedy, it has a lot of sad moments due to its relatable theme. We get a lot of moments where we might think “I’ve been there”, I mean we all get lonely and this show brings out a lot of those unpleasant memories. Luckily we get the chance to repress these memories during scenes where we can think at least it wasn’t as bad as that (Merchant having to buy drinks for a group of strangers in his efforts to pick up a girl, ouch). I find the sad scenes quite humbling at times because I can reflect off it ultimately turning into something I value a lot in the show.

The jokes are smart and sometimes slapstick, very rarely cheap which is refreshing to see. I quite like cheap laughs because I laugh at almost anything involving genitalia so I don’t complain but when you laugh at something which you either have never seen or rarely see, it makes it a lot more funnier and you feel good about it after. At first during the first couple of episodes I didn’t quite like that combination of comedy and drama within a show but when you accept it then you enjoy it for what it is.

As for sub plots and other characters, they hold up well and have a lot of potential if season 2 does go through. I wouldn’t say they were all engaging in this season but if there’s laughs then a comedy is a success in my eyes. Of course we all have different tastes in comedy, but if you’ve never heard of Steve Merchant and you want a good “what not to do” guide to dating then this would be a good place to start.

X-Men: Days of Future Past (Trailer + Discussion)

Posted on by
Reply


I recently re-watched all the X-Men films and I couldn’t help but notice that there’s a shiz load of continuity problems. As I moved on to the next movie you find more and more confusing errors that kinda ruin the franchise a bit. For example we see Emma Frost in X-Men: First Class (60’s) and in Wolverine: X-Men Origins (Decades after First Class) which are set at different times yet the character is younger in Wolverine: X-Men Origins. Another confusing error would be how we see Charles Xavier walk during a flashback in X-Men: The Last Stand but then we see him get shot in the spine and him being paralyzed in First Class. Of course a common reasoning behind all these problems is that it happened in the comics where characters would lose and regain abilities or whatever, but I can’t help but think they kinda screwed up a bit too much here.

There’s no doubt that First Class was a pretty awesome film, it raised the bar to a whole new level for X-Men films. So why not just say it was a total reboot of the franchise. Some people might say it is but the opening sequence is from the very first X-Men film so I think it was definitely intended to be connected with the past three films. It’s not a bad idea but they screwed up already in X2 when we see a glimpse of Hank McCoy (AKA Beast) as a human then in The Last Stand he’s back to being a blue furry monster. It’s just confusing, you can’t get away with it in movies like you can in comics because people like to complain for the sake of complaining.

To be honest it’s not a huge problem for me because I quite liked X-Men and X2 and it’s quite easy to just accept that what went down in the previous trilogy has lead to Days of Future Past; which looks amazing from the trailer. I saw The Wolverine once it came out but went in completely unaware that it was also connected with the X-Men story line. So as you can imagine once the after credits scene started playing I literally jizzed in my pants. Like wow, probably the best after credits scene ever.

Anyways the trailer is pretty awesome, it looks like we’re going to see an intensely cynical young Charles Xavier who doesn’t look in the best of shapes. I’m not aware much of the story or comics but I do know Wolverine is going to be sent back in time to help prevent a war which will happen in the near future probably related to Bolivar Trask and the Sentinels (sorry, probably a “no shit” comment to comic book fans). So it’s going to be pretty awesome seeing the past and future Xavier’s and Magneto’s in one film as well as past characters like Storm, Iceman, Rogue, etc. It’s going to be huge in terms of characters since we have even newer mutants joining the cast. What I’m hoping for is an even more intense Wolverine, I totally respect Hugh Jackman’s crazy commitment and love for this character. He hasn’t stopped working to improve this character since the very first X-Men, which is why The Wolverine was so satisfying because we  see some of that savagery we’ve not seen before. Days of Future Past better be a thrilling ride.

Star Trek Into Darkness (2013)

Posted on by
Reply

star-trek-into-darkness-trailer-finalRoze-Rating: 4.5 / 5

This second installment of Star Trek follows a now experienced James Tiberius Kirk as he captains his crew on the prestigious USS Enterprise. He has now taken to the chair but not Spock’s lack of emotion when it comes to certain situations. As a result of compromising a mission to save Spock’s life, Kirk is relieved of his captaincy and is demoted to first officer. This doesn’t last long as there is an attack on Starfleet’s archives in London by an enemy that no one is aware of but Fleet Admiral Alexander Marcus. Kirk is then sent with his crew to find the attacker with limited knowledge about who he really is.

Star Trek Into Darkness is definitely the most ambitious Star Trek film as it has almost everything you want in a Sci-Fi film. I’m not familiar with the past Treks and because of that I can’t offer any meaningful Comparison’s. But from what I hear the old films never touched upon some of the things the modern adaptations have. For instance they never had a clear depiction of Earth during the 2200’s and Kronos. Thank god for the development of modern technology for we wouldn’t be exposed to such awesome sites as these. Thus heaps of satisfied fanboys.

What I love about this film is that it’s more than just a space adventure, it’s nothing like Star Wars as people might think. From what I’ve read Star Trek has always been about developing stories that encompasses drama and character, not so much about the thrills of space shootouts. Star Trek Into Darkness definitely has the action and large scale thrills that previous installments lacked but it also has a strong plot and story line. It’s more of a space crime thriller than a full on action which I found quite refreshing. The action actually had substance, it wasn’t just silly and gratuitous, there was a believable reasoning to each action sequence.

What really differentiates Star Trek from any other space film is its filming style and overall look. We get too indulge our eyes to a colorfully crisp film consisting of a shit load of lens flares, which I actually liked a lot. It gives the franchise a new identity but also gives the impression that the future is bright. The film’s opening is probably the best example of a beautifully filmed shot of vivid colors aided massively by a great set.

I like how this film tried it’s best to film as much as they could authentically, making it a lot harder to pick out what’s real from the CGI. Huge props to them because it improves the film massively. The design as a whole is awesome, I don’t usually notice costumes that much but they’re freaking NAICE in this film, I want nothing more than to have a Starfleet jacket now.

Performances and cast are as solid as the last film. Slowly giving their own twists to their previously acted characters. I like the chemistry that they have which makes you as a viewer really buy into the crew’s relationship dynamics. What needs to be mentioned is the villain played by Bennedict Cumberbatch who is just phenomenal. I think quite a few people would agree when I say he’s gotta be the best villain of 2013. His character is more than just a ruthless super human, he actually show’s genuine emotion which almost makes his actions justifiable emphasized when he asks Kirk “is there anything you would not do for your family”; then the mind games ensue. On the first viewing these mind games are great fun making the film a whole lot more tense; who’s telling the truth and who’s your enemy? Overall, great popcorn flick with more substance than your used to in your average blockbuster film.

Man of Steel (2013)

Posted on by
Reply

2013_man_of_steel_movie-wideRoze-Rating: 4.5 / 5

Probably one of the most anticipated films this year, Man of Steel is a total reboot of the Superman franchise. Was it needed? I think most fans of the superhero would agree that it’s been due ever since the surge of comic book films over the past few years. Man of Steel explores the origins of Clark Kent tracking back to the demise of Krypton, fast forwarding to Kent’s journey to self actualization hoping to discover his destiny on earth.

I’ll confess that I haven’t actually seen any previous Superman films, so I’m quite clueless in terms of comparing past films with this one although I am aware of some Superman facts (who isn’t?!). One thing is for sure and that’s Man of Steel trumps its predecessors in the special effects department because this film boasts some of the best CGI and action sequences of the past decade. A lot of people don’t seem to be a fan of Zack Snyder, I think mostly due to his unique style. His past films include 300, Sucker Punch and Watchmen. All films which are far from bad but have something in common and that is a distinct visual style. Man of Steel joins his list of visually stunning films and may make the list of the most aesthetically pleasing films of all time. It’s hard to find a scene which isn’t beautifully shot or constructed. The film is clean, crisp, slightly grainy and contains some of the best lighting I’ve seen. Only negative would be that the sun seems to be conveniently placed in the background for more scenes than it needs to be.

In my second viewing I grew to appreciate Snyder’s storytelling technique, it’s unique and efficient which totally enhances the viewing experience. I really like how we start off in Krypton and get to see it on the big screen which I don’t think past films ever touched on. This would be a massive win for the fanboys out there. Once the film makes it to earth we’re entertained to a number of flashbacks which occur parallel to Clark’s journey to self actualization. The flashbacks have a lot of substance and we get to learn about his past and the ideologies that he was brought up with. This gives reason to some of his actions in present time. This was probably my favorite aspect of the film because some of the flashbacks were incredibly emotional, (Spoiler! If you’ve never heard of Superman) namely Jonothan Kent’s death scene which I totally loved. I mean I would never risk my life over a dog but that moment where he holds his hand up and accepts that he’s going to die for the greater good of mankind but also Clark was incredibly emotional but also hit on how much trust Clark had for his father to just let it happen.

I was quite pessimistic about the casting of Henry Cavill at first but once seeing him play the Man of Steel for real, he proved to be a perfect casting. He didn’t just get totally ripped for the part but he captured how human Superman is for such an extraterrestrial being. Small things like acting all cool when wanting to smash a brotha’s face in and that look of remorse when reluctantly doing what’s necessary. Michael Shannon as General Zod was a total win, you wont get anyone more intense and scary than that guy. The “I will find him!” quote will live on in my mind for a long time. I also really liked Lois Lane (Amy Adams) as a character in this film, she wasn’t a damsel in distress and when she was she took matters into her own hands. The fact that she can take her liquor says a lot about her character in general.

Lastly for a superhero film I think the action was awesome and far from generic. It definitely got your adrenaline pumping. I liked how the kryptonian’s fought, it seemed really appropriate that they could shift from punch to punch with intense velocity. If they can jump for miles then shouldn’t they be able to punch really fast? The action sequences had a genuine video game and comic book look to them from the fighting movements to the fire explosions; which proved to be the theme of the fights. Even though I found the action pretty epic, I think that’s where Man of Steel put a lot of people off, leading to quite a few negative reviews. The first half of the film was perfect in terms of narrative which made the action satisfying for me, but once it started you never had a chance to breath; it was relentless. After awhile all the noise, music and explosions start to lose impact and an emotional disconnect starts to develop which is why I think some people ended up leaving the film unsatisfied. That being said any action junkie would love this film.

Despite the lack of fun and joy with this first installment of the rebooted superman series, there’s a satisfying amount of action and narrative to keep you glued to the screen. Man of Steel is a total origin story of where superman came from and how he became more than a kryptonian but a symbol of hope to mankind.

On a final final note, Hanz Zimmer is a genius, the score for this film is amazing. I like how it’s present throughout which is definitely important for comic book films. I feel that comic book films nowadays lack a distinct theme song.

What do you guys think of the new superman? better than the classics? Do you agree with the critics or do you think they are being picky for the sake of being haters?

Gangster Squad (2013)

Posted on by
Reply

gangster-squad-poster

Roze-Rating: 3.5 / 5

In this period gangster thriller we are sent back to 1949 post WW2. John O’Mara (Josh Brolin) returns from war and back to sunny Los Angeles where things have changed drastically. Mickey Cohen is a power hungry gangster who is willing to do anything in order to grow his empire. His ambitions to own the whole of the west coast drives him to countless murders in what he calls “progress”. Before it’s too late Cheif Bill Parker (Nick Holte) contacts O’Mara and urges him to get a team together later known as “The Gangster Squad”. They’re mission is to take down all of Mickey Cohen’s crime operations before they grow too big to take down.

I expected this film to be loaded with plot twists, character development and periodical references. I suppose I thought it would be challenging LA Confidential or any other good period gangster films. Instead it lacked in all those areas and wasn’t as serious as I thought it would be. This was a good and bad thing because it ticked all the boxes that I like in a fun cop film but with a cast that it boasted and the performances it had; the lack of substance was unsatisfying.The plot is simple which didn’t really leave much room for an explosive film, which was disappointing especially when you have such an intense character like Mickey Cohen as the villain. That being said once you realize what direction the film is going, then you can sit back and enjoy it. As soon as I heard the music during the opening scene with Josh Brolin, I could tell it was going to be more fun than dramatic.

There’s enough action to keep the average film viewer satisfied but on the second viewing you realize it’s not as thrilling as it could have been. The shootout’s are loud but there isn’t much to them making them seem generic. Maybe I’m being overly fussy but I felt there was a missed opportunity in that aspect of Gangster Squad. Nevertheless they were still fun to watch.

The cast is amazing, I mean two of my favourite actors on screen… banging… again. So it was always going to be hard to hate this film when Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone are acting together. Luckily they put in some pretty good performances. A lot of people didn’t really like Goslings high pitched, slightly odd accent and I think the director must have caught on to it because it gradually subsided as the film progressed. I didn’t mind it to be honest, it gave his character more of an identity. The rest of the cast were incredibly solid, it was the second time I’ve seen Josh Brolin play a lead role and he nailed it. Now I wish he was the new batman. Sean Penn as always is amazing as the power hungry Mickey Cohen, if there was more to the script, giving him more of a dynamic than just a short tempered gangster with a tolerance to killing then he would easily be one of the most menacing villains of 2013.

Gangster Squad really is style over substance. It’s glossy and pristine, despite it being shot in dark surroundings for most of it, you can catch the colours of neon signs and red lipstick very clearly. It’s definitely nice to look at, which is one of the main positives of this film, it captures that time period pretty well in a unique fashion.

Despite some disappointment over Gangster Squad, I actually quite enjoyed it. It seemed like the perfect film for me, I like gangsters, I like snappy one liners and I like shootouts. Was the film perfectly executed? No, but it’s fun and entertaining enough to watch til the O’Mara-Cohen showdown.

The Impossible (2012)

Posted on by
Reply

the-impossible1Roze-Rating: 4 / 5

Based on a true story, The Impossible is an adaptation of what a family of five had to endure during one of the most devastating natural disasters to occur in our time. Maria (Naomi Watts), Henry (Ewan McGregor) and their three sons take a trip to Thailand for the festive holidays. Following Christmas day the family spend time at the hotel swimming pool not expecting what’s to come. Once the tsunami hits they are split in half not knowing if they have all survived. Only hope and the will to live pushes them to believe that somehow they will find each other.

I will say straight away that this film doesn’t fail to pack a punch emotionally. It’s intentionally powerful and so it should be for such an amazing story. it’s nothing short of a miracle what the family had accomplished after such a catastrophic event and it’s a story that needs to be told. There are a lot of encouraging and powerful themes explored in this film which can drive anyone to inspiration. It shows how heroes can come in any shape and sizes and all it take is a simple touch to say everything is going to be fine to heighten someone’s spirits.

This film for me holds two of the most powerful scenes of 2012. The opening scenes where the tsunami hits the hotel is both terrifying and realistic that your heart pounds uncontrollably. I felt emotions stronger than any other film that I’ve watched before, there was a genuine fear and realization about how vulnerable and alone you are in such a disaster. Recreating that event to the level of realism they did is pretty amazing, and it’s hard not to appreciate that scene. The second scene features Ewan McGregor where he calls his father-in-law to tell him their situation. I’ve not seen a moment as intense as that in a film this year, the amount of emotion he puts into it is infectious and if you don’t feel just a little emotional then you are obviously too manly for this film.

Performances from everyone needed to be intense and inevitably they were with such an awesome cast. I’ve missed seeing Ewan Mcgregor on the big screen, and he really proves how much of a talent he is. Props also going to the three kids, couldn’t have been easy parts to play but they got through it convincingly. Lastly Naomi Watts easily steals the show with such a devastating performance, capturing probably every emotion you could get in such a situation, and at the age of 44 it’s amazing how young she looks.

The only negative I could find with this film is that it didn’t seem to explore the people who weren’t so fortunate to find their families, there was a lack of tribute to the unlucky individuals. I can easily see where people could get easily offended, especially if they were victims of the tsunami or a similar disaster. Admittedly it could have really done with it towards the end because it became quite evident that they lost things to film and it ultimately played out the sentimental tone a bit too long. All in all, an amazing story told well through the media of film.