Old Man Logan

*No spoilers ahead*

"In the near future, a weary Logan cares for an ailing Professor X somewhere on the Mexican border. However, Logan's attempts to hide from the world and his legacy are upended when a young mutant arrives, pursued by dark forces."

Leaving a movie theater with completely satisfied feelings is rare. After seeing Logan (2017) on the big screen I had one of these moments. Long gone are the child's play of some of the previous films where the Wolverine has appeared. Logan presents us a world with depressing present and future for mutants, cynical and messed up characters and a glimpse of hope for a better tomorrow.

Director James Mangold (3:10 to Yuma, The Wolverine) has stated that he was granted full artistic freedom when making Logan. Most definitely the reason behind this was the success of Deadpool (2016) and Mangold's previous film the Wolverine (2013). One must have some serious talent to fully utilize this possibility. Fortunately director Mangold has that talent and makes the most out of Logan.

Logan is a violent piece of art full of wonderful moments ranging from warm and heartfelt to sorrow and depressing. Make no mistake, violent depiction is not a synonym for an outstanding movie but if used in a proper manner it can serve the story, characters and create a sense of actual threat. As a result of versatile emotions and violently depicted story the movie makes the viewer care and fear for its protagonists. This is exactly what many people have been waiting from a Wolverine movie and finally we got to see it on the big screen.

The structure of the story shares similarities with the best action movie of the 1990's. The movie is very atmospheric and balanced offering calm little moments before and after the storms. The action is organic to the story and is served in well thought portions. Logan is shot in a way that makes it feel like a western. The beautiful scenery is shown with longer shots and grounded direction. The character has always felt like one of the gunslingers of the past which makes me wonder how come it took seventeen years to make a film that does him justice?

Actors do a wonderful job with special credit given to Jackman (Logan) and Stewart (Xavier). Since the beginning (X-Men, 2000) they both have nailed their roles perfectly. Jackman plays Logan with ferocious intensity while Stewart shows us an crumbling Professor X with a grin. The newcomer Laura (played neatly by Dafne Keen) is the MacGuffin of the story. She brings vulnerability to the story and her interactions with Logan and Xavier fleshes out the characters. The only misstep I could nag about was the scarce amount of screen time given to our antagonists.

Logan is for the adults with focus on substance rather than style. It is a movie that is not afraid to show our favorite characters as weak, fragile and vulnerable. The film is hugely satisfactory and even holds some surprises in its sleeves. It is Hugh Jackman's swan song as the Wolverine and also his strongest performance to date as the titular character. Logan is a blockbuster smaller in scale and enormous in emotion. Wolverine's last appearance is a wonderful example that the way to create unforgettable films is to focus on character's and their story and make us care about what happens to them.

Five claws out of five.

"The Dead are Alive"

                                    *This review contains no spoilers*

"A cryptic message from Bond's past sends him on a trail to uncover a sinister organization. While M battles political forces to keep the secret service alive, Bond peels back the layers of deceit to reveal the terrible truth behind SPECTRE."

James Bond Will Return. And yet again he did. For the 24th time to be precise. As the critically acclaimed box office mega hit Skyfall (2012), Spectre is directed by Sam Mendes. Daniel Craig is back for the fourth, but most likely not for the last, time as the titular hero James Bond. Previously introduced characters making recurring appearances include Q, Moneypenny, M and Mr. White. Connections make Spectre fascinating as it unites all of Craig's previous films in an appropriate way. One could feel it is underlining the connection a tad too much but that's a matter of personal taste.

When the new era of Bond films began in 2006 the strength was not in gadgets, jokes or over the top schemes but in sheer style, brutal action and grand acting. Spectre continues the tradition and also adds a bit of goofiness to the mix. For the most part it works but every now and then the sense of real danger is not present. It leaves you wanting more. Considering the stretched run-time, director could have reached perfection by changing or altering few scenes to make the threat more menacing.

Throughout the history Bond movies have always reflected on their time and people. Spectre makes no exception. Story deals with current world wide topics while equality plays a large part. Women are portrayed not as damsels in distress but as smart, strong and capable persons. One of the main reasons why the new Bond films attract more people than ever before: they don't underestimate a person based on their gender.

Sam Mendes' stylish and confident direction is at display in Spectre. The beginning is breathtaking action film-making and the train brawl makes your heart beat faster than you could imagine. Spectre includes plethora of beautifully directed scenery. It lacks a bit of Casino Royale's (2006) tight and witty direction but Mendes' purpose was to make Bond more vulnerable and that's where he succeeded.

                                                 

Daniel Craig gave his best performance as Bond. He's grown for the role over the years and has been giving us a secret agent we could believe in. Supporting cast are given more time to develop and they breathe life in to their characters. This rare new aspect of a Bond film ultimately pays out and fits in the new rebooted Bond. But what about the villains? Spectre presents us physically and intellectually intimidating antagonists who will be remembered as classic Bond villains but unfortunately are not given enough actual screen-time to develop.

Spectre's sceenplay is great even though a little predictable. But it's not always about surprises, right? Story keeps you interested and you care about the characters. Also there are no excessive parts in the story, in its characters or even in the action. Strictly grounded. More believable. More effective.

All things considered Spectre meets the enormous expectations set to it and doesn't disappoint as a whole. Audiences are given a modern Bond filled with nods to the past Bond films. Spectre's flaws are outweighed by its virtues making it a strong entry in the long running series.

4+ out of 5 Vodka Martinis. Shaken, not stirred.

Rambunctious tale of revenge, Wunderbar.

"Who's that stumblin' around in the dark? State your business or prepare to get winged."



Django Unchained (2012) is the 8th picture from one of the most talented directors of our time, the man who does not posses the fear for controversial subjects and avoids using modern technology such as 3D. Quentin Tarantino is a director who posses the ultimate taste for smooth, intelligent and cliché breaking storytelling. And that is what Django Unchained is all about.

Django Unchained is fundamentally a tale of revenge with a lot tasty ingredients added to it. It's not about striving to achieve world peace, it's about rescuing Django's wife. A small scale story with lots of little details and rich characters. It's done in a way so mezmerizing that it feels like bigger scale film.


What makes Django Unchained so mesmerizing then? The answer to this question is quite simple, because it is fearless, mature and wickedly entertaining (and lots of other things too). The story is not afraid to take into account such a nasty and dark subject as slave trading of black people. It does not to try to hide its subject or try to please the viewer by not showing cruel and horrible things. As this is a movie everything is made to be as entertaining as possible but deep beneath Django shows how bad things actually were in the past. Tarantino does the same for Western here as he did for World War 2 in Inglourious Basterds (2009).


The direction in Django Unchained is glorious. Tarantino is really skilled in directing interaction between humans and it shows. He is one of the few directors around who is able to make table conversation scenes so exhilarating that you feel like you're watching a Finland vs. Sweden Ice Hockey match. The tension is enormous. Also his way of directing action is really refreshing as he does not use CGI (Computer Generated Image) at all. Thank god for that. Blood and explosions are done the old style, shit blows up and real looking fake blood spills out from humans when they are shot. Looks real and makes you happy. Why aren't other directors doing this? Just asking..

The screenplay for Django is detailed and contains a lot of references to his other works and for old movies as well (just like his every film does). It is a movie about movies. A true fan piece. The protagonist Django (Jamie Foxx) is an honest slave who loves his wife and with the help of German born Dentist turned Bounty hunter, played by the extremely talented Christoph Waltz, he begins his quest to rescue his beloved Broomhilda from an evil Plantation owner Calvin Candie (Leonardo Di Caprio). The story contains lots of juiceful events before Django and Dr. Schultz reach Candieland where Broomhilda is held. Tarantino makes all his story's characters, even the small ones interesting and somehow he always manages to find the perfect persons for them. I mean Don Johnsson as a greedy plantation owner. A-list actor in a small role. Fuck yeah where do I sign!


As for what comes to the acting in the film, it is phenomenal (starting to run out praising adjectives here..). Jamie Foxx is a talented actor playing maybe a bit less challenging role. He is Django in every way, Django's character just is not that versatile when compared to other characters in the film. It is not a minus in my books though, just a note since there is nothing wrong either. Christoph Waltz (playing Dr. King Schultz) is a master actor. Dr. Schultz is a charming, intelligent and thoughtful character. He has many sides and is a true incarnation of Waltz's skills as an actor. Leonardo Di Caprio plays the bad guy in Django. He has come a long way from the guy in Titanic. If I'm right this is first time he plays an actual villain. Well played indeed. He makes the character of Calvin Candie a nasty, evil person with a twisted mind. The leader slave and right hand man of Calvin Candie played by who else than Samuel L. Jackson completes the ridiculous amount of talent on screen. Jackson is terrific as always as playing the "dumb smart" slave who is loyal to his master. Absolutely wonderful and funny character I must admit.
 

In the end Django Unchained is everything you could hope for a film to be. It has a deeper message, it is entertaining, well made and my god the soundtrack is good. During the film I was thinking "This is what a movie should be like". And I still think that way. Go watch it, nevermind your gender, interests, or hobbies. Just make sure you're over 18.


"Auf wiedersehen. Bullseye"


*****/*****

"Hunted by your future. Haunted by your past."

"Time travel has not yet been invented. But thirty years from now, it will have been."


Who would have thought that during a year which introduced us the Assembling of Superheroes and third outing from Nolan's Caped Crusader the biggest surprise is offered by a movie about time travelling. Looper did what big blockblusters could not; surprise the audience by being clever, innovative and still quite original and all this achieved with a really low budget.

"In 2074, when the mob wants to get rid of someone, the target is sent 30 years into the past, where a hired gun awaits. Someone like Joe, who one day learns the mob wants to 'close the loop' by transporting back Joe's future self."



The protagonist of the movie is Joe, played excellently by Joseph Gordon-Levitt and Bruce Willis. He's a hired gun who kills people sent from the future to present day. He does the job and asks no questions. Clean and simple. But then comes the day he faces himself, and surprise surprise is not able to kill the older him. The plot of the movie is a bit challenging but rewarding and well-structured if you're able to follow it. It always keeps you guessing and you can not predict what comes next. I adore films that are able to give birth to this kind of a feeling.

From technical point of view the movie shines. Rian Johnsson (Director) is a skilled director and it is clearly proved with Looper. Direction is refreshinghly done, it even tries knew things and develops the old tricks. The world where Looper takes place is evocative. It's always nice to see that something else is actually taking place besides the protagonist and his story. It makes a movie fun and enjoyable to watch when you can spot little details over here and there which are not meant as subplots.



Among the great blockblusters Looper really delivers more than it should. The budget can be seen as simple locations used for most of the scenes throughout the movie. For example a great amount of time in the film takes place in a simple farmhouse which is also where the fascinating and unexpected ending occurs. The screenplay, characters and acting were so terrific that framework does not matter anymore. I'm not saying that it looks bad in any way, just modest compared to other movies presented during the year. Looper will make you think and feel if you embrace the plot completely. A motion picture which is able to do that in this day and age is a rare one.


*****/*****

007 Reporting for Duty

"Three months ago, you lost the drive containing the identity of every agent embedded in terrorist organizations across the globe."


A hard drive containing valuable information goes missing and MI6 blows sky high. Someone from M's past is responsible for all the chaos and now it is up for James Bond to get things straight, once again. That's the set up for Skyfall (2012), the newest entry in worlds longest running film series. And I've got to admit, it's a darn good entry. Precisely my cup of tea.
















Unlike Quantum of Solace (2008) Skyfall is not an sequel for Casino Royale (2006). All the familiar faces are there (and few "new" ones too) but it's a completely fresh story and stands on it's own feet. The first act in Skyfall starts off with Bond trying to acquire the missing hard drive. This is spiced with exhilarating chase scene with guns, cars, motorcycles and excavators on a train. Everything you could possible hope from a Bond film. And as realistically as possible. Those expecting exploding pens will be disappointed because Craig's Bond still remains  really close to the ground. Thank goodness for that.

















"England... Mi6... so old-fashioned!"


The second act of the film is a lot serene than the first one. It focuses on Bond getting back to his feet and trying to find out who has the stolen hard drive. This is where the film built its great tension. Skyfall is smart, emotional and calculative. It's not an action movie even though it does have some great and intensive scenes to it. Skyfall is more about emotions and characters played by tremendously gifted actors. Craig really shines here and reveals new, deeper dimensions to the character. Mr. Bond is only a human being after all. The villain called Silva, played by Javier Bardem, is the Joker to The Dark Knight. Yes, he is that great indeed. You can't help but to notice the few similarities to the above mentioned simile. All the wonderful acting is iced with spectacular set pieces and artistic direction. This is the most beautifully directed Bond movie to date. No shaky cam here, prepare for long and detailed takes. Sam Mendes, the director, really pulled it off. He handles everything brilliantly no matter whether it's action or drama.

The third and final act of the film is something that really surprised me. It made me question whether am I watching a Bond film or not. And I do not consider it as bad thing at all. What they did here was completely new for the series and they did it really well, I'm not going to spoil it for you.  Just see it for yourselves. It's truly worth it. Rather brave thing to do if you ask me. Actually the whole film is rather brave, and for a reason.

After 4 years James Bond is finally back with Skyfall. All the promises are fullfilled here and the continuation of the series is secured. The film is made with tremendous talent, it takes us places we haven't been before in the world of Bond. It brings back the rest of the beloved characters from the old movies and most importantly it gives us back the new and serious Bond, James Bond.


James Bond Will Return.


*****/*****


 Skyfall deserves no less than full points.

The Expendables 2 - The More the Merrier?

2010. A weekend break from Military service. The Expendables. Ridiculously over-the-top expectations. Everything mentioned before equaled for a big f*cking disappointment. A highly promising film brought down by a shitty screenplay and seriousness not suitable for it. A kick in the nuts.
 
But then came the day the Expendables 2 arrived to big screen. With Chuck Norris and Jean Claude Van Damme added to ensemble. I mean seriously? Could they actually make it right this time around? And boy they did! Everything the first one did wrong the sequel made up for it. The Expendables 2 goes straight into action with a really cool action sequence which knows no boundaries and basically just destroys everything, also the bad expectations. Just plain ass-kicking all the way through with a smirk.

All the icons (except for Mickey Rourke) are back and Schwarzenegger and Willis are given a lot more screen time. Also the main bad guy is a lot interesting and better. Played by Jean Claude Van Damme, a baddie with an accent and balls of steels who gives roundhouse kicks to Rocky. The visiting action legend Chuck Norris adds welcomed ironic and self-aware humor to the film, a cherry for the cake you could say.

"What's the plan?
Track 'em, find 'em, kill 'em."

Like its stars the film is everything what you could expect from this type of action film. Screenplay is straight-forward and simple but effective and interesting while giving enough reasons to blow shit up and shoot everything that moves. Exactly what everyone was hoping from it. And it does not jam like the first Expendables did. The movie goes through its run time like a steam train and you still have enough time to breathe and enjoy the big boys fairytale. Directing & effect wise the film does a decent job. Nothing new or special about direction and the amount of useless CGI is limited. The locations and sets are great and well-picked.

In the end it is quite hard to deeply analyze a movie like this since there isn't anything too deep about it. It's a fun movie. Movie made by action stars for action fans. Straight, simple and lots of entertainment made by people who really did enjoy what they were doing. Go and see it, and be open-minded and you won't be disappointed.

"Rest in pieces"

 

Prometheus - a worthy entry to the Alien saga?

"The search for our beginning could lead to our end"



Finally came the day that another decent Alien movie stepped in broad daylight. How to continue the series was talked about a long time and after years of speculations it finally turned out to be Prometheus, directed by the original Alien (1979) director Ridley Scott. Prometheus could actually be called Alien 0 since it's basically the origins story to the original quadrilogy. However it still remains mostly as a stand-alone film since it isn't dependent on the other films and neither is the viewer. And by this I mean you don't need to see the original films if you are not interested. Prometheus focuses on a group of scientists and their team investigating the origins of mankind and the trail to answers leads to a desolate planet far, far from earth. And as expected, they're not alone and definitely not safe...

Since Ridley Scott announced that Prometheus will be an indirect prequel to Alien the expectations towards the film raised from high to extreme. When the first photos and teaser hit the web I was already partly sold. And when the official trailer was finally released it really caught my attention. Audio visually it looked amazing (and it was). The atmosphere seemed to be in sync with Alien and actors chosen for the movie were great choices. Though being really excited about the material I saw I tried to keep my cool since rarely films live up to the expectations given out by stylished trailers nowadays.

For most parts Prometheus is pretty Alien but it has it flaws which makes it the third best film in the series after Alien and Aliens. The best part of Prometheus is definitely the whole visual outlook. It looks simply amazing. I can't remember seeing a movie this beautfiul for a while. And realistic special effects have become more rare nowadays than ever before and this is what Prometheus and the crew behind the film kept in mind. The CGI in this film is magnificent and used as less as possible.

Most of the the actors are also quite good, Fassbender and Noomi Rapace stand out from the crowd. What I found hard to understand was why Scott made many of the characters so unilateral and dare I say out loud, even boring? I would have loved to see more complex characters. But even that wasn't the biggest problem which I had with the film.

The film is supposed to be dark and ominous but somehow the score of the film is almost cheerful at times and not ominous at all. Also some typical cliches, mostly dealing with the characters can be seen. You laugh to the jokes but they don't really explore new terrains. And lastly, the ending is quite of a mix. At the moment I can't say whether I love it but I definitely like it since it was something I didn't expect. It also leaves room for a possible sequel and I don't mean Alien series by it.

All in all Prometheus IS a great film and a worthy entry to the Alien saga. It has a pretty good, though a little bit cliched, screenplay.  Awesome actors playing one-sided characters as best as they can and audio-visually it is a pure masterpiece. It's truly a feast for the eyes! If it wouldn't have been an entry in one of the most respected series in the world I would have probably found it even better.


"Prometheus has landed"

* * * ½ / * * * * *


Ps:  Reviewer is going to check it out again after rewatching the original quadrilogy.