Mockingbird In A Blizzard
By Nadia Ranaputri 


Image source: IMDB

Directors: Rich Moore and Phil Johnston
Cast: John C. Reilly, Sarah Silverman, Gal Gadot, Taraji P. Henson, Jack McBrayer, Jane Lynch, Alan Tudyk, Alfred Molina, Ed O'Neill.


"I don't think we're at Litwak's anymore," Wreck-It Ralph points out as he steps into the great unknown. "We certainly are not," Vanellope says. This great unknown they've just landed upon just so happens to be the internet. As in, the crazy vast land of websites. That's exactly what Ralph Breaks the Internet has brought to the table. As the sequel to Disney's 2012 animated film about an unlikely bond between an 8-bit bad guy and a cheery little racer, Ralph Breaks the Internet follows the fish-out-of-water premise in which characters explore the great unknown, a completely different world known as the internet. The internet is a fascinatingly crazy ride, but hey, this time you get to see what it's really like to step into the internet rather than just clicking webs on a computer.

Six years after the events of Wreck-It Ralph, the once video game outcasts Wreck-It Ralph and Vanellope von Schweetz live a seemingly perfect life in the Litwak Family Arcade. They do the same routine every day: go to work seperately in each of their arcade games and do their duties as video game characters by day, hang out in several other video games such as Tron and have a root beer drink off together by night. But when Vanellope longs for variation in her game Sugar Rush, specifically new tracks, Ralph tries to help her. Unfortunately, it doesn't go very well, as this frustrates a fellow gamer that leads a damaged steering wheel, causing Litwak to unplug Sugar Rush, leaving Vanellope and her fellow racers without a game. Luckily for them, Litwak just so happens to have a new installment to the arcade: Wi-Fi (one character calls it Die-Fi as a joke to how dangerous it could be) or in other words, the internet. Hoping to save Sugar Rush from fully perishing, Ralph and Vanellope venture to the internet in search of a new steering wheel. However, their venture to the internet isn't the end of their problems.

One of my earlier concerns whether or not a story about delving into the internet was a good idea. We had that with The Emoji Movie, and as unique of an idea as it is to have a film about Emojis (well, no one's ever done it, right?) it lacks in telling a good, decent even; story that justifies why it needed to exist. Well, you can rest easy, because Ralph Breaks the internet has a better story on hand. If you're going to sum up Ralph Breaks the Internet, it's a much more meaningful and joyful journey of the internet than The Emoji Movie. Yes, it has shameless product placement like Twitter, Amazon, Fandango, and eBay; but after all, it's the internet, right? It's a never-ending universe where a click could get you anywhere you please, and the film clearly wants to represent just how vast the crazy world of the internet is, but it is not ashamed to reflect on the reality of it, nor does it lose a sense of adventure. The way it's presented here is a bright and colorful world with satirical representations of things you always see on the internet, like figures using clickbait pop-ups that transport those who click to their "site", or virtual figures literally sending hearts to a leaf blower to a video. 



Image source: IMDB

What's interesting here is that it illustrates the internet as an actual world that you can walk around in. When you click a website, it leads you to that designated website, but in Disney's illustration of the internet, a click leads people to be transported into a hovering shuttle that heads you to a website (represented as floating buildings in a city that never sleeps) you desire. It really does give you the idea that while the internet is full of wonders, it's also got its ridiculous aspects, like becoming an internet star by continuously making videos based on whatever happens to be trending or wicked online games with obstacles beyond anything Ralph has ever seen. And then there's the most advertised bit of the film, the Oh My Disney sequence that involves Disney properties from the Star Wars Stormtroopers and cameos from fellow Marvel characters (a certain talking twig is among them) become highlights of the film. The standout of the sequence is no doubt the princesses, among them Cinderella, Anna, Elsa, Pocahontas, and of course, Merida with her Scottish rambling that other princesses could barely understand. It is an obvious showcase of Disney properties, but that doesn't mean it makes the film less enjoyable. It's certainly a fun little dive on a virtual version of Disneyland without compromising the story it wants to tell.

But this film has bigger plans at hand than just the wonders of the internet. It wants to show us a darker side too, though it won't go too deep into that. It's merely a representation of it, as it is with the other wondrous bits of the internet. It does an excellent job in telling both the positive and the negative side, enough for it to create a sense of joy and sympathy. "First rule of the internet: do not read the comments," Ralph is informed when he finds that the internet has harsh things to say about him. Ralph Breaks the Internet is also poignant in developing the friendship between Ralph and Vanellope. In fact, the film revolves around their friendship as they discover the many wonders of the internet. There's issues of being overprotective of one person to the point where instead of actually protecting them, it only holds them back. It shows a heartfelt display of how any friendship will have to go through changes, that one person cannot share the same dream with the other. That's essentially what happens to our friendly neighborhood wrecker and his quirky race pal. Ralph becomes insecure when Vanellope realizes that there's more to life than just daily routines at the arcade; she's found something much more exciting than that. It's the film's core message that is delivered strongly, despite it being quite direct, especially since this is an animated Disney film after all.

Ralph Breaks the Internet does what every film does: provide a sense of both escapism from reality and a reflection of it. It is essentially what a film is supposed to do, and Ralph Breaks the Internet just proves that it is more than just exploring a new world, but also dealing with the possibility of change and as Ralph realizes, how a world such as the internet could bring the worst in people. As surface level is it is when it comes to the thing we know as the internet, it at least has a good story on hand that makes it more than just a fun dive into the internet. It may oversimplify or barely scratch the surface of what the internet really is, (again, this is a Disney film, do you really expect them to dive into the gritty bits of the internet?) but it is enough to give glimpses at just how vastly crazy it really is. In the end, for a story about an exploration of the internet, it has its moral messages. Children can learn that the strongest friendship comes from the ones that strive throughought the changes, no matter how painful it may be. The older can find a poignant message that they could even relate to because they might have already experienced the same thing. I certainly did, and that was one of the biggest reasons why I enjoyed this film, I resonated with it. 



Image source: IMDB



Overall verdict: Ralph Breaks the Internet is certainly a joyful sequel to 2012's Wreck-It Ralph, putting two of the most unlikely friends into the bright and vast world of the internet. Disney's depiction of this cyber world is as expected, full of wonder. But while it's a whole new world, Ralph and Vanellope's friendship is put to the test once they come face to face with the internet, and it might even resonate with the audience, even if it is conveyed directly. The world of the internet is cettainly an interesting concept, but it isn't ashamed to jab at the internet itself. Whether it is becoming a star by making ridiculous videos, meeting Disney princesses and many of their other characters, or stepping inside an unpredictable online game, Ralph Breaks the Internet knows how to poke some lighthearted fun that puts a smile on your face, and it has plenty of heart to give around (metaphorically and literally). It might not hit as deep as Disney Pixar's Coco, but it sure gives enough to tug at our heartstrings while offering much of Disney's familiar joy and wonder.

Stars: 4.3/5



By Nadia Ranaputri


Image source: IMDB

Director: David Yates
Cast: Eddie Redmayne, Katherine Waterston, Dan Fogler, Ezra Miller, Alison Sudol, Johnny Depp, Zoƫ Kravitz, Callum Turner, Jude Law, Claudia Kim.


The Wizarding World has indeed expanded into its own cinematic universe to the point where it has its own logo in the opening. Just when we thought the wizarding world had ended with the Harry Potter series, the release of Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them five years after Deathly Hallows Part 2 provided a welcoming return to J.K Rowling's world of magic and wonder. Though I thought it had a couple of flaws, I did eventually warm up to the film more during multiple re-watches. It provided a sense of familiarity but a new kind of canvas to the world we all know and love. Like any other franchise starters, the first Fantastic Beasts film leaves a lot of room for us to speculate where our characters will be off to in the next story.

Picking up from where the first film left off, Grindelwald has escaped captivity and is on the loose in the streets of Paris, leading Dumbledore (Jude Law), unable to face against his former companion, no choice but to recruit Newt Scamander (Eddie Redmayne) to ready his wand and fight against Grindelwald in his place. This isn't the only task Newt has to take, as the Ministry of Magic seeks his help to track down the person Grindelwald soughts after: Credence (Ezra Miller), an interest to both parties involved, who was assumed to have perished in the predecessor, and reach him before Grindelwald does. Meanwhile, in Paris, Grindelwald prepares a legion of followers with the means of providing justice and freedom to wizards by robbing the Muggles of theirs. In the midst of all this, Newt's journey is then sidetracked by Tina's (Katherine Waterston) return, having been sent to Paris for the same reason. With both Grindelwald and Credence on the loose, Newt is torn between doing what he believes is right and if he's willing to choose a side in the process.

Eddie Redmayne returns as the beloved magizoologist Newt Scamander, and while he still has those lovable cheerful moments, he's slightly lost the lively charm that made Newt endearing in the first installment, but the script would perhaps play a part in this. He's gone a little solemn this time around, caught in something much deeper and a little more personal. The first film managed to show his fascination and enthusiasm towards the fantastic beasts that he sought after, but because there isn't much interaction with the beasts and the film's decision to focus elsewhere, a part of that is missing. That's not to say it is entirely gone or that it's a bad thing. Some of that familiar lovable manner is still there. There would be moments where his loving charm stands out, such as how he expresses his excitement upon finding clues in search of the now reinstated Auror and former companion, Waterston's Tina Goldstein. "She has incredibly narrow feet, have you noticed?" Newt says in awe. "Can't say I have," Jacob looks upon him with a look of confusion while Newt carries along with his search.



Image source: IMDB

The Crimes of Grindelwald has a much steadier tone than its predecessor, going for a darker tone for most of the film's duration. The palette is more saturated and muted, with the bustling and dim view of New York in a heavy rain, the much brightly colored Ministry of Magic in London (which is where Newt's story picks up), and the saturated streets of Paris. It is, like the installment before it, and most of the Harry Potter films; visually stunning. Whether or not the story excels, J.K Rowling through her script and Yates through his directing, they have imbued excellent world building, extending the wizarding world to new heights. The magic and wonder is still there, leaping in a constantly engaging manner. Secret magic portals, the return of the gold-loving nifflers, and a wizard's version of a circus attraction, carry the film's boisterous wonder that really makes you wonder why you can't enter the screen and visit such a world. The opening chase sequence that is Grindelwald's very own Great Escape is one of the more brilliantly directed scenes, immediately taking audiences by the hand to invite them over for what the film has in store. It's a compelling opening and introduction to the film's main villain. It has a lot of potential to build from there, the unfortunate thing is that if you look at the story, it doesn't seem to realize the kind of potential it has to do the visuals and the wonders justice.

So here's the main catch: it has too many things going on at once. The first Fantastic Beasts had solid world building with a much more cohesive main plot. While Rowling has a gift for world building and characters, it seemed that here, what goes on paper has not translated well on screen. The Crimes of Grindelwald lacks a cohesive buildup and an actual resolution. In fact, it lacks an actual story, the centre of what everything in the film is supposed to lead up to. Newt's adventures this time is muddled with sudden reunions and plot twists that had it not been placed with an array of the film's many arcs, would have made for a perfectly magical ride. Grindelwald, on the other hand, who is the main villain, mind you, is disappointingly bland, but it has more to do with the material Depp's given than his performance. You're first given a glimpse at Grindelwald's antics during the opening (which is a great start to the film, honestly), but for the rest of the film's duration, he's overshadowed and sidelined for other characters who frankly, end up not having any purpose in the film at all. Grindelwald may have been constantly refered to as one of the most powerful wizards in the wizarding world, which makes him a dangerous threat, but we don't see that here. For a film called Crimes of Grindelwald, it's quite baffling that they would focus on everyone else but Grindelwald. 



Image source: IMDB

The film becomes its own kind of obscurus, awfully muddled and unable to create a central story with everything that happens. It feels too much like pieces of a puzzle that had just came together, but still separate and incomplete. Think of it like a buffet where you constantly pick whatever looks good. You end up picking a lot of things and before you know it, you're unable to stuff your stomach with more food. That is essentially what The Crimes of Grindelwald is: overstuffed with subplots that eventually flood the main story, if the film has a clear story at all, to the point where it feels like it's been tossed aside or lost its way. The problem is, it really doesn't know which arc provides most to the story, so it puts as much arc as possible to give you a lot more than a full stomach and a headache at best. The constant revelations that serve as a twist are certainly a surprise, but not the best kind. Even when it's something you don't see coming, you start groaning in annoyance anyways because it has more to do with an obligatory setup for the next installments, but little to do with the story it's telling now, like the unecessary Justice League setup in Batman vs Superman.

There's cases of flashbacks, defining someone's legacy, figuring out the past, and chasing beasts, all arcs from the film's vault of several different characters; that are more of a distraction from the story than providing any real progression or relation to the main storyline, which really begs the question: what is the story trying to achieve here? Or the more dire question: what story are they actually telling here? Because it isn't clear at all of the endgame and the core story that the film is aiming for, leaving it muddled and unable to place its foot on the right stool, continuously going on different directions without a clear destination. A wider ensemble and bigger sheer of storytelling doesn't always mean a better sequel, and the issue with The Crimes of Grindelwald is that it doesn't know where the limit of arcs lie or when to turn down the noise, trapped in its own tornado of potential arcs that don't have a center to intertwine together. The first installment, despite having a similar problem, was at least able to tie most arcs together and have a clear story. Newt's coming to America, Credence and his adopted mother, Percival Graves and his obsession with finding the person behind the obscurus; they all serve a purpose to the main story.

But at least there's the beasts, right? Yes, but let's stop at that. They're simply decorations, admired but hardly play a part in the party other than to give the room (or the film in this case) some flair. They do provide some of the film's illustrious charm, but again, they're really just toppings on an ice cream. Other than the beasts, it is really the performances that are the film's shining beacon, particularly Jude Law as Dumbledore. In a muddled mess of a film with a one note villain, the return of a beloved character becomes the film's savior. This Dumbledore, a much younger and more active wizard, provides a much needed charm. Unfortunately, his part is fairly small here, perhaps saved for another film, because there are other things this film intend to focus on. But when he's on screen, his wit and calm demeanor is enough to leave audiences wanting more of Law's portrayal. When it comes to his scenes and at Hogwarts (Potterheads, you better be ready for a pang of nostalgia when this happens), there's always that speck of hope that the film does have its moments, and it actually does have its moments, enough for it to not fully be a mess, enjoyable at best. Hopefully with a more cohesive story at hand next time, it could lead future installments to a magical homerun.



Image source: IMDB

Overall verdict: The Crimes of Grindelwald is certainly intriguing when it comes to charming audiences with its glorious wonders of the wizarding world. Redmayne, despite his character losing a little of that charm that made him endearing, is still quite excellent in the lead role. Jude Law as Dumbledore is perhaps the standout out of the cast, making the most out of his limited screen time. This installment still carries on the charm and wonder that the previous installment, and the Harry Potter films, had brilliantly brought, though it lacks the feeling of an actual adventure that the first Fantastic Beasts installment excelled at. The story however, however, is muddled and plucks arcs that seem interesting, and places them on a plate without any coherence as to where it's supposed to go. The revelations feel like a confusing setup for the next installments rather than serving the story it's telling in this one. Because it's overstuffed with incoherent arcs, it loses the story it wants to tell in the progress, which is unfortunate, especially since they have nearly every untapped potential, just waiting to discovered.

Stars: 2.7/5



By Nadia Ranaputri

Image source: IMDB


Director: Bryan Singer
Cast: Rami Malek, Lucy Boynton, Ben Hardy, Gwilym Lee, Joseph Mazzello, Aidan Gillen, Tom Hollander, Mike Myers.


Believe it or not, the very first exposure I had to Queen was through Ella Enchanted, where Anne Hathaway belted out 'Somebody to Love' in a pub filled with giants. My then nine year old self upon watching the film at the time believed that it was the film's original song, which is silly considering that I then found out that it was a cover of the song that was originally sung by none other than Queen. To this day, Queen remains as one of the most iconic bands in history, their songs have hit the top of the charts several times and used in several films such as Ella Enchanted (Somebody to Love), Wayne's World (Bohemian Rhapsody), Shaun of the Dead ('Don't Stop Me Now' and 'You're My Best Friend'), and even had multiple songs covered by Glee. Queen is loved by the masses from one generation to another. Bryan Singer's new biopic, Bohemian Rhapsody, aims to tell the story of just how this band entered the music forray and the story of their eccentric frontrunner, Freddie Mercury; to the modern audience.

Bohemian Rhapsody starts off with the soon-to-be Queen front runner Freddie Mercury (born Farrokh Bulsara) moving luggages in Heathrow Airport during the day. At night though, he visits a local pub and listens to a band he's been following, hoping to show some of his songs to them. Turns out, it's his lucky day, because the band's lead singer just so happens to abandon the band just after their performance, leaving the spot open to Freddie, who eagerly leaps to take the opportunity. As they begin playing in other local gigs, they begin to get recognized when music manager John Reid (Aiden Gillen) stumbles upon their recording booth. They begin to work with Reid and with the support of their label EMI (run by Ray Foster (Mike Myers), who's reluctant over the band's experimental delve in music), they begin their tour around the world, selling out shows, and becoming the band that everyone knows and loves. However, as their success rises, their personal issues follow suit, particularly Freddie, who's figuring out his sexual orientation, despite being happily in love with his partner Mary Austin (Lucy Boynton); and the media's eventual intrusion on his personal life.

Rami Malek is a star stunner as Freddie Mercury, fully embracing the frontman's enigmatic mannerisms and his passion in creating music. Malek not only nails Mercury's look, but his spontenaeous ways and every bit of how Mercury works on stage. Mercury's struts, flaunts, turns, and flicks are so intricately portrayed and Malek just dissolves into Mercury, getting almost every bit of the frontrunner's moves. At times, he's doe-eyed and curious, especially during his younger years, eagerly following a band he's fond of and willing to impress the remaining band members who just so happens to be Brian May and Roger Taylor when he finds that the band's lead singer had just quit. When he gets on stage, that's where he sheds that doe-eyed look and trades it for sharp turns and magnetic sway. You're instantly drawn into his portrayal with his every turn at the beat. And even when it comes to his more vulnerable moments, Malek just outshines every other actor in the room, making sure that Mercury's inner search for identity and struggle comes through on screen. Queen's other band members, Roger Taylor, Brian May, and John Deacon, played respectively by Ben Hardy, Gwilym Lee, and Joe Mazzello; all put impressive performances and create a genuine dynamic together with Malek, despite them not being as established as Malek's Freddie Mercury. 


Image source: IMDB


The thing that really made Bohemian Rhapsody a gem is its artistic aspects. The recreation of Queen's musical numbers is spectacular to watch, especially if you're fond of Queen, you're likely to sing along and have a good time doing it. Each of the performances are captivating, capturing the essence of what made Queen's performances so iconic, especially with Malek brilliantly embodying Mercury's mannerisms on stage. The Live Aid performance gets a special mention here because it is really where the film takes the high road and gives Queen the performance of their lives. This is also where I admittedly shed tears in sheer delight of how amazing this sequence was recreated and the performances in it. And what also made it mesmerizing was its cinematography, which is really quite something, from the opening long shot of Freddie getting ready to enter the stage to the beat of 'Somebody to Love' that ends with a glide of the massive audience awaiting Queen's performance (which is actually one of my most favorite sequences of the film), to a wide shot of Queen performing the hell out of a show. It's visually appealing, and is the aspect apart from the performances that prevents the film from fully crashing down.

Spanning the 15 years of their rise to stardom and eventual success, Bohemian Rhapsody has the weight of cramming the many events that occur during those fifteen years, like who Freddie Mercury was before he was Freddie Mercury, how the band was brought together, how they got their band name Queen, and the struggles they had in making it in the music scene. It is suprisingly fast paced for a film that's more than two hours, but then again, it does have a lot to cover. For the first hour, the film is filled with quirky wit that does work most of the time, like the doe-eyed young Mercury belting out tunes in the parking lot in front of his future bandmates Brian May and Roger Taylor, his eccentric choice in fashion ("I've got to make an impression, darling," he confidently says when he's questioned about his clothing), the band mixing non-musical objects with their music, or Roger Taylor constantly having to repeat his high notes on the "Galileo" part in the 'Bohemian Rhapsody' song several times until the recording tape is nearly spent. But their dedication in showcasing their music to the world is relentless, from only playing in pubs to becoming one of the most iconic bands in history- from their music producer stating, "Mark my words, no one will play Queen," to the point where one of the characters say in the film, "When they hear Queen, ears perk up."

Bohemian Rhapsody manages to present the fact that despite their success, Queen has their issues as a band. There are scenes where they argue over whose song they want to use (one fairly hilarious scene being an argument about whether or not they want to use Roger Taylor's song 'I'm in Love with My Car' that leads to Taylor nearly throwing a coffee machine), and questioning some creative decisions regarding the songs. But at its center is Freddie Mercury's personal life, struggling with his sexuality and trying to keep anyone else besides the people closest to him from prying into anything other than his music. It is at most parts, executed well and also heartbreaking at some point, humanizing Queen's eccentric lead singer. This is mostly propelled by Malek's performances, who is effortless in portraying Mercury's struggles between his personal choices both in music and in his lifestyle. Mercury has personal issues that clashes alongside the media that constantly barges him with questions of interest regarding his sexuality, the focus merely on him than his band and their music. He throws lavish parties in his mansion, but cannot bring himself to face the fact that he'll eventually be alone at some point, asking his bandmates or his former partner Mary Austin to accompany him for dinner or for a drink when he spends the night alone.


Image source: IMDB

But when it comes to how Mercury's personal drama that surrounds him was executed during the second half of the film, that's where it gets most of its ups and downs. It's understandable that some things won't go into focus, but sometimes the film feels confused between wanting to focus on Mercury or Queen. It mainly focuses on the former, but that would mean the other members would have to take a back seat, though they're not fully shadowed by Mercury here. At some parts, it may feel underwhelming, mainly due to the pacing of each sequence (save for the Live Aid performance). Sometimes sudden developments are thrown at us without prior foundation as to why it was there, and it may take you aback for a second, particularly at the band's road to stardom and deep insight into their struggles as a band. It really jumps too swiftly from having the band do small gigs, and the next thing you know, they have a manager that's suddenly convinced to work with them by a single statement and sky-rocketting to instant fame. Some might be bothered by that, and to tell you the truth, I was slightly bothered by it too. It does affect the story and even if it does manage to show Mercury and Queen's struggles in a way that made them accessible to tug at heartstrings, it's everything else that surrounds them that prevents the film from hitting that sweet high note, the homerun that could have made it great.

Flaws aside, Bohemian Rhapsody was honestly very enjoyable, capturing some of Queen's essence as a band and their experimental music that would become much loved and iconic until today (though yes, there are some errors in the accurate depiction of for example, the era of a song's initial release). It's eccentricly magnetic in all the right ways, there's a big amount of wonderful chemistry between Malek, Hardy, Lee, and Mazzello. There's a brilliant scene where their music producer refuses to take risks with the band, and the band replies to this by stating that the name Queen serves as a mystery, that they could take any genre of music and incorporate it into theirs. It's scenes like those that really made Bohemian Rhapsody shine. It's captivating when the band starts to belt out the iconic tunes, but sometimes lacks when it comes to some part of the film's story execution, though I have to admit, it is still a damn good time. When walking out of this film, you're really going to leave with one thing in mind: that Queen and their lead singer Freddie Mercury will forever remain as icons for the ages. "You're a legend, Fred," Roger Taylor says. Mercury smiles and with the outmost fondness, says back, "We're all legends."


Image source: IMDB


Overall verdict: Bohemian Rhapsody thrives in visual appeal, recreating Queen's performances in spectacular fashion, led by Rami Malek's magnetic performance as Freddie Mercury. Malek stuns in embodying Queen's frontruner with his eccentric mannerisms on stage, drawing us to his performance. Ben Hardy, Gwilym Lee, and Joe Mazzello manages to stand alongside Malek fairly well, particularly when it came to the band's dynamic. Its striking cinematography is also where the film really shines through, capturing each performance, be it on stage or behind it. However, it does suffer in pacing that affects the story, making sudden developments happen that could take the audience aback for a second. Some things could have been explored more, but since it's cramming a story spanning 15 years, it is understandable that not everything is going go be delved further. Despite that, Bohemian Rhapsody really is a good time, and it's the kind of film that you'd sing your heart out shamelessly through every Queen song that plays throughout the film. It's not exactly a homerun, but it has every potential to be, and for nearly much of the parts, it does realize that.

Stars: 3.5/5

Trailer
By Nadia Ranaputri 

Image source: IMDB

Director: Bradley Cooper
Cast: Bradley Cooper, Lady Gaga, Sam Elliot, Dave Chapelle, Andrew Dice Clay, Anthony Ramos.

A Star is Born has had three previous remakes in the past, there's the original 1937 version, which led to remakes in 1954 and 1974. Each of the films contain a similar core story: an established figure in the entertainment industry who is overshadowed by an up and coming artist who eventually finds her way to the top, but it's executed in different ways to reflect on the background of the years they were released. In the 1937 film, it was a story between an aspiring actress played by Janet Gaynor and an already established actor played by Fredric March. By 1954, it was about an aspiring singer played by Judy Garland and a once infamous actor played by James Mason. The 1974 remake (the film that the 2018 version draws most of its inspiration from) also had an aspiring singer played by Barbra Streisand and a rock star played by Kris Kristofferson. Now, 44 years after the last rendition of the film, we have yet another remake of A Star is Born, this time with Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper.

A Star is Born begins with well-established musician Jackson Maine (Bradley Cooper), who on his way home from his concert, comes upon a drag bar unbeknownst to him, with an excuse that he needed another bottle of booze. He's in luck, because there, he meets aspiring singer Ally (Lady Gaga), a waitress turned occassional entertainer who turned heads with her performance of "La Vie En Rose" that immediately draws Jack to her. They spend the night together and by the next day, Ally is unexpectedly invited to sing with him on stage at his next concert. This leads them to pursue a romantic relationship and tour together on stage, which eventually helps Ally to rise to stardom, attracting a famous music producer and starting a solo act of her own. As Ally ascends her way to fame, Jack becomes aware of his descent from it, with his lifelong struggle of heavy drinking and passing out after concerts.

The main stars of the film, Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga, are really the driving force of the film. They play off each other brilliantly. Cooper, on one hand, is given a heavy part as a talented musician who is struggling with alcohol addiction. Cooper's performance is one deserving of an Oscar nomination, because this is perhaps the best performance I have ever seen from him. To play someone with so much weight and complexity is no easy feat, and Cooper takes on the role as if he's prepared for it his whole life, all while tugging heartstrings at his most emotional moments. Lady Gaga as Ally, on the other hand, isn't as complex of a character as Jack, but still manages to shine alongside Cooper. In tense moments, Lady Gaga is a force to be reckoned with, especially when she's placed in the same room with Cooper. There is a great amount of genuine chemistry between the two that really shines through, tremendously helped by Cooper and Gaga's performances of course, though the more plot based aspects of the romance had slight issues (we'll get to that in a moment). 


Image source: IMDB


As Cooper's first directorial debut, it is a stunner, and it's obvious that he has learned from his fellow directors of how they work behind the camera. Apart from his impressive vocals, his attention to detail and originality really shines through the screen, leaping with great potential. If you've read his interview with The New York Times, Cooper is fond of the fact that he is able to show a reflection of himself in the film, being both the director and the main lead. This is his take on the story, and it shows, very brilliantly, of his own personal take. With cinematographer Matthew Libatique, the film is resilient on raw emotions, keeping its shots fixtated on its actors, even during the musical numbers, as to give an intimate glimpse on the artists performing on stage. It remains that way during most of the emotional parts, especially when it's between Cooper and Gaga, which are brilliant and shows serious star power between two incredible performances.

A Star is Born isn't shy of showing how fame can change a person, particularly for Ally, as someone who started out being loved for her pureness and passion in her songs but isn't given enough freedom when drastically changed to someone she isn't. It plays some similar beats to Damien Chazelle's La La Land, where one of our protagonists strives for success in a career he/she wants to aim for, and in the process, there are struggles to be faced, and lots of ground to cover. When they do get successful however, it turns the tables on them in order to further turn their image into something that would allign with what is trending in the entire world. Just as Ryan Gosling's Sebastian in La La Land strives to bring authentic jazz back into the mainstream, Gaga's Ally does the same with the power of her soulful voice and original lyrics. Once they do reach the peak of their dreams, the industry tweaks their image in order to appeal to the mainstream audience. For Sebastian, it's trading authentic jazz for pop beats, and for Ally, it's her authentic solo singing style for catchy beats and backup dancers. It aims for the right amount of authenticity inside of the portrayal of an industry that is anything but.

It does however, slightly falter in Ally's arc during the second act. While Ally rises to stardom, it doesn't feel as emotionally packed as the beginning of her arc, which was one of the hightlights of the film. Perhaps it is the film's way of saying that as Ally rose to stardom, part of her authenticity and ability to say something for herself is stripped away. But this is also where Maine's arc of his eventual fall from stardom comes clashing in, and that's where most of that rawness and authenticity comes from during the second act. The fact is, Jack isn't jealous of her newfound stardom, he's sad that it has completely changed how she sends her form of art to the audience, continuously losing one of the things he loved her for in the first place: her ability to send soulful message through her booming voice and original lyrics. 


One of those moments came when Ally decided to change something about her image (one of the characters claim that it was her own decision), which shocks Jack, who decides to hold his true reaction as to not make her upset about her decision. Jack is the character that is perhaps the most fleshed out, laying his downfall from his stardom while Ally rises to hers, and it's shown in a heartbreaking way, such as when at some point, Jack was expected to perform at a show, but is replaced at the last minute by a much younger singer. His response? He offers to play second fiddle by being the guitarist on the background.

Image source: IMDB


What held A Star is Born from being masterful however, is the pacing. It isn't too major, but sometimes the pacing feels off, as if there was something that needed to shown to further elaborate on a particular arc, but didn't. Sometimes the film picks up on a significant time jump, but you can't tell until it shows a sudden development that makes you wonder if you missed something. This mostly happens during the second act, where Ally rises to stardom, while Jack's career begins to go downhill. The first act sometimes suffers the same, though as said before, it is not something too major, it just needed to make some room for some arcs to be fleshed out more. While most of the first act is jam packed, some aspects of Jack and Ally's relationship felt as if it developed a little too quick to suddenly turn to a romance. Not that I didn't like their romance, it just needed to be a little more fleshed out to further develop their relationship in the beginning. 

But there's a lot to be loved from A Star is Born, one of which are the musical numbers. The soundtrack is spectacular, and every single number packs a powerful beat. The decision for Cooper and Gaga to sing live during the filming itself instead of recording the songs prior to filming is a brilliant choice, and shows the amount of dedication into making the film as real as possible. Some comparisons could be drawn to big-screen musicals, particularly La La Land, in terms of portraying the struggles in making it big in show business, though other than that, they couldn't be any more different. What differentiates A Star is Born from other modern musicals is that it captures something that is emotionally raw, especially when it comes to what Jack and Ally would have to go through in the film. That's what made it shine. There is a line that Cooper's Jackson Maine says to Ally that to me, is the film's main message and driving force: "Talent comes everywhere, but having something to say and a way to say it so that people listen to it, that’s a whole other bag." To them, having something to say was through singing, but to us as the audience, it's through the film itself.

Image source: Culturess.com


Overall verdict:
A Star is Born thrives in making something as authentic as possible, putting struggles of making it in show business as well as the incredible musical numbers that are wonderfully performed by Bradley Cooper and Lady Gaga (Black Eyes, Shallow, and I'll Never Love Again are my personal favorites). The two leads have excellent chemistry, especially when it comes to the more emotional moments. The film's attempt in sending the message of the risks of trying to make it big in the entertainment industry is for the most part, well conveyed, but some aspects, particularly when it comes to Ally's arc; don't feel as emotionally packed when compared to the development of Jack's arc or the stuff that happens during the first and second act (though they have some minor pacing issues). Jack is probably the most fleshed out character of the two, drawing conplexities in his struggles with alcoholism that literally drove him to a breaking point sometime during the film which one of the film's most heartbreaking moments. Despite its issues, A Star is Born packs many emotional and heart-wrenching moments that are conveyed successfully. 


Stars: 4/5

Trailer
By Nadia Ranaputri

Image source: Business Insider


Director: Damien Chazelle 
Cast: Ryan Gosling, Claire Foy, Jason Clarke, Corey Stoll, Pablo Schreiber, Kyle Chandler, CiarĆ”n Hinds.

The moon landing was one of the most historical events known to man, and it's the story that has been told countless times to the point where we all know the eventual outcome. First Man is the latest to tackle the story, putting Neil Armstrong in the center of it once again. With Damien Chazelle at the helm, this would be his first biopic feature that doesn't include an artist as the protagonist. Having helmed critically praised films like Whiplash and La La Land, First Man is a vastly different field for Chazelle, depicting the true story behind the historic event. From the moment it opens, we're already strapped in alongside Gosling's Neil Armstrong as he takes off on a test flight in the Mojave dessert.

First Man is based on the book by James R. Hansen, which depicts astronaut Neil Armstrong's journey in becoming one of the first men to step foot on the moon. As many have already known the outcome of the mission, this film mainly focuses on the process of the 1969 Apollo 11 mission that took place to achieve the historical moon landing. Being one of the selected candidates in NASA's Project Gemini, Neil faces a difficult balance between doing the best he can in his job in order to avoid the consequence of certain death and telling his family of the risks he has to take whenever he goes to work, caught between going days, weeks, or months without coming home and the very possibility that he might not ever get to come home at all.

Gosling is effectively stoic and focused as the quite yet intelligent main lead. His emotions remain guarded when seen in the eyes of other people, but when the focus all comes down to him, that's when we see the gathering tears in his eyes and the clenched jaw that either prevents him from quivering his mouth or cause him to succumb to an overwhelming flood of emotion. Chazelle makes sure that every bit of Neil's progression is told by his reaction to the things he feels, hears, and sees. He's portrayed as someone who is not very open when it comes to talking about how he feels, even to his wife Janet. He keeps a calm demeanor despite there being scenes of him in the middle of a constant turbulence, whether it's during takeoff or a simulation test (which despite the fact that he passes out during the simulation, he regains his composure and confidently announces that he'd like to have another round at it).

Imags source: Variety

Even during its more dire scenes, Gosling keeps his emotions neutral, as if stating that panicking or any other type of sudden reaction is not the key to solving the problem, but rather to stay composed, focused on the task at hand and to find a possible solution. But when you put Neil face-to-face with his wife Janet, it's an ongoing battle of keeping both of their emotions in check. Alongside him is Claire Foy, who is the standout of the film and is giving a much more emotional performance as the stay-at-home wife who fears for how her husband's impending doom could affect her and their children. Her fear gets to the breaking point when she slams the door of Neil's office at home and forces him to to tell their children about the nature of his job and the consequences that follow it, showcasing Foy's and Gosling's performances at their finest. When Neil refuses to talk or even look at her, she stares him down with a gaze so intense, it even drives him to immediately walk back out of their house right after he entered it during one scene, trying to avoid the possible confrontation that his wife would bring had she known what happened to him.

First Man feels so authentic and grounded, making the epic feel genuine, particularly the moon landing, a gorgeous sequence that deserves to be seen on the biggest screen possible. But when it gets to the things that happen at home, it's also haunting as to show that this is no mere field trip. It depicts the familiar family life, but ultimately smashes the comfort of life back home with the possible fatality of a loved one. Similar to Whiplash and La La Land, Chazelle depicts the struggling efforts of achieving what is deemed to be impossible to reach. At some point, it questions the motives behind such an ambitious mission. It doesn't attempt to sugarcoat the tragedies and struggles of the journey to making history, but at the same time, it also highlights the determination in their goal and improving their ways to do so ("We need to fail down here so we don't fail up there," Neil points out in the film). The attempts made to further progress their goal of landing on the moon are interwoven with the more subdued sequences of the Armstrong family that are sometimes filtered with the feeling of dread from the possibility that Neil won't be returning home, or the constant news of astronauts dying from fatal technical issues that makes civilians question whether all of this was even worth it.

Image source: Cinema Vine

While the family aspect of the film gives the film an emotional touch, it's the sequences in NASA and in space where the film really gets intricate. It's also extremely intense, despite us knowing the outcome of the story. Crafts shake so violently that you wonder if they're even going to make it, and fatal obstacles like a dizzying sequence that involves a continuously spinning craft in the void of space are not taken lightly. But there are scenes that also immerse us in the beauty of space, told through the windows of the spacecraft and the reflection of Armstrong's helmet. It bounces brilliantly between the claustrophobic atmosphere of the space capsule and the vastness of space beyond it. The infamous moon landing is a gorgeous sequence to witness, and as the landing attempt is filled with Justin Hurwitz's illustrious score that elaborates on the feeling of triumph and the spectacular revelation of the moon itself, it eventually resorts to the absence of sound once Neil steps foot on the moon's surface. The film doesn't revel in its success by an epic composition, but through the silence of space and the ragged breathing of the men that made it happen.

The shots are mostly handheld when it comes to the scenes on earth, and at times, it even feels like it was shot like a home video, creating the feeling of normalcy. But the space stuff are more steady yet more fluid in movement, there are shots that are similar to the way Christopher Nolan conducted sequences on the air in Dunkirk: through the cockpit (or the compartment in this case) and the exterior of the craft that overlooks its movements and the atmosphere around it. But First Man is also immersive in bringing the audience in to the astronaut's shoes. When Neil enters the space capsule, some of the shots are told from his eyes, and for a moment, we are the ones being put in a claustrophobic space. It puts us in his spot to really know what it must have felt like for him, and the other astronauts to be put in such a tight spot with various possibilities of the whole thing being torn to pieces.

First Man is not the kind of film that thrives in showcasing the triumph of achieving what could have been seen as an impossible feat, but rather the kind that showcases the struggles in the process and grounded sense of realization that things like this have consequences. It's ultimately worth it, because when the film sticks the landing on the infamous moon sequence, it's saturated with the feeling of silent disbelief. It doesn't even show the millions of people watching the triumphant event, it keeps focusing on the astronauts who put their lives on the line and do everything they can to make sure every bit of their mission is successful. And like Dunkirk, it doesn't show the feeling of complete triumph, but more of relief and the disbelief that they made it, and when they really did make it, you can't help but cheer for it.

Image source: Fandango

Overall verdict: First Man feels authentic in telling the story that has been depicted several times on screen, taking it on a different kind of perspective and a new ground. Gosling is brilliantly composed as Neil Armstrong, bringing his A-game in portraying the astronaut who struggles in avoiding the possible fatality that could occur to him and the revelation to his family of the dangers of his job. He's perfectly paired with Foy's Janet Armstrong, who resides her emotions with intense stares and bursts of anger. It gives a feeling of normalcy, but it knows how to demolish that sense of normalcy with dread and gritty determination. It puts audiences on the Neil's shoes and invites them along on their journey to the vastness of space and eventually the perils that follow. The cinematography is gorgeous and adds a whole new level to the film, particularly the moon landing sequence that is accompanied beautifully by Justin Hurwitz's score; and is worth seeing on the big sreen. The grounded tone, the intense revelations, and the subdued feeling of triumph is what made First Man stand out amongst other films of its kind that had came before it.

Stars: 4.4/5 

Trailer
By Nadia Ranaputri

Image source: Geek Tyrant


Director: Ruben Fleischer
Cast: Tom Hardy, Michelle Williams, Riz Ahmed, Jenny Slate, Reid Scott.


When it was announced that Venom was headlining his own film in Sony's Marvel Universe (excluding ties from the Marvel Cinematic Universe despite Venom's constant connection in the Spider-Man universe), there was doubt, but there was hope. Venom wasn't exactly the best when the symbiote first appeared on screen in Spider-Man 3, and it seems that Sony wanted to do justice to the symbiote and his human counterpart by having him lead his own film. With an impressive cast of A-listers such as Tom Hardy, Michelle Williams, and breakout star Riz Ahmed, this film had a lot of potential to do this anti-hero justice in its return to the screen, which leads to the million dollar question: was it any good?

Venom follows investigative reporter Eddie Brock (Tom Hardy), who's known for being an ace reporter when it comes to tackling stories, but not immune to cause some trouble while working in his field. When we're introduced to him, he has a steady job and a loving relationship with his girlfriend Anne (Michelle Williams). His reputation as a reporter is then shattered when his interview with tech corporation owner Carlton Drake goes horribly wrong. As a result, his job, his relationship with Anne, and basically his whole life takes a downturn. Soon after, his path leads him to further investigate Drake's company, hoping to capture proof of the company's dark secrets. Turns out, the company's lab stores extraterrestrial symbiotes, used for sinister intentions. Brock's venture in the lab eventually seals his fate with the symbiote that would later become a part of him.

Hardy's performance is really what drives the film. No matter what the result of the film itself, you can tell that he genuinely wants to play Eddie Brock. His comedic chops are rather cringy at times, but his banter with the symbiote is quite fun to to watch ("I'm a loser, just like you," the symbiote says to Brock at some point). He's the brightest star in the otherwise dark sky. He makes the most out of a mediocrely written script, which keeps the film from completely crumbling apart. Hardy has a lot of good moments here as Brock, and he's very enjoyable to watch, which perhaps makes him one of the few good things about the film. Brock as a character has some good depth in the story, as he goes around with a motorcycle to document events as an investigative reporter, a job he seemingly loves but destroys when he gets the opportunity to have a face-to-face with tech billionaire Carlton Drake by spitting Drake's worst allegations against him. 


Image source: IMDB

Venom's real lack however, is in the story and the script. Venom falls victim to a typically generic story with an equally generic script that moves quite quickly, leaving you to wonder how the hell they got to a certain plot point with little to nothing to establish said plot point or that the very thing that is set out to establish said plot point is not explored and easily dismissed for the sake of keeping the plot going in just under two hours. It even has its own set of convenient facts that are excruciatingly obvious at presenting its coincidental convenience (oh you just told us this fact? How convenient). It's unfortunate, considering that the film's director Ruben Fleischer, was able to tackle the horror comedy Zombieland (with the help of a good script) with a lot of zing and charismatic characters. There should be a lot to like from this. So what happened with it?

The events that happen during the first and second act feel choppy, and as said before, everything just moves quickly before you could have the chance to explore the characters and the world they live in. Due to that, most of its characters have no real depth either (save for Brock, even if he can be a prick at times). Michelle Williams was quite wasted in a love interest role, though she has her moments here, and Riz Ahmed's character had no clear motivation and fails to come off as a formidable enemy. At its worst, there's a doctor whose only purpose is to serve as a barrier between two characters, or in other words, served no actual purpose to the story. 


Image source: IMDB

But I have to give kudos to some brilliant horror imagery here during some scenes that give it an eerie feel, though the film obviously does not have enough of those. There's an Alien-like vibe going on with the symbiotes, and I'm all for that; yet since the film has other plans, it's swiftly dismissed (to get the plot going and fit everything else into a film that's less than two hours, perhaps?) and sometimes just comes off as dull. It goes for a Xenomorph level of frightening when it comes to how the symbiotes take over the human body, except with some distractingly bad CGI and less gore in this one. But because it's more of a hardcore PG-13, it doesn't have that same snap when it comes to the gore as say, Alien: Covenant (say what you want about Covenant, but you have to admit, the gore is all kinds of eerie, and spot on too). So yes, it doesn't fully utilize the very thing that could have made the film better than what it turned out to be.

Venom doesn't really know where it wants to go. An R-Rating perhaps could have done the trick for a solid ride, but then again, it also comes down to the story itself. One moment, you're seeing something horrific that plays off a little like Alien; and then the next, it's on to some weird comedic scene that involves a post-symbiote Brock dunking himself into a tank full of lobsters. The point is, it's all over the place. Is it a horror? A buddy comedy? A drama? I don't know, you tell me. It's several different tones that don't go together as well as it should have. Think of it like the kind of dish that attempts to put sweet, savoury, and spicy all into one plate. It can work some of the time, but the problem here is that in this case, they don't go well together at all. That's essentially what this film is. 


Image source: IMDB

Overall verdict: Venom has some good moments, like some parts of a motorcycle chase scene that were genuinely fun, or some of the banter between Hardy's Eddie Brock and Venom. Hardy was easily the best part about the film, and clearly wants to play the reporter-turned-anti-hero. It did also have some great horror imagery that give us glimpses of an eerie feel that is almost similar to Alien. However, Venom still has many things to improve, particularly when it comes to the story. It moves a little too quickly to the point where a certain arc feels as if it came out of nowhere or a certain progression doesn't feel earned enough for it to suddenly happen. Riz Ahmed's character doesn't have much to offer as the antagonist, despite Ahmed's performance, and Michelle Williams is unfortunately wasted in a love interest role. Venom just doesn't know what kind of film it wants to be. Is it going for a horror tone? A comedic tone? Or something with a dash of drama? Venom has all three of those things. The problem is, the film executes it poorly, resulting in a clash of tones that don't go together as a whole.

Stars: 2.5/5

Trailer 

By Nadia Ranaputri

Image source: Wired


Director: Jon M. Chu
Cast: Constance Wu, Henry Golding, Michelle Yeoh, Gemma Chan, Awkwafina, Nico Santos, Sonoya Mizuno, Chris Pang, Ken Jeong.


Crazy Rich Asians has gained a much talked about platform due to its achievement of being the first film to have an all-Asian cast since The Joy Luck Club. It's in a way, a step up for Hollywood and for Asian representation in the media. Set mostly in Singapore, Crazy Rich Asians is filled with the richest, most glamorous, and at times, heartwarming story. Following this year's Black Panther, Crazy Rich Asians sets the stage for a Hollywood film with a fully diverse cast.

Crazy Rich Asians starts off in New York, where economics professor Rachel Chu demonstrates a strategy game against one of her students. From then on, her boyfriend Nick Young, also a professor, invites her to accompany him to his best friend's wedding in Singapore. The sudden first class flight with a private suite immediately gets Rachel to question Nick's true upbringing, and if he was far from the simple-minded man she's always known (one of the only few glimpses that showcases his simplicity is where he takes bites from her plate instead of ordering his own). Turns out, his family is one of the biggest real-estate developers in Singapore, having gained a crazy amount of fortune from their long-running business. Little did she know, as soon as she sets her foot on Singapore soil, she's stepping into the lion cage and into the claws of Nick's family and friends who are far from happy to hear of her and her relationship with Nick.

Constance Wu is daringly sweet in the role of Rachel Chu, a brilliant economics professor who knows that the right strategy is the key to winning. And it's easy to see why Nick Young, played by newcomer Henry Golding; would fall for her, (they have great chemistry together, even though my cousin who sat next to me was frustrated as to why the hell Nick did not say anything to prepare her for the coming storm) even if his family says otherwise. Golding is effortlessly charming in his first film role, sweeping the floor with his British accent and literal charm. He doesn't get as much meat to work with on his performance as Constance Wu, however.


Image source: The Mary Sue

But the star of the film is Michelle Yeoh as Eleanor, Nick's mother who is adament that Rachel is not the one for Nick. She has a much more grounded portrayal than the novel (she spends parts of the novel ranting in despair of the things she discovers about Rachel in complete exageration, which was probably riddicilous since they'd have Yeoh exegerate such mundane facts), making her much more intimidating than her novel counterpart. Awkwafina and Ken Jeong also have some gold comedic moments and provides most of the comedic relief in the middle of the crazy rich family drama.

The visual imagery that Crazy Rich Asians has on its belt is richly (no pun intended) stunning, showcasing all that Singapore has to offer. Right of the bat, as our main duo arrive at the infamous Changi Airport, which has a butterfly garden and a cinema; Rachel gawkes at the beauty of Singapore's airport while muttering out that JFK reeks of "salmonella and despair" in comparison to the lavish airport she had just landed on. Then we're taken on a sightseeing trip of the country, with stunning shots of Marina Bay Sands, and a fun sequence where the duo and their friends at the hawker centre with plenty of Asian delicacies from satay to traditional shaved ice with sweet syrup. However, it's perhaps the wedding scene itself that is full of wonder, awe, and grandeur that makes it the film's standout scene, if not one of them.

It's not as audacious or as absurd as its novel counterpart, but it has its riddiculous moments of showing off the rich. The film starts off with a jazzy revamped tune of a classic Chinese number by Jasmine Chen, and from there the stage is set for some crazy rich showcases. One of the more fun sequences include Nick describing some of his cousins, one a photogenic cousin who was introduced by scolding his wife for not wearing a better designer dress that would have landed them on the cover of the American Vogue instead of Vogue China, or Peik Lin's eccentric family that lives in a house of gold, and to its extent, one of the bachelor's companions who would rather set a bachelor party on a cargo ship in the middle of International Waters than a 'typical' bachelor party that he describes as "going to strip clubs and dog fights". The novel is clearly more detailed in describing the absurdities of the rich life, of how controlled the life of the rich is, but at the same time, incorporating Asia's rich culture that really hits the spot for those who grew with traditional Asian customs.


Image source: Time.com

Crazy Rich Asians has the ingredients for a classic chick flick. You've got the romance between our main couple, the comedy of the side characters (Peik Lin and her family are an utter delight and scored the biggest laughs in my theater), and the eventual girl-on-girl rivarly between Rachel and Nick's mother. It's nearly the exact same thing that you expect from any romance film that happens to have a dash of comedy, but sidesteps the traditional boy-meets-girl arc most romantic comedies follow (basically the main couple are already together by the time the film begins). And like most romantic comedies, it has a lot of heartwarming moments, especially between Rachel and her mother. 


Helmed by Jon M. Chu and with the script penned by Peter Chiarelli and Adele Lim, Crazy Rich Asians does follow a Cinderella-like story (the film makes sure to take note of that by having one of the characters comment on what they call a Cinderella moment), but the team manages to hammer the 400 page book with multiple point of views of several characters into a two hour movie, though for those who have read the novel will notice that some arcs will not get as much of a satisfying conclusion than the main arc that they were going for. 

Image source: Variety


Overall verdict: The film pales in comparison when it comes to showing the "crazy rich" side of things because the novel practically goes all out on it, though that's not to say that it makes the film any less enjoyable. The visuals of the film is brilliant and gorgeous, showcasing Singapore's best sites like Marina Bay Sands and the hawker centres that are popular among tourists. Constance Wu and Henry Golding have great chemistry that propels the film, but the standouts were perhaps in its supporting cast, with Michelle Yeoh as the fiercely intimidating Eleanor and Awkwafina is hilarious as Rachel's good friend Peik Lin. It has the basic ingredients of a romantic comedy and in some ways, a chick flick, but manages to bring something slightly new to the table. There are still moments where the absurdly rich side of things are sidelined for a more grounded storytelling, (the novel is much more grandeur and crazier at painting the lives of the absurdly rich) and that's actually more of a compliment than a complaint.

Stars: 4/5

Trailer
By Nadia Ranaputri

Image source: Digital Spy

Director: Christopher McQuarrie
Cast: Tom Cruise, Simon Pegg, Rebecca Ferguson, Ving Rhames, Henry Cavill, Sean Harris, Angela Basset, Vanessa Kirby, Alec Baldwin, Michelle Monaghan.


There is no doubt that Mission: Impossible has become the franchise that significantly gets better with each installment. We go to the movies to witness the magic and fun of a motion picture, don't we all? Well, that's one of the essence of the Mission: Impossible franchise. But what sets it apart from other franchises of its action genre in the likes of James Bond or the evergrowing Fast and Furious? Each of its own installment has mastered, if not elevated the elements of surprise, action, and its most powerful weapon: storytelling. The franchise may have grown increasingly in the amount of installments, but this gem also increases in story. Ghost Protocol was the brilliant sequel/revival of the series that brought the franchise back in the game, Rogue Nation elevated the franchise even further and rival other films of its genre, and its latest, Fallout; continues to further elevate the franchise on another level.

Two years after the events of Rogue Nation, Fallout presents a new mission to IMF agent Ethan Hunt: retrieve the plutonium from black market mercenaries to prevent the Apostles, the Syndicate's newest label; from obtaining it and unleash a nuclear bomb on the world. The mission however, ends in shambles, with Ethan and his team losing the plutonium in the process. As compensation for their failed mission, Ethan sets his sights on the White Widow, a mercenary dealer under the guise of a broker, who happens to have the previously missing plutonium stored in her vaults. This is then intervined by the CIA, who thrusts one of their own into the IMF team, causing a rift between both the IMF and the CIA. To make matters more complicated, Ethan's former ally turned supposed stranger Ilsa Faust makes her presence clear in the already harrowing situation, leaving Ethan and his team with hard-hitting decisions that could either bring salvation or destruction of not only the IMF, but the rest of the world with it.

One could perhaps say that Fallout is the best of the franchise, and it could be in some ways, but in many ways than one, it stands proudly alongside its other previous installments. You've got the stars, the action, and the stunts, but what's the point of it if you can't deliver a good story along with it? Fallout and its predecessors have proven that yes, a good story it what elevates its other elements to a whole other level. This is some master storytelling at hand here. It's not often that action films, especially spy films nowadays, utilize its maze of a plot and turn it into something of a special piece of storytelling. It's not just plot twists and action, it creates real challenges for our protagonists, both physically and mentally. Fallout is what 2015's Spectre should have been, rounding up the consequences of previous events and incorporating them in a whole new canvas for a new kind of story. Perhaps Fallout is somewhat some sort of culmination of the franchise, even if it was meant to be the culmination of the franchise, it truly manages to tie the pieces together in spectacular fashion. 


Image source: Variety

And there's an incredible amount of character development that makes the characters even more than just super spies and genius tech savies. Ethan, in particular, has great development throughout the franchise. He's the kind of spy who's loyal, honest, and all kinds of badass. Even Pegg's Benji Dunn, the tech genius of the team, has been more than just the comedic relief; he remains as vital to the team as the other members. Ferguson's Ilsa has a great arc going on here, proving as more than just a mere female spy who can kick butt, and with the help of Ferguson's performance; Ilsa is also able to develop as a complex character with complex values. Ving Rhames is also given a couple of emotional moments that really hits the spot, one particular scene being an emotional moment between him and Ferguson's Ilsa. Its newest additions, Cavill, Bassett, and Kirby (though Kirby and Bassett are a little underused), bring their A-game in to the mix (especially Cavill, who manages to shed the shadow of the man of steel and kick his way in to the team as a potential ally with fierce principles and a cool demeanor).

Of course, every Mission: Impossible film is not complete without its defining trait: iconic action setpieces with the one and only Tom Cruise, and once again, it really is him doing all the exhilirating action that you see on screen. Not only that, but the action itself is another vital reason why the film thrives. Fallout has incredible action sequences that are immersive and at the same time, cohesive. And the best part is: it's exciting and exhilirating. Shaky camera work and lazy editing don't exist here, and the same applies to strokes of a one-note tone. There's an exhilirating HALO jump atop Paris' bright lights, a beautifully constructed car chase sequence around the bustling Paris streets, and the tension-filled helicopter scene that gracefully highlights the alps of Kashmir. Each of its action sequences is significantly constructed to have its own vibe and continuously excels one after the other with its stunts, setpieces, and Lorne Balfe's impressive score.


Image source: Nothing But Geek

Mission: Impossible- Fallout is proof that not only is the franchise stopping anytime soon, but also of what happens when the amount of attention and focus on creating a good story is equal to building high stakes and thrilling action setpieces that get better with each and every sequence. Fallout truly raises the bar for modern spy films and is a true rival of other films that tackle the genre. Fallout creates an impressive culmination that really pays off to the fans who have passionately followed the franchise over the years, constantly elevating its game with each installment. When you see Christopher McQuarrie's name as the writer and director at the beginning of the film, it may merely be a name, but by the time the film ends, McQuarrie is the guy you want to take by the hand and throw a celebratory party in his name because you know that he's nailed it for the second time in a row.

Overall verdict: continuing the franchise's gold streak, Fallout spectacularly nails nearly every single element that keeps audiences immersed and on the edge of their seat. Fallout further cements its great character development that its predecessor had successfully created, presenting challenging arcs for our protagonists whilst every once in a while, adding a sprinkle of humorous banter. Its action sequences and setpieces are as always, thrilling and enticing. However, Bassett and Kirby are slightly underused despite their intriguing morals, but not to the point where they're considered useless plot devices. But Mission: Impossible- Fallout, like its predecessors, truly know how to mix enthralling action, gorgeous cinematography, and an equally gorgeous score to accompany each sequence; with great storytelling. If you're looking for some damn good fun with a great story, look no further than Mission: Impossible- Fallout. 


Stars: 4.6/5

Trailer
Newer Posts Older Posts Home

HELLO THERE!

Welcome to my blog! I'm an English Literature graduate navigating through a sea of films and books.

Categories

  • Articles/Editorials 12
  • Film Reviews 84
  • Movie Rewinds 6
  • Series Reviews 5

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Advertisement

Powered by Blogger.

Report Abuse

  • Home
  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • ▼  2021 (15)
    • ▼  July (1)
      • Mid Year Book Freak Out Tag (+ video!)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  February (4)
    • ►  January (5)
  • ►  2020 (10)
    • ►  December (5)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  February (2)
  • ►  2019 (9)
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  July (1)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  March (1)
  • ►  2018 (26)
    • ►  December (3)
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  October (3)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (3)
    • ►  March (3)
    • ►  February (3)
  • ►  2017 (27)
    • ►  December (4)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (5)
    • ►  September (4)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  July (3)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (3)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2016 (20)
    • ►  December (2)
    • ►  November (8)
    • ►  October (4)
    • ►  September (3)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (1)

Search This Blog

Blog Archive

  • 2021 15
    • July 1
      • Mid Year Book Freak Out Tag (+ video!)
    • June 2
    • May 1
    • March 2
    • February 4
    • January 5
  • 2020 10
    • December 5
    • November 1
    • May 2
    • February 2
  • 2019 9
    • November 3
    • October 1
    • September 1
    • July 1
    • May 2
    • March 1
  • 2018 26
    • December 3
    • November 3
    • October 3
    • September 1
    • July 3
    • June 2
    • May 2
    • April 3
    • March 3
    • February 3
  • 2017 27
    • December 4
    • November 1
    • October 5
    • September 4
    • August 2
    • July 3
    • May 2
    • April 1
    • March 3
    • January 2
  • 2016 20
    • December 2
    • November 8
    • October 4
    • September 3
    • May 1
    • April 1
    • March 1
Show more Show less

Pages

  • Home
  • Home
  • Film Reviews
  • Series Reviews
  • Movie Rewinds
  • Editorials
  • What's Listed
  • Home
  • Features
  • _post format
  • _error page
  • Beauty
  • Fashion
  • Lifestyle
  • Contact
  • Buy now

Popular Posts

  • The Trial of the Chicago 7- Review
    By Nadia Ranaputri Image credit: IMDB Director: Aaron Sorkin Cast: Eddie Redmayne, Sacha Baron Cohen, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Mark Rylance, Je...
  • Nomadland- Review
    By Nadia Ranaputri Image credit: IMDB Director: ChloƩ Zhao Cast: Frances McDormand, David Straithairn, Linda May, Swankie, Peter Spears, Bo...
  • Judas and the Black Messiah- Review
    By Nadia Ranaputri Image source: WBUR Director: Shaka King Cast: Lakeith Stanfield, Daniel Kaluuya, Jesse Plemons, Dominique Fishback, Darre...
  • Home
  • Features
    • Error Page
    • Short Codes
  • Documentation
  • Download This Template

featured posts

Advertisement

Copyright © Mockingbird In A Blizzard. Designed by OddThemes