smanteufel Reviews

Ninja Warrior (2006– )

More than an Obstacle Course

[8/10 · 21 September 2023]

Watching this show when I was a kid was an absolute event. I would gather around the Tv with my two older brothers to marvel at this epic obstacle course.

We would often argue about which one of us would be the most successful on it and how far we could realistically go. We would debate if any of us had the grip strength to traverse the cliff hanger; the reach to climb the warped wall; or even the speed and endurance to clear the first stage at all.

We were very sporty, athletic kids with hundreds of sporting achievements shared amongst the 3 of us, but even as children we knew that conquering the course would be impossible for any of us. These were highly committed, elite athletes dedicating their whole lives in some instances to this course.

As we grew older I personally began to admire the athleticism and drive of certain individuals that regularly competed. For a show on SBS 2 that only aired twice a week its remarkable that I so looked forward to seeing the likes of Makoto Nagano, Mr Ninja Warrior or the Fireman compete - Which made it all the more tragic when the fiercest competitors would get dunked into the muddy waters below.

I'll never forget the pre-run hype videos before each run: like the Fisherman climbing the flagpole of his boat or doing crunches off the side.

I'll never forget the energy in our own living room as we anxiously awaited our favourites about to run each stage.

I'll never forget the despair when Makoto was just inches from total victory, or the joy when he finally reached the summit.

But mostly I'll never forget spending time with my brothers.

I don't know when we stopped watching? I guess we just got older, but I'll always fondly remember those moments.

I recently endeavoured to watch the show again from the beginning for a little fun nostalgia trip with my partner. She was initially hesitant but I assured her it was all good fun.

Little did I know I would feel all that joy from my childhood once again, seeing my partner go through the same emotions: having favourites come and go; seeing certain obstacles and cowering with fear; or yelping with happiness when someone made it to the 4th stage.

I wondered what it was that made this simple obstacle course gameshow speak to not only myself and my brothers in our childhood, but also myself and my partner in adulthood, and I think the secret is the people, the regulars, the All Stars - the people that came together each tournament to root for eachother to reach the top. That's what separates this show from many others, the comradery and shared goal of finishing.

This isn't a competition but a shared dream and everyone there wants to just see someone make it. So many working class people 'competing' for the sheer joy of it. Because it certainly wasn't the measly prize money that kept the likes of Mr Ninja Warrior coming back.

The personal stories of sacrifice and willpower touched me to my core and honestly it sounds stupid but many of the people in this show are heroes to me. True everyday heroes doing their absolute best.

I'm glad I watched this show as a kid, and I'm glad I scoured the internet to watch it once more because I think it taught me many valuable lessons on what it takes to endeavour.

Yeah I guess it is just an obstacle course, but it really is something more to me. This show and the contestants in it are an inspiration - a true reflection of the bonds of friendship and a mark of tenacity, strength and willpower of the human spirit.

Andor (2022– )

A surprise to be sure...

[10/10 · 16 December 2022]

... but a welcome one.

Honestly some of the best Star Wars content we've had since Rogue One which is a funny coincidence not just because they both star Diego Luna as Cassian Andor, but more so because nobody ever really asked for either of them.

After a pretty rough period for Star Wars with nothing to shout home about other than the Mandalorian for some time now, Andor has been a real breath of fresh air with some breathtaking acting, writing and world building with the continued fleshing out of the formation of the rebellion.

Andor is very much Star Wars for adults, focusing on the aspect of the rebellion that fans always knew existed but was often overlooked in more child friendly films. Prior to Rogue one the rebellion magically formed fully funded without much explanation within canon. But Andor goes deeper than Rogue one, highlighting the fact that the rebellion had always been made up of small terrorist cells willing to do what needed to be done to unsettle a tyrannical regime. (Sadly quite topical for many countries in real life right now)

The sense of realism is the most frightening and brilliant aspect of this show, with Cassian himself being a reluctant participant in the freedom fighting activities for much of the shows introductory season. Cassian only really begins to see the need for resistance to the empire after being subjected to their indiscriminate cruelty on multiple occasions. Most pertinently the wrongful imprisonment of presumably thousands across the galaxy: including Cassian, in response to increased rebel activity. It's here that the final straw breaks for Cassian and also where we meet Keno Loy played by Andy Serkis who delivers one of the most powerful acting performances in Star Wars ever.

He is In fantastic company as well, with amazing performances from Diego Luna, Stellan Skarsgard, Genevieve O'Reilly and Fiona Shaw just to name a few.

No Jedi, no Force, limited action, but make no mistake THIS IS STAR WARS.

Tenet (2020)

Entertaining, but held back by Convoluted Storytelling

[8/10 · 10 November 2020]

I'll start by saying I enjoyed the movie thoroughly, and even with only a semblance of understanding the plot as the credits hit the screen, I understood enough of the overarching story to enjoy the characters and their adventure without understanding the intricacies of how the plot really comes together. Robert Pattinsons Acting was a highlight as well as certain scenes with 'reversing elements' so to speak. There is however something to be said about a movie that 'challenges' it's audience to understand it, (often through multiple watches) and where some will think it's bold, others will think it's just rubbish. Normally I would be inclined to the latter as I've always thought a truly great film: well written, directed and edited can only ever be just as good the second time around... Films the likes of the Sixth Sense, Donnie Darko or even Nolan's own Inception have commonly been touted as films that get better the more you watch and understand, but I beg to differ, stating that the true brilliance of a film lies within its mystery and reveal. It's the tension and suspense on that first viewing that can never be replicated on further viewings. That is to say the removal of said suspense in lieu of noticing clever moments of foreshadowing in any other subsequent viewing belies the point of any foreshadowing in the first place. I'm not saying there isn't an art to building a narrative in such a way that prior knowledge and hindsight can make subsequent viewings fun, but in a way these moments can't exceed an initial perception as they serve only to remind the viewer of their first watch, in effect bringing them back to the first time they watched it reigniting those same emotions they felt with a form of nostalgia. The trouble with Tenet is that the first viewing experience is muddled and unclear. Only after sitting down with a pen and paper drawing out parallel and convergent timelines of multiple characters (it's just the one timeline actually) did I actually "get" the plot, and even then a quick read of reddit forums didn't hurt my understanding of the film. What I'm saying is, I enjoyed this film... It was rapidly paced and edited with some very impressive sequences, but it was also challenging from a narrative perspective to the degree that it was very nearly beyond my patience. So if this sort of film isn't your cup of tea I'd probably give this one a miss, but if Nolan's over-complication of story structure (that's become something of his oeuvre) doesn't bother you, then there is a compelling and interesting sci-fi story hidden underneath.

Star Wars: The Rise Of Skywalker (2019)

TLDR: eh...

[3/10 · 19 December 2019]

It was a pretty big challenge to try and rescue the trilogy after what was done to it in the last film; so if you liked the Last Jedi this isn't the review you're looking for... move along.

We'll start with the boring stuff first; the editing. It was fast, like real fast. The film never left the audience with a moment to breathe. Starting the film with an adrenaline filled montage of Kyle Ren doing Kyle Ren things was only just the beginning. Each show stopping set piece sequence followed one another almost seamlessly, resulting in these 'big' scenes feeling repetitive and predictable. Too many and they almost become parodic and silly, especially when screen time dedicated to dragged out fight sequences with flying troopers (definitely going to be a hot selling toy no doubt) or horse like creatures running around on Star destroyers (Probably a toy too) are given precedence over dialogue and character building. The end result is corny one liners being shouted during these fast paced scenes instead of good dialogue that builds something resembling a cogent story. "They can fly now!?" x3... yeah we heard you the first time. That's one of the biggest problems with this film. Now Star Wars has never had particularly scintillating dialogue but what we got in this film was arguably the weakest of any Star Wars picture I've ever seen (maybe not the Holiday Special) because of these pacing/ editing issues impacting the script. Everything was delivered at lightning speed in order to move on to the next showstopper. Exposition was rushed and lazy/ if explained at all! Even the tempo of the score was so fast that slower scenes failed to enamour the audience to onscreen characters that we're supposed to feel something for in lieu of "intensity". Humour was also a recurring farce that hit the mark only a third of the time, but ultimately pulled away from any sort of running narrative yet again. But although the editing lead to what was a largely disjointed mess in terms of sequencing, the narrative was what really took the hit in this film.

I'll clarify again that it was probably an impossible task to make some fans happy after the Last Jedi. Defying expectations certainly wasn't what they set out to do in this film, instead trying to cobble together something that fans might connect with from the ashes. It was a noble goal, but bringing Palpatine back was not the answer. Essentially retconning Snoke in order to bring back an old favourite felt cheap, as if the first two movies didn't mean anything. Even if Snoke was just a guise for The Emporer hiding in the shadows. These facts weren't signposted or even hinted at in any of the preceding films. It was shoehorned in because the marketing team thought it would be a popular idea with fans. That wasn't the only retcon of what came before though, even characters that were built up like Rose were virtually absent throughout this whole movie in order to introduce new periphery characters like Jannah or Zorri that may better hit the mark with fans (to sell toys...).

It's a shame that the main branch of Star Wars films centred on the Skywalker story has become such a corny, trope filled shill. But hey, it's over now. So let's all breathe a collective sigh of relief and hope all future Star Wars anthologies and tv shows focus on mythology, characters and story.

Solo: A Star Wars Story (2018)

Fun's the word

[8/10 · 27 May 2018]

Let's be honest here, for an origin story this film ended up with more questions than answers.

(Again Spoilers - just making sure you get the warning)

What's going to happen with Qi'ra? How did Beckett kill Aurra Sing? Where's Darth Maul fit into all of this between what happens in Clone Wars against Sidious; to his eventual return in rebels with Ezra? Clearly there are multiple gaps that still need to be filled, whether that be in the *yet to be confirmed* next Solo film, or in other media? Who knows? One thing I can say is that this movie is fun. Alden makes for a decent younger Han; although at times the disconnect between his performance and that of Harrison Fords made me sometimes forget this was 'The Han Solo'. Nevertheless he was solid, and with Donald Glover pumping out a performance possibly even more devil-may-care than Billy D. Williams (seriously, who is cooler?!) the films acting performances were certainly true to form.

Most importantly however, this felt maybe not like a traditional Star Wars story, but it certainly felt like the Star Wars universe. This film touched on the gritty underbelly that we've always known was there, and expanded on this mythology in a fun way. Yes the story was at times muddled and seemed to pack in a lot of story arcs resulting in quite a dense film, but the energy: particularly of planets like Correlia, felt all too familiar to underworld planets we fans have seen in the now 'Legends' since Return of the Jedi, and for me it's another welcome addition to the Star Wars mythos. Again, the story was at times messy, lacking clarity in a lot of sequences; I personally would have liked to see Hans time with the academy explored: something more akin to his EU origin story, but I suppose times are a-changing. I'm also slightly perplexed by Chewbaccas motivations in hanging around, and there was nothing in this story that would really have warranted a life debt. But mostly I just look forward to seeing the next film: if we get one, where hopefully Darth Mauls leadership of the various crime organisations (forget Crimson Dawn, where's Black Sun?) can be fully fleshed out. It's also pretty likely that this next big heist on Tatooine will introduce Boba Fetts anthology film (crossover anyone?) But yeah, in so few words, we aren't done with this story and so far it's been fun.

Star Wars: Episode VIII - The Last Jedi (2017)

The Last Jedi? We can Hope

[3/10 · 15 December 2017]

The films lack of focus from a narrative perspective is perhaps the most obvious and daunting problem posed by this mess of a film, but it is also aided by Rian Johnson's many failed attempts at humour and fan service that fall well short of the original trilogies energy. Dare I say even Attack of the Clones, possibly the most condemned Star Wars film to date, at least had structure and relevant character development. The Last Jedi however falls flat on its face time and time again throughout its unnecessarily padded runtime, with dozens of 'shocking' and 'dark' moments: quite obviously Johnson's nod toward a darker Star Wars film akin to Empire, which are so overused and rushed in setup that I myself was completely desensitised by any impending twist. From the off, issues with regard to story and editing were prevalent with each scene plagued by over-dramatisation and poor pacing. The very first scene featuring Paige Tico's untimely death is indicative of sequencing throughout the whole movie, with her character kicking that ladder for what felt like a million years before the remote finally fell for an unnecessarily dramatic catch. However Paige's death is just the beginning in terms of exaggerated melodrama, with 'THAT' Leia scene following not long after...

With the passing of Carrie Fisher many speculated a heroic final goodbye for her much beloved character. Johnson however, obviously lacking in foresight handles this hurdle poorly, almost taunting fans with Leia's close brush with death on the bridge before she ridiculously flies through space in what could possibly be as cringe-worthy as I'm assuming her CGI duplicate will be in the next film. Leia's temporary replacement, Vice Admiral Holdo was also a wasted opportunity, with her character stepping up in Leia's absence as a potential new leader of the Resistance. Not only was her martyrdom another example of a newly introduced character being killed too soon, but it also could have served as a great sacrificial exit point for the late Carrie Fisher if their roles were reversed. Even the manner in which Laura Dern's character was killed off was jarring as her hyperspace insta-kill is honestly a step too far. The destruction level caused by such a manoeuvre will make fans wonder, why don't they just do that all the time? Why didn't they just do that to the Death Star?...Twice? Fans also wondered whether Gwendoline Christie's character, Captain Phasma would finally live up to all the hype as portrayed in advertising and merchandise, however she seems to have been surplus to any real plot movements once more; undoing all added canonical source material that sought to bring her back from the dead after the Force Awakens, and ultimately her characters appearance in the film was as brief as it was pointless... except for all the toys sold in her likeness I suppose. Well-done Disney. Money... Speaking of even more disappointing deaths, we move onto Snoke, a character depicted as the next main antagonist: a character who from early scenes in this film seemed like he might be the most powerful Sith Lord to grace the silver screen yet. His ability to manipulate Kylo and Rey across vast distances was a testament to his unique powers unseen by any other force wielding character in the now pretty average canon that Disney seems to be creating. But it was his signposted death at the hands of Kylo Ren that was most disappointing. A sequence set out to shock the viewer, yet I was not at all surprised at Kylo's betrayal; in fact I'll be more shocked if Snoke doesn't eventually put himself back together when Disney realises that they've just killed the most interesting character in the film. And of course it wouldn't be the first time a Star Wars villains death was later retconned as Darth Maul once survived being cut in half after Lucas Arts realised they could sell more toys if he was alive again, so all bets are off I guess. And finally I must mention Luke Skywalker's sudden departure. Putting aside the fact that many, including Mark Hamill himself fundamentally disagreed with creative choices surrounding his character... Luke's death was just really silly. A scene that totally lacked any emotion or resonance toward the story, he just simply died and that's that: kind of a spit in the face to kill off such a beloved character in such ambiguous fashion.

All these deaths and subsequent lack of empathy from audiences are the result of Johnson's flailing story. The plot can be summarised as succinctly as "Rebels flee from the First Order" in an almost comically long car chase, whilst simultaneously the plot with all its throwaway tangents and expendable characters seems almost impossible to discern an overarching story. Moments like Maz Kanata's holo call, Yoda's return (apparently force ghosts can now summon lightning and whack people on the head with sticks), or Rey's infinity mirror scene didn't work to expand the Star Wars world as we know it; alluding to an expanded universe that stretches beyond the main plot as other Star Wars films have done so in the past, rather these moments added unnecessary clutter to an already misdirected catastrophe of a film that's nothing like the Star Wars mythology of old. Much like J.J Abrams, Rian Johnson has looked to both copy and rebuke the classic Lucas mould by adding in uncharacteristic narrative elements that blur the lines between good and evil. And by effectively removing both the Jedi and Sith order by killing Luke and Snoke respectively, the series has set itself up to be more grey and ambiguous in intention. I feel this is what Mark Hamill was referring to when he spoke of doubts... Star wars should be formulaic. It's the classic battle between good and evil, but now Rian Johnson and J.J Abrams in kind, seem to want to leave their mark by reinterpreting and effectively butchering the series oeuvre.

Band Aid (2017)

Failing marriage never sounded so sweet

[8/10 · 27 August 2017]

Band Aid is a quirky indie picture written and directed by Zoe Lister-Jones that depicts the lives of Anna and Ben, a young married couple struggling not just with the dishes, but unemployment, un-fulfilment, miscarriage and of course the frailties of a monotonous marriage.

Together, both Lister-Jones and Adam Pally are brilliant in depicting a realistic and grounded relationship that balances comedy and drama, as the two uniquely deal with their marital problems by turning each and every fight into a song performed alongside drummer and neighbouring creep Dave, played by Fred Armisen.

The whimsical and clever lyrics of each song aside, the film is genuinely fantastic, both in direction and writing, with Lister-Jones churning out a brilliant performance that has me, and many others wishing she would write and direct more

Colossal (2016)

Not a Colossal waste of time, but not great either

[6/10 · 2 July 2017]

In what could playfully be argued as indie cinemas answer to Pacific Rim, Nacho Vigalondo's most recent picture seems to have divided many over whether or not this film even means anything.

I for one am a proponent of the film feeling that it represents real characters with real problems; whether that be Dan Steven's character (Tim) being a right ass, Austin Stowell's character (Joel) being a massive coward, or of course Anne Hathaway and Jason Sudeikis's characters Gloria and Oscar respectively, struggling with alcohol; something I found particularly relatable or so my friends keep telling me (I don't see the problem).

In any case, I found this character driven narrative to be both full of whimsy and validity, even if the explanation for the events that occur in the film are thinly veiled at best, it was Hathaway's exceptional performance that certainly helped me to look past this pretty rubbish story. Perhaps the most succinct way to explain this films narrative is that it is allegorical of our inner demons. The two main characters struggle with multiple psychological issues that at the beginning of the film seem at most, slightly embarrassing, with side effects including Gloria being unable to hold down a job, or fighting with her boyfriend, etc. But events later on in the film reveal that her drunken behaviour impacts more than just her own life, but is in fact killing hundreds in Seoul and yes, the metaphor is slightly over the top if you ask me, but its message is as clear as this movie is stupid, and that is, how our own personal problems can hurt others unbeknownst to us.

All things considered, this isn't a bad film to wind down your week on a Sunday night, with Anne Hathaway delivering one of her better acting performances, more akin to her part in The Devil Wears Prada than more serious outings like Le Mis, but ultimately this film feels forgettable and I can't say I would recommend it to anyone other than the most die-hard of Hathaway or Sudeikis fans.

In Your Eyes (2014)

An underwhelming piece of dribble

[3/10 · 17 June 2017]

I watched this film off the back of its strong premise and the promise of a decent acting performance from the usually brilliant Zoe Kazan. I suppose I'll preface my review by saying that I was disappointed, as the film seemed totally unable to stick to any genre it supposedly was. Initially pitched as a sci-fi/ romance, the film dwindled into a pudgy mess of awkward dialogue, ill-fitting score and incredibly unlikable and unrelatable characters.

Whilst the plot seemed a unique take on the generally overplayed star-crossed lovers theme it didn't take me long to figure out that this was just another chick-flick full of comedically bad villains the likes of; the nosy housewife who couldn't paint, or, the women who liked her steaks well done. The most heinous of all villains was of course Phillip the husband, whilst not being wholly neglectful in his marriage, was just so unrealistically dickish that at times I did think Rebecca, played by Kazan, should run away with the random voice in her head. Perhaps this was supposed to infer some underlying theme regarding domestic abuse, but in all honesty the worst thing he actually did apart from being a jerk all the time was stop her from refilling her wine glass at that boring function.

The old 'troubled intellectual' / 'Good Will Hunting' trope also made an appearance through Dylan's character, played by Michael Stahl-David, which might just have worked in making him a likable character if not for his continuous stupidity. It was particularly grating when the film tried to introduce the idea of his intellect through dry wit and the word "benign" when chatting with a woman at the bar... I mean clearly he's to good for this town if he knows such a big word. But overall I just found the film a hard pill to swallow as I cringed through nearly every interaction.

If you must watch this film, or you have already watched it and are trawling through the reviews for some explanation as to why you just sat through such a "benign" piece of trash, may I recommend a nearly identical yet vastly superior film "The F word" ("What If" in the U.S) also starring Zoe Kazan but without the psychic element or the terrible, terrible.... everything else.

Arrival (II) (2016)

Amicable and thought provoking yet ultimately negligible

[6/10 · 30 March 2017]

Dennis Villeneuve's newest picture Arrival has been advertised and for the most part received by audiences as an original and thought provoking sci-fi akin to Close Encounters of the Third Kind and Interstellar, but I have to say after watching it I feel slightly underwhelmed by the work of a director who to date has never made a film short of brilliant.

Arrival begins with a dozen UFO's 'arriving' on Earth at various locations. Your typical science fiction tropes are all present, with a seemingly mundane day interrupted by potential chaos as Louise Banks (Amy Adams) a college professor in linguistics suddenly becomes a sought after commodity by US intelligence in order to decipher an alien language. Together with Ian Donnelly (Jeremy Renner), she eventually learns the alien language enabling her to perceive time in cyclical fashion due to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. This of course is the first misinterpretation of scientific theory within the film, as the real theory: even being mentioned in the film as a debunked concept, is dependent upon an initial language perception, for example a natural speaking English person will not learn French and suddenly have a theoretical/ mental capacity on equal terms with a natural speaking national. The initial perception garnered by the first language absorbed generates an individual's perception. So it seems implausible that her perception of inter- dimensional time could be altered so drastically, if at all.

Which brings me to my second point, in that her new language is incomprehensible, and I don't mean in the general way that anything above the third dimension is incomprehensible, but in a way that is contradictory to theory cited within the story itself. Through learning the aliens written language, Louise is imbued with this new inter-dimensional vernacular enabling her to observe time from beginning to end instantly and freely as she congruently experiences her entire life at any given time as if she has done it before; because in effect, she has. The film shows and infers multiple instances with juxtaposing scenarios of happiness and sadness, with the prime example obviously being the birth and death of her daughter. This consequence of her power is portrayed in the film as a sort of Amor Fati (love of fate) or as Nietzsche conceptualised, an 'eternal recurrence' where one simply accepts their fate through contentment. But this theory is ultimately flawed within the context of this film and in turn with the structure of this films 'bootstrap paradox' narrative, instead choosing to portray Louise as a sort of Deus Ex Machina/ McGuffin who conveniently learns of things she has already done within cyclical time the very instant it becomes relevant to the linear dimension. There are multiple instances of the plot moving forward due to Louise's perception of the 'future'; for example, her phone call to General Shang was only able to occur because it had already occurred in the future, creating a causality loop where one action is dependent upon another in order to fulfil itself. Putting aside the fact that she seems unsure of herself at the time of the phone call, receiving her 'vision' of a conversation with the General in real-time suggests that her perception of time was still in fact linear, when if she was indeed able to perceive time in omnipotent fashion she would not have been so confused by any scenario having already experienced it retroactively. The mere presence of a causality loop denotes another scientific theory touched on in the film called Fermat's principle, where a ray of light will always transverse a distance that consumes the least amount of time irrespective of distance and refraction. The significance of this principle infers that in order for the light to take the least amount of time, it theoretically must 'know' how long each possible angle will take to transverse, in effect, knowing the future. This indicates that the path is set, and therefore predetermined. The consequences of this outcome with relation to Louise perceiving time in totality, essentially means that she has no free-will. If she has already experienced all of her time simultaneously, then she inevitably must fulfil what she has done in cyclical time in linear function as well. Therefore even if she does not occupy time in linear fashion, she still interacts within the third dimension linearly resulting in the fulfilment of the 'future' being enacted just as she had initially seen it.

Arrival does showcase great acting and traditional sci-fi elements throughout, but the overall rhetoric within the film, presaging an absolute need for open and honest communication across linguistic barriers is a nice sentiment, but ultimately negligible. The film finishes with a touching sequence of memories flooding through Louise's head of both past and future as she is presented with a cross roads; does she divert from this presented future and into the unknown? Or does she engage in a relationship with Ian Donnelly that will result in her future occurring the same way despite this realities afflictions, because it has moments of true beauty; is it no worth it? The trouble is she never had any choice to begin with as Villeneuve has compromised real scientific reasoning and logic in order to facilitate 'Hollywood' moments of tension and climax which contradict an abstraction of time that lends itself to omnipotence.

I enjoyed Arrival. It might not seem like it after reading this review, but it did have moments of excellence; and Dennis Villeneuve's style, although not quite as dark and gritty as in previous films the likes of Enemy or Prisoners, is still evident and as always striking. The main pitfalls of this film lie in its execution of narrative, which contradicts its implied meaning with its factual telling resulting in an ultimately frugal piece that although thought provoking, is just kind of a mess.

Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (2016)

Great addition to Star Wars, and hopefully the first of many...

[8/10 · 7 January 2017]

Rogue One, being the first of many to come in Disney's new anthology to act in conjunction with the main 'Skywalker' branch is really anything but a spin off. It is a film that fits seamlessly between episodes 3 & 4 filling in gaps and possible plot holes of the original film "A New Hope".

In many ways this film is episode 3.5 due to its ability to fill in and reference points from the original trilogy, and with lingering throwback shots of C3-PO, R2-D2 and blue milk aside, some of the reused sequences featuring original trilogy cast members in unison with amazingly done CGI work: as most Star Wars fans could probably attest to the fledgling nature of it's practice in the prequel trilogy, were used to great effect in bringing back minor and major characters alike. Of particular note being Grand Moff Tarkin originally portrayed by the great Peter Cushing, who is just about brought back from the dead to aid new cast members.

Felicity Jones and Ben Mendelsohn among others were inspired casting choices that paid dividends in bringing the film to life, with each and every character requiring, almost disappointingly, brief introductions before the main plot line, that inferred their place within the Star Wars universe paving the way for a visually powerful story that serves to unite them as The Rebellion.

The imagery was astounding with particular emphasis on scenery establishing shots that really showed the depth of planetary source material available to Gareth Edwards's, with the opening scene on Lah'mu being an excellent example of traditionalist Star Wars trope emphasizing that although this is not Star Wars, it still remains within the same world. And as always, a classic orchestral score, this time composed by Michael Giacchino: a worthy successor to John Williams, aids in the creation of a powerful atmosphere in unison with costume design to recreate that original Star Wars feel that Lucas and others formed over 3 decades ago.

Ultimately the story of Rogue One was entirely predictable, obviously leading into A New Hope, but that did not stop this film from providing laughs, thrills and intrigue that have become synonymous within Star Wars mythology and as a great fan of the series I can only hope that each iteration of this new anthology is as good as the last.

Star Wars: Episode VII - The Force Awakens (2015)

Remarkably generic...

[5/10 · 17 December 2015]

...And it was everything that I expected. It was a Star Wars film that fit almost to well into the mold of the original film: now called A New Hope, 1. Droid containing sensitive information hides from an evil force on a desert planet, which coincidently has a force sensitive youth vital to the plot nearby. 2. The bad guys search for the droid leads to the formation of ragtag team escaping the planet in the Millennium Falcon; all the while evil forces are using their new super weapon to destroy planets aligned with their enemies. 3. The girl is then captured and taken aboard said super weapon where the good guys stage a daring partially unplanned rescue of her which results in the ultimately pointless heroic death of a geriatric. 4. The good guys then all fly towards Starkiller Station (Death Star III) to destroy it in a mission involving flying through a trench with one good pilot essentially doing everything while a team on the ground disables the shields. 5. The good guys win. Everybody hugs. If anything I think the movie is formulaic on purpose. I think this film is an attempt to not upset the hardcore fans whilst bringing in the new fans with bright lights and pretty laser fights. This is a good thing; Star Wars needed a reset after such a long hiatus, and in recycling old set pieces and plot lines from the original films it makes it incredibly difficult for old fans to complain, because in effect this is what we asked for. Nothing better illustrated this than the opening shot of a silhouetted Star Destroyer flying overhead. These slight alterations to a tried-and-true formula were sporadic and well received by everyone I've spoken to. Of course there were what I would call inconsistencies and "cons" within the film: The Millennium Falcon seems to have turned into a bumper car, Stormtroopers still can't hit anything and Carrie Fishers performance within the film can only be described as awkward. But all in all, the movie was fun and has the potential to act as a fantastic foundation for future projects. This film was made to reintroduce the Star Wars universe, to introduce new characters and to sell toys. It is my hope that the next film is where the creative people that be branch out and tell a new story, something compelling and original that in hindsight makes this film a clever reset for the next generation of Star Wars fans rather than a generic rehash as it currently stands.