Some stuff I missed – closing 2017

With 2017 coming to a close, in an effort to reduce the never-ending list of things left undone, I decided to do a superfast review of some of the movies I missed reviewing during the year for whatever reason (mostly laziness). So, in no particular order, here goes:

Star Wars Episode VIII– The Last Jedi

This movie is arguably the most polarizing movie of the franchise. Director Rian Johnson definitely took a sharp detour from a lot of things considered canon and brought a movie with many twists and turns and discarded a lot of setup from “The Force Awakens”, angering and disappointing a lot of the die-hard fans. I am not the greatest Star Wars fan and just enjoy the movies for what they are, so I felt the movie delivered in a lot of ways – good strong performances, especially from returning Mark Hamill, as well as Daisy Ridley and Adam Driver and not to forget the last performance from Carrie Fisher (the other lead and supporting casts were great too); great effects and visuals; a decent plot touching upon a lot of core themes while bringing up more new ones. If only some of the subplots which really don’t amount to much could have been avoided, it would have been a far leaner and, in my opinion, better movie (this is the longest movie in the franchise so far). Given the number of things it disrupts, it would be interesting to see how J. J. Abrams takes it to the finish line. All in all, a good time – but I guess I can see what all the hate is directed at.

Angamaly Diaries

This one wasn’t initially anywhere near my radar, but the positive reviews and general buzz around it got me interested. Though the movie doesn’t have a real ‘plot’ so to speak, the way it captures the flavour of the region and progresses with so much energy and fun made it a really enjoyable watch. Introducing a lot of newcomers who mostly came through, the interesting mix of unique characters, cracking dialogue, excellent cinematography and one of the best tracking shots I’ve seen as its climax, this movie really worked for me. Probably something only I felt, but this felt very similar to last year’s ‘Kammattipaadam’ (follows the life over time of its main characters, featuring a gang of youngsters who are on the shadier side of the law, with focus on the uniqueness and nuances of the region the movie is set in). While I found ‘Kammattipaadam’ overlong, plodding and slow; ‘Angamaly Diaries’ was a joyride pretty much throughout. Watch it if you haven’t – may not be for everyone, but I think mostly you will enjoy it.

Coco

Pixar really got back to their element with ‘Coco’, a gorgeous looking movie with music at the centre of its tugging-at-the-heartstrings story. While it deals with death, a theme that would not seem the most appropriate for a children’s movie, the makers masterfully handle the subject and infuse so many beautiful moments that would resonate with both children and adults. And of course, it was nice to see Mexican culture take centerstage with its vibrancy and vitality. With its heavy focus on family, music and fun, this is a great one to be seen on the big screen with the entire familia.

Newton

‘Newton’ is definitely a good movie, but not necessarily the easiest watch since it is slow, a bit longer than it should be and generally leaves you with a feeling on nothing happening. That being said, it tackles a very relevant theme with humorous moments that will make you laugh and think at the same time. It’s also especially good that delicate subject matters are neither trivialized nor handled controversially. With amazing performances from Rajkummar Rao and Pankaj Tripathi, the movie also cements the fact that actors with talent are getting good roles, which is slowly becoming a better option than making a senseless movie with just the standard trappings of a commercial potboiler. ‘Newton’ may not be for everyone, but it was one of the better movies of the year.

Get Out

Jordan Peele’s psychological horror thriller is so disturbing (as a good horror thriller should be), what makes it so fascinating is the evident U-turn it takes from standard race centric movies – while making sense all the while. With some terrific acting, brilliant atmospherics which keep an element of unease throughout the movie, and masterful writing and direction, this was one of standout movies of the year for its sheer audacity. Highly recommended.

Aval

This horror movie has good performances from Siddharth, Andrea, Atul Kulkarni and many of its supporting cast, but it’s a surprising, star-making turn from Anisha Victor that is the highlight of the movie. While ‘Aval’ is pretty much by the numbers (except for the surprise ending I guess) and adopts the usual tropes to scare its audiences, it does it well and has a good mix of jump scares and tension building. It is one of the better Indian horror movies solely because it executes the usual stuff well. Nothing ground-breaking, but a decent watch nonetheless.

A Death in the Gunj

Konkana Sen Sharma’s directorial debut is a good example of a slow burn, where events and situations occur and accumulate over the course of the movie to result in a climactic moment. Though the movie is slow, the way it builds up it characters and adds so much nuance and backstory with very little, if any, exposition is to be appreciated. With great performances from a very strong cast, and confident directing at its helm, ‘A Death in the Gunj’ is a class in film making. Though not really ‘enjoyable’ in the strict commercial sense of the word, this one would be appreciated by those who are interested in the art of cinema.

Justice League

Easily the most disappointing movie of 2017 for me given I was hoping DC would get its act together after the success of ‘Wonder Woman’. The worst thing about ‘Justice League’ is that it isn’t really bad but more a just-there, ho-hum and generally lacklustre experience. What was expected to be a course correction for the universe ends up being a hotch potch that takes no risks in an attempt to appease everyone and ends up pleasing no one. And ofcourse for me personally, it sucks that the movie reduces Batman to pretty much a muscle man who has no place among people with superhuman abilities. It is no surprise that it didn’t generate any kind of buzz or excitement since its promotion also was pretty much nothing. Atleast ‘Batman v. Superman’ and ‘Suicide Squad’ had its moments, be it in gorgeous comic panel style shots or some good performances. ‘Justice League’ ends up being just a big nothing – DC really are in a spot and need to do some serious rethinking here.

Vikram Vedha

‘Vikram Vedha’ shows that you can make a movie that is both entertaining and intelligent. A good cat-and-mouse chase and cop movie, this was an enjoyable watch from start to finish with hardly a boring moment. The highlight of the movie is obviously the cracking chemistry between its two leads, and Madhavan and Vijay Sethupathi are pit against each other in roles that are perfect for them. Full credit to the writer-director duo for delivering on the super high expectations this pairing created. The visual imagery and dialogues alluding to the story of Vikram Betal is a nice touch. Definitely a must watch.

Lipstick under my Burkha

Needless to say, this movie had its fair share of controversy. But we won’t go into that here. As a movie, ‘Lipstick under my Burkha’ points the spotlight at its female protagonists who are across age groups but pretty much in the same regressive social structure of small-town India, and talks about their hopes, dreams, trials and tribulations. It is telling of our society and also of the relevance of this movie that so many people were uncomfortable and upset by it. While it is not the greatest movie I have seen, the good performances and storytelling with its shades of humour make for an interesting watch. One area I felt the movie was lacking was its portrayal of all male characters with the broad brush of negativity. A breakthrough movie for its relevance in our times.

Thor: Ragnarok

Marvel has to be commended for its sheer genius when it comes to identifying what their characters need. Thor’s solo outings have been less than exciting – and all that changed with the breath of fresh air that is ‘Thor: Ragnarok’. Taika Waititi’s unique vision reigns supreme throughout the movie and there are amazing visuals, good writing with all the irreverence and humour that is needed to shake up the franchise-within-a-franchise (if you can call it that), and a starcast that takes full advantage of the material they have. And of course, there’s Jeff Goldblum at his weird and wacky best – who doesn’t want more of that? Fun times!

Theeran Adhigaaram Ondru

Based on a true story, ‘Theeran Adhigaaram Ondru’ is an excellent police procedural, which focuses on portraying real-life events without much frills. Barring the very unnecessary love track, this is a movie that engages you from start to finish and does not insult the audience’s intelligence. Yes, it could have been tighter and some of the unnecessarily long action sequences could have been avoided, the focus on things like war tactics and strategy and a strong lead performance by Karthi makes for compelling viewing.

Blade Runner 2049

Surely the most visually stunning movie of the year, ‘Blade Runner 2049’ – the much-awaited sequel to Ridley Scott’s ground-breaking and polarizing sci-fi (what some call but I don’t necessarily agree) masterpiece – ticks all the boxes for what could be called a great sequel. A movie that just doesn’t ‘reboot’ or ‘rehash’ the original for the sake of it, but instead delivers a compelling story and takes the world of the original forward while adding new elements both thematically and otherwise, while maintaining the heart of the original, it is disappointing although not surprising that ‘Blade Runner 2049’ repeats history – like its predecessor, it has polarized critics and audiences and not done well box-office wise. My take though – I am not a die-hard fan of the first movie, which I saw just before ‘2049’, but appreciated it a lot. ‘Blade Runner 2049’ from Denis Villeneuve – who I feel cannot make a wrong move at this point – is a gorgeous visual masterpiece (definitely has to be seen on the big screen to be fully appreciated, though you will marvel at the sights no matter how you watch it) and though it is slow (again not unlike its predecessor), it has a good screenplay which pays homage and respect to the original and also respects the audience. Along with some great music and stellar performances from a great cast, I really liked the movie. There was a lot to discuss and debate over afterward as well. I hope like its predecessor, ‘Blade Runner 2049’ gets more recognition in years to come.  

Here’s to a great 2018 at the movies!

“Dunkirk” Movie Review

Christopher Nolan is a remarkable filmmaker. As a writer and director, he is able to come up with bold, fresh and out-of-the-box concepts and give them a grand, larger than life treatment to execute a movie that is both refreshing in its subject matter and appealing for the sheer scale and spectacle of it all. With “Dunkirk”, he continues this trend and delivers a movie that feels new in more ways than one. Indeed, even as a Nolan movie, this one is different. “Dunkirk” doesn’t have an amazing twist or a challenging intellectual premise that would have you debating and analysing the movie for days, weeks or months on end. This is a straight forward story inspired by real events that took place in the initial years of World War II. But, consistent with other Nolan movies, the way these events have been brought to screen set it apart from other movies dealing with similar subjects, and the result is another cinematic experience which further cements Nolan’s mastery of his craft.

“Dunkirk” throws you right in the middle of the war with nothing more than three lines of text to set up the premise. The movie details the events that took place at the titular location, where more than four hundred thousand British soldiers along with French soldiers were essentially sitting ducks for the enemy. The story is told in three parts – the land, which focuses on the events that take place at the beach; the water, which follows the efforts of civilian boats and the navy to come to the aid of the soldiers; and the air, which looks at the events through the eyes of air force pilots who are taking on the destroyer planes attacking the Allied soldiers and ships.

To call “Dunkirk” a war movie would be inaccurate in a sense – it defies pretty much all of the conventions of the genre. There is no backstory to any of the characters and very little dialogue, which is typically used to make us care for the characters and root for them (this feels true to life – you don’t expect people in such situations to take time out to narrate their life story). There is no villainizing of the opposing side, and literally no face given to the enemy – I’m pretty sure there was not a single shot of the face of a German soldier. There are no flying limbs or gory scenes which are a staple of most war movies – in fact, come to think of it, there is hardly any blood in the movie. Despite all this, or maybe because of it, the movie captures the feel of war in a way not many war movies have – the dread, the fear, the helplessness, the unfair nature of it all; and at the same time the heroism, the will to survive and humanity in the face of adversity. One of the few criticisms I have heard on the movie is that viewers may not be able to emotionally invest in the proceedings, but I don’t share that opinion. I was completely immersed in the proceedings, and the brutal relentlessness of what the characters endure had me tense and at the edge of my seat throughout. This is more a story of survival, which is what I would imagine being on the front is for a soldier.

The screenplay is non-linear along with being told from three different points of view over different timelines, and it can throw you as you try to tie the proceedings. It works to create the confusion and sense of disorientation adding to the experience, though I’m not sure everyone would appreciate it. The sense of urgency, the constant dread and the rising tension as the storylines clash together in a climax that is so rewarding – the writing effectively captures all of this. And full marks to Hans Zimmer, who once again collaborates to take Nolan’s work to another level – the crescendo of the soundtrack is just perfect for this movie.

The acting from the younger, inexperienced actors wasn’t bad, but I felt it could have been better in the hands of more seasoned performers. It’s the big names in the smaller roles who create the lasting impact. Since the air force pilot is mostly in a mask, the obvious choice is Tom Hardy – and as he proved before, being covered by a mask for all but one scene doesn’t get in the way of a brilliant performance. Mark Rylance, Kenneth Branagh and Cillian Murphy are also perfect, and add so much to the movie despite limited screen time.

But of course, the crowd-puller is Christopher Nolan. He is one of the few film makers whose works are a cinematic event that demands big screen viewing. If you haven’t seen even one of his movies post “Batman Begins” in the theatre, you have missed something. “Dunkirk” feels like what all his previous movies have been leading up to cinematically. From a technical standpoint, the movie is a masterpiece. The visuals, the sound, the practical effects with almost no CG (which in itself is an achievement), all of it create an experience which unsettles the viewer and makes the tension palpable. I could literally feel the claustrophobia in most of the scenes. With most of the movie being shot in IMAX, the movie offers up a visual treat – if you can watch it in an IMAX screen, I would highly recommend it. Even if you aren’t really particular, the bigger screen will add to the experience. I have to give special mention the dogfight scenes, which are easily the best I’ve seen put to film – it makes Top Gun look like a cartoon.

In case you haven’t figured it out already, I highly recommend the movie. While it may not necessarily tick all the boxes for everyone, it is a movie which showcases the talents of a master craftsman who is at the top of his game. “Dunkirk” is a worthy addition to his already impressive filmography, and for that alone, it deserves a watch.

“War for the Planet of the Apes” Movie Review

“War for the Planet of the Apes” (WPA) is a satisfactory conclusion (it does leave the possibility of future movies though) to a trilogy that has been able to combine heavy themes like war, subjugation and the hope for peace with the spectacle we come to expect of action movies. The series has improved with each addition, and ends on a high with WPA.

A word of advice, you do need to be caught up on the previous instalments (atleast “Dawn”) to fully enjoy this movie – the text during the opening credits aren’t enough. WPA starts off not long after the events of “Dawn of the Planet of the Apes”. Despite the efforts of their leader Caesar (Andy Serkis), the apes are being targeted by an army of humans led by a ruthless Colonel (Woody Harrelson). When an attack by the humans leads to tragedy, Caesar sends his clan of apes to relocate across the desert as he sets off with a few others to exact revenge on the Colonel.

Matt Reeves is at the top of his game here. WPA is predominantly a war movie, and draws inspiration from movies like “The Great Escape” and “Apocalypse Now”, among others. The battle scenes in particular are very well executed, and the first scene in particular brilliantly captures the essence of war. But the focus is more on the emotional aspects, and the movie is more a meditation on the cost of war and themes of revenge, compassion and tolerance. In fact, the middle portion of the movie is quite slow as Caesar and his group make their way to find the humans. The portions with the little girl whom they come across, though a good plot device, feel like the brakes have been pressed hard, and slow down proceedings in a big way. That’s not to say it’s all slow and plodding. The moments of confrontation between Caesar and the Colonel were, for me, among the best moments of the film. 

Unlike the last movie, there are some lighter moments in the movie, mostly on account of the new character ‘Bad Ape’. These moments give the movie a more ‘filmy’ feel, but Matt Reeves is able to create a good balance between these lighter moments and the greater themes the movie wants to convey while still being a big budget action movie.

The performances are excellent. Woody Harrelson as the Colonel brings humanity to the character, and it helps that his character is very well written. The other supporting cast is also exceptional. But the movie undoubtedly belongs to Andy Serkis, who conveys so much emotion despite not having a lot of lines. It helps that the CGI has advanced, which helps to showcase his performance all the more. The CGI is so advanced that you have to remind yourself that the apes are computer generated. 

All in all, despite the inconsistent pacing, this is a solid movie and well worth a watch. 

“Jagga Jasoos” Movie Review

“Jagga Jasoos” is a perfect case study for what happens when a promising idea is met with sub-par execution. In case you were wondering, the results are not that great. The idea of a detective story set as a musical/thriller/comedy paying homage to works like Tintin, The Hardy Boys, Famous Five, etc. is interesting, and in the hands of a better crew, may have worked well. But “Jagga Jasoos” doesn’t work, mainly due to its confused and muddled tone, shoddy screenplay and overindulgent direction.

“Jagga Jasoos”, narrated mostly through music and as episodes from a comic book series of the same name, tells the story of Jagga (Ranbir Kapoor), an orphan boy who is shy and awkward on account of his stammering. He is befriended by a father figure he calls Tutti Futti (Saswata Chatterjee), who then suddenly leaves him and Jagga grows up alone with only yearly video cassettes he receives on his birthday. He has the mind of a detective, and helps solve cases including the one which brings him in contact with Shruti (Katrina Kaif). Events lead him on a quest to seek out Tutti Futti, and he is entangled in a world of militants, an illegal arms racket and a bunch of shady characters.

The biggest problem for me was that “Jagga Jasoos” can’t quite decide what it wants to be. Though the main aim is to be an over the top mad-cap comedy, it simultaneously tries to tackle ‘big’ themes like terrorism, the negative effects of illegal arms trade, activism, etc. with a level of gravity that rings untrue and ends up feeling shallow and nothing more than lip service. It doesn’t help that it does it with dialogues that have the subtlety of a sledgehammer. Even when it doesn’t, the movie doesn’t commit to the craziness and is a weird mix of being grounded in reality and being a fantasy, and as a viewer I couldn’t immerse myself fully into the experience, which is what a movie like this should be trying for. 

The makers try to capture the essence of detective stories like Tintin (the hairstyle of Jagga is an homage I’m guessing - either that or they were channeling Ace Ventura), but fail on account of trying to be crazy. Even with the exaggeration and the comedy, they seem to be trying too hard, and it all feels like a failed attempt at trying to be edgy and more often than not it misses the mark. Case in point – the stammering of Jagga lasts so long every damn time, it ended up being irritating instead of endearing.

The screenplay is very shoddy, and the makers try to hide it in the whole musical crazy vibe – once the novelty of the musical runs out (which is within the first ten minutes), it’s pretty evident that there isn’t much substance here and just a bunch of scenes strung together to form a movie. The amount of time invested in Jagga’s early cases, which covers pretty much all of the first half, seems bloated and overlong. Not that the second half is any better – the second half is a muddled mess that sees the protagonists going across the globe on a wild goose chase. It also doesn’t help that the editing is especially weak – unnecessary scenes and plot points get way too much screen time, and even scene transitions are jarring in their inconsistencies. Not sure if real world troubles including the multiple delays may have been a cause for this.

To focus on the positives, the camerawork is beautiful. It’s very clear that Anurag Basu and cinematographer Ravi Varman have an eye for capturing picturesque locations and beautiful shots. In a movie where the music is a key player, Pritam delivers the goods and the resultant soundtrack is infectious, catchy and actually manages to tie the movie together. The performances from the key players are also very good. Saswata Chatterjee is very good as the father figure. Both Ranbir Kapoor and Katrina Kaif are in good form. Katrina Kaif was a surprise to me, especially her comic timing. Ranbir Kapoor is perfect, and he makes Jagga a very likeable character with the right mix of innocence and smarts. His performance is definitely the highlight of the movie.

At the end of the day, Jagga Jasoos is let down by a sum of its parts. And at the helm of it, Anurag Basu’s direction is the biggest letdown here. It looks like after Barfi, he has tried to replicate the beautiful visuals plus quirky characters success formula – but this time, he seems to have not paid attention to anything else. From “Life.. in a Metro” to “Jagga Jasoos”, it looks like his ambitions have increased but his execution has definitely taken a dive. Which is too bad – “Jagga Jasoos” could have been something special, but ends feeling like a “galti se mistake”.

“Spider-Man: Homecoming” Movie Review

Marvel has finally got its hands on arguably its most popular creation. And as we all know, with great power comes great responsibility – Marvel Films has taken up the responsibility and how! They manage to bring freshness into the Spider-Man franchise by cleverly avoiding the normal tropes that have become cliché by now, and deliver a fun, light superhero movie that works.

“Spider-Man: Homecoming” is a refreshing origin story (of sorts), which in itself is saying a lot. After his involvement in the events of “Captain America: Civil War”, Peter Parker (Tom Holland) returns to high school and spends his after school hours trying to fight crime in the streets of New York city, while impatiently waiting for his next ‘real’ mission with the Avengers. Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) has become Peter’s mentor, and entrusts his head of security cum chauffeur Happy (Jon Favreau) to keep an eye on him. Things get real once he gets entangled with a group of criminals making high powered weapons using the alien technology from the first “Avengers” movie led by the Vulture (Michael Keaton). Add to that everyday high-schooler stuff like dealing with bullies, building a Lego Death Star and trying to let his crush know how he feels!

You’ve got to hand it to Marvel Films – they are able to capture the essence of each of its vast array of superheroes and give them a unique and distinct treatment on screen. “Homecoming” is no exception – the web-slinger gets a treatment that feels true to the character. The tone of the movie is set with the opening bit itself, where the Spider-Man jingle plays. Peter Parker is essentially a kid when he gets his powers, and an obvious aspect of the character’s development would be coming to terms with his powers while going through issues any normal teenager would go through growing up. While the previous iterations of the character, including the comics, have used the death of Uncle Ben to essentially jolt Peter Parker into becoming a responsible superhero, this movie steers clear of this aspect in what now feels like a stroke of genius. In fact, there is not even so much as a mention of Uncle Ben. This allows for the entire movie to be about Peter’s development into a superhero (which is what this movie is all about), and also avoid the emotional baggage.

This movie focuses on all the right things. Peter’s interactions with his friends, especially Ned (Jacob Batalon) provide for some of the best moments in the movie. The bits where Peter is learning and adapting with the suit are also especially good. The big ticket action sequences are good, yet not over-the-top and all about the world ending. Even the Vulture is not a supervillain with grand plans of taking over the world, but just a regular bad guy trying to provide for his family through illegal means. The makers cleverly ground the story and live up to the “friendly neighbourhood” tag. It’s good that Tony Stark is not given more screentime than he deserves, and his involvement in the movie is not just to pull crowds into the theatres; but adds to the plot and the character’s growth as well.

The performances are all top-notch. The regulars like Robert Downey Jr. and Jon Favreau have been playing these characters for so long it’s hard to find a false note. The supporting cast including Marisa Tomei, and especially Jacob Batalon seem perfectly cast. Michael Keaton as the Vulture is great, but feels underutilized. Speaking of underutilized, why was Donald Glover even there? It seems to be a placement for a plot point to come in the upcoming movies, but in this movie he is seriously wasted. I haven’t seen anything Zendaya is in, but I know she’s quite popular and even her character seems underwritten, and more in service of things to come.

But of course, this movie is all about Tom Holland. Marvel has taken a gamble with the younger Spider-Man storyline, which needs a young actor; but Tom Holland is definitely dispelling any doubts that may have been there. His performance as the young hero is perfect, and the earnestness and enthusiasm he imbues the character with is infectious.

All in all, this movie is definitely worth a watch. While it may not be the best superhero movie out there, it is a refreshing addition to the ever-growing MCU. It’s highly entertaining and caters to all audiences, and pretty much delivers on the good time I expected. 

P.S.: Stay till the end credits (there is a mid-credits and a post-credits scene, so make sure you catch both) – it’s hilarious!

“Despicable Me 3” Movie Review

If you have seen the movies in the “Despicable Me” series, you pretty much know what you can expect in the latest instalment. “Despicable Me 3”, not unlike its predecessors, is harmless fun which isn’t aiming for anything special – it’s a good time while you are watching it, but you’ll hardly retain any of it once you have stepped out of the theatre.

The movie follows criminal mastermind turned crime fighter Gru (Steve Carell), who is booted off the Anti-Villain League along with his wife Lucy (Kristen Wiig) when they are unable to apprehend former child actor turned criminal mastermind Balthazar Bratt (a criminally underutilized Trey Parker – pardon the pun). Into the picture comes Gru’s wealthy twin brother Dru, who wants to become a supervillain like Gru was. Add to it sub-plots about the minions leaving Gru, Balthazar Bratt’s evil plan, Lucy’s attempts at being a mother to the three girls, something about a unicorn, and you’ve got the hotch-potch plot that pushes the movie to the end credits.

The biggest problem with the movie is that there are so many opportunities lost in an attempt to cram in multiple storylines. The idea to separate the minions from Gru to give them their own storyline was a bad one, since it was Gru’s interaction with the minions that provided for some of the best laughs (which is probably why the “Minions” movie was just average). The introduction of Dru also doesn’t add much, and it’s a shame that more promising opportunities were compromised. The idea of having a former child actor become a villain was golden, but unfortunately not really utilized – and it’s a shame since Trey Parker’s bits were among the most enjoyable in the movie, and I couldn’t help but think about what could have been.

But that’s not to say the movie isn’t enjoyable. What the movie lacks in focus it makes up for in virtually non-stop gags and witty one-liners, which have been the highlight of this franchise in the past as well. Also the emotional elements and family-bonding type stuff are handled pretty well and doesn’t slow the pace. The voice acting continues to be the greatest strength, with Steve Carell, Kristen Wiig and all the others continuing their good work from the previous movies. Russell Brand’s Dr. Nefario is absent from this movie, but it isn’t really a big loss. I guess I’ve said enough about Trey Parker already, and he was the scene stealer for me.

To sum up, this one is just a plain and simple decent time. The younger audiences would enjoy it a lot more I guess. Don’t go running to the theatres for this one – you can catch it on TV later. 

“Baby Driver” Movie Review

I have been very excited about “Baby Driver” ever since I heard the reviews the movie got in the South by Southwest film festival, and the trailers just added onto it. And the movie doesn’t disappoint – it is probably the most fun I’ve had at the movies this year; and to be fair, there have been a few good movies this year.

The plot of “Baby Driver” is pretty straight forward – Baby (Ansel Elgort) is a young getaway driver who is forced to work for a crime boss Doc (Kevin Spacey). Once he falls for a young waitress Debora (Lily James), he wants out and has to navigate his way out of his life of crime while ensuring he doesn’t get killed by Doc and his gang of crooks (including Jamie Foxx, John Hamm and Eiza Gonzales). What adds the flavour here is that Baby suffers from tinnitus (a constant ringing in his ear) on account of a childhood accident, and has to drown out the noise with music. So, since our protagonist is perennially plugged into his iPod, the scenes are almost all set to the music he is listening to.

In “Baby Driver”, writer-director Edgar Wright focuses on the technical side of his craft, and as a result, the movie is all about the action… and the music. So, not surprisingly, the plot is probably the weakest link here. That is not to say that his writing doesn’t hold up – it is just in service of the action here, and is as slick as the proceedings warrant. Some of the best scenes are the ones without any action, and just the witty exchanges between the characters (special mentions to the scene with the Mike Myers masks, and the one with Doc’s nephew). But the main plot device, which is the romantic track, doesn’t really get you invested. It felt rushed, and I never felt any emotional connect with Debora. But it doesn’t feel out of place and blends into the proceedings, so no real harm done. It felt like slow moving traffic in an otherwise fast paced screenplay.

Edgar Wright’s writing is complemented by the excellent cast, who seem to be enjoying themselves a lot. Which is good, since it shows in the final product. Ansel Elgort is suitably mysterious, but also manages to balance the innocence and vulnerability of Baby. Kevin Spacey and Jamie Foxx seem to be doing coked up, crazier versions of their roles in “21” and “Horrible Bosses” (with a ‘kill-everything-in-site’ motto) respectively. John Hamm and Eiza Gonzales are also well cast.

But, needless to say, it is the action that this movie is all about. With amazing driving and chase sequences set to a killer soundtrack, the movie doesn’t take its foot off the gas and pretty much keeps the pace throughout. The action is grounded and realistic, despite sequences being over the top – I think the “Fast and the Furious” franchise should take some notes here. And of course, there is the music, which works so perfectly everything seems choreographed around it perfectly.

If you haven’t yet watched “Baby Driver”, race into the theatre near you and catch it. It is an action movie; it is a musical; it is a comedy – and seriously, how many movies can you say that about? With hardly a false note from the time the ignition is turned on to when it zooms to the finish line, this is a joyride from start to finish. 

"Cars 3" Movie Review

The latest instalment in a franchise considered by many as Pixar’s most substandard offering, “Cars 3” will probably not change any opinions – unless “Cars 2” was your favourite. Pixar seems to have heard the complaints everyone had with “Cars 2” and delivered something closer to the original – with more focus on characters and an emotional plot. So “Cars 3” is a solid-ish movie, but definitely not in the league of some of Pixar’s finest.

The movie brings back the focus to race car Lightning McQueen, whose career seems to be arriving at the finish line with the rise of a new breed of racers led by rookie Jackson Storm, who use technology to gain more speed and consistency forcing the old timers into retirement. Now McQueen must try and keep up with the pack, or risk fading away – his journey forms the core of the movie.

The key strength of “Cars 3” is the emotional heft it carries – the themes of mortality, relevance, and legacy the filmmakers focus on would touch a chord with the adults, though probably may not be fully appreciated by the younger audiences. It was also good to see that Paul Newman’s Doc Hudson was integrated beautifully and is an integral part of the story, effectively becoming a heartfelt tribute to the actor. The voice acting is spot on, especially Owen Wilson who effectively conveys McQueen’s doubts and misgivings.

That is not to say the movie doesn’t have its share of spectacle – as with every Pixar movie, the animation is spectacular. The racing scenes are gorgeous, and the demolition derby scene in particular stands out (both beautiful to watch and maybe the most fun part of the movie). I saw the movie in 4DX, which really added to the fun element – this movie really works perfectly with the format.

To sum up, “Cars 3” is fun while it lasts. While it may not be an addition to Pixar’s best list, it definitely gets the franchise back on track.

"Wonder Woman" Movie Review

Finally! After a bunch of disappointments, the DCEU has finally managed to produce a movie that nails it. And in doing so, they also managed to do something the MCEU could have attempted earlier but didn’t – showcase the female hero in her solo movie. Full marks to director Patty Jenkins and writers Zack Snyder, Allan Heinberg and Jason Fuchs, who give us a movie that celebrates its female protagonist without trying to force an agenda; and also doesn’t cram in references to the extended universe (something “Batman v Superman” was panned for).

“Wonder Woman” is the origin story of its titular character. She is Diana (Gal Gadot), princess of the Amazons, a demi-God sort-of race that was created by the god Zeus to save humans from his jealous son Ares. She is brought up in Themyscira, an island away from anything else and trained as a warrior. The isolated existence of the Amazons is interrupted when American spy pilot Steve Trevor (Chris Pine, who continues to impress with every movie) crash lands near their island and brings the horrors of World War I along. Diana feels this is her calling and goes with Steve to fight for humanity and end the war, and in the process discover her powers et al.

The movie works well both as a superhero movie and a war movie. The action scenes are great, but they work in service of the plot and aren’t too flashy – they don’t feel special effects heavy, which helps given the superhero movie fatigue that is kicking in (except for the climax, but then it is a superhero movie). The war is a perfect backdrop for the character’s growth – the war scenes feel they have been handled like a proper war movie, and not as a forced plot device. Also the positivity of the movie is something that would have also worked for Superman, whose interpretation took a u-turn for the grey, brooding “Man of Steel” version. This feels like the movie “Man of Steel” should have been, and “Captain America – The First Avenger” could have been.

The success of “Wonder Woman” is mainly because the makers have a clear interpretation of the character and do not hesitate to water it down because it can be considered naïve and corny in a largely cynical time. I haven’t read any of the comics so I can’t speak for accuracy, but this works. Diana’s ‘fish out of water’ moments, her naïve innocence (the scene where she squeals with joy on seeing a baby is priceless), her belief in the greater good, all these moments go towards defining the character and also bring some of the best moments in the movie. The biggest plus of the character is her compassion that is her greatest strength, and this is highlighted well without overdoing it. This is the superhero we need, and I hope this character becomes a role model for the younger generation.

It is especially refreshing that there are no broad strokes or generalizations, and that Diana doesn’t have the challenge of facing discrimination per se. It is also good that Steve Trevor is such an endearing character – a quintessential war hero – who realizes Diana is special and treats her as such without giving it a second thought.

The performances are top notch. Of the supporting cast, special mention to Robin Wright, who makes the most of her role despite limited screen time. Chris Pine seems the perfect choice for Steve Trevor, and the chemistry he shares with Gal Gadot make for the best moments in the film. But the movie does belong to Gal Gadot, who completely owns the character and brings us the strong yet gentle superhero we need. She captures the essence of the hero and brings a layered, nuanced performance.

The movie does have some flaws – the last act feels a bit like a departure from the rest of the movie and may not work for everyone (though they do tie everything together the best they can), and the great reveal isn’t all that surprising. But these are nit-pickings in a movie that really works. I would highly recommend this movie for one and all. Not only is this an entertaining movie, it is in a way a very important one. If you haven’t caught it yet, go ahead and watch it.

"Guardians of the Galaxy: Vol. 2" Movie Review

‘Guardians of the Galaxy: Vol. 2’ brings back the band of misfits who teamed up in the first movie – and pretty much everything else. And though that’s not a bad thing, it feels like the makers are struggling to add the element of surprise that was the biggest strength of the first movie. The irreverent humour, the soundtrack of 80s music, the jazzy special effects, it all feels familiar. But it still is a fun ride, so it’s not like audiences would be complaining too much.

This movie primarily focuses on the parentage of Star-Lord (Chris Pratt), when he is met by his biological father Ego (Kurt Russell) and taken to his planet along with Gamora (Zoey Saldana) and Drax (Dave Bautista). Meanwhile, Rocket (voiced by Bradley Cooper) and Baby Groot (still Vin Diesel) are trying to keep Gamora’s sister Nebula (Karen Gillian) hostage while evading the Ravagers led by Yondu (Michael Rooker). Everything is not what it seems, and the true motivations of all the characters are revealed as the movie progresses.

This movie is definitely packing more in the emotional content than the first one. Themes of family, identity and sacrifice are explored here, and at times it seems a little out of character when the movie treads into serious territory. But those are brief moments and not too out-of-place. The one thing which felt out of left field was the final act, which seems to take an abrupt turn from the rest of the movie. But that is also covered up nicely with the cracking one-liners and fun effects.

The movie does what it is expected to, it dazzles us with the visuals and gets us laughing with the jokes. The characters we care for are still the same (the makers have done a great job with Bautista’s Drax in particular). The actors are charming and don’t take themselves too seriously. It feels almost formulaic, but hey; it works.

‘Guardians of the Galaxy: Vol. 2’ is fun while it lasts, but chances are it won’t stay with you very long after you leave the theatre. Still, it’s a good time to be had – go for it!

P.S. 1: There are five post credits scenes, so don’t leave the hall until you’re sure that you’ve caught them all.

P.S. 2: It was disappointing that the version I saw had some scenes cut – unfortunately censored because of some mildly adult humour I’m guessing. I am thinking the censor board should lighten up.

"Babubali 2: The Conclusion" Movie Review

The wait is finally over! Arguably the most eagerly awaited movie in Indian cinema of all time, ‘Bahubali 2: The Conclusion’ is finally out. So, does the movie live up to the hype? Though I personally felt it wasn’t as great as the first movie, it definitely does stand up to the great expectations and turns out to be an epic in all respects.

‘Bahubali 2: The Conclusion’ picks off with the flashback chronicling the story of Amarendra Bahubali (Prabhas), who has been recently chosen as the would-be ruler of the kingdom of Mahishmati. Pretty much the entire first half is spent in showing the camaraderie between Kattappa (Sathyaraj) and Bahubali, and the romance between Bahubali and Devasena (Anushka Shetty). Without going into too much detail, a mix-up causes Sivagami (Ramya Krishnan) to get angry and give the throne to Bhallaladeva (Rana Daggubati). Despite this, Bhallaladeva and his father Bijjaladeva (Nasser) continue to plot Bahubali’s downfall. Once the big question of why Kattappa killed Bahubali is answered, it’s time for the son to take revenge and claim his rightful throne.

Straight off the bat, there is no doubt that the movie is a visual spectacle. The camera work is superb, and it’s not just in the grander scenes (of which there are many). Especially in the battle scenes, many images will awe you. The word “epic” keeps coming to mind, and for good reason. The set design, make-up and costumes, special effects and music (for the most part – I felt that the special effects in the final portion weren’t able to do justice to Rajamouli’s grand vision, and the music was nothing too special but background music was good), all of the elements work together to come up with something that is truly of a scale that hasn’t been matched in Indian cinema.

The acting matches up. Both Prabhas and Rana Daggubati do full justice to what are probably roles of a lifetime – both in terms of the physicality as well as the emoting. Prabhas plays the lighter moments and the emotional bits with equal ease, and Rana Daggubati embodies the menacing and evil nature of his character well. The rest of the cast matches up as well – especially the ladies. Anushka Shetty, with probably the strongest character of both parts, shines. And Ramya Krishnan also exudes the authority and fury of her character perfectly. It also helps that all the actors are given well written characters, and though there are some contradictions here, for the most part the strong writing provides a solid foundation for all performers. Kudos to the writer especially for giving us strong female characters.

The biggest problem for me was the length and inconsistent pacing. There is way too much time spent on the romantic relationship of Bahubali and Devasena, and that takes away from the bigger parts of the story. Key plot points, like Bahubali’s loss of the throne and his subsequent banishment, could have used a little more screen time. And not to mention the final act, where Shivudu rises up and leads the rebels in the final battle against Bhallaladeva (again it would have been good to have some more examples of Bhallaladeva’s cruelty) – it is probably not even a quarter of the film. My biggest pet peeve was that the part where Shivudu needs to change from an inexperienced soldier to a master strategist; is explained off in a single line and the whole sequence gets under a minute. It was a good idea but didn’t get any screen time. Despite its length, many portions like this felt rushed – which is actually a major criticism if it was a lesser movie. In my opinion, it would have helped if the great reveal of why Kattappa killed Bahubali happened just before the interval, and post interval it was the final battle. Or else have this one only for the flashback, and a part 3 purely for the battle.

I felt the comedy track in the first half stuck out as a sore thumb, and felt like an abrupt shift in tone. And I didn’t particularly enjoy it either. Speaking of abrupt shifts, the changes in the motivations of Sivagami also felt odd – such a strong character being swayed so easily, though essential to the plot, felt forced and out of place. It’s to the credit of Ramya Krishnan’s talent that she keeps us invested throughout.

But all said and done, despite its flaws, this is not just a movie – it is landmark in Indian cinema. Hats off to S. S. Rajamouli for his vision, and his ability to realize that vision. Definitely go watch it if you haven’t already.

"The Fate of the Furious" movie review

The latest instalment in “The Fast and The Furious” franchise delivers pretty much what viewers have come to expect from the franchise – over the top stunts, a plot which purely works as a thread to bind together the various action scenes, and the general experience of a popcorn flick which delivers a good time if you’re willing to leave your brains at the door. However, I couldn’t shake off a feeling of fatigue by the time the credits were rolling.

“The Fate of the Furious” has Dominic Toretto (Vin Diesel) going against his crew – sorry, his FAMILY – when coerced into working for super hacker/mastermind Cipher (Charlize Theron). The rest of the family, with a little help from Deckard Shaw (Jason Statham), the villain of the last movie, must work to stop Dom by jumping from one crazy action scene to the next before Cipher can get what she wants (something do with nukes and world domination, but all that is not really relevant). The movie is intended to be just plain fun, with a lot of action scenes and the witty lines, as long as you don’t focus on anything logical like character motivations and the laws of physics.

Of course, the movie relies on its over the top action set pieces that border on the impossible/insane, and it is these moments that are the highlight. The makers don’t try to change what works and pretty much play to the crowd – fight scenes for the Rock and Statham and bigger set pieces with no let up on extravagance. The problem is that it gets tired towards the end, and it seems the film makers are just trying to compensate for substance with an overdose of ludicrous action scenes (the final showdown with the submarine was overkill and overlong, but that’s just my opinion). It felt like the franchise should slow down and maybe go back to its street racing roots rather than have such high stakes – or atleast make some changes. There is never a sense of danger despite what the characters are faced with, and everything just feels too convenient. The action scene with Jason Statham in an airplane (which in itself is far from grounded) was the highlight for me and got me far more excited than the bigger, crazier moments (though special mention to the “let it rain” scene). In fact, Jason Statham and the Rock were the only ones who seemed to be having fun doing this. Vin Diesel has a lot more acting to do, which isn’t necessarily a good thing.

All in all, the movie was a disappointment – in a franchise that has relied more on the surprise and shock generated by its action, it was just a matter of time before it became by-the-numbers and formulaic to the point that it became boring. And though the movie isn’t a total bore, it felt tedious. The franchise has probably reached the finish line – but since this was the first movie in a long time not to mention this being “the last ride”, chances are there will be more to come. Hopefully the makers can add some excitement to the next one.

'Logan' Movie Review

To call ‘Logan’ a superhero movie would be misleading and, in a way, disrespectful. The movie generated a lot of hype – the key reason being that Hugh Jackman has decided to hang his claws, so to speak, and he was very insistent that the movie be just right. So there were a lot of expectations. And oh boy, did they get it right! More akin to a gritty western style action movie than the spectacle based CGI fuelled jam-packed action rides we are used to; the makers defy genre trappings (more than even ‘The Dark Knight’ and ‘Deadpool’ did) and give us a bold, mature movie with genuine heart.

The movie is set in the not too distant future (2029, if I remember correctly); and seems pretty bleak. Most of the mutants are gone, following some sort of incident. Logan has aged significantly and his healing powers are not as potent as they used to be – he is hurting both physically and emotionally. He is a heavy drinker and drives a limo to make ends meet and take care of a deteriorated Charles Xavier (Patrick Stewart), who is now suffering from a brain condition which results in seizures that affect everyone around him. The plot kicks into high gear when Laura, a young mutant who is being chased by an evil corporation and its mercenaries joins them, and they have to get her to safety.

There are just so many positives here – everything from the tone, to the directing, to the acting. Credit to James Mangold, who has directed and also written the story, for not succumbing to standard comic book movie trappings. The acting is brilliant – Patrick Stewart is in fine form, and Dafne Keen playing Laura is an exciting find who could be one to watch out for. But of course, it’s Hugh Jackman’s show – and he shows just how invested he is in the movie by delivering a nuanced and layered performance that is the highlight of a movie that has so many things going for it.

Logan definitely justifies its ‘R’ rating (‘A’ in India) – this one is not for the kids. It is the most violent X-Men movie by far – the action is brutal, savage and raw; which is appropriate given the protagonist. Rather than focusing on gratuitous violence, the makers use the freedom of the ‘R’ rating to explore mature themes of isolation, loss, family, sacrifice and living with one’s actions – all of which, despite the focus on character building and relations, seems appropriate for Wolverine.

In fact, the main reason the movie works so well is that it feels like the perfect Wolverine movie – after the first two movies which were far from perfect, the quintessential anti-hero gets the movie that truly represents him. Yes, the movie is long and, at times, slow. But it works, and delivers a swan song that is damn near perfect. It is a satisfactory conclusion for one of the most successful franchises. Just go watch it! Even if you aren’t a big fan of the franchise, you can’t help but leave the theatre with a sense of closure. 

"John Wick: Chapter 2" Movie Review

It would come as no surprise that if you didn’t like the first John Wick movie, chances are you won’t like ‘John Wick: Chapter 2’. However, for fans of the first part, it will come as a pleasant surprise that the second instalment not only lives up to expectations, but ups the ante and delivers a high octane thrill ride that surpasses its predecessor.

I’ll try not to give too much away. The movie kicks off right after the first one ends. John Wick is contacted by a former associate to honour an agreement he had made to get out of the assassin business. Trouble ensues once John, who initially refuses, reluctantly takes up the job. Not long after, there is a contract on him and all of the other assassins are after his life. So it’s up to John to use all his gun-fu expertise to survive and exact vengeance on the villains.

The best thing about John Wick: Chapter 2 is that it takes the formula that works and revs it up. There’s no attempt to overhaul the vehicle – instead the movie just take the action to the next level, and also corrects some of the flaws its predecessor had. The world the movie is set in is more fleshed out – and though some parts are a little silly, it adds to the charm of the whole thing.

There is not much in terms of plot here, but you’re too busy having a good time to notice. The fight choreography is innovative and very well executed (special mention for the portion where John is being targeted by a lot of people, there is some shooting in public but not the kind you’d expect, and a pencil comes in handy). The light touches of humour that worked so well in the first movie are here as well. And certain moments like the meeting of Laurence Fishburne and Keanu Reeves feels like fan service for Matrix buffs.

A word of mention for Keanu Reeves, who is pretty much there in every scene of the movie. His commitment to the film is exceptional, and he also manages to stay to the character by adding depth and vulnerability, and not just the physical exertions the role requires.

I would highly recommend ‘John Wick: Chapter 2’. Even though it is a sequel, the movie feels fresh and exciting. Action fans will love it. If you were in any doubt; yeah, he’s back!