Star Wars Episode VII: The Force Awakens (4/5, Good)

An epic comeback from one of the most successful sci-fi saga with the daunting challenge to blend the old school characters with new ones whilst relaunching a new trilogy. The Force is strong with this film. 

There is something inexplicable about Star Wars. Why does it enhance so much fuss? It is magical. Those epic blue-colored words "A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away..." were a timer before an explosion of joy when the "Star Wars" logo invades the screen accompanied by the cult score of John Williams. Almost three years of patience with the biggest marketing deployment ever made suddenly redeemed in one instant. 

                                                       
                                              New score composed by John Williams 

A new story, a new trilogy. Director J. J. Abrams said: "This film is made by a Star Wars fan for Star Wars fans". We believe this sentence resumes the spirit of this new Star Wars' episode. There are thousand of references to previous films (especially Star Wars: A New Hope) and other discrete winks (such as with the score of Williams). We will not tell you the story but what we can say is that we are fully back with a good Star Wars atmosphere, supported by a good story. After the disappointment of Episode I (1999) and II (2002) we were skeptical. We were surprised by the solid plot, the good script and the stunning action scenes. That is what you ask for when you watch a film like this one. 

The introduction of new characters- Finn and Rey and a complex evil as Kylo Ren (portrayed by the brilliant Adam Driver) give this saga a new approach. The presence of a color character (outrageously criticized by a few) and a woman as the leading ones are a rupture into the classic scheme of action films. This is 2015, not 1977 anymore. Having to combine the classics with the new ones, the story meticulously make path to stretch this bond and make it solid enough so we can enjoy the view. J.J. applies something learned by horror-film Wes Craven: "You never screw with the originals". The script is thus a success: it is funny, dramatic and hugely entertaining. Of course, the action scenes are incredible and anyone can enjoy them. The comeback of John Williams at the score is simply perfect: quite discrete at the beginning but if we pay attention, there is also an incredible complexity in its melodies and tones. 

We won't tell you any more as we have read so many reviews full of spoilers. This is simply a huge film, perhaps one of the most expected in the last decade reminding us that we all have inside a grasp for adventure. This new episode starts really well a new trilogy whilst adopting a cautious approach: not taking a full step into a new generation but slowly going ahead. They don't want us to forget the characters from the previous Star Wars so the similar dramatic development to New Hope can also be criticized. Nevertheless this was a film with tremendous expectations: try to bare with that. Therefore what is our verdict: even if you are not a Star Wars fan, you should go and see it. Rarely are such films who gather people from such different cultures to make it one of the greatest sagas of all time. 

Trailer: 

Carol (Very Good, 5/5)

A powerful forbidden love story in the USA of the 1950s where love was crouched by social norms and structures. A fresh and a fantastic film.

The latest Todd Haynes' film is a masterpiece. We haven't seen a love story of this kind in a long time. Not because the film puts the overwhelming discrimination and the lack of understanding of  society with homosexuals in the background but because we have not seen such an authentic love story in a long-time. When the Rom-Com films sell love as a commodity , films like Carol teaches them what love actually is. 

Both Cate Blanchett and Rooney Mara are fantastic. They would both deserve an Oscar. Two women bounded by a prohibited love. Living in a world where women are merely objects and used for domestic tasks. Their gender and real desires are repressed by a man-dominated society. Gender inequalities is normal, homosexuality is a disease. In contrast to this, these two women fall in love and escape into a road trip for be submerged by their repressed love. Carol (Cate Blanchett) is a mature woman who has been married and knows society too well whilst Terese (Rooney Mara) is a young idealistic and naive woman. Both characters connect in their own personal oppositions to society and embrace that rebelliousness. 

Does that make their love more powerful? Not really. They simply love each other. Love is powerful and irrational. It cannot be explained. But obstacles lie ahead. Not only because society builds them but because we carry them as human beings. Carol explores these topics with subtlety and sensitivity.It never falls into the cliché. A fantastic film not about homosexuality but about love. Highly recommended. 

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay , Part II (2/5, Bad)

The final chapter is an epic action film seeking to thrill us with an overload of action scenes and little dialogue. It will also be remembered as a film with a terrible ending. 

The Hunger Games: Mockingjay as one film itself is dull and lacks of genuine excitement. Of course, the twists and the different situations make our beautiful Jennifer Lawrence go through a lot. She is becoming the symbol of the resistance against a system of greed, discrimination and violence. The irony is that her character becomes an object of entertainment and shock by this movement of resistance: not only she is being filmed with a perfect aftermath battle background to capture her anger but also she is being told what to say in front of the camera. That is an interesting element brought into the script: there is no real escape from human nature's taste to violence and entertainment. 

Part I was setting the dramatic tone. Part II (as usual) is merely action scenes. A few scenes can be remembered for its powerful dramatic tone but the CGI scenes take the stand to forget an actual script. Of course you would say, this is a blockbuster. Well, the action scenes aren't so thrilling neither. Heroes fall from both sides but we did not share a single tear. Some actual dramatic scenes are ridiculous supported by a terrible acting. Too bad, there was much to do in a context of a civil war.A highlight though: the massive Donald Sutherland portrays the perfect evil and is still scary enough until the end.

Perhaps the end is the most "epic" thing: it is the perfect "not to-have" ending. Was it necessary? Even Lawrence and the famous "Peta" are laughing in front of the camera for knowing how ridiculous that finale was. But hey, the film is a pretty entertaining blockbuster with a lack of epic to make it a great Part II. The lesson? Splitting a film into Part I and Part II does not make it a better novel adaptation. 

Spectre (3/5, Regular)

In this latest James Bond installment, the successful recipe of Skyfall is used once more but with less darkness and thrills. It is still a decent action movie supported by the convincing Daniel Craig.

After the masterpiece Skyfall (one of the best of the Bond franchise), director Sam Mendes accepted the challenge to make another Bond film. His recipe was the character development of Bond with unfamiliar stories of his past set within a darker story. Being Mendes an expert in telling dark tales (e.g. American Beauty,Road to Perdition), he was the right candidate to follow-up on Skyfall. He applies the same recipe but which lost most of its emotional power due to a greater focus on action scenes. Of course, this is the last Daniel Craig's film as James Bond therefore it has to be finished with style! 

We won't complain about that because the action scenes are simply marvelous. All of them reach the level of spectacular and thrilling. However as we have said before, it undermines the character's development and the relationship to each other. The new James Bond girls (Monica Bellucci and Lea Seydoux) look alike the previous ones in other Bond films. Maybe one of the merits in this Craig's chapter as Bond were actually the darker Bond girls, embedded by dark deeds. Too bad. 

The script seeks to close the curtains building a bridge with the previous films -Casino Royale, Quantum of Solace, Skyfall-  and pushing Bond to face ghosts and demons of his past. It is one of the greatest struggles the super-agent ever faced and the plot achieves to make the film very exciting. Despite a few scenes slowing down the length of the film, the overall story is coherent and entertaining.

One of the downturns of the film is actually the character played by Christoph Waltz, certainly very threatening but does not achieve to make us feel scared. Sadly for Waltz (an amazing actor) his role is the bridge with the previous films and does not fit to him. Daniel Craig is convincing as always and will be remembered as one of the darkest Bond ever. As said earlier, the Bond girls are stereotypes therefore nothing to be remembered. 

A good closing film for Daniel Craig portraying James Bond but heavily affected by the quality of its predecessor, Spectre is a good action film that will entertain you and will make you remember this Bond chapter with a smile. 

Trailer: 

Suffragette (4/5, Good)

A film about the women who led the struggle against a system who cherished the value of equality but without taking it into practice. A compelling topic accompanied by electrifying acting from Carey Mulligan.

London, 1912. City of a country kissing the values of a healthy democracy but hiding behind the curtains a repressive regime based on colonialism and exclusion of different sectors of society. This film targets the women who were struggling to have the right to vote. The suffragette were a real historical movement from women who decide to fight against the roles that society were pushing them to be: mere housewives and workers. They decided to make it otherwise, whatever it takes.

Women's vote is still a problem today. It has been legalized in Nigeria in 2003 and isn't still an option in Saudi Arabia. At a wider-scale, gender equality is recognized as one of the main issues of the 21st century. This film takes place at the beginning of the 20th century but women still fight today. Films like these are a reminder that many things in our world are simply wrong. Change must come but change comes with a price. The suffragette suffered them but they achieved what they were aiming for.

Carey Mulligan is at the center of this film, accompanied by the amazing Helena Bonham Carter and the brief appearance of Meryl Streep. Without Mulligan, this film would be a downfall because she is the perfect actress to portray this British mother, wife and worker who had to bear the costs of a repressive and macho society. Her acting is impeccable and does deserve an Oscar. The script accompanies well and seeks to highlight the most significative events in the suffragette's movement history. Maybe this is why suddenly we jump from one year to another quickly as the film wants to illustrate the evolution of the struggle. Sometimes we are so close to Mulligan's main character and we feel empathy towards her. However some other times, we are simply far from her as we don't really see an evolution in her character towards the last half of the film.

This film is a great start for anyone curious about history, democracy, feminism and societal changes. Shooted with a raw but cared photography, we are close to a documentary but the film also illustrates the intimacy of a few of these characters. It is a recommended film, not only because of its story but also because it still relates to issues today that occur in a world showing off with the values of equality and liberty. 

Trailer: 

Knock Knock (1/5, Horrible)

Keanu Reeves + Eli Roth together. That sounds promising...Red Curtain Cinema decided to give a chance to a terrible actor and to a director known for its grotesque and black-humor approach. The result: a pathetic film.  

Any film from Eli Roth rhymes with hysteria, sadistic torture and psychological violence. He embraces once more these rules in his latest film. The result of it? A pretty boring film, with nothing to give and to value from. Even Keanu Reeves (what is he doing in here?), playing the role-model father of a happy american family cannot achieve any credible acting. The two psycho girls (portrated by Lorenza Izzo and Ana de Armas) are merely hysteric girls enjoying cruel practices and good music.

The only good thing from this film is the soundtrack. The songs have been carefully chosen to match lyrics along with the degradation of this man's life. As the movie goes on, the violence intensifies and the narrative looses sense. We feel this is once more another Hostel or Saw film. Do we really need another round like those? Not really. Those horror films are finished. Get over it Eli Roth. 

To conclude, a poor script with a very poor acting and a cool soundtrack. The ending is fun but cannot save this terrible film. Don't waste your time watching it, you'll regret it. 

Trailer:
                                   

Sicario (4/5, Good)

An electrifying film about the drug cartels in Mexico and the power struggles inherent in these wars. Very harsh.

French director Denis Villeneuve decided to approach the cartel drugs war in Mexico with crudity and realism. He decides to be graphic in many scenes, involving gore scenes and physical violence. However the great struggle appears in the main characters: they all loose humanity in a world of aggression and violence. Emily Blunt is great in her role as a woman who struggles to fit in a war dominated by men. Benicio Del Toro is the example of the man who has nothing to lose but somehow seems to hide more than what we know. Josh Brolin is impeccable as a man leading a war: harsh, numb and calculator. 

This film blends the best of Traffic putting forward dramatic elements over the policial plot (the social context of Mexico, the anti-drugs politics of the US) and the worst of The Last Stand with a confusing character development and action scenes. This is a genre in ebullition and Villeneuve knows it. The crudity of the photography is a reflection of the harshness and bitterness of this war. All motivated by greed and the lack of humanity due to a global economy that does not help to spread other values. Sicario is a good film because it is a photography of a reality. That is why it is also scary. 

Regression (3/5, Regular)

A thriller/horror film inspired by real events with a good acting from Ethan Hawke and Emma Watson. However it is a largely forgettable affair.

Screenwriter and Director Alejandro Amenábar goes back to its roots with this new thriller. Inspired by a wave of "satanic abuse" cases in the US during the 1980s, Regression puts at the center of the story a troubled cop and a young fragile woman with a dark story.  In this small town of the US, everyone has his dark deeds and no one is to be trusted. While Ethan Hawke's character slowly founder into this terrifying case, he looses control and his deepest fears will submerge. 

After Tesis and The Others, Amenábar showed his credentials as a director capable of keeping the viewer tense and confused. He developed once more the scheme of a story with mysteries and a final twist to leave everyone out of breath. However this final twist could be disappointing for some and original for others. That is up to the viewer. The acting is very convincing (especially Hawke showing different colors) along with a very grey and dark photography. It reminded us of Rosemary's Baby and The Omen.

An entertaining film that explores people's deepest fears but also the social elements embedded in the daily life of a small town. Spiritual beliefs and prejudices are strong. It reminds us that one of the deepest fears for the people isn't the fear of Satan or of Death but most of all, the fear of what does other people think of us. A film to be seen but to be forgotten pretty quick. 

Trailer: 

Ten Thousand Saints (4/5, Good)

A coming-of-age drama led by the great Ethan Hawke and the now grown-up Asa Butterfield about a group of people living the chaos of the 1980s New York City.

Four people going through different phases in their lives. Four people that meet and try to live in the fast-pace rhythm of New York city. The city was changing: the end of the Cold War , the rise of the massive globalization, the beginning of grunge and alternative rock music. As the world go through those changes, these four characters have to cope and follow the wind of change. However change comes with hard challenges and that is what growing up is all about. 

This film from Shari Springer Berman and Robert Pulcini is representative of their style: realistic, raw cinematography, crude music. Their documentary style clearly shines in this film wanting to tell not only a story but also to expose the reality of a changing urban landscape. New York has always been the symbol of urbanism and it is evolving constantly. The originality of the script of aligning New York's pace with the character's changes is a reminder for people to remember that they also are the consequence of their environment. We are vulnerable to it and we depend on it to build ourselves and show our true colours.

Ethan Hawke is simply genius. Playing a father's role like in Boyhood, he still achieves to feel curious about this progressive and hippie dad who named his son Jude after the Beatles' song. However this also highlights one of the weaknesses of the film: the characters are built upon the momentum and not on their life history. We know only the facette of the people at the specific moment of an ever-changing New York city. This gives less depth and complexity to the characters. Shame because the story context was perfect for that. Nevertheless it is still an enjoyable and good dramatic film to watch. It isn't a masterpiece but it isn't a bad movie either. It is simply a good film.

Me and Earl and the Dying Girl (Bad,2/5)

An already familiar tale told through the eyes of an unconfident and uninteresting teenager. A very strange film.

Another story of a teenager dying from a disease. Another foreseeable movie ending. The Fault in Our Stars rings a bell to you? We all know what is going to happen, however it is the trip to that ending that matters. Is it going to be moving? Is it going to be funny? Is it going to be dull? All those questions went through our head whilst watching this film. The film is very good at something: at being indecisive. It surely wanted to reflect the main character's personality of Greg, portrayed decently by Thomas Mann. At a first glance he has none but then it changes. Perhaps this is the strongest aspect of the film: while we discover a complexity and depth, the movie starts to be more mature in its focus and storytelling. That was pretty original. However it is a shame that the other characters (especially Earl) are deeply superficial. Even our dear Dying Girl (Olivia Cooke) does not make us feel sympathy or empathy. Simply nothing. That's a low point for a dramatic film.

Another strength of the film is in the technical part. Very fresh cinematography by Chung hoon Chung with a very special attention to colors. Also the music by the genius Brian Eno is an essential plus to it. A shame they are not able to save the film. Director Alfonso Gomez-Rejon and screenwriter Jesse Andrews forgot to give a stronger personality to the characters and to the relationship between the Dying Girl and Greg. We observe it but we don't feel anything. There's definitely something wrong. It only starts to shine at the end. The end is definitely the best part (we would even dare to say that they made a whole film just to get to the well-done ending).

One the film ended, we did not understand the whole critical acclaim with this film. It has certain freshness and originality but lacks of soul. What is originality without a soul? Something forgettable. This is what this film is: easily forgettable. A shame because there were good ideas dancing around the camera but we left the cinema pretty indifferent. Our advice? Just watch the end, forget the rest.


Trailer: 

Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation (3/5, Regular)

Agent Ethan Hunt is back to face new bad guys and, with no surprise, they are being more dangerous and scary! In proportion to that, Ethan Hunt undertakes crazier tasks and stunts! Very entertaining. 

Tom Cruise decided to continue with the saga that gave him success. This new Mission Impossible is much better than its predecessor (or even MI2) because it doesn't suffer from long and boring scenes. This movie goes really fast as Tom Cruise (as an actor and as a producer) knows that people don't have much time to have fun. Therefore his recipe is unbreakable: action, action, a simple and square story and...more action! Does it work? Oh yes. 

The main quality resides in the action scenes. They are very impressive and they try to be as accurate as they can. Many action films today seek refuge with CGI whereas Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation continues with the traditional real stunts. The first scene is already very impressive. Not even to mention the last one. The other advantage of this film is that it blends the different qualities from the previous Mission Impossible movies. They learned how to shoot a good action sequence and how to build a good spy story. 

Final words? This is a very good action film. Don't expect too much of it (we read a review for this film saying 'very informative' ...what?! ) otherwise you will be disappointed. Let yourself go with this new mission , apparently impossible, for Ethan Hunt ( terrible acting from Tom Cruise, as usual) and his new buddies to save the world. 

Love & Mercy (3/5, Regular)

A biopic about Beach Boys' creative soul Brian Wilson who struggled not only with the pressure of fame but also with his own ghosts and demons. 

When the film starts, the Beach Boys are at the peak of their career. Big hits such as 'I get around' and 'Surfin' in the USA' have already been tuned in the radio and a young generation of Americans were dancing to their beach-surf rock music. However Brian Wilson wanted to give a new direction to their music: that is when he wrote entirely and recorded with experienced musicians the fantastic album 'Pet Sounds'. Even if this was the beginning of profound admiration from music critics and common people to the talent of Brian Wilson, it was the beginning of dark times for him. His inner madness would posses him by the power of fame and the pressures of people who were expecting so much from him. 

The film alternates between past and present giving full spotlight to Brian Wilson. Two brilliant actors, Paul Dano (young Wilson) and John Cusack (older Wilson) depicts him with great talent and credibility. Supporting actors are stunning such as Paul Giamatti acting as his manipulative manager. They are the pillar of the film because sadly, the script is not the best thing from this film.

Indeed the script alternates between the past and present following a certain logical pattern but however this does not add further quality to it. It gets fuzzy, it gets confusing. The film's length starts to be felt to a certain point and it seems that the story doesn't know where is it heading. That is why the conclusion feels a bit 'quickly wrapped-up'. We are far from the great biopics such as Walk the Mile or Ray. Nevertheless if you enjoy the Beach Boys music and are interested into the story of a solitary and crazy man such as Wilson, then this is a good film. 

5 Flights Up (3/5, Regular)

A mature couple decide to sell their flat in Brooklyn, New York. However a home is tied to memories and past experiences. A film about life and its ups and downs. 

We saw this film in a rainy Friday night. It was a perfect match as it is a film made with heart. Two great actors as Diane Keaton and Morgan Freeman representing this married couple in the contemporary New York is magic. They are an unbeatable couple and they struggle through the challenges of living in one of the most expensive cities in the world. Do they really want to sell their apartment? It is because it is worth a fortune today? What about their future home? Will they ever find one? 

What is great about this film is its positive tone and its view about the city. Brooklyn acquires its own personality and complexity. It moves all the time being a 'globalized space'. People greet and leave to give place to new other people from different backgrounds. Is it because cities like New York which are changing so fast that people start to get attached to old places and memories? The couple depicted in the movie surely does. The outside world tells them to sell their apartment because it is highly valued. However the stories they shared together in that apartment goes much more beyond a penny. It is invaluable. This is a story about life that gives us so many good things that cannot be economically valued. Love and happiness are intangible. That is the most important. 

It certainly has a Woody Allen touch with the city taking over our characters. It certainly has a feeling of 'deja vu' but its lightness and heart make it a warm story that will make you smile. Sometimes it is good to remember the good things that we have around us. This film helps you to do that.

Jurassic World (3/5, Regular)

                                                   

 The day has finally come. The Jurassic Park saga is back on our screens again and this time, they decided to make everything bigger, stronger and,,,BIGGER! However, this quest for bringing a big show to our hungry eyes has a cost.

Jurassic World- former Jurassic Park- is now open. People see Dinosaurs as if they were animals from a zoo. This park, behind its high-tech infrastructure and facilities, is expecting a disaster. Once more, everything goes to hell with enormous dinosaurs destroying everything on their way. We know how it goes, we have seen 3 previous films like that! 

So the real question now, does this new Jurassic Park meet our expectations? Half-way actually! We have incredible special effects (of course, Jurassic Park has been known for that) and great action sequences. There are thrilling scenes which make most of the show. The story is very simple and director Colin Tremorrow wants to keep it that way: gives a blow of spectacular and leave us attached to our seats. He is actually able to make it as many scenes are very entertaining. It's a Jurassic Park made with heart (it is advised to see the first movie to enjoy all the references). 

The problem lies in its simplicity actually. All the characters (especially the two young teenagers) are uninteresting. They don't have anything to share, anything to give to the story. They are so simplistic that they easily fall into clichés. It actually looks like a 1990 film made in 2015. Yes it sounds weird, ,we know,  but it is true. As you have a film with no characters (even the characters from the terrible Jurassic Park III have more depth!), there is not real emotional power. We are actually amazed by that: the film was so highly expected that they could have given a bit more to the characters. 

As it is a Jurassic Park movie, we think it was a regular movie. However without that label, it would be a bad one. That tells you a lot about this new feature. You will have fun, you will be thrilled (and impressed by the action scenes (we recommend to see it in the IMAX 3D) . However if you expect a story, characters...forget it! Therefore we left the cinema with a bittersweet feeling. Feeling that something which could have been really good is actually...bad. 

Red Curtain Cinema at BFI Imax, London 

                                       

Mad Max: Fury Road (3/5, Regular)

A vertiginous apocalyptic road trip embedded in a infinite desert where the law of the strongest prevails.Very entertaining.

The fourth installment of the Mad Max franchise finally arrived! We had to wait for years to see this new feature, Most problems were related with the script and also if Mel Gibson would accept to be part of it. The producers decided to go another way: rehire the same director George Miller from previous Mad Max movies and putting new actors (Tom Hardy, Charlize Theron) in front of the cameras. Now they have an excuse to continue making new Mad Max films. Tom Hardy is a very convincing Max, adding a darker tone to the character. Thumbs up for Charlize Theron: her stolen femininity due to a world of macho prevalence is seen in her eyes. 

The vertiginous rhythm of the story does not let you breathe:everything goes so fast like if we were...mad. This apocalyptic world is scary enough to make us feel uncomfortable giving a darker touch to the saga. George Miller knew it: he had to impress the fans and newcomers. He focused his efforts on making an outstanding production design and original action sequences. The more the film goes on, the bigger the action sequences. We cannot think, it is all about survival. Survival is aggressive and you don't have time to think. 

 Another original asset is that the action sequences are all car-chasing scenes. It is hard to imagine how many technical barriers the crew overcame to shoot the scenes. The editing was key to transmit  this feeling of adrenaline. Of course, putting so much focus into the action undermines the dramatic story but Miller seems to whisper into your ear: "You want to know more? Check my other Mad Max films!". Bold move. 

The film is hugely entertaining and satisfies anyone in seek of explosions, fights and stunning stunts. If you are a sensitive person, forget it. This is not for you. The real shame is that Mad Max: Fury Road will be easily forgotten. In opposition to the 1st and 3rd films, it does not offer anything to remember. Nevertheless, it is still a Mad Max movie!


Trailer:

Fast and Furious 7 (2/5, Bad)

Another film with the same old bunch of people who like to ride very fast and overall, very furious. A cocktail of explosions and almost no drama except one: this was the last's Paul Walker film.

Fast and Furious 7 takes back where Fast and Furious 6 (such a weird sentence isn't it?) finished: Jason Statham presenting himself as the new bad guy. For a movie action fan, this is great. For someone wanting the Fast and Furious saga to finish, the worst nightmare. Director James Wan (Final Destination, Saw I ) is behind the camera for this one. We thought it could be promising: he has an inch for dark stories. Sadly the only dark thing happened far from the cameras when Paul Walker died in a car accident. 

Universal Studios had great interest in this film. That is why 80% of the film is pure action. However we are far from realistic stunts. CGI have replaced the big stunts and even Paul Walker in certain scenes (perhaps one of the greatest achievements in this film). Fans will have a blast: they have explosions, cheesy sentences, close-ups on beautiful women's assess. Do we like it? Not really, it starts to be boring. 

It is a film with no inspiration, except the tone of self-parody in a few scenes. It is so exaggerated that you laugh at it. Nevertheless we highlight the end and how they close the curtains on Paul Walker's character (and on the real actor). Very moving and a beautiful homage. Perhaps it is the best thing in the film and it's sad to say it. Our final verdict: same cocktail, same recipe, just bigger. 

Maggie (4/5, Good)

An innovative approach for a classic topic: a beloved one ,slowly agonizing and entering into the dark shadow of Death, seen through the eyes of the father. Bold move from Schwarzenegger. 

In a near future, the world has been affected by a plague which turned people into zombies. Slowly recovering from the aftermath, people still infected by the disease are taken into quarantine. Farmer Wade (Schwarzenegger) refuses to take her infected daughter Maggie (Breslin) to the health authorities. Her daughter will slowly fall into the darkness of the disease and loose her humanity. Wade will be behind her into that path, but to what cost? 

This is not only an original approach to a classic dramatic framework (beloved one affected by a lethal disease) but also brings a new perspective into the zombie film genre. This time, people does not convert into zombies rapidly (the opposite of 28 days later, Dawn of the Dead) but slowly instead. The story is therefore more dramatic and less scary. The apocalyptic story inner in the zombie genre is delegated to be a mere background. 

We enjoyed very much the mise en scène: it adopts a documentary style to bring authenticity. The cinematography based on a shaky camera (mainstream today) is used for a dramatic purpose and we weren't bothered by it. The story is good even if the script fails at the end ( we already know what's going to happen but...should it have been that way?). The plat of resistance? The acting by Schwarzenegger and Breslin. We see this physical and psychological transformation from Maggie mainly through the deepening despair of the father. It is a chronicle of a death foretold. Bold move from Schwarzenegger, it is a hard role. Breslin is outstanding, she is the heart of the film. 

It is with a great surprise that we saw this film. This is one of the best roles from Schwarzenegger and he can add this one to his filmography with some proud. It is a small-budget film (most of it came from Schwarzenegger's big wallet) and a good film was made from it. Too bad the ending and some clichés but it does not undermine the audacious and original approach to a classic story. 

The Avengers: Age of Ultron (4/5, Good)

Marvel unleashes their biggest money-making title with "The Avengers". There is action, humor and some drama. Is it better than the first one? Worth to think about.

We won't spend time telling you the story. The Avengers is the kind of film you either see or not. However let us say that it is recommended that you have seen previous Marvel films (especially the first Thor, the first Avengers, Iron Man 3 and Captain America: Winter's soldier). With those films seen, you could fully appreciate the film and feel the excitement Director Joss Whedon wants you to experience. 

           

                                                    A bit of music to accompany the reading...

                                                        

The script has been developed with great care and thoroughly. This film has to connect with the new Marvel's "Phase 3" therefore new characters emerge and others are left behind. Joss Whedon had a great challenge ahead: not to undermine the characters dramatic development by including new ones. This is usually a recipe for failure: the examples of Batman and Robin , Spiderman 3 and to a lesser extent The Dark Knight Rises are known. Did Whedon achieve it? Not really. 

The previous film have already set the characters and Whedon has the advantage to play with it. Nevertheless when these new characters (we won't reveal them) appear, we fall once more into the spectacular appearances and no real dramatic development from these. We recognize though the attempt to make a darker story and discover the deepest fears of the main characters. They are beloved by everyone as heroes but at the same time, they are incredibly lonely people.

Of course, special effects are outstanding and breathtaking action sequences are not dismissed. Ultron is a bad-ass character which is a great challenge for the Avengers. Marvel Studios put the bar very high for this blockbuster and an enormous team of people (you could see it with the credits..)  worked up for it. As any pop-corn movie, it is hugely entertaining. Even if we don't have the same excitement as in the first one where the cross-over of the Marvel Characters was outstanding. Besides this, it is a good film to watch. You won't regret your money! 

 Trailer:
                                     

Match (5/5, Very Good)

An outstanding film supported by three actors illustrating love, honesty and loneliness. A very pleasant surprise.

Tobi (Patrick Stewart) is a man who achieved a successful career in the ballet scene. He danced and directed many Ballets in the most prestigious theaters around the globe. Despite his notoriety and prestige, he is a lonely man. He finds a balance in his loneliness but also his recognition as a great figure in the Ballet world. However everything changes once he is interviewed by a student (Carla Gugino) and her husband (Matthew Lillard), curious to know more about the ballet world. 

Having seen the trailer at the BFI Flare last March, we wanted to assist and watch the film. Sadly it was sold-out and we had to wait until the next opportunity would come. It was worth the waiting. The film is incredibly intense whilst it doesn't undermine its delicacy and sensitivity. The casting is definitely the best element in here. Patrick Stewart is colossus as this man who behind his humor, hides a very hurt and sad man. Matthew Lillard is making a brilliant come-back after shining in low-budget teen movies. 

These are the kind of pearls Cinema has to look for. It has everything in it: humor, drama, a great photography, interesting soundtrack. All these elements combined together make this film directed and adapted from his own theater play, Stephen Belber. He has the ability to take the story into a powerful ending where the three characters meet and are enlightened by their own weaknesses and strengths.It is a trip which will change deeply the three of them. Highly recommended, you won't regret it. 

Jupiter Ascending (2/5, Bad)

Announced as the promising return of the Wachowskis, we could have expected an intense script with great compelling dramatic and philosophical content along with stunning action sequences. Mission accomplished? Not really!

This is the story of Jupiter Jones (Mila Kunis) who lives a monotone life as a house cleaner along with her family. Being told by her mother that she would be destined to great things in life, she cannot but only cope with her daily life. Everything changes when a genetically engineered ex-military (Channing Tatum) comes to planet Earth to look for Jupiter Jones. Her genetic-signature marks her as the next one to inherit many planets to rule them. In a infinite universe where other powerful and greedy people like Balem (Eddie Redmayne) wants more power, she will have to face many dangers in her path that will change her forever.

The Wachowskis used to entertain us with "The Matrix" trilogy where a mister-nobody became the One that could alter a whole set system of institutions and perceptions of this world. Jupiter Ascending is the same topic: to discover the inner you and spread your wings (or your firework as Katy Perry would say). Therefore there is a feeling of déjà vu. You might expect something new coming up from these already-used elements in the film. Sadly, we didn't get any satisfaction.It actually gets worse: foreseeable ending, cheesy scenes (and not even to mention the dialogues...) and gaps in the script. Another relevant failure: Mila Kunis. Terrible acting.

What are the highlights of the film? First of all, the special effects and the production design. Both are just excellent. We have never seen SFX with such visual impact for a long-time (not as revolutionary as The Matrix but still). The production design with influences from Magic Fantasy and the Sci-fi genre are evident and could be thought as an homage. The other pillar is Eddie Redmayne who plays very well the bad guy. He is scary but somehow we also feel empathy with his character. Only a good actor can do that.

Considering we expected so much from The Wachowskis, we are disappointed by this film.Nevertheless if you want an entertaining film with good action sequences and with stunning visual shots, then this is the right film for you. Good to watch a Sunday night. However we cannot but lament the fall in The Wachowskis filmmaking. They revolutionize the sci-fi genre in the 2000s. Today they look like regular sci-fi film directors.

Trailer: