Movies & TV series

Top Movies – Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice Movie Review (Spoiler Free) – Movie Reviews Sites

Superman returns to the big screen but this time, the Bat of Gotham and a quirky and stupid version of Lex Luthor confront him.

Genre: Action/Fantasy/Sci-Fi

Director: Zack Snyder

Cast: Ben Affleck, Henry Cavill, Jesse Eisenberg, Amy Adams, Gal Gadot,
Holly Hunter, Callan Mulvey, Laurence Fishburne, Jeremy Irons & Diane Lane.

Run Time: 153 min.

US Release: 25 March 2016

UK Release: 25 March 2016

German Release: 24 March 2016

If you want to read my other reviews of Batman and Superman movies, click here!

The long awaited and indirect sequel to Man of Steel has arrived – Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice is out in theatres across the globe! Since its announcement three years ago, the movie reached incredible heights of hype and it was clear that it would never satisfy those ridiculous expectations that fans had set. The question though is if Batman v Superman is a good movie and worth to watch in cinemas. After the release of the second, spoiler heavy, trailer I decided to walk into the screening room with care and I was right to do so, because by keeping my expectations low I managed to really enjoy this blockbuster.

After the events of Man of Steel, that left Metropolis decimated, the world has been left with mixed feelings about the last son of Krypton (Cavill). While some worship him as a god, others harbour hatred and fear towards Superman. One of those persons is Bruce Wayne (Affleck), who saw his Metropolis building destroyed and employees killed during Supe’s fight with Zod and is, therefore, preparing for war against the Kryptonian. Lex Luthor (Eisenberg) on the other hand is following his own agenda and is trying to pit the two heroes against each other.

Batman v Superman might be a continuation of Man of Steel and sees Superman dealing with the repercussions of his Metropolis battle, but it is foremost a Batman movie. The story was mostly good and managed to catch my interest since the opening act. One of the positive aspects of this blockbuster is how grounded it started off, engaging in real life problems such as racism, granted against aliens but racism nonetheless, that arose due to Clark’s outing. My favourite part though was the Bruce Wayne/Batman story arc, which was fantastic! Watching the battle of Metropolis through Wayne’s eyes gave the whole scene a new perspective.

I liked how the plot pieces fell in line, prepping both characters to fight each other and the battle between the two titans was handled tremendously well and was fun to watch. I also liked Diana Prince/Wonder Woman’s smaller story arc, but I thought that it should have been kept simply as a cameo scene, leaving her out of the final battle. In fact, I believe the whole third act should have been scrapped because the secondary villain our heroes fight was a completely wasted opportunity; the movie should have just focused on Batman taking on Superman!

While I thought that the smaller hints at the Justice League movie weren’t that bad, I would have preferred if it would have been handled differently, as it felt as if it has been crammed into the film out of necessity to build a larger world. The fact that Snyder needed to include those hints, made it feel as if there were too much going on and since the movie is about 20 minutes too long already, it could have definitely done without them. The biggest issue from which Batman v Superman is suffering though is the fact that it is a structural mess! The movie jumps storylines every five-to-ten minutes, to give everyone enough screen time and the beautifully grounded story arc it started with, was thrown away turning it into and extreme fantasy flick.

Ben Affleck was incredible as Bruce Wayne/Batman, but I always did believe that he was able to pull it off. He really sold the emotions and feelings Wayne had towards the Man of Steel, and you fully understood why he hated him so much. That hatred drove his alter ego Batman to pursue criminals more viciously than ever before, and I felt like this was one of the best Batman incarnations we saw on the big screen yet. Jeremy Irons depicted Alfred, and just like Affleck he owned the role of Wayne’s elderly butler. But he did not only serve Bruce with breakfast and good advice, this Alfred has more to offer than what we saw in the Nolan trilogy.

Henry Cavill was once again great as Clark Kent/Superman. I really liked him in Man of Steel, which explored Clark’s human side. This film shows us his evolution towards Superman and the trouble that it brings with it because even though the Man of Steel does not answer to any government, his actions cause political friction and it clearly affects him on an emotional level. Amy Adams was once again fantastic as Lois Lane, but during the later half of the plot, she stopped being the smart journalist that was presented to us in Man of Steel and became a damsel in distress, for Superman to rescue.

Gal Gadot did not disappoint as Diana Prince/Wonder Woman and I really enjoyed her presence in the movie. She proved that she was able to kick some serious butt, but I did wish she had been kept as a minor side role, without outing herself as Wonder Woman.

Jesse Eisenberg was the only cast member who I thought did not work out. His rendition as Lex Luthor was a mess and he proved to be extremely annoying as the main villain. He did not play Lex Luthor, but rather Jesse Eisenberg who tried to act as Lex Luthor. His twitches fit more to a paranoid schizophrenic and he lets us know a little too often that he is suffering from daddy issues. To be frank, I don’t know who understood and embodied the character of Lex Luthor as good as Michael Rosenbaum, of the Smallville series.

Just like the Man of Steel before, or any other Zack Snyder movie for that fact, Batman v Superman consists mostly of fantastic and handsome cinematography. The film is really beautiful to look at, making good use of special effects and perfect fight choreographies; Batman battling Superman looked as if the pages on Miller’s Dark Knight comic lines were coming to live! What really annoyed me were the hard cuts used, to jump between storylines, but Hans Zimmer & Junkie XL’s grand sounding composition made up for that in every way!

Verdict: I really liked and enjoyed Batman v Superman and I left the cinema with a big fat smile on my face, but the sad truth is that it was far from being a good movie. While the cast and performances were fantastic (except Eisenberg’s Lex) and the first two acts were really engaging, the movie started to slightly fall apart as soon as the third act started, and the secondary villain was introduced. The overall structure of the movie was a complete mess, cramming too many comic book storylines into one film and trying to use the movie as a springboard for other DC characters and the Justice League movie. Overall, I would recommend DC comic readers and comic book fans to go watch this movie, because it is a fun blockbuster as long as you know that you are walking into a comic book adaptation. I wish I could give it a higher rating, sadly the movie has too many flaws and it will, therefore, obtain a 6.5 out of 10.

Have you seen Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice yet? If so, let me know what you thought of it and if you agree with my opinion. Thank you very much for reading this review, and if you found it helpful, please share it with others.

Top Movies – Man of Steel Movie Review – Movie Reviews Sites

Although suffering from some issues, Zack Snyder take on the Man of Steel was a visual spectacle that grounded the character of Clark Kent/Superman.

Genre: Action/Fantasy/Sci-Fi

Directors: Zack Snyder

Cast: Henry Cavill, Michael Shannon, Amy Adams, Diane Lane,
Antje Traue, Russell Crowe, Laurence Fishburne & Kevin Costner.

Run Time: 143 min.

US Release: 14 June 2013

UK Release: 14 June 2013

German Release: 20 June 2013

Welcome back to my string of reviews, this one on Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel, which will lead up to Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice that I am going to watch tonight. Man of Steel was written by David S. Goyer and Christopher Nolan, who also produced this superhero blockbuster, and were trying to re-imagine Kal-El’s story for the big screen. This was one of the most polarising films of 2013, with critics and audiences alike either hating or loving this movie. Personally, I really liked Man of Steel and thought it was one of the better Superman pictures we obtained since Donner’s Superman II.

— BEWARE OF SPOILERS! —

The planet of Krypton is about to implode and General Zod (Shannon) attempts to save his people via a political putsch. Jor-El (Crowe), lead scientist of Krypton, steals the Codex (a skull imprinted with the genetic code of every Kryptonian) and combines it with baby Kal-El’s DNA before he sends him off to Earth. Jor-El dies protecting the spaceship from Zod and shortly after, Zod’s rebellion is stopped and he and his army are banished to the Phantom Zone.

On Earth a now grown up Clark Kent (Cavill) is travelling the world, searching for something that might answer where he came from. His adoptive father Jonathan Kent (Costner) died a few years ago during the tornado season in Kansas and his adoptive mother Martha (Lane) is tending the farm all alone. When Clark stumbles upon a Kryptonian spaceship in the arctic, he accidently sets off a distress beacon that draws Zod to Earth. While mean he makes the acquaintance with Daily Planet reporter Lois Lane (Adams), who is immediately infatuated with her mysterious saviour. Once Zod attacks Earth, Clark needs to choose whom to trust: The humans that adopted him, or the last of his people?

What many viewers did not understand and, therefore, disliked, was that Man of Steel wasn’t a typical Superman movie! What Snyder gave the audience was more; a beautiful road trip tale that saw Clark in search for answers to who he is and where he came from. It is a sweet emotional and human story with flashbacks that explored Clark’s loving childhood.

I really liked the extended Krypton scenes, showing us more of its people, its culture and the political system, as well as the fauna and flora. Snyder also implemented a lot of easter-eggs attributing to other superheroes and villains such as Aquaman, Batman, Carol Ferris and Lex Luthor. I also believe that Superman killing Zod at the end was important, it was an act that tormented him immediately and set the path for his more peaceful resolutions. The blockbuster had good solid and over-the-top action as expected from a Superman film, but it could have benefited from a little bit less.

As much as I liked Man of Steel, it also suffered from some severe issues. The dialogues sounded sometimes a little wooden, especially during the beginning scene on Krypton, and the pacing of the movie was a little bit messy, but not too much that it would throw the viewer off. The codex subplot was handled way to rushed and was not explained properly. The church scene is until now my least favourite scene in the whole film; I don’t understand why he would seek a stranger, who doesn’t even share his (religious) belief, for advice. Lastly, the romance between Clark and Lois was handled really rushed and felt forced and sloppy.

Henry Cavill was great as Clark Kent, who was tormented throughout the movie about why he is on Earth and what his purpose is. Can he trust humanity with his secret? Can he even trust his own people to leave the planet alone? Cavill portrayed Clark like no-one before; in spirit he is human, even though if genetically he is Kryptonian, and he was brought up by the Kent’s with a moral code of justice. Clark is a guy who wants to do good, but needs to be careful how to go one about it and he is most definitely not a pushover!

Russell Crowe was one of the best parts of this movie. He was simply perfect as Jor-El, Clark’s biological father, giving the character personality and emotion. Michael Shannon, on the other hand, was good as General Zod, but it did not feel like he owned the character. Nevertheless, he managed to kick butt and was a good villain for the first film, making his point about why he does what he does. He isn’t just a maniac ready to commit genocide, he is a warrior that was bred to protect Krypton and it’s people, without them he has no purpose left.

Kevin Costner & Diane Lane were fantastic as Jonathan and Martha Kent. Lane understood her character and gave a lovely rendition as Clark’s adoptive mother and Costner gave one of his best performances in years. Although I did have an issue, when Jonathan suggested to Clark that it might have been wiser to let his classmates die in a car accident, to keep his super strength a secret. That is not the Jonathan Kent I know!

Amy Adams was, in my opinion, the best Lois Lane portrayed on screen. She acted like a reporter and not like a damsel in distress, playing the reporter. She always showed curiosity and was on the hunt for the next big story. Her chemistry with Cavill, on the other hand, was somewhat weird, because of the forced love story that needed to happen in this film.

Man of Steel is a beautifully shot movie and an incredible visual experience that shows us the story of Superman like we have never seen it before. The quieter scenes, depicting flying birds, clothes hanging to dry or a toy in a field of grass, turned this big fantasy movie into a more human and realistic tale. The scenes, in which Clark learns to fly, were as if the pages of Superman: Birthright had come to life. The depiction of Krypton and the general effects used, still look fantastic – as in every Zack Snyder film. Still, there are traces in which CGI was used very noticeable, specifically the Kryptonian fistfights, but the transition from CGI Superman to the real Henry Cavill was flawless.

Verdict: This is a Superman film still enjoy watching today. I loved how human it looks and feels, as it tries to make the point that, although physiologically an alien, Clark has more of a human soul than some people on Earth. The cast did a fantastic job, depicting the comic book characters, specifically Russell Crowe as Jor-El and Henry Cavill as Clark/Superman. The music by Hans Zimmer was epic and powerful as always, and the cinematography is beautiful, including fantastic effects. It might not be a perfect movie, suffering from pacing issues and wooden dialogues, but it is nevertheless one of my favourite depictions of the last son of Krypton. I will give Man of Steel a 7.5 out of 10.

What is your opinion of Man of Steel? Where you a fan of it or did you despise it? Leave a comment in the section below and share your opinion. As I stated at the beginning of this review, I will go watch Batman V Superman tonight and will have my review online tomorrow evening. Thank you very much for reading and if you liked this review, make sure to share it.

Top Movies – Nola and the Clones Review (Spoiler Free) – Movie Reviews Sites

Nola and the Clones is Graham Jones newest illustration; a tale that explores the human soul.

Genre: Drama

Directors: Graham Jones

Cast: Caoimhe Cassidy & Joseph Lydon.

Run Time: 82 min.

Release: 07 March (Published on Youtube)

Irish visionary director Graham Jones (How to Cheat in the Leaving Certificate & Randomers) released his seventh independent film early this month. Nola and the Clones is a slow paced study of character, which is beautifully shot and very provocative. The magical atmosphere created by the different musical pieces and mystical shots, surrounded the movie from beginning to end and contrasted the grounded drama.

The story centres on Nola (Cassidy), a young and deeply wounded woman, who lives on the streets of Dublin after a tragic past and is in search for self- acceptance and love. Along her path she makes the acquaintance of several young men (Lydon) who have a striking resemblance to one another. Nola is stuck in a difficult situation; on one side she tries to escape a world she feels trapped in, full of male predators. On the other hand, she simply accepts her predicament and plays along; doing exactly what is expected of her.

Jones uses observational storytelling to creatively depict Nola’s tale on screen and splits the account into two parts. The first is her dealing with the different men who look incredibly alike. The clones are a clever metaphor used by Jones, that represent the type of male Nola not only attracts but is also drawn to. All of them might be nice lads, but they do try to control and impose their will on her, which makes the external similarities in reality be internal similarities. The dialogue between Nola and the men is eye-opening; many of them try to fool her into performing a sexual act out of “love”, just to silence their own thirst for pleasure. Nola though isn’t stupid and knows very well what her male counterparts are up to.

The second element of this story is told through visual experience, as we follow Nola through different streets and watch her find shelter in cafes, department stores or nightclubs. Those scenes offer a refreshing change of the often one-sided dialogues, since we obtain glimpses into the inner machinations of Nola’s mind, as she observes the structured and ordinary lives of those around her. We also see her in stores trying on hats and tiaras, sometimes even mimicking other women in an attempt to recapture her womanhood.

Caoimhe Cassidy gives an excellent rendition as Nola. She not only delivered harsh and believable lines, but also expressed her feelings through fantastic body language. Nola is a very complex character; she carries deep psychological scars from her childhood that led her to build a wall to safeguard her true emotions. She acts cold and distant towards people, especially men, because she can’t trust their motives. Yet ironically, while she locks away her spirit, she offers her body for sexual services in exchange for money.

Joseph Lydon on the other hand, plays the many different “clones” Nola encounters through her journey. I was surprised at how resourceful Lydon presented himself, looking and acting different in many encounters. As much as I liked his different personas though, some of them seemed sheer cartoonish and one dimensional, which was surely the point but I thought it disrupted from the main message.

The cinematography is simple but very effective. Jones uses two different styles that tell the two elements of the story apart. Still shots for when she is with men, either talking or engaging in sexual activities, while using scenes with different shots throughout the city and countries that represent Nola’s highly chaotic life, which sees her always in motion.

The soundtrack used for this indie-drama is composed of different types of tunes. The opening credits contain an energetic and upbeat song; from there on it changes to softer, more melodramatic tunes that at times are reminiscent of a film-noir.

Verdict: Graham Jones wrote and directed a beautiful little tale that sees a young woman struggling with her gender and with the people around her. It entices the audience with handsomely shot scenes, which depict the living habitat of the protagonist, and interesting lines of dialogue between Nola and the men she encounters. The music is beautifully picked and contrasts the harsh realism of the story by setting a magical, nearly mystical, atmosphere. Both actors give fantastic performances, especially Caoimhe Cassidy who incorporated the character of Nola. This little independent film was a pleasure to watch and I do recommend you see it yourself and will leave the link down below! I’ll give Nola and the Clones a 9 out of 10.

Thank you very much for reading my review and I do hope you give Graham Jones’ film a try! If you liked this review, make sure to share it with others.

Watch Nola and the Clones: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ni1xd2dEP4

Top Movies – 10 Cloverfield Lane Movie Review (Spoiler Free) – Movie Reviews Sites

Prepare for a genius and nerve-wrecking game of cat and mouse, with shining performances by John Goodman and Mary Elizabeth Winstead!

Genre: Horror/Mystery/Thriller

Directors: Dan Trachtenberg

Cast: Mary Elizabeth Winstead, John Gallagher Jr. & John Goodman.

Run Time: 103 min.

US Release: 11 March 2016

UK Release: 18 March 2016

German Release: 31 March 2016

Let me warn you straight away! This movie is best experienced going into the theatres without expectations and with the least amount of knowledge about the story, so if you did not see 10 Cloverfield Lane watch it first and then read my review. Also don’t expect it to be a direct sequel or spin-off, because it will otherwise disappoint you – You have beenw warned. I will try and keep this review nevertheless as spoiler free as possible, which is really hard because the film was created in secret. So let’s get on with it!

10 Cloverfield Lane is an extremely tense and claustrophobic mystery-thriller that does not try to succeed its forerunner by coming of a bigger product, but instead delivers a smaller picture that is qualitatively better than its predecessor. It is also Dan Trachtenberg’s debut feature film and I was surprised by what this director accomplished in terms of suspense and psychological-terror.

Michelle (Winstead) wakes up in an underground bunker, after having been in a horrible car crash, with her broken leg chained to a wall. Shortly after her awakening, Howard (Goodman) makes an entry and explains to her that there is no going back to the outside, because there has been an attack and the air is now lethal. Michelle quickly makes the acquaintance of the other bomb shelter resident Emmett, who confirms to a specific point what Howard said about the outside world. But can Howard be trusted and what are his real motives? Is he simply delusional? You’ll have to figure that out by yourself!

As soon as the opening scene began, I obtained vibes of Hitchcock’s Psycho and it didn’t end there. This movie pays homage to older thrillers such as Misery as well as paying tribute to H. G. Well’s sci-fi literature work. It is a skilfully written piece of cinematic art that has a constant build-up in tension, as the viewer watches Michelle trying to figure out if her “saviour” Howard is serious about his rants of the end of the world, or if the guy is just batshit crazy. This leads me to my next point; Trachtenberg sets up a beautiful cat-and-mouse game full of misdirection that keeps not only the audience guessing what will happen next, but also the female protagonist they follow.

Sadly, the third act revelation was somewhat of a letdown for me; not because it did not fit per-se, as there are several hints towards what really might be going on, but because it felt a little too sudden and out of place. Until the third act, this film was very grounded and realistic. The things that were depicted on the big screen could have been taken from police file records of similar cases, but as soon as we get to the last ten/fifteen minutes, the story makes a 180 degree turn and I got to see something I didn’t expect and was perplexed by because it did not suit from what we saw beforehand, at least in that extreme manner it was depicted.

John Goodman was outrageously brilliant as Howard, the apocalyptic nut who encloses Michelle and Emmett in his fallout shelter with him and tells them he is their saviour. Goodman is one of the truly great actors still alive and his portrayal of Howard was riveting, giving me goose bumps every time he appeared on screen. This is because there is really something off with the character; his extreme need to control everything is really uncomfortable and it is impossible to decipher what his real motives and intentions are, which makes the female protagonist be on constant alert.

Mary Elizabeth Winstead plays Michelle, and she gave the best performance of career to date. Michelle is the viewer’s conduit as we obtain every bit of new information through her, but what I appreciated most is that Michelle is not a stupid character, she is in fact extremely smart and pays close attention to her surroundings. Winstead’s acting matches that of Goodman in every possible way and she manages to convey her feelings about her situation perfectly.

John Gallagher Jr. was the most underrated actor of this small motion picture. It was his character that somewhat stabilized the situation between Howard and Michelle and brought at least a sense of normality into the absurd situation. Emmett was also the funniest of the three, as his educational level is not very high and lead to some humorous lines of dialogue.

The cinematography for this movie is as close to perfect as it can get. Trachtenberg delivered a beautiful picture, very reminiscent of thrillers from the 50’s, and did not let the camerawork be confined by the enclosed space they were filming at. There is always something visually new to explore also building suspense and tension. The camera also pays close attention to smaller objects that might not look very interesting at first, such as a game, a hand movement or a book. There was also some good use of special effects, although the darkness of them scenes clouded these.

Bear McCreary composed the music, with the opening song setting the mood for what type of film to expect. The complete soundtrack is actually chillingly fantastic and very reminiscent of Hitchcock movies.

Verdict: I really wanted to give this high-tense thriller a perfect score but due to the rushed third act reveal that, even though hinted at throughout the whole plot, did not really suit the rest of the film (like a wrong piece of the puzzle), I needed to take off some points. Nevertheless, the rest of this premise was a fantastic homage to the old school cinema of thriller and horror; the script was written very clever and the performances by the three actors are extraordinary. This was one of my best times in a cinema and will therefore give 10 Cloverfield Lane a 9.5 out of 10.

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is a movie I can only recommend you go see in cinemas, because it is worth your time and money. I was extremely surprised by it and will go see it again, as soon as it is officially released in Germany. Thank you very much for reading and as always, if you found this review helpful make sure to share this review with others.

Top Movies – Pride + Prejudice + Zombies Movie Review (Spoiler Free) – Movie Reviews Sites

Lily James and Sam Riley give good renditions in this mediocre adaptation of the book that parodies Jane Austen’s novel.

Genre: Action/Comedy/Horror/Romance

Directors: Burr Steers

Cast: Lily James, Sam Riley, Bella Heathcote, Douglas Booth,
Matt Smith, Jack Huston, Ellie Bamber, Sally Phillips,
Charles Dance & Lena Headey.

Run Time: 108 min.

US Release: 05 February 2016

UK Release: 11 February 2016

German Release: 09 June 2016

When it comes to book adaptations I am usually very careful, because a lot of them succeed to disappointing me deeply. It’s even more difficult to anticipate what to expect, when the film is based on a book that parodies one of literature’s greatest romance novels. Pride and Prejudice and Zombies is exactly that and although it basically is Pride and Prejudice with zombies sprinkled throughout the plot, I did end up enjoying this premise more than I actually had expected. Having said that, I wouldn’t call this a good movie.

American screenwriter and author Seth Grahame-Smith, who also wrote the mash-up novel Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, wrote the novel of the same name this film is based on. Grahame-Smith was given the idea by his editorial, which were conducting an analysis of cultural popular characters such as ninjas, pirates, zombies and vampires and compared them to public domain titles like War and Peace, Crime and Punishment etc. The book quickly rose to third place on the New York’s bestselling list and became a bestseller on amazon.co.uk.

If you read Jane Austen’s magnificent literary work or saw previous adaptations of it on screen, you will be familiar with the story plot. Not much has changed; it is still a romance story surrounding the five daughters of Mr. and Mrs. Bennet (Dance & Phillips). When a wealthy young man (Booth) moves out into the country, the five sisters Jane (Heathcote), Elizabeth (James), Mary (Millie Brady), Kitty (Suki Waterhouse) and Lydia (Bamber) are invited to a ball. Elizabeth meets Mr. Darcy (Riley) and a love-hate relationship ensues, but before anyone can enjoy the night the estate is overrun by zombies.

I’ll begin with the negatives, as it is the little things that were supposed to make this film different that are really forgettable. The idea of including zombies in a period piece sounds great and differentiates it from other motion pictures; sadly it did not feel like there was an imminent threat by the undead. The protagonists are warriors trained in different styles of martial arts and specialised to fight zombies, but that premise was a let down since we don’t get to see proper fights on screen. I also thought that it could have done with a little less Pride and Prejudice and more The Walking Deadstory-wise, because the romantic side-story about Liz’s sister Jane was brushed over so fast, I didn’t even care about it! This brings me to my last issue; the pacing is terrible.

That being said, this movie is supposed to parody Jane Austen’s work and it does it brilliantly. The silliness and jokes are handled really good and made me laugh throughout a couple of scenes, which it is something truly I liked about this adaptation, it also doesn’t take itself too serious since it’s a satiric copy of one of literature’s greatest works. Many reviews I read, complaint about the fact that the women in this world had no bigger worries than marriage even though there is a Zombie epidemic occurring throughout the land, I on the other hand found it funny as it was part of the parody.

The cast is undoubtedly the best part of this horror-romance, as all actors involved gave their best and did a fantastic job. It is mainly that reasons I won’t give Pride and Prejudice and Zombies a lower grade. Sadly not all the characters obtained the much-needed attention for the audience to care about their story.

Lily James, who plays Elizabeth Bennet, radiates an incredible charisma and likability in this movie, reminiscent of her role in Cinderella. Her character is not only able to defend herself and kick some serious butt, she is also beautiful well mannered and intelligent. Collins was a perfect choice to play the protagonist and was my favourites character in this satire. Sam Riley portrays her male counterpart Mr. Darcy, a cold and brutal Colonel who does not think twice about killing the undead. Darcy is a tortured human being, haunted by his actions of the past and Riley depicted those emotions incredibly well. He also has good chemistry with colleague Lily James that made their love-hate relationship seem genuine.

Bella Heathcote acted as Elizabeth’s older sister Jane. Heathcote gave a strong rendition of the character but wasn’t given enough screen time to make her character or her love-story important for the audience. Douglas Booth plays pretty face Mr. Bingley, who has little to none experience in fighting and seems to be slightly coward-ish. I liked that twist of the ridiculously good-looking male stereotype, because it emphasised the point that looks aren’t everything. Booth did a good job but, like Heathcote, he didn’t get much screen time.

Lena Headey was a fun inclusion to the cast and added quite a bit of humour to the film. She played Lady Catherine de Bourgh, who in this adaptation is a wealthy lady warrior with an eye patch. Heady added character traits of her Game of Thrones role Queen Cersei Lannister to this persona, but ultimately surprised me at the end, when she showed compassion for the Bennet family; taking them in when the zombie problem becomes to dangerous.

Pride and Prejudice and Zombies is generally a very nice looking picture as long as there is no action involved and does make use of stronger colder colours, such as blues, or lilacs, which suits its surrounding world well. I also need to pay respect to the makeup artists, because the zombies were well realised. The cinematography drops to a low though, as soon as action scenes come into play. The fighting sequences are shot in dark surroundings and close-ups are used, to hide the fact that these actresses and actors are not able to strike a martial art pose. A good example is the sparing scene between the sisters.

Verdict: I did not hate this movie I had fun watching it! My main issue with Pride and Prejudice and Zombies is that it isn’t a very memorable picture, which is sad because I was looking forward to see a period-piece drama that plays during a zombie apocalypse. What the audience obtains though is Pride and Prejudice with a few zombies sprinkled in here and there. This adaptation could have benefited from more horror and action, to distinguishing it from the book it tried to parody; instead it recreates the story we saw so many times before and adds badly choreographed action scenes. The acting was good and I did like the movie’s humour, but the fact that there was no real new component simply turned this into an ordinary film without a special trait. I will therefore give this horror-romance a 6 out of 10and recommend you check it out, once it’s out for rental.

Thank you very much for reading and if you want to comment on any of my thoughts about this movie, please leave a remark in the section below. My next review, for 10 Cloverfield Lane will be uploaded tomorrow, so keep an eye out if you are interested.

Top Movies – Cloverfield Movie Review – Movie Reviews Sites

J.J. Abrams and Matt Reeves delivered a fantastic catastrophe-flick, that saw the destruction of New York by an unspecified being.

Genre: Action/Horror/Mystery

Directors: Matt Reeves

Cast: Mike Stahl-David, T.J. Miller, Jessica Lucas, Odette Annable,
Lizzy Caplan, Mike Vogel, Billy Brown & Ben Feldman.

Run Time: 85 min.

US Release: 18 January 2008

UK Release: 31 January 2008

German Release: 01 February 2008

Cloverfield was my personal surprise hit of 2008 and my second favourite found footage film right after End of Watch, which combined the previous mentioned style with the monster movie genre. It was also responsible for reviving the found footage format, which slowly died out after the 1999 horror-shocker The Blair Witch Project. J.J. Abrams came up with the idea for Cloverfield while promoting Mission: Impossible III in Japan, thinking that the US film industry is in dire need of an own movie monster. Paramount Pictures green lit the project in secret and the trailer released for this action-mystery was one of the best marketing strategies I have seen for a movie, barely revealing anything about the film but still creating buzz.

—- BE AWARE, THIS IS A SPOILER REVIEW!! —-

Robert Hawkins (Stahl-David) is about to move to Japan and accept a position as vice-president of a company. His Brother Jason (Vogel) and “sister-in-law” Lilly (Lucas) plan a secret good-bye party for him and make Hud (Miller) film the whole thing, with Rob’s camera. We are then told by Robert himself that the tape in the camera contained precious memories of his first date with his long-term secret crush Beth (Annable), who left the party enraged. An earthquake and an explosion suddenly interrupt the party. The people run in panic out into the streets and it is revealed that a giant monster is attacking Manhattan. Rob calls Beth and shortly after decides to go and save her.

Monster films might not strike as being very innovative in Hollywood; there are several sequels and versions of King Kong and of course the American remake of Godzilla, but what Cloverfieldachieved by crossing the monster genre with the found footage category was genius! It not only revamped both genres but also gave this small budget production a complete new sensation. The home-video-type footage gave the audience the feeling to watch something extremely personal and also made the plot seem much more realistic.

This is a love story at its core that is wrapped in elements of action, mystery and horror. What surprised me was the effective scares it used in some of the scenes, which made it more frightening than other horror films nowadays. It is left unexplained where the Cloverfield monster came from and the scariest creature was not the giant Godzilla-like thing, but the little parasitic monsters that fell of its host. Having the main character about to move to Japan was a nice nod towards Godzilla and the severed head of the Statue of Liberty was inspired by the movie poster of the 1981 action-flick Escape from New York that had a very provocative and terrifying effect.

As any other film, this one wasn’t perfect but I only had a couple of issues with the story. For one, why do the others follow Rob to save Beth if they could have moved to safety? Then there is the issue of the camcorder battery that doesn’t seem to run out, and finally, although Hud gave a reason for documenting the destruction of Manhattan, there was no cause to film his friends being in danger, or suffering emotionally!

Here is where the movie drops the ball as all characters, except for the main protagonist, felt flat and not fleshed-out enough. Rob Hawkins (Michael Stahl-David) is the hero in this story, trying to save the life of his secret love Beth amidst the destruction of Manhattan by a 60-ish meter monster. Previously it was revealed that due to Rob accepting a job in Japan, him and Beth had fallout about a possible relationship.

Hudson ‘Hud’ Platt, played by T. J. Miller, was possibly the most bland and generally idiotic character of the group. The only reason for his creation was the fact that he was the best option to hold the camera and a disposable persona at that. What makes him even more unlikeable is the fact that he doesn’t stop filming, even when it concerns his friends’ safety.

Matt Reeves and Michael Bonvillain did a great cinematographic job. The found footage style in which this low-budget blockbuster was filmed gave the movie a personal and realistic touch, as if the audience were stuck in that horrific situation together with the protagonists. Reeves made the right decision by not showing the full monster until the end, the movie was like a build-up to the big horrific reveal, and while this might be a flaw in other movies it did work perfectly here. The special effects are still fantastic to look at the monsters and the destruction of Manhattan look incredibly realistic, which might have been enhanced by the shaky cam.

Verdict: Cloverfield was one of my favourite films of 2008 and I was floored by its sheer intensity. It had a perfect marketing campaign and delivered a simple but effective story that showed how a group of people tried to survive a monster invasion in New York. Filming it, as a found footage type movie was the best decision by the production team, because it not only gave the movie a fresh note but also singlehandedly revamped two genres. I can watch this movie over-and-over again without being bored by it, because there is always something new to discover. I will give Cloverfield an 8.5out of 10.

What did you think of Cloverfield? Were you one of the people experiencing motion sickness while watching? Leave a comment below and let me know. My review for 10 Cloverfield Lane, the unofficial sequel, will be uploaded this Saturday so keep your eyes open if interested. Thank you very much for reading and as always, if you found this review helpful share it!

Top Movies – London Has Fallen Movie Review (Spoiler Free) – Movie Reviews Sites

***Olympus*’ sequel sees London under siege by a terrorist organisation, while Gerard Butler is trying to save the US President’s life and throwing around late 80’s action one-liners.**

Genre: Action/Thriller

Director: Babak Najafi

Cast: Gerard Butler, Aaron Eckhart, Morgan Freeman, Alon Abutbul,
Radha Mitchell, Angela Bassett, Colin Salmon & Charlotte Riley.

Run Time: 99 min.

US Release: 04 March 2016

UK Release: 03 March 2016

German Release: 10 March 2016

Click here if you want to read my review for Olympus Has Fallen.

If you read my review for Olympus Has Fallen, you will know that I was not a particular fan of the 2012 action blockbuster, so having heard that it obtained a sequel somewhat disappointed me. Nevertheless, when I saw the first trailer I was hoping that this second instalment might offer something better than the first movie, sadly that wasn’t the case. In fact, this atrocity is even worse than I could have possibly imagined and I was very close to simply leaving the theatre I sat in.

While the first film was directed by action-veteran director Antoine Fuqua, this sequel was directed by Babak Najafi, who brought us movies such as Easy Money II. Najafi tries to jump on the success-train from the first movie, which was a throwback to old 80’s and 90’s action cheese, but he completely failed by trying to make the sequel bigger but dumbing down the story and dialogue.

When the British Prime Minister passes away from a heart attack, the leaders of the Western world are invited to attend his funeral. Included are US President Benjamin Asher (Eckhart), his protector and Secret Service agent Mike Banning (Butler) as well as the Director of the US Secret Service Lynne Jacobs (Bassett). What starts out as the most protected event of the world, quickly turns into a deadly trap to kill the Western leaders, planned by a terrorist cell. Mike Banning and his MI-6 contact (Charlotte Riley) are the only ones able to stop the terrorists from unleashing their plan.

Olympus Has Fallen was a fun throwback to early 90’s action flicks, which implicated that its story might have been a little far fetched, but still believable enough for the audience to accept it. London Has Fallenis, on the other hand, completely unbelievable from beginning to end! There is absolutely no way that a terrorist cell would be able to infiltrate all infrastructures of one of the best-protected cities in the world, without anybody noticing! The plot in general is laughable and absolutely stupid, expecting the viewers to just turn off their brains and accept what they are seeing on screen.

While Najafi produced a simple-minded action flick that surely did not try to offend anyone, the studio managed to release an incredibly politically incorrect and xenophobic action-film. Apart from all the bad guys being either South-Asian or from Orient decent, it also depicts all Western countries (apart from the US, who saves the day once again) as being completely incompetent or just plain stupid. I also found it preposterous and distasteful, how Vice-President Trumbull was ready to sacrifice millions of British civilian lives (and possibly further from other countries), to save one President. It is an appalling scene that made me despise Morgan Freeman as an actor.

The only positive aspect this movie has is in its depiction of action, which accounts for 80 percent of the movie. I was having a blast watching London fall into chaos, while Mike Banning was running around, with President Asher right behind him. I do believe that action sequences have more impact in a European city because everything is more enclosed, compared to the wide-open streets in the US. That said, the dialogues used for the slower parts in between the action sequences, are extremely stupid, and has Butler recite a lot of Arni one-liners from previous action films.

Mike Banning, played by Gerard Butler, is a real badass and reminded me of Sam Fisher from the Splinter Cell game series. Having said that, what made him such a fun hero in the first film was the fact that he was a broken man, who was trying to find himself again in the middle of a crisis. In London Has Fallen he seems to be invulnerable, shooting down every enemy from impossible angles and that did hurt his credibility, making the audience care less about his safety. The fact that he tortures an enemy with a knife, just for apparent fun, is an action that costs him sympathy points.

Aaron Eckhart portrays once again President Asher and while I liked the chemistry between him and Butler, making them look like real buddies on screen, I found him to be one of the most useless characters. His persona was hiding under Butler’s armpit for more than half of the movies runtime, while complaining and moaning about the situation. It is only during the last action scene that he finally decides to fight back.

Angela Bassett was another disappointment. She plays head of Secret Service Lynne Jacobs, but as soon as shit hits the fan, she is completely incompetent to do anything at all. Morgan Freeman though, portrayed the most despicable character in the whole film. His rendition of VP Trumbull was not only that of a reckless man, but he also had the nerve to give one hell of a bullshit speech by the end of the blockbuster, justifying America’s involvement in recent wars.

Cinematographer Ed Wild did a good job for most of this film. The actions scenes were nicely captured and increased the enjoyment, when Gerard Butler kicked some serious terrorist butt. There were however a couple of crass cuts that pulled me out of the action sequences and the visual effects in this movie were a complete mess and could not have looked more unrealistic!

Verdict: London Has Fallen is a poorly written and edited sequel, that tries to springboard from the successful original Olympus Has Fallen. While it does contain extremely fun action sequences, it is the appalling story and the dull and brainless dialogue that kills any enjoyment out of this blockbuster. Aaron Eckhart and Angela Bassett are seriously underused and their characters are nothing but useless, while Butler’s Mike Banning turned into a trigger happy & bulletproof superhero that can’t be hurt at all. I despised myself for deciding to go watch this action flick and can’t recommend anyone to go see this action travesty in cinemas. I will give London Has Fallen a 3.5 out of 10!

Thank you very much for reading my reviews and following my posts! If you enjoyed this review and found it helpful, make sure to like it and please share it with others.

Top Movies – Visions Movie Review (Spoiler Free) – Movie Reviews Sites

Blumhouse newest horror release offers a clever twist in an otherwise mediocre movie that stars a bunch of comedy actors.

Genre: Horror, Thriller

Director: Kevin Greutert

Cast: Isla Fisher, Anson Mount, Gillian Jacobs, Joanna Cassidy,
Jim Parsons, John De Lancie, Bryce Johnson, Eva Longoria
& Annie Tedesco.

Run Time: 82 min.

US Release: 19 January 2016 (Netflix Release)

UK Release: Unknown

German Release: 21 April 2016

Kevin Greutert (Saw: The Final Chapter, Jessabelle) delivers an intriguing but ultimately disappointing paranormal-horror flick. Visions was actually first released in Turkey last year and was a direct-to-Netflix release for mid-January in the US, but will not have a cinematic released in Germany, until late April. To say the truth, I am not surprised that it wasn’t released in cinemas in the States, which makes me wonder why it obtained a place in theatres in Germany. Having said that, L.D. Goffigan and Lucas Sussman’s script does have quite the potential.

A year after her car accident, Eveleigh Maddox (Fisher) and her husband David (Mount) move to a vineyard to start a new life. Eve, who suffered from PTSD after the accident, stops taking her medication when she learns of her pregnancy. One of the area’s infamous wine distributors Helena (Cassidy), accepts an invitation to their welcome-party and is later found by Eve standing in the bedroom and muttering in a strange trance. That same night, Eve obtains her first nightmarish vision, but it is brushed of as a returning PTSD symptom by her husband and doctor (Parsons), her new friend Sadie (Jacobs) though, believes it could be something more sinister.

What really disappointed me was the fact that Visions had a great idea to start with but wasted it’s grand potential impressively, with bad performances and poor deliveries. I really liked the unusual and fresh approach to the haunted house genre that gave the movie a sense of novelty, but that great approach was overshadowed by the clichéd development of male characters, in this case Eveleigh’s husband and Dr. Mathison, who don’t believe her visions are true and simply shrug them off as PTSD symptoms.

Still, the director makes a good attempt at thinning down the amount of jump scares used in the movie; only utilizing them when there is a logic reason and therefore giving this horror-thriller a fantastic build-up of tension, which ends with a surprising twist in the final act. Again, the steady development of tension is ruined by the fact that about 80 percent of the movie is a set-up for that the clever turn of events in the end, which also includes one of the laziest reveals. But what really hurt the story, was the incredibly badly and messy written dialogues.

The characters are probably the worst part of this film; they are poorly developed and incredibly boring, even though the cast consists of a variety of respected television actors. The problem is that that these actors and actresses are better known for their comedic performances and had never been utilised in horror pictures. The issue is increased, as giving them the minimum amount of screen time wastes the entire cast, apart from Fisher.

Isla Fisher played the lead character of Eve Maddox, a young fashion designer, who after a car accident moved with her husband to the county as the new owners of a vineyard. Fisher, who until now played minor side roles, gave a very pale and monotonic performance and was completely miscast in my opinion. Her line delivery was awful and I did not believe a word that came out of her mouth. Her persona suffers from horrific and scary visions, which are supposed to create some sympathy for her, but due to her irritating performance and carelessness, the viewer is left simply not caring about her fate.

Eve’s husband David, played by Anson Mount, was a waste of a character and only made appearances after Eve experienced a paranormal vision. The only reason for this character to exist was to bind the protagonist to the house and confront her on everything she is experiencing. It is clear that his wife is suffering terribly, when she is in the house and I found it irresponsible and dislikeable from him to make her stay.

I only know Gillian Jacobs from the sitcom Community, but even there she was my least favourite of the cast. Jacobs depicted Sadie, Eveleigh’s new friend from the pregnancy yoga class and an incredibly weird person. She gives off a serious crazy vibe from the beginning that made me question Eve’s sense of human understanding. Jacobs gave the worst performance in this horror film and her constant babble about the “mommy-sense” made me wish I could cut off my ears. She was the weakest link of the cast!

Eva Longoria and Jim Parsons were completely wasted. Longoria played Eve’s best friend Eileen and was only used in two scenes, which begs the question why she was cast at all, if an Extra could have sufficed. Parsons had a little more screen time and depicted Eveleigh’s gynaecologist, but he was miscast just like Fisher. I could not see past his Sheldon Cooper persona, which hurt his credibility as a Doctor and made the scenes with him involuntarily funny.

The cinematography in Visions was generally all right, and made use of colder colour schemes, such as pale blues when the lead character suffers from horrific visions. Still, the abrupt cuts that occur throughout this horror’s length turned me off and took me completely out of the movie. I also disliked the extreme visual vibrations, at the beginning of the movie that were supposed to display the state of shock Eveleigh is suffering from. Other than that, I thought that Visions was a nice looking movie with good use of special effects.

Joachim Horsley composed a well-structured orchestral soundtrack for this movie. The slow but intense melody of woodwind instruments was a major contributor to the build-up of tension and a change from the typical loud and abrupt noises that are used in today’s horror flicks. Apart from Horsey’s orchestral sounds, some scenes also included parts of popular pop songs.

Verdict: Visions had a promising idea that offered a fresh coat of paint to the cliché filled horror genre but the premise was wasted, by a bad script that set most of the films runtime as a set-up for the twist at the end. If the writers had focused on a more compelling story, the turn of events would have had a bigger impact. The actors are completely miscasts and gave forgettable renditions, but I also need to stress that the characters were poorly written, with most of them making only two-to-three minute appearances. As a fan of the horror genre, Vision truly disappointed me and I will therefore give it a score of 3 out of 10.

Have you seen Visions yet? If you did, leave a comment below to let me know what you thought of it. I finally managed to catch a screening of London Has Fallen and will upload my review for it tomorrow.

Top Movies – The Brothers Grimsby Movie Review (Spoiler Free) – Movie Reviews Sites

**Sacha Baron Cohen’s comedic talent keeps dropping and his latest movie is living proof of that. The Brothers Grimsbymight be funny, but it is seriously disturbing.**

Genre: Action, Comedy

Director: Louis Leterrier

Cast: Sacha Baron Cohen, Mark Strong, Rebel Wilson, Isla Fisher,
Scott Adkins, Penelope Cruz, Gabourey Sidibe & Ian McShane.

Run Time: 83 min.

US Release: 11 March 2016

UK Release: 24 February 2016

German Release: 10 March 2016

Sacha Baron Cohen returns to the big screen in his fifth scripted movie Grimsby, or as it is known in the U.S. – The Brothers Grimsby. I was curious to see what Cohen’s new comedy would be about, as his previous works consisted primarily of mockumentaries. Grimsby though was a full-length feature film that co-starred the great British actor Mark Strong, so I was hoping for a movie with a little more depth and less toilet humour. What I obtained was the complete opposite! Making matters worse, I sat in a nearly empty cinema with just an older fellow sitting up front, who was crying tears of laughter, while a nice Muslim couple sat behind me and did not whether to laugh or to cry out in shock. That bizarre situation made me feel truly ashamed every time I had to laugh.

Grimsby revolves around Nobby (Cohen), a British working-class citizen from the northern seaport town of Grimsby. Although he has everything a man from his status needs – several children, a home and the most attractive woman in Grimsby (Rebel Wilson), Nobby still misses his long lost brother. Unknown to Nobby, his brother Sebastian (Strong) is a successful MI6 agent, trying to foil a sinister plan by a mysterious organisation. When Nobby runs into Sebastian by coincidence, he not only interferes in his mission but accidently puts his brother on the MI6 hit list.

Something that needs to be remembered when going to see a Sacha Baron Cohen film is that the man likes to take specific subjects to the extreme, and while Borat was a really funny mockumentary that had a point to make it was Brüno that began Cohen’s descent into comedy purgatory. The case with Grimsby is that although being one of the funniest films I have seen this year, it also accounted as to one of the worst experiences I made in the cinema to date. It is vulgar, disgusting and extremely insensitive, which made me feel seriously ashamed of myself for finding parts of it funny!

Grimsby has no redeeming quality whatsoever! Much like Dirty Grandpa it simply sets up a string of sex jokes (anal, genitalia and elephant ejaculation), ready be ticked off. It also tries to implement a message about the value of family, with a background story that tries to make you sympathise for the brothers on an emotional level, but fails miserably. The side-story that concerns the saving of our world, only scratched the surface of that message and copied a little bit off Kingsman: The Secret Service. I did like how the movie mock’s the British working class, but again Cohen took it to such extremes that it was uncomfortable to watch. My last story related issue concerns the structure of the plot, which is a complete mess.

As an action-comedy that focuses on the British working class, the larger percentage of the characters depicted in this movie are dim-witted and drunk football hooligans, who are neither interesting nor sympathetic. The stupidity of Grimsby’s citizens became stale after five minutes and quickly irritated me.

Sacha Baron Cohen proved that he can be a good actor when given the right role, as shown by his work in Sweeney Todd, Les Miserable and Hugo. He also invents personas that are mostly funny and engaging, as long as they don’t overstay their welcome. Nobby was definitely not one of those characters, even though I respect Cohen for fully immersing into one of his creation once again, eventually becoming the idiotic and borderline alcoholic brother of the best MI6 agent, England has to offer. Nobby was rude, extremely annoying and if it hadn’t been for him, his brother would not have found himself in so much trouble.

Mark Strong was the one reason why I didn’t stand up and leave the theatre. He does actually sell his character well and is tremendously funny in this movie, but I can’t understand what made him think that taking on this role would be good for his career, because I can’t see an outcome where he leaves this movie with his reputation undamaged. That being said, I witnessed Strong doing things in this movie I would never have thought I’d see him do and as an element of surprise it keeps the movie somewhat fresh.

Penelope Cruz stars in her second terrible comedy this year, but compared to Zoolander No. 2 her role in this vulgar piece of art is limited to a short screen time. She plays a famous actress, who also works as an ambassador for world peace and tries to cure the world of disease. If you think it sounds familiar, it’s because it is! The same plot was used last year in another English movie.

Oliver Wood shot this film and it is thanks to him that this awkwardly paced action-comedy has some redeeming moments of action. The opening sequence that sees Mark Strong follow a suspect in a Middle-Eastern country was filmed mostly in first person POV style. While the fast cuts and the extreme shaking movements can get a little nauseating, those action sequences are still impressing to look at. Other than that, Grimsbysuffers from mediocre effects and stunts that at times look very fake.

Verdict: The Brothers Grimsby might be a funny and entertaining comedy, but it’s also extremely disturbing and disgusting. The fact that I hated myself for finding the jokes in this movie funny, should make it clear that it has no quality at all and is pure garbage. Sacha Baron Cohen might give a great performance but his character is despicable, leaving Mark Strong to be the only noteworthy actor in Grimsby. The cinematography was quite good, but the effects are mediocre. If you are a fan of Cohen’s previous work, especially The Dictator, then you will have a good time with Grimsby, if you do not like Cohen’s humour, I recommend you stay as far away from this movie as possible. Myself, I did find it funny but felt ashamed of the fact that I laughed and will therefore give it a score of 4.5 out of 10.

Have you seen The Brothers Grimsby yet? If not, are you planning to? Leave a comment below with your remark about the film and let me know what you thought of it. I will try and finally watch London Has Fallen tonight, so keep an eye open for my review of it, either tomorrow or on Monday. Thank you for reading and if you found this review helpful make sure and share it with others.

Top Movies – Kung Fu Panda 3 Movie Review (Spoiler Free) – Movie Reviews Sites

The second sequel to this fun, kung fu animated film series, is surprisingly well done and includes great messages for children and adults.

Genre: Animation/Action/Adventure

Directors: Alessandro Carloni, & Jennifer Yuh

Cast: Jack Black, James Hong, Bryan Cranston, J.K. Simmons, Angelina Jolie, Dustin Hoffman, Jackie Chan, Seth Rogen, David Cross, Lucy Liu & Randall Duk Kim.

Run Time: 95 min.

US Release: 29 July 2016

UK Release: 11 March 2016

German Release: 17 March 2016

What I learned from experience is that when a third instalment of an unplanned trilogy comes out (especially in the area of animation), it normally manages to disappoint me immensely. Kung Fu Panda 3though accomplished the exact opposite; it surprised me in a very positive way and left me with a smile on my face. I am stunned at how good this second sequel was and am glad to have decided to go watch it at all, because I was thinking of skipping this one.

I was introduced very late to this franchise, as I decided not to go and watch the first one when it came out in theatres due to the reason that I despise Jack Black as an actor. About two years ago some friends of mine bought the Kung Fu Panda 2 Blu-ray and invited me to watch it, when I told them that I didn’t see the first one they threw in the first movie and made me watch it. I was pleasantly surprised and became a fan of this animation series.

The story focuses as always on Po (Black), who is the protagonist of the Kung Fu Panda film series and needs to step up and become a master. Po is not up to the task at first, humiliating himself and his friends during their first training session. He meets his biological father (Cranston) who happens to appear at the same time as Kai (Simmons), the villain in this movie, who escaped the spirit realm stealing the chi from every master. It is than revealed that Po needs to go to the secret panda village to learn the way of the chi and save the world from Kai. While mean Po’s adopted dad (Duk Kim) goes through some jealousy issues and follows Po to the panda village.

Although good, this movie did have issues, especially due to the fact that the producers and directors decided not to mix up the plot a little bit more but instead used the same formula as in the last two Kung Fu Panda films. Po fools around, then loses his believe in himself and finds new strength and at the end… well you know what happens. The fact that there is no fresh component makes this animation feel extremely repetitive. Also since it is very fast paced, some of the emotional sequences don’t really pay off and therefore it seems as if there would be a lack of depth. Other than that, I had a blast watching Kung Fu Panda 3!

This is a great and enjoyable movie with a good message for children and adults alike, about how being yourself and not trying to emulate someone else will bring out your true strength. The dialogues were funny and witty, as with the previous films, and contain the right amount of banter between Po and the rest of the Jade Palace crew. It also profits from well-choreographed action sequences and the implementation of family values is one thing I especially liked. In my opinion Kung Fu Panda 3 is a perfect family movie, because it has a story that both, children and adults, will enjoy!

Poe’s character is still clumsy and very naive, but what I like about these animated pictures is that they never reset the knowledge that he gained from the previous instalments, instead each segment sets the character up for his next challenge and training. In my opinion, Jack Black gives his best performances playing Po in this franchise and I enjoyed every minute he was on screen giving of smart-mouthed remarks, kicking butt and making a fool of him.

Bryan Cranston played Li, Po’s biological father, and he gave a fantastic vocal rendition. In Kung Fu Panda 2 we saw how protective Li can get when it comes to the safety of his family, in this sequel we see his other side and he is a lovely and caring father. Is he a perfect “person”? No, he isn’t. He has flaws like all of us do, but he is the most sympathetic character in this animation. The introduction of Po’s biological father is great because it gave Mr. Ping, played by James Hong, a larger role and we get to see new facets of his persona.

Kai, voiced by J.K. Simmons, was a fantastic villain but I found him to be a little bit underused, because the story focused more on Po’s family drama than the dangerous Kai who escaped the realm of souls. Simmons sounded like a threatening and seriously disturbed character and his double-chained blades reminded me of Kratos from the God of War game series.

Kung Fu Panda 3 has great and incredibly fluid animation and I was amazed at how many rich details it contained. I also liked the use of split screens during the action sequences and the hand drawn animation used during flashbacks, which not only meshed beautifully with the computer animation but it actually looked as if it were painted on a scroll. It also makes use of a wide colour palette with beautiful and strong colours, like gold, reds and yellows that are mixed with more subtle blues and lilacs.

Hans Zimmer returned as composer for this animated motion picture and he created a beautiful soundtrack that includes Asian musicians, such as the Chinese cellist Jian Wang and pianist Lang Lang. The music also included a portion of the Imagine Dragons song “I’m so Sorry”.

Verdict: Kung Fu Panda 3 was a surprisingly well-scripted action-adventure animation that carried on the story of Po from the two previous movies. It did have a couple of flaws that took some of the fun away, but overall I had a great time watching this in the theatre. It has a mesh of beautiful looking animation styles and includes fantastic vocal renditions of well-known actors including Bryan Cranston and J.K. Simmons. This movie will make for a great time for both adults and children, and it is a film I do recommend you go see in cinemas. I will give Kung Fu Panda 3 an 8 out of 10.

Have you watched Kung Fu Panda 3 yet? If so, let me know what you thought of it by leaving a comment below. Thank you very much for reading and if you found this review helpful, make sure to share it with others.