Bohemian Rhapsody

One of my earliest memories is of my sister Tracey watching Live Aid on TV. I don’t remember watching it myself, I was five at the time, and probably doing much more important things like playing with Barbies. But I remember her watching it and I remember it being a big deal. I knew it mattered even then.

Fast forward to about 5 or so years later and the beginnings of my Queen phase. I had posters, I had every album on cassette and vinyl, I had videos of their concerts. I was not cool. But then I was never destined to be. I’ve always embraced the things I loved, no matter how uncool they made me. I didn't know another teenager who's favourite band was Queen, and who's favourite TV show was Star Trek The Next Generation. But if I can’t be true to myself it doesn’t matter how much fake me fits in, she’s not the real me.

I know right now you’re probably thinking, jeez just get on with the review already. I’m prefacing the review with my earliest account of fandom because not only did loving Queen make up a very important part of what made me me at an early age, but it also probably indicates the expectations I had for this film. The first time that Freddie’s story had been told to the masses, and a lot of people will take this movie as gospel.

Those of us who have followed Queen for a long time however, those of us who’ve read up on the band, we know that this movie is not showing the full story. And in some instances has jumbled up some very important events in the Queen timeline.

If like me you’ve read any of the reviews for this movie you’ll know that amongst fans of the band, there have been a lot of less than favourable write ups. Even knowing this I still wanted to see the film and make up my own mind, as I quite often do. So that you don’t lose faith and stop reading, I will say now that I’m glad I did.

If you’re a fan of Queen there is still a lot here for you. Firstly the performances. Rami Malek really does put his heart and soul into becoming Freddie. It’s an impossible task but my god does he put everything into it. It doesn’t feel like he’s “doing” Freddie, it doesn’t feel like a caricature based on what we know of Freddie, it’s not a performance that’s all in the teeth. He’s not Freddie and he doesn’t quite have Freddie’s flamboyance, but he gives it his all and he’s believable.

Gwilym Lee and Joe Mazzello playing Brian and John respectably are incredible. They are so like them that it’s like you’re watching the real people. I was flabbergasted at how good they were and how true to Brian and John they were. Roger I never quite got. Ben Hardy was as good as the other guys performance wise, but I never fully believed him as Roger.

Lucy Boynton who first impressed in the fabulous Sing Street also does a believable and rather heartbreaking turn as Freddie’s longtime friend and lover Mary Austin. And as someone who is aware of the significant part that Mary played in Freddie’s life, I’m really happy to see that neither she nor Freddie’s bisexuality were erased in this movie.

The main problems I had with the film I already knew about going in, and as such I think I was probably the right level of prepared that they didn’t annoy me as much as if I’d not known about them going in. The first is how the film paints the remaining members of Queen as innocent little choir boys compared with bad influence Freddie. It also downplayed Freddie’s lifestyle too, which considering the story they are telling here seems kinda detrimental to the finished product? The second inaccuracy is that Freddie received his AIDS diagnosis prior to Live Aid.

This is my biggest bugbear for two reasons. 1) a whole new generation of Queen fans that this film will create will be massively misinformed. 2) It undermines not only one of Freddie’s best performances, but the live performance voted the best of all time, by anybody.

He didn’t give that performance because he knew he was going to die. He gave it because he was just that fucking good. To suggest otherwise just detracts from how fantastic that performance was.

However, those annoyances aside, I still found that I enjoyed the film overall. I felt giddy every time they came up with a new song that we already know and love, and the recreation of the Live Aid concert cannot fail to be enjoyed on a big screen. Hearing Freddie in surround sound certainly didn’t hurt. Some of the members of the audience that I was in were clapping along to Radio Ga Ga and that couldn't fail to warm my heart.

The dubbing isn’t always done that well, but the alternative of not having Freddie’s voice in the movie could only have been disastrous. Therefore my complaints here are minimal.

I’m not ashamed to say I blubbed like a baby at the end of the film, and upon hearing the opening strains of one of my favourite Queen songs in the credits I resolved to stay to the end, and give Freddie my utmost respects for being the artist who tells me when I’m feeling down, the show must go on.

8/10

The Not So Magnificent Seven

After such a good start to October I somehow managed to while away the rest of the month without seeing another film, and even worse, without making use of my trusty Cineworld Card.

Desperately trying to catch up with what I'd missed, and make use of my card, I somehow managed to cram 7 films into 3 days.

I'm not going to say a great deal on all of them but I thought a brief run down of my thoughts was required.

We shall start with the first film I saw - The Hate U Give



Incredibly important film about the current Black Lives Matter movement in the US, and the frequency with which unarmed black men are being killed by white police officers. This isn't based on a true story but it could so easily be based on any number of accounts of exactly the same situation as what happens in this film.

A strong central performance from Amanda Stenberg makes this film stand out from the crowd. It's both eye opening and incredibly moving in parts. Definitely worth a watch if it's still on near you. 7/10

Film 2 was the rather lacklustre Venom. 

Disappointingly neither Tom Hardy or Riz Ahmed are at their best here. And is it just me or is Michelle Williams acting actually getting worse (and is she becoming more breathy sounding) with each passing year? The effects are kinda ropey in places, and ultimately it leaves you wondering ‘did this film need to be made’? The end credits glimpse at the new Animated Spider-Man feature film looks great though it has to be said. 5/10

The third film I saw was Bohemian Rhapsody. I have a LOT to say about this one so it’s getting a separate review. Keep your eyes peeled for that!

Film four was the overlong and incredibly boring First Man. 

If Ryan Gosling can’t make your lead character interesting and charismatic then I think your film has problems. If this film is genuinely based on truth then I’m sorry to say that Neil Armstrong is a very dull man. The director needed reining in on the running time of this beast, and I think other characters should have been given more of a chance to shine. We know he gets to the moon so why did it take so damn long to show it?

This is by no means a bad film. The acting is top notch and I can certainly see Oscar nominations rocketing towards this one, but it's incredibly long and tediously, and just boring, and therefore I can only give it 4/10.

The fifth film I saw was the first of a horror triple bill - Slaughterhouse Rulez.

I will admit that from the trailer I was fully expecting this to be a slight step up from a Goosebumps type movie but it fell somewhere between that and a real gore fest. I enjoyed it, even if the acting isn’t always top notch, it was a fun ride and a perfect post Halloween movie. 6/10

The penultimate movie of the triple (and indeed the not-always-so-magnificent 7) was Goosebumps 2. 

I know I saw the last Goosebumps movie but I’ll be honest, I don’t remember much about it. This one was loads of fun. The possessed dummy was just the right amount of creepy for a kids film, and considering this definitely WAS made for kids (it’s a PG cert) I thought it was more engaging than Slaughterhouse. I found myself enjoying it a lot more and just generally having a blast. Definitely recommend for those with kids looking for a spooky film this autumn. 7/10

Finally that leads me to him. He came home. And what a bloody and fitting end to the Halloween franchise this is (providing the powers that be don’t decide to make another one).



Jamie Lee Curtis’ Laurie Strode from the original 1978 Halloween (that's right kids, that's before even I was born) returns for this sequel which effectively erases every Halloween movie that has followed in the last 40 years (including Halloween 2, H20 and Resurrection which all also featured Curtis as Laurie Strode). Forget those movies exist because this is the definitive sequel. Strode has spent the last 40 years dealing with PTSD over what happened on that fateful Halloween night, and my god has she got her Sarah Conner on.

Strode has always known the day would come when Michael Myers would again escape the mental facility that houses him, and she has prepared for the day when she would once again face him.

I won't give any spoilers away but I will say that for fans of the original this is an absolute must see. I will admit that I am nowhere near as hardcore horror as I used to be and I was scared to see this on my own, which is why I waited to see it until someone could come with me. But it's not wall to wall horror as some would have you believe.

Sure there are jump scares, and to bring the franchise bang up to date there are some scenes that are truly gruesome and horrific, but this is a Halloween movie, would you really expect anything less? Curtis and co act their socks off. It's great to see so many strong women in this movie, rather than them just being the screaming victim all the time, and for a woman in her 60s, Jamie Lee Curtis is as bad ass as they come.

As a huge fan of the original I honestly can't recommend Halloween highly enough to fellow fans. See it before it finishes in cinemas. 9/10

Three Films, Three Days, Three Cinemas

As the title of this blog suggests, last weekend I unintentionally saw three different films over three days at three different cinemas.

I'll start with the first film A Star Is Born which I saw on Friday at The Connaught Theatre in Worthing.

A Star Is Born is the fourth incarnation of this apparently timeless story, previous versions having starred Kris Kristofferson and Barbara Streisand, James Mason and Judy Garland and Fredric March and Janet Gaynor. None of which I am ashamed to say I have seen.

In some ways it probably helped to see this version having not seen any of the previous ones as it puts less expectation on the new version, which by all accounts of Director Bradley Cooper, only has certain elements in common with the previous films anyway.

The story this time focuses on established Rock star Jackson Maine (Bradley Cooper) who is clearly struggling with alcohol and drug addiction when we meet him at the start of the film. After a gig he stops at a bar where he meets Ally (Lady Gaga), a waitress who has a natural talent for singing and song writing. Jackson finds himself drawn to this woman who has such a unique outlook on him, and on the world around her, and he finds himself falling for her, and her for him. But of course, with addiction thrown into the mix, it's never going to be plain sailing for the two.

A Star Is Born had me gripped from start to finish, mainly because of the performances of the two leads. I bought into their love affair from the off, even though on reflection, it did seem to happen very fast. I found the chemistry between Cooper and Gaga to be electrifying. They bounced off each other so well, and when they sang together it was a thing of beauty (I've already purchased the soundtrack).

The only negatives I can say are that the film is quite long, and does feel it. Not that that is especially bad. At no point was I not enjoying it, but I did feel it could have benefitted from being a few minutes shorter. And the shocking scene at the end of the movie I felt unprepared for. I knew it was going to be sad. People had told me it would be sad. And it was one of those movies that you could tell was going to be tragic in some way, but I was not at all prepared for what did happen, and I felt duped somewhat that I hadn't been prepared.

Having said all of that, the film is stunningly directed by first timer Cooper, and I  was definitely not expecting Gaga to be as good as she was. Yes it wasn't a big stretch to play a girl from New York who has natural talent and makes it in the music industry - if not quite being herself - but she was still fantastic and nothing can take that away from her.

8/10

On Saturday I saw A House With A Clock In It's Walls at Odeon Brighton. What an adventure that was.

Sadly that adventure had more to do with the awful experience my friend and I had at the Odeon than the film itself. Which I am sure when watched uninterrupted by several fire alarms and a restart that came with sound but no picture, would have been a perfectly adequate family romp but which would have been otherwise rather unremarkable.

A House... tells the story of an orphaned boy Lewis (Owen Vaccaro) going to live with his uncle (Jack Black) who it turns out is a warlock (boy witch), and who's neighbour (the always stylish and stunning Cate Blanchett) is also a witch. 

During the course of the movie we discover, along with Lewis, that the magnificent house his uncle lives in was cursed by the former resident, an evil warlock (Kyle MacLachlan) and the three of them must work together to break the spell he placed on the house, before it changes the course of history.

Unfortunately, it feels like I will remember A House... for all of the wrong reasons, and that my overriding thoughts on the movie will be tainted by the truly awful experience of a cinema where no-one working there knew what was happening, how to communicate with the cinema goers, let alone with each other, and where I would think twice before going to watch another movie, EVER AGAIN.

A House gets 6/10 and I think that's me being quite generous.

On Sunday I went to see The Wife at my favourite of the Brighton cinema's Dukes at Komedia.

I'd seen the trailer for this twice at said cinema, and was then shocked to see it wasn't showing there on the first week of the movie being released. It was instead only showing at The Duke Of Yorks, which if it's possible to, I despise more than the Odeon.

I don't think I have ever had a pleasant experience at the DoY's which is a real shame as I love to support independent cinema, and yet I hate to go there with every fibre of my being.

I was saddened to think that I would have to break my 'no DoY's' rule and go there to see The Wife, when to my surprise, in it's second week of release went to Dukes at Komedia. Phew.

The Wife tells the story of Joan Castleman (Glenn Close), wife of Author Joseph Castleman (Jonathan Pryce) who is about to be awarded the Nobel Prize in literature. You can tell from the trailer that he's going to be a bit of a shit, but to what extent it's unclear. Well, without spoiling the movie I couldn't possibly say but let's just say that he's more of a shit than the trailer would have you believe. 

The performances are fantastic from Close and Pryce, and I must say it was a lovely surprise to see Christian Slater in a mainstream movie where he's actually really good and working with really great actors again.

Regrettably, although the calibre of acting here is way above par, the story is still a little slow in places, and the end is not as punchy as I had hoped it would be from the trailer. Still an intriguing and superbly acted film that I would highly recommend, but definitely more of a slow burner.

7/10

American Animals

I really didn't know what to expect from American Animals. I'd seen the trailer and was suitably intrigued, but when people asked me what it was about I could never really hold it in my head. A heist/robbery was all I could mutter, but it looks really good. 

I was even more intrigued when my friend and trusted reviewer of Thursday Night At The Movies gave the film 4.5/5 which is high praise indeed. Seriously, sign up to her blog because her reviews are fantastic and way more frequent than mine.

I missed the film at Cineworld but I was determined to see it and boy am I glad I did! Part heist movie, part documentary, the film follows two college friends who decide to steal some rare, and highly valued books from the college library rare books room. It's guarded by one lowly librarian (played by The Handmaid's Tale's Aunt Lydia) so how hard can it be?

It turns out very, as the boys have to enlist the help of two other students before attempting the robbery.

This film is one of the most interesting I have seen this year. Much like Searching, this film is uniquely filmed, but this time it's in the way it seamlessly goes between interview footage from the real people that the movie is based on, to film footage of the actors playing these people. It's a fascinating story even if all you saw was the actors (who embody their characters perfectly) but to see the real people and find out what happened to them and how it affected those closest to them takes it up a whole other level.

I don't think I breathed during the robbery scenes and actually had my hands on my head for some of it, it's super tense and stylishly shot, but never feels anything other than gritty and true to life. 

Evan Peters completely stole the show for me, playing the charismatic Warren, but similarly all of the actors were faultless. I'd only seen Barry Keoghan in Dunkirk, and I don't think I've seen anything that Blake Jenner or Jared Abrahamson have done before but they were all the complete embodiment of their characters as far as I was concerned. 

If you can find this movie in cinemas I urge you to go and experience it. It's a ride you won't forget. 

9/10

The Miseducation of Cameron Post and Call Me By Your Name

My main reason for reviewing these two films together is that they cover a similar subject matter, and I saw them on the same day. But I wanted to show you the two posters for these films side by side, because it wasn't until I searched for the posters that I realised how eerily similar they are. Same colour blue, same wistful look up to the sky from one of the main characters, same colour and similar font of the titles. Weird.

Anyway, allow me to start with Cameron Post as that was the film I watched first. A film set in the 90s about a girl - Cameron Post (played brilliantly by Chloe Grace Moretz who impresses me more and more each time I see her) - who is discovered to be a lesbian by her religious family and promptly sent off to God's Promise, a camp for troubled teens, in the hope of converting her into a straight and God fearing member of society.

This might not be a true story, but the fact that this did happen to many kids and is still happening around the world today makes me really fucking angry. The story is well told and has lighter and also incredibly dark moments too but it handles everything with sensitivity and the acting on show is top notch.

I definitely felt like they could have done more to set the time period for film, as although it's a 90s set movie, there were only a few moments where my brain remembered that fact. For the most part I felt like this could have been set in the present day. I don't know if that's because the 90s doesn't feel that long ago to me, or because I know things like the conversion camp still happen, but I felt more like it was because the filmmakers hadn't done enough to make it feel like a period piece. 

Having said that, I didn't feel like this detracted from the film, more that I would have just liked to have seen more 90s references in there and had it feel more like a 90s set film. 

The acting as I said is all top notch. This is Chloe Grace Moretz's film, make no mistake, and she is fantastic in the lead role. But she is ably supported by Forrest Goodluck and Sasha Lane who play two of Cameron's alley's in the camp, whilst Jennifer Ehle (remember her? Where has she been for the last 20 years) and John Gallagher Jr are both great as the leaders of the camp.

I think it's an important film on many levels, it continues the conversation around the importance of mental health in young adults, and that they should have a safe space to express themselves, as well as adults that they can trust. It also does a great job of not talking down to the audience it's aimed at, and doesn't shy away from showing them sex scenes and pretty horrifying scenes too, but at no point do those scenes seem gratuitous or unnecessary. 

8/10

Call Me By Your Name is a film I'd wanted to see since it was released last summer but I'd somehow missed it at the cinema. It was shown on an open air screening this summer but I happened to be in London on the night it was on and so missed it again. 

Now that I've seen it I'm quite glad I didn't go out of my way to pay to see it in the cinema as I don't think anything would have been gained by seeing the film on the big screen.

I've heard such wonderful things about Call Me By Your Name, but unlike Cameron Post which is also a period set film and about a young person coming to terms with their sexuality, the sex scenes in this do feel slightly gratuitous and unnecessary. 

Maybe it's because of the way the film is shot like some art history experiment that the sex scenes just feel really out of place. Yes it's got stunning scenery, yes it's got a rousing score that would impress the harshest of critics, but where is the film's heart?

I found the film over long, and quite dull until it came to Elio and Oliver actually getting together and then everything seemed rushed. I assume this was intentional, because the characters waste their summer together by denying how they both feel, and then when they realise they want to be together the summer is over. It's a great metaphor but it doesn't really make for a very interesting film.

I felt like this film also suffered from the same time period setting issues as Cameron Post, but not quite on the same scale. Yes this does feel like a period piece, but not necessarily an 80s set film. Maybe because it's set in rural Italy so you don't have the same pop culture references that would be available in movies set in the USA for example? I'm not sure but I know that again there were only moments when I remembered it was set in the 80s, and those moments were few and far between. 

I also had trouble buying into the relationship between Oliver and Elio. I could see why Elio would fall for Oliver, I mean who wouldn't fall for Armie Hammer? But I really struggled to see why Oliver would feel anything for scrawny and underage Elio who if anything, seemed to act even more childishly than his age would allow. From what the film showed you they barely spent any time together too, so it's not even plausible that they fell in love with each other's personalities over time. It just didn't work for me.

I really wanted to like it, and I didn't think that was something I'd need to work on, I assumed it was a given. How wrong I was.

5/10

Searching & The Children Act

On this gloriously sunny Sunday in September, with absolutely nothing to do, I decided last minute to take myself on a double movie date. Most people would think this was a crazy idea but as the cinema is my second home this doesn't strike me as a weird way to spend my day.

First film of the double bill was Searching. A film I'd only recently heard of and which probably wouldn't have been at the top of my list of films to see, had it not starred John Cho. Cho is someone I always enjoy watching, whether it's in a stupid role (Harold and Kumar/American Pie films), turning an iconic sci-fi character on his head (Star Trek Reboots), or in a more serious role (usually on some ill fated TV series - Kitchen Confidential/Flashforward).

The fact that Searching had Cho as the lead character immediately piqued my interest and I am so glad it did. Not only is he fantastic in this film, easily captivating the audience, it's also a really good film. I might even go so far as to say one of my favourites of the year so far. 

The story is a simple one, and if you've seen the trailer you'll know it's about a father of a missing girl. The question is, what happened to Margot Kim? Did she run away, was she kidnapped, murdered? And if she was kidnapped or murdered, who the hell did it? This is a great whodunit thriller and keeps you guessing right to the end. There are plenty of twists that I didn't see coming, and best of all, it's whole premise is something I had never seen before on film.

So if you're looking for something a bit different, something that will keep you hooked til the last reel, definitely go and see Searching. 

9/10

The second film of the day was The Children Act, starring Emma Thompson and Stanley Tucci, based on the novel by Ian McEwan.

I was not familiar with the novel on going to see the movie, and in fact I knew next to nothing about it. I based my decision to see it purely on the talent involved. I mean who wouldn't want to see Emma Thompson and Stanley Tucci on screen together? It's an acting powerhouse.

The story revolves around High Court judge Fiona May (Thompson) and the two big events unfolding in her life as we come into her story. One is the breakdown of her marriage to husband Jack (Tucci), and the other is the case she is presiding over regarding the life of 17 year old Jehovah's Witness Adam. Adam is in need of a blood transfusion to save his life, but on religious grounds he is refusing the transfusion. As he is a minor, the hospital seek an injunction to save the boy's life. 

For the most part this felt like a BBC drama, particularly from the point where Adam's story really started to present itself. The actors playing the roles of Adam and his family felt very much like the kind you'd see in a BBC drama. A good one, but still not quite movie worthy. Having Emma and Stanley in the film however was always going to raise it to another level. The sad thing is that I feel like the film wasn't really worthy of them. And without them it probably wouldn't have even had a theatrical release.

That's not to say that they are not both fantastic. I doubt either of them knows how to be anything but that, but sadly even Queen Emma and Superb Lord Stanley have their work cut out with such a dull storyline and bland support. It's a shame because when they are on screen together I could feel so much potential but it just wasn't realised. 

It did make me realise just how much I adore Stanley Tucci though. He's just so damn cool. 

If you're a big fan of the actors you should see it for their performances, but just don't expect to see a life changing film. 

5/10 for film 10/10 for Emma and Stanley (😍)

Why The Justice League Movie Didn’t Work... For Me

Isn’t it ironic that I was both listening to Ironic today (because I could hear my neighbour singing it really out of tune) and that my last film review over a year ago was for Wonder Woman. Which was by no means a perfect film, but which was so much better than Justice League. 

Now I’m aware that Justice League had issues from the start. Director Zack Snyder having to abandon the production for personal reasons and Joss Whedon taking over. Production that massively overran due to said unforeseen issues. And then extensive reshoots as if the production schedule wasn’t long enough. 

All of these are evident in the film, not least because of Henry Cavill’s face having been very badly CGI’d in almost EVERY scene he’s in. I mean he basically had to reshoot all of his scenes bar one it seems. That’s excessive even for a film with this many problems. 

Of course I don’t need to talk about my feelings towards Zack Snyder or Joss Whedon as I think my reviews of both Man Of Steel and Avengers: Age of Ultron speak for themselves on that front. But I do feel I have to address the elephant in the room, which is that this is basically Avengers but in the DC universe? Alien army invasion, team of heroes need to be brought together to fight the army, they don’t get on, but then (spoiler alert) they come together anyway to save mankind. There’s even a line in the movie about the team’s billionaire Tony Sta... sorry, Bruce Wayne “finally playing well with others”. Mmm where have I heard that before? 

I know it was written by the same man who wrote Avengers but come ON. That’s no excuse for him seemingly having only one idea and re-working it for a different group of heroes. 

But the main reason it didn’t work for me is the complete lack of care I felt for the characters. Not wishing to sound like a stuck record (because I’m pretty sure I said that I didn’t care about Clark/Superman in my lengthy Man of Steel review), but one of the reasons Avengers Assemble works is that you have already established most of the heroes in their own movie (not bitter about Hawkeye AT ALL). Even Black Widow, who might not have had a stand alone film, had a huge role in Iron Man 2, establishing her character straight off the bat. 

With Justice League we’ve had a Superman movie that turned the beloved character of Clark Kent into an afterthought, Batman V Superman in which the only likeable character was Wonder Woman, and a Wonder Woman movie that was basically a female version of Captain America: The First Avenger. Hardly a basis for getting to know the team before they become a team. 

In Justice League they try (and fail) to cram three other characters back stories into about half an hour of screen time (woo 10 mins each!), then the big bad shows up, Bruce tries to rally the troops but Superman is dead and everyone else apart from Barry (whom I love) hates him, then they somehow overcome their obstacles really quickly and form the team, but then the end still manages to drag on for another hour. 

They waste the Thimyscirans, they objectify Diana far too much, they underdevelop every single character, so you just don’t care what happens. At the end of the film if the world had blown up I would have just rolled my glazed over eyes and turned off the TV. 

To sum up, I definitely won’t be switching allegiance any time soon. And I certainly won’t be adding Justice League to my DVD collection. 

Also, the poster is ugly AF.