Jurassic World Review

Jurassic World Review

After all these years since the first Jurassic park one thing hasn’t changed and that’s that dinosaurs are still awesome.

 

I wasn’t a fan of the original Jurassic Park and I’ve never seen either of the two sequels (Although I’m assured they’re pretty abysmal) so I can talk about this new film with no nostalgia to influence this review.

 

To cut to the chase I really enjoyed Jurassic World, I think it did a large amount of things well. I liked the characters in this film and while they weren’t exactly original, there’s the badass former military guy and the cold women who’ll learn passion and love but these arcs were done well and both were fun and likeable. Being a Jurassic film means there obviously has to be kid characters and they were okay too, the older one in particular progressing throughout the film.

 

Some of the side characters were quite well done too. While not overly memorable they were fun to watch such as the rich person who owns Jurassic World and the science comic relief man.  The biggest weakness in the character roster was the villain and while I won’t spoil who it is, it is pretty damn obvious. He was pretty much just a dumb cartoon character which was kind of disappointing and made you wonder why a film about a hybrid dinosaur killing machine needed a human villain.

 

The most important characters of the film arguably however are the dinosaurs.  The thing to get out the way is the effects are fine. They’re not ground breaking like the first Jurassic park but they’re not bad and I never really noticed them which can’t be a bad thing. The hybrid dinosaur itself wasn’t anywhere near as stupid as I thought it would be. Take one look at it and you can probably guess what dinosaurs have been combined to make it but it served as a good monster for an antagonist for the film.

  
 

Everyone saw the trailer and thought the raptors looked like they’d be ridiculous. Were they tame or something? As it turns out no, the film made it very clear that they were still wild animals and killers. I liked their integration into the plot, they played quite a big role and they weren’t silly so that’s good although it really bugs me that these Jurassic films have such a focus on Raptors, a dinosaur from the cretaceous period.

 

Honestly you can see where the plot is going throughout the film and nothing was really surprising and the pacing seemed a little off. It seemed to have quite a slow build up before at one point everything went crazy. It would be kind of like slowly cooking a jacket potato in an oven for a while before deciding to shoot it with a rocket launcher. The first half of the film was good too while the second half was a little up and down. Jurassic world had some really good creative scenes with others that felt really forced and kind of messy.

 

The thing is, it’s a fun mess. I found out afterwards that part of the team that worked on Pacific Rim worked on Jurassic World and that seems like a good comparison to me. It’s no masterpiece but I don’t think it’s really trying to be. At the end of the day it was well acted, kept you on for the ride and was fun and for a cynical mind like mine to be able to look past all the dumb stuff in the film it must have done something right.

 

 

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Thecoolstuffblog12/1807956062763462

 

What should happen in the Five Nights at Freddy's Movie?

What should happen in the Five Nights at Freddy’s Movie?

I don’t want a Five Nights at Freddy’s movie. I thought I should make that perfectly clear. I’m a fan of the series, I enjoyed every game and love delving into the lore but will it translate well into movie form? Probably not but I hope the movie can at least be watchable. What do I in my humble opinion think should be in the FNAF movie? I explain below.

 

As we all know video game movies are terrible. I’ve always thought the best thing to do would to be setting a movie in the universe of the certain game franchise without centring on the plot of an actual game. This would give the writers and developers chance to do what they want to while still remaining loyal to the setting and franchise. For the FNAF movie I think it should be set in one of the Pizzeria’s we’ve never seen in a game. Setting the movie before 1987 and FNAF 2 or even as a spinoff that doesn’t relate to the events in the games would allow the writers some free will and not make the movie too restrictive. It would also allow a brand new story and thus a setting unrelated to the pizzeria’s in the game series I think would be a good idea.

 

The lore is perhaps the most interesting part of the entire franchise. First things first, I will be very unhappy if the movie just reveals everything that we have to speculate about. Apart from that it’s important for the movie to be for fans of the series but equally the movie has to try to bring in newcomers to the series. Take FNAF 1 as an example. There was some interesting backstory subtly laced in but it wasn’t all explained in one go or made too complex too quickly. A similar thing needs to happen with the movie’s plot. It’s because of this I think it’d be preferable to have a separate plot from the games. FNAF 3 briefly mentions sister locations. Something like this I believe would be ideal as you could still capture the essence of the games while not being tied down by heaps of lore and backstory.

 

FNAF is subtle in its story. This is a big reason why I don’t think it’ll work as a film, most of its story isn’t shown. A movie needs to show more due to the medium itself however the films focus I think needs to be on the character in the Pizzeria. The film cannot just take place in the Pizzeria and what time we spend outside will hopefully be used to build a complex and interesting character. This is strange considering the characters in the game are merely vessels to play, however this is not a game. A likeable character is important otherwise we’ll just be watching a boring horror with cardboard characters waiting for them to die.

 

There’s a catch however with what I just said. Too much time cannot be taking place outside the Pizzeria. This seems obvious however would you really be surprised if we spend ages with some random idiot and their boring life? Maybe showing the character in the Pizzeria during the day would be good as it would set the scene and start building the creepy atmosphere of the twisted place. Whatever they do none of us want to see a FNAF movie where most of the time is spent outside a Freddy Fazbears Pizzeria.

 

Another thing I hope happens is that out main protagonist is alone in the Pizzeria. The games made you feel incredibly isolated and this added to the tension and fear. This means that with the main character in the Pizzeria there needs to be no friends, no love interest and definitely no wacky black sidekick. If a little group goes in and a black guy dies first I may leave the cinema. With what I’ve said so far it sounds a bit like I just want a scare fest with an interesting character. This isn’t true, the Pizzeria’s always have a dark secret behind them and this should be no exception. I think it would be good if the protagonist would gradually discover some sort of conspiracy or mystery behind the Pizzeria as he tried to survive. I just think it needs to leave somethings left unanswered and be subtle about what’s going on, not just throw everything at us.

 

Horror films need to have horror. Let’s think about what makes FNAF scary. I’d say the suspense and tension as the animatronics move around the Pizzeria and you never know when you’re about to be attacked. I’ve never thought it’s just jump scares. There are very well crafted jump scares, but what makes the jump scares terrifying is the build-up. The atmosphere and tension alone makes the game scary even if you aren’t killed once. I’m sure you can see where I’m going with this, for the movie to be scary and not just full of jump scares then it needs to use creepy sets and build the tension and suspense of the situation of being in a dark Pizzeria full of killer animatronics. Obviously there will be jump scares and they will be effective like they were while playing the games if they’re well-crafted amongst the good build-up and atmosphere.

 

Let’s not have a gore fest. Please movie makers, don’t do it. Don’t get me wrong, if we see one person get violently stuffed into an animatronic suit I wouldn’t be disappointed. While I am quite strange I think maybe in the intro we could see this happen to someone, it would build the stakes as well as show newcomers to the series what these animatronics are capable of. But this shouldn’t be a regular occurrence, it’s not what FNAF is about.

 

The film needs to as I said earlier introduce new people to the FNAF franchise as well as be faithful for the fans. This makes throwing in all the many animatronics we’ve seen over the games seem a bit silly. How much would a newcomer be confused with the original 5, the toy versions, balloon boy, the puppet, spring trap, shadow animatronics and phantoms? I think the ideal situation would to be to use the 4 main animatronics from the original FNAF as the main antagonists. This should please both parties as it won’t be overcrowded for new comers and as a fan myself I would be very pleased seeing the classics on screen. Freddy, Bonnie, Chica and Foxy are perfectly capable of being terrifying antagonists for the film and keeping it to 4 for most of the movie would avoid the film feeling over crowded. I would however like to see a cameo from Golden Freddy, not only is he my personal favourite but I imagine all the fans would love to see his ghostly presence. He doesn’t need to play a big role, just a cameo, even just a glimpse would be great.

 

I really want the FNAF movie to be good. I am a fan of the franchise, I will go and see it and I can’t wait for FNAF 4. I’m not exactly confident but let’s hope this is an actual good video game movie. But nevertheless I’m curious, what is everyone else hoping to see in the movie? I’ll end this post now, the power on my laptop has nearly run out …

The Hunchback of Notre Dame - Film Review

The Hunchback of Notre Dame - Film Review

What do you think of when you think of a Disney film? Personally I imagine a fairy tale with a likeable main protagonist lots of magic and wonder and a pleasant tale of good triumphing over evil. Something like that. I haven’t read Victor Hugo’s The Hunchback of Notre Dame but if I’m not mistaken it’s a dark and twisted story about the corruption of Church and it involves huge amounts of death, attempted rape and most the main characters dead. Not quite the same really so this does seem like a strange film for Disney to make. Furthermore this film came out after Pocahontas where Disney was starting to lose some of its popularity. This film had the making of a disaster so I sat down last week feeling extremely ill looking forward to ripping it apart. About ninety minutes later I had a film that made me wish I had written my top 5 animated films list after seeing this rather than before.

 

Does this film have problems? Yes it does. Is it perfect? Absolutely not? But the good in this film is so good I couldn’t not talk about it. The Hunchback of Notre Dame is about a hunchback named Quasimodo who lives in the bell tower of Notre Dame. He cannot leave and only interactions come with Judge Claude Frollo, a highly religious man who teaches Quasimodo to see himself as an abomination. The film is primarily about Quasimodo’s quest for acceptance and happiness as he eventually leaves the tower for the Festival of Fools and meets the Gypsy girl Esmeralda.

 

Let’s start with the story. While not the films strongest point it’s by no means bad. It’s pacing is a little off at times and it does occasionally feel slightly clunky but the film is in its characters, not plot. The film seemed to struggle whether to do what it wanted or be as faithful as possible to the novel, which as a Disney film we know won’t happen. It also confused me why the crowd randomly turned on Quasimodo and how abruptly Esmeralda and Phoebus fall in love. However it was enjoyable and the progression in the characters was clear, so I can’t complain.

 

Quasimodo is a very likeable character. It doesn’t take long for us to really get behind him and feel sorry for him, he has been so unfortunate in his life. While not the most subtle metaphor, him looking so ugly does make a point as he is such a kind individual with the purest of intentions. It’s impossible not to like this guy as he’s so endearing and good natured. However he’s not so perfect that he’s not realistic. He makes mistakes and uniquely for a Disney film he doesn’t get the girl but I can’t help but feel happy for him when he finds his acceptance and moves on with his life.

 

The love interest of the film (Quite a busy one with three guys after her) is a Gypsy named Esmeralda. She’s okay I guess but nothing special. She’s just your typical nice but independent female lead. Maybe the fact that she’s a Gypsy but acts kindly towards Quasimodo is supposed to be interesting but I didn’t really get that if it was the case. There’s nothing wrong with her, she’s just not particularly engaging. The same applies to Phoebus and their romance. Phoebus is the new captain of the guard and again there’s nothing really wrong with him. He had good intentions, he helps people etc he is kind of like the typical Disney Prince cliché, just a little bland. The romance between then is pretty dull too, they just throw one liners at each other and then fall in love. It does make more sense plot wise for them to be together it just doesn’t grasp my interest.

 

The main thing I wanted to talk about is the villain Frollo. This is a superb villain. His actions and intentions are as diabolical as any villain I can think of but he sees himself as a soldier for God and free of sin. He gets away with his awful deeds by convincing everyone, including himself that he’s doing it as an act of God. It makes not just a great villain, but a great character in general. He is very developed and interesting and is the best part of the film. His motivations are very controversial for a Disney film, he is essentially abusing his power as he lusts over Esmeralda. It’s twisted and almost shocking but at the same time it was interesting to see from a Disney film. It’s awful the way he makes Quasimodo inadequate is horrific and I couldn’t believe what I was seeing when I saw the old man smelling the young woman’s hair. Frollo was without doubt a fantastic villain.

 

Speaking of shocking, some of the imagery in this film was certainly unconventional from Disney, as was the constant talk of God and religion. I enjoyed the music in this film, not because it was catchy but because it was powerful and told the story. The opening song and Hellfire song in particular were great and I particularly enjoyed the choir which was powerful and impactful. The Hellfire song was very risqué for Disney with the imagery of a seductive woman, the begging to banish Esmeralda to Hell and Hell’s fire. This song was great because it gave us insight into Frollo and how he believes he isn’t to blame despite his many sins. It does exactly what a song should do in a musical and describe how the character is feeling and what is behind his or her motivations.

 

There were some problems however. The Gipsies and their culture in the film I thought were confusing, especially for a younger audience. It portrays them as thieves and uncivilised creatures at times, but at other times you’re supposed to be sympathetic at how they’re misunderstood. Then you see their fortress and it’s full of all their stolen stuff, but then Esmeralda, the one they all seem to look up to is kind and caring. Frollo wants to kill them all but Phoebus who is a high class civilian pity’s them. Even the Festival of Fools is conflicting in its messages. They come across at first as fun loving at first but they turn on Quasimodo quickly and practically bully and insult him to a point where he is extremely upset. Only Esmeralda is kind to him out of the entire Gypsy crowd. There song was odd too, not that it was bad, it was fairly entertaining but maybe it was just me but I found something about it quite uncomfortable and almost slightly off, like it was implying they were quite nefarious. Not the most important aspect of the film but certainly worth mentioning.

 

I’m never really a fan of the comic relief in these kind of films and here was no exception. They weren’t the worst comic relief I’ve ever seen, but in a darker film such as this they did feel more out of place. I never find these characters funny and while they weren’t so obnoxious that they spoilt the movie I did still find them irritating. I did enjoy them more when they appeared to be imaginary, it made sense for Quasimodo’s character to make imaginary friends but you see them in the final battle at the end fighting the guards and you realise they just come to life. They could be worse but they are a weaker aspect of the film.

 

The film is however grand in scale. The animation particularly Notre Dame itself was fantastic and the film just appeared huge. On top of this the Choir suits the film brilliantly as it gets across the feeling and tone of the film as well as simply sounding great. It was one of Disney’s more controversial and risky films but at the same time it’s one I think they did an excellent job with and one that I can see why they wanted to make this instead of just another fairy tale. As I said earlier it’s not perfect, it’s not that faithful to the novel. It is however and incredibly interesting adaptation, a deep and intriguing main character and villain with in depth motivation and personality and it is definitely worth a watch. If you haven’t seen it then I really advise you do, it really is worth your time.

Frozen - Film Review

Frozen - Film Review

Hey Matt you should watch Frozen, many people said to me. It’s really good and it has a great message for young girls. So I watched Frozen and what was the main thing I took away from the experience. Don’t listen to people, they will only end up telling you to watch films like this one and you’ll end up majorly disappointed.

 

The film is about two sisters, Elsa and Anna. After the death of her parents Elsa is due to be coroneted as queen but she has a random assortment of ice powers that would throw the whole kingdom in jeopardy. Anna must save the kingdom and Elsa from her own powers and prevent an eternal winter.

 

The films main protagonist is a young girl named Anna. She’s a vibrant and innocent young girl full of life and energy. She is also painfully naïve and at times stupid. Yes she’s been deprived of social interaction by the world’s worst parents (although one must question why she doesn’t go out occasionally). But she still wants to marry a guy she met during that same day, she’s easily manipulated and let’s face it, she not very capable of doing anything on her own. I understand she was extremely sheltered but this made her un-relatable. I get these are her flaws but even with these she seems a bit too jolly and innocent in what is a pretty dire situation. I have to say also she is not a good role model. She is swept of her feet by a handsome and charming prince in about 5 minutes, just because other characters point out how dumb this is it doesn’t take away from the fact she wanted to marry someone she met a few hours ago.

 

Elsa is far more interesting. She is conflicted and understandably so about her powers but also not wanting to live a life of solitude. Furthermore she is pretty intense when she decides to let it go (see what I did there) and let all her powers take control and dispel all her despairs and fears of hurting people. What makes her more interesting is that she is obviously flawed. This doesn’t make her a weak damsel in distress, instead it puts her questionable actions in context and makes her more interesting as a result.  However her character weaken ironically when Anna turns up in her ice castle. She goes straight back the broken character while I would’ve liked to have seen her remain more cold and distant, at least at first. It would’ve made it far more rewarding when she does the right thing and understand the infinite power of love (no really) at the end.

 

I hate the snowman, he’s annoying and not funny and thus I refuse to use his name. I get that he’s comic relief, but that’s not an excuse for his annoyance. He doesn’t even attempt to make jokes, I think the running gag is his head falls off. It’s just not funny. Other than that he makes random statements and I wish he hadn’t been in the film at all.

 

Now the villain so spoilers I guess but to be fair it’s pretty damn obvious. Prince Hans seems like a typical prince but as soon as another male is introduced you know he will become the villain. He has pretty much no personality at all outside of being a typical charming prince and then power hungry ruler. What else is there to say, he is pretty boring.

 

The actual love interest, Kristoff is really strange. What kept bugging me is he shares carrots with his reindeer who he seems to like just a bit too much. Also why does Kristoff talk for Sven in a goofy voices? Animals can often talk in Disney films, why not just make the reindeer talk, it would’ve made a lot more sense. He’s kind of a loner, except he has a huge family of random troll people and a reindeer. But Anna opens his mind up to friendship and love or something? I don’t know, there wasn’t a lot to him. Again he was just a typical good guy who does the right thing in the end.

 

I think you can see where I’m going with this. There are no original thoughts in this film. I can’t believe people thought it was so unique. Elsa was quite interesting but other than that we have a bunvh of paper cut out of the stereotypical Disney character. The bumbling but ‘loveable hero’ the comic relief, the bland love interest and a power hungry villain. The only difference is the act of true love is from siblings, not two characters who are involved romantically.

 

The film follows a formula that has been done a million times. Maybe the film was too hyped to me but it was very average. Most of the characters are pretty bland and the plot isn’t that interesting. The twist about the villain is obvious and the ending is as cheesy as any other Disney film. I know it’s primarily for kids, but the best Disney films can be enjoyed by people of all ages.

 

I suppose I should comment on the quality of the songs. Honestly they’re all fine. I’m not a musical person at all and I’m not exactly a big lover of musicals but here the songs are perfectly functional. They get across what they want to and they I suppose and none of them offended my ears at all. I won’t exactly be singing them myself but for me they were at least passable, which is all I really want from Disney songs. So well done Frozen, a part of your movie is completely adequate.

 

The first song frozen heart has some burly men singing about ice. It sets up the not so subtle foreshadowing of the frozen heart metaphor and reveals itself to be like every film involving ice ever. It also brings up the point of if they export ice why are they disappointed that everything is frozen?

 

Next is do you want to build a snowman, a real tear jerker … apparently. Okay while not as emotional as everyone told me it was I agree it was a powerful scene. This was the only part of the film I actually sympathised with Anna as it highlights how lonely she is in the castle all by herself, particularly after her parents die. Elsa too corners sympathy as she is also lonely but also lives in fear of herself and her power.

 

Next up is called for the first time in forever and it consists of lots and lots of boring filler. Anna goes from wanting to spend time with her sister to wanting to find romance and I think there’s a line about her being gassy in there somewhere. Elsa meanwhile stands around all fearful at having to pick up a couple of expensive looking objects.

 

Next song is standard love song # 232 which is called love is an open door. Anna and Prince Hans sing a boring and annoying love song. There’s not really a lot else to say.

I cannot be the only one who though of this when
I saw Elsa's giant snowman monster thing

 

Next is that all famous let it go section and admit it’s actually pretty good. While I’m not really a fan of the song, the whole scene with Elsa letting go of all her restraint and freeing herself works very well. Her powers, while strange and unexplained (Making a dress?) do look very good and how she erects an ice castle could symbolise her letting out all her frustrations and fears. I admit this part was very impressive and memorable.

 

I barely want to talk about the other two songs. In summer and fixer upper. Oh dear. Talk about annoying filler. I think they’re supposed to be funny but I found them awkward and honestly quite tragic at times. These songs were annoying.

 

Finally the message. This is kind of a mixed bag for me. I like that it addresses love at first sight being too good to be true and the importance of family. I like that it highlights the absurdity of marrying someone you met that day and buried very deeply is a message about letting out your feelings and being yourself. However by most these will be overlooked for people to shout about female empowerment. The issue is most male characters in this film are painted as un-trustworthy and selfish. I like a strong female character, but equally I like them to be strong without having to be so unsubtle about feminism. What people don’t seem to get is that strong female characters work because they’re strong, not because they’re strong females. Equally having flawed and even weak female characters is fine too. Films will get a lot better when characters are defined by their personalities, not their gender. Not everyone is strong a righteous, this should be reflected in characters. We should not focus on trying to shove feminism down the viewer’s throat but instead produce relatable characters we can all understand regardless of gender. I feel they pulled this off with Elsa but not with any other characters.

 

So overall what did I think of Frozen? A resounding meh. It was by no means the worst film in the world. After watching it I can understand why people like it when looking at face value. For most it’s a fun little adventure with a heart-warming sibling relationship and a positive outlook on love and family. On top of this he songs are at least passable and the animation does look great. Maybe Elsa is too strong but in comparison the other characters do not stand up. It is her story but we spend far more time with Anna who by comparison is pretty one dimensional. Maybe we’re not supposed to look this deeply but the fact of the matter is that some of us do and the film does not hold up anywhere near as well as some of Disney’s other films. On top of this the plot was too simple and basic, the ending was corny, the supporting characters were uninteresting and the film lacked the comedy it was trying to produce. I was finding myself feeling quite bored at times, in particular about half way through. It did pick up slightly towards the beginning and end but this was not enough to salvage it. It wasn’t too bad but I wouldn’t recommend or watch it again. It’s kind of like a small scoop of ice cream on a really large wafer cone. Some of it as in Elsa and the animation are really good but you have to get through a lot of averageness to get there.