Star Wars the Empire Strikes Back - Review

Star Wars the Empire Strikes Back – Review

After the trailer we all saw a few days ago I was really in the mood for Star Wars. It’d been way too long since I had watched the Empire Strikes back and I was curious to see whether it’s as good as I always think it is.  When asked my favourite film I would always proudly admit it was the Empire Strikes back so how was it now? Let you be warned there will be spoilers although let’s face it, everyone in the universe knows what happens in this film.

 

The Empire Strikes Back follows the aftermath of the Rebellion destroying the Death Star. A good film needs a good plot and this film definitely has that. The first film set a great foundation and Empire really ups the stakes. It would have been very easy to unite the same crew as last time and send them all off but instead after a short time our main protagonists get separated. This was a great move as not only did it allow more locations and thus show us more of the world that was being created but also meant the characters had new challenges to overcome.

 

If plot is the bread then characters are the butter and a sandwich with butter is a dry and thirsty experience, so how were the characters? We’ll start with our main protagonist Luke. A bit of a tangent here but when you think of the prequels what is one of the main things that sticks out? For me it’s how irritating Anakin was. I am not criticising the actor, honestly considering what tripe he had to work with I think he did a decent job. This is especially apparent in scenes with no dialogue but the point is he was whiney and stuck up and perhaps most importantly for this kind of story, completely unreliable. Luke could be whiney at times but it was never annoying because we could kind of see what he was saying. He reacted to how many people would but he was still brave and determined and all those good things you want in a hero. Unlike what the prequels did with Anakin, Luke was written to kind of stray the border at times with good and bad and it wouldn’t be unfeasible to see him go either way but at the same time we wanted to see him succeed.

 

The other two main leads, Han Solo and Princess Leia spend a lot of time together throughout the film and take up a lot of screen time so if they had no chemistry this would be a huge problem. Luckily they’re really enjoyable to watch. I’m a huge fan of Han Solo, he’s the kind of character I’d like to think I was similar too even though I know it’s definitely not the case. He’s if nothing else, really cool. More than that though he was a character I enjoyed seeing the growth of. He started out in the first Star Wars as just in it for the money and let’s face it, a bit selfish. He develops though from the guy who shot first into a genuinely good guy, one you could always rely on. He never loses that swagger and bravado that makes him such a great character to begin with.

 

Leia doesn’t quite have such an arc, she doesn’t change anywhere near as much as Luke or Han but that doesn’t mean she’s not interesting. She is strong and she holds her own and she doesn’t need to be rescued all the time. I also like the chemistry between Han and Leia, they do bounce of each other well and again unlike the prequel it is like a real romance. You do believe what’s happening, you don’t just have to assume they’re in love because George Lucas says so.

 

Now I need to talk about Darth Vader. Right. Do villains get any better? I doubt it, Vader was a powerhouse in this film. Like everything else he really stepped it up for the Empire Strikes Back. He was far more evil here and while we saw him do a few cool things in the first film we really get an idea of his power here. He executes people by choking them, he throws stuff at Luke and the lightsaber duel is superb, it really highlights how easy Vader finds it to block Luke’s assaults. Vader is powerful but he’s also complex and while his character isn’t explored that much there are subtle moments with him that I absolutely love. I loved it when we saw the back of his head and how it was all scared and I like seeing him bow to the Emperor. Little moments like that I thought did a great job of showing us a bit more without having to spell it out to us.

 

Of course there are so many great supporting characters it’s hard to fit them all in to one blog post. Yoda was a fantastic mentor character, we are always aware there is more to him but it never just gives it all away and equally we are shown how wise he is. Chewbacca has great interactions with Han, C3PO has some good lines (I especially like it when Han is making his move on Leia and runs charges into the room exclaiming about some random sci-fi gibberish). Lando is like more awesome cool smuggler character and Boba Fett for all 12 seconds he’s there is just plain awesome.

 

There are some amazing scenes in this movie, I’ve already mentioned the show down with Luke and Vader, the chase through the asteroid field is great, the battle for Hoth was cool and one of my favourite ever movie scenes is in this movie. It’s where Han gets frozen in carbonite and it’s a fantastic scene. The line I know was so fitting and such a great way of emphasizing the moment.  The music is perfect and then we see Vader’s helmet through the smoke! I love that scene.

 

There’s so much more I could talk about and I could go on for pages and pages but instead I’ll answer the question of is the Empire Strikes back as good as it has been in my head. Absolutely, the film is a masterpiece and if you’re one of the 3 people on earth who hasn’t seen it then I highly recommend you do.

A Five Nights at Freddy's Recollection

A Five Nights at Freddy’s Recollection

All things that are popular are popular for a reason. Batman is popular because he’s awesome, Twilight is popular because lonely and desperate housewives want to feel fulfilled and 50 Shades of Grey is popular is popular because there is no justice in the world. What about Five Nights at Freddy’s. It has three games now and the third is certainly dividing opinion. Now more than ever opinion seems to be split on the franchise so what better time to talk about it?

So for the three of you who have been living under a rock what is Five Nights at Freddy’s? Well while each game adds more mechanics and gimmicks each game features a security guard sitting completely still in an office, trying to stop yourself from being killed by animatronics that may be possessed by murdered children or stuffed with dead bodies. Yeah, not disturbing in any way. Add a heap of tense and creepy atmosphere, some deep and interesting lore and backstory and some compelling gameplay and you have a great trilogy right?

 

When the first game came out I couldn’t find anyone who disliked it. It was original, it was intense and it was downright scary. Thousands of theories were spouted from the backstory, it made many YouTubers from their over the top reactions to the jump scares. Then again, it scared a lot of people. Most horror games are scary because of what you find and the atmosphere of the location. Five Nights at Freddy’s was scary because you were completely helpless. You couldn’t run away or fight back. All you can do is close your doors and hope your power doesn’t run out. I wasn’t the jump scares that was the scariest bit, but rather the waiting for the animatronics to come and seeing them move around the building. I think this game is great.

 

The sequel was certainly interesting. Its mechanics were slightly changed up and more animatronics were added. A large slice of new info on the lore was presented to us and some weird ass death mini games entered the game. At the time it came out many thought this game was even scarier. I understand, you didn’t have doors anymore, you had to wear a Freddy mask and watch them stand in front of you and glare with their messed up faces. Strangely however, I wouldn’t say it’s scarier per say. The jump scares were more surprising and the mini games were a good addition but the atmosphere wasn’t as thick and it felt a lot less Claustrophobic. It was still really good though and the franchise was still just as popular.

 

The third game was released and things got more interesting. This is where opinion started to split amongst the crowd. The game had sort of a 50/50 split with people having savage arguments in YouTube comment sections. The game was a bit different, there was one animatronic, there was a ventilation system you had to keep on top of and you had to lure the creature away. The death mini games were back in the form of compulsory mini games at the end of each night with hidden mini games to explain the lore and get the alternate ending. Personally I didn’t think this one was as good. I seemed like it was being a bit pretentious with its ridiculous hard to find mini games (The tiles in the office … really) and it was nowhere near as scary. It was still decent though and not worthy of huge amounts of hate like it has been. So why is there so much hatred?

 

Maybe because it’s popular? On the internet people love things that are fairly unknown, it makes it really cool. People tend to dislike popular stuff. It’s not hipster anymore. But there has to be more … there is.

 

People complain it’s not scary anymore. Well duh. Things get less scary the more you experience them. The game isn’t as shocking the longer it goes on, that’s normal. Even the most terrifying things ever created will eventually get scary. Maybe saying having a cutesy animal animatronic jump out at you wasn’t even scary in the first place. It was the build-up and the tension. This was especially apparent in the first game. Every time you put the camera down you could get attacked. They moved, you anxiously waited for them to move before your power runs out. Foxy was genius, the slow and tense atmosphere would become quick and hectic as you scrambled to close the door before it gets down the corridor. The game was great and remained tense even when it got less scary because you wanted to make it to 6 AM. The second was similar in how scary and tense it was and while the third was disappointing and felt like it was there to serve the lore it was at least enjoyable and a nice way to tie up the series.

 

Let’s talk about the lore a little more. I find it hard to believe this was ever supposed to be a trilogy. I imagine it was meant to be a scary one off game with a vague but interesting story. The game was expanded and more sequels were added and the lore was increased but I have always thought the story telling was very clever. It gives enough to theorise but not enough to 100% prove anything and equally never just giving it away. It is very clever as the creator knows at this point an out and out answer would never be able to live up to the hype and expectation you have in your head. In reality any theory could be correct and Scott Cawthon may not even have an entire backstory mapped out. It leaves it to us to fill it in and it makes a highly interesting plot.

 

I think the biggest reason Five Nights at Freddy’s has lost its popularity is because after the success of the first one everyone over hyped the sequels. Hype is a terrible thing for a game, a game will almost never live up to its hype and our opinion will be tainted before we even play it. Maybe we expect a bit too much. These are fun and tense games, is it too much to expect them to go down in gaming history as some of the great horror games like a Silent Hill 2. Will we still be talking about them in about 5 years’ time? Probably not. Were they a good experience when we played them and for a long while afterwards as we pondered on the identity of the purple man or the significance of Golden Freddy? Absolutely yes. So let’s enjoy them while they last and enjoy that lovely feeling of nostalgia when we stumble across them somewhere years later and always remember to watch pirates cove and wind up your music box. Or maybe just get a job where you’re probably not going to die, that’d work too.

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.