Death on the Nile (2022)

 

Running Time: 127 minutes

Media: Cinematic release at local cinema

While I love my local cinema, it's cozy and simple, and reminds me of the times I used to go to the Beverly Hills Twin Cinema when I was much younger, I've had to deal with the fact that a) we're still living our lives within a pandemic, b) seats are a lot tougher to acquire as a result and c) I was surrounded by other movie-goers wanting to watch the film. I'm still a little paranoid about other movie-goers being too close, can you blame me?

Anyhow, I tried to not let this detract me from enjoying this film. Like the first film, Murder on the Orient Express, the audience is treated with a star-studded ensemble cast, including director/actor Kenneth Branagh once again as the famous Hercule Poirot and his good friend, Bouc, played by Tom Bateman. Throw in Armie Hammer, Gal Gadot, Annette Benning, Letitia Wright, a very serioous Russell Brand (which blew my mind) and the team up of none other than both Dawn French and Jennifer Saunders among many others and you have a feast for the eyes and ears.

We're treated with a brief history look back at 1914 during World War I, which explains a few things regarding Poirot, and his double handlebar moustache. I love the fact that there was consideration of detailing this as a means of explaining part of his own history, and detailing information about his lost love, Katherine. I felt this was a great way of tying up the two films together to provide context that viewers of both films could enjoy. While you didn't need to be a fan of Agatha Christie's books to enjoy these films, these small details provided something that can help sutain the cinematic universe being created by these two films.

The film fast forwards to three years after the events of Murder on the Orient Express, which lead to Poirot witnessing events unfold between a love triangle between Linnet Ridgeway (Gadot), Simon Doyle (Hammer) and Jackie de Bellefort, and then having his life entwined when he finds himself in Egypt and coming across Bouc flying a box kite on one of the Great Pyramids ("because no one has ever done it before" according to Bouc... Hell, why not?)

Poirot is then invited to join in the festivities of Linnet and Simon's wedding, with Jackie in stalker mode, and a number of guests at Assouan; and then leading to the events of all parties boarding the S.S. Karnak to travel along the Nile. Some time later, despite Linnet's concerns that she does not trust any of her guests (which to be honest, is a bit of a weird thing... after all, why invite a number of people you don't trust to your own wedding?), she is found dead, shot in the head. Let the investigation begin!

All guests have underlying stories as to why they are there, and their relation to the bride and the groom. A former fiancee, a cousin lawyer, a former school friend, the groom's former lover, the godmother, a family friend, the maid and more, all get their time in the spotlight. I have to admit, seeing Russell Brand in a serious role floored me... He needs to do more of those... Armie Hammer, I don't know... he seemed... very out of place in this film, almost a caricature of himself, and his dance routine with Emma Mackey as Jackie at the start of the film seemed like nothing more than a raunchy distraction which felt like it didn't belong in this type of film. I guess I'm speaking from a place as one who has read a number of Agatha Christie's novels, and the storyline compared to what I saw in the film, I guess I had some difficulty making the connection.

Having seen Gal Gadot in a number of empowered roles (Fast & Furious, Wonder Woman, Wonder Woman '84, Justice League, Batman vs Superman, and more recently Red Notice) recently, it's difficult to see her as a vulnerable woman in the eyes of the audience. I keep expecting her to kick ass, so her character potrayal while refreshing is not as believeable. As usual her beauty shines, but unfortunately, in this film her character shines far less... 

Letitia Wright's accent as Rosalie Otterbourne feels forced, and thus sounds fake, despite her character's wholesomeness. Ali Fazal's portayal of Andrew Katchadourian comes across as a token villain, and the portayal of French and Saunders together as a duo once more in more ways than one in the story (you will understand what I mean once you come across the relevant scene three-quarters through the film) feels contrived to appeal to certain modern-day demographics, especially considering that this wasn't how they were portrayed in the source material. It seems it was only really thrown in there as an afterthought. Annette Benning as Bouc's mother comes across like an overbearing mother who wants nothing more than to protect her son.

The background scenery throughout the film is beautiful with wonderful shots of Egyptian landmarks, even though filming took place only in England, so kudos to the editors to blending in these shots with the filmed work in England. The costumes are more vibrant than what I expected to be present in the late 1930's, to help brighten the plot and help the audience focus on the majority of the somewhat two-dimensional characters.

Throughout the film, Branagh's Poirot shines, not just with regards to his egotistic behavior of being the world's greatest detective, but also when this persona is flipped on its ass when he realizes how vulnerable he himself is. Seeing Poirot as vulnerable is something you wouldn't see in Andrew Suchet's or Peter Ustinov's portrayals, so this is refreshing and we as an audeience find ourselves relating and empathizing with him as we take the journey with him. Bateman as Bouc follows through from Orient Express with his whimsical devil-may-care outlook on life through to the end, and this is commendable. You find yourself getting hit hard towards the end when you find this lifestyle coming back to haunt him. Russell Brand... Oh my f[CENSORED]king god, knowing what I have seen of his other films like Arthur, Get Him to the Greek, and Forgetting Sarah Marshall, and then seeing this side of him has made me appreciate the man much more. I want more serious roles for him. This is like what I saw with Jim Carrey in The Majestic, a flip side which makes you think "Wow."

The soundtrack is peppered with jazz numbers sung by Sophie Okonedo and others which are catchy, amid orchestration which is easily forgettable. This film is just enough to get you escaping to the 1930's and having you observe the unravelling of the tale without having to delve into the source material, while still maintaining a considerable grasp of it, with enough changes to warrant a 21st century's audience's attention. I'm giving Death on the Nile 3½ stars and hoping that they bring the third of the series out... Hopefully a rendition of "Death in the Clouds"?

Les Miserables (2012)

Running Time: 158 minutes.
Media: Cinematic release (Hoyts Broadway)


True story, when I was seven, my mother had a number of books in French that I was interested in reading... There was Around the World in 80 Days, The Three Musketeers, From the Earth to the Moon, and Les Miserables. I couldn't help asking my mother "Who's Les? He's got a pretty awful surname...?"

Alright, you can stop laughing... I did think it was a pretty unfortunate surname. And I never thought to see the musical until recently, and now that I have seen this adaptation, I would love the opportunity to see this once it makes its way back to Australia... that and Avenue Q, but I digress...

I was really happy about seeing this widescreen, and I knew that being a 2½-plus hour movie, the category of "EPIC!" would consistently flash in my head as I watched it, I made myself comfortable. Being a late session there weren't many people around... in fact I would have been surprised if there were no more than ten people in this particular cinema. This made for a wonderful viewing session.

Moving on, Les Mis has managed to garner nine (count them, nine) BAFTA Awards, including Best Film, Best British Film, Best Actor in a Leading Role and Best Actress in a Supporting Role and eight Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture, Best Actor and Best Supporting Actress. Now given that Hugh Jackman and Anne Hathaway have already won Golden Globe Awards for Best Actor and Best Supporting Actress respectively, the odds of them bagging an Oscar each this year are quite high... I wouldn't be surprised if this movie gets a clean sweep.

For those living under a rock, Les Mis, is the story of the struggle of one Jean Valjean (played by Hugh Jackman), who has made a promise to a former and now dead worker of his to look after her illegitimate daughter. Valjean is also on the run from parole after serving a nineteen year sentence for stealing a loaf of bread... Times were harsh back in pre-revolutionary France. Valjean's nemesis is a prison guard, Javert (played by Russell Crowe), who has made it his life's work to hunt Valjean down and bring him back to jail for breaking parole.

Cosette, played by the ever adorable Amanda Seyfried is the adopted daughter of Valjean, with her mother, Fantine, played by Anne Hathaway. The musical is such that very little of the script is spoken, it's sung through pretty much from beginning to end... which kinda reminded me of how it was with Evita. The music is wonderful and it captures your heart, because it is bubbling with raw emotion... especially from Jackman and Hathaway... all other characters kinda pale in comparison... Russell Crowe less so, seeing that a number of critics have said that his only real musical experience stems from his involvement in his band 30 Odd Foot Of Grunts, and an assortment of random appearances... But you know what? He pulls it off just fine, I like his performance as Javert. Javert is a very troubled character, and as a result, the singing must follow in a similar manner to reveal the character through their music. Valjean is hurried and passionate and loving and determined for survival, and his singing conveys that. Javert's character is focused and troubled at the same time, with an obsessive streak with finding Valjean and bringing him to justice, and Crowe's singing conveys this too.

Hathaway's... just... extraordinary, I had to shake my head in disbelief in how beautiful and heart wrenching it was... It put Susan Boyle's rendition to shame. Fantine (Hathaway's character) is only focused on one thing, not herself, but the life of her daughter, Cosette. She's literally sacrificed herself so that he daughter could live. I believe her portrayal of Fantine. I wanted to cry, I really did.

Jackman, though said by a number of critics as "not as good" as his 1985-1987 London production counterpart, Colm Wilkinson, is actually remarkable, he embodies that role... and he's quite believable. What I was surprised about though was how he managed to shape up for the role. He actually lost 15 pounds (6½ kilos), to become the gaunt and emaciated ex-convict Jean Valjean, and gained 30 pounds (13 kilos), to become the mayor, Monsieur Madeleine, the new identity adopted by Valjean. Jackman is known for the vigorous regimes he undertakes for certain roles. He had a similar regime when he underwent a high intensity weight training regimen to improve his physique for the role of Wolverine in X-Men Origins: Wolverine. He altered the training program to shock his body into change and also performed cardiovascular workouts. So that shot of him as Wolverine rising from the tank after having his bones infused with adamantium - no digital touches whatsoever.


Rusty's portrayal of Javert is complex, but you kinda feel sorry for him after realizing he (Javert) is only just trying to do his job... He's taken a lot of flack for his performance, and I can see why some people may think that way, but I feel he gave it his all in this role; and while though that may not be enough for some, without Javert there can be no Jean Valjean. For those who don't care, look towards the end of the film at Javert's final scene where his soliloquy kinda makes you understand why he spent all that time chasing Valjean, and the inevitable demise thereafter, but prepare to cringe at the very moment.

There are a few surprises scattered here and there throughout the film. Sacha Baron Cohen and Helena Bonham Carter play Monsieur and Madame Thénardier; and they previously starred together in Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street, so their ability to work together musically is surprisingly upbeat. Bonham Carter looks like she tends to, a bit necrotic... She does star as a number of unusual roles, doesn't she? But she works well as Cohen's husband on-screen. Cohen works wonders as Monsieur Thénardier, and I think kinda steals the scenes he's in. He's a hidden jewel in the movie... a built in "easter egg" of sorts.

Who else, oh yes... For those playing at home, the Bishop is indeed Colm Wilkinson, the original Jean Valjean from the London production back in the 80's. I hear there's also a cameo of Frances Ruffelle as a prostitute who harasses Fantine, but I have yet to find her. I almost squealed in my seat when I did, not that the other ten or so audience members noticed... Being a late session I enjoyed this movie without much interruption, and I enjoyed it so much, I almost came close to singing along... But I didn't, but any musical that makes you feel like doing so must deserve some sort of credit for moving you.

That is why I am giving Les Miserables a 4½ star rating. It comes very close, but there's a feeling that it doesn't quite give you the opportunity to sit back and take in the performances, it's almost as if it wanted to finish a lot sooner than expected. I may also be docking the ½ a star due to the slight tranquilizing effect that Crowe gives as Javert in certain scenes. Although he does well for what I believe is his first musical, he doesn't bring it home. Sorry Rusty, don't get me wrong, I enjoyed your performance, but I feel that somehow you seemed a little subdued in the final edit; that could very well have been to direct our attention to Hugh, who knows? Four and a half stars.

Pearl Harbor

Screening Time: 184 minutes.
Media: Blu-Ray.

Michael Bay has a lot to answer for with regards to this film. Despite earning nearly $450 million in the US Box office, and thereby giving it the title of the sixth-highest earning film in 2001, "Pearl Harbor" has received so much flak in the way of reviews and critiques, it's been deemed as the second worst film of Michael Bay's movie career. Second. Not the first, but second. What was the first? It seems "Pearl Harbor" had some stiff competition against "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" only to lose out for the title.

Okay, here's the low-down. It's a war movie which is wrapped around a somewhat predictable love triangle. The problem here is that the movie is meant to reflect the real life events of the attack on Pearl Harbor, Hawaii on December 7, 1941; but in doing so it is filled with a number of inaccuracies, I won't go through the list as the Wikipedia article of the movie is considerably thorough. Needless to say, being based on a historical event as significant as the trigger that led the Americans to enter World War II against the Japanese, it's no wonder that Pearl Harbor attack survivors dismissed the film as "grossly inaccurate and pure Hollywood."

The concept of artistic license appears to be considerably stretched in terms of what happened, how it happened, where and with whom, et cetera; and I'll come to Bay's defense here, these changes were more than likely done to help improve the plot line of the film. While this'll not have been the perfect solution and despite the plethora of bad press and reviews it received, the film was simply this: a piece of fiction based on a real life event. And yes, it wasn't necessarily the best way to go about it, but the movie did make $450 million dollars, so there must have been something that deserved that kind of return.

Let's take for granted that yes, Michael Bay did push the limits of twisting the events of the attack of Pearl Harbor to suit the story line of the film. Let's look past what we can with respect to the actual war components and look beyond that to the interwoven love story, A difficult task for some, I know.

Ben Affleck and Josh Hartnett play lifelong buddies who join the US Air Force. Kate Beckinsale plays Affleck's love interest... And then plays Hartnett's love interest... And then Affleck's again... After he supposedly returns from the dead after nearly getting killed in a mission with the British Royal Air Force fighting the Nazis...

The storyline is fairly predictable, and right now I don't rightly care about giving out the spoilers for this film: Boy meets girl, boy goes to fight Nazis, boy supposedly killed in action, boy's best friend comforts girl, boy's best friend and girl fall in love, boy comes back "from the dead", boy feels betrayed, boy and his best friend go to war against the Japanese after being attacked, boy's best friend dies after discovering girl is pregnant, boy and girl get back together and raise son named after dead best friend.

So let's see, a few clichés scattered in this film; the lifelong friendship, the love triangle, the betrayal and the consequent forgiveness, the naming of the kid after the dead friend... I always found that last one a little creepy... Oh, and let's not forget the somewhat hammy death scene of Hartnett's... I actually found myself asking these very words: "Are you f[CENSORED]king kidding me?" To see that particular scene was as painful as wiping my backside with sandpaper.

I have to confess I am very much divided as to how to rate this movie. Granted, there's the love story and the war, and the attacks and the special effects; but I have to say that I must lean towards a low rating... This movie was meant to reflect the historical account of the Pearl Harbor attacks, and as someone who recently visited the Pearl Harbor memorial site, and learned of the story first hand from footage and personal account from survivors from the attacks, it saddens me that a number of inaccuracies were made in the name of entertainment... It kinda sullies the historic value of what Pearl Harbor represents, kinda craps over it... And it's because of this that I award this film two stars for the effort.

Marvel's "The Avengers"

Running Time: 143 minutes.

Media: Cinematic release.

Before we go any further, let's make one thing clear... this is not the film with Ralph Hiennes and Uma Thurman... If you want to read about that, go here, otherwise continue reading.

Marvel's version of The Avengers would have to be one of the biggest films in history, now drowning in almost $1.5 billion US worldwide... At the time of this review, the value had reached a whopping $1,492,215,000... the mind boggles at just how big this is...

With three film franchises furiously knitting themselves together with a number of other characters, Marvel's The Avengers is a gestalt... it's greater than the sum of its parts... and for all intensive purposes one of the biggest films ever. The year 2003 saw the somewhat tatty performance of the original "Hulk" movie starring Eric Bana... A good testing ground for the Avengers' greenest member... Then came Edward Norton's performance which seemed a little more homage-worthy to Bill Bixby's portrayal of Bruce Banner, back in 2008. All very well and good, you may think, but who ends up getting the role of The Hulk? Our green friend is re-cast a third time by Mark Ruffalo, who to be perfectly honest, seems to fuse the seriousness from Eric Bana, and the simplicity of Edward Norton to create an amalgam of what the Hulk should really be. Adding Lou Ferrigno to voice the Hulk in this film has made this worthy of including the Green Machine.

Iron Man also came around that same year, resurrecting Robert Downey Jr's career and life all in the one hit. RDJ's ability to channel Tony Stark's character time and time again with perfection just oozes assurance without any shadow of doubt that he is the ideal person for the role. Chris Hemsworth and Chris Evans respectively marking their territory as strong contributors to the Avengers film as Thor and Captain America show that their characters will be forever immortalized as these two Marvel characters for years to come, though it does raise the question as to whether Chris Evans will still be reprising his role as The Human Torch in any future Fantastic Four films. The ever sexy Scarlett Johansson as Black Widow is also present from her role in Iron Man 2, and The Bourne Legacy's Jeremy Renner carries on his role as Clint Barton (aka Hawkeye) from the Thor movie, and Samuel L. Jackson reprises his role as SHIELD director, Nick Fury, who has appeared in all of the Avenger films to varying capacities.

The film basically revolves around the dynamic of all the members to work together to fight off the forces of Loki's army, who has recently acquired the Tesseract and intends to rule Earth with it... Of course the Avengers Initiative is activated and the awesomeness begins... In fact, this entire film is just bursting at the seams with pure awesomeness, and filled with extra tidbits such as Tim Hiddelston reprising his role as Loki, charming up the scenes once more... and more abitious than ever to rule the Earth. Clark Gregg also shows up once more as SHIELD's Agent Phil Coulson and Gwyneth Paltrow as a slightly blonder Pepper Potts... (what was the go there?) Cobie Smulders is Agent Maria Hill, who seems more like a ramped-up and sexy personal assistant with combat skills... and Paul Bettany takes up the helm once more as JARVIS, the AI for Stark's Iron Man suit.

I enjoyed this film immensely, and despite a few slight disappointments... One which is a major spoiler, so I can't mention it here... but seemed necessary to advance the film along; but nevertheless, the film seriously kicked ass. The dynamic of this team trying to work together is hilarious because of the number of egos these characters possess, but it all settles down in the end. This film has rightly earned its 5-star rating, and I can't wait for pay-day so that I can buy the damn Blu-Ray which only just came out on sale a week ago!

The Expendables

Running Time: 103 minutes.
Media: DVD.

Now, when you tend to see this many names in the one billing, your mind starts wandering; and you yourself start wondering how they're gonna give each of these people as much screen time as possible... For that matter, with something as nigh-ridiculous as an A-grade movie which seems to push the boundaries of a B-grade movie, such as what The Expendables proves to be, you wonder how this movie actually managed to rake in over $US 274 million.

I'll tell you how... it's a action-filled kill-fest, filled with top-billing stars. Combine this with a few B-grade actors and a somewhat plausible, and however, predictable plotline, and you've got the movie I'm currently watching now...

The action, bullets, knives and digital blood are non-stop in this film... I wish I could say the same for the seriousness of the film... The film manages to contain, in order, Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Dolph Lundgren, Randy Couture, "Stone Cold" Steve Austin, Terry Crews, Mickey Rourke, Bruce Willis, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Eric Roberts; without the cup overflowing in testosterone. As fantastic as that is there are a few points that I have to make... Sylvester Stallone's acting proves to be as wooden as his face. I don't think I saw any actual emotion on him throughout the entire film; if I didn't know any better, I'd say he's suffering from partial palsy. Jason Statham, Terry Crews and Randy Couture always seems angry and bitter... And Dolph Lundgren... Geez, did anyone know of a film that he's been in before this? Ever? The Masters of the Universe perhaps?

There's some redeeming features to this film, Mickey Rourke actually acts in this film; there's a quite poignant moment where Rourke, who plays the role of "Tool", a former Expendable, actually steals the scene with a monologue about Bosnia. Jet Li, who is more action than he is words does what he does best - deliver punch after kick, after punch, after kick. There's also the inclusion of the ever lovely Charisma Carpenter, who used to play Cordelia in the Buffy TV series. Eric Roberts does what he does best, talk down to everyone and smirk, not that that's a bad thing... it seems he does that in every film he's in, so I've taken that as a given with this film. And I couldn't resist adding a "'Cause Stone Cold says so!" every time Steve Austin said a line!

However, these "redeeming" qualities aren't quite enough to save The Expendables from getting top billing from me. the plot has as much weight as bag full of air. I'm even more surprised  that it's going into sequel mode later this year, with the addition of Chuck Norris and Jean-Claude Van Damme... Can this sequel possibly work and not cause cinemas to explode from the sheer raw manpower? Given the nature of the cast members involved they should maybe consider renaming the sequel "The Expirables" for their lack of presence in Hollywood of late... Or "The Expandables" in relation to the girth of some of the actors who haven't kept fit of late... Who knows... Considering that Stallone both directs and produces this film still redeems it somewhat. Meantime, The Expendables gets three stars from the Movie Madman.