The Authenticity of Resident Evil: Afterlife [2010]

[Reader disclaimer: spoilers will be discussed].

If you're a gamer, I'm sure you're all too painfully aware of the game-to-film curse that somehow manages to take our most beloved video game franchises and suck them dry, returning to us on-screen as shadows of their former selves. Hollywood likes to regurgitate their cookie-cutter stories with everything and video game adaptations always seem to fall victim to it.

One video game franchise in particular was for a while considered to be a game-to-film success story, said franchise being my childhood love: Resident Evil (1996 - present). Paul W.S. Anderson came forward in 2002 with the first Resident Evil movie starring Mila Jovovich as the titular 'Alice' (a character, I should note, that never features in the video games) and managed to garner $130 million at the box office. It wasn't the perfect video game adaptation, but it showed promise, and most of us were just happy to have something that wasn't complete garbage (looking at you, Super Mario Bros).

After that, Anderson spawned numerous sequels, which...well, they weren't as great: six films were made in total but even Resident Evil: The Final Chapter (2017) only managed to score a measly 38% on Rotten Tomatoes. The general consensus amongst long-time fans is that the downfall of Anderson's zombie-filled empire came with the release of Resident Evil: Afterlife (2010), the fourth instalment of the franchise. However, it is my opinion that this film is perhaps the only instalment that authentically reflects the true, campy yet delightfully violent nature of the original video games.

Firstly, let's look at references. The script for Afterlife began in 2008 but there are some undeniable influences from the Resident Evil 5 (2009) game that was released a year later, namely the inclusion of the "majini" as well as other Easter eggs, such as the P30 injector. 

"Majini", for those of you that aren't familiar, are a type of undead that retain some intellect and have distinctive mandibles that open up like a fleshy mouth-flower, much like the Demogorgon from Stranger Things (2016 - present) or the Reaper vampires from Blade II (2002). They were first introduced in-game with Resident Evil 4 (2005), where arthropods named "plagas" infected an indeterminate region of Spain, turning their victims into madmen with terrifying (albeit impressively flexible) mouths: the inclusion of this in Afterlife is never explained but it was a treat to see the filmmakers not only move away from the T-virus storyline and include variation but also reference things from the newer games.

Secondly, the characters. As with the majini, we are (finally) introduced to Chris Redfield (played by Wentworth Miller), one of the two playable characters from the first ever game in 1996. Incidentally, Chris is never featured in the sequels, but his appearance in Afterlife brings such a wave of nostalgia to the viewer, especially when we're also given a scene where he and his sister, Claire (played by Ali Larter) are reunited: this is a nod to the game franchise's ongoing plot-line of Claire and Chris spending most of their time searching for each other.

Albert Wesker (played by Shawn Roberts) is also given more screen-time in Afterlife: he was initially introduced in Resident Evil: Extinction (2007) but thankfully plays a larger role in the fourth instalment. Wesker is, first and foremost, one of the most prolific antagonists of RE and it was quite shocking that he was shelved up until the fourth film.

And then there's my favourite character: the Majini Executioner. When I was rewatching the film, I assumed this hulking behemoth of undead flesh was the Axeman (as listed on Afterlife's IMDB page), a side character from the Resident Evil Outbreak File #2 (2004) spinoff game. Then I realised that it was the Executioner, introduced in Resident Evil 5. 

Despite the Executioner lacking a backstory as in-depth and brutal as the Axeman, this character makes for one of the greatest secondary antagonists of any RE film, in my opinion. From his intimidating silence to his over-sized meat tenderiser of a weapon (which distinctly reminds me of the Champion's Cudgel from The Elder Scrolls series), the Executioner scene in Afterlife epitomises everything great about the franchise: gratuitous violence, bad-ass character design and a soundtrack that slaps. It genuinely feels like you're watching a mini-boss fight scene and it's fun as hell.

Lastly, the tone of Afterlife is, in my opinion, what truly grounds it as the most authentic-feeling film. Scenes like the Executioner fight as well as the rooftop explosion feel like we're in a video game, the latter demonstrated by camera movements and choreography you'd typically see in a third-person shooter as the player takes down waves of enemies. One of the best scenes of the film is where the Redfield siblings battle Wesker on the Arcadia ship, an almost shot-for-shot remake of a cutscene from Resident Evil 5 (in which Chris and Sheva Alomar fight Wesker as well, see the video above for the comparison shots).

Afterlife's dialogue is questionable. I don't think I could ever truly defend the film's writing because, for the most part, it's mediocre and downright laughable. But it doesn't detract from the action: in fact, it sort of supports the campy, ridiculously theatrical tone that we see evident in pretty much every single RE game prior to the release of Resident Evil 7: Biohazard (2017), which took a more serious and realistic approach. If anything, Afterlife would've been out of place for the film franchise had it taken itself seriously and tried to mimic the tone of its contemporaries, such as 28 Days Later (2002) or I Am Legend (2007).

All in all, Resident Evil: Afterlife achieves what I believe none of the other instalments do, and that is authentically capturing both the tonal and visual elements of the original franchise in a way that stands as a great example of what Resident Evil is all about. Fun, gore and some funky looking zombies.

- K 

[Editor's note: video credit goes to Hero on YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74_gTzYCxeg]

Why The Human Centipede 2 [2011] is Actually A Decent Film

[Reader disclaimer: spoilers will be discussed. This piece also contains material of a disturbing and graphic nature].

You won't have to have seen The Human Centipede: First Sequence (2009) to know what it's about. No doubt your friends have made you watch it for a dare at that one sleepover or you were too curious after it was hyped up and made the decision to see what it was all about. If you haven't seen it, well the premise is simply a man that wants (and succeeds in) stitching three people, erm...ass-to-mouth. 

This late noughties horror flick became an instant sensation, a modern-day video nasty, sickening people all over the world and earning itself some tidy bans in a few countries. Tom Six (the director) had openly declared to society that he was the new face of b-movie torture porn, despite it being disliked by so many people, audiences and critics alike: mainly it was hated for its audacious and disturbing source material but it also didn't help that the performances were lacklustre and the script could be called mediocre at best.

So it's interesting that its successor, The Human Centipede II: Full Sequence (2011) was surprisingly good in comparison. I'm sure most would disagree with me on that and happily plonk it onto the same burning heap that the original film (and third instalment) sit atop like an un-welcomed bad-taste horror prodigy.

However, this sequel has some merit, namely its use of meta-storytelling. The entire premise of  THC2 is that a sadomasochistic, introverted man named Martin (played by Laurence R. Harvey) is obsessed with the first Centipede movie and fantasises about creating his own real-life monstrosity with 12 people, as opposed to the original three. THC2 derives its horror not only from the visceral and gratuitous violence we see on-screen but from the genuinely terrifying concept that its grounded in our reality.

If we look at this film at surface level, it's pretty simplistic: the entire thing is shot in black and white (a seemingly artistic choice but nevertheless a necessity for Tom Six after he couldn't get it through censorship gates) and it does do what it says on the tin...it gives us a human centipede. But if you take a more analytical approach to it, you'll notice that THC2 is not only able to be self-referential but it also pays homage to other aspects of horror, making it more than just a two-dimensional snuff-like flick about some people stuck together with staples.

The main bulk of the film feels like a midnight feature of underground cinema, something so depraved and explicit that it could only be watched by dedicated movie-goers or curious patrons looking to get a kick out of being freaked out; the use of black and white alone makes me reminiscent of the b-movies they'd show in the 60s. 

There's a particular scene in THC2 that makes me think of Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho (1960): in the final act, our "protagonist" (if you can really call him that) finally snaps and smashes his emotionally abusive mother's head in with a crowbar, after which he proceeds to sit her at the kitchen table and stare at the bloody remains of her face like a man without a care in the world. It's unnerving, similar to the way in which Norman Bates kept his mother's corpse around and spoke to it like she was still alive: such absurd niceties are what truly evoke a good reaction from the audience (at least in my opinion).

The characters in the sequel definitely supersede that of the first film. Martin's incompetent yet believably malicious character is a complete 180 of Dr. Heiter from THC1, in that Martin is at least a character you can almost sympathise with as a victim of emotional, physical and sexual abuse, whereas Heiter is just a psychopath abusing his skills as a physician. Supporting character Dr. Sebring (played by Bill Hutchens) is a walking, Freudian parody, depicted as an authoritative yet perverse opposition to Martin. And of course there's Ashlynn Yennie, an actress from THC1 who reprises her role as an exaggerated, meta-version of herself, further strengthening the link between the first and second film.

Is this a perfect horror film, though? No, and I'm not here to contest that it is because THC2 is very self-indulgent, the narrative is littered with tired, stereotypical tropes and arguably strays further out of the torture porn category and more into a fetishization of scat/bodily fluid/snuff kinks (I wonder if Tom Six is aware that gross doesn't necessarily equate to horror).

However, the final act of the film is what fans remember: it's simply a test of endurance on behalf of the viewer as to how much you're willing to witness. If the act of teeth being smashed out with a hammer wasn't enough for you, THC2 gradually unpacks all of the twisted ideas in its arsenal: from ripping out a tongue with pliers, to explicit sexual assault, to stomping on the skull of a new-born baby, THC2 does it all and spares no mercy in showing it. It is an embodiment of the torture porn genre but not in the generally campy, over-the-top way: it's decisive torture, implemented by an amateur in crude fashion. It's horrifying because, unlike Dr. Heiter with his medical expertise, any of us could be capable of doing what Martin does (if you're twisted enough). 

The Human Centipede II: Full Sequence is a decent horror film (despite its obscenities and ludicrous script) because it not only utilises the shock factor of the first-film but creates something entirely new in the process: bigger, bloodier and weirder than before. 

- K

Film Reviews: Sometimes Mainstream Isn't So Bad [Overlord, 2018]

[Reader disclaimer: spoilers will be discussed. This piece also contains material of a graphic nature].

When out in public, we tend to notice those Hollywood blockbusters plastered across the side of the local buses. For the most part, I don't pay attention to whatever has entered the mainstream stratosphere, especially in horror; "Hollywood horror" is a compilation of tired tropes, bad acting and abhorrent dialogue. 

I remember Overlord (2018) being advertised. I chalked it up to being yet another terrible film that would no doubt make a decent penny at the box office and be forgotten instantaneously. But, as it turns out, this film is not just a basic horror: it's fun, it's gory and I'd say arguably pretty unique.

The film follows Boyce (Jovan Adepo), an American soldier tasked to destroy a watch tower behind enemy lines during WW2. He's part of an ensemble, eventually joined by Chloe (Mathilde Ollivier), a local woman who is trying to protect her younger brother from Nazis. The set-up is pretty simplistic but there are some absolutely haunting visuals, from dead soldiers hanging from the trees to the experiment subjects we see later in the film. 

The characters in this film are...okay. Most of them are loose stereotypes that a murdered in violent fashion without being fleshed out, demonstrating a complete lack of indispensability that we often see in both horror and war films. Boyce is a refreshing addition: a POC protagonist who is not only morally sound but manages to live throughout the narrative, subtle in its revision of harmful tropes (such as the black person dying first). 

One of the standout characters in this has to be Wafner (Pilou Asbæk) a.k.a Danish Michael Shannon. For a fictional Nazi character, he's impressively determinate and perverse: sure, he's no Hans Lander, but he's certainly entertaining in a 'you just love to hate the guy' kind of way. German Greyjoy is charismatic, respectful yet absolutely screams 'Nazi scum', presented in a way that's almost pantomime-like.  

The visual effects of Overlord are delightfully gross. If you've seen any marketing for it, then you'll know there is a scene wherein Wafner's character literally has half his face smashed off, achieved by a combination of prosthetics, CGI and good ol' fashioned sfx makeup. In fact, most of the gore and body horror in this film is well-done: in some respects, it leaned heavily into Cronenberg territory, which I certainly enjoyed.

My takeaway from this film is that, at times, it feels like it wants to be taken seriously yet for the most part, it's supposed to be fun. Is it the best horror film of 2018? No, but I don't think that matters, to be honest. It's impressive for what it is and certainly got dunked too hard on by fans upon release. 

Overall rating: 7/10

- K 

Ranked: Favourite Film Soundtracks

[Reader disclaimer: there will be spoilers discussed. This piece also contains material that might be sensitive to some readers].

There are many components to a film: cinematography, editing, mise-en-scene, lighting, acting. In certain genres, a key aspect tends to stand out more than others, for example, music composition in horror is essential for creating that tension and unease that we typically associate with scary movies (such as the orchestral stab when we experience a jump scare or the rise of string instruments when tension is being built). 

Before the late 20s (with The Jazz Singer (1927) being one of the first examples of films with synchronised speech in it), films often relied on non-diegetic music to demonstrate the emotions of what we saw on-screen. It's still an important component today, however, music has changed drastically since the Silent Era of piano compositions to modern-day remixes and scores on a grand scale.

Here are some of my favourite examples of music used in film.

10) Time by Hans Zimmer - Inception (2010)

Hans Zimmer is one of my favourite film composers. From the macabre yet stunning soundtrack of The Dark Knight (2008) to his playful and enchanting work on The Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl (2003), Zimmer is undeniably talented at utilising every instrument to evoke emotion from the audience.

One of his greatest examples of work (in my opinion, obviously) is the final scene of Inception (2012), in which we see Dom (Leonardo DiCaprio) using the spinning top but leaving to greet his children before we ever see if the top falls or stays upright, leaving the ending ambiguous as to whether or not Dom and the others have returned to reality.

The song Time is played over this sequence, a powerful yet melancholic piece that finishes with lone keys played on the piano. It conveys almost a sadness and provides the audience with a taste of closure before the song abruptly ends on the shot of the spinning top. In comparison to the rest of the soundtrack, Time feels like a solid landmark at the end of the film, one that beautifully marries rising brass and string instruments with the poignant and saddening notes of the piano.

9) The Kiss by Trevor Jones - The Last of the Mohicans (1992)

I can't say that The Last of the Mohicans (1992) as a film has aged particularly well but there are two aspects of this film which are still unfaltering in their impressive nature: Daniel Day-Lewis' performance and the soundtrack.

When I think back to the films I watched as a child and the songs I remember, this one has always stuck in my mind. The Kiss comprises mainly of violins and drums in a romantic, almost Celtic fashion. At this point in the film, Hawkeye (Day-Lewis) seeks out Cora (Madeline Stowe) and they passionately embrace, finally succumbing to their mutual attraction for each other.

As a viewer, this scene is a moment in the making. We witness the romantic tension between the two lovers for so long and desperately await that climactic moment wherein they kiss, so the rise from minor to major chords feels empowering and relieving. 

8) Hellraiser by Christopher Young - Hellraiser (1987)

Talking of films from childhood, this spot on the list had to go to one of my all-time favourites: Hellraiser (1987). Obviously most horror films from the 70s/80s renaissance are indisputably iconic, from Charles Bernstein on A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984), John Carpenter on Halloween (1978) to one of the most famous themes in pop culture, Mike Oldfield's Tubular Bells for The Exorcist (1973). 

Out of all of them, however, I had to nominate Christopher Young's work on Hellraiser. I believe my attachment to this soundtrack is founded in both nostalgia but also due to its likeness to composer Danny Elfman's discography: they both tend to use gothic themes intertwined with classical styles of musical composition, which I think works effectively when it comes to horror films. 

Either way, as soon as Hellraiser starts playing, I'm immediately thrown back to the first time watching it, sitting in absolute awe of Doug Bradley. 

7) Bundle of Joy by Michael Giacchino - Inside Out (2015)

Let's be honest. There are plenty of Pixar soundtracks that could sit on this list. Some of you might be surprised to see that I've picked something remotely new as opposed to something more nostalgia-based from the 90s, such as Toy Story (1995) or Monsters, Inc (2001).

I went to see this film on my 19th birthday and this is one of the first pieces of music to be introduced to us: the birth of Riley (Kaitlyn Dias). This small piece of music, with just the piano alone, evokes this sense of wonderment and childlike happiness that seemingly captures Riley's personality before we're even able to see her character grow up on-screen. It's heartfelt and light, something that Pixar films are most certainly renowned for. 

I believe that if I had seen this film as a child, I would've had a fond nostalgia for its music. As an adult, I can appreciate what Giacchino is trying to translate to his audience and it works.

6) Bunsen Burner by CUTS - Ex Machina (2014)

It came as a surprise to me when I watched Ex Machina (2014) after listening to The Prodigy's 2015 album, The Day is My Enemy because one of the songs on the tracklisting actually samples Bunsen Burner in a more sped-up format. So, every time I listen to the Ex Machina soundtrack, I'm reminded of The Prodigy.

Regardless, Bunsen Burner has been firmly etched into my memory ever since I watched this film for the first time. It's electronic, ebbing introduction fades effortlessly into a strong, three, minor-notes sequence that never feels repetitive, only tense. Within the context of the film, this is the climactic scene of the final act, wherein Ava (Alicia Vikander) turns on her creator, Nathan (Oscar Isaac) and fatally stabs him: we, as the audience, realise Ava's inability to feel true empathy and that she truly is a threat.

Bunsen Burner feels, in a way, like the empowerment of a freed prisoner but also the final curtain of the characters we have grown to trust and even like within the narrative. It's a musical double-edged sword.

5) Rohan by Howard Shore - The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

The entire discography of The Lord of the Rings franchise is impressive. There's no denying that. However, I'd argue that the second film, The Two Towers (2002), holds some of the best use of Howard Shore's work; the grand scale of the battle scenes, the intimate moments between characters, the light-hearted nature of comic relief.

Rohan is my favourite of all these themes, as it's used to both present touching scenes (such as the freedom of Théoden, played by Bernard Hill) but also the more melancholic moments, such as Éowyn (Miranda Otto) lamenting the dying landscape of her home and the ill-nature of her people.

Every geographical location in Middle Earth has its theme and Rohan is distinct in its use of string and brass instruments, conveying an atmospheric feeling of grandeur and unity. 

4) I Got 5 On It by Michael Marshall ft. Luniz - Us (2019)

In his first film, Jordan Peele demonstrated his ability to handpick songs that were absolutely perfect for the narrative, with Get Out (2017) featuring artists such as Childish Gambino and Flanagan & Allen. In his second film, Peele truly stepped up his game by not only delivering some more iconic songs but giving one of the most haunting remixes of an R&B song I've ever heard.

I Got 5 On It, originally sung by Luniz, is remixed with a dramatic, high-pitched underscore, which elevates a formerly relaxed song to a song of panic, paranoia and frustration. This, accompanied with the scene of Adelaide and Red's (both played by Lupita Nyong'o) expertly choreographed fight, makes for both an entertaining yet nerve-wracking experience. 

This trend of taking 80s/90s songs and giving them new life is so enjoyable and I genuinely hope we see more of that in the future.

3) In the House, In a Heartbeat by John Murphy - 28 Weeks Later (2007)

This simplistic piece of music is by far one of the best examples I've seen in a horror film, period. John Murphy's In the House, In a Heartbeat begins with two piano notes, then layers that with a four-chord sequence. This builds louder and louder, eventually transgressing into electric guitar and drums, mirroring the increasingly tense scene it accompanies of Don (Robert Carlyle) abandoning his wife to flee from extremely fast zombies. 

As someone who plays music and finds interest in learning chord progressions, this track opened my eyes to the idea that a song doesn't have to have a lot of fancy notes in order to be impactful. What 28 Weeks Later (2007) does so efficiently is creating even more tension through its music, producing almost a sensory overload for the viewer. 

Don's escape scene in the first act is honestly one of the reasons that I actually favour this sequel over its predecessor film.

2) Mr. Moustafa by Alexandre Desplat - The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014)

Wes Anderson is renowned for his quirky characters, pastel backgrounds and oddly catchy music. Out of all the films he has produced thus far, however, I believe The Grand Budapest Hotel (2014) has the best soundtrack: it's fast paced, dramatic yet completely endearing. 

Much like The Two Towers, this film has musical themes for locations and chapters of the narrative, the best arguably being the Mr. Moustafa theme in which we are introduced to the titular character (played by Ralph Fiennes). It features a variety of sounds, it's pace is typical of iambic pentameter and it's playful rhythm parallels the playful nature of the character itself. 

I adore it, as I adore the film.

1) Death is the Road to Awe by Clint Mansell - The Fountain (2006)

If you're a new reader of mine, or just unaware of my top 10 films in general, then I'd like to explain that The Fountain (2006) is my favourite film of all time. It's generally regarded as one of director Darren Aronofsky's lesser films, despite it featuring A-list actors such as Hugh Jackman and Rachel Weisz, but to me I think it's more of a spiritual journey rather than purely a film.

In the third act, three timelines merge to demonstrate the acceptance of death, how grief is a valid process and how the inevitability of us dying is not always the end. This, shown through stunning, golden-toned sfx, is accompanied by Death is the Road to Awe; this is one of the first experiences I've had where a song made my heart stop, my hair stand on end, my breath shorten. It is, simply put, exquisiteness. 

There's a specific section of this track where the sound falters and then explodes into a crescendo of violins, harmonic choir voices and drums that mirrors the on-screen scene of Tom (Jackman) ascending into the galactic nebula named Xibalba (also known as the Mayan afterlife). It's dramatic, powerful, almost alien. And it's beautiful.

Honourable mentions

Of course, I didn't have room to fit all of my favourites on here, so here are also some honourable mentions:

• What's Up Danger by Blackway & Black Caviar - Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse (2018)
• Pray For Me by The Weeknd ft. Lamar - Black Panther (2018)
• Bang Bang by Will.I.Am - The Great Gatsby (2013)
• Redeemer by Jonathan Davis ft. Marilyn Manson - Queen of the Damned (2002)
• Danger Zone by Kenny Loggins - Top Gun (1986)
• Burly Brawl by Don Davis - The Matrix Reloaded (2003)
• Main Theme by Marilyn Manson - Resident Evil (2002)
• Down to Earth by Peter Gabriel - Wall-E (2008)

- K

Film Reviews: Is Neurodiversity The Punchline? [Joker, 2019]

Joker (2019)

[Reader disclaimer: there will be spoilers discussed. This piece also contains material of a sensitive nature].

Out of all of the Best Picture nominees for the 92nd Academy Awards season, I think I might be right in saying that Joker (2019) has received some of the biggest and controversial opinions from film-goers (with the exception of Jojo Rabbit (2019), of course). The film provides a new take on DC's iconic villain, depicting a man named Arthur (Joaquin Phoenix) who is essentially a struggling stand-up comedian with a neurological disorder that causes him to laugh uncontrollably, experience delusions and has difficulties with social interaction. 

I'll begin with what I found to be the good parts of this film. Firstly, if we look at technicalities alone, it looks and sounds wonderful. The cinematography, the camerawork, the musical score (maybe with the exception of Gary Glitter's song in the third act): they all equate to a very unique and distressing experience. I cannot fault it on that front. 

Credit: @themadimay_

Secondly, there are some representations of neurodiversity that don't rock the boat in terms of being harmful stereotypes. For example, the establishment of isolation that Joker experiences ("the other guys don't feel comfortable around you") and the inability to relate to people (demonstrated by a scene in which Joker observes the behaviours and social cues of people around him in his local comedy club) are very reminiscent of things that mentally ill people experience on a daily basis. We become sympathetic to this character's frustrations because we as individuals are shown a reflection of our own experiences, whether we are neurodiverse or not. 

However, Joker is (in this writer's opinion) a harmful film for representing mental illness in the way that it does. I will preface this by saying I am neurodiverse, therefore I am going to have a more biased say on this film: the things I take issue with are representations that will undoubtedly result in how others may treat me in the future. 

The entire premise of Joker is founded on this idea that a mentally unhinged man is pushed too far by the unforgivably cruel, neurotypical-driven society that surrounds him, and so he consequently has a psychotic break that leads him to murder five people within the film's runtime, beginning with three, middle-class boys that had begun beating him on a subway. 

Within the context of this scene, it's a grey area as to whether or not Joker is valid in his actions. The first two men are killed in self-defence, which can be justified, however he murders the third after running from the scene and begging to be spared. Joker then flees the crime scene and dances in a dingy, public bathroom, as if to suggest that his actions are all a performance to him and not as serious as the audience will make it out to be. In this sequence, it feels as if the film is saying that not only is a mentally ill person more capable of or inevitable in killing someone but it portrays Joker as a man who lacks empathy, contradicting earlier scenes in which we see his close relationship with his mother and his need to be liked by those around him. 

I have seen reviewers online claiming that this turning point is "haunting" or a "masterful depiction of mental illness" when, in reality, it's a blatant fetishization of a criminally insane man who has chosen to take the lives of other people (whether they deserve it or not) because he's fed up of being the bottom of the barrel. Now, as a neurodiverse person, I can agree with that sentiment: in the UK right now, funding to mental health services are being cut left and right (something also shown in Joker), and of course that's frustrating. However, that doesn't mean we're going to go out with a pistol and shoot people in the face for it. Demonstrating the flaws of the system in the film might be a realistic representation of our current society but to show it in a way that suggests that violence is the answer, or that there's no hope for the people affected by it, is irresponsible on the filmmakers' behalf.

Credit: @cigarettesenate

Another justification that the film tries to slap on you is that Joker's mother, Penny (Frances Conroy) is revealed to also be mentally ill, suffering from severe delusions and having a past of physically abusing and neglecting her son as a child. It is also revealed that Penny is not his biological mother and that she has been in Arkham Asylum numerous times. In this sense, it's almost as if Joker is suggesting that victims of child abuse are exempt from scrutiny, even if they commit heinous crimes like murder, when really a backstory like this should only provide context, not a means to his madness.

Finally, there is the climactic scene in the third act, wherein Joker attends a talk show (one which has laughed at his expense previously for his seemingly terrible stand-up material) and proudly announces that he is the one that murdered the three men on the subway, which has inadvertently started a revolution in Gotham (ironic, really, considering that Joker is the poster boy for an uprising that he doesn't even care about; "I don't believe in any of that"). 

The show's host, Murray (Robert De Niro) argues with him in a heated debate, with Joker claiming that society treats neurodiverse people poorly and then ends the segment with the joke "what do you get when you cross a mentally ill loner with a society that abandons him and treats him like trash? You get what you fucking deserve!" and murders Murray live on air. 

This is arguably the most poignant scene of the entire movie but it is also the most harmful. This entire interaction suggests that Murray's death is justified because of Joker's experiences, which it is not. Mentally ill people are not going to turn on neurotypicals and murder them because of how they've been treated; it is shown in many case studies that substance abuse largely has a direct correlation with most homicides and that mentally ill people are far more at risk to themselves than others. And to depict a division between these two types of people, to suggest that neurodiverse people are an 'Other', is enforcing this societal idea that we are different or "made wrong", or that without medication, we are more enlightened than everybody else.

I've said it once and I'll say it again: showing mentally ill people in cinema, ones with a predilection for murder, is not high art. It does nothing but portray harmful stereotypes of real people with real issues who are trying their best to navigate through a world that still sees their struggles as a taboo topic and are subjected to discrimination on the daily due to misinformation and unrealistic representation in the media (see Split (2017) for a 101 of how not to depict people with BPD). 

Credit: @catholicdad420

In a way, Joker largely tackles important issues, such as neurodiversity being shunned, capitalism and materialism being a basis for class division and kindness being integral to societal harmony. However, it does not tackle these issues in a healthy way. And I believe this is the true essence of Joker: feigning intellect but being unable to deliver it in a tangible and respectful way. As Jeremy Scott said in his recent review of Joker, "it's one of the most well-made movies I ever hated".

Overall rating: 6/10

- K

[Editor's note: Thank you all so much for being patient with me! I know I haven't posted content in a few months and that was down to personal/financial issues that I'm currently working through. I always appreciate my readership and feedback. See you again next week, hopefully!]

Ranked: Best Picture Nominees for the 92nd Academy Awards

Well ladies, gents and non-binary folks, it's that dreaded time of year again: Oscars season. Every time I walk into this dragging my feet, ready for the inevitable disappointment of my fave losing and elitists on Film Twitter™ arguing over the tiniest technicalities ("I'm telling you, you can see the motion blur!")

If you've been following me for a while, then you'll know that last year, I wrote a review for every single BP nominee. However, as proud of that as I am, I will not be doing that in future: instead, I will be posting a listing of them ranked based on my own enjoyment and critical viewing. I'd like to add a disclaimer here and say that, although these are not fully fleshed-out reviews, they will likely contain spoilers of integral plot points, so avoid reading on if you still have time to cram your viewings in!

9) Marriage Story

Directed by: Noah Baumbach

Starring: Adam Driver, Scarlett Johansson

Also nominated for: 
- Actor in a Leading Role (Adam Driver)
- Actress in a Leading Role (Scarlett Johansson)
- Actress in a Supporting Role (Laura Dern)

- Original Score (Randy Newman)
- Original Screenplay (Noah Baumbach)

At the bottom of the list, it has to be Marriage Story. When I heard this film was out on Netflix, I wondered whether or not we could be in for another Roma (2018) level of excellence to grace the streaming platform...I stopped wondering that after about ten minutes of run-time, when I promptly realised that this film was going to be nothing more than an arduous case study into a frankly over-dramatic heterosexual relationship between two, cis-gendered people living in LA. 

Yes, it's about divorce, and divorce can be a messy affair. However, this movie just felt bland and one-dimensional in every sense of the word. The infamous climax between husband, Charlie (Adam Driver) and wife, Nicole (Scarlett Johansson) is definitely a spectacle to behold but one shockingly dynamic scene does not a good movie make, otherwise we'd have to consider films like The Break-up (2006) being Oscar-worthy as well (which they're definitely not). 

If it wins Best Picture, I will set fire to every DVD I own. That's how confident I am that this has absolutely no chance of winning.

Overall rating: 5/10

8) Once Upon a Time...in Hollywood 

Directed by: Quentin Tarantino

Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Brad Pitt, Margot Robbie

Also nominated for: 

- Actor in a Leading Role (Leonardo DiCaprio)
- Actor in a Supporting Role (Brad Pitt)
- Cinematography (Robert Richardson)
- Costume Design (Arianne Phillips)

- Directing (Quentin Tarantino)
- Production Design (Barbara Ling and Nancy Haigh)
- Sound Editing (Wylie Stateman)
- Sound Mixing (Michael Minkler, Christian Minkler and Mark Ulano)
- Original Screenplay (Quentin Tarantino)

Now, some of you who know me might be surprised to see me put Tarantino so far down on the list. After all, I'm a big fan of Reservoir Dogs (1992), Pulp Fiction (1994), Inglorious Basterds (2009), and especially Django Unchained (2012): however, all of these films have something that I believe Once Upon a Time does not, and that's an interesting plot.

I have never sat down to watch a Tarantino movie and become so dejected and bored within 20 minutes that I pull out my phone to look at something else and yet there I was the other night, doing exactly that. The acting is fine, and I understand completely why Pitt is nominated for Supporting Actor, but I doubt he has a chance against Joe Pesci; I'm genuinely surprised that Margaret Qualley wasn't put up for Supporting Actress because I'd argue she has one of the best performances of the whole film.

The last act is overkill, even for Tarantino: the gratuitous violence left me disgusted, not entertained. The only nod I think this film deserves is for Sound Mixing and Sound Editing but, all in all, this really isn't Tarantino's best work and it shows. 

Overall rating: 4/10

7) Joker

Directed by: Todd Phillips

Starring: Joaquin Phoenix, Frances Conroy, Robert De Niro, Zazie Beetz

Also nominated for: 
- Actor in a Leading Role (Joaquin Phoenix)
- Cinematography (Lawrence Sher)

- Costume Design (Mark Bridges)
- Directing (Todd Phillips)
- Film Editing (Jeff Groth)
- Makeup and Hairstyling (Nicki Ledermann and Kay Georgiou)
- Original Score (Hildur Guðnadόttir)

- Sound Editing (Alan Robert Murray)
- Sound Mixing (Tom Ozanich, Dean Zupancic and Tod Maitland)
- Adapted Screenplay (Todd Phillips and Scott Silver)

I won't go too into detail with this one (keep your eyes peeled on Saturday for a fully comprehensive review) but I will say that, despite its incredible musical score and cinematography, I do not believe that Joker has a place amongst the nominees for Best Picture. It is a narcissistic, "edgy" film that tries to convey an important message in a godawful way. 

I will say that it is 99.9% likely that Phoenix nabs Best Actor for this one because he does undoubtedly put a lot into his performance and, by default, he's the best of the men currently nominated. Having said that, I wish he wasn't receiving it for playing a character whose foundations are harmful stereotypes and poor writing. 

Overall rating: 6/10

6) 1917

Directed by: Sam Mendes

Starring: Dean-Charles Chapman, George MacKay

Also nominated for:
- Cinematography (Roger Deakins)

- Directing (Sam Mendes)
- Makeup and Hairstyling (Naomi Donne, Tristan Versluis and Rebecca Cole)

- Original Score (Thomas Newman)

- Production Design (Dennis Gassner and Lee Sandales)

- Sound Editing (Oliver Tarney and Rachael Tate)

- Sound Mixing (Mark Taylor and Stuart Wilson)

- Visual Effects (Guillaume Rocheron, Greg Butler, Dominic Tuohy)

- Original Screenplay (Sam Mendes and Krysty Wilson-Cairns)

This one really caught me by surprise. Admittedly, I am not the biggest fan of war movies: I find them bleak, uninteresting and difficult to watch, though I have found in recent years that I do enjoy some, such as Fury (2014).

However, I found 1917 to be entertaining. Is it a sensational war movie? Not particularly. Does it bring anything new to the table? Well...no. But I can say that the camerawork kept me intrigued the entire time, Thomas Newman's score (which some viewers found out of place) actually worked for me and there's something to be said about the intensely human feeling this film radiates. It deserves it's nominations for Visual Effects and Production Design, the latter being a win I wouldn't find unrealistic.

Overall rating: 7/10

5) The Irishman

Directed by: Martin Scorsese

Starring: Robert De Niro, Joe Pesci, Al Pacino

Also nominated for:
- Actor in a Supporting Role (Al Pacino and Joe Pesci)
- Cinematography (Rodrigo Prieto)
- Costume Design (Sandy Powell and Christopher Peterson)

- Directing (Martin Scorsese)
- Film Editing (Thelma Schoonmaker)

- Production Design (Bob Shaw and Regina Graves)

- Visual Effects (Pablo Helman, Leandro Estebecorena, Nelson Sepulveda-Fauser and Stephane Grabli)

- Adapted Screenplay (Steven Zaillian)

I think, if The Irishman hadn't been nominated, there would have been a Joker-esque uprising in the form of avid film-goers frothing at the mouth and slamming their heads straight into their keyboards. So, it makes sense that it's up for Best Picture because, let's be honest: it's Martin Scorsese. The man is a legend.

In terms of the actual plot, I enjoyed The Irishman. I watched it back-to-back with Goodfellas (1990) first because I wanted to see how a) the actors' CGI holds up in comparison to actual footage of their younger selves and b) I liked the idea of having a Scorsese double bill to really get into that gangster movie mindset.

The acting in this film is so damn good, as expected: so good, in fact, two actors from the film are up for Supporting Actor (Al Pacino and Joe Pesci). If Pesci doesn't win it, I'll be absolutely shocked. He stole the show in every scene, truly embodied his character and delivered some of the best pieces of dialogue.

The only big issue I had with The Irishman is its pacing. For a Scorsese film, one that is expected to be at least three hours long, I was disappointed to find that it dropped the ball in places. I wouldn't say I ever experienced boredom but the momentum of certain scenes definitely slowed to a snail's pace and became a bit arduous to watch. It won't win Best Picture but it's certainly a wonderful film, one that truly reflects Scorsese's talents.

Overall rating: 7/10

4) Jojo Rabbit 

Directed by: Taika Waititi

Starring: Roman Griffin Davis, Scarlett Johansson, Taika Waititi, Sam Rockwell

Also nominated for:
- Actress in a Supporting Role (Scarlett Johansson)
- Costume Design (Mayes C. Rubeo)

- Film Editing (Tom Eagles)

- Production Design (Ra Vincent and Nora Sopková)

- Adapted Screenplay (Taika Waititi)

When I heard about this film, I was immediately sceptical. Satire, especially within our political climate, is a touchy subject: offended critics are more commonplace now than tumbleweeds in the Film subreddit threads. So, it came as a pleasant surprise to me when I sat down to watch this film and found it to perfectly balance comedy and tragedy, considering it's set in Nazi Germany.

I'm glad this earned itself a spot amongst the other nominees because I think, if judged purely on face value, it would've been overlooked. Nazism, something that has resurged in recent years, is something that we don't particularly want to see on our big screens, especially if it's coming from filmmakers trying to justify the use of them. But given that Waititi himself is a Polynesian, Jewish man playing Hitler (which he describes in various interviews as being the ultimate "fuck you" to Hitler and the Nazis' legacy), it's safe to say that there is no point in Jojo Rabbit where that part of history is celebrated (moreover it is parodied, mocked and harshly berated, as it should be).

Not surprisingly, it hasn't been nominated for a great deal of categories (despite the performances being hilarious) but I will say that if ScarJo is going to have to win something, I'd rather she get her award for her supporting role in Jojo than her lead role in Marriage Story.

Overall rating: 8/10

3) Ford v Ferrari

Directed by: James Mangold

Starring: Matt Damon, Christian Bale, Caitriona Balfe

Also nominated for: 

- Film Editing (Michael McCusker and Andrew Buckland)
- Sound Editing (Donald Sylvester)
- Sound Mixing (Paul Massey, David Giammarco and Steven. A Morrow)

It will probably come as a complete shock to a few of you that I put "that car movie" at number three on my ranked list. It came as a shock to me too, if I'm honest. I went into this knowing nothing about the film and only having a sub-par interest in Ford or Ferrari as companies (my favourite sports car is made by Volkswagen, for Christ's sake).

However, this film has such heart: tonally, it felt like a warm, nostalgic hug from your gearhead dad. The writing is cliché in places, and despite it being biographical, it is predictable. But I found myself not caring about the technicalities, which was a first for me. I've been watching and analysing all of these films but for Ford v Ferrari, I just sat back and enjoyed the ride, really unphased by all of its technical flaws.

The fact that Christian Bale was not nominated for Supporting Actor is an absolute oversight on the committee's behalf. Sure, it was no Pesci performance, but it was damn good. If anything, I'll be even more shocked if this doesn't get Sound Mixing because the sound of this film was sensational.

To be frank, the only reason Ford v Ferrari secured it's position at number three on this list is that I liked it ever so slightly more than Jojo Rabbit: otherwise both of them would be tied for third place.

Overall rating: 8/10

2) Little Women

Directed by: Greta Gerwig

Starring: Saoirse Ronan, Emma Watson, Florence Pugh, Eliza Scanlen

Also nominated for:
- Actress in a Leading Role (Saoirse Ronan)
- Actress in a Supporting Role (Florence Pugh)
- Costume Design (Jacqueline Durran)
- Original Score (Alexandre Duplat)

- Adapted Screenplay (Greta Gerwig)

What can I say? I like women in period clothing: my love of The Favourite (2018) should've been a clear indicator of that.

Little Women, as both a concept and a story, has been done ten times over. I have seen two other adaptations and I have read the original source material. And guess what? This is the best version of the book I have ever seen. It's dramatic, it's funny, it's poignant, every single female actress is stellar...it cannot be faulted.

There is only one issue with this nominee and that is that it's somehow in the Best Picture category and not the Directing one as well. The Academy have already come under fire in the last decade for their dismissal of female directors (with only two being nominated since 2010 and only five in the history of the Oscars), so their exclusion of Gerwig is, to say the very least, appalling. It makes me wonder whether her biting social commentary throughout the film, lecturing men on their inability to recognise women as their equals, bruised some male egos at the Academy.

Overall rating: 9/10

1) Parasite

Directed by: Bong Joon Ho

Starring: Kang-ho Song, So-dam Park, Woo-sik Choi, Jeong-eun Lee

Also nominated for: 

- Directing (Bong Joon Ho)
- Film Editing (Yang Jinmo)
- International Feature Film

- Production Design (Lee Ha Jun and Cho Won Woo)

- Original Screenplay (Bong Joon Ho and Han Jin Won)

I should not have to explain the reason why Parasite is on the top of the list but, for those of you who haven't seen it yet, here's why: it is amazing. Gorgeous cinematography, great acting (despite none of them getting a nomination for it), darkly comical yet intense and overall a fucking great viewing.

This film has such a threatening yet entertaining aura about it: basically the antithesis of Ford v Ferrari. And it works. It has the pleasantness of Okja (2017) and the potency of Snowpiercer (2013). The fact that it's up for International Feature Film and Best Picture is a clear sign that the Academy is making some improvements; in 92 years of the Oscars, only 10 films have ever been nominated for both of these categories.

It would make history to see Parasite win, though it's very clear that the Oscars needs a film like Parasite whereas the case is not the same vice versa: I very much doubt Joon Ho requires the approval of a bunch of white American men, as he clearly knows his worth and is very dedicated to his craft. Having said that, this is my pick for Best Picture and I will be crying tears of shame once again if it doesn't win.

Overall rating: 8/10

- K

Film Reviews: Disturbingly Fun Nostalgia [Toys, 1992]

Toys (1992)

[Reader disclaimer: there will be spoilers discussed. This piece also contains material of a mature nature].

We all have films we think fondly of, especially those that inspire nostalgia within us. Most of you probably have a soft spot for the Disney renaissance, with The Lion King (1994) at the forefront. Some of you might remember such gems as Matilda (1996) or The Parent Trap (1998) remake.

When I was a kid, I watched a lot of different kinds of films, but they weren't usually tailored for children. There is one kid's film I remember, though: Toys (1992). I happen to own it, so I popped it on to relive my childhood, delve deep into the nostalgia of yet another classic performance by the late Robin Williams. What I ended up discovering was that this film, a film apparently aimed at children, is one of the craziest things I've ever seen. 

The premise is as follows: the owner of a toy factory (Donald O'Connor) dies and leaves his company to his military-based brother, Leland (Michael Gambon) because his son, Leslie (Robin Williams) and daughter, Alsatia (Joan Cusack) are not yet mature enough to run the business by themselves. Leland begins to incorporate war toys into the company's schemes in an attempt to relive his glory days, thus endangering the company and everyone in it, and so Leslie tries to thwart his attempts in order to save the future of toys.

Now, the one thing I vividly remembered about this film, confirmed by rewatching it, is that the set design and cinematography of Toys is absolutely awe-inspiring. The filmmakers took inspiration from René Magritte's paintings and created surrealist (and sometimes disturbing) imagery to truly capture a feeling of childlike imagination, paralleled by Leslie and Alsatia's characters. The vibrant palettes, varying sizes of props and the accompaniment of music from the likes of Tori Amos and Enya made for a bizarre viewing experience, something akin to that of Wes Anderson or Melanie Martinez: it felt innocent yet also vaguely threatening. 

What I didn't remember was the completely bonkers story line of Leland's essentially fascist regime of recruiting child soldiers to pilot toy planes and relive his glory days as an established militant general, depicting him as an unhinged Vietnam war veteran who slowly starts to lose his grip on reality. Leland's ideology of the military's future is for it to be affordable but also incorporate the concept of "warfare without a conscience", showing that his time fighting has robbed him of a moral compass. Again, this is a kid's film but go off, I guess.

Leland builds toys (some of which resemble something out of Mike Trim's War of the World sketchbook) and programmes behind restricted doors and begins to alienate himself from everybody else. Towards the end of the film, he even attempts to murder his own son.

Then there's Alsatia's character. As a kid, I remember her being an odd addition to the gang but finding her quirks endearing. As an adult, you can see that she is clearly coded to be autistic, which doesn't sit well when you consider that, contextually, Alsatia is actually a robot. 

Joan Cusack's performance conveys stereotypical traits of autism, such as abnormal speech behaviours and an intense focus for certain things: her brother never considers this to be odd due to knowing her true nature as something that is non-human, however, her uncle constantly berates her for her behaviour, referring to her as a "loony". In retrospect, these scenes are uncomfortable to watch and make you question why the writers of the film wrote her to be this way, as if to suggest there is a correlation between autistic behaviour and engineered programming (in other words, implying that autistic people are the "Other"). 

On the subject of writing, I had to research the certification for this film because there were far more adult jokes in this than I'd remembered. According to IMDb, it's a PG-13 (simply PG by the BBFC) due to "language and sensuality"; the words "big cock" and the phrase "war is the domain of a small penis" were included in this film and I don't know what I'd classify that as other than...gross.

There is a scene where Leland unnecessarily rambles on about how he can't achieve an American accent. There is a scene wherein Leslie and Gwen (Robin Wright) start 'doing the do' and some soldiers are listening in on them moaning. There is a scene where Leland almost lets Leslie be murdered by an aquatic war machine "to see if it works". 

As the credits rolled on Toys, I was left with a singular thought: who is this movie for? Surely it's wildly inappropriate for children but it's also extraordinarily weird for adults as well. Also the question remains, what is this film? It starts off as some outlandish and eccentric adventure which turns into a social drama and then the third act arrives with a Game of Thrones-esque battle scene of toys (which results in the massacre of all our fluffy, childhood friends). In the end, I can't help but classify Toys as some kind of horror-inspired anti-war film, though I think it's beyond labels at this point.

Would I recommend watching this? For curiosity's sake, sure. I'm glad I revisited Toys but I doubt I'll be sitting down to watch it again: if I'm looking for Williams in the 90s, I'll go for some Bicentennial Man (1999).

Overall rating: 5/10

- K