Having a bit more spare time on my hands than usual and with no new films of any note to take a look at, I decided to make a list of films I’ve been meaning to see, but haven’t got around to watching and choose a few from it to finally watch. This film, 1994’s Chungking Express, directed by Hong Kong film director Wong Kar-wai is acclaimed, particularly by Quentin Tarantino, who said when he first saw it that he ‘started crying’ as he was ‘just so happy to love a movie this much’. Watching the film, you can see why it appeals to Tarantino so much, it’s got a nice smooth pace to it, as well as a catchy soundtrack and sharp dialogue. It’s always strange going into a film that does have that level of acclaim attached to it, as you’re not always sure what to expect. As such, I went into this film with an open mind, not looking at any further reviews, plot synopsis or trailers for it, instead letting the film make it’s impression on me as it went along.

The film contains two separate stories, although both are set within the same area and are thematically linked. The first story follows a policeman still hurting from a breakup who encounters a woman while out drowning his sorrows, unaware that she is a drug dealer. The second story, which seemed to take up a larger portion of the film, is about another policeman, also going through a breakup, who begins to fall for a snack bar worker. Both stories deal with the heartache, loneliness and confusion that can begin to take hold once a relationship falls apart. Although the film features a lot of humorous moments and exchanges, there’s also a lot of introspection here as we dig into the character’s thoughts and feelings. In this sense, the film hits quite emotionally and feels quite naturalistic too, with a more urban and grounded focus a lot of the time on how these sorts of situations affect people. It focuses on the mundane parts of a breakup, the loss of routine and the quieter moments that can almost feel like a loss of identity.

One way in which Wong Kar-wai does this is through his portrayal of time. In the film he uses a technique where he speeds up everything around a character, but slows down the character themselves to impress upon the viewer how that character is experiencing time at that moment. This helps to tie into the feeling of the loss of routine after a breakup and whilst it is visually impressive, every time he implements it, there is always a narrative reason for doing it. Time is a central theme in Chungking Express, with characters either having too much or not enough of it. But much like a breakup, whilst they stand still, the world around them moves on. Dutch angles are also used frequently within the film, again fitting in narratively to put the viewer inside the head space of a character. Looking back at the film, the narrative itself is not overly complex and in the hands of another director, it may not have worked, but every technique Wong Kar-wai uses here helps to make the film a brilliant form of visual storytelling, which ultimately is what separates a good film and a great one.

Music is also used as a recurring motif, with the most notable use being of The Mama’s and Papa’s ‘California Dreamin” in the second story, along with a Cantonese cover of The Cranberries ‘Dreams’ by Faye Wong, one of the actresses in the film. Both of these help to characterise Wong’s character, also named Faye and her desire to escape and travel beyond her current situation. A lot of films do use recognisable songs in their soundtrack, some to good effect and some to bad effect. Some films, for example, Suicide Squad, use popular songs on their soundtrack to create a sense of recognition, but they fail to link to any key themes or ideas that the film presents. The best use of them is when they relate to the themes of a film and the characters within them, as they do here. As well as relating to Faye herself, the songs also help to relate to some aspects of her relationship with the policeman. It expresses the idea that their relationship may well be doomed due to the daydreaming nature of Wong’s character. Again, linking to Tarantino’s own enjoyment of Chungking Express, this is something that he has taken on in his own films, even using a cover of ‘California Dreamin” in his film Once Upon A Time In Hollywood.

I’m a huge fan of films that manage to replicate a feeling or emotion. For example, I love horror films that can build up a sense of tension and anxiety. With films about romance, I love the type that replicates how real life relationships feel and how troubles within them affect both of the people involved. Chungking Express does this to an almost scary level and even though there are a few aspects that are slightly quirky, at it’s core there’s a lot here that’s relatable for myself, as I’m sure there will be for many others too. The way in which it displays certain aspects of breakups is incredibly intimate, there was one scene in particular in the first story where the policeman does something, which I won’t spoil, out of complete desperation and loneliness. This scene manages to be both funny and desperately sad at the same time, again, one of the things that impresses me is the ability to mix tones, because that’s how real life plays out. If it had been an overly sombre or overly comical look at these themes, it wouldn’t have hit anywhere near the levels that it does, but the film has a particular style that makes it incredibly enticing.

Chungking Express is quite rightly considered a classic. It’s a beautifully bittersweet film with characters that draw you in. When the film ended, I found myself wanting to know more about what happened to the characters next, whilst at the same time not doing, due to the realistic nature of how relationships are treated in the film. Out of the two stories, the second resonated with me more, mainly due to the connection between the policeman and the snack bar worker feeling more built up and therefore creating a stronger emotional feeling at the key points in their story. The acting performances from the four main actors, Takeshi Kaneshiro, Brigitte Lin, Tony Leung and Faye Wong really help to work towards crafting these characters and as much as Wong Kar-Wai’s writing and directing is a huge part of making this film work, as well as the cinematography, the actor’s work in making these characters endearing at the heart of it help to elevate the film to another level. This is one I’d highly recommend.

Overall rating – 🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟/5

After two attempts to start a cinematic universe with Dracula Untold and Tom Cruise’s The Mummy, Universal, much like DC did with Joker, decided to take a step back from this approach and instead move towards a more standalone, small scale style. This led to the involvement of Blumhouse Productions, along with the Upgrade director Leigh Whannell, both skilled at getting the most out of smaller budgets, in the production of The Invisible Man. Together, along with an incredible performance from lead actress Elizabeth Moss, they deliver a thrilling, exciting sci-fi horror film which takes on a classic story in an intriguing way.

When her abusive ex-boyfriend Adrian Griffin kills himself after she leaves him, Cecilia is surprised to discover that he has left her a huge fortune in his will. Her surprise turns to fear as she becomes convinced that Adrian, a world-renowned optics scientist, is actually still alive and has managed to find a way to turn himself invisible. This leads to a struggle to convince those around her of the situation, which adds to the sense of paranoia as well as the contrast with the real-life domestic abuse victims who often struggle for support after being open about their experiences. For me, this is when horror films are at their most powerful, when they feed on our primal fears and tie into the terrors that occur in reality.

The links to the themes of domestic abuse and mental illness are treated with respect by the film, mostly through the strength of Moss’ performance. She plays a woman shattered by her experiences, on edge and fragile, although she never becomes a caricature, still displaying signs of the person she used to be before the trauma that she has been through. With the history of how horror films have sometimes exploited serious issues, it was refreshing to see those handled more thoughtfully and carefully here. The film does still have a sense of fun to it and allows itself to be free to go all out with it’s idea of The Invisible Man, which is an impressive balance. The overall concept is of course inherently a little silly, but then the film uses this to it’s advantage in the narrative – who could possibly believe Cecilia in her conviction that her ex-boyfriend has mastered the power of invisibility? Even still, the film does come up with a fairly grounded reason for this in-universe, showing that this did come into their thinking during the filmmaking process. Being able to make this film and include those themes whilst still allowing the sci-fi elements to be prominent within it takes a lot of work and it pays off in a strong way.

Leigh Whannell’s direction and the camera work within the film is masterful and it leads to some incredibly tense sequences, where you are almost put into the mind of Cecilia, unsure as to what is truly going on and where the Invisible Man is at all times. With a budget of seven million dollars, the film rests upon the technical skills of the filmmakers and in a way this is a perfect film to make on a smaller budget, as a lot of it revolves around what you can’t see, rather than what you can. The way the camera moves around the space, hinting at where The Invisible Man might be is a really interesting way of ramping up the tension and I feel as though this will add to the rewatchability of the film, trying to spot where he might be in different scenes. The use of sound within the film, both diegetic and non-diegetic is really effective as well, always making you feel uneasy, especially in the opening sequence where the absence of sound makes any slight sound that does occur stand out a lot more. The use of space and sound in horror films is sometimes that massively appeals to me, for instance when talking about The Lighthouse, or Doctor Sleep, so it was great to see it done well here.

As the film does progress, it can feel like the genre switches a little from horror to thriller, which can feel slightly jarring at first, although I can understand why that was done and you quickly becomes used to it. Even though the tense sequences of build up to The Invisible Man playing around with Cecilia are brilliantly done, I feel as though they could have almost gotten to be too much if the film had continued in that type of vein. As someone who is sceptical about horror films though, the horror elements within this film are absolutely done right. One of the elements I usually don’t like is the over use of jump scares, they can often feel cheap and as though they are being used as a replacement for genuine filmmaking techniques that can make a horror film genuinely memorable. Here though, the jump scares do feel earned when they come, mainly because of how inventive they are and how organic they feel within the scenes when they occur. The plot and story are strong as well, constantly keeping you gripped with various twists and turns, there were a lot of points where I was unsure where the narrative was going, which left me feeling surprised, sometimes in a brutal fashion, adding to that horror film feel even more.

The Invisible Man is an excellent approach to breathing new life into the concept of one of the classic Universal Monsters. It manages to give the story a modern update, whilst also keeping the focus on what makes the idea of The Invisible Man both scary and formidable. It would be great to see a few of the other monsters, such as Dracula and The Wolfman, receive a similar type of treatment. What needs to be remembered is that these stories have been told many times over and that for them to still resonate as strongly whilst being original, creativity and inventiveness is needed to look at them in a different way. In a strange way, the failure of the big budget approach has led to a return to the drawing board which has actually made these films way more interesting. I can’t wait to see what comes next.

Overall rating – 🌟🌟🌟🌟/5

Stories based upon real-life events can be both incredibly gripping and important at the same time. On seeing the trailer for Dark Waters, directed by Todd Haynes, I was immediately pulled in through the promise and potential of the plot. These types of films, when done right, can help to bring serious issues to the forefront of the public consciousness and there is always a tightrope to walk in making them dramatically interesting whilst at the same time not letting this overwhelm the serious aspects of the issues being portrayed. In terms of dramatically interesting, this doesn’t mean turning the situation into a Hollywood spectacle, but rather looking into where the dynamics are in the narrative and using them to make the story the most powerful it can be and remaining true to the facts at the same time.

Dark Waters is a film about Robert Bilott, played here with a great amount of intensity by Mark Ruffalo, a corporate lawyer for chemical companies who becomes conflicted after being approached by a client to look into American company DuPont in relation to the amount of pollution they are knowingly adding to the water supply. After beginning to research more into the case, Bilott becomes determined to take on DuPont in a seemingly unwinnable case and the film follows his effort across the years to expose their unethical practises. Even from the brief synopsis, the real life intrigue as well as the intrigue ready to be delved into cinematically is evident, we have the potential redemption arc from his role as a defendant for the companies who then turns to work against them, as well as the always appealing narrative of the underdog taking on the corporate giant in a courtroom battle.

You can tell from the performance from Ruffalo that this is a story that means a lot to him and he gives an urgent, at times desperate performance as a man under a lot of stress and pressure. His character arc isn’t as well crafted as it could be, a little more build up and justification for his decision to switch sides on the chemical companies issue would have helped to identify with his character a little more. Anne Hathaway plays Bilott’s wife Sarah, performing well as always and although efforts are made to show how Bilott’s battle against DuPont is taking it’s toll on his family as well as him, the results of this are fairly mixed, as the family drama pales in comparison to the scale of the legal battle and the discovery of the heights that the pollution levels DuPont has inflicted on the local communities has reached. A lot of the performances apart from Ruffalo’s are toned down, obviously purposefully to maintain that realistic tone, but they can sometimes feel more muted than they need to be.

As the story is told quite competently, it often feels like as though the creativity in telling it has been somewhat stifled. The direction and cinematography is never particularly flashy or showy. It could be argued that this isn’t needed for a film like this, but due to it’s style, the themes don’t feel as if they’re delved into any deeper than at the surface level and this leads to the emotional hits later on in the film not landing as strongly as they might have done. Whilst the narrative is about the real life case, it is also about the story of Robert Bilott, why he felt such a connection and a need to take on the pressure of the case. We get this in small doses, but ultimately a lot more was needed in the build up to get across the scale of the incident and the effect that it was having upon everyone involved. A lot of the film can feel expository and by the end, it feels as though it is skipping through a lot of major points in the story, feeling as though you are reading a Wikipedia entry on the case, rather than watching a film about it.

As I previously said, it can be a challenge to tell a real life story, especially one that’s quite political, while keeping in mind that film is a visual medium and should be treated as such. There’s so much more that can be done to elevate a story from being interesting to also being visually engaging. Having said that, the film is certainly not shot poorly, it’s shot well enough, the acting is solid and it managed to keep me engaged throughout, purely on the basis of the intrigue of the story alone. The film has been described as a political thriller, although the thriller elements are quite minimal in truth. It is more of a drama, fairly slow moving, taking you through the timeline of this investigation. The real heart of the film is the engagement with the idea of corporate companies and how they wear people down, the attrition like approach they take to cases and the amount of money they can pour into them that makes the battle feel near impossible. We see real life people from the events appear in the film which I thought was a really nice touch, it just would’ve been nice to see more of that type of thing.

Despite a lot of the flaws with Dark Waters, this is still an incredibly vital story that needs to be watched and shared. It is a solid film, there was just the potential for so much more if the script had been stronger and the direction had been a little more creative. After all, the better the film is, the more it’s going to be discussed and the more the message is going to get out there. The facts, of course, should remain largely the same in a whistle-blower type film like this, but that shouldn’t necessarily hold the film back in terms of creativity. That is and always should be open to be experimented with when it comes to film.

Overall rating – 🌟🌟🌟/5

Steve Coogan teams up with writer-director Michael Winterbottom once again, this time bringing us a satire mostly based upon, although never explicitly stated, British businessman Sir Philip Green. Green is the chairman of Arcadia Group, which includes a list of retailers such as Topshop, Dorothy Perkins and Burton, to name but a few. He came in for criticism due to his role in the downfall of BHS, as well as his general controversial behaviour and exploitation of sweatshops, leading to calls for him to be stripped of his knighthood.

Here though, as the portrayal is a lot more veiled, Coogan plays a character named Sir Richard McCreadie, with Greed mainly focusing on the build up to his 60th birthday party. Intertwined with this, we also get flashbacks to his earlier life, along with the attempts of journalist Nick, played by David Mitchell, to build up a biographical profile of McCreadie’s life. The rest of the cast list is seriously impressive, with Isla Fisher, Shirley Henderson, Asa Butterfield and Sophie Cookson rounding out the rest of the McCreadie family. There are also a few celebrity cameos throughout the film as McCreadie tries to tempt them into appearing as his party to boost his reputation and some of these are the comedic highlights of the film.

Coogan gives a brilliant and convincing performance as an unpleasant, self-centred man and yet he still manages to carry that sense of charisma that makes it believable enough that he would appeal to other people to the point of having them onside. This is a really difficult line to walk and if he had gone too far in either direction, it could potentially have come across as too much, but this is perfect casting and he carries the film in some parts. The acting all round is pretty solid, David Mitchell essentially plays himself as a nervous, awkward journalist, something he readily admits in interviews, but that every man, relatable aspect of his character becomes absolutely key as the story progresses. Dinita Gohil as Amanda, part of McCreadie’s planning team for the party, also becomes more important and involved as the film goes on and I liked her performance here too. A special mention also goes to Sophie Cookson, who I’m most familiar with from Kingsman, who gives a great comedic performance as McCreadie’s daughter Lily, who stars in a reality TV show on the level of TOWIE/Made In Chelsea and the parts with her in the film satirise these types of shows really well.

The humour here can sometimes be a little hit and miss, but it lands for the most part and lands effectively. Coogan is a well-established comedic legend and he brings a lot of energy to the film. The soundtrack is also great, as you’d expect from the director of 24 Hour Party People, there are loads of upbeat tunes that make an appearance throughout that really add to the film. The narrative in Greed also managed to surprise me, at one point in the middle of the film I thought I had a grasp on it, but as it moved towards the end, it did manage to surprise me and stray away from being anywhere near predictable, this was something that impressed me about the film, in that it wasn’t afraid to push into the realms of ridiculousness as a satire. A few satire type films can be afraid to go the full way and hold back a little bit, removing the point of them being a satire in the first place, but Greed can’t really be accused of that, from a narrative standpoint anyway.

Where the film isn’t as strong is perhaps in the delivery of it’s overall message. There are really two main themes going on here, the first being the examination of McCreadie and the questionable morality of how his businesses operate and the second being the refugee crisis. These are both incredibly serious and complex subjects which even within the realm of a satire need to be explored and given the time and respect that they deserve. However, it can feel like at points in the film both of these themes sort of clash with each other and even though the signs are there for a link to be made between the two, it never really is. Along with this, the two characters who become crucial to the plot in Asa Butterfield’s Finn and the aforementioned Amanda, never really get the development needed early on in the film, with this time instead being shared with other characters. With the film not being particularly long at around 1hr 45 minutes, there could have been a call to either cut some more unnecessary parts to make time for these characters and themes or make the film a little longer to allow for this too. If this had been done I feel like the film would have been a lot more powerful and it’s messages would have hit home even more than they already do.

Greed is a solid film, with a lot of enjoyable moments and lively sequences. It can at times though, feel like a film with a lot of good ideas with some never being fully realised to their full potential. Satire has been and can be an incredibly powerful tool, it uses absurdity to remind us of and evoke real world concepts and events. What it does do most strongly here is to show the detachment of those with a ridiculous amount of money from reality, however with a little more development and streamlining of themes, this could have gone from a good film to a great film. As it is, it’s probably worth watching just due to the cast, direction and editing which help to add extra energy to the film and give it enough strong points to carry it through.

Overall rating – 🌟🌟🌟/5

Failure has become a dirty word. It’s something that a lot of people don’t want to talk about, something that gets swept under the rug and yet it’s the one thing that every single one of us has in common. Everyone, especially including myself, has failed at one point or another and been forced to react to it. Losing isn’t pleasant, it takes you to some of your darkest places and a lot of the time it seems like you’re going to be stuck in those places forever. The idea of failure and what we can learn from it, how we react to it, has been playing on my mind for a while, but Tyson Fury’s victory in the rematch vs. Deontay Wilder brought it back to the forefront of my mind again.

Tyson Fury previously beat Wladimir Klitschko to win the WBA, IBF, WBO, IBO, Ring magazine and lineal heavyweight championship in 2015, to the shock of a lot of boxing experts, he was accomplished at British level, but due to his weight and perceived poor defensive tactics, it was seen as unlikely that he could win against Klitschko, an established and highly rated champion at world level. For Tyson though, this was the start of a fall into addiction and mental health struggles, two issues that had been there under the surface, but had been fully uncovered by reaching the highest of highs. In the build up to a planned rematch with Klitschko, Fury seemed far removed from his usual self, seeming disinterested, tired and in one concerning pre-fight face to face, alluding to suicidal thoughts. In a later interview with the Rolling Stone magazine, Fury would go on to say ‘I hope I die every day.’ After a postponement and a charge from the UK anti-doping agency for cocaine use, as well as concerns over Fury’s weight gain, he vacated the world titles won against Klitschko, before having his boxing license suspended by the British Boxing Board of Control. Out of boxing, struggling with depression and gaining weight to the point of being 28 and a half stone, Fury became a figure of fun in some of the nastier British tabloids.

A lot of people doubted Fury’s ability to come back, especially the man who he’d eventually go on to take the heavyweight title off, Deontay Wilder. This was something that helped to bring Tyson back from the brink. It’s hard to summarise the incredible size of his comeback here, how many mountains had to be climbed for Fury to lose all that weight, get his license back and step back into the ring again. I’d encourage anyone who hasn’t already to look deeper into his story – it’s fascinating. He worked incredibly hard on all aspects of himself over a gruelling amount of time, but he did it. After two and a half years out of the ring, Fury came back, with a warm up fight against Sefer Seferi on an undercard fight at the Manchester Arena. Only one fight after that, Fury was fighting Wilder for the heavyweight title in LA, a fight many believed Fury to have won, but it was declared a draw. In the 12th round of that fight, Fury was sent to the canvas with two clean punches from Wilder, but got back to his feet to deny the American the win. Then, in the rematch on February the 22nd 2020, Fury went out, dominated Wilder with an aggressive, positive performance and stopped him in the seventh round to reclaim the WBC heavyweight title. Fury had done it, he’d come back after being written off by many and after struggling with the toughest of battles. His story is a reminder that nothing is ever done, every situation can be turned around and that even in the darkest of circumstances, there can always be hope. His victory wasn’t only in the ring, he also seems more comfortable with himself and more able to deal with his mental demons. Depression never goes away, but he now seems better equipped to deal with those darker moments when they come.

It seems like a lot of the time in today’s culture, failing at something publicly means that you’re done, finished or ‘cancelled’. But this simply isn’t a healthy way to live your life. Like I said earlier, every single one of us has, or will fail at some point. Failure is just part of the learning process, it’s how you get better, every huge victory is the result of a lot of losses, often times losses that have come in private, losses that have led to frustration, anger and self doubt. With a lot of negative emotions, the best thing to do isn’t to ignore them, but rather to learn how to process them in a healthy way. You have to deal with them, but not dwell on them and let them consume you to the point where they’re having a heavy, detrimental effect.

For me, I hit a big personal loss towards the end of last year and I didn’t have a clue what to do. I tried to ignore it for a while, pretend that everything was fine and just shove past it. But you can’t do that, everything you try to bottle up just comes along later on, in a much more forced and aggressive manner. The result of bottling it up hit me hard, sending me into some really low moods and pushing a lot of self-doubt into my mind. I found that it was a lot easier to try and look at it in a rational way – what had happened? What could I have done better? Even still, was there anything I could have done better? Sometimes a perceived failure isn’t even down to your actions, it’s just all down to circumstances or outside influences. The best way is to look at it is from situation to situation and deal with it from there, recognise what happened, take what you can from it and try to push on. You shouldn’t try to force yourself to forget it, failures are part of us all and part of the journey. I found everything much easier once I’d opened up, spoken about it and began accepting that what happened had happened.

I think as people we all need to become more comfortable with the idea of failure and losing. This doesn’t mean not caring, not in the slightest, instead it means looking at what you can and can’t change. Frustration and upset is natural, but it can then be harmful if these feelings stick around for way too long. It can be hard sometimes, especially if you’re a pretty harsh self-critic. The media and social media can both contribute to this a lot. Very few people are going to share their moments of defeat publicly and with good reason, but it’s important to remember that we all have them. Social media can be a strange place when you’re at a low point, because a lot of it can lead to comparing your life to others, when it’s not an accurate representation, so it can sometimes do some good to pull away for it slightly and put things into perspective. The media in Britain forms bizarre narratives out of winners and losers, where it’s framed as if those who lose just disappear and become irrelevant, but life doesn’t work in such a simple way, it’s more complex. There’s no such thing as rises and falls in the way that they’re usually depicted, life isn’t a film. Life is a constant rise and fall and once you become accustomed to that, losing hits you way less hard and allows you to focus on the next chance to succeed.

Ultimately, no feeling is final and no situation in life is permanent. Sometimes the brain has a funny way of making you feel like it is, but it’s not the case. Where would most of the people you know in life be if they’d given up after a perceived failure? Where would Tyson Fury be? As a kid, I used to write a lot of stories and scripts, probably at least two or three short stories a week, just for fun, because I was really into my writing. As I got older, I found I was more inclined towards starting up a story or a script and then quitting as I got halfway, or even a quarter of the way through. When I was younger, I had no worries about whether what I was doing was good, or shit, I was just going for it, but as you get older, you do become more self aware and too much of it can hold you back. You can start thinking all the time instead of actually taking any action. The only way you ever get experience or progress is by practising your craft and fear of failure can hinder this massively. So now, I’m trying to mix both approaches, having that more mature analytical approach, accepting that’s part of growing up but also trying to keep that fearlessness I had as a kid. I know I’ll probably fail a load more times in the future, but I’m okay with that now. Because I know through that failure, I’ll end up somewhere great. We all will.

Going into Birds of Prey, directed by Cathy Yan, (I’m absolutely not typing out the longer title!), I was pretty hopeful for an entertaining film. Margot Robbie seemed really enthusiastic about getting this film done and the trailers made it look like a solid comic book film. Ewan McGregor also seemed to be having a lot of fun in the trailers as the villain Black Mask. Although the links to Suicide Squad were there, a film that for many was incredibly messy and over-stylised, there was a feeling that this would be slightly more toned down, while still very much being a part of that type of world, giving us a more coherent film that still felt linked to the film it was a spin-off from.

The film, for the most part, does actually deliver on this. While the film is called Birds of Prey, it is mostly centred around Harley Quinn, with the Birds of Prey playing supporting roles, so much so that the title in the US has now been changed to Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey. The story for the film is about Harley Quinn breaking up with The Joker, which sets her onto the path of getting involved with a stolen diamond, wanted by Black Mask, who with Harley and The Joker now separate, sees an opportunity to get his revenge on Harley without repercussion. As a bargain for her life, Harley agrees to retrieve the diamond for Black Mask, which puts her on a collision course with Cassandra Cain, Renee Montoya, Black Canary and Huntress. What appealed to me about this story is the way that it’s fairly small scale and allows for more character time and development for Harley, played really well by Margot Robbie. She manages at times to inject a sense of vulnerability into quite a naturally over-exaggerated character. The low-key aspect of the story also allows for smaller scale villains, such as Black Mask and Victor Zsasz, played by Ewan McGregor and Chris Messina, to shine and they’re both an incredibly entertaining pair to watch on screen.

Two things I really liked about Birds of Prey was the action and the set designs. Cathy Yan does a great job at directing the film, although as a relative newcomer, only having directed one feature film before this, Chad Stahelski of John Wick fame came in to oversee the action scenes on this, something I think is an excellent idea. The action scenes in this film are incredibly well choreographed, you can see every bit of action that goes on, with no shaky cam or blur to distract the viewer from it. The action at times is incredibly over the top graphic, which only helps to add to the comic book feel that is being embraced here. The set design is really impressive, especially during the end sequence, the main thing that sticks in my mind is the colours used, they’re bright enough to add that sense of style to the world being created, whilst not being too garish that they distract away from what’s going on. In Birds of Prey, there seems to be a more comfortable sense that this is a comic book film and it feels like everyone involved is relaxed and having a lot more fun with it. Along with the aforementioned acting performances, I also thought Mary Elizabeth Winstead as Huntress and Jurnee Smollett-Bell were great as Huntress and Black Canary respectively, with Winstead putting in a brilliant comedic performance in her limited screen time.

However, the narrative structure in the film was one part that took away from the film for me and prevented it from being able to move from solid to great, as it took just a little long to get going and once it did, it jumped all over the place, flashing back every few minutes. I can see why they went for this approach, to match up with the chaotic feeling of Harley Quinn, but for me it seemed to take away from the development of the Birds of Prey, especially the characters of Renee Montoya and Cassandra Cain and with so much narrative to get through and so many new characters to be introduced, it may have been better to go with a more straight forward narrative. The film seems caught between making it solely about Harley Quinn and being about the Birds of Prey, but I feel like it would’ve been better served if it had focused more on the Birds of Prey aspect, especially to build on the theme of Harley going out on her own and finding a new place to belong. We also get intermittent narration from Harley throughout the film, sometimes in places where it feels a bit odd, sometimes it works but at other times it can take you out of the story a little bit.

Ultimately, Birds of Prey is a really fun film, feeling like a real throwback to 90’s comic book films, creating a world that feels quite lively and offering great chemistry between the characters when they are all together. Although it is still slightly messy here and there, it is refreshing to see a comic book film played for slightly lower stakes, rather than an end of the world type theme that might not necessarily fit the characters or the themes. If you’re looking for a fun superhero action film with some strong performances, I would recommend you check this one out, as long as you go in knowing what to expect.

Overall rating – 🌟🌟🌟/5

Fred Rogers was a children’s television host and creator of the long running American show Mister Rogers’ Neighborhood. While he’s not as prominent a figure in British culture, the set of his show, as well as the famous red sweater is still instantly recognisable. Mister Rogers was known for dealing with more serious topics than kids shows were normally known for doing, treating them with the sensitivity with which they deserved to be treated with, whilst also treating the kids with enough respect to be able to open discussion on these topics with them. A lot of his creative efforts were aimed towards positivity towards one another and he’s an insanely popular figure, with his words still resonating with a lot of people today, so who better to play him than Tom Hanks?

While Tom Hanks was nominated for an Oscar for his role as Fred Rogers, it is notable that his nomination was in the Best Supporting Actor, rather than the Best Actor category. That is because the film revolves around a journalist named Lloyd Vogel, who is given the assignment of writing a piece on Mister Rogers for Esquire Magazine. Although the piece is designed to focus on Mister Rogers as a hero, Vogel is initially sceptical and when the two meet, Vogel’s cynicism clashes with Mister Rogers sense of patience and optimism. The story is inspired by the real life article written on Mister Rogers in Esquire Magazine by journalist Tom Junod and to frame the narrative like this is really interesting, as it allows us to look at Mister Rogers from an outsider’s perspective and helps to see the effect he reportedly had on many people he came into contact with. Vogel is a character who is almost child-like in some aspects, someone who is at a point in his life where he needs the lessons Mister Rogers teaches and it’s incredibly satisfying to follow his character arc as the film progresses.

The theme in the film of cynicism vs. being more open and understanding was a really important one for me and something that feels really relevant at the moment. If we look at how certain issues are approached nowadays, especially with how toxic social media can get and how strong negative backlash seems to be at times, a move towards more compassion would be a welcome one. Like the journalist’s attitude at the start of the film, there are many who look to criticise just because it garners more attention, more clicks, more views and this creates an environment where people are constantly in fear of that often empty criticism, leading to them being unable to be their true selves. I can’t speak too much on Mister Rogers, as aforementioned, he isn’t as prominent in British culture, but a lot of his work seemed to be about building people up rather than knocking them down and this leads to a really heart warming message and journey within the film. Themes of fatherhood and the harm of holding onto grudges are also prevalent and they also pay off really effectively and emotionally in the film as well.

Whether or not the film leans too heavily into over-sentimentality will all depend on your tastes, but for me, it got the balance just right. With Mister Rogers not being the central figure of the film, the viewer is given just enough of him so that his personality doesn’t become too overbearing, which could have been a possibility if the film had been made with him as the main focus. Instead, he is more of an influence on events, entering here and there and the emotional moments are given the time and respect that they deserve, without being overdone and pushed too heavily onto the viewer. The other thing that makes the film work in this regard is that all of the main characters are fully developed, although Vogel is cynical, he’s not merely a caricature, the reasons for his cynicism are fleshed out and we’re able to understand and empathise with them. Similarly with Mister Rogers, he isn’t made out to be entirely perfect, but rather a man who’s just trying his best to slow things down, appreciate them moment by moment and keep open to other people and their feelings.

The film is beautifully directed by Marielle Heller, who injects a lot of life and energy into this story. She switches the film between telling the story and mixing in elements of the Mister Rogers Neighborhood show to frame the telling of it. This is a really clever way of incorporating the show into the narrative of the film and it allows scenes that could have been merely transitional or expositional to become a lot more visually interesting, with the aspect ratio changing each time too to mimic the TV show. This framing device also allows the character of Mister Rogers to speak directly to the viewer. Tom Hanks does fit this role well personality wise, but looking at real life footage of Fred Rogers, he has both the vocal inflections and movements perfected to a very impressive level, showing that Hanks must definitely have done a strong amount of research for the role. We also have Matthew Rhys as Lloyd Vogel, who performs very well, with a lot of the film focusing on his emotional journey. Susan Kelechi Watson and Chris Cooper star as Andrea Vogel and Jerry Vogel respectively, Lloyd’s wife and Lloyd’s father who he has a tenuous relationship with, both actors get a lot to do with multi-layered roles and they do great with it too.

A Beautiful Day In The Neighborhood is a simple story elevated by the creative approach taken to it, the direction, the acting and the writing for each character. It is quite nice to watch a feel-good film, but even nicer to watch one where there’s a huge amount of talent, effort and love involved in the telling of it. It helps to keep it fresh in the mind that there are many different ways to tell a story, to move a scene along, to advance the plot and that if you look to keep the film engaging and stimulating, it really can lift a story from being a good one, to a great one.

Overall rating – 🌟🌟🌟🌟/5