The Mandalorian and Grogu

We all know that May the Fourth is Star Wars Day, but did you know that just like how there are different dates for Easter and Christmas in the Orthodox Church, there is also "Orthodox Star Wars Day" on 25th May, which is the date Star Wars was originally released in cinemas in 1977? Well, if you didn't know that, now you do. 

A couple of nights ago, on Orthodox Star Wars Day, Cathy and I went to the local Odeon to watch the first Star Wars film to be released for seven years, The Mandalorian and Grogu. (Yes, it really has been seven years. That was a whole pandemic ago!)

This latest Star Wars film is about the Mandalorian bounty hunter, Din Djarin, and his foundling trainee, Grogu, continuing their story from the three TV series of The Mandalorian (and the episodes of The Book of Boba Fett that they rather stole the show in).

Very mild spoilers follow below...

If you haven't seen the TV series, then you might struggle getting into this story. It is quite episodic, with three distinct story chapters that could have been episodes in a fourth series. (There are primers available online to bring you up to speed.)

The Mandalorian is now working for the New Republic, as a contractor bringing in former Imperial generals who are operating as war-lords. This makes narrative sense to me, as the surviving Imperial factions pose the most risk to Grogu, the child in the Mandalorian's care. 

His work for the New Republic brings the Mandalorian into the orbit of the Hutt gangsters who first appeared in The Book of Boba Fett. Carnage ensues. 

I enjoyed watching this but there were moments when it felt a bit indulgent. Dave Filoni, current president of Lucasfilm, uses the film to bring back certain characters he created earlier in his career. Notably, this includes Rotta the Hutt, spawn of Jabba the Hutt. 

Rotta is presented as a complex character trying to emerge from the bloated shadow of his father, but it feels a bit worthy and preachy the way its done. Rotta first appeared in the Clone Wars cartoon series that had a 'moral' for every episode and his story arc feels very Saturday-morning-cartoon.

There are some niche references as well. The INT-4 mini-rig vehicle produced as a toy by Kenner in the early 1980s makes a live action debut. It's the latest in a line of appearances in modern Star Wars media of those early toys that were the product of a toy designer's imagination way back when. 

Another returning character is Zeb, the darkly comedic Lasat from Star Wars Rebels. He was my favourite character in Rebels and it's nice to see he has survived the war against the Empire. He's still serving in the military, though. The war isn't quite over everywhere. 

My favourite callbacks were when the film-makers leaned into the "baby Yoda" idea and had Grogu picking up little Yoda-isms. He spends some time living in a swamp, with a mud hut and a walking stick. Cathy pointed out, there is also a crashed spaceship in the swamp - another Dagobah reference.

There has been some criticism of modern Star Wars - particularly the Mandalorian series - being geared towards 'fan service' (I thought BOBF had too much). But really why not provide some service to the fans? After all, it's the fans that turned this franchise into the behemoth it is. 

Next year it will be a whole half century since the first instalment of Star Wars was released in cinemas. I doubt The Mandalorian and Grogu will have the same cultural resonance, but as a small continuation of what has turned into a cultural movement, it ticks the right boxes. It was a fun movie and made me, a self-confessed fan, happy. 

More reviews

The Mandalorian Season 1

The Mandalorian Season 2 

A conversation about religion in The Mandalorian Season 2

The Book of Boba Fett review 

Cinema viewing 2025

In 2024, five of the seven films I went to were 'quels of some sort. My cinema trips in 2025 started in the same vein with a Disney sequel to one of my favourite films.

Moana 2 (Odeon, Cardiff Bay)

I'd put Moana in my top 5 Disney films, no question. So this sequel had a lot to live up to. My overall sense was that it was a decent attempt, but some aspects didn't really work. 

This time Moana is trying to raise a sunken island, which for some reason is keeping the various peoples scattered across the ocean's island chains separated. She connects with Maui, the demigod again, and they team up to raise the island to the chagrin of a storm god who sunk it. 

It's always difficult when sequels feel they need to go more epic and don't quite pull it off. It's also a fine balance between preserving the aspects of the story and characters that made a film work first time around and introducing some new aspects that keep things fresh and interesting.

I felt they didn't quite get the balance right with Moana 2. This time Moana has a motley crew of islanders helping her, but none of them were developed as characters. It was a stereotypical 'crew' with the talented but clumsy one, the grumpy curmudgeon, and so on. More could have been done with those extra characters as opposed to just being extra hassle for Moana to deal with. 

So, yeah, a decent attempt that fell slightly short of a very high bar. It was worth seeing and I enjoyed it. 

The Penguin Lessons (free preview at Showcase, Nantgarw)

Cathy scored us some free tickets to go and see this film that was based on a true story. Steve Coogan isn't my favourite actor, but he does dramatic non-comedy roles pretty well. He plays a teacher called Tom who is moving around South America and winds up in a school in Argentina just at the start of the crackdown that established the brutal junta dictatorship in the 1970s. 

He also acquires a penguin after a drunken holiday over the border in Uruguay. The penguin becomes attached to him and won't leave and the story then follows a fairly familiar story arc as the initially hostile Tom becomes very attached to the penguin in turn, becoming a better person along the way.

While Coogan plays the character well, the penguin is cute, and Jonathan Pryce is excellent as the headmaster of the school, I found the historical setting of the film the most compelling bit. The film managed to capture the slow descent of an unstable country into scary totalitarianism. The scenes where the secret police disappear people off the streets - many of whom are never accounted for - are shocking, and Tom's inaction in the face of such shocking brutality is captured incredibly well. The remorse he feels at his cowardice, as he confesses his shame to his penguin friend, lifts the film out of the 'human saved by an animal' genre.

It poses that question of 'what would you do?' if you were in a situation like that. In the film Tom intervenes on behalf of one character, but apparently that sub-plot was added to the script and wasn't something that happened in real life. There is a poignant note at the end about how many mothers were still waiting for news of their disappeared children.

The unexpected serious side of the film made it a much better watch than I initially expected. 

Elio (at Y Galeri, Caernarfon)

Pixar films have been quite hit and miss of late. This had moments that really made me laugh. It fell a little bit into the animated story trope of kid losing their parents and the adult trying to care for them really struggling. Within that trope, the main character, Elio, inadvertently makes contact with an alien having family troubles of their own. They become friends and find a way forward together. 

The alien antagonists that threaten Elio are suitably scary, but there is a point to their martial aggressive natures. The subtext that trying to hide your soft centre behind sophisticated battle armour is laid on a bit thick, but the point is valid and Pixar make sure to hit several other moral compass points along the way - dishonesty leads to disaster (for others if not for you), authenticity matters more, expressing love isn't weakness. 

I don't think the film did particularly well in the cinemas, which is a shame. There weren't many in the showing we went to - at the little arts cinema in Caernarfon that we try to go to when we are on holiday in the area. But even though it didn't seem to get a lot of press, I'd prefer Pixar to carry on creating original stories instead of just adding more instalments to successful franchises. (Yes, of course I will watch Toy Story 5 when it comes out, but that's not the point...)

Sketch (free preview at Showcase, Nantgarw)

More free tickets, for a decidedly odd film that is best described as 'horror for kids'. It would score highly on the kid's film bingo card. Dead parent, check. Unexplained supernatural situation, check. Conflict with adults who don't believe the kids, check... until they do believe, check. 

I don't want to put too many spoilers in this, but the story is basically about two kids who have lost their mum and don't want their dad to sell their house. They find a place with magical powers and inadvertently trigger an invasion of monsters. Which they then need to stop. 

The adult roles are played by Tony Hale as the dad, and D'Arcy Carden as the kid's aunt who is helping the dad sell the house. D'Arcy is, frankly, a bit wasted in this. She is a supremely funny actress but this felt a bit flat. 

There are some good action sequences and comic moments, but the story is a bit weak. It's the kind of film to put on while ironing as you don't need to be paying it full attention. Some of the kids in the screening we went to got quite bored in the slow bits. 

Zootropolis 2 (Odeon, Cardiff Bay)

We went to this with a group of friends to celebrate Cathy's birthday. Another Disney sequel to a film I rate highly. The original Zootropolis is a very enjoyable, narratively complex story about politicians generating misinformation to stir up fear between different groups of people for their own benefit. That theme is still very pertinent.

The story in the sequel is along the same lines but this time the villainy is perpetuated by wealthy citizens of Zootropolis. So, it's a little more cliched than the first movie. Unlikely cop duo Judy Hopps (a rabbit) and Nick Wilde (a fox) pursue the case against all odds and against direct orders. Will they succeed in bringing the bad guys to justice? Well, this is a Disney film so you can probably guess the answer. 

There are plenty of callbacks to funny moments in the previous film, and multiple nods and homages to other films, both Disney and otherwise. Special highlights were jokes about Ratatouille and The Silence of the Lambs. Overall the film was excellent and I would rate it as probably the best Disney sequel I've seen. I definitely want to watch it again. 

The Muppet Christmas Carol (Cineworld, Shrewsbury)

A Christmas Eve treat for me and Cathy, watched with my brother and three niblings in tow. I saw the film when it was originally released in the early 1990s, then many times over the years on VHS, DVD and latterly streaming. I was delighted this was the original cut with Belle's song 'The Love is Gone' in it. The song adds such emotional depth to Scrooge's visit to Christmases past. 

I would argue this is both the finest adaptation of Charles Dickens' classic novel and probably the best Muppet film as well. It has lost none of it's vitality and it was great to see it in the cinema again. 

2024 Cinema trips - all the 'quels

It was a case of all the "quels" in 2024. I saw sequels, a prequel and an interquel. In fact, five of the seven films I saw in the cinema were "quels", and the other two were adaptations of books. Here's what I watched on the big screen:

Dune Part 2 - sequel (although they split the source material in two for the movies so this was a continuation sequel rather than a second story in a franchise). Full review here. 

Inside Out 2 - sequel. I really liked the first Inside Out film, which took a complex concept and explored it in a very accessible way. The sequel continued the story of Riley and her emotions, which have multiplied as Riley grows up. This is probably one of the best depictions and explanations of how anxiety is a protection mechanism that can go into overdrive and become harmful. 

Besides Anxiety, the other new emotions include, Embarrassment, Envy, Ennui and, my favourite, Nostalgia, who pops in and is promptly dismissed for being too soon. Although I think I felt nostalgia as a teenager - certainly I found myself looking back to things I had done a few years previously and having a new appreciation for them. Nowadays I agree strongly with Douglas Coupland's comment that "nostalgia is a weapon" and I know it gets weaponised against me. That's why I end up with things like an A Team van made by Playmobil...

The film has a happy ending for Riley and her friends as they navigate the emotions around changing schools, establishing new friendship groups and playing ice hockey. I like the mix of joy and anger that fuels Riley's in-game activity. There's a good explanation about how our beliefs about the world and about ourselves shape our lives - another deep topic that I felt the film-makers summarised well. 

Harold and the Purple Crayon - the film version of a popular kid's book. So, not totally original but technically not a 'quel. Full review here. 

Alien Romulus - an 'interquel' that was apparently set between Alien and Aliens, the first two films in the franchise. Not the greatest movie in the Alien franchise but I enjoyed it. Full review here. 

Beetlejuice! Beetlejuice! - a "legacy sequel" released decades after the first film. Full review here. 

Transformers One - a prequel of sorts. I'm not sure where in the Transformers franchise this animated film fits, but it was expanding on the in-universe lore and would act as a prequel to just about any other Transformers movie. 

It's the origin story of Optimus Prime and Megatron, and why they became bitter enemies. I thought it was very well done despite leaning hard on some over-used tropes - the people in charge don't have our best interests at heart; best friends become implacable enemies; there is a quest for a lost artifact that can save civilisation. 

However, within those well known story arcs, the script was lean, the film was fast-paced with several action sequences that all served the purposes of the plot, and there was plenty of humour in the dialogue and situations but it never got silly. It felt like a grown up kid-friendly cartoon. It also added some depth to other long-established characters, even those with limited screentime like Starscream, who in this was more than just a whining minion of Megatron. 

The Wild Robot - another film based on a book. I watched this with Cathy on her birthday in a cinema that was experiencing temperature issues. It was freezing. At one point in the story an ice storm hits - at that point it felt like we were in a 4D film experience. 

The basic plot was of a robot booting up on a remote island and looking for tasks to carry out. Being a robot it works out how to communicate with animals and gradually develops its self-awareness to become the protector of the wild creatures. This includes teaching an orphaned gosling to fly - which I found was a surprisingly moving storyline. 

The third act of the movie dragged a bit. The most intriguing part was seeing the wider world, with humans living in large hi-tech habitats, with hydroponic farms, hovering over the drowned ruins of cities (San Francisco to be precise). It's a world after the climate apocalypse and the survivors seem to be doing OK with an army of robot servants undertaking menial tasks. Somehow, that felt like the most unrealistic part of the film compared to a robot learning how to talk to a gosling and teach it to fly before its fellow geese migrated and left it behind. 

Looking ahead to 2025, I'm sure there are more 'quels to come. I have set myself a challenge to try and watch more original films next year. 

Halloween movie review - Beetlejuice! Beetlejuice!

Hey, remember when I posed with this guy?

Well, I finally got round to seeing his new film. I went this week with Bryan and Elaine. Considering the film was released in early September I was surprised how many other people were watching it too - but then it was half term week in the run up to Halloween. The further mystery is why the studio didn't wait to release this as a big Halloween release, considering it's set at Halloween and is a ghost story (of sorts).

Mild spoilers follow...

This is a sequel that rides the current trend of very late sequels, arriving 36 years after the original movie. Alongside Michael Keaton as the titular Beetlejuice, Winona Ryder and Catherine O'Hara both revive their roles as Lydia and Delia. We get a throwaway line explaining why Geena Davis and Alec Baldwin's characters aren't around and Jeffrey Jones's character, Charles, appears in an animated segment and is sort of in it thereafter but in a way they didn't need to use the actor.

I was a fan of Tim Burton's movies for a long time but lost a bit of faith in him as a director more recently. This felt like a return to form - as if someone had said to him 'Hey, Tim, go and make a Tim Burton movie!' And he definitely maxed out the trademark black humour and silly gore. The writers must have had fun imagining as many different gruesome deaths for the residents in the afterlife. I particularly chuckled at the escapologist who was still chained inside his box that was full of water. 

It's a short, fast-paced film with a lot going on. Lydia is now a TV ghost whisperer. Her stepmother Delia is a successful artist. After Charles dies, the pair travel back to the 'ghost house' where they first met Beetlejuice for a memorial service. Lydia's daughter. Astrid (played by Jenna Ortega) is with them. She definitely doesn't believe in ghosts and thinks her mother is a fraud. She changes her mind during the course of the film.

Because there is a lot going on, some storylines feel rushed and unnecessary. Monica Bellucci is frankly wasted as Beetlejuice's angry ex-wife seeking to kill him for good. Willem Defoe as a dead actor who thinks he's a cop steals the scenes he is in, but it's also an aspect of the story that gets squeezed. Meanwhile there are some scenes that are overplayed - while I like any scenes featuring trains in movies, the "Soul Train" dance sequence could have been cut despite the energy it brought to the perilous journey into the underworld for the mortal characters. 

After a great dance number during the wedding scene, with the characters bewitched to sing along to MacArthur Park (with the wedding cake dissolving as they sing about a cake left out in the rain), the film ends with the characters suffering a variety of fates - some pleasant, some not so. There is a mixed bag of happy ever afters for the main characters, again playing to Tim Burton's strength of not ending a character's storyline conventionally. One happy ending turns into a horrible nightmare and then the credits roll.

As very belated sequels go, this was great fun. I laughed a lot, winced at some gory bits, laughed again, enjoyed the spectacle of the musical sequences, and overall thought it was great. It extended the Beetlejuice story without just rehashing the original film and was well worth seeing on its own merits too. 

Film review: Harold and the Purple Crayon

SPOILER ALERT!

Harold and the Purple Crayon is a very popular illustrated children's book in America. Despite not being very familiar with the story, I thought the trailer for this looked interesting. And with Zachary Levi in the title role, it felt worth a look. 

The story starts with Harold and his friends, in their illustrated form, having various adventures with the magic purple crayon. Anything drawn using the crayon takes form, whether that's a dragon, a moose, a porcupine, a boat, or whatever. 

Harold and his friends are used to listening to the "narrator" and when the narrator stops answering their questions, Harold draws a way into the "real world" to try and find him. Mayhem ensues as Harold uses the creative power of his purple crayon to help people, although his good intentions cause chaos. 

I won't relate the entire story, but basically there are people who realise the power of the crayon and use it for their own ends, but it all works out in the long run. Zooey Deschanel plays the other lead role opposite Levi and there is able support from Lil Rey Howery (who I last saw as Buddy in Free Guy) as Moose, Tanya Reynolds as Porcupine, Benjamin Bottani as Harold's first friend in the real world, and Jermaine Clement (from Flight of the Conchords) who plays a great hammy villain. The script is quite tight - I laughed several times - and the runtime of 90 minutes is just the right length.

Apparently the reviews haven't been kind to the film, but what do film critics know, really? I went in with fairly low expectations and was pleasantly surprised. And there was one element of the film that went a bit deeper than I expected. 

Harold has entered the real world looking for the 'old man', the narrator. This is a mix of father figure and creator, who has suddenly gone silent. As he becomes aware of who the 'narrator' was - the author of the book, the late Crockett Johnson - he realises that from now on he won't have a narrator for his adventures. This places him in existential crisis - asking the big questions of what does he do with his life now?

In one sense this is a way of looking at parental bereavement. The gap left by a now absent parent. But, for me, it felt there was a wider parallel of any occasion where we are feel that things we were certain about are no longer certain and the need to find a way through - that suddenly we are the narrators of our own stories, the creators of our own worlds and we can't rely on there being a voice from the sky telling us what to do next. 

Harold's response when he gets a final message from the author, telling him to take his destiny into his own hands is to be grateful for the opportunity and to see it as an adventure. It is refreshing to watch a movie with such an uplifting and life-affirming conclusion. 

Why I was disappointed with Toy Story 4

Spoilers follow for all the Toy Story films

[2023 edit: This post was originally written when TS4 was released in cinemas but for some reason I never posted it. However, I re-read it recently and I still feel this way about the film. And now, with rumours of Toy Story 5 rumbling, I thought I may as well post it with a few minor edits.]

There's a law of diminishing returns on sequels. I still rate Toy Story 2. I thought Toy Story 3 was OK, but never felt the need to watch it a second time. 24 years after the first Toy Story movie, Woody and co returned for a 4th cinema outing.

There are some real pro points to the film. Rabbit and Ducky are great new characters and they gave me the best laughs. Duke Kaboom, voiced by Keanu Reeves, is another brilliant new character with probably the single best line in the script. The animation is high class. Bo Peep's sheep steal the show with their antics. The Pixar geek in me loved seeing a nicely animated Tin-Toy in a cameo appearance.

But overall, something just didn't sit right.

This is Woody's film. The film quickly establishes that his new owner, Bonnie, doesn't give a crap about him. She strips him of his sheriff's badge and then throws him back into the cupboard, rejected. Worse still, when he finally escapes the cupboard, her klutzy dad literally stamps on Woody's face twice. It would appear carelessness is genetic.

Weirdly, Woody is still obsessed with caring for Bonnie. He stows away with her to kindergarten to make sure her first day goes alright. Then he fixates on protecting the toy she makes on her first day, 'Forky'.

Even if you haven't seen the film, you'll have seen Forky. He's on all the posters. He's a spork with a crudely applied mouth and googly eyes. He is also easily the most annoying Pixar character ever. Unfortunately for the film, after Forky's appearance all the other established characters, who we have come to know and love as we shared their adventures, are brutally relegated to background characters. Rex, Jessie, Mr Potato Head, Hamm, the aliens, Bullseye, Jessie and even Buzz are now just wallpaper to the Forky story.

Woody believes that Forky is Bonnie's most important toy right now and blah, blah, blah, oh who cares, Woody? More importantly, why do you care? Bonnie doesn't want to play with you! Why don't you just let her be and if she's so stupid as to lose her stupid spork toy, that's on her. Tough love, Woody! Give her some tough love! Maybe then she will take more care of her toys.

Anyway, there's some stuff about how Woody never got over Andy, then he sees Bo Peep's lamp in an antique store and goes in looking for her. At this point the film goes creepy and weird.

We have already had a flashback scene where Bo Peep is sold 9 years previously, presumably on Craigslist or something. She asks Woody to come with her and he says no because Andy needs him. Clearly he is haunted by this, so goes into the creepy, weird antique store. There he meets an old doll who blames her failure to be played with on a defective voicebox, which could be replaced by Woody's voicebox. Her henchmen - a bunch of ventriloquist's dummies - try to rip it out of him until Bo Peep turns up and rescues him.

I quite liked the recasting of Bo Peep from toddler's nightlight to independent woman living her own life by her own rules as a "lost toy" who has actually found herself. She is a feisty, clever, strong-minded role model of a lamp now. I warmed to her.

Various shenanigans ensue. Keep an eye out for the third Combat Carl figure waiting for his high fives. Woody needs to rescue Forky for Bonnie. That means going back into the creepy antique store. There's some stuff with Buzz. Woody ends up sacrificing his voicebox in return for Forky, and then the doll in question ends up rejected by the little girl she desperately wanted to have play with her anyway. (Another kid comes along before the end of the movie so the voicebox thief does get her play companion in the end. Not sure what the message is there. Kidnappers and extortionists get a happy ending too? It feels like anything is possible in America these days.)

So we get to the end of the film and Woody has given everything. His badge is gone. He's had his face crushed. He's been rejected and abused every which way possible. He has been overlooked, abandoned, lost and no one has even noticed he is missing. He has even given away his voicebox - his essential self, as it were, and still Bonnie only really cares about a crummy spork.

And then he has a choice. Stay with Bo Peep - who he has already seen leave his life once before - or stick with the ingrate brat who now owns him. Well it's a no brainer, right? He's got to finally put his own worth over his sense of duty and stick with Bo. Except for some reason the way it played felt so wrong.

I've really examined my feelings on this, and I think this is the reason it felt wrong: Actually, Woody was selfish all along. He always said that Andy was the most important thing. He let Bo leave with just her sheep for company on that dark and stormy night, because Andy was the most important thing. Because, in turn, he was important to Andy. He got played with. He was the leader of the room. He was in a position of respect and authority.

All that stuff about Forky being important to Bonnie was actually about Woody being important to Bonnie, even though she didn't know about it. His self-identity as the important toy was being lived vicariously through Forky. He was there when Forky was made. He was the one who introduced Forky to the gang. He was the one who sat up all night trying to stop Forky jumping into the trash. He was the one who cared, who knew that Forky was oh-so-important to Bonnie, even though there was so little evidence to show that none of the other toys picked up on it.

And that selfishness came to the fore as the other toys were relegated to background characters. Yes, Woody stayed with Bo Peep, but he left Bullseye! He left Buzz! He left Slink! He left all those other loyal to the hilt friends - the ones who braved death on the roads and the elevator to save him from Al the Chicken, the ones who had turned down the safe life of being adored behind glass for him, the ones who had held his hands as they seemed to face imminent immolation in the incinerator at the dump.

There was barely a goodbye.

I know we are meant to see this as Woody's triumph. He finally sheds the sense of duty that consumed him even to the point of robbing him of his voice. He steps out and puts himself first - and we are meant to think this is him actually doing this for the first time. He tastes freedom for the first time.

But when he does it, really he's just revealing his own dark side of selfishness.

And that's why I think I left the cinema feeling more than a tad depressed. A beloved character turns out to be less of the heroic toy cowboy and more like a flawed human.

I didn't need this sequel.

(If you watch it, keep it playing right until the very end for the final Pixar logo.)

The 1962 film verson of The Day of the Triffids

During our holiday week, we watched a number of DVDs that we had picked up cheaply in a charity shop. One of them was the film version of The Day of the Triffids released in 1962. In this review I am going to include some spoilers for both the film and the book version of The Day of the Triffids, so if you haven't seen this or read the book and you want to, then stop reading now!

The DVD cover

I am a big fan of John Wyndham's writing and have re-read The Day of the Triffids a few times. He was an elegant writer with a very lean approach to storytelling. There was no unnecessary descriptive text in his work. He got on with the action. When there is exposition in his books, he handles it all very matter-of-fact and tells the reader what the reader needs to know at that point. Sometimes there are hints of the darkness ahead - because there is always darkness ahead - but he doesn't overdo it.

This film was produced about ten years after The Day of the Triffids was first published. And they butchered the book as they turned it into a screenplay. That would be my biggest gripe about it.

I don't really expect much from a 1960s monster movie. The direction was very stagey and unnatural. Sometimes that doesn't matter in a film, but this was clunky. The script was poor. Characters would say things then other characters would say things and what they said didn't necessarily seem to follow on. There was one actress who seemed to only be in the film to scream theatrically when she saw a triffid. (That annoyed me particularly because John Wyndham didn't write his female characters like that - in his books women were usually resourceful, brave, clever and funny. They didn't just stand there screaming.)

The film did some scenes well, particularly cutaway scenes on a cruise liner with everyone struck blind, passengers and crew, and the same with a passenger airplane that was doomed to crash. Those bits were suitably chilling. The rest, not so much. 

It's possible to do an adaptation that sticks to the story. The BBC version from 2009 (which I blogged about here but haven't seen since it was broadcast) was much closer to the book. This film felt like it had been adapted by someone who hadn't really read or understood the book, been given a list of principal characters and told to get on with it. 

The only part that was really close to the book was the opening scenes that established the lead character, Bill, in a hospital bed with his eyes bandaged while everyone else looks at the "meteor" lightshow, and then the following morning when he removes his dressings and discovers everyone else has gone blind. 

The triffids themselves were only mildly menacing monsters in this film. But they are meant to be only mildly menacing because they're plants. They don't run after you even though they can move. It's the ones lurking, hidden in the bushes that get you with their deadly stings. In the first third of the film, the director made good use of not showing the entire monster, just a slimy root on a stair, or a flower betraying the presence of a triffid hiding in with other greenery. But then they became slowly-advancing rubbery aggressors and it was hard to take them seriously. 

There is a great visual sequence where Bill rigs up a flame thrower and torches massed ranks of triffids being held at bay by an electric fence, which is an event that was sort of lifted from the book. It's surprisingly violent, watching the triffids burn. But the action had been so staccato up to that point that the big set piece didn't have any tension to it. The final denouement - with the discovery that seawater could be used to turn triffids into puddles of oozing slime - wasn't part of the book at all. 

Where this film really went wrong was making the triffids space aliens carried on meteors. That's not in the book. Triffids are discovered in an African rainforest and then deliberately farmed for their highly versatile oil. In fact, that's why Bill ends up in hospital having eye surgery in the book - on a visit to a triffid farm one of the plants tries to sting him and some of the venom ends up in his eyes. 

So, the triffids don't arrive on meteors. And, as a further twist, the lights in the sky aren't actually meteors at all! What's revealed in the book is that a satellite had been launched that was a weapon designed to cause blindness, and it had malfunctioned. 

The idea of space-borne weaponry was incredibly forward-thinking in 1951. It was a few years before the first orbiting satellites were launched. It's probably the scariest part of the story - and it's the bit that gets left out of adaptations!

Because the point of The Day of the Triffids is that humans are prone to exploiting very dangerous natural resources, and are very resourceful at thinking up ways to kill other humans, and if something went wrong it could get very nasty. Basically, John Wyndham's message is that we don't need an alien invasion to doom us. Humans are very capable of dooming ourselves. 

John Wyndham did write an alien invasion novel a couple of years later. The Kraken Wakes is an equally vivid story, and possibly edges The Day of the Triffids in both concept and delivery. It hasn't ever been made into a film, but given how film-makers missed the point of the triffids, maybe that's a blessing. 

Reflecting on 2021 - films and TV

I saw three films in the cinema this year. They were, in order, In the Heights (which was fantastic - I blogged about it shortly after we saw it), Scoob! and Dune. I was going to write an extended review of the latter, but didn't get round to it in the recent busy weeks. 

Broadly speaking, I thought Dune was an excellent capture of the essence of the book. I realise if someone hadn't read the book then it might be hard to follow. But, you know what, the book was published over 50 years ago so people have had plenty of time to read it. For once it was nice to watch an adaptation that didn't dumb it down for the non-reading masses. My only criticism was that it had a score by Hans Zimmer, whose one trick is big, blaring atonal noises to signify vastness. It could have done with more subtlety, because everything is vast in the Duneiverse so there were lots of atonal blarts throughout the film.

Similarly, Scoob! played to the fans. I especially liked the cameo appearance by Captain Caveman. The little kids who were with us watching the film seemed to like it too. So, all in all, that was a decent film as well. 

We have also seen some new films via the streaming services as well. We watched the new Disney animations Raya and the Last Dragon, Luca, and, on Christmas Eve, Encanto. All of them felt like tick the box Disney stories. None really had anything particularly that stood out. I did laugh at Luca's creepy uncle who lived in the ocean deep and therefore was see-through. 

I think the best new release I saw on a streaming service was Free Guy. There was one scene in particular that really moved me. I blogged about it back in October. 

We also watched the two new Marvel releases, Black Widow and Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings. They were OK. I don't feel they added much to the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU), and in the case of Shang-Chi, I was mainly left wondering how many other mythologies being real and hidden worlds within worlds there can be in the Marvel canon.

Turning to TV, though, and there have been four series set in the MCU. I would rank them in order of quality as Loki, WandaVision, Hawkeye, The Falcon and the Winter Soldier. All the series are trying to move characters on into the story arc that is taking over from the Avengers story arc of the last 10 years. WandaVision was a tease for the first few episodes, which Cathy found annoying. In a later episode it included a memorable comment about the nature of grief, which prompted me to blog.

Loki was similarly focused and introduced the idea of parallel universes and divergences in timelines. It was quite clever and I enjoyed the other versions of Loki that cropped up. (Aligator Loki being my favourite.) Hawkeye was released in the run up to Christmas and was suitably seasonal. It introduced some new characters, including a villain who may become relevant in the rest of the MCU.

The Falcon series couldn't decide what it wanted to be. Was it a series addressing race issues, or addressing fascist responses to displaced peoples? Were the terrorists the bad guys, or the good guys? Unfortunately I found the terrorist leader to be completely unbelievable as a character and the show itself veered between the peril that the Falcon's family might lose the family fishing boat and shadowy figures manipulating events on a global scale. 

Two series on Netflix that we really liked, Kim's Convenience and Atypical, came to an end this year. Both opted for sweet endings with unresolved storylines left hanging. In Atypical almost all the characters got a happy ending that meant they would be embarking on an adventure somewhere. It was both satisfying but sad that in a way the characters were going off and doing something else and we wouldn't see what would happen to them. That is how life works though, with people moving on and living a life invisible to us. 

We also rewatched a lot of TV. We watched the entire run of Frasier, most of which was still very good, years after it first aired. We watched most of Cheers, which hasn't aged as well. We watched all 8 seasons of Castle, which got a bit wrapped up in its story arcs and then bodged the ending of the final season with a tacked on scene that didn't work. 

Towards the end of the year we started rewatching Futurama. One or two episodes have been uncomfortable to watch, showing how much things have changed in the last 20 years. However, most of the jokes have made me laugh.. for the umpteenth time. And the episode with Fry's dog, well, I knew it was coming, but dammit, I still choked up at the end! 

That's the mark of good telly - that it can still hit you in the feels even though you know it's gonna hit you in the feels. 

I may have jumped the gun on this review as the first episode of The Book of Boba Fett is about to drop on Disney Plus. But I will save that for a future review post.

Review of 2020 - new films

I watched 41 films for the first time in 2020, but only seven of them were actually new releases. I saw three in cinemas before they closed under lockdown rules in March, and I saw another five new releases on Netflix and Disney Plus. So this isn't going to be a long post at all.

Even though we only went to the cinema three times, Cathy and I did get to meet a film star. 

The eight films were (in order):

• 1917
• JoJo Rabbit
• A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood
• Onward
• Enola Holmes
• Mulan
• Soul
• The Midnight Sky

1917 was a very well-made first world war film where the central conceit was that it was filmed as if it was a continuous shot. Although there were a few 'fade to black' moments. I thought it started really well, with the panning shots down trenches, but a bit like the central protagonists who got sent to deliver a message, it got lost a little bit along the way. It captured that sense of danger, especially in the quiet bits not knowing when or if a shot or bomb would come out of nowhere. I would say it was worth watching, but I wouldn't want to watch it again.

JoJo Rabbit was a second world war film that tried to be three films in one - a film about the Nazification of children by the Hitler Youth, a film about Germans resisting the Nazi regime, and a film about Jews in hiding from the Gestapo. The second theme was the one least served by the script. There were some very clever touches throughout the film, which focused mainly on the little boy, JoJo, and his imaginary friend, Adolf Hitler. 

I was uncomfortable seeing the Hitler Youth sections played for laughs, but that's probably just as well. It was very black humour, particularly the lines delivered by the ever-excellent Sam Rockwell. As it became apparent that the regime was willing to use children dressed in paper uniforms as cannon fodder to slow down the advancing Allied armies, the real dark heart of Nazism was exposed, and if it had been played entirely straight, then it would have been unrelentingly grim. 

Changing the tone slightly, the film I saw most recently in a cinema was A Beautiful Day in the Neighbourhood. This starred Tom Hanks, as the real-life Mister Rogers whose show 'Mister Rogers' Neighbourhood' was a hugely popular children's TV show for decades in America. I have never watched that show so can't really compare Hanks' portrayal to the real person. During the film, Rogers is interviewed by a hatchet-job reporter who sets out to find the real Fred Rogers behind the TV persona, only to find that Fred is the genuinely nice guy he portrays on TV.

It's a schmaltzy film. Probably the schmaltziest film I've seen in a long time, with a family reconciliation theme in the life of the hardbitten reporter that was saccharine. There was a bit of the 'uncanny valley' about Hanks' portrayal as well. So overall it wasn't a film I'd bother watching again.

Onward was Pixar's film most affected by the pandemic, with it's release date bumped and then pulled completely in favour of release on Disney Plus. It's set in a fairy-tale style world that has modernised and magic has died out, although there are still creatures like unicorns (which knock over garbage bins to root through the trash) and fairies (who are a biker gang). The main story is about a young troll who discovers his late father was a magician and has created a spell that could bring his dad back from the dead for a short period of time. The spell goes wrong and only half his dad appears, so he and his brother go on a quest to finish the spell.

It had its moments, and lots of funny gags. The scene at the Manticore's Tavern was probably my favourite. But I felt it was trying too hard to make an emotional impact and unfortunately it couldn't land its punches. 

Enola Holmes was released on Netflix. It stars Millie Bobby Brown, who played Seven in Stranger Things, as Enola, the younger sister of Sherlock Holmes. She has the same sleuthing mind and puts it to use when her mother disappears. There is a sub-plot involving the suffragette movement but the main story involved Enola getting mixed up with a young aristocrat who is on the run because his life is in danger. 

I liked the film. Millie Bobby Brown carried it well, with lots of breaking the fourth wall. There was a scene filmed at the Keighley & Worth Valley Railway, and having been there and seen the sheds full of train carriages that are used in various period dramas, I found it quite amusing to try and see how many different coaches they used. This was based on the first book in a young adult fiction series, and I would be very keen to watch sequels.

Mulan was a live-action remake of the classic Disney cartoon, released on Disney Plus in lieu of a cinema release. I have two main issues with the film. Firstly, if you are going to remove the best character from a film, in this case Mushu the dragon, for the sake of 'realism' why replace that character with another supernatural character who was a bit crap? Secondly, if you are going to recreate an iconic scene, like Mulan triggering an avalanche with a fire rocket, why change the mechanism of that scene, and make it crap?

Disney keep remaking their classic cartoons as live action movies, and I've been disappointed with them. (Cinderella is perhaps the exceptions because the original cartoon is a really boring film anyway.) If Disney are going to keep doing remakes, they could at least be making Muppet versions of these films, which would be a lot more entertaining. 

On Christmas Day I watched Soul, which was released on Disney Plus. Ostensibly it's a film about death and making sure you actually live your life before you die. The  main protagonist, voiced by Jamie Foxx, is a music teacher with dreams of playing in a real band, who gets his shot only to die in an accident. As a disembodied soul he tries to make his way back to Earth, only to wind up in a therapy cat that has been brought in to comfort his comatose body in the hospital. 

There are other stories around that, with some telling points about people losing sight of their lives by focusing too much on one thing, or being afraid to actually live at all. The animation is absolutely gorgeous at times. There are several jokes with the usual selection of clever gags that will probably go over the heads of kids who watch it. And overall there is that bold theme of actually experiencing life while it is being lived and finding joy in that. Pixar often take these deep themes and present them in a new way, and they are probably the film studio making the most philosophically challenging mainstream movies at the moment. 

The final film I watched this year was The Midnight Sky, which starred and was directed by George Clooney, and released on Netflix. George was the sole survivor of a catastrophe on Earth, and spent the film trying to warn a returning spaceship crew that the planet was a radioactive mess. It was two hours long, but felt longer, was pretty bleak throughout and didn't have much of a resolution. The few action sequences had predictable conclusions. By now, if there's a spacewalk and everyone is really happy at how successful its been, there is bound to be a disaster. And there was.

So, of those eight films, I think three were worth recommending. They would be JoJo Rabbit, Enola Holmes and Soul. Whereas Mulan and The Midnight Sky are ones to avoid. 

Cinema trips in 2019

Another end of year review.  I saw 10 new films at various cinemas this year, as well as a special screening of Labyrinth for Cathy's birthday.

Selfie with a film star 

Subdividing those 10 films into subcategories, I saw 5 animated films, 4 superhero films and the latest episode of the Star Wars franchise.

Here are the films (BEWARE SPOILERS):

How to Train Your Dragon 3: The Hidden World

I don't really remember much about this. There was a theme about the world not being ready for humans and dragons to co-exist peacefully so the solution is for the dragons to be hidden away. Not the most positive of messages. 

The Lego Movie 2

Another disappointing sequel. The first Lego Movie was excellent with a reveal of the human world in the final third of the film. Unfortunately the sequel uses the humans as a plot device from the get-go almost and it just doesn't work. There was a great song midway through and I really liked the subtitled velociraptors, but that wasn't enough to make the movie pop like the first one. Cathy was also very upset at the way Fabuland animals had been enslaved in subterranean mines.

Captain Marvel

I really enjoyed this. Lots of humour, a cracking 90s soundtrack (including Garbage's Only Happy When it Rains), Skrulls, and some backstory in the "Cosmic" part of the Marvel Cinematic Universe including a bit more about the Kree and their homeworld. I thought Brie Larson played the main role very well, being vulnerable enough to be believable as a human and soldierly enough to be believable as a member of an elite Kree battle group.

Shazam!

This vies with Captain Marvel for my favourite comic book movie of the year. Zachary Levi is a brilliant comic actor and he carries off the role of child who finds himself magicked into an adult mage's body in a much more credible way than should be possible. Mark Strong was a great scenery-chewing villain as well. There were some scary scenes which juxtaposed a bit awkwardly with the knockabout comedy. But, overall, this is the first DC Comics Movie in a long while that I've actually wanted to watch again (or at all!)

Missing Link

A stop-motion animation about an explorer who finds an intelligent "missing link" and tries to help the sasquatch find his Himalayan relatives. There's a very funny joke about the name of the valley where the yetis live but not much else really stood out. Worth a watch, though. 

Avengers Endgame

The conclusion of the 10 and a bit year movie arc and, whew! It was about time. There are some good bits. Chris Hemsworth as Thor gone to seed was very funny. The film was also interesting for showing the after effects of the Thanos "snap", with support groups and people trying to rebuild their lives. Superhero movies don't often do introspective like that.

Overall, I quite liked the quantum time travel nonsense plotline because it had to be something like that and as far as time travel can ever work in a movie, it worked. Iron Man's closing line to Thanos was suitably momentous. There was quite a protracted goodbye scene, which dragged as such scenes tend to do. When superhero movies aim for an emotional punch they rarely land it on target.

Toy Story 4

I was very disappointed by this. In fact I wrote a massive blog post about why it annoyed me, although I didn't post it because I felt like I sounded like an old man shouting at the clouds. But, basically, there was no real warmth in the script and the characters I've loved from previous films were sidelined. The real thing that irritated me is that Bonny, the toys' new owner, doesn't really care about her toys. She treats them disdainfully and it may feel strange to say this, but it felt disrespectful. It wouldn't have been so bad if the scriptwriters weren't treating the established characters equally disdainfully.

There were a few things I enjoyed - Bo's radio control skunk vehicle, and the new characters Bunny and Ducky - but I really didn't need this movie.

Spider-Man Far From Home

The Marvel Cinematic Universe returned post-Endgame with this slightly silly movie. I like Tom Holland as Spider-Man. Unfortunately I had spoilered this film for myself by finding out a key plot point, and I think that hampered my enjoyment of the film because I knew what was coming. (Mind you, Cathy spotted the 'twist' before it happened anyway.) It was also a bit juvenile being a school trip to Europe film as much as a superhero film.

Star Wars Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker

Another "well, that's finally over" franchise movie. My main criticism of this film is that it tried to ram too much in. It had about 3 or 4 stories in there and none of them were given enough time. The mystery of Rey's history was solved, sorta. The resistance won, sorta. Evil was vanquished, sorta. But by the end it felt like there were no original ideas being tapped. Bring back a character from the original trilogy - this time, Lando. Develop a planet-destroying weapon - this time on Star Destroyers. Make up for a plot hole from the original trilogy - in Cathy's words, "a great injustice has been righted". Go back to the idea of Force Power being linked to genetic heritage, because why not? 

Like several of the other sequels I went to last year this was a bit meh. You don't need any more Star Wars films than the Original Trilogy in my opinion. The sequel Trilogy isn't bad, but it isn't great either. 

Frozen 2
I really liked this. I went in with low expectations and it had a few story problems. But it has a great message of keeping on on dark times and if you can't see too far ahead just "do the next right thing", which is an excellent message. They wisely reined in Olaf as a character and there is a fab song with a montage spoofing 80s music videos, which had me laughing out loud. Of all the animated films I saw in the cinema in 2019, this was the best.


My aim for 2020 is to expand my horizons a bit and try to see some films that aren't animated, superhero movies or continuing an existing franchise. (I've already made good on that intent this month, so we'll see how I do over the course of the year.)

My big 2017 film review

I didn't manage the target Cathy set for me of watching 52 new films in 2017. But I did see 41, which isn't bad. Back in February I noted the ones I'd seen so far. I was going to do this regularly throughout the year, but, um, well, anyway...

I've decided to keep this review to just films that I saw on cinema release in 2017. I've included short summaries giving my verdict on the film.

*January*  - snapshot summaries here
Passengers
A Monster Calls
Sing

*February*
The Lego Batman Movie - read my long review here

*March*
Beauty & the Beast
Probably the most unnecessary remake in cinematic history, which is saying something. Emma Watson spent most of her time having to react to empty air where the CGI characters would be and it really showed she's not that great an actor. The additions to the cartoon, both songs and narrative, weren't much cop either.

*April*
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2
A sequel to my favourite film of recent years that I liked even better than the original. I got emotional at the end. Cracking soundtrack too. My film of the year, and probably of several years. I saw it twice in the cinema and then bought the Blu-ray when it came out. And the soundtrack. And a ton of merchandise. And the Lego sets. I collect Rocket Raccoons and Cathy collects Groots. That says a lot about us really. (It also has a very interesting religious angle, which I blogged about.)

*May*
Alien Covenant
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRGGHH! This film is so stupid it hurt me. I actually felt rage when I thought about it afterwards. Every STUPID thing the STUPID people did in STUPID Prometheus they went and did again! Walking out on the surface of a planet without a protective suit. Trusting the CLEARLY EVIL ROBOT so much you stick your face up close next to an alien pod-egg, even though you've just seen your crew-mate's decapitated head floating in a fountain. I mean, come on! How dull are you? Recycling every twist you can imagine from previous films and adding such an obvious one I was literally mouthing 'Please, no, don't do that' because it was so obvious.

Possibly contentious opinion: The best thing that happened to Star Wars is that is got taken away from George Lucas. Someone needs to do the same thing with Ridley Scott and Alien.

*June*
Wonder Woman
This film had flaws. I guessed who the baddy was going to be, because by now I have seen so many superhero films it's always going to be that guy who is just too helpful to the heroes. But Gal Gadot was a revelation. The scene where she went over the top of the trench into a hail of bullets and powered through inspired me. So, all in all, I thought this was great despite the flaws.

*July*
Despicable Me 3
Someone out there might still find minions amusing. Pretty sure even little kids are sick of this franchise now. It would make a good primer about how a movie can get totally lost through having too many sub-plots.

Cars 3
I would nominate Cars 2 as the worst Pixar sequel by miles. But this was great - the sequel Cars should have had. We took my Niece (6) and Nephew (4) to see it for Nephew's first trip to the cinema. Even they recognised it was a far superior film to Cars 2, even if I'm not sure they fully grasped the mature storyline of growing old and being replaced by the next generation coming through.

Spider-Man Homecoming
This was pretty good overall. It had a lot of humour and Spider-man is a dorky schoolkid again. Marisa Tomei is a brilliant comedic actor and was a refreshing change as Aunt May. Michael Keaton as a villain - what's not to love? I've seen 5 big screen Spider-man films now, and I think this one is probably the best. And it fits back into the Marvel Cinematic Universe, which works for me.

Dunkirk
This was very powerful, with a plot timing device I only got about halfway through. I'm very glad I saw it in the cinema because the aerial combat scenes needed to be on a big screen. I know this sounds daft but the sky is big and the sense of losing sight of a plane and not knowing where it will be coming from next was very well captured. The sense of desperation, of trying to escape, and repeated failures, ratcheted up the tension. It got to me and most of the rest of the audience, judging by how we all sat there slightly stunned afterwards.

*October*
Blade Runner 2049
My comment about Ridley Scott and Alien also applies to Blade Runner. Visually it was very arresting and evocative of the first film. There was too much gratuitous nudity and the plot really didn't bear much scrutiny. I would make a case that this film settles the argument and Deckard isn't a replicant. Which I know is controversial, but if you follow the logic through, he can't be.

The Lego Ninjago Movie
Two Lego movies in a year. If you want to see the Law of Diminishing Returns in action, here it is. This was some way off The Lego Movie and The Lego Batman Movie. It was still much funnier than Sing or Despicable Me 3 though.

Thor: Ragnarok
My third Marvel Comics Universe film of the year and a real departure for Thor films, which tend to be a bit slow and depressing. This was gaudy and colourful, so much so it felt a little bit like a rip off of Guardians of the Galaxy. I laughed a lot, particularly at the new character, Korg, who introduced Thor to the weird world he ended up on. Cate Blanchett was suitably villainous as Hela, but was under-used. Anthony Hopkins phoned in his part as Odin for the third time in three films. But overall I enjoyed it a lot and it's easily the best of the Thor films.

*November*
Loving Vincent
This was an oddball one - an animated retelling of the tragic death of Vincent Van Gogh, with the twist that each cel of the animation was painted in the style of Van Gogh's art. I was intrigued by the concept, which worked some of the time, and learned quite a bit from the story. Some of the voices didn't work for me, especially Chris O'Dowd's indomitable Irish accent that felt very out of place. If you are a fan of animation, quirky films, or art, then this might interest you.

*December*
Justice League
Yay, Gal Gadot is back. This was my first real encounter with Batfleck. He didn't really do it for me. As a 'getting the team together' movie, it works better than most. Superman is still a superhero I don't care about. It was supposed to be a big secret he was in this film, but then I saw the toy sets in the supermarkets and noticed the S logo was included in the poster. Here's a tip, film-makers, if you want to hide Superman's presence in your movie, don't put his logo on the poster! In my opinion, DC is a long way off Marvel in terms of films that I want to see. Suicide Squad was the worst film I saw in 2016. The other Superman and Batman films up to this one have looked just awful. This didn't really win me over but I might give Justice League 2 a look when it rolls around.

The Last Jedi
I saw this twice before the year end. I thought it was great and have posted a long review about it already.

In summary
I watched a lot of superhero films this year, which is a bit embarrassing, but, hey, I go to the cinema to be entertained. Some quick 'awards':

Best film: Guardians of the Galaxy, Vol. 2

Best animation: Cars 3

Worst film: Alien Covenant, although Beauty & the Beast ran it a close second.

Most unexpected character appearance: Sauron in The Lego Batman Movie

Biggest twist: What happened to Snoke (trying not to reveal a spoiler there)

Best visual moment: the speeders carving up plumes of red dust across a white salt field in the battle of Crait, closely followed by Wonder Woman deflecting machine gun fire as she walks through no man's land

2017 film reviews - January & February

This year I am going to try and review films througout the year rather than having a stupidly long list at the end of the year like I did in 2016. So, to start this off here's the list of films I saw for the first time in January and February 2017. The key is as follows: C = cinema, D = DVD, N = Netflix

The Secret of Kells (D) - made by the team who made Song of the Sea (which was my film of the year in 2015). Brendan, an apprentice manuscript artist working in the scriptorium in Kells monastery looks after a manuscript gospel begun by St Aiden on Iona, as Kells comes under attack from Vikings. He is helped in his mission to protect the book by a faerie called Aisling who lives in the forest outside the monastery. The animation is excellent, although not reaching the heights of Song of the Sea, and the story is well told.

Passengers (C) - big budget sci-fi starring Chris Pratt and Jennifer Lawrence, who are both 'passengers' who have paid a huge amount of money to travel to another planet. A few decades into their 190 year journey they wake up. It's hard not to write about this without spoiling it, but it raises interesting questions about being faced with your own inevitable mortality despite having the rest of your natural life to live and what would you do if circumstances trapped you in total isolation from the rest of humanity. The film had a few flaws, but both lead actors were very good and I enjoyed it.

A Monster Calls (C) - Cathy and I had both read the book by Patrick Ness that this is based on, so we knew what to expect. The story focuses on Conor, whose mother is dying from cancer. One night the yew tree in the neighbouring churchyard comes alive as a monster and offers Conor three tales, told in animated sequences, before demanding Conor tell him "the truth". It's not an easy subject to cover in a film but it tries to address the difficult mixed feelings people have in those horrible situations. We both thought it was very well done, but Cathy felt they had missed one of the key aspects of the book. I was a bit thrown to realise halfway through that I recognised Conor's dying mum, Lizzie, as Jyn Erso in Star Wars: Rogue One. Other actors involved include Sigourney Weaver, who gives an understated masterclass in acting as Conor's grandmother.

Ex Machina (D) - science fiction thoughtful thriller from British screenwriter and director Alex Garland. Domhnall Gleeson plays a programmer called Caleb who works for a search engine company and wins a staff lottery to spend a week with Nathan, the reclusive billionaire company founder, at his isolated luxury home. Nathan wants Caleb to run a Turing test on a possibly sentient artificial intelligence he has created. The AI looks feminine, is called Ava and is played brilliantly by Alice Vikander. Caleb starts to believe Ava is genuinely conscious and therefore alive and then has to decide if he will help free her from the secure area where Nathan has contained her. But Ava might have 'her' own plans. This is a thought-provoking film looking at some of the issues involved in creating articifial intelligence and I thought it was well worth a watch.

What's Your Number? (N) - rom-com with Anna Faris as a 30-something woman with a disastrous love life who gets hung up on the number of men she has slept with. Not wanting to bump the number higher she decides to revisit all her ex's in the hope that one of them has developed into marriageable material. She enlists her lothario neighbour, played by Chris Evans (AKA Captain America) to help her track them down and in the process rather predictably they end up liking each other. I did laugh quite a few times, particularly at the scenes involving Faris' real-life husband Chris Pratt who pops up here as one of her ex's. Chris Evans is also funny and very watchable. There's a bit of nudity and frank sex talk, but nothing over the top. Andy Samberg has a very brief cameo, which also made me laugh a lot.

The Cobbler (N) - Adam Sandler plays a New York cobbler who's inherited the family firm, including a load of old junk in the basement. Hidden down there is an ancient shoe repair machine with magical properties that means when he puts on the shoes he has repaired he takes on the likeness of the owners of the shoes. This sounds on paper like an awful premise, but it strangely worked, helped by a strong supporting turn from Steve Buscemi and a bit of a twist. Well worth watching for something a bit different.

Good Will Hunting (N) - I know, I know, it's 20 years old and people can't really believe I'd never seen it, but hey, I'm finally caught up. Surely everyone knows the story and the story behind the story - that Matt Damon and Ben Affleck wrote a script and ended up winning an Oscar. Everyone talks about Robin Williams in this, and he is great, but I feel for Stellan Skarsgard who never gets mentioned but is absolutely pivotal. It's weird watching this now, and remembering how fresh-faced Affleck and Damon once were, before fame and Bourne and Batman. They tend to sleepwalk through movies now so it was kind of nice to see them act. Also I think I appreciated the film more, having been to Bawstun and hearing the accents in real life and riding the train through the city.

Sing (C) - Animated film about a city full of animals where a koala puts on an X-Factor style competition to try and save his crumbling theatre. The 'we need to save the theatre' trope was a cliche when the Muppets re-used it for their comeback movie several years ago. So that wasn't promising. The characters are a mixed bag. None get explored in real depth. There's a happy-ish ending and one or two clever jokes, but nothing exceptional.

The Lego Batman Movie (C) - I've already written a (spoilery) blog about how this didn't really work. It will appeal to a lot of kids who like Batman and who like people being silly and will therefore like Batman being silly. They have a lot of fun with the Batman mythos, but as a film it isn't great. There are cameos from villains from other franchises as well.

Birdman (N) - There was some hype about this when it came out and it won an Oscar for Best Picture. Michael Keaton is great as an actor who was famous 20 years previously for portraying a masked vigilante superhero before such films were such big business, and is now trying to resurrect his career in a Broadway play. I do wonder exactly how much of his real life feelings of regret for walking out on Batman back in the mid-90s informed this movie. It's hard not to think Birdman is a bit close to the bone. The film is a bit slow. Some of the other characters are a bit annoying. I didn't really like the ending. But overall I thought it was worth a watch and the cinematography as characters are followed through the twisting backstage corridors of the theatre is fantastic.

Ratchett & Clank (N) - I'm not sure this actually got a cinema release. Certainly it didn't really register. Catching up on Netflix, it's a by the numbers kids science fiction animation based on the vintage PlayStation game(s). Ratchett is a mechanic who wants to join the Galaxy Rangers. Clank is his robot buddy (and is rather adorable). Together they thwart evil, including a villainous robot voiced by none other than Sylvester Stallone. It's enjoyable knockabout stuff which made me laugh along the way, but isn't really a must-see.

2016 film review

I watched 31 films for the first time in 2016. I've decided to lump them in to one blog post with a one paragraph review. Key: C = cinema; D = DVD; I = in-flight movie; N = Netflix

Edge of Tomorrow (D) - Tom Cruise gets to "Live, Die, Repeat" in a Groundhog Day meets Starship Troopers sci-fi adventure. I quite liked this and the idea of exploring different options each time was well done, even if I didn't see any point to the physical training every time he woke up after dying. It's not like he would keep his newly honed muscles.

Kung Fu Panda 3 (C) - the next installment in the adventures of Po the Dragon Warrior and the Furious Five kung fu masters. It was alright as sequels go, as Po and his friends teamed up against a supernatural villain seeking revenge. It has lots of Pandas in it.

Zootropolis (C) - my contender for animated film of the year. Disney do subversive quite well, and the subtext of this - politicians using fear to divide society to gain power - is very relevant. One of the characters even has a Donald Trump hair do.

(Longer reviews of Kung Fu Panda 3 and Zootropolis)

Captain America: Civil War (C) - third in the increasingly bleak Captain America series, all of which seem to end on downers. The Marvel films are a series and this one felt like one of those episodes you get to move the overall plot line on, rather than being enjoyable in their own right. You really need to have seen the previous Captain America and Avengers movies to understand what was going on, which annoys me, even though I have seen those films. There are a load of new characters now in the Marvel movies and I don't care about any of them. The best scenes were the ones with Tony Stark and yet another kid playing Spider-Man, who is now back in the mainstream Disney-owned Marvel Comics Universe instead of the pseudo one being run by Sony.

Deadpool (I) - I wasn't sure about this but I enjoyed it more than I probably should have. Ryan Reynolds obviously loved being Deadpool, although when he wasn't in the mask his 'scarred head make up' did make him look like a decrepit Ted Danson. Much was made of how Deadpool breaks the fourth wall to engage with his audience. This whole film mocks comic book movies and as such the whole thing is a fourth wall breaker.

Our Brand is Crisis (I) - Sandra Bullock plays a washed up political spin doctor who takes a job in South America running an election campaign for a deeply disliked candidate. The film was mediocre, although the comms stuff was quite interesting.

Straight Outta Compton (I) - the story of NWA, as told by the survivors (and it's noticeable how slanted it is towards them). The scene in Detroit where the band ignore police instructions not to play 'F--- the Police', and then get run off the stage by the police, was particularly memorable, as was Ice Cube's visit to his corrupt agent's office with a baseball bat.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows (C) - second in the new series of films. The Turtles' good deeds get noticed by the general public. The guy from the TV series 'Arrow' plays Casey Jones. Megan Fox does her usual thing. It is very reminiscent of the cartoon series. (Which I'm not saying is a bad thing!)

The Secret Life of Pets (C) - animated film that follows some well-worn movie cliches, although it did take a diversion about halfway through with a revolutionary chihuahua advocating animal revolution against humans.

Ghostbusters (C) - the reboot more famous for daring to cast women as ghostbusters than anything else. I thought this was OK. There were some clever scenes and I enjoyed the cameos from the surviving original ghostbusters, especially Bill Murray as a sceptic unconvinced by the 'busters ghost-catching exploits. The opening scene in a supposedly haunted house that suddenly gets supernaturally invaded is genuinely creepy and very well done.

Shaun the Sheep Movie (D) - a nice, warm feature film from Aardman, with no dialogue but a lot of charm. Sean and friends go to the city in search of their farmer who has amnesia and is now lauded as a hair styling genius for his shearing skills.

Star Trek Beyond (C) - another sequel and outing for the Enterprise crew. I wasn't convinced by the motives of the main villain and there were too many convenient coincidences. There is a spectacular space habitat, though, if you are into that sort of thing. Karl Urban's version of Bones McCoy is yet again the best thing about the film. Zoe Saldana is, again, woefully under-used in a Star Trek film, which should be a crime.

Finding Dory (C) - sequel to Finding Nemo. Dory sets off to find her parents. Some fun new characters, including Hank the septipus (he only has 7 legs left) and a beluga whale who thinks his echo-location is a superpower. I was sucked in to the emotional scene at the end and got a bit moist-eyed.

Ender's Game (D) - I was sceptical if they could really make a film of the book 'Ender's Game'. My scepticism was well-founded. This film struggles to bring the source material to life and invest it with any energy because its mainly ponderous CGI. The Battle Room sequences are the best bits. Harrison Ford isn't a particularly animated actor at the best of times and was grumpily robotic. Ben Kingsley was hilariously miscast.

Suicide Squad (C) - an utter nonsense of a film, which only made money because of Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn in the trailer. There were so many things wrong with this film I probably need to do a whole separate post for it. Will Smith was woefully miscast.  Frankly, I'd have been happy to see all the members of the Suicide Squad die instead of the only interesting one.

Jason Bourne (C) - it's a 'direct by numbers' action film that rhymes with 'yawn'. I don't think there was anything in it particularly noteworthy. I did go and see it with my friend, Anthony, who is a top bloke and we had a coffee and a long chat afterwards, which was better than the film really.

The Little Prince (N) - I was very excited by this animated version of the Antoine de Saint-Exupery classic book when I saw the trailer for it, with its mix of computer and stop motion animation. I was gutted it didn't get a UK cinema release and then excited again to see it was on Netflix. But, harshly, I can see why it didn't get a release. This is one of those adaptations where they try to do something new based on the source material and missed the mark by a considerable margin. The fox character is very cute in the computer animation and beautiful in the stop-motion and that's probably the best bit.

The Lobster (N) - a weird premise. Colin Farrell stars as a man without a partner in a dystopia where you have to have one. He goes to a matchmaking hotel where he must find a new mate or be turned into an animal. The first half is darkly comic, but then he goes to live in the woods with other determined singles and it goes bleakly tragic. The turning point is a distressing scene of animal cruelty. Don't watch this film if you like dogs.

The Magnificent Seven (C) - I don't object to remakes, but if you're going to remake one of the absolute best westerns of all time you need to bring your a-game. Even Chris Pratt, Ethan Hawke and Denzel Washington couldn't raise this above the mediocre. Denzel mumbled his way through most of his lines, which got very annoying.

Pride (D) - gay activists in London start raising money for striking miners during the mid-80s union-led unrest. Cue a clash of cultures between the traditional Welsh villages and the flamboyant metropolitan homosexuals. The threat of bigotry and gay-bashing, and the emergence of the AIDS epidemic gives this true life story real depth and show how far we have moved as a society.

Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children (C) - Samuel L Jackson is making some odd film choices these days. This is one of them. It centres on a time travel plot twist, which, as ever with time travel plot twists, just doesn't work. The monsters are scary and eat eyeballs plucked from their victims' heads, which I wasn't expecting in a film pitched as a kids' film.

The Penguins of Madagascar (D) - this is silly, but miles better than Madagascar 3, which is one of the worst animated films released by a big studio I've ever seen. The Penguins are funny and the film's alright. It had enough scenes that made me laugh.

Storks (C) - I'd seen a lot of trailers and that drew the sting from this very well made animated film. Storks no longer deliver babies, just packages for an Amazon-esque company. But then a baby comes along and one stork has to cover up its mistake and deliver the baby to his waiting parents. You have to watch this just for the wolf pack. Seriously! The wolf pack!

Mascots (N) - mockumentary as various sports mascots (the guys in the big animal costumes) compete to be mascot of the year, including a chap from London who is the third member of his family to be 'Sid the hedgehog'. It's a gentle film and worth watching on Netflix, if you have it.

Trolls (C) - stupid (in a good way), bouncy, funny, singfest with some quite nasty villains who want to eat the trolls because that's the only way they can taste true happiness. I'm sure there is some kind of message in that.

I, Daniel Blake (C) - at the end of this film, as the credits started rolling, nobody moved. It was probably thirty seconds or more before people started shuffling in their seats getting ready to stand up and leave the auditorium. This is a visceral look at how years of Tory policy have weaponised the benefits system to deliberately make it hard for vulnerable people to get the help they need. There is a scene in a food bank that is beyond upsetting and lived with me for days. Heavily researched, this film wears its authenticity on its sleeve, and it is relentlessly damning of the people who engineered the situation desperate people find themselves in.

RED (N) - Bruce Willis and some other older actors play 'Retired and Extremely Dangerous' former CIA operatives, who are being targetted for some unknown reason. Except, even though they are retired, they are extremely dangerous, as the bad guys find out to their cost. A silly film, made very watchable by performances from Morgan Freeman, John Malkovich and Helen Mirren. And Bruce.

Moana (C) - Disney animation set in Polynesia. Moana must find the exiled god Maui to challenge the encroaching darkness that threatens to devour her island. Some great music and a very funny meta joke about Disney princesses add to the interesting concept. It's the first cartoon I can remember with such an emphasis on tattoos. I have doubts how accessible it would be to very young children but I really enjoyed it.

Elysium (D) - it's the future and the rich live on Elysium, an idyllic space colony, while the poor live on dust-bowl Earth. Matt Damon plays an engineer who needs to get to Elysium for life-saving medical treatment and makes a deal with a criminal gang leader to perform a heist and get a space on a shuttle trip. Jodie Foster co-stars as the Elysium security chief in what can charitably be described as not her best ever role or performance.

Star Wars Rogue One (C) - I wrote about this here. It's cured me of Star Wars.

Argo (D) - Ben Affleck won an Oscar for this. I can see why. It's a taut drama set after the American Embassy in Tehran was swamped by a mob and all its staff, bar six, are taken hostage. The CIA set up a fake movie production as cover to get the six fugitive Americans, now hiding out at the Canadian ambassador's house, out of Iran. It's the end of the 1970s. Everyone smokes, even on planes (remember that?). I knew the outcome but it was still tense right up until the final scenes. A really, really well-made film.