TOP 10 MOVIES OF THIS YEAR!!!!

My top 10 movies of this year!
These are based of what I believe for me were the best of the best films of 2016!!!

Heads up - I haven't seen Hacksaw Ridge, La La Land, Silence and many more becasue they all get released January!

10) Deadpool

Deapool kicks off this list. With it's fun and meta jokes, this was a character that I don't even like but the movie won me over.

9) The Revenant

Leo deserved his Oscar with a great performance accompanied by the ever great Tom Hardy. Also the cinematography was breath taking.

8) Bridge of Spies

A master class on how to direct with Steven Spielberg and a master class on how to act with Tom Hanks and Mark Rylance.

7) The Witch

Scary, tense and uneasy. The best horror movie of the year.

6) Captain America: Civil War

A Superhero movie done right. Balancing a lot of heroes isn't easy but the Russo's are becoming experts at it.

5) The Hateful Eight

Tarantino knows how to direct and tell stories. Not his best but is still unparalleled by most films.

4) Arrival

Arrival proves the Denise Villeneuve is a director to be reckoned with. The best Sci-Fi movie of the year. A film that relies on language rather than explosions for excitement is exciting.

3) The Neon Demon 

The most underrated and most polarizing film of the year. You either love Nicolas Windin Refn films or hate them. I love his movies. Especially this one.

2) Nocturnal Animals

One of the most powerful performances from anyone this year. Jake Gyllenhaal steals the show with Micheal Shannon. So depressing but very powerful.

1) Your Name

Just beautiful. 'Nuff said.

Why has Mediocre become Acceptable?

Furious 7, Iron Man 3, Minions and Transformers: Dark of the Moon have all made over 1 billion at the box office. More than The Dark Knight, Drive, The Wolf of Wall Street and Inside Out. How did it get this bad?

We have the power to dictate what studios release. We refused to watch Ghostbusters (2016) and no more will be made. Yet we never do this often. We all complain about the influx of terrible movies but we're the ones fueling studios to keep making them. Have we just accepted mediocre as normal?

With so many studios wanting to build their own universe, it has seemed that they want to rush an important step; quality. This is the same with us - we want different characters to cross-over in other movies that we accept that bad movies will happen in order for them to cross-over. "Who cares if Iron Man 2 was bad at least he'll be in Avengers" - Sound familiar?

The quality in which we as the audience accept a film has dramatically declined. As it seems the standard of a film no longer matters but instead it has come to who stars in the film or if it's a character we recognize that gets us to the cinema. I am no saint and often do that too. If it's a star I know then I'll probably watch that movie over an independent masterpiece with no one recognizable. This has fueled Hollywood to keep making these generic movies that have no personality. However, the studios are not the only ones to blame as it may also be down to everyone being over sensitive, leading to studios having to hit every demographic in order to make some money. But we can change that by opening our minds and allowing different ideas on the screen.

You cannot sensor art.

Art is expression and freedom and once you sensor that then we live in a world where free speech doesn't exist.

Our over sensitive minds means studios will cater to them. If a studio allows a risky move in their movies, you can guarantee backlash and boycotts from audiences which studios do not want. An example is The Interview, which had such a backlash that cinemas didn't play it and Sony got hacked. This has put fear in studios not wanting a similar situation which means they would rather make a generic movie than push the bar of creativity.

As the audience we have power. We have to stop buying tickets for the generic crap and demand something different. If we support more creative films (even bad ones to a degree) then studios will have to consider making more dynamic and inventive pieces of art. We shouldn't accept mediocre but instead films that push the medium to more imaginative places. But before we change the studios, we have to change ourselves.

Remember, If we don't change now, we are one step closer to a Citizen Kane remake. Think about that.

The Problem with Doctor Strange

*CONTAINS SPOILERS*

Doctor Strange is the third in Marvel's phase three line up. It stars Benedict Cumberbatch as Steven Strange and is about his recovery and enlightenment with the help of The Ancient One (Tilda Swinton). The movie has spectacular visuals and choreography that transport audiences to new realities but it has some problems that made this film a 'good' film but not a 'mind blowing' one. 

When I watch a movie, I judge it on how the movie was directed and if the story was interesting. I do not judge a movie on, if they got a certain character correct or if they put some Easter eggs in there. This is no different to comic book movies. I don't care if a movie has got Batman correct because if the movie sucks then the movie sucks.

I have no knowledge of Doctor Strange so I watch this movie as I would any other by not knowing that much about our main protagonist. Which the movie doesn't help, Doctor Strange has no character arc. This is shown when he only struggles with his powers for about five minutes and he masters the skill of magic in about 15 minutes. There's no struggle nor does he change his ways to become more skilled. He just achieves master level in minutes.

A struggle of a character who has worked hard to earn his skill helps create tension however Dr Strange does not struggle meaning there is no conflict with his inner-self. He doesn't beat his demons because he never changes throughout the movie. He stays the same man from beginning to end. The only thing he learnt was there's something bigger out there.

I hate it when these movies have the whole world at stake. THIS DOES NOT CREATE TENSION! It's boring because I don't care if everyone dies as I don't know them.

Making a movie smaller is not a bad thing. It actually means the stakes are bigger for our protagonist. Doctor Strange should make a hard decision to save the people or person he loves or cares for, not the world because who cares? The movie should have focused on Strange and Christine Palmer (Rachel McAdams) because they have a deeper relationship that we as the audience can relate to. How many of you go out and save the entire world? and how many of you would sacrifice yourself for the people you love?

In The Dark Knight Rises, Chris Nolan shows that even an entire city can still have stakes involved. But how they do it, which Doctor Strange fails to do, is establish other characters and their world. In The Dark Knight Rises, we see other characters interact in their world, from Gordon, Blake and Foley. They all have something to lose if they fail. Batman doesn't save the entire world, he save his city. A place we have seen throughout the entire trilogy, not like Hong Kong for Doctor Strange. He wants to save his legacy and the people he cares for. For a third movie in a superhero trilogy, it was small compared to Doctor Strange and it worked in their favor. The movie focuses on a few characters and allowing us to see what they can lose. 

In Doctor Strange, we see he cares for Christine, but the threat is in Hong Kong. Thousands of miles away from her. She's not in harms way nor does she know what is happening. The giant CG blob fest was neat to look at but it never transmitted fear. The bomb in The Dark Knight Rises was ticking and every second lost was a step closer to everyone's loved ones being dead. For Doctor Strange I had no idea what was happening because they weren't clear on the outcome. 

With all these world shattering threats, what will make Infinity Wars stand out? 

I also want to compare it with Interstellar. Both relied on visuals to push the story but Interstellar is much more effective because of the emotional connection we see with Coop and Murph. That was missing in Doctor Strange. There was no emotional connection between him and Christine. They had a fling in the past and she does mean something to him but we never see anything that really shows us their connection. They never have time to themselves and discuss their past and maybe their future. She is ultimately forgotten and without the emotion, a movie loses it soul.

How Doctor Strange beat Dormammu was pathetic. I have no problems with rewinding time - I enjoyed the battle when time was reversed and we see that effecting the fight. But the loop was unforgivable. This is where I don't judge a movie by how comic accurate they are but by how well they are made. Doctor Strange fans probably know what that necklace power is capable off - but for me they did not establish enough rules. The biggest one is - how did he stop the loop? They never show us and they probably didn't know themselves. It took me right out the movie because of how ridiculous it was. Film is a visual medium, show us the important parts! 

On the other hand if they wanted to go down the 'Earth in danger route', there was only one way to make this movie incredibly ballsy. Replace Dormammu with Thanos. At first when Steven Strange went on his acid trip, I thought he saw the impending doom of Thanos, this got me super excited but alas I was wrong.

Instead of having Dormammu, making Thanos the antagonist and losing to Doctor Strange shows that Thanos needs the infinity gems because he is not strong enough without them. By making Doctor Strange defeat Thanos it gives him the important role of guiding the Avengers because Strange would have the know how to defeat him. It would have shown the importance of the gems and how far Thanos would go to collect all of them. With Thanos defeated, he would come back angrier and wary of Earth's threat making him a more fierce villain. 

Overall Doctor Strange was a good movie. It focused more on the visuals then the story and for that it lost its emotional footing. The movie lacked heart and lost itself in the Marvel formula. Mads Mikkelsen was sorely wasted and should have been the only antagonist. A more emotional story with those visuals would have created a gripping movie from start to end.

But I do recommend you watch it and see for yourself.     

The Marvel Cinematic Universe - Why is it Important?

INTRODUCTION

The year was 2008, the UK experienced its largest earthquake in 25 years and the boom of comic book movies was hot with successes such as Spider-Man, X-Men and The Dark Knight(released the same year). But it was Marvel that had the biggest game changer we had ever seen in cinema. The MCU was born with the success of Iron Man. With 8 years on it's still going strong, film after film are being released with all being financial hits but why is it still going strong and what makes it so damn important?

IT CHANGED CINEMA (UNIVERSES)

That's no understatement, Marvel has changed how we watch films. We cannot miss any of their releases unless we want to miss the discussions or even understand scenes from other movies. The platform in which Marvel has created has meant every other studio is building their own universe and it's not just for comic book movies, we are getting a Universal studio Monster movie starting of with The Mummy reboot starring Tom Cruise and let's not forget Godzilla and King Kong Universe or how about the Hasbro Universe. Every studio is now rushing to see what's in their lockers so they can pull a Marvel. Before, studios would not dare to plan so far ahead with a movie slate. Promise 10 movies and the first one fails then you look like a fool. However the confidence in which Marvel has instilled on people is shocking. We trust them to the point where they can release just an end credit scene and it will be sold out in seconds. Other studios should be bowing to Marvel for what they achieved. If it weren't for them, Warner Bothers would have shoved their DC universe back in their locker. The divided Man of Steel, a horror show of Batman v Superman and the complete mess of Suicide Squad has not scared Warner Brothers who have kept their slate and are continuing to make more superhero films. The success of Marvel has given hope to audiences that DC and Warner can get it right. We live in a new era in cinema where no Studio will make just one single stand-alone movie. If a movie has more than one character get ready for sequels, prequels and spin-offs just to build a movie universe. 

IDEALS

Marvel has given kids icons to look up to and it has given the rest of us those same icons. Marvel has made their heroes, heroes first. They do not skew the line between good and bad with only the second and third Captain America movies doing that. However Marvel are clear that the good guys win all the time. This is similar to the original Star Wars where the ideas of good and bad are different and as an audience we know who to root for. Now this has created a generic formula where you know what you are expecting from the movie but the clear distinguish of good an bad has made Civil War more emotional because as the audience we know Iron Man is good and we know Captain America is good which makes their fight at the end that much impactful. They are heroes and they won't fight each other without a clear and logical reason. The first two phases paints the Avengers as the good guys but with Civil War and Winter Soldier our own beliefs are shattered. We don't know who to trust or who's right. The ideals of the MCU are going in murkier waters with each new phase with their actions becoming more reckless we are seeing the tide change again.

NOT JUST MOVIES (MTU)

Marvel have perfected the movie industry and now they are taking over the TV industry. Daredevil, Jessica Jones, and Luke Cage have been received with critical success. The dynamic and tonal change has made the Marvel universe different and layered. They have cleverly made the TV shows more gritty and dirty, making the TV shows and movies different allows audiences differentiate themselves when watching a Marvel movie in the cinema and watching a Marvel TV show on Netflix. Depth and layer has been built and makes the Marvel universe more real. When we watch the movies we can explore the bigger world but watching the Netflix shows we explore the bigger themes. Daredevil is Marvel's best product and reminds me of Batman Begins. It has a real feel and Matt Murdock's build up isn't superhero like, it's authentic and we see his struggle and rise to become the Devil in Hell's Kitchen. The Netflix shows are taking more risks and have been rewarded. The sexual and violent nature of the shows is refreshing and keeps Marvel relevant. The MTU also brings us different characters, who would have ever thought Luke Cage, Jessica Jones or Iron Fist would have a live action adaptation?  

CULTURAL IMPACT

Now this is an obvious one. However we cannot underestimate how big it really is. The MCU has earned a staggering $7.787 billion from the box office. That's more than the Harry Potter films and James Bond films. We have grasped to the MCU because it got their marketing right. Every age and gender was accommodated, leaving no stone un-turned. Kids to grandparents can watch and enjoy their superhero movies. Compare that to DC and Warner Brothers who have alienated a large majority of their audience. Would a five year old or a 70 year old watch BvS or Suicide Squad? When Marvel changed their formula for Captain America: The Winter Soldier they did not go and alienate their audience. They updated what they could but still keep their fan base happy and bring in new fans who wanted a mature film. This is why non-comic book readers or even non-comic book fans still where Captain America T-shirts or Hulk hats because they are safe with Marvel and know what to expect and when the tide does change their movies become significantly better. That has to be respected.

CONCLUSION

The MCU has sparked a new life in cinema and has changed the way we view films. It will be marked down in history as a new era in the film industry. With phase three beginning, Marvel will be continuing strong for years and that is why the Marvel Cinematic Universe is important.

TV or Movies?

INTRODUCTION

If I was to say you could only watch TV shows or movies for the rest of your life, what would your answer be? For me its movies and if this was 10 years ago I would believe you would also choose movies but now I see audiences gravitate towards TV shows more. With the rise of Netflix and binge watching giving us 12 hours of pure ecstasy and with the quality of these shows improving we see TV becoming more popular. However can TV shows replace movies? Let us look at two big point for TV that is always used against movies.

LONG FORM STORYTELLING

When it comes down to TV shows the main argument for it and against Movies is the writers have time to expand and develop their characters while movies averagely have 2 hours to do the same. However I see that as a weak argument. Let's take TV's greatest show Breaking Bad. It had 5 seasons, with season 1 having 7 episodes, 2-4 having 13 episodes and the final season having 16. And with the help of a website it calculated that fans spent 1 day, 23 hours and 32 minutes watching Walt's slow descent from humanity. Now let's compare that to Drive, a Nicolas Winding Refn film. A movie with similar themes of a slow descent from humanity.

Drive is 1 hour and 40 minutes long and just like Breaking Bad is slow and lets scenes ferment. With Breaking Bad having a budget of $3 million per episode and Drive only having $15 million for the whole movie, surely Breaking Bad is far greater than Drive? Well that's down to the audience but Drive tells the same character story Breaking Bad does. Sure both go their different ways and tell a characters humanity slowly fading differently but both achieve the same outcome. As the audience we get more back story for Walt which is needed to give him empathy and for us to route for him even when he does some despicable acts and with Ryan Gosling appropriately named Driver, his mysterious background is what attracts us to him. At first we see he drives robbers to their mark and makes the escape. But as the movie gradually shows us more we sympathies when we see his lighter side with Irene. His average apartment and having three jobs we know he doesn't earn a lot so we want him to succeed.

Both Walt and the Driver start on their own personal high ground, obviously Walt starts higher but they both have good guy morals however with circumstances intervening they both fall from their perch. At the end of Breaking Bad and Drive both get their ultimate due and we question who they really are. Leaving unanswered question about our character, the main one what happened next?

Long form storytelling is and will always be an advantage. More time with characters means we can understand their situation. However movies can achieve the same emotional outcome even with far less time. Films such as Taxi Driver and Inside Out achieve emotional levels that replicate those on TV. It's not about how much time you have, it's about how you use them.

CREATIVE FREEDOM

There is no doubt that movies are becoming very studio involved with whole departments of suits deciding what goes in and out the movie. Marvel, Warner Brothers and Disney all have department for their movie universes and whatever they say goes. But is that the same with TV shows?

There are some freedom barriers but not on the same scale. In many cases TV shows do have far greater freedom than movies, however, this is due to Movies watering down their content to make money while TV shows just need high ratings to be successful and the best way for that is controversy. TV shows that don't hold back on violence or politics are deemed better and more people watch them. I think this is because we want the truth when it comes to such agendas. The brutal nature of House of Cards shows us a dramatized workings of the White House but looking at today's American politics has become more real and more interesting.

However it depends on who you are in the industry, if you are a TV director there isn't much creative freedom because the show writers essentially run the whole thing and it's them that dictates the style and feel of an episode. On the other hand that is different to films where the director runs the show (sought of) while the writers don't get much say, an example would be Steven Spielberg's Bridge of Spies, which had been written by Joel and Ethan Cohen.

In movies such as Batman v Superman, Suicide Squad and Fantastic Four it seems that the comic book genre is hit the worst with Studios intervening and that's due to comic book movies still being the hot property in Hollywood. Studios spend up to 200 million and need 1 billion to make it financially successful in their eyes. So these films must cater for every demographic to get the most for their buck. This plays no bearing in TV comic book shows, Netflix's Daredevil to CW's The Flash have been received with critical reception by fans and critics. Is it down to more freedom? It could be the case because Ant-Man though having average reviews and not deemed a bad movie is a bland and boring superhero film. With someone like Edgar Wright, Ant-Man would have had its identity and no doubt would have been a far superior movie but Edgar Wright left due to creativity conflicts and what did Marvel do next? They appointed a 'yes' man to take over.

I believe that TV does have more creative freedom to tell a story. Imagine Game of Thrones as a movie and how many cut backs would have been made or how many add-on to accommodate the biggest market at the moment China. For writers TV is where to be and for directors Movies is where to be but it all depends on who you are. A Chris Nolan movie would never be altered by the studio nor would a studio ever touch a Scorsese flick. In essence it's all about building a reputation.

QUALITY

Quality is what these two mediums will be judged on because no audience cares about backstage squabbles, all we want is a good product. And when it comes down to it Movies and TV shows both have the good and bad, and both have benefits and disadvantageous. Could I see Breaking Bad as a good movie, no, and could I see Mad Max: Fury Road as a TV show, absolutely not. Why? because they both understood their medium and stuck with the element that was given to them. Breaking Bad had the option to be one season or 10 seasons but the writers new when to stop and how long to take. The same with Mad Max, it new it had a limited run time so they made a fast paced simple movie and the atmosphere in the cinema cannot be replicated on TV. It's up to the audience to decide which is better but for me we should celebrate that at least there's something good to watch everyday.