The Amazing Spider-Man (2012)

Based on the comic book by Stan Lee and Steve Ditko, this film is perhaps one of the best adaptations of Spider-Man to be released thus far. I appreciate that for the uninitiated, there seem to be far too many reboots of the character and the story, but most of these are due to the film rights being passed around from studio to studio - at a time when Marvel weren’t making their own films yet - before reverting back to Marvel Studios, allowing them to incorporate their own character into the Marvel Cinematic Universe at last.

And yes, before you ask, this film is another origin story (at least we weren’t subjected to that once Spider-Man entered the MCU, I guess Marvel came to the conclusion that audiences were well aware of Peter Parker’s transformation by then). But I must say, as a long-time reader of the comics - Spider-Man is by far my favourite Marvel character, and has been since the late 1980s - this is certainly the most accurate origin story of the character. In fact, even the title of the film is testament to that: the first appearance of the character was in The Amazing Spider-Man.

Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) is a high-school senior in New York. Living in Queens with his Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen) and Aunt May (Sally Field) - since his parents died in a plane crash when he was very young) - he is your average nerd. Terrorised by the school bully, awkward around girls, especially the girl he has admired from afar for years, Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone), the list goes on.

Uncle Ben (Martin Sheen) and Aunt May (Sally Field).

After being bitten by a genetically-enhanced spider, he begins to take on some spider-like qualities, specifically much more acute senses and an ability to climb walls. Yes, I know you probably already know this, but what you may not know is that - as far as the comics are concerned - he never had the ability to shoot webs. Rather, his webs were shot from electronics mounted to his wrists - a fact which this film has accurately portrayed.

Of course, you can’t have a Spider-Man movie without a formidable villain, and this film delivers there, too. Dr. Curtis Connors (Rhys Ifans), a researcher working in Oscorp Tower, who has been trying to crack cross-species genetics for years, comes to a breakthrough (partly with Peter’s help). Any comic readers out there can probably name the villain already. For the rest of you, it’s The Lizard, a half-man, half-lizard creature with super strength and claws that look like they would cause some pretty serious damage.

Peter’s admiration for Dr. Connors, and his hatred for The Lizard, are essentially what creates the majority of the tension in this film. The rest comes from his developing on-again, off-again relationship with Gwen Stacy (once again, they’ve nailed this; Peter’s first girlfriend in the comics was always Gwen, I’ve no idea what possessed the writers of the first Spider-Man movie to make MJ his first love).

I’ll leave the rest of the plot for you to discover for yourself, especially if you haven’t seen the film yet.

Peter Parker/Spider-Man (Andrew Garfield).

The screenplay - by James Vanderbilt and Alvin Sargent and Steve Kloves - is as close to perfect as a comic-book adaptation can be, certainly at the time this film was released. As I have already discussed, many of the events, characters and situations in this film are lifted straight from the pages of the original comics, much more than any other Spider-Man movie had been previously. The characters are all accurate to the books, and with plenty of additional conflicts - internal and external - thrown in to flesh out the film.

James Horner’s score is brilliantly constructed, and perfectly suited to the on-screen action throughout. It is at the same time suitably epic and also sufficiently understated when required. At no point does the music dominate or overshadow the action. As you might expect if you are familiar with Horner’s previous work, the score is exclusively orchestral, and the arrangements are very well realised.

Thanks to the cinematography of John Schwartzman, significant portions of the film look as though they have been lifted straight from the pages of a comic book. There is decent use of light and dark which, while it may not win any major awards, is certainly sufficient for the subject matter.

The performances of the cast are equally decent. While not particularly inspirational at any point, they are certainly well-suited to their respective roles. Garfield is an adequate Peter Parker (though the mantle of the best has since gone to Tom Holland of the MCU), and Stone is by far the best on-screen Gwen Stacy to date.

Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone).

The supporting cast are also adequate enough. In selecting a standout among the supporting cast, I can’t go past Rhys Ifans as Dr. Connors. He brings real heart to the character and, conversely, portrays The Lizard with just the right level of impending threat.

I would certainly recommend this film to fans of Spider-Man, though I suspect finding a fan who hasn’t seen this film yet might prove difficult. I would even recommend this film to anyone who didn’t enjoy the trilogy that preceded it, asking you to give the character another chance.

Director Marc Webb has made an incredible adaptation here, one that would only be outdone by its sequel two years later (which I shall be reviewing in due course).

8 out of 10.

Zombieland: Double Tap (2019)

Ten years after the original Zombieland film, the sequel finally hits screens around the world. And yes, all your favourite characters are back for a whole new adventure.

It has indeed been ten years since the events of the first film (as we hear in the opening narration, a lot has changed in the intervening years). The zombies - yes, they are still around - have continued to evolve and develop over the years, and there are now four particular sub-species (for want of a better word) of zombies, each of them with their own strengths and weaknesses, that our slightly mismatched foursome have learned to deal with in order to survive.

The whole original team is back: Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson), Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg), Wichita (Emma Stone) and Little Rock (Abigail Breslin). Each regular human in this new society is known only by their hometown - in the same way as the first film - as a way of maintaining some form of anonymity, and not allowing yourself to get too close to anyone, in case any of them turn, and have to be eliminated.

L-R: Little Rock (Abigail Breslin), Wichita (Emma Stone), Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson) and Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg).

Columbus still adheres strictly to his ‘rules’ for survival, and has managed to get the others to agree to follow them as well. It is perhaps for this reason that they have managed to survive as long as they have in such a dangerous environment.

As the film begins, the team have recently settled into a new ‘home’ at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. That’s right, the White House (which allows for plenty of presidential-related humour, but also plenty of interesting historical information about plenty of former Presidents).

After Wichita and Little Rock take off on their own again - still refusing to remain tied down to the others - Tallahassee and Columbus, after spending the day at the mall, picking up a few more supplies, meet another human as yet uninfected. The girl, named Madison (Zoey Deutch), is a blonde airhead (as Tallahassee remarks, the only reason she hasn’t been attacked by zombies yet is because zombies feed on brains, and she doesn’t have any!).

Tallahassee (Woody Harrelson) and Nevada (Rosario Dawson).

There are a whole host of other human characters that we meet for the first time in this film: Little Rock’s new ‘boyfriend’ Berkeley (Avan Jogia), and potential allies Nevada (Rosario Dawson), Albuquerque (Luke Wilson) and Flagstaff (Thomas Middleditch).

I’ll leave the plot there, because I’m sure you’ll want to discover it for yourself. If you enjoyed the first film, you will certainly enjoy this one: it is virtually identical in tone and feel to the original. The humour is just as present and frequent, with laughs at every turn. The level of violence is also just the same, so if you find such things distressing, perhaps this film isn’t for you. (I mention this because I know of a few friends who loved the humorous tone of the first film, but as soon as the gunshots started - which was only a few minutes in - had to abandon their decision to keep watching).

The screenplay, by Dave Callaham, Rhett Reese & Paul Wernick is very clever, with the aforementioned humour and violence laying the groundwork for an equally enjoyable film. There are plenty of twists and turns throughout the film, allowing the viewer to simply sit back and enjoy the ride. The characters are all clearly defined, with plenty of backstory and background and development to round them out well.

Chung-hoon Chung’s cinematography is fantastic, with the same fast-paced shots you would be used to from the original. The pacing of the film overall is well executed, with events and circumstances coming at you at breakneck speed.

Columbus (Jesse Eisenberg), Wichita (Emma Stone) and Madison (Zoey Deutch).

I must make particular mention of the stunning production design. Martin Whist has done an incredible job of creating a post-apocalyptic world, right down to the very last detail. The White House and Graceland sets in particular are well designed and constructed, adding to the overall tone of the film.

The cast performances are good across the board. One of the clear standouts to my mind is newcomer - to this franchise, not to acting in general - Zoey Deutch. It actually takes a lot of work, and a lot of intelligence, to play a character as stupid as Madison; it is not as easy as it looks. And she does a brilliant job. Yes, the character is created by the screenwriters, but it is in her embodiment as the performer that she is brought to life in such a fantastic way.

Director Ruben Fleischer - who also directed the original - has made a sequel that certainly lives up to its predecessor. I wouldn’t say this film is better than the first one, but it is definitely as good as the first one was, and even that is a monumental achievement for any sequel. Again, if you enjoyed the first film, definitely check this one out; you’ll thank me.

8 out of 10.

Birdman (2014)

Winner of the Academy Award for Best Picture in 2014, and subtitled 'The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance', this film is a monumental achievement for all involved, even if it feels a bit too much like art for art's sake in my opinion.

Riggan Thompson (Michael Keaton) is an actor who enjoyed moderate success years ago with his superhero character named Birdman. Now, many years later, he is trying to revive his career with a stage adaptation of a Raymond Carver short story, that he has written, is directing and starring in. And it previews on Broadway tonight, but it is definitely not ready.

When a co-star, Ralph (Jeremy Shamos) is knocked unconscious during a final rehearsal, he storms out and quits the production, threatening to sue. Mind you, this isn't entirely a bad thing, as Riggan couldn't stand him, nor could Riggan's manager Jake (Zach Galifianakis).

Another co-star, Lesley (Naomi Watts) suggests her friend and fellow actor Mike Shiner (Edward Norton) to play the role, and he steps in (at incredibly short notice) and takes on the role that Ralph vacated.

Add to the mix Riggan's daughter Sam (Emma Stone), with whom he is relatively estranged, but trying to get back in touch with, and you have the ingredients for quite a confrontational story.

Oh, and I almost forgot to mention, Riggan is going slightly crazy, hearing Birdman's voice in his head, and believing himself to possess god-like powers of telekinesis and so on.

The very first thing anyone would notice about this film is the fact that it takes place entirely in one, two-hour long, camera shot (or at least it appears so, with some clever edits and camera tricks). The effect of this is in one sense unsettling, adding to the overall psychological feel of the film, and at the same time, drawing the audience right into the centre of the action from beginning to end.

It also works well as a parallel of the play that the film largely centres around, as there don't seem to be any 'edits', it all just feels like one long unified piece.

The script, by Alejandro G. Iñárritu & Nicolás Giacobone & Alexander Dinelaris & Armando Bo, which incidentally also won an Academy Award in 2014, is absolutely superb. Again, as with the single-camera-shot idea, the script feels very much like a stage play, as we observe these characters confronting one another throughout, and dealing with their conflicts largely through their dialogue, and so on, which is very much the way things are done in a stage play as opposed to a film.

Emmanuel Lubezki's cinematography, already briefly mentioned above, also won him an Academy Award that same year, and rightly so in my opinion. The way this film has been shot is just so clever, and the use of shadow (predominantly to cover the edit points) is done so well. But trust me, the edits happen so quickly you won't notice them; the whole thing feels like one continuous moving shot, and Lubezki's talent in pulling this off to such an extent is clear.

The score by Antonio Sanchez consists entirely of a drum kit, which in some sections of the film, is actually part of the on-screen action (such as when Riggan and Shiner are walking down Broadway and walk past a busking drummer). As such, the score never takes away from anything happening on screen, and it certainly does not overpower the action at any point, as it is only the one instrument, and thanks to a decent sound mix, never stands out in any obtrusive sense.

I am a little reluctant to discuss the performances of the cast here, as I'm still not entirely sure how it is they are supposed to function. In the case of every single performer in the film, overacting seems to be the soup of the day, with no exceptions. When someone wants to make a point, they yell. If they need to show any emotion, they yell. The entire film feels like one big joke to everyone, it would seem.

However, I don't know if this is intentional - with the director making a statement about the nature of stage performers versus film performers - or if the cast are just plain bad at what they do. I tend to believe the former is true, as many of the cast have given amazing performances in other films they have done before and since.

Director Alejandro G. Iñárritu has made a wonderfully cinematic piece of art here, but it feels just a little too self-indulgent for my tastes. I'm not saying it's bad - because it's actually very good - but there's only so much of it I can take.

7 out of 10.

La La Land (2016)

A fantastic musical in the style of the classic Hollywood movie musicals, this film almost won Best Picture at the Academy Awards (remember that?)

Sebastian (Ryan Gosling) and Mia (Emma Stone) seem destined to be together. At least, one would think so, as they keep running into each other randomly over several months.

First on the highway, as Mia is distracted, running lines to herself on the way to an audition, and Sebastian is the frustrated driver behind her who just wants her to pay attention to the moving traffic.

Then Mia walks in on the moment Sebastian is fired from his job playing incidental music in a restaurant, after his boss Bill (J. K. Simmons) is furious that Sebastian hasn't adhered to the strict easy-listening set list, but instead has been playing his own free jazz.

But it is after they meet again at a party in the hills that they finally get to talking. Both of them are trying to break in to their respective industries, but neither seems to be having any luck.

They strike up a friendship, which leads to a relationship, as they both support each other in their dream careers: Sebastian, as he starts performing with old friend Keith (John Legend) on a tour around the country; and Mia, as she finally tries to venture out on her own and write and perform a one-woman show.

The screenplay, by director Damien Chazelle, is quite good. The characters are very well written, and clearly defined, with realistic goals and conflicts. The story - a romance at its heart - is also a tragedy, as the paths of dreams and reality seldom meet.

The songs, with music by Justin Hurwitz (who also wrote the score) and lyrics by Benj Pasek and Justin Paul, are certainly not your standard musical-type songs. Each song is perfectly suited to the character(s) who sing it, with a big number to open the film (this song is amazing, but more amazing is the choreography of all those background performers), slower jazz songs for Sebastian to sing, and somewhere-in-the-middle for Mia.

The choreography throughout is sensational, and in fact in my opinion eclipses the songs themselves.

But where this film truly shines is in the production design (by David Wasco) and costume design (by Mary Zophres). Both of these elements add so much to the feel of the film. Wasco's design of the sets, filled with vibrant colour, matches perfectly to the stunning costumes, particularly throughout the first half of the film.

The cinematography by Linus Sandgren serves these two elements well also, as we get to see these stunning sets and costumes through the eyes of a constantly-moving camera (at least it feels like it is always moving; it may be stationary from time to time but the action of the scene places you right in the centre anyway).

The cast are all fantastic too, especially Emma Stone, who won an Academy Award for her hard work. Gosling is also quite good, and boy, can he dance!

One can't help but feel nostalgic while watching this, as there is so much respect paid by all involved for the old movie musicals of yesteryear, and the film - while being set in the modern day - feels very much like one of these classics. I will happily watch this film over and over; it's just so beautiful.

8 1/2 out of 10.