January/February Films

I took a break from reviewing to get over some lovely illnesses over the past month, but before March begins, here are a few short reviews of films that have been released since the start of the year...

DARKEST HOUR

Director:

Joe Wright (Atonement, Hanna, Pride and Prejudice)

Starring:
Gary Oldman (Leon, The Dark Knight, Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban)

Lily James (Baby Driver, Cinderella, Pride and Prejudice and Zombies)
Ben Mendelson (Rogue One, The Dark Knight Rises, The Place Beyond The Pines)

Plot:
During the early days of World War II, the newly-appointed Prime Minister Winston Churchill must face threats from opposing European forces as well as from within his own political party. 

With British forces stuck in Calais and Dunkirk, Churchill must decide whether to enter peace talks with Adolf Hitler or carry on fighting the good fight to the end.

Verdict:
There is no doubt in my mind that Gary Oldman will win Best Actor at this year's Academy Awards for his portrayal of Winston Churchill; he commands the screen whenever he appears, conducts great chemistry with whoever he shares the screen, and dammit he wore a fat-suit, how is he not going to get the Award?!

However apart from his tour-de-force performance, there is not much else to write home about.  A downside to Oldman's scenery-chewing is that everyone else begins to pale in comparison, even the ever-impressive Kristen Scott Thomas feels like wasted talent, and Lily James isn't given enough screen time to show her potential range.  Whilst the film revolves around the powerful man that was Winston Churchill, unfortunately the film is too in love with him to deliver a compelling and interesting narrative outside of passionate and patriotic speeches.

Rating:
5/10

COCO

Director:

Lee Unkrich (Toy Story 3, Finding Nemo, Monsters, Inc.)

Starring (voices):
Gael Garcia Bernal (Amores perros, The Motorcycle Diaires, A Little Bit Of Heaven)
Benjamin Bratt (Miss Congeniality, Demolition Man, Doctor Strange)
Alanna Ubach (Legally Blonde, Sister Act 2, Meet The Fockers)

Plot:
On the revered Dia de Muertos (Day of the Dead), Miguel, the youngest of a shoe-making and music-hating family wants to perform at a local music talent show.  However after disrespecting the dead, Miguel is transported to an other-worldly plain where he is able to converse with his dead relatives.  He must now receive their blessing to return home before the sun rises, and potentially discover the reason why music is so forbidden within his family.

Verdict:
This film broke me.  A grown man.  Weeping.  In a packed cinema screen. 

But dammit I wasn't the only one!  A lot of men in that same screen seemingly had 'something in their eye' or 'decided to chop onions' at one certain scene towards the end of the film.

Pixar truly have a knack at replicating real life moments on screen, despite usually featuring fantastical characters and situations, making brilliant movie moments in the process.  One only needs to mention the first ten minutes of Up or Wall-E for examples of how talented they are at telling a story that truly hits home.

The team behind Coco truly took innovative steps with this in terms of the maturity of it's storyline and characters.  There is no Doomsday scenario, Miguel's life isn't in jeopardy and the Land of the Dead's very existence isn't being threatened.  It is a simple story of a man not wanting to be forgotten, and how music can bring a family together rather than tear it apart.

The amazingly detailed and vibrant Land of the Dead had me open-jawed and the story had me interested through-out, even if I did predict some of the plot twists a little early.  The music by Michael Giacchino is heart-warming and toe-tapping, and the artistry is definitely some of Pixar's best.  

After a few missteps, I believe this is Pixar back to their best and would definitely recommend.

Rating:
9/10

THE POST

Director:

Steven Spielberg (Jurassic Park, Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan)

Starring:
Meryl Streep (Mamma Mia!, The Devil Wears Prada, Sophie's Choice)
Tom Hanks (Forrest Gump, Big, Saving Private Ryan)
Bob Odenkirk (Better Call Saul, Breaking Bad, Fargo)

Plot:
Set in the early 1970s, and following America's defeat in the disastrous Vietnam War, The Washington Post's owner (Streep) and chief editor (Hanks) have to decide whether or not to publish The Pentagon Papers, leaked classified documents that paint the White House and America's involvement in the Vietnam War in a less-than-stellar light.

Verdict:
Streep.  Hanks.  Spielberg.

It had all the hallmarks of an instant classic.  But something just didn't work for me.  With this cast and director, I expected a much better film.  Not to say The Post is a poor film, as it is most certainly not.  However, it never really elevates itself over 'competent' and 'entertaining'.  And whilst that's seemingly enough for several Academy Award nominations, I certainly wasn't convinced.

Is the film focused on the female-empowerment of Meryl Streep's Katherine Graham? 
Or the underhanded tactics of Nixon's White House?
Or the Presidents who preceded him with their involvement in the Vietnam War? 
Or the importance of the Free Press in situations such as this true story? 
Or the dangerous similarities to the current situation in America?
Why not all of them at the same time? 

This unfortunately results in a narrative that becomes top-heavy in narrative importance and left me rather bored, which shouldn't be the case in a story that is so relevant and important.

Rating:
5/10

THE CLOVERFIELD PARADOX
Director:

Julius Onah

Starring:
Gugu Mbatha-Raw (Belle, Beauty and the Beast, Black Mirror)
David Oyelowo (Selma, The Butler, Rise of the Planet of the Apes)
Daniel Bruhl (Captain America: Civil War, Rush, Inglorious Basterds)

Plot:
In 2028, the Earth is suffering a massive energy crisis.  To combat this, a group of international scientists and engineers board the Cloverfield space station and attempt to discover a source of unlimited energy using a particle accelerator, similar to the Hadron Collider in Switzerland.  However, one of the experiments accidentally transports the station away from the Earth and they must find their way back.

Verdict:
It's a rarity that I speak about 'Straight-to-Netflix' films, but I am such a fan of the Cloverfield film series, I wanted to discuss the latest instalment.  And... it's a weird one.

Whilst I was a huge fan of the original found-footage Cloverfield and appreciated the change in tone and style for 10 Cloverfield Lane, I wasn't too won over by this space thriller.  Critics of Lane pointed to the film existing on it's own terms without any reference to Cloverfield before JJ Abrams suggested bringing it into their Shared Universe, but I didn't see that as a negative.  If anything, I felt as if it added to the tension and the mythos behind the original monster movie.  However, it's more evident here that the film could have been a fine sci-fi thriller without having to tie it to the first two films.

It results in an overly-confusing story, pointless horror moments and a wasted cast that is filled with talent that is under-utilised.

The Cloverfield Paradox manages to be a sci-fi film without grand ideas, a thriller with absurd attempts at tension and a horror without scares.

Must try harder, JJ.

Rating:
3/10

PHANTOM THREAD

Director:

Paul Thomas Anderson (There Will Be Blood, Magnolia, Boogie Nights)

Starring:
Daniel Day-Lewis (There Will Be Blood, Lincoln, Gangs of New York)
Vicky Krieps (A Most Wanted Man, Hanna, Anonymous)
Lesley Manville (Maleficent, Another Year, Vera Drake)

Plot:
In 1950s London, renowned fashion designer Reynolds Woodcock (Day-Lewis) creates dresses and garments for women in high society.  However his charisma and talent is matched with a ruthless and obsessive personality.  After debuting his latest outfit, Reynolds meets a waitress, Alma (Krieps), at a countryside restaurant who soon becomes his muse, but Alma finds it difficult to cope with Reynolds' lifestyle and erratic behaviour.

Verdict:
The duo of PTA and DDL working together again would make any film buff start drooling.  Their work on There Will Be Blood is phenomenal and one of my favourite films of the past ten years.  

And now DDL is back portraying a manipulative and obsessive genius! 
In his supposed final performance!  
By one of the great auteur directors! 

...So why isn't Phantom Thread better than it should be?

Similar to The Post, I'm not saying it's a poor film.  I don't think PTA or DDL know how to even spell 'poor film'.  But I was left wanting more.  The components on their own are spectacular.  The direction is brilliant, the acting sublime and the outfits are worthy of highest billing, since the film is all about a fashion designer and his amazing eye for well-made dresses.  But putting them all together just left me feeling slightly hollow.

Perhaps it was the central romance between DDL's Reynolds and Krieps' Alma.  I never truly felt or believed in their chemistry and passion for each other and the film centres itself on this main romance.  

Maybe my feeling is because I seem to appreciate the film as a piece of art more than a piece of cinema.  I feel like the film should be hung on a wall in an art gallery more than at the local cinemaplex.  And that's a compliment, right?

Rating:
7/10

THE SHAPE OF WATER

Director:
Guillermo del Toro (Pan's Labyrinth, Hellboy, Crimson Peak)

Starring:
Sally Hawkins (Happy-Go-Lucky, Paddington, Godzilla)
Michael Shannon (Man of Steel, Nocturnal Animals, Revolutionary Road)
Doug Jones (Pan's Labyrinth, Hellboy, Crimson Peak)

Plot:
Eliza (Hawkins) is a mute, isolated woman who works as a cleaning lady in a hidden, high-security government laboratory in 1962 Baltimore.  Her life is changed forever when she discovers the laboratory's most classified secret; an mysterious, scaled creature from South America that lives in a water tank.

Verdict:
It's a real stupid mistake of mine to constantly forget Guillermo del Toro every time I try and list my favourite directors.  I always think of Fincher, Nolan, and Scorsese but del Toro deserves to be included in that shortlist.  The man just doesn't know how to make a bad film.

Famously, del Toro recounts how, as a child, he was never scared of monsters; he instead wanted to be friends with the monsters, and he has shown that in nearly every film he has made.  He often features other-worldly creatures in his films, and always makes their worlds so inviting and magical that I can't help but want to live there too, especially compared to our grey, boring, non-magical world.  The Shape of Water is no exception.

Del Toro's love for the fantastical is projected onto this film in nearly every aspect of The Shape of Water, as well for the time period (1950's Cold War-America).  The set design, music, costumes... everything is done with such love, care and attention, I can't help but believe that this will win Best Picture at this year's Academy Awards.

The direction seems effortless, the soundtrack is equally romantic and nostalgic, and the acting throughout is sublime.  Sally Hawkins manages to engage and charm the audience without uttering a word.  Michael Shannon does his 'Michael Shannon thing' of being tall and imposing, but in just such an understated and menacing way.  And Richard Jenkins steals the show as the closeted and balding neighbour and I truly hope he gets recognised for a subtle but powerful performance.

I probably sound like I'm rambling over this film but I truly believe it is one of del Toro's best and absolutely worth a watch.

Just remember that fish-men need love too.

Rating:

9/10

Until next time, thanks for reading!

If you enjoyed what you read...

Facebook: www.facebook.com/pages/Mike-Dunn-Reviews 

Instagram: @mikedunnreviews
Letterboxd: https://boxd.it/rKj9

Twitter: www.twitter.com/MikeDunnReviews

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri

Director:
Martin McDonagh

Starring:

Frances McDormand (Fargo, Burn After Reading, Miss Pettigrew Lives For A Day)

Sam Rockwell (The Green Mile, Iron Man 2, Moon)

Woody Harrelson (Zombieland, The Hunger Games, War for the Planet of the Apes)

Plot: 

After the death of her daughter seven months earlier, Mildred Hayes (McDormand) decides to rent three abandoned billboards near her home to advertise the local police's failure to find her daughter's killer to the community.  The police create havoc for Mildred to try and intimidate her to take the billboards down.

Verdict:

Seemingly, you need three things to be a Martin McDonagh film;

• a talented cast,
• strong and sudden acts of violence, and
• underlying layer of pitch-black comedy throughout. 

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri is no exception.


Frances McDormand has been an incredible talent since her debut in Blood Simple and starring in nearly all of the Coen Brothers' films has given her ample time to display her incredible range.  Mildred Hayes is a more dour and sombre character than usual for McDormand, but she stills brings a deep-seated rage and vindication to the role that makes Mildred a renegade, 'nothing-left-to-lose' character that becomes hard not to root for.

On the other side of the conflict, Woody Harrelson and Sam Rockwell portray Ebbing's police chief and deputy respectively, and both live up to their reputations; Harrelson stoic and methodical, and Rockwell chaotic and foolish.  With Mildred's baiting billboards, you'd imagine a rage-fuelled performance from Harrelson similar to his seething portrayal of the General in last year's War For The Planet of the Apes, but instead he takes a backseat to Rockwell who manifests himself as Righteous Justice.

Rockwell embodies the stereotype of a racist, idiotic hick but since he has a police badge and lawful use of a firearm, understandably this results in more than one extreme use of police force.  Rockwell's Officer Dixon is often the butt of the film's jokes, but it's not just Dixon's stupidity to blame for the injustice in Ebbing, Missouri. 

The film instead focuses on the poisonous impact of hatred and it's pointlessness when trying to grieve or find justice in today's world.  Harrelson's Police Chief Willoughby tries to explain this to Dixon throughout the film, with Dixon only becoming what he truly wants to be once he gives up his anger and negative behaviour.

A bit different from two Irish hitmen hiding in a Flemish city.  But Three Billboards is equally heavy in moments and tone.

Thankfully though, similar to McDonagh's previous films, In Bruges and Seven Psychopaths, there is more than enough humour sprinkled throughout the film to keep the tone balanced from the darker moments.  Most of the laughs come from supporting players, such as Peter Dinklage's love-struck neighbour and Samara Weaving's air-head love rival, who both provide subtle and effective performances.


Overall, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri serves well as an effective emotional catharsis. Regardless of who you are angry at, they get their comeuppance in this film.


Police are treated as ineffective. 
Racists are treated as idiots. 
Smug people get thrown through windows. 


It's truly a heartwarming ride.  If you'd like to see a realistic portrayal of grief and how people coming together can at least try to overcome it, I'd highly recommend this film.


Rating


8/10

Until next time, thanks for reading!

If you enjoyed what you read...

Facebook: www.facebook.com/pages/Mike-Dunn-Reviews 

Instagram: @mikedunnreviews

Twitter: www.twitter.com/MikeDunnReviews

All The Money In The World

Director:

Ridley Scott

Starring:
Michelle Williams (My Week With Marilyn, Brokeback Mountain, Shutter Island)
Mark Wahlberg (The Departed, Transformers: The Last Knight, The Happening)
Christopher Plummer (Beginners, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo (2011), The Sound of Music)

Plot:
J.P. Getty (Plummer) is the richest man in the history of the world.  His vast fortunes come from investment in oil and real estate, but he has never truly invested in his family.  When his grandson is kidnapped whilst living in Italy, the kidnappers deliver a ransom of $17 million, but Getty refuses to pay.  Getty's daughter-in-law (Williams) tries to persuade him to change his mind, but instead he hires an ex-CIA agent (Wahlberg) to get his grandson back without having to spend a penny of his money.


Verdict
It's not often that a film's reputation precedes it.

In recent memory, I remember waiting for The Dark Knight to start, unfortunately knowing the untimely demise of Heath Ledger, which only amplified his performance and made the film feel special.

Similarly with Justice League last year, I had heard about the film's troubled production and how much money went into digitally removing Henry Cavill's moustache during re-shoots, which again added to my experience when first watching the film.

Unfortunately ATMITW's notoriety didn't come from re-shoots and dodgy moustaches, but the actions of one of my former favourite actors, Kevin Spacey.  There's no doubt that you know of the reason why Spacey has been in the news over the past few months, but understandably he was removed from this production and replaced within a month of the film's release by beloved character actor, Christopher Plummer (who had actually met Getty during the 1960s!).

Unfortunately, nothing in the film comes closer to the controversy surrounding it.  Whilst Michelle Williams gives a decent performance as the distraught mother looking for a way to bring her child back and Mark Wahlberg shows up and effectively smolders, the two stand-out performances are from Plummer (shocker) and Romain Duris as one of the kidnappers who starts empathising with the grandson, and almost starts wishing for the kid to escape.

*NB: I wrote this review before the Williams/Wahlberg salary news was made public, but comparing the two performances, Williams outperforms Wahlberg in every scene and this should have been represented in their pay, but unfortunately this was not the case*

Thankfully, it is in the performances of Plummer and Duris that the film asks its main question: "What does family mean to me?"

Whilst Getty sees family as some sort of leech on his own personal fortune, the kidnapper Cinquata is bound by his family to see this grisly duty through to the end, despite his moral objections. 

This dilemma manages to flip the perception of who truly is the villain, as Getty's constant refusal to pay for the release of his grandson, even whilst the ransom lowers to $10 million and then $4 million paints Getty as a heartless and selfish monster, yet Plummer stays resolute and stoic in his performance. 

Apparently Spacey played up this monstrous side of Getty, almost becoming a caricature, which is another reason I'm grateful for the recasting.

Plummer added a warmth to the character, with certain earlier scenes between the younger grandson and his kindly grandfather contrasting even more so when Getty reveals himself to be so cold-hearted towards his own blood relative.

Moving onto the direction, this is a welcome change for Ridley Scott to focus on a tense thriller mixed with a family drama, rather than an action-filled set-piece set in space, or some boring and pretentious swords-and-sandals film. 

However, the pace of the film slows to a dull plod after the initial kidnapping and doesn't really kick off again until the last third of the film when escapes attempts are made and the grandson gets closer to freedom.  Unfortunately by that point, most of the interest has died away and you're just wanting the film to be over.

Overall, an interesting and subverted premise is wasted by a lack of pace and some sub-par direction, and ultimately a large feeling that just something isn't right. 

Removing Spacey was obviously the correct decision and Plummer is an inspired replacement, however in keeping with current times, the removal of a powerful and rich white man had a resounding impact.

Rating

5/10

Until next time folks, thanks for reading!
If you enjoyed what you read, 

Facebook: www.facebook.com/pages/Mike-Dunn-Reviews 

Instagram: @mikedunnreviews

Twitter: www.twitter.com/MikeDunnReviews

Room

THESE FOUR WALLS...

Do you know what's depressing for a guy who's had around five years of acting training?

The fact that no matter how many performances I may give in the future, I'll never be as good as Jacob Tremblay in Room.

He's seven.  Seven years old.  And he is just perfect in this film.  In fact, there isn't much about the film that isn't perfect.  It just hits every single target it aims for.

Brie Larson is as equally brilliant as Tremblay, but all the praise will be heaped upon this little star-in-the-making, and justifiably so.  But before I go on about how fantastic a film this is, let me just clarify the story for you in case you have heard about this film and its subject matter...

PLOT

Room begins on Jack's fifth birthday.  All he knows is the world that he inhabits.  One tiny box space that he calls 'Room'.  Jack lives in 'Room' with Ma, his mother, who was kidnapped by a man known simply as 'Old Nick' and locked away in 'Room' seven years earlier.

Jack spends his day watching the magic fantasy tales on TV and reading Alice In Wonderland, but Ma decides it's time to tell Jack the truth about their situation and try and find a way to escape 'Room' together.

Note: The film never shows Ma's kidnapping, or the subsequent seven years; the film is told through Jack's eyes so innocence is preserved.  Ma's journey to 'Room' is purely anecdotal, but still chilling when being recounted.

OPINION

Firstly, I urge you to see this film.

Secondly, Good God, I hope you bring tissues with you when you do.  I'm pretty sure there wasn't a dry eye in the house when the lights came up.  People were just sat in their seats, trying to comprehend what they had just seen.  They needed a moment to compose themselves, and I can't blame them for their reaction.

When you hear the plot or set-up of a film like Room's, you second-guess yourself and hesitate.  It's only human to worry about subjecting yourself to experiences that we wish we never go through ourselves.

But I assure you that whilst the initial set-up is horrendous from our perspective, the film is all set through Jack's eyes.  Like Ma's struggle throughout the film, we are kept going by Jack's enthusiasm and strength despite their horrible living conditions.  

The film focuses on the bond between mother and son rather than the struggle they have to overcome and that's where Room stands apart from your standard kidnap-film.

It is heart-warming and yet heart-breaking, tense and yet serene, depressing and yet life-affirming.

The real beauty and truth from this film is definitely found in the smaller details, and thanks to director Lenny Abrahamson and director of photography Danny Cohen nothing is missed and every aspect of their life within Room is captured.  For better or for worse.  Twin that with the brilliantly-understated score by Jóhann Jóhannsson, and get ready to look at the dust in a sunray in a whole new way.

First coming to my attention in Scott Pilgrim vs. The World, I'm glad that Brie Larson is building on the critical acclaim that she received for Short Term 12 a few years ago.  

Her role in Room is a thankless one as Ma suffers throughout the first half of the film, dealing with her own imprisonment as well as her child's, and thanks to Larson's effortless delivery, you feel every emotion she experiences.  

Her performance is incredibly strong and relatable, reacting to the situation like a real person and not a movie heroine.  She is flawed and damaged by the events, her hidden struggle pushed aside for the sake of her son.

The ever dependable Joan Allen and William H. Macy provide solid performances as Ma's parents, but it is relatively unknown Tom McCamus who steals the parental show as Ma's new step-father.  His character is so enjoyable and relatable, he is one of my favourite characters in a film in some time, a credit to McCamus and screenwriter Emma Donaghue.

But returning to Tremblay again, his performance is so honest, truthful and believable that you believe every emotion he goes through.  You travel alongside him on this emotional rollercoaster, despite you obviously knowing there is a world outside of those four walls.

It really is a credit that an ordeal as horrible as the one depicted in Room is never too much for the audience to handle, mainly because Tremblay's Jack keeps us going.  Like with Ma, Jack propels us forward and fully gains our attention, distracting us from the horrible conditions.

I should probably stop now before I go into too much detail about the story, but if you are interested, check out the trailer at the bottom of the review.

Definitely one of the films of the year and it only was released in the first few weeks.  

If 2016 continues this trend, then we are in for a fantastic year ahead of us.

Rating - 9/10

Until next time folks, thanks for reading!

If you enjoyed what you read, 

'Like' me on Facebook at www.facebook.com/pages/Mike-Dunn-Reviews 

or 'Follow' me on Twitter at www.twitter.com/MikeDunnReviews

Joy

When deciding the first film of a new year to watch, not many people spend too much time on it.  It's only a film, right?

For me, it is the bar against which to compare the rest of the year.

I try and make an educated decision to see the best on offer, and in January you often find some Oscar-worthy beauties.

Last year, Birdman blew me away.  The year before that her truly surprised me.  There was added pressure on myself to pick correctly.  With what was on offer in the first week of 2016, I thought I made a smart choice with the latest David O Russell/Jennifer Lawrence/Bradley Cooper/Robert de Niro film.

No, not Silver Linings Playbook.

No, not American Hustle.

No, not Joy.

Wait, scratch that last one.

PLOT

Slightly based on real events, Joy (Jennifer Lawrence) is a divorced mother-of-two, living with her mother and grandmother, and her ex-husband lives in her basement.

Having been very creative as a child, she decides to use that creativity to try and make a better life for herself.  Designing a self-wringing mop, Joy utilises the new concept of home-shopping television channel QVC to try and get the life she deserves.

OPINION

It probably wouldn't be fair to say that Joy bored the ever-living hell out of me, but it wouldn't be too far off.  Granted, I could watch Jennifer Lawrence all day (in a non-creepy way) and she is by far the best aspect of the film.  But like Legend showed last year, a fantastic central performance cannot carry an overall flawed film.

The film flits between different tones and dramatic styles, from kitchen-sink realism to surreal fantasy, back to manic farce, and you don't know what to think.  Should I be laughing?  Should I be crying?  Should I leave the cinema?  And this is all in the first hour before Bradley Cooper has even shown his handsome, handsome face.

With taking so long to get going, by the time Joy starts trying to fix her mundane life, I had so little interest in her character or the horribly selfish people that fester her existence.  The only enjoyable character is Joy's grandmother and she hardly gets any screen time at all!

Whilst rightfully getting attention due to Ms Lawrence acting the hell out of her role, Joy doesn't live up to other expectations.  Similar to the QVC channel on which Joy stars, it looks bright, shiny and well-crafted, but ultimately it is off-putting, extortionate and leaves you feeling rather empty.

Rating - 3/10

Until next time folks, thanks for reading!

If you enjoyed what you read, 

'Like' me on Facebook at www.facebook.com/pages/Mike-Dunn-Reviews 

or 'Follow' me on Twitter at www.twitter.com/MikeDunnReviews

Macbeth / Bill (Two For Tuesday)

Better A Witty Fool

Speak to any person who has sat through high-school English and they can name at least one play written by William Shakespeare.  If you were like me, you would have also been shown some films adapted from his works, because English teachers are lazy sometimes.

No doubt the works of Shakespeare have been the backbone of British theatre since they were first performed more than 400 years ago and his name has become synonymous with tragedy, comedy and historical epics since then.  Even if there have been questions about the identity of their true author.

In the past few weeks, there have been two films released associated with William Shakespeare, an adaptation of his most feared and dramatic work, Macbeth, as well as Bill, a fictional biopic of Shakespeare's lost years made by the team behind the Horrible Histories TV show.

Now whilst these two films are both alike in background, they are very different in terms of theme, message and audience.  Whilst Macbeth is obviously for the drama lovers in the crowds, Bill is mainly aimed at children and those with their tongues firmly in their cheek.

Macbeth

For those unaware of the plot, Macbeth takes place in medieval feudal Scotland as King Duncan (David Thewlis) defends the crown from those wanting to take it from him.  Macbeth (Michael Fassbender) is one of Duncan's most trusted soldiers.

However, when Macbeth meets a set of witches that tell him he will one day be King of Scotland, he becomes obsessed with his supposed future and spurred on by his wife, Lady Macbeth (Marion Cotillard), sets about taking the throne for himself.

It's a story that has been adapted and performed countless times but this is the first time that I have seen the titular character portrayed as such an emotionally-damaged soldier.

In countless versions before this, Macbeth has either been an underhanded coward or just a simple puppet of his wife, Lady Macbeth.  However director Justin Kurzel portrays Macbeth as a devastated man before the witches even mention his royal potential.  He is shown as a grieving father and a man thoroughly affected by war, such an emotional state that the resulting paranoia and greed is understandable from such a frame of mind.

Michael Fassbender is perfect as the titular aspirational murderer, bringing raw anger to the battle scenes and a fevered madness to his slow and painful descent into hallucinating paranoia.  He is equally pitiful and yet despicable as he frantically holds onto the throne, which is a hard act to balance.

However it is not just Fassbender where the casting got it right, it is brilliant throughout.  The ever-reliable Paddy Considine is fantastic as Macbeth's general, Banquo, giving a more menacing silent performance than other characters just by providing unyielding intense stares or pregnant pauses.  Sean Harris is also an inspired choice for Macduff, bringing an intensity that is necessary for his mutinous treason against the villainous Macbeth.

But the plaudits for performances of Macbeth usually hang on those of the play's seminal character, Lady Macbeth, probably the strongest female character in fiction.  Marion Cotillard performs the role with such grace, poise and passion that I was surprised that her role is dramatically diminished compared to other versions I have seen in the past.

Lady Macbeth is known to be the driving force behind her husband's actions and the one who spurs him to commit the heinous deeds.  After their coronation, they both suffer from paranoid delusions and hallucinations but she is still resolute in her reasons and her pursuit of power never falters.

However Cotillard's Lady Macbeth hides behind her husband more than previous incarnations which disappointed me. Whilst her devious side is shown in the early scenes, I felt like that could have been emphasised in the latter scenes, but her performance was still fantastic.

Performances aside, the art direction is truly beautiful.  Towards the end of the film, after the surrounding forest is set alight, the amber hue that descends upon Macbeth's castle gives the final scenes an otherworldy quality that made me think I was watching painted backgrounds.

The sweeping shots of the Scottish Highlands set the scene perfectly, as they show how desolate and cold medieval Scotland would have been.  It also emphasises the pointless task that Macbeth embarks on, as it seems that they are quarrelling over the control of empty green fields and misty moors.

Filled with political ambition, murder and some fantastic performances, Macbeth is truly an emotional experience.  If you aren't a fan of the original Shakespearean version, the film's dialogue is not updated but that doesn't at all detract from the film.  It's a beautiful and brutal adaptation that's worth paying money for.

Bill

But enough about Macbeth!  What about the man who wrote it?  What happened during the years between William Shakespeare's time in Stratford-upon-Avon and him becoming famous in London?

Well the Horrible Histories team predict he had quite an exciting life!

Set during the troublesome time before England's war with Spain, the Spanish King Philip II plans to sneak into England and blow up Queen Elizabeth I.  But how can he do it?  Luckily, the hapless Earl of Crawley Croydon is planning on staging a play for the Queen, using the words of the new talent Bill Shakespeare as his own, and they are looking for actors.

It sounds ludicrous and it is, especially compared to the plot of Macbeth mentioned earlier, but that's the great thing about Bill; it doesn't take itself seriously at all.  And it is all the better for it.

I can honestly say that this is the most I have laughed during a film probably all year.  The script's wit is irreverently British, the slapstick is childish but not annoyingly so, and the puns are so amazingly awful (but in a good way...)

I've never watched the Horrible Histories TV show but my friends with children tell me that it is one of their favourite shows to watch with their kids, as there is enough entertainment for both of them.  The kids get to learn about the time period and the events that happened, and the humour is still intelligent for the adults to get a kick out of it. When I went to see the film, there were more adults in the screening than children and they were all laughing out loud.

I would highly recommend both of these films, obviously for different reasons.  If you are wanting a visceral epic filled with political ambition, set in the Scottish wilderness, Macbeth is a great option.
But if you just want a film that is a good laugh, filled with British wit, sarcasm and one that kids can enjoy as well, Bill is a fantastic choice.  I truly hope that this isn't the only film to come from these gifted talents.

Until next time folks, thanks for reading!

If you enjoyed what you read, 

'Like' me on Facebook at www.facebook.com/pages/Mike-Dunn-Reviews 

or 'Follow' me on Twitter at www.twitter.com/MikeDunnReviews