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

Alien: Covenant

Director: 

Ridley Scott (Alien, Blade Runner, Gladiator)

Starring: 

Katherine Waterson (Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them, Inherent Vice, Steve Jobs)

Billy Crudup (Watchmen, Spotlight, Almost Famous)

Michael Fassbender (Macbeth, Shame, Assassin's Creed)

Genre: 

Science-Fiction / Horror / Thriller

Opinion:

Let me start by saying: I liked Prometheus. 

It is not an opinion that is shared by many people, but I did.  I didn’t watch Prometheus expecting a film in the same mould as Alien or Aliens, but one that further explained and established the beginnings of an existing franchise.

You know… what a prequel is meant to do.

And what I got was a well-told and interesting science-fiction film that theorised about who potentially created life on Earth, and what would happen if you managed to royally piss them off.

It had everything I expected; tension, scares, body horror.  Even the added bonus of idiotic people who should not be sent into space, since they can't figure out how to avoid a rolling spaceship going in one direction.  But most intriguingly Prometheus was about ideas.  More than just "Who created us?", the film discussed free will and morality and whether the lack of these could have a corrupting influence.  It touched upon whether religion is a manufactured construct or a necessary comfort, and these aren’t topics you find in most modern sci-fi/horror films.

But unfortunately the film wasn’t warmly embraced among the Alien die-hards and it will forever be remembered as an honest attempt that failed.

Skip to six years later and Ridley Scott has got another shot.

Set a few years after Prometheus, a spaceship intent on completing a colonising mission comes across a radio signal from a seemingly habitable, but unknown, world.  Curious to it’s origin, the crew make the decision to investigate… and things go as well as you'd expect.

To go into further detail will spoil too much of the story, but if you have seen an Alien film before, you will probably see the signposts for where the film is heading.  However, the audience’s familiarity with the stereotypes of the Alien franchise is where Ridley Scott tries to make the best use out of his prequel; by showing the audience how the later and much more acclaimed films were set in motion; showing you how the dominoes were set-up before we saw them fall over.

Although it seems that Scott has bowed to pressure from the audiences, and tried to have his Prometheus cake and eat it with Alien knives and forks… if that makes sense.  

He wants to carry on telling the story he started in Prometheus, further developing the origins of the Engineers and theorise about ideas of our creation, but to keep the audience from complaining, he’s made some dumb people run around dark, steam-filled corridors whilst being chased by a slick, black, death creature.  And the film suffers because of it.

The crew of the Covenant are never given any back-story apart from Character X is married to Character Y, since all of these people are couples and most of them are going to lose their partner to a slick, black, death creature.  Billy Crudup and Katherine Waterston are given centre stage, but potentially interesting plot points are never fully developed and as with Prometheus, Michael Fassbender steals the show.  Crudup is a proven talent and Waterston is an interesting up-and-comer so it’s a shame that they aren’t given much with which to work.  

There ain’t no Ellen Ripley for the audience to root for, that’s for damn sure.

Whilst the locations are gorgeous and rich in detail (it might as well be H.R. Giger's homeworld), and the direction never falters, Alien: Covenant follows the trend of films with huge potential not being able to fully embrace their director’s vision, for fear of alienating too much of the audience and losing box office in the process.

Gareth Edwards’ Godzilla. Josh Trank’s Fantastic Four / Fan4stic.  Even Ghost in the Shell from earlier this year. 

They don’t want to leave the audience bored, or scratching their heads in confusion and telling their friends not to watch the film because of it.  It’s the nature of the industry currently, and I don’t blame Scott for bowing to this pressure.  I just hope that Scott doesn’t do the same with Blade Runner 2049 later this year.

Rating – 5/10 - It's worth a watch, just don't expect much.

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

Star Wars: The Force Awakens (spoiler-free!)

A New Hope?

Since I'm in the middle of my Top 50 of 2015 countdown, I tried to tell myself that I wouldn't review films I watched in December, and save them for January.  They could last a few more weeks without me writing down my opinions on them.


I just couldn't do it.


Last night, my childhood was reawakened as I finally witnessed my heroes back on the big screen.  None of this Qui-Gon/Dooku/Grievous nonsense; Han, Leia, Chewie, they were reunited and it felt so good!  Even iconic and yet background characters like Admiral Ackbar and Nien Numb got a smile out of me just by appearing on screen.


Finally I was back in the universe that I spent so much time when I was a child.

So what has been happening since the Luke, Han and Leia were partying with Ewoks at the end of Return of the Jedi? 


To avoid some spoilers, let's just say a new evil organisation has risen and the Rebel Alliance is needed just as much as it ever has been.  But in order to make an difference, the Alliance need some plans that are hidden with a droid, BB-8.  The plot ringing any bells so far?


What follows is a beautiful, emotional and exhilarating adventure crossing planets, starships and iconic Corellian freighters. 


It might come across like a checklist of every Star Wars nerd's ideal sequel, but it's necessary to restart this sleeping giant of a franchise.

We are reacquainted with old faces, with the reappearance of Han, Chewie and Leia providing a weight of familiarity and love from the audience that truly is hard to replicate. 


There is the feeling of unspoken hardships and battles in the past in their muted and effortless performances, which honestly brought a tear to this film critic's eye.

We are also introduced to new heroes; the AWOL stormtrooper Finn (John Boyega) and Rey (Daisy Ridley) making sure BB-8 doesn't fall into the wrong hands, and daring pilot Poe Dameron (Oscar Isaac) leading the X-Wings in battle whenever they are needed. 


Boyega brings an intensity and earnest nature to the character of Finn as well as a surprisingly comic timing, whilst Ridley initially struggles with the role but eventually settles into her role as the new female protagonist with a lot of potential hidden for the future.


The real surprise comes in Oscar Isaac.  Having never impressed me before in roles such as SuckerPunch and The Bourne Legacy, Isaac appears to be incredibly at home in the Star Wars Universe, bringing an air of cool not seen since a young Han Solo shot Greedo first.

But heroes such as these are only as compelling as the villain facing them and one of the most intriguing parts of The Force Awakens is the guy plastered all over cereal boxes and pencil cases worldwide; Kylo Ren. 


Ren is possibly the most interesting villain the franchise has produced since Darth Vader, and whether it is his petulant and unpredictable attitude or his unique and dramatic background, his story is the most I am most looking forward to watching.

The effects are brilliant and won't be outdone for a long time, as finally seeing the Millennium Falcon diving and swooping will certainly make you feel like you are finally in the dogfights among the TIE Fighters and X-Wings. 


Again, it's like the director J.J. Abrams has asked the fans what they want and just given it to them, all the while making sure there are compelling storylines with fascinating characters at the heart of them.

This isn't to try and say it's perfect as that isn't the case at all.  But it is the film that the fans, and the franchise, have needed since the failures of the prequels.  Once the cobwebs have been shaken loose, it's clear that this is simply a breath of fresh air into a Universe of infinite possibilities.  One that I am eagerly waiting to visit again.

Star Wars is back, ladies and gentlemen, and it's packing a punch.  Like a lightsaber being passed from father to son, it is a film that will be cherished and viewed for years to come.

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

The Martian

Disco Inferno

So after my little outburst about Pixels, I feel like I need to review a film that reminds me that there are still credible actors and directors out there.

And not just hack, washed-up comedians who aim to make as much money as possible and just clearly don't give a....

Sorry... sigh... anyway, The Martian...

PLOT

In the close future, we have been able to send humans to Mars.  On one of these missions to study the red planet, astronaut and botanist Mark Watney (Matt Damon) gets struck by the site's communication satellite during a evacuation-worthy sandstorm.  With no trace of him and his suit reading no life-signs, his fellow astronauts blast off to safety, unwittingly leaving him behind for dead.

When he regains consciousness, Watney realises whilst he has a year's worth of food, it's four years until another mission can be launched to come and get him.

Of course, that's if he can let Earth know he's alive...

And his tent doesn't rupture in another sandstorm...

And he can grow food and collect water on a planet that has neither...

It's not looking good...

OPINIONS

Going into The Martian, some colleagues and fellow film reviewers had described the film as "the best film of 2015 so far!" or even "best science fiction film ever seen!".  I cannot agree with either of these statements, but that doesn't mean I thought it was a bad film.

Quite the contrary in fact, as I was delightfully surprised by The Martian.  For one, it is much more upbeat, light-hearted and positive in it's approach to the storyline that I would have imagined.  A film such as this usually comes with dramatic music, peril throughout and more than enough amounts of self-pity.

But that's where The Martian and it's main character, Mark Watney, differ.  A day or two into his lone stay on Mars, Watney declares that he is "not gonna die here!" and sets about fixing his situation. He begins to use his scientific mind and botany skills to grow a sustainable food source on Mars to keep him alive.  His trials and experiments are great entertainment as Matt Damon uses his charismatic skills to their very best and is an incredibly watchable lead actor.

His optimism and humour is a refreshing change of pace in these sort of 'All Is Lost' films and allows the film to never feel depressing or boring.  The 70's era soundtrack also helps, as Chastain's Commander Lewis is a huge disco fan (unfortunately for Watney).  From ABBA to Donna Summer, the classic anthems never fail to put a smile on your face and move the story along at a brisk pace, often framing the film's montages in a seamless fashion.

To counterbalance the one-man show taking place on Mars, the film has an abundance of talented side-characters, such as Jessica Chastain, Jeff Daniels and Chiwetel Ejiofor being those entrusted with bringing Watney home alive. Everyone plays their part well, with no one letting the film down.

ON THE OTHER HAND...

Having said that... it was a shame to have up-and-coming actors such as Kate Mara, Donald Glover and Michael Peña come across as under-utilised. However that is bound to happen when the cast-list is so overburdened with famous names.

Suffering from another issue with such a large cast of characters, The Martian spreads itself a little thin when trying to flesh out all of them.  The film's light-hearted and jovial attitude seemed to flow through every character, seemingly making everyone not take the situation seriously.  Whilst it was refreshing not having a villain to root against, with humanity joining together being a worthy and admirable central message, consequentially, all the characters seemed bland, similar and unremarkable.

Going back to what I said before about the film being remarkably upbeat for an 'All Is Lost' type of film, I feel that whilst that was refreshing and what the film will be remembered for, I felt it still needed more peril and danger in the mission and Watney's overall situation.

Watney's solutions came too easily to him and mistakes he encountered became less frequent.  He seemed too capable in the situations he faced, coming across as a little too 'Hollywood' in places.  I was expecting a level of danger and loneliness as experienced in the similar Cast Away or 127 Hours but everything came together too easily for my taste.

LET'S WRAP IT UP...

By no means is this a disappointing or bad film.

This film is a remarkable and beautiful piece of work.  Director Ridley Scott and writer Drew Goddard have adapted this story onto the screen incredibly well and I think it is one of the best science-fiction works to have been on the silver screen in the past few years.  I personally preferred Gravity or last year's Interstellar, but The Martian can be easily held next to those names.

The cast is brilliant, the soundtrack is foot-stomping and the overall message is an important one, full of hope and perseverance.

I just would have preferred Matt Damon to go through a little bit more trouble.  And there's no harm in that.

Rating - 8/10

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

Pixels

Garbage In Motion

Step right up ladies and gentlemen!  Right this way!  

Have I got a film for your viewing displeasure!  

Enter into the cinema to hand over your hard-earned money for a film that defies the senses and baffles the mind!

Interested in a comedy with no jokes?!

A thriller without any peril?!

A film seriously casting the guy from Paul Blart: Mall Cop as the President of the United States?!

Well then, boy, is this film for you!

I honestly try not to swear in my reviews; I feel like it lowers the tone, does the film a disservice and I come across like I cannot voice my arguments properly.

But my God, F##K THIS FILM!

PLOT

When they are 13 years old, Adam Sandler, Josh Gad and Peter Dinklage participate in an arcade video game tournament.  Footage of this, and the games themselves, are sent into outer space as some kind of time capsule or message of peace, I really can't remember.

Anyway, aliens intercept it, interpret it as a declaration of war and therefore send versions of those video games to destroy present-day Earth.

So since Sandler's best friend Kevin James (of Paul Blart: Mall Cop) is the US President...sigh... he enlists Sandler's expertise, as well as Gad and Dinklage to fight back against the video game-aliens.

Think Ghostbusters with video-game aliens replacing the ghosts.

(Good God, I'm so sorry Ghostbusters.  You do not need to be mentioned in the same review as this mess.)

My feelings exactly, Josh Gad.

OPINIONS

"But, Mike...!", I hear you cry, "...just why is this such a horrid stench on the map of movies through the years?!"

I'm glad you asked.

Pixels will be used as evidence in future years when someone eventually decides to call Adam Sandler and Happy Madison Productions on their current strategy of creating bull$hit films for an amazing amount of money (on average $71.5 million, from 2010's Grown Ups up until now), phoning in performances, paying his friends extraordinary fees and never even trying to make their films funny.

What happened to the Adam Sandler of The Wedding Singer?  Happy Gilmore?  Punch-Drunk Love?! The guy who came from Saturday Night Live with so much promise and actual comedic acting-chops?  Instead, Pixels features the 'dead behind the eyes' performance that we've gotten used to over the years.  A guy who turns up to earn the paycheck and then go back to his trailer.

Despite the pixels around him,
Sandler's performance is the most fake thing in this photo...

Uuuuuuuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrgggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, this film...

There is just an overall sense of confusion over the movie.

Early on, Sandler jokes that Paul Blart: US President's wife hates him, and they have a chuckle.  But his wife (played by the fantastic Jane Krakowski) adores him and puts up with his buffoonery regardless.

Yeah, we should be disappointed we lost this one...

Whilst combating Pac-Man, Peter Dinklage's character enters a cheat code. A cheat code!  In real life!  Not in a video game, but real life!  How?!  How does that actually work?!  It's never explained!

When the aliens first arrive, they engage in an aerial dogfight, which humans lose against Galaga.  Fair enough. They tell us to prepare for the next battle, but it's Breakout.  They proceed to destroy the Taj Mahal.  How could humans have beaten that?  It's a one player game.

After the humans win one of the battles, they get a video game character as a 'trophy'.  One of these is Qbert, the lovable orange blob thing that lights up steps by jumping on them.  But after the war is over, Qbert just morphs into a female video game character that Josh Gad's creepy basement-dweller has been obsessing over since a teenager.  ......Why?  Where was Qbert's say in this?  Isn't that just a bit sinister?  And does that make her a literal 'trophy-wife'?

I'm getting literally angry thinking about this film.

Why is Peter Dinklage in this pile of rancid slime?  Brian Cox, Sean Bean, Michelle Monaghan, all of them.  They're credible actors that don't have to put up with this $hit.

Qbert before he gets malformed into a man's 'non-speaking pretty thing'

When you have such a plethora of video game franchises to work with, the limitless possibilities of using memorable intellectual properties in humorous scenarios as well as Nintendo's allowance to use iconic characters such as Donkey Kong, Mario and even Duck Hunt, you can't come out with something as terrible and pointless as Pixels.  It's a crime.  Although everything seems to be a crime in this film.

Adam Sandler and Happy Madison Productions kidnapped my childhood innocence.

They stole money from countless unsuspecting audiences around the world.

They beat and battered my sense of decency.

They indecently exposed their cash-hungry scheme to throw together a film just to create box-office.

They fraudulently sold me the idea of fantastically-realised video games in real life.

And they murdered any chance of that happening in the future.

LET'S WRAP IT UP

In someone else's hands, Pixels could have been an ode to a time-long-forgotten.  It could have joined the ranks of Wreck-It-Ralph and Scott Pilgrim vs. The World as examples of love letters to the past-time.

Arcade machines could have made a retro comeback into popular culture instead of kitsh memorabilia.

Hell, Nintendo could have started to come around to the idea of a Legend of Zelda or Metroid film, but Sandler and director Chris Columbus took the easy route.

"Let's just put random video game characters everywhere!  It doesn't matter about context!  Nostalgia will mask everything!"

Stuff like this is why video games aren't treated with the same respect as films and books as an art form.  You've set the gaming community back another few years, so thank you for that.

From a true fan of both video games and film, fuck you Happy Madison Productions.  And goodnight.

Rating - 1/10 (since I can't give 0/10)

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