I really wanted to love Hail, Caesar! The Coen Brothers have very consistently made films that, even in some of their weaker offerings, have had something to really relish in or enjoy. As filmmakers go, they exhibit a broad range of depth that most other filmmakers out there never seem to attain, as proven by the excellence of films like The Big Lebowski and ranging to darker and despairing works like No Country for Old Men. It’s a real shame to go into a film like Caesar and come out of the movie feeling like I’ve got nothing really to say in response other than a simple shrug. At best, the film is a muddled mess that has a brief moment or two of genuine greatness, but unfortunately it never manages to pull together in any satisfying sort of way.

The biggest problem that plagues the movie right off is that it never seems to commit to being about anything in particular, and I can’t quite put my finger on why this is so. As far as the story goes, the film is about a man’s responsibilities managing a Hollywood movie studio in the early 1950s, but it’s only occasionally an enjoyable movie to watch. The central character is played by Josh Brolin, the man at the helm of Capital Pictures, ironically named as questions are raised as to whether films produced on a studio level serve as works of art or as products of capitalism in artistic guise. However, Brolin’s portrayal of Eddie Mannix is very one-note and filled with little charm, and it became very hard for me to care about the decisions he struggles with over the course of the film. He’s very neutral throughout, and only at the very end is there any glimpse of real emotion that breaks through his otherwise gruff stereotypical Hollywood portrayal. Stereotypes are fine to have with minor players, but when the central character comes off as bland, as Mannix does, the movie’s intent suffers in the process.

Many of Caesar’s other big names suffer the same fate, from George Clooney, Tilda Swinton, Scarlett Johansson, and Channing Tatum; all are given interesting and quirky roles to fill, but are handled in a way that that feels fairly incohesive to the whole. Every moment feels like it’s trying to come together in a way that never quite succeeds, and at some points becomes a bit of a chore to watch.

The real exception to this is when Ralph Fiennes and Alden Ehrenreich enter the scene. In the grand scheme of things, they are fairly minor characters in the film, but are so interesting to watch that I was left wondering why the rest of the cast didn’t receive as much care and attention as these characters got. I’m left feeling that had the filmmakers spent more time focusing the rest of the story with the same kind of care they spent with scenes like those with the characters of Laurence Laurentz and Hobie Doyle, we would be left with a much more compelling film.

There’s a really great musical number sandwiched in the middle of the film, and while it was quite fun scene, I think it underscores everything that I think the movie tried and failed to do. The film forgets momentarily about its central narrative, and becomes something else. Is Hail, Caesar! paying homage to films of old? If so, instances like this musical number feel too modern for me in the way that it’s shot to work as a successful love letter to Hollywood films of the fifties. And while it was enjoyable, it goes on for quite a while, and I forgot that Mannix was there on the set by the side, watching it happen. It felt incongruous to the idea that it was a movie in production, whereas Clooney’s speech near the end of the film works more successfully in this respect.

Even the driving central thread that serves as cause to many of Mannix’s problems suffers from confusion and a lack of cohesion. While potentially a funny and interesting narrative point in the context that lurked underneath the blacklist era in Hollywood during the Cold War, it simply wasn’t all that compelling a narrative point to follow in the film’s own context.

There are a lot of fun and interesting ideas throughout Hail, Caesar! It’s just a shame that they never really work together as a whole.

Ignacio Peña

Spoiler Alert: The following review contains minor plot spoiler.

Disclaimer: This film contains a lot of violence, crude humour and irreparable damage to fourth walls.

Deadpool follows an ex-mercenary who gets diagnosed with cancer and is forced to agree to very shady procedures in order to be cured. Not only does he get cured but receives the ability to heal quickly from even the deadliest of wounds… and also leaving him looking ugly as all hell.

Many could argue that the superhero genre has become bloated and stale in recent years as it has risen in popularity. Not because they are necessarily bad films, though some definitely are (being rightfully mocked at various points in the film), but that they all feel very similar and tame. With these kinds of by the books, cliché superhero films being such big box office guarantees, studios do not see the need to take a gamble in making a mature over the top superhero movie. However, after strong lobbying from first time director Tim Miller and Ryan Reynolds, who’s career has been over-shadowed by a string of box office flops and sub par romance films in recent years, as well very positive reactions to leaked test footage on the internet, Fox Studios decided to green light Deadpool. Armed with a small budget compared to superhero films, shaky production beginnings (it was in development hell for 10 years), and source material that many believed simply could not be transferred to the big screen. Deadpool was expected to fail as a movie, after all this is not Deadpool’s first movie foray into film, with the widely panned appearance in X-men Origins: Wolverine, where he was also portrayed by Ryan Reynolds. What was seen as chains that would tether the film from ever rising above, turned out to be the balloons that lift it not only above superhero movies but above many films in general.

It’s the makers of this films’ passion that is the driving force behind the movie. It is clear from the start that the two men behind the script, Paul Wernick and Rhett Reese, understood the character of Deadpool, often referred as The Merc with the Mouth, and how his mind works. At no point in the film do the jokes feel forced or out of character and there are a lot of jokes. It is Deadpool’s signature fourth wall breaks that this attention to the character really shines through. Deadpool is fully aware of whats going on around him. Not just within the movie but the world in which the film exists. It is this awareness that allows the films humour to expand out of the boundaries of it’s fictional universe and create satire out of things the audience has experienced. This is especially well done with Ryan Reynolds’ past superhero attempts. All this would never truly come together if it were not for Ryan Reynolds however.

Every so often an actor comes along and completely embodies a role to the point where they become the character they portray. Notable mentions include Robert Downey Jr as Tony Stark/Iron Man and Hugh Jackman as Wolverine. The key word in that sentence being ‘becomes’ for unlike Downey Jr and Jackman, Reynolds is the character of Deadpool. It’s very clear that the character means a lot to Reynolds and this translate to a pitch perfect portrayal of the Merc with the Mouth. His mannerisms and comedic timings are done to near perfection. This was made clear early in the promotional material in the lead up to the film. Ryan Reynolds is Deadpool. It’s clear that he has a lot riding on the success of Deadpool as a character but also loves the character and makes him incredibly likeable for someone who is as much a bad guy as the villain in the film. While in no way is Ajax a fleshed out character with his own set of motives and back story but the film never sets out to do this, instead choosing to focus on making him someone dislike and want to see in a final face off.

This is all part of Deadpool’s strongest aspect. It’s 1 hour and 40 minute run time. As a film, Deadpool always feels concise and never strays from its objective. It doesn’t branch off into several sub stories that may or may not be concluded in this film, nor does it try to set up not only this film, but several other films to come. Every second of the film feels relevant solely to this single movie keeping the films pace constantly moving and focused. Nothing feels wasted, unnecessary or tacked on to add extra meat to its already fleshy bones. The films small budget also contributes to this feeling by keeping the story constrained to fewer different set pieces as possible, instead focusing on squeezing as much as it can into each frame. The film knows theres a bigger world out there but chooses to remain only on its own bloodstained path. This is backed by the films non linear approach to the characters origin storytelling in the first act. Jumping between the hilarious opening action set piece and the mistakes he’s made to bring him there.

The film also has some of the most hilarious and well choreographed action I have seen recently. It does not use the dreaded shaky cam or fast cut editing of many action films of recent times, instead focusing on creativity, something that pays off massively leaving the film feeling fresh. It definitely pushes the boundaries of its 15 rating at times but not many superhero films have the ability to do that making Deadpool stand out in the sea of Marvel and DC films. It also benefits from its cast of supporting characters which compliment each other excellently. Whether its Colossus’ polar opposite attitude to Deadpool in all aspects of life, the subconscious need to seem cool to teenager Negasonic Teenage Warhead, yes she is called Negasonic Teenage Warhead and the film acknowledges the ridiculousness of this name, or the perfect chemistry between Deadpool and his elderly blind roommate Al and his best friend Weasel. Deadpool may be centre stage in this film but that stage is held by its supporting cast.

But not only is Deadpool a great action film. It is also a great romantic comedy, as crazy as that may sound. The writers chose to focus on the love story aspect of the film which is rarely a good idea. It is done in such a way however that you can see Deadpool’s motivation in wanting to get her back. Everything he does is for her and you fully understand and see why. It gives an otherwise morally vacant character purpose whilst keeping it feel sincere.

If I had any criticism of the film, it is that it is an origin story. This is however because I already know of Deadpool’s origins and therefore feel I cannot hold it against the film since most people do not. As far as superhero origins go, this is the most definitely best and by a very long stretch.

Is Deadpool a superhero movie? Is it a romantic comedy? Is it a heartfelt look into a man trying to come to terms with illness? Yes, yes and yes. Deadpool is a film that could have and should have failed in almost every aspect but instead does the opposite. I struggled very hard to truly find a flaw with this movie. It knows where its boundaries lie and never tries to be something bigger than it can. If I was to score this movie I would give it a perfect 10/10, something I don’t say about many films. In my eyes in stands amongst the small handful of films that not only do I personally love but I deem near perfect, up there with the best of the best like Fight Club, Reservoir Dogs and Christopher Nolan’s Interstellar. Its a film that rises above all of its expectations instead laying dead in a pool of its own limitations.

Mert Kece

SPOILER WARNING: Please note that the following review contains minor plot and character spoilers

The Big Short is a very interesting movie. Not only in it’s subject matter, four insiders of the financial world foreseeing the collapse of the housing market and taking on the big, greedy banks, but in how cleverly and engagingly it manages to pull off its blackly satirical narrative and execution. It is directed and co-written by Adam Mckay, who’s most notable work is the comedy Anchorman, as well as a strong A-list cast of actors. This consists most notably of Christian Bale, Steve Carrell, Ryan Gosling and Brad Pitt as well as slew of other great supporting actors. The film is set over the span of roughy three years from 2005 to 2008 and follows four “outsiders and weirdo’s” as they are called in the film with the same objective of betting against the banks but different motivations.

The film begins by introducing the audience to its great cast of distinct characters. There is the almost prophetic Michael Burry, a socially awkward, metal enthusiast surgeon turned short wearing Wall Street maths genius who predicts the upcoming housing crash and see’s an opportunity to cash in. He portrayed superbly by the energetic Christian Bale who fully embraces the character and makes him the most interesting and enjoyable to watch character in the film. Then there’s the arrogant, show-off, obnoxious banker Jared Vennett, played by Ryan Gosling, who is mainly there as a narrative figure as well as a tool to explain some of the more complicated financial terms. It’s in these moments that Gosling manages to elevate his relatively two dimensional character with his well timed comedic insults and 4th wall breaks. The heart of the film comes in the form of Mark Baum, a man who hates the way in which the banks operate by screwing over the common man. Carrell once again manages to show here that he is more than just a comedic actor with another award worthy performance. He successfully captures the looks of disgust as Baum begins to realise what he has achieved and just how much greed has screwed up the financial market. Lastly, there is jaded, retiree Ben Rickart, portrayed by ever brilliant Brad Pitt, who reluctantly decides to help two ambitious small time investors. It is this character who reminds the audience of the seriousness of what happened, grounding you back to the reality of the situation amongst all the satire. Pitt manages this through a very calm, low key but memorable performance that feels welcome amongst the more in your face characters.

The great acting and fleshed out characters are merely the back bone of what makes this film stand out and feel fresh. It is through Mckay’s direction, writing and editing that sets this film apart from its counterparts. Something that came as a surprise considering Mckay’s past films have all pretty much been Will Ferrell comedies. The film has at times an almost documentary feeling in the way the film is shot. There are sudden zooms to capture reactions and quick pans across the room to catch a developing situation. Throughout the film there are quick flashing cuts at critical moments, giving slightly different flashes of perspective on the scene. Thrown into the mix are also usually seemingly random, brief news and internet clips that feel unusually relevant to everything that is going on. They also provide small breaks between key moments to allow the audience to try make sense of whats happening.

Sound and music are also used to tremendous effect with moments of relieving silence contrasted by well timed musical queues, whether it be for comedic effect or atmosphere building. All this gives the film a heart that keeps it flowing throughout the movie. Its not often that films are paced as consistently as The Big Short and hence never did it feel slow or boring. A particular triumph when you consider you’re watching a film full of Wall Street Jargon. You can really see Mckay’s style shine through this film and see’s him earning a well deserved Best Director nod at the Oscars.

This pace is also kept through Mckay’s clever writing. Fourth wall breaks are used through out the film, mainly by Gosling, to quickly explain financial terms used in conversations. More complex terms are explained through smart analogies given by characters that simplify things without feeling condescending to the viewer, more often than not adding an extra layer of satire to the film. There are some extra interesting ways that things are explained but I won’t spoil those for the viewer. Conversations are filled with sharp witty remarks that I’d most similarly compare to 2015’s The Martian, to similar effect. There were numerous moments where the whole cinema erupted in laughter before falling silent with intrigue again. Very rarely did the satire feel forced or out of place. This is mainly thanks to the remarks being written in a way that almost never feels forced or stiff. All these components could often lead to a messy confused movie but instead pays off massively, giving the film its energy and rhythm.

The film does have a few shortcomings where the feel and the tone quiver slightly but these are few and far between and quickly forgotten as you are pulled back into the film. One notable scene which almost unexpectedly forces a heart to heart on the viewer. Although it is done to develop the characters motives further it feels out of sync with the rest of the movie.

All in all The Big Short is another film about the shady dealings of Wall Street, but it’s a Wall Street film with its own a fast continuous pulse that keeps the film flowing and alive. It’s a film that is fully aware of both itself and the rather alien world of investment banking and uses this awareness to great effect. It utilises the flashy style which it creates and rides it triumphantly like a wave. It feels fresh after a superb year of stand out films and you’ve got to respect Mckay for that. With lots to love and little to hate, it’s a film that goes big but doesn’t fall short.

Mert Kece

The Revenant opens in darkness and the sound of a man’s breath fills the cinema as the first image slowly fades into focus. The sound of breathing, of gasping, of terrifying screams of agony and words of comfort and of the wind; the sounds of life fill a tale which unfolds in a violent maelstrom that, through each moment, asks what makes a man savage. Is it the absence of the civilized world, or is there something more inherent in all creatures that will drive one to violence? It’s a film where no man is exempt from succumbing to this savagery in the face of losing what is most precious to them, what it is that makes them human.

The film itself is fairly barren of much dialogue, yet here is a movie where the art of film is working at its best. The imagery throughout the film does a tremendous amount of work filling in what isn’t said, and where characters can easily fall into archetypes in the hands of a lesser filmmaker, everyone is given their due. Leonardo DiCaprio and Tom Hardy are captivating in this; where words are delivered sparingly, there is an unspoken ferocity driving each of them that makes it difficult not to watch.

The film is challenging. It is unapologetically violent where the story needs it to be violent, but it is never done with relish, and this is perhaps because of just how much the story itself isn’t one to relish in. Just as none of the characters themselves feel wrong for their actions, the film has no apologies itself for showing the end result. It is visceral in depicting what men at conflict will do in the defense of their lives or the lives of others.

The cinematography is stunning. Throughout the film we are treated to shots of the cold wilderness that serves as their hell, yet in that same prison they are surrounded by endless beauty. That wilderness too, like the many gasps for life that punctuate the film, is constantly marked by its own breath, by the wind which rushes through the tress in the cold of the north. There’s an otherworldliness to the desolate landscapes of snow that actively serve to underscore the conflict driving this film, and every shot adds a level of unease and strange beauty to the struggle being told.

That is what is so remarkable about The Revenant. Never is there a wasted moment. It’s a film that needs to be experienced. I would be doing anyone who hasn’t seen it a great disservice of getting into any real story specifics, but it’s important to note just how thoroughly revenge is seeped into the DNA of its telling. It’s remarkable because it left me questioning just how much a person will do in their own context to survive what struggles they face. While the film has very clear protagonists and antagonists, they are simply that: they are antagonists to each other. One could argue the virtues and vices of seeking revenge for an injustice done upon a person, but it is unquestionable how the desire for vengeance fills any human being when they have been wronged. I will only refer to one line of dialogue in the film, in answer to a question posed, because it has stuck with me more than any other:

“I just killed a man who was trying to kill my son.”

That has stayed with me, for the very reason that, long after I left the cinema, I still think about that line and I wonder to myself how reasonable that actually sounds. In a film that concerns itself with the divide between what renders a person as savage or human, therein lies a single line of dialogue that embodies the very conflict of both. It shows that perhaps one can never truly be separate from the other, that it may be that very conflict itself which renders us all human.

Ignacio Peña