Bridesmaids revisited

After succumbing to all the hype I finally watched Bridesmaids the other night and was unfortunately disappointed. Part of the problem was the fact that it had been hyped so much, from comments like “funniest film of the year” to “the female Hangover”. For funniest film of the year, it might be, but only because I can’t think of any other comedies that are jumping out at me as being massively funny this year. As for it being a female version of The Hangover, which I’m a big fan of, I felt it fell short.

Not to say that I disliked it. The first act was pretty funny and a good scene setter, and the second act was hilarious – the scene on the plane was side-splittingly entertaining. However, the third act was disappointing and not funny enough to pay off a lot of good set up. The sing-a-long was also pretty misjudged.

Kristen Wiig is a strong female comic and made for a good lead, and Chris O’Dowd continues to break Hollywood as her charming love interest, but the film is less about her relationship with him and more about her “Bra-mance” with her best friend. It was a nice idea to shift the bromance concept that is permeating cinema at the moment onto women, and there were some really good comic moments, but I just felt that it could have been more.

There are some great supporting turns from Rose Byrne (who is proving to be incredibly versatile), Jon Hamm (playing a super-sleazed up caricature of his role on Mad Men) and Matt Lucas. The main comedy props go to Melissa McCarthy though, who completely steals the film from everyone else. By the end of the film you wanted to have seen much more of her character.

There are a couple of other characters who are woefully underused – Ellie Kemper from The US Office and Wendi McLendon-Covey from Reno 911 –just when they are beginning to develop on the plane ride to Vegas they end up disappearing for practically the rest of the film.  Which is a real shame as if there had been more focus on the Bridesmaids as a group in the third act and less on the lead character’s spiral into depression, the whole film would have been a lot funnier and would have remained consistent with the marvellous second act.

Overall, it’s good but it could have been better. I think my perception of it was skewed somewhat negatively by all the hype, but then it’s been one of the most successful comedies ever, so what do I know. 

Speaking of scary…

It’s been a good week for scary movies. After my review of Orphan yesterday, today I’m going to run through another film that managed to scare the bejeezus out of me…Insidious.

Let me start out by saying that I enjoy being scared by a good horror movie, and therefore end up watching loads of them. The drawback of this is that because I watch so many, I have become somewhat desensitised and now hate it when lazy film makers fall back on cliché and convention. If you’re lucky enough to be making movies for a living a least put some effort in!

And then something like Insidious comes along. From the makers of Paranormal Activity, the film revolves around parents Rose Byrne and Patrick Wilson who move their children into a new home only for their eldest child to be struck down and fall into a coma whilst exploring the loft. Then when they relocated their unconscious son back to their house, strange things start to happen…

It’s great when a film can scare you, and nowadays it can only do that if it does something original. Whilst the main storyline does play into the cinematic conventions of previous films, the originality here comes from the where the scares are placed, thus the conventional becomes unconventional. What subverts the genre is despite some resistance, the husband is much more accepting of the fact that there are strange things going on (unlike the annoying cliché of the husband refusing to believe even in the face of overwhelming evidence).

Borrow strongly from Poltergeist there’s a real sense of the house turning on the family, and there’s even an older psychic lady joining the fray (played by Magda from There’s Something About Mary), but again part of the reason this works is that they take the plot away from the expected instead guiding it down a route that’s much harder to predict.

There are a couple of genuinely frightening moments that will make you jump (unless you’ve got the constitution of a gargoyle) and much like Orphan the reason it worked for me is the use of implied menace rather than turning the film into a gore fest. It’s ultimately just a really well made horror movie that I can’t recommend enough to fright-fiends.

All in all, definitely one for horror fanatics and not one for the feint hearted. You have been warned…

"X" gonna give it to you

So X-Men First Class. Let me start by saying that I was dubious going in...not in the least because I didn't think that James McAvoy had the chops to take over from Patrick Stewart. Plus I'm not keen on the idea of the weird prequel/reboot hybrid it was pitched as...I find the idea of RetConing the X-men films so soon after the release of the last one a bit unnecessary.

However, I must admit that I was pleasantly surprised. Whilst McAvoy starts off as a Sixties Austin Powers stereotype (I cannot make my peace with Xavier constantly saying “Groovy”), by the end he had grown on me, and made me think that perhaps I had been too quick to judge him. Michael Fassbender goes the other way, insomuch as he is consistently brilliant throughout, until the final post-battle scenes, when his accent really starts to slip. Some people were really down on January Jones as Emma Frost, but I liked her. The cold, distant beauty act encapsulated the Emma Frost from the comics (at least the pre-GenX Frost, anyway), and on a superficial level, she did make those outfits look good.  Rose Byrne and Oliver Platt were both solid, and Jason Flemyng makes the most of the little screen time he has (all in the all the Brits were pulling more than our fair share of the weight – represent yo!) The stand out performance has to be Kevin Bacon as Sebastian Shaw, and as a child of the Eighties it is nice to see Bacon in such a big role in such a big movie (I’ve been a fan since Tremors, and the game named after him was a key flirtation device when I was romancing my wife).

There are some flaws in the film, some of which jarred me as a comic book geek, and some of which annoyed me because they don’t make sense in the context of the other films (my point about RetConing your own work!) Firstly, Moira McTaggart is NOT a CIA Agent, she’s a Scottish scientist. Secondly, Banshee is Irish (and his family are pretty much the only Irish characters in the X-universe). Being of Irish heritage myself, it’s a little annoying to see Banshee (and Moira to some extend) being made into Americans because it’s easier for the story.  Thirdly, (and I fully admit I’m being picky), Havok is Cyclops’ younger brother – you’d think they would mention that. These issues are all largely because I’m a comic book purist, and I can get over them. On to the stuff that REALLY annoyed then...

1)  Didn’t a much younger version of Emma Frost turn up in Wolverine: Origin? Just saying.

2)  This was my biggest annoyance – at no point in any of the other three X-men films, did Professor X mention that him and Mystique GREW UP TOGETHER! Seriously, where did that come from.

3)  Of all the heroes and villains to use, Riptide (who isn’t even named) and Angel (the crappy female one) are just poor choices. Even Avalanche would’ve been better than Riptide. I can only hope that if Bryan Singer does get around to doing X4 and X5, he brings in some quality villains like Sinister or Apocalypse (who I freely admit are too big to be Shaw’s sidekicks, however there is a whole Hellfire club to choose from).  As for Angel, I always hated that character. Fricking Jubilee would’ve been better than her.

On to the good, and there was a lot of good going for it. I did like young Mystique (despite the backstory) and if they do turn this into a trilogy I hope they explore her relationship with Azazel (baby Nightcrawler, anyone?). Of the “kids” her and Beast are the best, and I thought Beast’s story was well handled (although the prosthetics at the end really hindered his mouth from moving when he was talking). The other thing I like was the fact that Beast was the only one whose age was about right (in the context of X3).

The highlight of the film for me (and what has been missing from the previous films) was the costumes. Finally getting to see the X-men in blue and yellow, as they should be. I get that black leather is “cooler” (or at least is was when they were riding on the crest of the Matrix’s waves), but ultimately the X-men are SUPERHEROES and it’s good to see them in costume.

Re-reading the above, I might have been a bit unfair on the film, as I did really enjoy it. I was entertained throughout and apart from a weird Rocky-style montage, and the exposition montage explaining to the audience just how the cold war worked in the lowest common denominator, the film was consistently good. There were some good set pieces, and although the final battle is a bit disjointed it really works in setting up Xavier and Magneto becoming the characters that people will recognise.

Possibly the best of the X-films to date, with a neat cameo from Rebecca Romijn. The films only use of the F-word (hey, it is a 12a) was brilliant, and probably the high point for me. Slightly disappointed that there was no “sting” in the tale, but I think that’s only because I come t expect it of Marvel now!

If they can keep pulling off films of this level I’ll be more than happy. Let’s see how Green Lantern compares later this month...