Genre: Comedy
Director: Jeff Tomsic
Cast: Ed Helms, Jake Johnson, Annabelle Wallis, Jon Hamm, Isla Fisher, Rashida Jones, Leslie Bibb, Hannibal Buress, Jeremy Renner
RunTime: 1 hr 40 mins
Rating: M18 (Some Nudity and Coarse Language)
Released By: Warner Bros
Official Website: http://www.tagthemovie.com/
Opening Day: 21 June 2018
Synopsis: For one month every year, five highly competitive friends hit the ground running in a no-holds-barred game of tag they’ve been playing since the first grade—risking their necks, their jobs and their relationships to take each other down with the battle cry: “You’re It!” This year, the game coincides with the wedding of their only undefeated player, which should finally make him an easy target. But he knows they’re coming…and he’s ready. Based on a true story, the New Line Cinema comedy “Tag” shows how far some guys will go to be the last man standing.
Movie Review:
Tag, you’re it. You know that childhood game where two or more players chase each other in an attempt to tag someone or avoid being tagged? Well, according to a Wall Street Journal article in 2013, it turns out that a group of ten friends have been playing the game once every month for the last 30 years of their lives. It’s not difficult to see why Hollywood has sparked to turning their life story into a bromantic comedy full of high jinks, disguises and carefully choreographed pranks, and thanks to the solid chemistry of an excellent ensemble cast, ‘Tag’ is a light, frothy summer comedy that’s packed with silly fun and an unexpected dose of sweet sentiment.
As conceived by Rob McKittrick and Mark Steilen, this adaptation focuses on the days leading up to the impending nuptials of Jerry (Jeremy Renner), the only member among a group of five childhood friends who has never ever been tagged. Coincidentally, these days fall within the month of May, the month where these lifelong buddies take up the same epic game that they have been perpetuating since they were nine-year-olds. The opening scene shows just how epic their game has evolved to, with the qualified veterinarian Hoagie (Ed Helms) sitting across a sceptical Lil Rel Howery interviewing for a job as a janitor at the swanky New York insurance firm where his buddy Bob Callahan (Jon Hamm) is CEO.
Hoagie so happens to intrude upon Bob giving an interview to Wall Street Journal reporter Rebecca (Annabelle Wallis), who decides the tag story is more interesting than Callahan himself and signs herself up to join the duo for a cross-country ride to round up the rest of the team. In Denver, Bob tags their stoner pal Chilli (Jake Johnson) after a intense foot-race through apartments and fire escapes; while in Portland, Sable (Hannibal Buress) is in the middle of a therapy session when the trio emerges from out of the room’s closet to grab him. And with Hoagie’s aggressive and hyper-competitive wife Anna (Isla Fisher) in tow, the gang head back to their hometown of Spokane to pin Jerry down.
Making his feature film debut, veteran TV director Jeff Tomsic approaches the film as a series of elaborate high-energy set-pieces that wouldn’t feel out of place in a conventional Hollywood actioner. Among the highlights are a night-time ambush at the country club where Jerry is due to hold his wedding; a mano-a-mano between Hoagie and Jerry at a mall where the former disguises himself as an old lady with a walker; a cat-and-mouse in the middle of the forest complete with booby traps and body doubles; and last but not least, a fake-out at Jerry’s Alcoholics Anonymous session that also reveals his fiancée Susan (Leslie Bibb) to be the agent of a singularly bizarre gag. It’s no-holds-barred all right, but even so, the shenanigans are always in good fun and never performed with anything so much as ill intent.
That’s the same spirit in which the other raunchy gags are devised, which includes Nora Dunn as Hoagie’s flirtatious mum with an awkward crush on Chilli, Rashida Jones as a honeypot trap for both Chilli and Bob, and Thomas Middleditch as a homophobic gym receptionist whom the guys threaten to ‘waterboard’ for information on Jerry’s whereabouts. The supporting cast is sheer comedy gold, as is the lead quintet of Helms, Hamm, Johnson, Buress and Renner. It is clear just how much fun these actors had making the movie, and their energy, enthusiasm and cheer is simply infectious. In particular, their interior deadpan monologues that precede a number of their attempted tags are utterly hilarious, and especially in Hamm’s case, demonstrates the actors’ impressive comic chops.
But amidst the infantile pratfalls is a poignant subtext about friendships, and perhaps more accurately, the seemingly unbreakable childhood ones that somehow get swept away in the day-to-day grind of adult life. Indeed, more so than claiming the bragging rights of breaking Jerry’s record, the whole point of their game is so that they can keep up with each other – or in literal terms, stay in touch with one another, which is often a lot more than we can say for the friends we grew up with. There is also a more sobering reason behind Hoagie’s desperation to tag Jerry, and Helms nails the moment with surprising pathos. It’s a finish that will bring tears to your eyes all right, which you’d probably didn’t expect watching Chilli plunge down a fire escape or Jerry throwing a thermos of hot coffee in Chilli’s face.
As Hollywood usually does, ‘Tag’ isn’t a faithful retelling of the real-life story it was inspired by, but we have to say that we didn’t quite mind the creative liberties that Tomsic and his two screenwriters have taken here. At its heart, their movie still succeeds in capturing the verve, playfulness and enduring companionship that characterises their annual game. To be frank, we expected this to be some man-child comedy about arrested adolescence, but we came out very much – and pleasantly, we may add – surprised by just how much we enjoyed spending 100 minutes with an undemanding bunch of friends we’d love to be part of. So like Anna or Rebecca or Susan in the movie, we were more than happy to hear the words ‘Tag! You’re it!’.
Movie Rating:
(A rambunctious celebration of friendship, this wacky, raunchy and surprisingly poignant action-comedy will have you gladly wishing that 'you're it!')
Review by Gabriel Chong
Genre: Drama/Thriller
Director: Vaughn Stein
Cast: Margot Robbie, Simon Pegg, Mike Myers, Max Irons, Dexter Fletcher
RunTime: 1 hr 30 mins
Rating: NC-16 (Violence and Coarse Language)
Released By: Shaw Organisation
Official Website:
Opening Day: 17 May 2018
Synopsis: In the dark heart of a sprawling, anonymous city, Terminal follows the twisting tales of two assassins carrying out a sinister mission, a teacher battling a fatal illness, an enigmatic janitor and a curious waitress leading a dangerous double life. Murderous consequences unravel in the dead of night as their lives all intertwine at the hands of a mysterious criminal mastermind hell-bent on revenge.
Movie Review:
If you’re curious about ‘Terminal’, it’s probably because of its name cast, which includes the likes of Margot Robbie, Simon Pegg and even Austin Powers… we mean, Mike Myers. But just why such a group of talented actors would lend their time to this interminably boring and utterly pointless movie is beyond comprehension, even more so for Robbie who is among one of its four producers. Oh yes, writer-director Vaughn Stein’s filmmaking debut is a ‘Sin City’ inspired neo-noir infused with a kaleidoscope of neon colours but with all the substance drained out, so unless it’s a one-and-a-half hour of candied pastiche you’re after, you needn’t even bother.
Notwithstanding, for those keen to know more, here’s our attempt at trying to wring coherence out of it. Told through a tortured timeline, the disjointed narrative is made up of three intertwining storylines: first, that of a contract killer named Bonnie (Robbie) who aims to prove herself as a hitman to a mysterious employer by pitting two assassins (Dexter Fletcher and Max Irons) against each other; second, that of diner waitress Annie (also Robbie) who crosses paths with a dying English professor named Bill (Pegg) at the titular restaurant; and third, of a limping janitor (Myers) who shuffles along the vast, depopulated railway station which all the other characters inhabit seemingly going about his own business, but clearly bearing some larger connection to every single one of them.
It will take a little more than an hour before Stein stitches these series of playlets together, but what a terrible hour it is. There’s Fletcher and Irons’ pair of hitmen trading hard-boiled dialogue that tries to sound cool and gritty at the same time, but is really only corny and cringe-worthy. There’s Robbie delivering her dialogue with a snarl that tries to be intimidating and erotic at the same time, but just feels unnecessarily over-the-top. There’s Robbie again challenging Pegg about death, freedom from it and the “pathetic fallacy” that comes off sounding more and more like intellectual psychobabble for the sake of it than anything else. And last but not least, there’s Myers trying to make sense of his role that ends up like a diminutive Dr Evil. Alas, there is hardly any reason to care for any of these characters, not least because they are caricatures that inhabit some artificial underworld that makes no sense, and don’t even get us started about how badly written the lines are.
To his credit, Stein tries to build momentum towards an off-the-rails ending in the third act, but as ballsy as it is, it is equally ridiculous - and considering how underwhelming the earlier acts were, just simply unsatisfying. Oh yes, it’s no surprise that these characters are somehow all connected to one another (including Bonnie and her alter-ego Annie) but to sit through one hour of flashy, hyper-stylised nonsense to get to that point is hardly worth it. There is some strength in its stylistic combination of a neo-noir palette with the Day-Glo colours from ‘Alice in Wonderland’, but the Crayola noir itself is hardly enough to keep one engaged for a full hour.
‘Terminal’ suffers from a classic case of style over substance, or in this case, all style and no substance. There is nothing human, credible or real in its tired tale of deceit, double crosses and narrative switchbacks, so why Robbie, Pegg and/or Myers even bothered is terminally incomprehensible, just like much of the movie is. Its alternate title is ‘End of the Line’, and that’s a pretty apt description for Stein’s filmmaking career if he doesn’t prove that he has more to put on screen than a neon-coloured cartoon.
Movie Rating:
(All style and no substance, this neon-lit ‘Sin City’ inspired neo-noir is interminably boring)
Review by Gabriel Chong
|
TRAILER WATCH - DEADPOOL 2 (FINAL TRAILER)Posted on 21 Apr 2018 |
|
TRAILER WATCH - THE EQUALIZER 2 (FIRST TRAILER)Posted on 21 Apr 2018 |
Genre: Horror/Thriller
Director: Dain Iskandar Said
Cast: Elyana, Umie Aida, Ramli Hassan, Faizal Hussin, Sofi Jikan, Bront Palarae, Hasnul Rahmat, Adlin Aman Ramlie, Nam Ron, Chew Kin Wah
Runtime: 1 hr 46 mins
Rating: PG13 (Disturbing Scenes)
Released By: mm2 Entertainment
Official Website:
Opening Day: 19 April 2018
Synopsis: It’s a tale about the lure of riches, power, eternal youth, beauty and the blood one must spill to achieve this. Dukun centres around a conflicted lawyer, Karim, who is searching for his lost child, Nadia. His desperation leads him to be entangled with an alleged murderer, Diana Dahlan, who links the disappearance of Nadia to darker secrets that could cause Karim to lose everything.
Movie Review:
Had it not been banned by the Malaysian censors for a decade, the supernatural horror ‘Dukun’ probably wouldn’t have been released to as much fanfare. But despite its notoriety, those looking for the sort of graphic horror that Southeast Asian cinema has been known for will probably be disappointed – compared to the likes of the Mo brothers’ ‘Macabre’ or even the more recent ‘Satan’s Slaves’, writer-director Dain Iskandar Said’s feature filmmaking debut is a much visually tamer affair, comprising some brief scenes of dismemberments, contortions and cannibalism with little gore and offscreen violence. What’s a lot more interesting – and we suspect the reason why it was temporarily prohibited in the first place – is its debate between Islam and ‘black magic’, especially how it alludes to the authority of the former deferring to the powers of the latter.
Arguably, if this were the core of the film, it may not even have seen the light of day today. So rather than discuss it head-on, Said approaches it from the perspective of a legal and police procedural surrounding the trial of a female shaman Diana Dahlan (Uime Aida) accused of the gruesome murder of a prominent businessman. The verdict of the said trial is known right from the start, as the opening prologue shows a smug Diana in a tight dress and red lipstick readying herself for her impending execution by hanging in jail. Instead, the ensuing dual narrative chronicling both the judicial proceedings and the investigation around that murder seeks to establish the whydunnit, the former through a series of witnesses that the prosecution has lined up to take the stand against Diana and the latter through further probes that the two lead detectives commence into a string of similar murders in the past.
Frankly, the fractured chronology doesn’t exactly add up, especially how the case against Diana would go ahead if the police had not even concluded if she was responsible for other murders with the same modus operandi. Notwithstanding, the story remains engaging because of its flirtation with the supernatural, emerging eventually as a cautionary tale on exploiting these means in service of one’s ambition and/or lust for power. While not quite so explicitly emphasized throughout the film, the incongruence and even irony of having such a case judged before a court of law is stated simply and succinctly at the end of the trial. It is also in this same vein that the authority of Islam and the laws of the dark arts come under scrutiny, and although the closing quote makes it quite clear which side the film wants its audience to come down on, the apparent tension between the two is not fully addressed, leaving one to ponder just how such ancient practices sit alongside modern-day mainstream religions.
That conflict is given greater prominence in another parallel narrative which sees Diana’s lawyer Karim (Adlin Aman Ramliee) searching for his teenage daughter Nadim, who has been missing for the past six years. Though clearly engineered for narrative expediency, the film would have us believe that Karim crosses paths with Diana out of sheer coincidence after he approaches the police for help in locating her and is asked in turn to act as her lawyer in court. It is not hard to guess that, or how, he and his daughter’s fates are ultimately intertwined with that of Diana’s, so much so that she would gladly accept a guilty verdict and request that she be executed at the soonest possible time. There are hints of familial tragedy here – most notably that of a married couple who would do what is possible to realise their dream of having a child – but not quite fleshed out enough to be as poignant as it could or should.
Given the controversy surrounding the film, it is inevitably a let-down that ‘Dukun’ isn’t more provocative or sensational than it is, especially its treatment of the mystical and even unnatural. Then again, Said deserves credit for not indulging in excesses, opting instead for a grounded depiction of the occult. And just like its subject matter, Aida’s magnetic performance as a female shaman is deeply enduring, no less outstanding or powerful now as it was a decade ago. It is no coincidence that she is front and centre the bleeding heart and twisted soul of the film, and no surprise that her blend of seduction and menace is what will send chills down your spine long after the lights come up. As long as you set aside those expectations of notoriety, ‘Dukun’ should do just fine as an exploration of the disturbing, even unsettling, paranormal of close cultural resonance.
Movie Rating:
(It probably isn’t as shocking as its notoriety suggests, but this horror thriller of the occult still packs some disturbing, even unsettling, chills)
Review by Gabriel Chong
Genre: Drama
Director: Yang Ya Che
Cast: Kara Wai, Wu Ke-Xi, Vicky Chen, Aaron Fu, Wen Chen-Lin
Runtime: 1 hr 52 mins
Rating: M18 (Sexual Scenes)
Screening Dates: 30 April, 3 & 5 May 2018 (visit scff.sg/films/the-bold-the-corrupt-and-the-beautiful/ for showtimes)
Synopsis: Madame Tang colludes and mediates between the government and the private businesses for the benefit of her all-female family. One case does not go according to plan, and an entire family close to Madame Tang fall victim to a gruesome murder. Ambition, desire and lust eventually change Tang’s relationships with her own family forever.
Movie Review:
Ambition, corruption and beauty make nasty bedfellows in writer-director Yang Ya-che’s Golden Horse Award-winning crime drama set in the 1980s, which pivots on a family of three generations of women. The head of the clan is the ruthless matriarch Madame Tang (Kara Wai) who, though ostensibly dealing in antiques, is in fact acting as go-between for dirty businessmen and crooked politicians looking to profit from land speculation. Assisting Madame Tang in her nefarious schemes is her adult daughter Tang Ning (Wu Ke-xi), who loves and loathes being her mother’s pawn, drowning the latter in sex, drugs and alcohol. Rounding out the family is the teenage Chen-chen (Vicky Chen), an ingenue who watches the immoral going-ons intently, but is also slowly but surely being groomed by Madame Tang to participate in the family business.
The significance of their familial bonds is put to the test when a bank director within Madame Tang’s circle is murdered in cold blood with the rest of his family, although their daughter Pien-pien (Wen Chen-ling) manages to make it out alive but is left in a coma. At first, the suspicion falls on the family’s horse trainer Marco (Wu Shu Wei) whom Pien-pien was seeing secretly – after all, her mother had discovered their affair just hours before the murder, and in turn Marco was supposed to leave the Lin residence that very evening. But pretty soon, the apparent suicide of a government person in charge of land planning and subsequent discovery of further bodies inadvertently trains the spotlight on their illegal real estate manoeuvrings, sending each and every one involved – family or otherwise – scrambling to protect their own individual interests.
In fact, the movie is as much a whodunnit as it is a character study of the Tang family. Madame Tang turns out to be less a coordinator than a conspirator in her own right – and a scene where she sings the Shanghai Bund theme song in a karaoke room, before literally dropping the mic on the one who had intended to confront her about her betrayal is particularly memorable. But yet just as delicious, though heart-breaking, is watching her manage Tang Ning’s meltdown (as the latter comes to realise the full extent of her mother’s maliciousness) and manipulate Chen-chen at the same time against Ning. And as Madame Tang, Kara Wai deserves every single accolade she has received, simply sensational as a Machiavellian seductress whose moral depravity are concealed under layers of courtesy, class and elegance.
On Ning’s part, each further revelation of her mother’s maleficence only causes her to become even more emotionally and psychologically damaged, and the actress Wu Ke-xi portrays her with just the right explosive mix of outrage, resentment and fragility. But neither Madame Tang or Ning is the core of the film; in fact, that honour belongs to Chen-chen, from whose perspective the fractured narrative largely unfolds from. Though she starts off as a quiet observer of the events going on around her, Chen-chen is gradually forced to choose how she wishes to respond to Madame Tang’s cultivation, with far-reaching consequences that will haunt her long into her adult life. As Chen-chen, Vicky Chen’s performance is layered yet contained, and her transformation from demure to sinister is fascinating to watch.
Thanks to the trio of excellent actresses, Yang’s film comes off much better than it really is. For one, it feels convoluted and over-plotted, yet somehow inadequate in tying up all of its plot ends. For another, its hyper-stylisation is a little artificial to say the least – in particular, the use of a pair of traditional Hoklo-speaking storytellers to narrate parts of the story through song is unnecessarily distracting. Still, it’s not hard to see why it has been lavished with so much praise back at home, not least because of its sumptuous production design, beautiful cinematography and thoughtful references to Taiwanese history. It’s not quite ‘The Godfather’ material, but this fem-centric spin on the traditional gangster drama genre is deeply engaging, occasionally thrilling and surprisingly poignant. As we’ve known through countless other films, being bad can be so wickedly delicious to watch.
Movie Rating:
(Equal parts gangster melodrama and family dysfunction, this tale of three women united by blood but divided by morality is viscerally and emotionally thrilling)
Review by Gabriel Chong
|
TRAILER WATCH - VENOMPosted on 24 Apr 2018 |
Genre: Drama
Director: Jon M. Chu
Cast: Constance Wu, Henry Golding, Michelle Yeoh, Gemma Chan, Lisa Lu, Awkwafina, Ken Jeong, Sonoya Mizuno, Chris Pang, Jimmy O. Yang, Ronny Chieng, Remi Hii, Nico Santos, Pierre Png
RunTime: 2 hrs 1 min
Rating: PG13 (Some Coarse Language)
Released By: Warner Bros
Official Website:
Opening Day: 22 August 2018
Synopsis: The story follows native New Yorker Rachel Chu (Wu) as she accompanies her longtime boyfriend, Nick Young (Golding), to his best friend’s wedding in Singapore. Excited about visiting Asia for the first time but nervous about meeting Nick’s family, Rachel is unprepared to learn that Nick has neglected to mention a few key details about his life. It turns out that he is not only the scion of one of the country’s wealthiest families but also one of its most sought-after bachelors. Being on Nick’s arm puts a target on Rachel’s back, with jealous socialites and, worse, Nick’s own disapproving mother (Yeoh) taking aim. And it soon becomes clear that while money can’t buy love, it can definitely complicate things.
Movie Review:
We are proud, immensely proud, to say that for a little red dot which some had up until recently mistook as a province in China, Singapore has been getting plenty of limelight within the last few months. On the political stage, the recently concluded Trump-Kim Summit that was dubbed the ‘Singapore Summit’ showcased our professionalism at organising a milestone diplomatic event. And just barely two months after, the very first Hollywood film to feature an all-Asian ensemble in more than 20 years (the last being Ang Lee’s ‘Joy Luck Club’ back in 1993) is easily the most impressive our island city has ever looked on the big screen. Oh yes, the iconic touristy locations including Chijmes, Marina Bay, Gardens by the Bay and Marina Bay Sands are all there, but there are also surprising nods here to our hawker culture (which you may have heard our PM announcing at this year’s Rally is being put up for a Unesco listing) and Chinese heritage that you’ll cheer for, and damn if seeing the sights and sounds we call home doesn’t make our hearts swell with national pride.
Indeed, ‘Crazy Rich Asians’ is as much a win for Asian-Americans as it is for Singapore, and you’d be plain silly to let some misplaced criticism about how the movie doesn’t reflect the real Singapore (because it was meant to be a satirical fantasy?) or lacks the representation of other races (because no film set in New York, or London, or Los Angeles reflects the full cultural breadth of the place?) rain on our parade. Gamely assembling an outstanding ensemble cast from Hollywood, Malaysia and Singapore, this adaptation of Singapore-born author Kevin Kwan’s bestselling novel is as breezily entertaining and hilarious as the best of the rom-coms, but its examination on class, culture and the Asian identity is what truly gives it emotional heft and thematic resonance. In fact, it would be utterly simplistic to say that it is a critique on the nouveau riche in Singapore society; there is also the intra-community prejudices within the Asian diasporas, the Chinese tradition of filial loyalty and its implications on parent-child relationships, and last but not least the tensions between different forms of identity including personal, cultural and class.
If it isn’t yet obvious, this movie is so, so much more than just an indulgence in the escapist pleasures of the ultra-rich that its synopsis may suggest. Certainly, as the young economics professor Rachel Chu (Constance Wu) at New York University accompanies her boyfriend Nicholas Young (Henry Golding) back to Singapore for his best friend’s wedding, she plays the role of the audience surrogate channelling our sense of disbelief, amazement and disgust at his family and their never-never land of aspirational wealth, obscene consumerism and invidious judge-iness. Yet beyond these and the obvious caricatures of Nick’s movie-director cousin Alistair (Remy Hii), his status-conscious Hong Kong cousin Eddie (Ronny Chieng) as well as spoiled-rotten bachelor Bernard (Jimmy O. Yang), there is plenty of sobering material about Nick’s formidable mother Eleanor’s (Michelle Yeoh) disdain towards Rachel and protectiveness towards her son. Ditto the crumbling marriage between Nick’s fashion-maven cousin Astrid (Gemma Chan) and her husband Michael (Pierre Png), owing to the latter’s inferiority complex and subsequent infidelity.
As directed by Jon M. Chu, the movie is perfectly balanced between big broad sequences and quiet intimate moments. The former comprises the gaudy scenes of opulent dinner gatherings, lavish bachelor/ bachelorette parties and $40 million weddings that the trailer was full of, and Chu’s eye for colour and movement ensures that these scenes are lively, vibrant and eye-popping. But it is the latter where his film truly scores – witness for instance how Chu and his cinematographer Vanja Cernjul capture the way Eleanor sizes Rachel up and subsequently regards her with withering putdowns as well as icy glares, and how Rachel and Eleanor face off in a penultimate segment over a thrilling game of mah-jong. Just as captivating but for entirely different reasons are the occasions where Nick and Rachel distance themselves from the crowd and allow themselves to re-discover just why they had fallen in love with each other in the first place. As packed as the movie is with its huge group of characters, Chu never loses focus on his core characters and their relationships vis-à-vis one another, and it is his keen eye for these interactions that ensures his film also possesses emotional gravitas.
Most significantly, ‘Crazy Rich Asians’ offers a touching lesson on embracing who you are, no matter if you’re rich or poor or disparaged. That is as true for Nick as it is for Rachel, just as true if not more so for Eleanor, and surprisingly poignant for both Astrid and Michael. Wu is a standout as the classic good-girl, never overselling the role but instead playing it with just the right mix of poise, vulnerability and self-assertiveness at the right time. Her chemistry with Golding is also infectiously appealing, and for all the hackles about casting a British Malaysian actor to play a Chinese Singaporean justifies the casting choice with his own polished screen charisma. Even more electrifying though is the push-pull dynamic between Wu and Yeoh as their characters lock horns with each other, and though the movie belongs to the younger actors, the veteran Malaysian actress is absolutely regal in her supporting role that is crisp, authoritative but also unexpectedly deserving of empathy. Chan and Png try to flesh out the complications arising from a reversal of the classic Asian husband-wife breadwinning role, but they as well as the other more minor supporting actors relegated to over-the-top bit comic parts are constrained by their little time onscreen.
That said, Kwan’s novel wasn’t ever going to fit neatly into a two-hour feature film, which also means that some of the subplots were going to necessarily receive short shrift; still, for the most part Chu’s screenwriters Peter Chiarelli and Adele Lim have retained the core themes within the novel and ensured that these remain just as affecting as Kwan had intended. Like we said at the beginning, Singapore has never looked as gorgeous as it does in this movie, and credit to that colourful razzle-dazzle goes of course to Chu’s visual eye. Yet beneath that shiny veneer is also a layered reflection of the Singaporean Chinese identity, which is both ethnically similar and different to the American-Chinese (or better known as Asian-American) identity, demonstrating how race is shaped as much by history, geography and kinship. Ultimately, its message about identity is as much relevant for an Asian-American audience as it is for us, especially how our multi-racialism often neglects intra-racial differences as well as class differences. You need not be Asian, or crazy rich, or even Chinese, to enjoy this hilarious, romantic and heartfelt rom-com that doesn’t lose its cultural richness while retaining its universal appeal.
Movie Rating:
(As hilarious, romantic and heartfelt as the best of the rom-com genre, 'Crazy Rich Asians' is also a surprisingly textured and poignant examination of ethnic, class and personal identity - as well as the best Singapore has ever looked on the big screen)
Review by Gabriel Chong
Genre: Comedy/Romance
Director: John Cameron Mitchell
Cast: Elle Fanning, Nicole Kidman, Ruth Wilson, Alex Sharp
RunTime: 1 hr 42 mins
Rating: NC-16
Released By: Shaw Organisation
Official Website:
Opening Day: 24 May 2018
Synopsis: It's London (well, Croydon to be exact....), 1977, and our teenage hero Henry (Alex Sharp) - known as Enn - and his two friends, John and Vic, are in search of a night to remember, uninterested in the Silver Jubilee celebrations that are going on behind the privet hedges and lace-curtained windows of quiet suburbia. Desperate to be taken seriously by local punk matriarch Boadicea (Nicole Kidman) and her coterie of followers, they hear of a party not far away and decide to gatecrash. On arrival, nothing is quite as they expected. The house seems to be full of teenage students: exotic, foreign, unbelievably gorgeous. Know-it-all ladies' man Vic identifies them as American - what else could they be? Soon, Enn is in way over his head (and heart) with the beautiful, enigmatic Zan (Elle Fanning), an outsider just like him. As Enn becomes her ambassador to a brave new world of punk, partying and music, he learns that Zan has a new world of her own to share (quite literally) and over the course of twenty-four hours, the two will go on an adventure that is truly out of this world.
Movie Review:
If you’re cool, you’d know who Neil Gaiman is. The English author known for his short fiction, comic books and graphic novels have inspired a generation of geeks to keep conversations on The Sandman, The Ocean at the End of the Lane and The Graveyard Book going for years. Titles like Stardust, Coraline and American Gods have been made into critically acclaimed movies and TV series.
That is why we were excited about this science fiction movie based on the 2006 short story of the same name by Gaiman. There are punk wannabes (in oh so cool UK too!), strange beings dressed in brightly coloured rubber attire (sure looks like a sex orgy party!) and a very odd Nicole Kidman as a punk rock queen - but the resulting film is a mixed bag of queerness.
Set in 1970s UK, a teenage boy and his two misfit friends (one of them has a third nipple) chance upon an isolated house filled with beings evidently not from the country - could they be Americans? The trio travel from room to room experiencing really weird things done by the colourfully clad beings. They soon find out that these latex draped creatures are aliens and there’s an outrageous plan in store. Enter a rebellious young extraterrestrial that yearns to know more about the outside world, and yes, you have a romance brewing.
If you are familiar with Gaiman’s works, this strange genre wouldn’t surprise you. While the story might have worked well on print, translating it for the big screen is a separate challenge (that’s probably the reason why we are still waiting for a Sandman movie to happen). The wildly imaginative realms of Gaiman’s world can only go as far as perplexingly bizarre dialogues, curiously designed costumes and anything that may earn this film a cult favourite status.
The only way it resonates with the mere mortal is through the protagonist and the extraterrestrial’s romance, which seems like a convenient approach to reach out to the masses. The last scene provides a nostalgic closure, but you feel like that could have been something more.
Another reason why we had such high expectations of this film is because of the director John Cameron Mitchell. The filmmaker known for originating the title role in the musical Hedwig and the Angry Inch, as well as reprising it in the 2001 film adaptation directed by himself, seems to be trying to straddle between quirkiness and mainstream romance in his latest work. As a result, the 102 minute film is uneven in tone and becomes predictable towards the end.
Alex Sharp, better known for his Broadway performances, takes on the role of the protagonist with ease. He emotes well with his lovelorn eyes, and you feel for the character when he comes to term with his romance. Elle Fanning is the extraterrestrial who wishes to change the course of her life, and having played key roles in The Neon Demon (2016) and The Beguiled (2017), this shouldn’t be difficult for the 20 year old actress. Hamming it up and adding star power is, of course, Kidman. The actress has been taking on interesting projects like Lion (2016) and The Killing of a Sacred Deer (2017) recently, which probably explains her involvement in this film.
This film is undoubtedly an ambitious project, but the results could have been much, much more spectacular.
Movie Rating:
(This is a mixed bag of queerness which could have benefited if the filmmakers were more outrageous and bold)
Review by John Li
Genre: Thriller
Director: Dean Devlin
Cast: Kerry Condon, Robert Sheehan, David Tennant, Carlito Olivero
RunTime: 1 hr 51 mins
Rating: NC16 (Coarse Language And Some Nudity)
Released By: Shaw Organisation
Official Website:
Opening Day: 3 May 2018
Synopsis: From the director of Geostorm comes latest thriller BAD SAMARITAN, which tells the story of how two young men (Robert Sheehan and Carlito Olivero), who valet cars at a local restaurant, develop a clever scam to burglarize the houses of customers while they eat. Things go smoothly until one robs the wrong customer and discovers a woman being held captive. Afraid of going to prison, he leaves the woman and returns the car to the restaurant. Filled with guilt, he makes a call to the police, who find nothing when they investigate. Now, the valet must endure the wrath of the kidnapper who seeks revenge on him, all while desperately trying to find and rescue the captive woman he left behind.
Movie Review:
Before he parted ways with Roland Emmerich, Dean Devlin was Emmerich’s co-author and producer on big-budget blockbusters like ‘Stargate’, ‘Independence Day’ and ‘Godzilla’, and it is no wonder then that Devlin had been entrusted with a budget of similar size for his filmmaking debut last year. On hindsight, Devlin would probably have done better to kickstart his fledging directorial journey with this low-budget high-concept thriller, which though not quite killer material, is frankly a lot more coherent, enjoyable and exciting than ‘Geostorm’ was. Don’t get us wrong – ‘Bad Samaritan’ is as trashy as its title sounds, but it is also trashy fun, which is pretty much all that we had asked for stepping into a movie like this.
In a nutshell, the story revolves around a low-level thief who discovers a woman (Kerry Condon) chained and gagged in a room of the house he has set out to burglarise. The so-called bad Samaritan is Sean (played by Irish actor Robert Sheehan), an amateur photographer by day and valet/ burglar by night. Together with his best friend Derek (Carlito Olivero), the pair have a neat little scam going where they break into the homes of the owners whose cars they are supposed to be parking and steal what they can without being discovered, making sure they get back before their victims finish their dinner at one of Portland’s high-end Italian restaurants. It all goes well until it doesn’t – in this case, when Sean runs into the wealthy jerk Cale (David Tennant), who happens to be a psychopath.
Though he may find himself on the wrong side of the law from time to time, Sean cannot quite muster enough indifference to simply look away from the fact that someone’s life could be in danger. So despite Derek’s pleadings, Sean turns himself in to both the local police and the FBI to lodge separate reports against Cale, thus triggering a series of cat-and-mouse games between Sean and Cale that will have life-threatening, even life-ending implications, for the former. To say more would inevitably ruin the joy of watching the mano-a-mano duke it out – especially as Cale goes from creepy to psychotic to diabolical over the course of the film – but suffice to say that Cale turns the tables on Sean by unravelling not just his life but also the lives of those closest to him.
Twisted as it may sound, it is a lot more interesting watching how Cale screws up Sean’s life than it is to see how Sean try to track down Cale. That in large part has to do with Tennant’s utterly over-the-top performance, relishing the opportunity to sink his teeth into a gloriously unhinged individual whose way of getting over his teenage trauma of failing to break a horse is to do so now with women instead. There is method to Cale’s madness – just watch how he breaks into Sean’s apartment while the latter is showering, aims a gun at Sean but instead of killing him there and then, mock-fires a bullet with a nutty smile – and the former ‘Doctor Who’ actor plays the role with just the right balance of insanity and control.
There is an almost breathless pace at which Devlin unspools the proceedings, although both he and writer Brandon Boyce could have equally contributed to a much tighter film by trimming some unnecessary scenes in the first hour. There is a redundant subplot at the beginning which sees Derek breaking into the house of a perfectly nice married couple with two kids and getting chased around by their guard dog; another couple of scenes with Sean and Derek arguing between themselves whether to go to the police; and yet another involving a local police detective that go on for far too long. Just as a potboiler, the key is to sustain the suspense throughout, and at close to two hours, Devlin’s film does sag from time to time.
Still, this is a surprisingly competent sophomore film from a director who was reportedly removed from reshoots of his very first movie. Whether intentionally or unintentionally, ‘Bad Samaritan’ harks back to the 1990s when mystery thrillers like ‘Basic Instinct’, ‘The Last Seduction’ and ‘Fatal Attraction’ were the rage. Certainly, it has those same lurid qualities, and is itself tense and gripping enough to match the more memorable ones, elevated of course by Tennant’s villainous act. As far as pulpy thrills are concerned, this unassuming thriller will do just fine.
Movie Rating:
(As long as it's pulpy, lurid fun you're after, this potboiler of a thriller will do just fine)
Review by Gabriel Chong
| « Prev | 345 | 346 | 347 | 348 | 349 | 350 | 351 | 352 | 353 | 354 | 355 | Next » |
Most Viewed
No content.