CINEMA: Frozen 2

Cinema:

Possible SPOILERS ahead.

On the opening day at the cinema, I took my brother, my one of my close friends and his girlfriend. We all loved it and it was absolutely hilarious, I laughed so much my cheeks hurt.

Source Material?:

It is said that Frozen is loosely based and inspired on the fairytale The Snow Queen by Hans Christian Andersen in 1844.

However, Frozen and Frozen 2 are quite original stories.

Frozen 2 and what I liked about the film

• Olaf recapping Frozen (and then the plot of Frozen 2 after the credits) - This scene was probably the best in the film and the funniest. And Mattias' reactions throughout.

  

• Kristoff's song - Into the Woods (Jonathon Groff) - 80's/90's Boyband vibe, with Bohemian Rhapsody chorus visuals (with the Reindeer). The lyrics are amazing and hilarious. I loved this scene, it made me laugh so much. 

• Olaf's song - When I am Older (Josh Gad) - First off, SAMANTHA. Second, the visuals. Third, the lyrics. Just amazing and hilarious. 

• Kristoff trying to propose to Anna the whole way through the film. Adorable but cringy, and you feel so sorry for Kristoff the whole way through, with embarrassment. 

• Anna and Leather - Anna makes a raunchy comment at the end of the film, saying that she prefers Kristoff in leather - one for the adults!

• Anna becoming Queen of Arendelle at the end of the film.

• Just Sven and his facial expressions.

• The characters in general and how each of them developed.

CINEMA: Le Mans 66 (James Mangold, 2019)

Le Mans 66 (James Mangold, 2019)

Warning: SPOILERS AHEAD - This is a true story and the events took place 53 years ago!

I took two of my friends, Rory and Sophie, to see this film. 

Like me, Rory is a huge Car fan and was super excited to see this film. He said he almost cried when the sound of the GT40 Engine was going around the track at Le Mans in the film.

American Poster (Below):

Le Mans 66 (James Mangold, 2019)

This is an adaptation of the true story of Carroll Shelby and Ken Miles' partnership and how they beat Ferrari with a Ford at the Le Mans race in 1966. 

I personally really enjoyed the film and cannot wait to watch it again. Matt Damon and Christian Bale as the two lead characters are both fantastic. Damon portraying Shelby, the American engineer and automobile designer and Bale as Miles, the engineer and professional race car driver. Together on screen, they create have amazing "bromance" chemistry and keep us in the moment all the way through the film. 

Carroll Shelby was by far one of the most famous and successful car designers on the planet, he also won Le Mans in 1959 and was one of the reasons Ford asked him to build a race car for the Le Mans 1966. 

The cinematography and the editing helped to create the suspense and tension in the film, keeping up close and personal with Ken Miles while he is driving. 

As an adaptation, I believe it was accurate and uncovered the story well. I really enjoyed it the whole way through and is definitely worth a watch.

CINEMA: Midway (Roland Emmerich, 2019)

Going to the Cinema:

Warning: SPOILERS AHEAD

I took my dad to go see the new film out Midway (Roland Emmerich, 2019) which tells the True Story of The Battle of Midway in World War 2. 

The Battle of Midway (4th-7th June 1942):

After Japan hit Pearl Habor and the American's repaid them with the Doolittle Raid, the Battle of Midway happened. This was a major turning point in the Pacific war along with the Battle of Guadalcanal, helping the Allies to win the war against Japan in the Pacific. This battle happened six months after Pearl Habor and this was all fresh in the minds of the soldiers.

Midway (Jack Smight, 1976)

My dad and I decided in preparation for the new film we'd watch the first one together first.

I watched this for the first time on 5th November 2019 with my dad.

He said he hadn't seen this version since he was a kid in the 70s. 

Midway (Roland Emmerich, 2019)

The new adaptation of these historic events of the Battle of Midway.

This is one of the films my dad and I have been looking forward to this year. We are both War Buffs and we do love films that are about real-life war events. I personally really enjoyed this film and was glad that it was quite historically accurate.

In the film, they cover the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Doolittle Raid and the Battle of Midway.


Pearl Harbor
The events that happened on the 7th of December 1941 led to America joining the Allies in the war.

On this day, the Japanese led a surprise preemptive strike on the Naval forces in Pearl Harbor in Honolulu, Hawaii. over 2000 Americans were killed and four of their battleships including the USS Arizona (which we see hit by the Japanese and sunk in the film).

The Doolittle Raid 
This was the first strike where the Americans dropped bombs on the Japanese Island, hitting Tokyo. 

I think they did this quite well in the film.

Aaron Eckhart was a good choice for Doolittle and was able to do him justice. I prefer his portrayal of Doolittle over Alec Baldwin's in Pearl Harbor (Michael Bay, 2001).

The Battle of Midway
This battle had the audience on the edge of their seats.


Emmerich even used a similar shot of a B17 landing on Midway, which was taken from the 1976 film. 

The Dive-Bombing in this film kept me at the edge of my seat, literally. Even though I knew the history of this event I was nervous for the characters, especially during the dive bombings as Emmerich decided to keep the camera close to the characters, creating the tension and suspense where we wonder if the bombs are going to hit the enemy carriers and if the characters will be able to pull the planes up in time.

Protagonist 
Ed Skrein (left) is the main person we follow in the film (I consider him the protagonist of this film).

Lieutenant Dick Best was a Dive Bomber pilot and a squadron leader. He was stationed on the Enterprise and flew a Dauntless along with his co-pilot Murray. He was awarded the Navy Cross and Distinguished Flying Cross  His bomb sunk the Akagi and he bombed the Hiryu. It is believed that Best might be the first American pilot to get two successful bomb hits on the Japanese in one day.

Famous Faces
Hiring the likes of Dennis Quaid (Halsey), Luke Evans (McClusky), Woody Harrelson (Nimitz) and Aaron Eckhart (Doolittle) was a good move for this film.

Ed Skrein has been becoming more famous since playing the antagonist in Deadpool (Tim Miller, 2016). I think he did a fantastic job in this film and kept us in the audience at the edge of our seats during the dives.











At the end of the film, Emmerich put in pictures of the real people and explained what happened to them after the war.

He also dedicated the film to both the American and Japanese who served.

CINEMA: Maleficent: Mistress of Evil (Joachim Rønning, 2019)

SPOILERS AHEAD for Maleficent: Mistress of Evil.

Going to the Cinema:

I took one of my best friends, Phoebe, to go see this film. She is obsessed with anything to do with dragons and absolutely loves the character of Maleficent and the film Maleficent (Robert Stromberg, 2014), so I had to take her to see this at the cinema.

I went in with low expectations as Disney sequels don't particularly do well, however, I was relatively surprised and enjoyed the film. As this is an adaptation from the fairytale of Sleeping Beauty, I am going to do a blog post about it.

Adaptation From?

The earliest version of the Sleeping Beauty story is from the 1330s. Sleeping Beauty is a fairytale, which features a princess cursed by an evil witch and awakened by 'true love's kiss'.

Sleeping Beauty (Henry Meynell Rheam, 1899)

Maleficent (Robert Stromberg, 2014)

In this version of the film, the first film of this 'series', Prince Phillip doesn't break Aurora's sleeping curse, Maleficent does. Maleficent is betrayed and places a curse on the daughter of the King. Over the course of the daughters upbringing, Maleficent gets to know her and regrets what she has done. After failing to stop the curse, she actually is the one who fulfils it with true loves kiss - mother-daughter love, unconditional love. This is significant because it shows that the character of Maleficent has a heart and can become good.

She is both the hero and the villain of the story.

Maleficent: Mistress of Evil (Joachim Rønning, 2019)

Again, SPOILERS AHEAD.

In the sequel, Maleficent is still seen as the villain by the humans. She eventually finds her own people and finds out they have been pushed to the endangerment of their species by the humans and are waging war against the humans. They eventually through Maleficent becoming the dragon and the union of Aurora and Phillip, become united with the humans and live in peace.

Mistress of Evil:

The title is misleading in a way, as we believe the 'Mistress of Evil' is Maleficent from the title, however, the Queen is actually the true Mistress of Evil and the true villain of the story.

Michelle Pfeiffer's character of the Mother-in-Law Queen Ingrith is very interesting. She is a complex character, who hates the faeries. Her husband, the king and her son, Prince Phillip are both suing for peace and this is taking away from her plan. She poisons her husband and blames Maleficent, starting a war between the humans and the faeries. She is the VILLAIN of this film and the true Mistress of Evil.

For a second time, Angelina Jolie does a magnificent job portraying the character of Maleficent. 

The relationship between Maleficent and Aurora is one of a mother-daughter relationship and all she wishes is for Aurora to be safe.

Maleficent does not agree to the marriage of Aurora and Phillip to begin with. She believes that because of the betrayal of her first true love Aurora will experience the same and humans are not to be trusted. Aurora and Phillip's true love throughout the film proves to Maleficent that True Love does exist. Maleficent agrees to the marriage and walks her daughter down the aisle. 

Left: Prince Phillip (Harris Dickinson) and Queen Aurora (Elle Fanning) during the proposal in the film.

CINEMA: Joker (Todd Phillips, 2019) - Part Two

In this blog post, I will be analysing the film that was released this weekend. SPOILERS ahead. Although, it is pretty obvious that Arthur becomes the Joker at the end of the film, by the title alone.

Warning:

• The film is 15 
• Rated: Strong bloody violence, and language.

What is the film about?: 

Who: Story follows the character of Arthur Fleck, who becomes the Joker

What: Origin story of the iconic Arch-Nemesis of Batman

When: 1981

Where: Fictional city of Gotham

Beginning of the film:

Set in 1981, Arthur Fleck, a party clown, lives in Gotham City with his mother in a poor deprived area. Arthur suffers from a mental illness (mentioned in the previous post) and is seven different medications. 

The whole film is an origin story about how Arthur becomes the Joker. I believe that Phoenix's performance is possibly Oscar-worthy.

Mental Illness:

Mental Illness is a huge part of this film. Arthur begins the film as a person struggling with his mental illness, he ends the film with his mental illness controlling his life and making him make decisions which aren't morally right.

He becomes the leader of the violence in the city - He becomes a SYMBOL for the deprived and poverty of Gotham. 

In this film, it shows that mental illness is something that cannot be helped by the government, shutting down the facilities that Arthur needs - his counselling and meds.

This portrayal of Mental Illness is painfully honest. People have asked if this depiction of mental illness is "DANGEROUS"?

Becoming the Joker - We can see it coming? Can we? Arthur is a loner, he cannot engage with society, he isn't noticed and is consistently ignored and is misunderstood (the scene from the bus with the kid and the mum). 

Significance of the Joker

The Joker is the "Clown Prince of Crime" and the iconic "Arch-nemesis" of the Batman.

In this particular adaptation of the character, we explore how he goes from being Arthur to Joker. This transformation is one which hasn't been explored before in a standalone film. I think it was clever of Phillips to do this without Batman (Bruce Wayne is in the film, but it is about twenty years or so before he becomes Batman). Having a film showing how Arthur becomes the Joker because of the way he is treated by society and in this case not being helped with his mental illness. Was Arthur always destined to become the Joker? I believe he was.

Society

Was it the society he lived in that made him into the monster of the Joker?

Gotham is uneasy at the start of the film. All the city needs is just one thing to flip it and bring chaos. This one thing is Arthur. Arthur kills the three rich men on the subway after they harass a woman and physically beat him. He ignites a fire which makes Gotham want to revolt. Arthur as Joker inspires the city and after he shoots and kills the TV host, the city goes into utter chaos, violence roaming free. Revolting against the rich, the poorest of the city, through the symbol of Arthur the KILLER CLOWN, turn on everything morally right and take up arms. 

Batman

Batman isn't in this film because Bruce didn't become Batman until about twenty years after his parent's murders. The murders of his parents happen in the last five to ten minutes of the film. 

Is Thomas Wayne partly responsible for the rise of the Joker? Is his dream of the 'Hope for a better tomorrow' realistic for Gotham? Were his murder and his wife's just for her pearls and money? Or was it an assassination?

Music/Score and Character

The music in this film along with Phoenix dancing helps to give us an insight into the character of Arthur. 

Hildur Guðnadóttir - Composer for Joker.

Especially in the scenes where we see Arthur/Joker dancing - the score completes the character. 

Bringing out the dark, distressing, broken and oppressed character to light.

Psychoanalysis

I learnt about Psychoanalysis in A Level Media Studies and learnt some more in some of Caitlin's lectures in Level 5 Cultures and Aesthetics. Also, I find the subject quite interesting and have done some further reading around it.

Looking at how it could affect the viewers...

Is it too gritty? It is too realistic? Is it too violent? Too dangerous?

My Rating:

Overall, I give the film a 4/5.  

The reason it loses a star is due to the film being a SLOW-BURN. However, I agree why Phillips chose to do the film this way, explaining the why, how, when, and where Arthur becomes the Joker in intense detail.

Phoenix deserves to get nominated for the portrayal of the character. 

He brought life to the character in a way we haven't seen before. 

He also scared the living jeepers out of everyone in the cinema.

I can't wait to see what Phoenix is going to do next...

CINEMA: Joker (Todd Phillips, 2019) - Part One

I went to see the film Joker on its opening weekend.



I took my brother, who is doing A Level Media Studies and he even gave me some interesting points to consider for this blog post, including relating this particular character of the Joker with previous portrayals of the character and how society was responsible for making the Joker in the film. Just to note SPOILERS ahead. Analysis of film in PART TWO post.

    
Left: Joker US Cinema Poster. Right: Joker and Arthur.

Adaptation of Character:

The character of the Joker was created in the 1940s by Bill Finger, Bob Kane, and Jerry Robinson for DC Comics. He first appeared in 'Batman #1' on the 25th of April in 1940.

The Joker is the "Crown Prince of Crime", the iconic "Archnemesis" of Batman and one of the most interesting supervillains created (and that's not just my opinion).

For this particular adaptation, the premise was taken from the Graphic Novel: 'Batman: The Killing Joke' (1988), but for Todd Phillips, this was only for the basis of the film, not adapting the story.

Appearance in Film and TV:

The character of the Joker has appeared in many an adaptation in the Film and Television industry.

Portrayals include Jack Nicholson, Heath Ledger (RIP) and of course, Mark Hamill! (We don't talk about Jared Leto, uttering his name is like saying Bloody Mary in the mirror three times).


Left: Jack Nicholson in Batman (Tim Burton, 1989), Middle: Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight (Christopher Nolan, 2008), Right: Joaquin Phoenix in Joker (Todd Phillips, 2019).


Above: Mark Hamill has voiced the character of the Joker for 27 years.

Film:

• Batman: Mask of the Phantasm (1993)
• Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker (2000)
• Batman: New Times (2005)
• Batman: The Killing Joke (2016)

TV:

• Batman: The Animated Series (1992-1994)
• The New Batman Adventures (1997-1999)
• Superman: The Animated Series (1997)
• Static Shock (2002)
• Justice League (2002-2003)
• Birds of Prey (2002)
• Robot Chicken (2005-2012)
• Justice League Action (2016-2018)
• Scooby-Doo and Guess Who? (2019)

Video Games:

• The Adventures of Batman and Robin (1994)
• Batman: Vengence (2001)
• Batman: Arkham Asylum (2009) 
• DC Universe Online (2011)
• Batman: Arkham City (2011)
• Batman: Arkham City Lockdown (2011)
• Batman: Arkham Knight (2015)
• Lego DC Super-Villains (2018)

It's safe to say Mark Hamill has definitely got one-up on anyone about the role of the Joker, although he has only ever voiced him, never portrayed him in a live-action adaptation.

COMPARING JOKERS:

Should we compare?

Nicholson's portrayal of the Joker:

• Film: Batman (Tim Burton, 1989)
• One of the most iconic Joker's.
• It is said that Nicholson "breathed new life" into the character of the Joker.
• The character of Jack Napier becomes the Joker in Batman.
• Nicholson brought darkness to the character, compared to Cesar Romero's Joker in 1966
• True to the comic book character - brightly coloured suits, well-timed jokes and one-liners.
• Nicholson's joker had a backstory, although compared to Joker (Phillips, 2019) who's entire film is dedicated to the backstory of the Joker (Arthur Fleck portrayed by Phoenix).
• Nicholson's Joker played well off of Michael Keaton's Batman and complimented him. In a flashback in the film, Napier kills Bruce Wayne's parents in cold blood, leaving Bruce alone and the main reason he becomes Batman. Batman says to Joker: "I made you, you made me first".
• The Joker in this film stole the entire show (even though Keaton's Batman is considered as one of the best)
• Iconic Laugh of the Joker was pulled off well, although compared to Ledger and Hamill a lot.

Ledger's portrayal of the Joker:

• Film: The Dark Knight (Christopher Nolan, 2008). Second film/middle film in The Dark Knight trilogy.
• Ledger's psychotic portrayal of the Joker left the audience at the edge of their seats while watching this adaptation of the character. A criminal mastermind and Mass Murderer.
• Themes of the character: Chaos, anarchy and obsession.
• A joker playing card is left at the scene of the crime of Thomas and Martha Wayne's murder, Gordon shows this to Batman referencing Batman Begins (Nolan, 2005).
• The unpredictability of the character is what is most shocking to audiences worldwide. 
• Voice wise, Ledger varied in tones and pitches, creating an eerie feel.
• Traditional Purple and Green colours.
• The backstory of his smile: The GLASGOW SMILE, where a wound is caused after cuts made to the side of the victim's mouth - leaving a scar in the shape of a smile.
• Questions were raised in regard to Ledger's death and his role as the Joker. Were they linked? That is a whole other topic.
• Ledger was awarded the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor posthumously for his role.
• A lot of people will say that Ledger is the best Joker and how he is the most iconic. Is this still true after the release of Joker (Phillips, 2019)?

Hamill's portrayal of the Joker:

• Although Hamill's portrayal is only through voice acting, some people believe that his version of the Joker is the best. (He's my favourite Joker!)
• After watching the Joker (Phillips, 2019), Hamill praised Phoenix for his performance, 

• Mark Hamill's portrayal of the Joker is all through VOICE.
• Through his voice acting, Hamill was able to portray the Joker just as he should be crazy, psychotic and frightening. 
• Hamill's laugh of the Joker made his portrayal iconic!
• Because it is only his voice, Hamill has been able to portray the character for the last 27 years.

Phoenix's portrayal of the Joker:

• Phoenix makes the character REALISTIC. He is humanised and we are able to follow him through the misery that society puts him through. Also, depicting Mental Illness in this adaptation, especially in the current climate, is a real insight. 
• He didn't need Batman. A very young Bruce Wayne appears, and the murder of his parents happen, but this is a good twenty years or so before Batman.
• Addressing MENTAL ILLNESS - set in the early 80's, where mental illness was barely talked about because of the stigma, Fleck finds it hard to find help. Phillips (director) gave Fleck a real mental illness, Pseudobulbar Affect (YES, I have done my research!), which eventually turns into the iconic Joker laugh.
• Phoenix created a COMPLEX character - Living in poverty with his mother, who is ill, is enough stress for anyone. His job as a Party Clown is going nowhere. He is always being humiliated. He just wants to be liked, to find love and to feel like he matters.
• This adaptation address TOPICAL PROBLEMS, such as poverty. Arthur Fleck lives with his mother in the poorest part of Gotham, barely surviving. The rich thrive, while the poor die. 
• This particular adaptation of the Joker shows the audience how a person living in a society, where he needs help and doesn't get it. Fleck needs help, serious help. Is it true to say the society turned him into the Joker? Is it society's fault for failing Fleck? Is it Thomas Wayne's fault? 

I will be discussing this adaptation in more detail in the next post!