It Chapter 2 review

In 2017, I reviewed chapter 1 of It so it only makes sense that I review the second part now.

Every twenty-seven years, the inter-dimensional, supernatural creature Pennywise the Clown (Ben Skaarsgaard) preys on the citizens of Derry, Maine.  Having defeated Penny wise as children, Bill Denborough, (James Mcavoy) Beverly Marsh, (Jessica Chastain) Richie Tozier (Bill Hader) Mike Hanlon, (Isaiah Mustafu) Ben Hanscom, (Jay Ryan) and Eddie Kaspbrak (James Ransome) return to defeat It once and for all.

Although It is supposed to be a horror film, the horror elements were the weakest part.  This was because of the sheer over-reliance on CGI and jumpscares.  From the mutated creatures hatching from fortune cookies to the young Beverly Marsh (Sophia Lillis) being depicted as a flaming skeleton, I was more repulsed/ amused rather than scared.  Instead of hiding behind the sofa, I was rolling my eyes at the silliness of it all.  At some points, I almost wanted to laugh out loud.

The truly scary moments were when we were faced with plain human evil – no CGI, jumpscares, just good writing and acting.  The film opens with gay couple Don Hagarty and Adrian Mellon being brutally beaten up by some homophobic teenagers.  The grown-up Beverly Marsh is married to an abusive husband who whispers instead of shouts.  The adult Stanley Uris (Andy Bean) kills himself, as he is too afraid to return to Derry with his friends.  Even the build-up of the stupid ‘Beverly Marsh as a flaming skeleton’ scene was scarier than the actual scene itself.

In a flashback, Ben Hanscom gets a quiet moment with his unrequited love, Beverly.  He misreads the situation and tries to kiss her.  She brutally rejects him, asking how she could want to kiss an ugly, stupid, fat boy like him.  Afterwards, she turns into a flaming skeleton.  This version of Beverly Marsh was really Pennywise in disguise but seeing one of our heroes being so cruelly abused, by what should be his friend, was far scarier than some silly CGI.

All four of these scenes were far scarier than the best special effects that Final Cut Pro had to offer, because these scares were earned.  Rather than trying to repulse or shock, director Andy Muschietti subtly built atmosphere.  After all, what’s scarier? Being the victim of an unprovoked hate crime, being torn apart by the love of your life or some silly little monster that you can squish under your thumb.

This isn’t to say that Ben Skaarsgaard wasn’t great as Pennywise.  He was very creepy, but Muschietti was over-reliant on CGI.  Some of the best parts came from the characters and the chemistry they shared.  The scene where we see all 6 main characters reunite in the Chinese restaurant is great evidence of this, if you ignore the fortune cookie scene afterwards.  Bill Hader was perfectly cast as the adult Richie Tozier and his rapport with James Ransom, Eddie Kaspbrak, gave the film some much light-needed relief.  It also made for the remarkably poignant bittersweet ending where Eddie dies saving Richie’s life.

Similar to its predecessor, there is a definite over-reliance on CGI and jump scares, but solid character work makes this is an enjoyable if uneven watch.  At almost 3 hours, you can argue that it is over long.  But with the book being over 1000 pages long, far longer than it needs to be, almost 3 hours doesn’t seem that bad now. 

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood review

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood (OUTIH) isn’t on the top 1000 films of all time, but I recently watched it in cinemas and here’s the review.

Rick Dalton (Leonardo Dicaprio) is a Hollywood actor who’s afraid that his career is at an end.  Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt) is his stunt double and driver.  Together they navigate the changing landscape of 1960’s Hollywood.  Meanwhile, Charles Manson and his cult machinate a plot to begin a race war by killing Roman Polanski (Raful Zavierachi) and his wife Sharon Tate (Margot Robbie.)

As well as directing this, Tarantino also directed Kill Bill.  My main criticism of that film was that it was more style than substance.  The same criticism applies here.  Rather than offering a strongly plotted narrative, Tarantino presents a mostly nostalgic vision of Hollywood and stretches it to its limit.

Where Kill Bill is a homage to martial arts films, OUTIH is a homage to 1960’s Hollywood.  It’s overly seasoned with gratuitous real-life allusions, from Dicaprio being digitally imposed into the Great Escape, to Brad Pitt fighting Bruce Lee (Mike Moh) to Steve Mcqueen (Damien lewis) appearing for 5 minutes to even the title: Once Upon a Time in Hollywood being a reference to Sergio Leone’s ‘Once Upon a Time in the West” and … “in America.” Of course, Leone is best known for his spaghetti westerns with westerns featuring heavily in this film.

However, all these references felt more like Tarantino patting himself on the back, showing off how much he knows about Hollywood, rather than actually doing anything for the plot.  The real narrative lay in the conflicted mind of Dalton – a washed-up movie actor trying to revive his career.  Dicaprio was great in this role.  He imported true humanity to Dalton and prevented him from becoming just another of many Hollywood has-beens.  The scene where he breaks down in his trailer is the best example of this.

What’s left of the plot focusses on Booth being mixed up in the Manson family.  Although this is more of a sub-plot that should have received more attention than it did, the outrageous ending notwithstanding.

Three of Manson’s cult go to kill Tate and Polanski.  Instead they decide to kill Dalton and Booth.  The plan goes wrong as all three are brutally killed in progressively over-the-top ways.  This stylisation of violence is quintessential Tarantino, but it does become silly at times.

And we need to take a moment to talk about feet again.  Tarantino is just trolling us at this point.  He knows that his foot fetish is common knowledge and doesn’t give a damn anymore.  From Margot Robbie’s feet at the forefront of the frame, to Margaret Qualley’s feet pressed right against the windscreen, it was all a bit much.

While the film has all of the classic Tarantino hallmarks, I fear it is another example of style over substance.  And I get it, Tarantino! You have a foot fetish.  You don’t need to remind me of it in every single movie. 

Kill Bill Volume 1 Review

Number 200 on the top 1000 films of all time is Quentin Tarantino’s martial arts thriller ‘Kill Bill Volume 1.’ I just happened to see this film on TV, hence why I’m reviewing it out of order.

The Bride (Uma Thurman) awakens after an assassination attempt by her former hit squad goes awry.  She vows revenge on her former colleagues including her boss.  (David Carradine)

Kill Bill pays homage to many of the grindhouse and martial arts films of the 60s and 70s.  However, I think it is more homage than actual film.  Of course, you would expect there to be elements of the genre present, but I think it was overdone.  Don’t get me wrong, the martial art scenes were brilliantly choregraphed, the Crazy-88 fight being the obvious example, but they became over-long and tedious.

I understand that the film focusses on martial arts, but the extended fight scenes did little to push the narrative forward.  And that is my main criticism of the film.  It was all more style than substance.

The narrative, as it was, was stretched very thin.  The Bride has a fight with the first member of her hit squad, Vernita Green, and then travels to Japan and has another fight with the Crazy-88 and then a final fight with the next hit squad member O-Ren (Lucy Liu.) Throw in some feet shots for good measure.  We’ll talk about this later.

I did think that the staging and cinematography were brilliant, especially with how the Crazy-88 fight was in monochrome and later silhouetted.  Also, while O’Ren’s backstory being depicted as an anime cartoon was certainly innovative, it became very familiar, after a while.  I was hungering for some actual narrative and fleshed-out characters.

Now is the time to talk about Uma Thurman’s feet.  It’s well-known that Tarantino has a foot fetish, but this is the first time that I’ve really been aware of it.  Did we really need to spend so much time looking at Thurman’s feet?

Ultimately, this is an enjoyable film to watch once, but how any substance gives way to style, does make it tedious after a while.