Thursday, 28 January 2016

TuckFrump


I suppose it was expected that a controversial figure like Donald Trump would be a source of criticism from various political groups, but this is genuinely the response from one of those groups offended by his policies. Apparently they forget about the principles of democracy and how America has thrived off of free speech, only using that as an excuse to broadcast their biased rhetoric. But let's at least give these perpetual idiots a chance to produce a good argument. Let's see what they have to say that warrants the censorship of Donald Trump.


1. What a great idea it is to force your own political agenda onto a small child. I'm sure that kid under the voting age has a broad political insight, so what a great cornerstone of your argument. Better yet let's get the kid to have an expletive filled rant. Which group is meant to be the assholes here? I'm struggling to tell.
2. Apparently calling breastfeeding mums 'disgusting' is ignorant. However criticising a man for reciprocating the views of many conservative Americans somehow isn't ignorant; but I forget that's not how this blatant propaganda works. How dare Donald Trump have a strong opinion on a divisive issue that differs to this group; what a fucking pig. The actual reasons why Trump should conform to this group's view is even worse; just because something is natural doesn't mean it should be supported. Rape and incest are also natural constructs, yet does that mean Trump should support that as well. I'm a supporter that women should be able to breastfeed in public within reason, yet Trump just isn't being rude when he disagrees, and is perfectly entitled to an opinion that differs from these entitled pricks. I haven't even mentioned how all this controversy is over an ALLEGATION, and even then that's one example. But no, it's now apparently factual that Donald Trump hates ALL breastfeeding women. Who's supposed to be the ignorant one again?
3. Here we go again. Just because Donald Trump said some things deemed racist he's obviously the same as Adolf Hitler. Fuck any sort of context or logic, because of course it's clear that Trump's policies are fuelled by eugenics. Saying Donald Trump is like Adolf Hitler is a bit like saying all Muslims are Osama Bin Laden, which is exactly a point made in this video; fucking hypocrites. Oh and Trump never said he wanted a 'Muslim database'. Rather it was Trumps inability to comment on a question based around this topic that started the smear campaign.
4. Yes Trump has made some disparaging comments about marriage equality, which again he is fully entitled to. But obviously because everything offends these morons they want to censor anyone with strong opinions that differs to theirs despite not giving you the whole story. Trump's opinions on homosexuals aren't as black and white as this campaign makes out, and actually Trump has historically supported homosexual couples. There's even evidence to suggest that this is the same story for his 2015 campaign, which in comparison is far less controversial on the issue than the other Republican candidates. But no, it's Trump that's the problem.
5. Oh no, he insulted you. Boo-fucking-hoo. I might be able to take your outrage seriously if you could counter with an intellectual point to try and disprove the argument, but no, because of course feelings are more important than facts.
6. Trump called Japanese people 'Japs'. What the fuck is the world coming to? Next you'll be telling me he'll be doing something as disgusting as calling British people 'Brits'. What a vile human being.
7. Have you ever considered providing any sources for your claims? Probably best not in case educated people try and look up your ludicrous claims.
8. Trump made fun out of fat people in America? I can safely say that nobody else in the world makes this stereotypical joke about Americans. Literally never hear it; ever.
9. We keep taking quotes out of context don't we. Maybe you would like it if Trump did actually say he thought all Mexicans were rapists, but let's actually consider the full quote. "When Mexico sends its people they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you; they’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists, and some, I assume, are good people. But I speak to border guards and they tell us what we’re getting.” Turns out Trump didn't say anything of the sort.
10. A hair joke. Is that honestly the best you could come up with? I might be able to take that joke a little more seriously if you didn't have fucking Leo Sayer promoting your campaign.

I'm not even American, but I would happily vote for Trump to spite these people after watching such absolute bullshit. I'm sure some people who oppose trump actually have strong points and don't just fabricate the truth and jump to conclusions when the reality is entirely different, but unfortunately this video forgot about them. Just because somebody has strong opinions that aren't yours doesn't mean they should be instantly chastised, especially when that criticism comes in the form of whinging and claiming that you're somehow the victim in all this. If self entitled hypocrites like this continue to gain popularity then the only victim will be the free speech of America. And mark my words that would be far worse than Trump becoming president.


Tuesday, 26 January 2016

Top 10 Films of 2015


#10 Ex Machina (8/10)

I often consider '2001: A Space Odyssey' to be the greatest piece of cinema in history, and 'Ex Machina' has been one of only a few films since to give me that same sense of intrigue that you got with the Stanley Kubrick masterpiece. 'Ex Machina' is a futuristic and sophisticated film that has a debate over technology at the fore, only this sci-fi film has the advantage over classics in the genre of being broadcast to an audience who are much more technologically advanced. Even so, this is a very technical film that focuses on the personalities inside the technology rather than just some raw mechanisms, and this is a far greater mechanic in film to question the place of technology in society. I thought this film nailed this concept, and credit goes to the talented cast who were fully believable and allowed me to immerse myself in a simple world filled with complex technology. The only way this film could alienate you is if you go into the theatre with the ignorant attitude that this will be a generic action film, when the reality is that this is a complex piece of art with much more going on than first meets the eye.

'Ex Machina' was the very impressive directing debut of Alex Garland, who used his experience of impressive screenplays in films such as '28 Days Later' to full effect. As a result this is a film that feels nothing like a mere 15 million dollar production, and in my opinion looked far more appealing than the new 'Star Wars' film that had tonnes more cash thrown towards the visuals. Sure 'Ex Machina' has the advantage of a simple setting, but that's all it needs to work. The polished production though is just the icing on the cake over what is a very solid premise that on occasion did give me a buzz of excitement. That's a tough skill to pull off in a film primarily designed to make you think, but I found myself regularly revelling in a plot that was designed to both raise hairs and ask you questions that will conflict with your own personal beliefs. I'll admit the methodical pace might not be for everyone to enjoy, but stick with it and you'll get some tense moments stemming from a simple yet deep subject. This is a film for those that recognise the artistry behind modern cinema, and as such this was one of the standout films of the year. 


#9 Mad Max: Fury Road (8/10)

If you're going to make a film that goes down the road of focusing on high action sequences, which a lot of films do these days, then this is how you should go about doing it. This latest 'Mad Max' film was full of big explosions and loud chase sequences, putting some extra meat onto an already sumptuous plot that always came first in the premise. The overall product is an almost perfect fusion of action and western elements that ended up highlighting the positives in both genres, yet still becoming easily accessible for modern audiences. That's quite a neat trick to pull off, and I can understand why critics were so highly positive of the film. Here under the disguise of a blockbuster action flick we have a surprisingly complex plot with a surprising amount of raw emotion thrown in. You could say that was keeping with the classic 'Mad Max' formula, and you may have a point, but this film never feels copied or rehashed. Instead this film is obscene, extravagant, and absolutely charmless; but that's why it's been so successful. I never thought I would see the day a man in a car chase decides to whack out his flame powered guitar, but thanks to this film I've now lived long enough to see what was one of the greatest spectacles in cinema history.

Tom Hardy puts in a fine performance in the lead role despite not actually doing that much, but his role screams 'blockbuster' in every scene, and you will find many iconic moments littered throughout what I expected to be a far more standard performance. Even supporting actress Charlize Theron puts in a great performance, arguably superseding Hardy's performance with her far more transcendent role. It's not the most intellectual film you'll see all year, but as a spectacle this was in a class of one, which sounds strange considering that this title was in development hell ever since it was deemed too 'politically insensitive' to be released during the Iraq War. Even when principal filming had finished the 480 minutes of footage took three months just to analyse, followed by the sheer amount of special effects needed. In all honesty it's a miracle that not only was the resulting film polished, but one that also became a big box office success. Many critics have claimed that this is one of the greatest action movies of all time, and although I'm not convinced it's that good, I will say that this is an exciting and quality film nonetheless.


#8 Carol (8/10)

According to many this was the best film of the year, and I can see where they're coming from. This is certainly a film worthy of high praise, but for me the overall experience was only good, and had a long way to go before being considered the greatest of 2015. The overall setting was a weird love triangle with a lot of lesbianism thrown in, which is fine by me, as was the casting, which saw Cate Blanchett and Rooney Mara produce two performances that were great when mixed together. Their roles were just what was needed to accurately translate what was originally a controversial novel set around a shocking scandal, but that part was never shoved down your throat, and instead the focus was on the individual characters who are deeply affected by their scandalous behaviour. 'Carol' was a film with real subtlety and vigour, as such becoming one of the more emotionally invested films of the year, and one that handled mature subjects with the seriousness and grace that they required.

This excellent piece of cinema was the result of eleven years of development, with the end result being one of beauty and elegance. I'd say the overall experience was a satisfying one, and the overall feel was very similar to that of 'Brokeback Mountain', although the latter film is less mature and made with a commercial audience in mind. 'Carol' in contrast relies on the sublime ambiance and cinematography to convey a strong sense of passion within the plot, and it's because of this element that I can understand why critics were so quick to praise what many thought was a perfect film. I would say that this was a timely piece, exploiting the growing acceptance of homosexual relationships in art, but beyond that there is an immense level of artistry and passion that went into this creation that leaves an overall special feeling. I can understand why this is the highest rated film of the year on 'Metacritic', but presumably other audience members see things in it that I don't.


#7 The Walk (8/10)

It's not particularly hard to create an interesting story around the extraordinary life of Phillipe Petite, and as a personal fan of his unbelievable tightrope feat above the Twin Towers a story with him involved is always going to be compelling. Take 'The Walk' for example. This is a film that has the same fascinating story to drive the plot whilst also adding some of the most pleasing visuals I've ever experienced. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is entirely believable in his lead role as Petite, and you can genuinely believe he shares the same passion for daredevil stunts that the actual character does, but it's always overshadowed by just how good this film feels. This is what 3D films were made for. The sheer immersion from the visuals alone is staggering, and some of the shots used are just awe inspiring. The actual walk itself as a climax is such an adrenaline rushing moment that it opposes the dialogue driven opening segments in such a way that you just have to experience this fantastic climax in the moment. The tension in that walk alone is almost a surreal feat considering that this is a documentary, and for a film that tells a well known story, this is one of the few that actually put you in the position of the protagonist, and in a biopic praise doesn't get higher than that.


#6 The Revenant (8/10)

In all honesty this is a movie that will survive throughout history solely due to Leonardo DiCaprio's quite extraordinary Oscar worthy performance. The extent that DiCaprio goes to in order to tell the incredible survival story of Hugh Glass is just stunning. The various stories plastered all over the Internet describing the ordeal that DiCaprio went through is totally believable and a sign of the commitment this man had to what may just be his finest ever role. Unfortunately for Tom Hardy, who is also in fine form in the supporting role, his part is completely muted by just how good DiCaprio is, and in truth so is the whole cast in an overall very well acted film. I was always one of those people that didn't think Leonardo DiCaprio deserved an Oscar, but after having watched 'The Revenant' there is no doubt his performance here is one of the all time greats. 

Once you get past the role of DiCaprio you get to a film that you will often presume is just trying to be 'Oscar fodder', but I don't really care about the over-the-top nature as the visual presentation is just stunning. There's some amazing shots of the harsh wilderness and the natural world, only serving to further the idea of just how brutal the Hugh Glass story really is. As a film this was as gritty and realistic as I like in an action film, and I'm glad the Hollywood cliches don't overpower what is a story heavily embedded in history. To say there aren't any of those cliches would be a lie, and there's also some big problems with the narrative, as it has an ending that doesn't make sense and some weird pacing that means the film runs out of steam by the end, but aside from those issues this is an excellent piece of cinema with some outstanding performances within.


#5 Spotlight (8/10)

I wasn't aware a film about journalism and child molestation could be as gripping as this, but this surprise hit proved me completely wrong. 'Spotlight' is a mature and sophisticated film that handles pressing issues in a unique way that understandably put many audience members off. However for me this was a film that gave me a genuinely insightful view into the realistically depicted world of journalism without glorifying any characters for the sake of cinema. This film understood that it was showing the audience history changing events, and as such treated the issues seriously as if the audience were adults and were genuinely intrigued by the subject matter. The inner workings of the plot are complex enough to thoroughly rinse your mind of any predetermined thoughts, which is a good thing, as on the face of things the plot can become a little narrow in places with a lack of raw content; but as long as this film kept asking questions it never got dull.

'Spotlight' was a film that gave me the unique stories of multiple characters in their full, fleshed out glory. You get the sense of why each character is tied into the narrative, and each story is given equal amplification in a film that tries to avoid taking sides in such a controversial case. I applaud the directors and cast for keeping with this style of narrative, as the serious tone is one that can accurately show the emotional feelings of the entire cast who all do a great job with their respective characters. This is a film that's touching, thoughtful, vile, and realistic, with a huge emphasis on immersion of the audience. I'm not convinced this deserves to be given a 'Best Picture Oscar', but this is an overall extremely well made docudrama.


#4 Bone Tomahawk (8/10)

Of all the films that I thought were going to revive the western genre, it certainly wasn't this film that I expected to achieve that. 'Bone Tomahawk' was a film with a unique blend of western and horror that combined to create a quite sophisticated, yet primarily exhilarating film. But don't think this small budget film was full of cheap and pointless thrills, because this had a lot of realism despite being totally fictional, and actually became more believable than the majority of factual films this year. 'Bone Tomahawk' had an authentic sheen that it never lost despite containing some of the most unorthodox villains this year. At the centre was the harsh reality of the Old West that never felt like it was forced down the viewer's throat, instead relying on the contrast between the mundane of life in the past with intense action sequences to make the thrills and characters a million times better.

The real highlight however was the ensemble cast, who were just great together. With these characters you really did get the sense that the film was set in a small tightly knit community, and these relationships were interesting to explore and elaborate on despite still being centred around that idea of realism. In such a dull setting it was so nice to see some of the most extravagant plot points this year, and by that I mean the gruesome death scene that comes out of absolutely nowhere. It's a disturbing yet brilliant piece of cinema that only improved a solid and gritty plot. Again, realism was at the centre of that scene, and that's what made it all the more horrifying. I love a brutal and visceral film that feels plausible at every stage, and when you combine this with a solid premise and a well paced film you get an experience that ramps up the intensity exponentially. I had my doubts when first picking this one up, but wow did this film blow me away beyond all expectations.



#3 Jurassic World (8/10)

'Jurassic World' was the blockbuster of the year. Now I don't particularly like the idea of a film being a slave to the commercial market, as that often leads to the removal of fundamental elements just to make the film more inclusive, but in 'Jurassic World' I felt the quality wasn't ruined by pandering to more people, despite the fact that this production was obviously meant to sell big. Okay it's not the most intelligent film of all time, or intelligent for the franchise even, but who honestly cares about what's realistic in a science fiction film that looks this damn good. I'm a scholar in a course that includes prehistoric biology, but I didn't give a flying fuck about the dimensions of the dinosaurs included, because I'm aware that this is a work of fiction, and should always be treated as such. It may not be as good as the original 'Jurassic Park' in terms of fictional tales, but for the first time since that groundbreaking film was released I got the same goosebumps I always did when you ended up getting a look at some of these epically made creations.

I also didn't find any fundamental problems with this film. The cast were perfectly acceptable, and actually went beyond my expectations. Chris Pratt is a cool and nerdy guy who does what's needed in the lead role, and the kids aren't even annoying, which is nothing short of a miracle in a big blockbuster like this one. I still think the overall spectacle was inferior to that of the original, but this newer version never gives up on the dinosaurs and almost always quite rightfully has them as the focus; and that's good in a film where the characters can end up looking a bit bland in comparison. No 'Jurassic World' didn't bring anything new to the table, and there are parts filled with cliched nonsense that frustrated me, but as a film this was about the most entertainment you could possibly squeeze out of a few hours. This film looks the part and travels at such a rapid pace that you can't help but sit on the edge of your seat almost all the way through, looking at some creations that will make any human say 'holy shit'. To me this is what modern cinema is all about, and in a classic homage to the Steven Spielberg style of film, this one pulled it off in style.


#2 Sicario (9/10)

Well this was one of the most intense films this year. 'Sicario' literally means 'hitman' in Mexico, so I was expecting something action orientated, but nothing compared to how graphic and thrilling the final product turned out to be. The cast in particular put on a stellar show, especially Benicio Del Toro who was the dark role that this film desperately deserved. His character fits into the narrative perfectly, which I wish I could say for leading actress Emily Blunt who never quite fully fits into that FBI role as well as she should. I certainly blame the casting for failing at finding the correct person for a role that should be believable, but at least Blunt doesn't become an absurd character that doesn't contribute to the film despite being so one dimensional, at least making the film entertaining, and I guess in any other thriller I'm sure she would have flourished. I suppose it's in the style of the film that the main role becomes lost in the greater concept of conflict, which is always the central focus of any good war film.

I would say that 'Sicario' throws the theme of conflict around a lot more haphazardly than many of its contemporaries, but it's not a thoughtless production and actually requires a little bit of thought to truly enjoy the whole narrative. When this film does do things right though, they properly hit the mark. 'Sicario' has some of the best cinematography and music I've seen and heard all year, which is an extremely powerful mechanism in a plot that sometimes becomes hard to relate to. Maybe it's because of my ignorance on the Mexican Drug War, but I can safely say that no cinematic experience has ever brought a current conflict so vividly to life. This was an experience were I felt I was a part of this ongoing conflict, and some of the merciless mental images produced by this work are sickening to say the least. This is a graphic production that never feels predictable or gimmicky, and its impactful nature deserves a lot of respect with its depictions of conflicts in relation to global warfare. In essence the film portrays the narrative as a trivial part of a global issue, and that's such a great mechanism for any good war film.


#1 Bridge of Spies (9/10)

Thank you Steven Spielberg. Thank you for making what appeared on paper to be one of the duller parts of the Cold War into one of the most interesting and gripping films I've watched this year. When the powerhouse combination of Spielberg and Tom Hanks come together you just know the results will be good, but what I didn't expect was a historical production that managed to be insightful and intriguing throughout the whole duration. My expectations of 'Bridge of Spies' were that this wouldn't be a film that would leave me on the edge of my seat, but thanks to brilliant performances by the whole cast that's exactly what happened. Hanks in particular plays such a good leading role and his charisma shines above the whole cast. It's a memorable performance that deserves an Oscar, as does the work of Spielberg who once again masterfully recreates his version of history with every little detail being meticulously thought through and refined. The result is a film that flows perfectly from scene to scene, making a fascinating tale out of a forgotten event in history.

Okay there are still a few Hollywood cliches lying around to let you know that this is a commercial film, but at the heart of everything there is that passion for history that Spielberg loves to tell. I do question the roles of the Russians being portrayed as solely evil warmongering bastards, but that's a small detail to overlook from an overall very polished narrative. The styling as well deserves special praise, because at every stage the film feels like a product of its time. There are many classic elements used that scream of 1950's cinema, and I like that the film forgets about high action and explosive scenes, and instead focuses on sophistication and coherence. The script was masterfully written, brilliantly fleshing out each character into the elegant plot, which was paced really nicely for an overall positive experience. It's amazing to think that this film was made for only 40 million dollars, which is further proof that when it comes down to historical films Spielberg can turn a simple idea into one of the most interesting anecdotes and a top notch film with very little resources. 

Thursday, 21 January 2016

Star Wars: The Force Awakens Review



As a big 'Star Wars' fan I just had to review this one. This is undoubtedly the biggest film released in the past decade, and its huge success at the box office is proof that me and many others were greatly anticipating more 'Star Wars' action in a setting previously unexplored by the previous films. This was a fresh new era for 'Star Wars' with acclaimed director J.J. Abrams taking the helm from the legendary George Lucas. But is this new 'Star Wars' deserving of the box office records its smashed and the praise it gained almost unanimously from critics? Well that's a question that's very much debatable. This review will contain a lot of spoilers, so don't say you haven't been warned.

Certainly the whole 'Star Wars' style of presentation is included. The money spent on the film was used effectively, just like we all knew it would be, and this new lick of paint gives the 'Star Wars' universe a sumptuous feel that you always dreamt the films would look like in your childhood dreams. The new galaxy is visually exciting and full of vivid life forms that only expand on the already huge world of 'Star Wars', and this world has even been populated by a new cast that strangely for a 'Star Wars' film put in some good performances. This new babyfaced cast surprised me with their genuinely good standard of acting, and the diverse cast all pulled their weight even if some of the personalities aren't as iconic as a 'Star Wars' mainstay should be. Included in this new film is Princess Leia's grandmother, a female clone of Anakin Skywalker, and a hormonal teenager playing a Sith Lord. A cast that diverse is bound to tell an exciting story, but I can't help but feel Daisy Ridley and John Boyega were rather underwhelming in their respective starring roles. They both put in believable performances, yet never feel like they belong in such an epic adventure like the cast of the original films did. Ridley in particular was a character who seemed to be able to do everything instantly, but never excelled at any of these roles. I feel her character wasn't helped by having almost no time to be developed, and her apparently grand journey was paced awfully, ending up with her in a central focus that she really doesn't deserve at this point in the trilogy. When you compare this pacing to the tale of Luke Skywalker it becomes clear that on this leading path Ridley's character does not have what it takes to be a legend of the 'Star Wars' franchise. Luke never fucked over a Sith after just one film; his journey was spread out over three films, yet I'm supposed to believe that Ridley's overnight success is plausible. Okay Ridley's character is helped along by legends of the franchise, but even a character as legendary as Han Solo can't carry Ridley into the limelight after such a short time.

I'm sorry, you two just aren't charismatic enough to be truly memorable characters, yet alone the heroes one of the biggest movies of all time.

Abrams' mistakes continue when you consider the plot of this new film. I imagine Abrams took a look at the fourth film in the franchise, and then put the script of that film through a photocopier. Abrams kept the part where a droid that contains important information falls into the hands of an unlikely hero who then gets captured and people try and rescue her from the enemy. He also kept the setting on a desert planet that has problems with poverty, and how the journey on this planet is sidetracked with the meeting of two smugglers, and also the part where the heroes blow up a huge planet sized ship owned by a totalitarian regime hellbent on destruction thanks to their new superweapon. In truth Abrams just blatantly copied the plot from the fourth film, which isn't really acceptable when this film takes place just thirty years after the original trilogy's galaxy changing events. Come on Abrams, do you genuinely expect me to believe that this new 'evil empire' would build another planet destroying ship thirty years after the last two were destroyed in almost identical fashion? It's all very well showing that history is repeated, but when the repetition is so implausible the plot becomes a predictable and dumb affair.

What amazed me is that this planet destroying ship being blown up wasn't actually part of the main plot, which was the more menial task of finding Luke Skywalker in order for him to do fuck all. Unlike the originals there didn't seem to be any purpose to this menacing ship, only providing a method for Abrams to show off those nice effects and fast paced action sequences as if he got Michael Bay to write the script. I accept that many 'Star Wars' films contain plot points that hinge on an unbelievable coincidence, but in this film I felt these coincidences became more noticeable and overshadowed an overall less meaningful and lazy plot. Abrams just lets the viewer assume key details without expanding on the already rich 'Star Wars' experience, and that's annoying in a franchise where there is almost a limitless possibility of places to take the plot. I can't help but feel that Abrams just played it safe to appease the majority of fans, and for me that's not what the wonder of 'Star Wars' should be about, and actually places the film in the territories of the more generic action flick.

 Was this a scene from four or seven? See, it's really hard to tell, and that's the primary problem with the plot; nothing stands out as original or fresh.

The overall script was another recurring problem that I found far too predictable and samey for what could have been an epic film. Even the prequels had a larger emphasis on building up tension and keeping the audience guessing despite having the disadvantage of being set before the original storyline; but at least George Lucas tried to experiment and mix things up. In this new episode I felt that Abrams forced the viewer to fill in the gaps themselves rather than give any explanation or purpose to the settings and events of his film. The scene pictured above for example is when this Third Reich style faction decide to blow up a whole system of planets for apparently no reason at all. Is this a huge event in the 'Star Wars' storyline? Yes, so why doesn't Abrams get the viewer to care about these things? For all we know this could have been accidental after the 'First Order' got bored on a Sunday, but even in the world of cartoon violence that 'Star Wars' is famed for this event was dreadfully executed. Another gap that was left for us to fill in despite having adequate airtime was that huge Sith thing, who on the face of things is like nothing we've ever seen in the series before. But guess what, thanks to poor scripting the viewer is left with a seemingly pointless character that's hard to even care about with so little context given. I really liked some of the new inclusions in this expanded universe, so why the hell didn't Abrams show off these new elaborate constructs like any other great artist would?

 Who the hell are you? Even The Emperor had more of a description in the fifth film, and he was barely even in it.

Once you get past the flimsy story you can at least respect the action sequences for their occasional moments of brilliance. I do admire Abrams for trying to inject some energy into the franchise in a far better way than George Lucas ever did in his prequels, and although this change of direction isn't going to please every 'Star Wars' fan, it is at least a surefire way to make sure the franchise becomes successfull with modern audiences. Sometimes the tendency to overindulge certain action sequences did alienate the lifelong fan inside me, but maybe these increasingly mature scenes are the change that 'Star Wars' needs to push it away from simply trivialising full scale intergalactic conflicts. I still would have liked to have seen the fun that made the original 'Star Wars' films so brilliant to watch, and by that I mean choreograph a better lightsaber battle, as the one in this film was piss poor. It's all very well putting all that extra effort into cool looking lightsabers, but then to ruin that on what was a battle filled with amateurs is inexcusable. I'm sure this will be addressed in the next film, but don't feel the need to try and force these classic scenes into a 'Star Wars' film when they're not required. A two minute lightsaber battle at a snails pace was not what anyone ordered, and this all goes back to my criticisms of Abrams just playing it safe and not trying to experiment with where he wants the series to be taken.

Underwhelming and very short. No it wasn't my sex life, but this pointless lightsaber battle.

Overall I have to say that this new film was not at level I expected after reading such positive reviews beforehand. This was never going to be as bad as the horror show that started off the prequels, and for that we can be thankful, but even the prequels had much greater climaxes and a lot more innovation in their production. This new film was a fast paced affair, and I enjoyed watching almost all of it, but to say there wasn't that overriding feeling of disappointment would be lying. I don't hate this film at all, and people that are directly comparing this film to the originals are obviously going to be underwhelmed, but this was a film that brought 'Star Wars' into a modern era, and you have to say that it does cater to a modern audience very well. In terms of quality though, this is just average for a 'Star Wars' film, and I even thought the third film was better overall. The third film never felt like another version of old 'Star Wars' content, and all we got with this new one was some rehashed graphics and an updated presentation. That's all fine, but there was always that 'Star Wars magic' in the originals, and despite being a good film this new episode is a culprit of forgetting about that 'magic' for most of its duration.

Final Score: 7/10   ***1/2