Review #1,141: 'Independence Day: Resurgence' (2016)

By the time the 300-mile wide alien spacecraft appears in the skies and touches down on our world, it had become quite clear that Independence Day: Resurgence, the belated sequel to the beloved 1996 disaster movie, was here simply for our money. For anyone expecting anything else but lifeless CGI akin to a video-game cut-scene and actors with less charisma than the beers I felt myself needing to consume throughout this complete waste of time and money will be sorely disappointed, but hardly surprised. The original Independence Day was just as daft and just as stupid, yet it had a charming innocence about it, which possibly stemmed from the sight of famous landmarks being obliterated before 9/11 made it slightly uncomfortable to watch some mindless carnage. It also had Will Smith, who probably read the script for Resurgence and decided that it was so bad that he opted to do Suicide Squad instead.

Just like in real life, 20 years have past since those gigantic spaceships destroyed a host of major cities before being taken down by the combined efforts of... well, America. Just like in Alan Moore's Watchmen, the devastation caused by the alien race has brought humanity together, putting their differences aside to fight a common enemy. There's also been some amazing leaps in technology thanks to the debris left by the alien crafts, and a space station on the moon acts as humanity's first line of defence against another invasion. David Levinson (Jeff Goldblum) is now one of the top figures in alien research, and when he meets up with African war-lord Umbutu (Deobia Oparei) in 'Central Africa', discovers that the defeated aliens sent a telepathic distress signal to their home planet 20 years ago. Umbutu receives some of these messages due to his close encounters with the creatures, as does former President Thomas Whitmore (Bill Pullman) and Dr. Brakish Okun (Brent Spiner).

Of the new arrivals, there's the cocky and hunky hot-shot pilot Jake Morrison who, when we first meet him, is using his cockiness and hunkyness to save the space station from catastrophe. He is played by Liam Hemsworth, an actor I find utterly boring even in his better roles, who is clearly here for an easy payday since the script requires him to do little more than shout a defiant "aaaaaaaagh!" every time he faces danger in the cockpit. Jake is caught in some kind of squabble with Dylan Hiller (Jessie T. Usher), the son of Will Smith's character in the first film. Independence Day turned the Fresh Prince of Bel-Air into one the most bankable A-listers in the business, but Resurgence certainly won't be doing the same for Usher. He is one of many forgettable new faces in a packed ensemble which also includes President Whitmore's daughter (Maika Monroe), the current lady President (Sela Ward), the competent General Adams (William Fichtner), and Levinson's former flame Dr. Catherine Marceaux (Charlotte Gainsbourg in one of the greatest ever "what the hell am I doing here?" performances).

While I recognise that development only occurred sporadically throughout the last 20 years, the best that the 5 (yes, 5) screenwriters behind Independence Day: Resurgence could come up with is to simply remake virtually everything that came before. There are shots of people gazing into the sky, landmarks turning into balls of flame, a dog-fight during which the enemies' weakness is exposed, a rousing Presidential speech which Pullman half-arses here, and Jeff Goldblum doing his Jeff Goldblum thang. The Force Awakens (2015) was criticised for doing the same, but at least it introduced a whole new bunch of likeable characters and exciting set-pieces to distract us from this obvious flaw. Here, we get wise-cracks by Jake as millions of people die around him, and a climax that feels like the boss level from a computer game. And all without Will Smith. Simply put, Roland Emmerich's sequel is a boring, soulless ejaculation of digital nonsense that cares about nothing but filling its pockets with the cash of the unsuspecting.


Directed by: Roland Emmerich
Starring: Liam Hemsworth, Jeff Goldblum, Jessie T. Usher, Bill Pullman, Maika Monroe, Judd Hirsch, William Fichtner, Brent Spiner, Charlotte Gainsbourg
Country: USA

Rating: *

Tom Gillespie

Review #1,006: 'The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 2' (2015)

One of the ugliest and blatant money-spinning schemes to emerge from Hollywood in recent years is the trend of splitting up the final entry of a successful book series unnecessarily into two parts. Although I wasn't overly keen on The Hunger Games' second entry, Catching Fire (2013), it was at least - along with the original 2012 movie that kicked off the successful movie franchise that helped launch Jennifer Lawrence into super-stardom - decently paced; a tight, nifty thriller with some enjoyable set-pieces. Part 1 of Mockingjay lacked anything in the way of spectacle, and while Part 2 certainly delivers on the action front, it still stutters due to stretching a pretty slim book into over 4 hours of screen-time.

Following a slow start during which we meet up with heroine Katniss Everdeen (Lawrence) who is coming to terms with the horrors of war and the re-emergence of the emotionally damaged Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) in her life, things pick up when Katniss defies the orders of revolution propaganda chief Plutarch Heavensbee (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and the increasingly shady President Coin (Julianne Moore), and forces her way to the front line. What Katniss and her team face on their way to assassinate President Snow (Donald Sutherland) is a city booby-trapped to the gills with giant machine guns, flamethrowers, and other imaginatively-designed instruments of death awaiting them at every turn. Circumstances have changed but the Games remain the same.

What Part 1 lacked most of all was the Hunger Games themselves, and here they are cleverly woven back into the story. As absurd some of the set-ups are (surely a couple of well-placed soldiers armed with walkie-talkies and sniper-rifles would have been more efficient and cost-effective?), they undoubtedly eject the film with the excitement it sorely needs. Mockingjay Part 2 is also extremely dark and violent, pushing its UK 12A certificate to breaking point. One set-piece set in a sewer that sees a horde of snarling monsters chase our heroes in a scene straight out of a horror movie and a genuinely shocking (if you haven't read the books) moment of brutality near the end prove to be brave and mature decisions. And why shouldn't young folk see death depicted without the usual padding or sentimentality?

I also applaud the story for taking an unconventional approach to the inevitable Everdeen-Snow showdown, but its here that events take a confusing turn as Lawrence's Everdeen is kept at an emotional distance that clouds her motivations without the aid of narration, and the movie struggles in the closing moments. It's also an ending that should have come the film before, with the slicing of the story resulting in Part 2 going out with a slight whimper when it could have been explosive. On a positive note, it seems that audiences are finally catching on to the kind of studio greed that forced them to watch the likes of The Hobbit for nine hours over three years, as Lionsgate's movie performed poorer than expected at the box office (though it still made a shed-load).


Directed by: Francis Lawrence
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Donald Sutherland, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Julianne Moore, Elizabeth Banks
Country: USA/Germany

Rating: ***

Tom Gillespie

Review #948: 'The Hunger Games: Mockingjay - Part 1' (2014)

Following in the footsteps of fellow hit book franchises Harry Potter and Twilight (and arguably The Hobbit), the final entry into The Hunger Games series splits the final book in two, no doubt causing the producers to rub their hands together at the idea of doubling their profits while arguing that the decision was ultimately a creative one. While it would be cruel to state that the result is half a complete movie, Mockingjay Part 1 doesn't feel finished because, well, it isn't. So we get a build-up without a satisfying climax, while the action remains suitably thrilling and Jennifer Lawrence again demonstrates why she is the most powerful actress in the world right now.

The Hunger Games - which pitted a member of each of the lower-class districts against each other in a fight to the death - are now over, and full-scale rebellion is under way. Katniss Evergreen (Lawrence) has been whisked off to District 13, where freedom fighters are holed up as they plan to finally overthrow wealthy dictator President Snow (Donald Sutherland). Under the leadership of rebel leader President Alma Coin (Julianne Moore), Katniss is groomed by former Hunger Games Gamekeeper Plutarch Heavensbee (Philip Seymour Hoffman) to be the face of the rebellion and places her in propaganda videos, only Katniss can't act for shit. In the hope of drumming up support, Katniss is sent out into the field with a group of film-makers to witness the destruction inflicted on her people in her absence.

My main gripe with the Hunger Games movies (I haven't read the books) are that the 'good guys' we are meant to root for are little more than a collection of one-dimensional generic heartthrobs. Noticeably lacking charisma are Katniss's two love interests, Gale Hawthorne (Liam Hemsworth), now a soldier in the rebellion, and Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson), survivor of two rounds of the games and now a prisoner of Snow. Out of the young actors on show, it's only Lawrence who manages to sell her character, evoking sympathy as she is forced in front of the camera as a tool of war to spout ridiculous speeches that she struggles to deliver with any earnestness. On the other side, Snow is placing Peeta in front of the camera as he interviewed by TV host Caesar Flickerman (Stanley Tucci) pleading with the rebels to put down their weapons and end the fighting.

The focus on the artistry of propaganda from both sides is one of the most intriguing aspects of the film. Like the themes of class divide and capitalism from the first movie, the way the adult themes are weaved into an action movie made mainly for young adults works well, helping to give the story a gravitas rarely seen in blockbusters franchises. Sadly, scene-stealers Woody Harrelson and Elizabeth Banks are given very little to do as the story struggles to fit them in, but the introduction of Moore as the straight-talking Coin adds class and Sutherland positively purrs his way through his role as the big bad, a character deserving of more development and screen-time. The film is dedicated to Philip Seymour Hoffman, who tragically died during filming, and it's humbling to see the great actor deliver a masterclass when the role doesn't even call for it. As half of a finished movie, Mockingjay Part 1 is as entertaining as it is frustratingly unsatisfying.


Directed by: Francis Lawrence
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Julianne Moore, Donald Sutherland, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks
Country: USA

Rating: ***

Tom Gillespie

Review #906: 'The Hunger Games: Catching Fire' (2013)

While 2012's The Hunger Games, based on the opener of Suzanne Collins' trilogy, was very much a collection of familiar genre tropes and felt like Battle Royale (2000) for the Harry Potter generation, its themes of class suppression by a ruling elite and the grumblings of a working-class revolution felt refreshing for a story primarily aimed at a younger audience, and also extremely relevant to our times when wealth is seemingly celebrated above all else. Following the first instalment is the awkward middle entry, always struggling to bridge the gap between a fresh new world and its inevitable final showdown. Catching Fire struggles where most other middle sections fail - it's essentially a re-hash of the first film, and fails to progress the story enough to warrant its 2 hour 20 minute running time.

The movie makes a few key mistakes. Above all, it makes the terrible assumption that you've already read the book, failing to explain various aspects of the story which, although it doesn't confuse the rather straightforward plot, it left certain questions niggling in my brain. If the ultimate goal is to kill everybody you're lumped with and be the lone survivor, then why are teams of 'allies' forged by the game maker? What's really going on in the slums that we only glimpse in scenes of dusty faced onlookers? And are The Hunger Games, an event in which young members of the poor are plucked at random to inevitably die, really the best way to control an increasingly disgruntled majority? These questions aside, Catching Fire is also plain boring.

Picking up shortly after the climax of the first film, where the bow-and-arrow-wielding Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) won the Hunger Games with her close friend Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) after choosing to die together rather than one surviving, the two champions are left pondering the aftermath. Finding herself a hero to the enslaved working class, President Snow (Donald Sutherland) insists that she play her role and help maintain social order. Following a few incidents of rebellion, Snow decides that Katniss is a threat and turns to new Gamemaker Plutarch Heavensbee (Philip Seymour Hoffman) for council. His idea is to throw all the past victors of the Hunger Games into the event together, bending the rules in his favour by introducing a natural disaster or event every hour, including poisonous mist and killer mandrills.

Despite Jennifer Lawrence's obvious star quality, Katniss comes across as one-dimensional and charisma-free, failing to justify her 'chosen one' status. Her budding romance with gruff district worker Gale (Liam Hemsworth), to whom she explains that her kiss with Peeta was merely a way to manipulate the audience into aiding her survival (although her feelings may be becoming real), feels like a discarded draft of Twilight. The characters are so robotic that I simply didn't care who lived and who died. Catching Fire ultimately feels like a way of stretching out a story that could have been told in two instalments, where, by the end, I felt like we were no further along than where we were at the start. The ending comes so abruptly that it's obvious the filmmakers are under the illusion that they're leaving us thirsty for more, but while that may be the case for its huge fanbase, it left me staring at the screen waiting for any kind of satisfaction that I knew would never come.


Directed by: Francis Lawrence
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Donald Sutherland, Elizabeth Banks, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Lenny Kravitz
Country: USA

Rating: **

Tom Gillespie

Review #526: 'The Expendables 2' (2012)

Since 2006's Rocky Balboa, Sylvester Stallone has been on a nostalgia trip, re-visiting the characters and genres that catapulted him to the A-list in the 1980's and early 90's. After his rather average yet commercially successful homage to cheesy action - 2010's The Expendables - Stallone and his crew are back, with some extra recruits and some familiar (and aged) faces from the genre. Thankfully, Stallone has passed the director's chair to Simon West, a director who has plenty of experience in blowing shit up with the ridiculous yet irresistibly enjoyable Con Air (1997). If there was a main problem with the first film, it was that Stallone's action scenes were messy and confusing, hardly akin the kung-fu-inspired action of the 1980's.

After returning from a successful mission in Nepal, new recruit Bill (Liam Hemsworth) announces his retirement at the end of the month. Shady CIA operative Mr. Church (Bruce Willis) forces group leader Barney (Stallone) into taking a mission to recover a mysterious item in a crashed plane located in Albania. The group, including Lee Christmas (Jason Statham), Hale Caesar (Terry Crews), Toll Road (Randy Couture), Gunnar Jensen (Dolph Lundgren), and newly appointed technical expert Maggie Chan (Yu Nan), are ambushed by international criminal Claude Vilain (Jean-Claude Van Damme) who kills Bill and flees with the retrieved item. Gradually the team uncover a plot to find a storage of plutonium left over from the Cold War, and the enslavement of a nearby town by Vilain.

Early rumours that Stallone was going for a milder tone to allow a younger audience to see and enjoy the film are quickly dashed with an opening scene full of exploding heads and CGI blood. Stallone loves his blood and explosions - that was clear from 2008's almost pornographically gory Rambo. His goal was to aim higher and bigger with the sequel, and while on a whole it is pretty much on par with the first, the scope is certainly larger and the giddy in-jokes are more outlandish and obvious. The film is certainly full of love for the genre that was so good to Stallone, and what person that grew up in the 1980's and 90's would not smile at the sight of Planet Hollywood's Stallone, Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger mowing down bad guys side-by-side?

Yet it is at times so ridiculous and self-consciously cheesy that it comes across as a parody of itself. Schwarzenegger and Willis steal each other's catch phrases ("I'll be back!"/"Yippee-kay-ya") and Stallone even cracks a Chuck Norris Facts joke, and while these are funny, it takes the edge off the action and creates a feeling that none of these characters are really going to be in any real trouble. While Mickey Rourke sadly departed the project and Jet Li only briefly appearing, the addition of Chuck Norris and an actually very impressive Van Damme certainly compensate (the latter adding to his surprisingly moving performance in JCVD (2008)). But the film is crammed with far too many characters that pushes the whole Expendables crew minus Stallone well into the background. It won't stop me watching the upcoming third instalment, but this is no more than an amusing way to kill 90 minutes - much like the films it's playing homage to.


Directed by: Simon West
Starring: Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Jean-Claude Van Damme, Dolph Lundgren, Terry Crews, Randy Couture, Liam Hemsworth, Chuck Norris, Bruce Willis
Country: USA

Rating: ***

Tom Gillespie

Review #429: 'The Hunger Games' (2012)

It could be argued that we are living in the last decades of Western Civilisation as we know it. The connotations of our popular culture has all the elements of distraction from what actually matters within our society. Reality television is now the most watched entertainment, with it's collection of delusional contestants vying for their 15 minutes of fame, along with the populous need to both humiliate and celebrate people of little worth. This format of mass-distraction is mirrored in the fall of the Roman Empire, which had its Gladiatorial Colosseum's as both a form of distraction and control. In the 21st century, television (along with other forms of media communication) is used to control and sedate the masses, and foment apathy in the population. It is also a form of contagion that infects those who believe they can also be rich and famous with little or no ability or talent. This seems to be what The Hunger Games is attempting to comment on, within the context of a distopian future.

Set after an uprising during a war, North America has been divided into 12 districts controlled by its centre, The Capitol. Each year one boy and one girl between the ages of 12 and 18 are selected by a lottery from each district to fight to the death in a televisual show. From district 12, Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence), volunteers herself for the event after her younger sister was selected. Along with male contestant, Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson), are transported to the Capitol, which resembles the Roman cities that the film is attempting to align itself with. After training and attempts to get sponsors, they are let out into a forest world to fight.

I really can't be bothered to explain any further the plotting or character narratives within this film, as you will more than likely have seen it before: The Hunger Games has similar themes, and has an incredibly similar storyline to both Battle Royale (2000) and The Running Man (1987). Whilst it's central character is played well by Lawrence (she has a slight presence on screen with her ordinary beauty), she has very little to do in a weak script, and obvious plotting. The films iconography is lifted wholesale from Roman history, and its depiction of a vapid elitist population fails to enlighten the initial premise (that admittedly could have been good). Within the first hour the film also manages to insult the spectator by repeating certain scenes of dialogue only 20 minutes after it was initially shown ("We are totally aware that that happened, cause not much has happened since, and it happened moments ago").

Writer Suzanne Collins has stated that the inspiration for the book came from channel hopping between reality TV and the Iraq war, but she fails to find a voice strong enough to contextualise all the information into a credible framework, and simply seems to use the idea to speak only to the idiots who watch the reality TV that she seems to want to criticise; in other words the idea has been produced in much more intelligent ways elsewhere, whilst The Hunger Games decreases its concepts to feed it to the masses. Back to the 2010's, it has been suggested that around 90% of teenagers desire fame. In this narrative world, this desire simply is not there. In conclusion, interesting idea which fails to interest - the film is too long, and it simply does not engage.


Directed by: Gary Ross
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks, Lenny Kravitz, Stanley Tucci, Donald Sutherland
Country: USA

Rating: ***

Marc Ivamy