Spectre (2015)

Director: Sam Mendes

Story: John Logan, Neal Purvis, Robert Wade

Cast: Daniel Craig, Christoph Waltz, Léa Seydoux

Music: Thomas Newman

Time: 148 minutes

Bottom-line: Thrilling, but doesn’t match the standards of Casino Royale or Skyfall

The twenty fourth instalment in the James Bond, the fourth (and mostly the last) film starring Daniel Craig as 007, Spectre brings back the hero after 3 years. Co-starring Christoph Waltz, Léa Seydoux in the lead roles, with Ralph Fieness, Ben Whishaw, Naomi Harris reprising their roles, and Andrew Scott in the supporting cast, the film shows us Bond’s encounters with probably the biggest villain he has faced yet.

Craig as 007

“I am the author of all your pain…”

After Gareth Mallory (Fieness) gets promoted to M, Bond (Craig) disobeys MI6’s orders and goes to Mexico City and assassinates a certain Marco Sciarra, as per the previous M’s (Dench) orders. He procures a ring with a stylised octopus and returns to London, where he is suspended from field duty. M meanwhile has conflicts with Max Denbigh (Scott), the head of Joint Intelligence Service, who plans to absolve the double-O section. Bond later learns about a terrorist organisation called Spectre, whose meeting he attends. He identifies the leader as Franz Oberhauser (Waltz), a man long presumed dead. As Bond is pursued by Franz’s hitmen, he finds clues linking various characters from the previous three films, which brings him to Madeleine Swann (Seydoux), who leads Bond to the largest criminal organisation he has faced in his career.

Waltz as Franz

Daniel Craig still carries that style and class despite the four-year gap between Skyfall and Spectre. It would be a disappointment if this is the last film with him playing 007, for I found his portrayal highly impressive. The bond girl here – other than being much older than expected – is quite different from the rest (at least she doesn’t get him into trouble!). Christoph Waltz is someone whom I believe is one of the top actors of today, especially in playing the role of a villain. Cunning, charming, and incredibly suave, he plays this role to perfection…the only fault being his character should have been given more screen time. The crew did not use his acting skills to the full extent; he could have played a much better villain.

Seydoux as Swann

The opening action sequence is clichéd… Skyfall at least had a twist just before the opening credits rolled. The visual effects could have improved, and the title sequence wasn’t as impressive as that of the previous Craig films. The action sequences were impressive, and the stunts exciting (and unbelievable of course!). The story is not that great because there is more talk and less action; I did not like the idea where they brought in all the villains from the previous films and tied everything into one bundle. The first encounter between Franz and Bond in the meeting is probably the best scene in the film.

Scott as Max 

While the script has its strengths, the most obvious fault I could find is the misuse of characters. The idea of a “master villain” is something debatable, but I for one did not like it. Watch Spectre mainly for the action; in most other aspects, it falls short of expectations.

My Rating: 3/5

Rotten Tomatoes rating: 65%

Kung fu Panda (2008)

Director: John Stevenson and Mark Osborne
Story: Ethan Reiff, Cyrus Voris
Cast: Jack Black, Angelina Jolie, Dustin Hoffman
Music: Hans Zimmer, John Powell
Time: 92 minutes
Bottom-line: Hilarious and exciting, with memorable characters

One of the biggest critical and commercial successes for Dreamworks, Kung Fu Panda is one film that never gets old. The film features an ensemble cast, with Jack Black and Dustin Hoffman in the lead roles, with Angelina Jolie, Ian McShane, Seth Rogen, Lucy Liu, David Cross, Randall Duk Kim, James Hong, and Jackie Chan in the supporting cast. The success of this film led to the development of two more sequels, which released in 2011 and 2016 respectively.

Valley of Peace, China: Po (Black) is a giant panda who helps out his adopted goose father, Mr. Ping (Hong), in his noodle restaurant. Po idolises a set of warriors called the Furious Five: Tigress (Jolie), Monkey (Chan), Mantis(Rogen), Viper (Liu), and Crane (Cross), all trained by a red panda Master Shifu (Hoffman). Po however is unable to pursue his dream of learning kung fu because his father wants him to help with the business. Meanwhile Grand Master Oogway, an old tortoise (Kim) has a vision that a snow leopard Tai Lung (McShane) will escape from prison, in search of the Dragon Scroll – the key to infinite power. So Oogway and Shifu decide to hold a tournament to choose the “Dragon Warrior” – the one who woul save the Valley from Tai Lung. However the chosen one is not one of the Furious Five, but Po! Is it a mistake by the wise and experienced Oogway? Or is Po actually capable of becoming the Dragon Warrior?

Po

The film is sometimes called a wuxia film, meaning that it is an adventure story based on martial arts (Chinese). Kung fu Panda gives a blend of Chinese culture, adventure, action, comedy, and a message. The concept of the Dragon Scroll is what gives us something to think about: we all have something that we desire, thinking that if we possess it then we would be a step ahead. As Po realises in the film – and so do we – such a thing does not exist physically. We can be whatever we want to, as powerful as we want to, if only we believe in ourselves. There is no secret ingredient that works magic. All five warriors and even Shifu disparage against Po, dismissing Oogway’s decision as a flaw...but Po still manages to convince them wrong by working for it.  

(From left) Viper, Monkey, Mantis,
Shifu, Tigress and Crane

The animation is stunning – the way the characters have been created, the way the stunts have been shown, the swift moves and the stylish action. The animals of the Furious Five are a tribute to the five styles of Chinese martial arts. The lead character being a panda gives scope for slapstick humour but no other animal seems to fir that role. The vocal work is excellent, in particular Jack Black (I’d say it is better than most of his acting performances too!). Look out for the scenes where Po trains, and not to forget the (melodramatic) showdown between Lung and Po.

Tai Lung

Filled with humour, there is not a single dull moment in Kung fu Panda. The message might be clichéd, but the presentation matters too. With this animation, vocal work and action sequences, this one is a sure-shot entertainer!

My Rating: 4/5
Rotten Tomatoes rating: 87%

Inferno (2016)

Director: Ron Howard

Screenplay: David Koepp (based on the novel by Dan Brown)

Cast: Tom Hanks, Felicity Jones, Irrfan Khan

Music: Hans Zimmer

Time: 121 minutes

Bottom-line: Faithful to the book; in other words, equally horrible

Humanity is the disease; Inferno is the cure…

The third Robert Langdon novel to be made into a film, Inferno continues to do what the previous two films did – ruin the book (if the novel isn’t terrible as is!). Tom Hanks reprises his role as Langdon, and alongside him star Felicity Jones, Irrfan Khan, Omar Sy and Ben Foster. This is also the third collaboration between Howard, Koepp, Hanks and Zimmer.

Florence: Professor Robert Langdon (Hanks) finds himself in a hospital. The doctor tending to him, Sienna Brooks (Jones) says that he is suffering from a head trauma, courtesy a bullet grazing his head. He is unable to recall anything from the past 48 hours. Just then a female assassin tries to kill Langdon but Sienna escapes with him to her apartment. After cleaning up, Langdon finds a Faraday pointer among his belongings, which shows a modified map of Botticelli’s painting of hell. We learn that a billionaire named Zobrist (Foster) has taken drastic measures to curb the world’s population, by spreading a virus, and that he has left a trail of clues based on Dante’s Inferno to track it down. Meanwhile the WHO and another secret organisation, headed by Harry Sims (Khan) is also after the pointer and Langdon. Will the virus be released? The clock, is ticking…

 

Hanks as Langdon

Having written some amazing screenplays for Panic Room and Jurassic Park, why did Koepp write one for a Dan Brown book?! While it is a more-or-less faithful adaptation, a lot of my friends and myself found the movie far worse than the book. The ending is altered here (the book’s climax is far better), and the last half hour seems very hurried. The story as such has several plot holes I feel; I mean if Brown goes to such lengths to make sure his history is right, then he can do some work to get the logic of the stories right as well. I also did not find the need of the discussion between Dr. Sinskey and Langdon about their past… it is not related to anything going on at all. Then of course there are the clichés in all Langdon novels – a far younger female partner, who always is a prodigy, the last-minute escapes, the assassin working for some secret organisation… just the names seem to be different!

 

Jones as Sienna

Tom Hanks is one guy whom I believe, can never give a bad performance, irrespective of the role/theme/story. In his third movie where he plays the professor, he gives the best he can for such a role. Age and injuries seem to be the last things to worry about, as he ever so easily escapes assassins and cops and runs around from the country to country. The highlight I’d say, is Irrfan Khan. With about thirty minutes of screen time, he makes the most of it with enough sarcasm and dry humour…and some surprises too.

 

Irrfan Khan as Harry Sims

Hans Zimmer’s score is excellent, as always. The cinematography is usually of a good level in Howard’s films but here however, it becomes bad, particularly towards the climax. While the acting is worth watching, the story is not...whether you liked the book or not. In short, the film is not worth your money.

My Rating: 2/5

Rotten Tomatoes rating: 24%

Te3n (2016)

English translation: Three

Director: Ribhu Dasgupta

Story: Suresh Nai, Ritesh Shah, Bijesh Jayarajan

Cast: Amitabh Bachchan, Vidya Balan, Nawazuddin Siddiqui

Music: Clinton Cerejo

Time: 136 minutes

Bottom-line: Well-crafted suspense thriller

Having seen Big B in Pink, my friend suggested I watch another of his wonderful recent solo performances: that of John Biswas in Te3n. Co-starring Vidya Balan and Nawazuddin Siddiqui, this is the story of how one man traces the kidnapper of his granddaughter…eight tears after the incident.

A priest seeking redemption; a police officer seeking justice; a grandfather seeking answers…

John Biswas (Bachchan) is a 70-year-old man who visits the police station regularly, desperate to find the kidnapper and murderer of his eight-year-old granddaughter Angela, eight years ago. Police inspector Sarita (Balan) wants to help him but is clueless herself. Biswas however, continues to gather his own evidence carries out an investigation. John approaches Father Martin (Siddiqui) for help; he was the inspector in charge of Angela’s case. Disappointed at not having solved it, he converted to a priest. Things take a turn when another boy, Ronnie, is kidnapped, and the modus operandi for this is exact in every way to the Angela case. Determined to catch the criminal this time, Sarita puts her full enthusiasm in the investigation, compelling Martin to help. Will they find the kidnapper who caused so much misery for 8 long years?

 

Big B as John

While Big B has enough experience in his career to play any sort of role, he seems most convincing as that on an old man, be it in Black, Piku, Pink or Te3n. Playing a man stuck in the oblivion of his own troubles, I like the way he is shown fighting a lone battle; listening to the tapes over and over, making a big issue out of every iota of a clue, the determination to catch the criminal… and the best part is he shocks you even more in the last twenty minutes of the film. Nawazuddin Siddiqui – even in Kahaani– seems to have a special ability to play a role of a cop. Despite his “disguise” as a priest, the way he renders his lines and his body language are quite authentic as to how an officer would do so. Vidya Balan doesn’t exactly play an action heroine, but I like the power she brings to her role as Sarita. Whether her theories are right or wrong, she certainly puts forth compelling arguments.

 

Siddiqui as Father Martin

The story’s climax was certainly unexpected for me. While it ties up all loose ends, it may seem like an over-complicated plot. To tell why would let out spoilers, but whether or not such a complex scheme is well thought out is up to the viewer to decide. A keen watch is certainly required to spot out all the hints; the narrative structure is deliberately confusing. However, there is no unnecessary drama, no fight scenes or such; in that aspect it is quite clean and crisp.

 

Balan as Sarita

While the plot might seem convoluted, it is certainly entertaining. Amitabh Bachchan is superb as John, and Siddiqui and Balan have aptly supported him. Join Big B as he goes on a quest to find the kidnapper, in this crime thriller.

My Rating: 3.5/5

Swiss Army Man (2016)

Directors: Daniel Scheiner, Daniel Kwan

Story: Daniel Scheiner, Daniel Kwan

Cast: Paul Dano, Daniel Radcliffe

Music: Robert McDowell, Andy Hull

Time: 96 minutes

Bottom-line: Non-stop fun… but storyline needs work

This comedy-adventure film starring Daniel “Harry Potter” Radcliffe and Paul Dano takes a new look at the survivor film genre. Swiss Army Man is the story of two men trying to find home from a deserted island, but unlike what you expect, this film has tons of comedy and brings out some really good acting from both leads.

Hank (Dano) is a man marooned on an island… who is about to hang himself. Just then he sees a body (Radcliffe) wash up on the shore. He immediately goes and tries to revive it but to no avail. As the tide washes the corpse away, Hank notices that the body propels itself by farting. Hank uses this body as a jet ski and rides across the ocean, landing on a mainland shore but with no civilisation in sight. That night Hank realises that he can use the corpse as a (seemingly everlasting) source of water. The body finally starts to talk and assumes the name Manny. Hank teaches Manny everything about the world and uses the body as a multipurpose tool kit: from storing water, to firing stuff and what not. The adventures these two share on their way home is what the film is about.

This is the first film I am seeing Radcliffe perform in a non-Potter role, and I am quite impressed; the 26-year-old seems to have gained a lot of acting tips after the 8 movies. Initially he plays just a lifeless human, but later he plays the role of an adult with an innocent child-like mentality. He is oblivious to the way people talk and behave. Slowly he begins to learn about life, death and love, before falling in love with a woman on Hank’s phone. I like the way his lines have been written: funny at times and at the same time philosophical. The scene where the bear attacks Hank is one to look out for. Paul Dano is one actor who never seems to have very few prominent lead roles, and this one is surely one of his best. I loved his acting especially at the end, when they interview him on TV. Though I feel Radcliffe and Dano are an unlikely duo, and the chemistry is not as much as say, Tatum and Hill in 21 and 22 Jump Street, the individual performances are superb.

 

Dano as Hank (back) and Radcliffe as Manny

There is a lot of humour: clean and dirty jokes. However, the story is not that good. I was surprised to see a comedy film in the survivor genre but wasn’t happy with the way the film ended. The “fantasy” elements – Manny’s superpowers – helped to add to the fun as well, but then most of the humour seems to thrive on that.

Swiss Army Man is a fun movie but not worth paying for. The acting is pretty much the only standout, and the comedy depends on your taste. Lots of laughs guaranteed, but an average film on the whole.

My Rating: 3/5

Rotten Tomatoes rating: 67%

Pink (2016)

Director: Aniruddha Roy Chowdhury

Story: Aniruddha Roy Chowdhury, Shoojit Sircar, Ritesh Shah

Cast: Amitabh Bachchan, Taapsee Pannu, Kirti Kulhari, Angad Bedi, Andrea Tariang

Music: Shantanu Moitra, Faiza Mujahid, Anupam Roy

Time: 136 minutes

Bottom-line: A clean film, and highly entertaining

 Amitabh Bachchan finds himself in top form in this courtroom drama, Pink. Co-starring Taapsee Pannu, Kirti Kulhari, Angad Bedi, Andrea Tariang in the lead roles, with Angad Bedi and Piyush Mishra in the supporting roles, the film addresses several social issues prevailing in India today, and in the process offers a superbly made drama, arguably one of the best films of 2016.

“We must learn to protect the boys…not the girls.”

The film starts off with a group of boys hurrying away in a car, with one of them bleeding profusely; there is some talk about a girl called Minal. Meanwhile in South Delhi, three girls - Minal Arora (Taapsee), Falak Ali (Kirti) and Andrea (Andrea Tariang) are independent working women living together in an apartment. We get to know that the girls were at a party one night with three boys – one of them the nephew of a politician – and as things went out of hand, Minal had smashed a bottle upon one guy’s eye. The boys file an FIR against the girls, labelling them as prostitutes and charging Minal with “Attempt to Murder”.

That’s when we see Deepak Sehgal (Bachchan) – who is pretty much a creepy stalker in the first hour or so – reveal his true colours. A retired lawyer suffering from bipolar disorder, he decides to (suit up and) help the girls fight against their incredible powerful opponents. How does he do it?

 

Bachchan as Deepak

The issue of female safety has always been a hot topic in India, particularly after the Nirbhaya incident. Apart from that, related topics like females’ dressing sense, their independence, their behaviour also come up often. Pink has such a solid storyline that it manages to give a heads-up to all of these. As Deepak’s character points out in his “Girls’ Safety Manual”, why is it that boys can live independently but girls cannot? Why is it implied that when a girl smiles and chats in a friendly manner to boys, she is “asking for it”? Why is it a “crime” if girls drink but merely a “health hazard” if boys do? As these questions ring in your ears, you cannot help but applaud and cheer as Bachchan delivers these lines (whether or not these issues are actually solved is a different matter, but at least you can put some thought into it after watching the movie!).

There is enough screen time inside the court for Pink to be categorised as a courtroom drama. While a lot of Indian films have scenes with lawyers fighting over an issue (mostly with the hero being wrongly accused!), this one was actually effective in providing the thrills. The way Deepak – ever so calmly – finds faults and loopholes in the arguments, the way he sarcastically and humourously proves his points, and not to forget the way he brings out the bitter truth in today’s reality is superbly scripted and filmed.

(From left) Andrea as Andrea, Taapsee as Minal
and Kirti as Falak

This is easily Bachchan’s best solo performance in a long time. I love the way his character is developed: from a silent man just observing the events around him, to a lawyer fighting a seemingly impossible case. Those lines he delivers have the “Big B” effect… and that’s why the message is so clear. The three girls have all done outstandingly well. Their expressions and body language in the courtroom, as they are verbally accused over and over again for soliciting, makes you want to empathise with them.

If you’re a Big B fan, stop whatever you are doing, and watch Pink. To all those wanting a clean, powerful film, watch Pink. This drama will surely be one to remember.

My Rating: 4.5/5