Ant Man and Alternative Movies That Never Were

After the hassle it took to eventually put Ant-Man on to the big screen, it's interesting to consider how different some films would have been if we had received the original planned versions.

It dawned on me recently that while I am a self proclaimed geek who is incredibly passionate about both films and comics, I still haven't found the time to watch Marvel's Ant-Man which was released over a year ago. I'm not particularly anxious about watching the film and I haven't surreptitiously been putting it off, I just simply haven't found the time to watch it yet. I am of course excited to see the film, but even before I watch it I have to confess that I am fascinated with the production of it. It's odd to think about the fact that Ant-Man was a project that started back in 2003, and yet it has only just made it to the big screen. It was picked up at roughly the same time Jon Favreau was hired as the Iron Man director, which as we all know has had three solo films since, so why did it take so long for Ant-Man to make it to the big screen?

Up until a certain point the film was going to be directed by Edgar Wright, famous for The Cornetto Trilogy, who was also eagerly penning the screenplay. He was incredibly passionate about the project, but it soon prevailed that he was not being given proper creative control and so couldn't make the film he wanted to. As Wright's vision was slowly replaced by studio input he eventually left at the last minute, taking lead actor Simon Pegg with him. His film was set to bounce between present day and the sixties, showing both the original Hank Pym and the new Scott Lang, but supposedly the studio wanted something different which caused trouble for the project and lead to Peyton Reed taking over as director. Personally, I would love to have seen Edgar Wright's original version of the film with Simon Pegg in the lead role; I would argue that his visual style, witty writing and respect for the source material would have made a fantastic film for a truly intriguing comic book character. After thinking about this for some time it soon provoked thoughts about alternative versions of films that were meant to happen but then were changed to become the films we know today.

There are of course famous stories from across Hollywood about alternative films that never were, alternative projects that have achieved cult status. Most notably the original plan of Martin Scorsese directing Schindler's List and Steven Spielberg directing Cape Fear, before essentially doing a straight swap. It's that sort of the thing I find exciting to think about. How different would Scorsese's Schindler's List have been? Would the red coat still be in the film and go on to become the iconic image we know today? The list of possible differences is vast and intriguing, which is why I thought I would take this opportunity to discuss the alternative films that never were. 

I am Legend (2007)

Production for this film initially began in early 1997, with Arnold Schwarzenegger in the lead role and Ridley Scott as director. Writing had already begun for the film, but the screenplay advanced so the plot dealt with more horror elements, which subsequently sent the budget for the film through the roof. The commercial viability of the film was questioned, resulting in the film being put on the back bench by March of 1998. The version of this film we received was nothing particularly special, I know a lot of people like it and it is generally held as a crowd pleaser but I'd be lying if I said I didn't find it incredibly annoying and self important, but I'm not too sure how much different it would have been with Ridley Scott in the director's chair. Don't get me wrong, I think Ridley Scott is wonderful and has made some of the best films of all time, but I'm not sure we need to see his version of I am Legend. 

Spider-Man (2002)

While there were a couple of different people attached to a live action Spidey project in the nineties, such as David Fincher, the most notable name was James Cameron. Thankfully we did not receive this version of Spider-Man because Cameron's vision was completely obscure and would not have suited. In his original outline for the film, not only was the planning grossly over budget, but there was notable use of profanity, and a love making scene that took place on the top of the Brooklyn Bridge. It's a nightmare to think about, but in reality all we had to do was wait for Sam Raimi to step into the spotlight. Don't get me wrong I like some of James Cameron's work, but I don't think he's the genius that many people cite him to be, and because I love the character of Spider-Man so much I would rather not see him placed in the hands of the man responsible for Titanic and Avatar. 

Alien 3 (1992) 

If you have ever seen Alien 3 then you know already what a rubbish film it was, and you may be aware of the terrible time director David Fincher had making it. Cuts and reshoots were made without Fincher being present, and so the film that was eventually put to the big screen was not the film Fincher wanted to make. But there was an original version of the film written by Vincent Ward that has now achieved cult status as one of the best films never made. If you research further into the topic there are certain places where you can find original sketches and notes for Vincent Ward's Alien 3, which details the plot for a completely different film altogether, set on a wooden planet inhabited by monk like figures, with a lot of rich religious imagery. It is a film that sounds utterly brilliant, and yet fans will never get to see it, which is a tremendous shame as it means we're left wishing the story had ended after Aliens. 

Watchmen (2009) part I 

Ultimately this project was let down by director Zack Snyder, he's widely renowned as a visual director but he absolutely failed as his own trade with this film, but originally different directors were set to make the big screen adaption of Alan Moore's classic graphic novel. First there was the news that Terry Gilliam was attached to the project, at least in the very early stages, which would have presented the audience with a different film altogether. Gilliam is one whose films have the perfect balance between being obscure, visually impressive pieces, but also intelligent and weighted enough to deal with heavy questions and themes However, he is also widely known as someone who cannot stick to a budget. So after story boarding the film and realising there was no way to adequately reduce the source material, there were concerns as to whether the film they would make would remain faithful to the source material. His version of the alternate eighties and the world of masked vigilantes would have been difficult to get through, but it would have been an unquestionable work of genius. After toying with the idea of making Watchmen into a film and then a five part series for television, Gilliam eventually left the project after speaking to Alan Moore and asking him how he would go about making the film, and Moore's response was "Easy. I wouldn't."

Watchmen (2009) part II

After Gilliam (previously mentioned) left the project in the nineties there was a gap left for a new director. Stepping into the role was Paul Greengrass, director of Captain Phillips and the second and third installments of the Bourne series. I think Greengrass came as close to making the film as he could have been, having actually been on set and seen with various props from the film, so it was something of a sudden surprise that he left the set before the cameras were rolling. I personally feel that Greengrass would have delivered the best version of Watchmen as he has proven countless times that he can balance action and drama perfectly, without distorting the pace or removing substance. It would have been an interesting project and may not necessarily have been as graphic as Snyder's version, but I think it would have made a much better film with more substance and character. Personally, I think Watchmen is an unfilmable piece of literature, but I would rather see a talented filmmaker make a decent attempt, rather than watching an immature director ruin one of the greatest pieces of art this world has ever seen.

The Hobbit film series (2012-2014)

I know fans will hate me for this and I can already tell I'm about to get a storm of hate mail from Peter Jackson fans (again) but I didn't like The Hobbit trilogy. I think Peter Jackson showed that he should have left Middle Earth alone and left it for someone else to take the reigns. Personally I much prefer the sound of the two Hobbit films that Guillermo Del Toro was originally planning. He is one of the best minds working in cinema at the moment and his imagination has no boundaries, particularly when it comes to fantasy films, so I think it would have been better to place the project in Del Toro's hands. Of course he was still involved in the films and receives a screenplay writing credit for them, but that's not enough. If you've ever seen his original sketches for his films you know that Del Toro is a genius and creates such beautiful creatures and settings with a real passion for practical effects, so I truly believe he would have made better films of the source material than Jackson did. At least, if anything, they would have been better disciplined than the Bilbo Baggy trilogy we actually received.

The Lovely Bones (2009)

This project was in the works for a very long time before getting off the ground, and then it resulted in a film that was remarkably unremarkable. Peter Jackson was the eventual director to stand at the helm of the film, thinking that he could appropriately apply his experimental approach to fantasy worlds to this project that explores death and the afterlife. I admire Jackson as a filmmaker, but this film is hugely problematic and is by no means his best work. Originally the film was going to be directed by the fantastically talented Lynne Ramsay, who famously bought the rights to the film and started the project before the book was finished, and then swiftly left the project upon reading the book in its entirety and being hugely disappointed with it. It's interesting because of course Ramsay's version of the film would have been better, but we are lucky that she left when she did because otherwise we would not have the brilliant film adaption of We Need to Talk About Kevin, one of the best films of modern years. It was a big sacrifice, but one we should all be glad of.

Total Recall (1990)

This is another alternative film that has gained cult status as one of the best never made, but for me this is one, much like Lynne Ramsay's The Lovely Bones, that was a sacrifice well made. Originally the film was to be directed by David Cronenberg, which is understandable considering his back catalogue and his ruthless directing style. It would have been a completely different film, with more focus on the main character who was to be rather like Walter Mitty in the sense that reality is slipping from his grasp, albeit in a more sinister fashion. However after Cronenberg's vision was slowly replaced by the producer's interests it was a mutual understanding that Cronenberg should leave, thus allowing Paul Verhoeven to enter the director's chair, whilst replacing lead actor William Hurt with Arnold Schwarzenegger. It is not a shame that Cronenberg left the project, because it allowed him to be signed to another project and make his masterpiece: The Fly. Another sacrifice well made in my opinion. I don't necessarily have any issues with the version of Total Recall we received, I just think such a cerebral film would have been perfect for David Cronenberg. 

Wolverine (2013)

While I don't have any issues with this film per say, I think it would have been really interesting to see the original film intended for release that was directed by Darren Aronofsky. With a clear passion for the source material written by Frank Miller and Chris Claremont, and a guarantee that the film would be hard edged, it looked as though this film was going to be one of the best comic book films of recent years. However, just three months into production, Aronofsky had to leave the project due to personal circumstances. As I said, I don't have a problem with the film we received, I just think it would have been better if Aronofsky had stayed with the project and made the film we all wanted to see. 

I'm aware that there are many other famous films that were never made, but these are just a select few for me that sound the most interesting. They have all achieved a status, for good or bad, and so it is interesting to consider just how different they could have been.

Of course there are others that have grown infamous status in Hollywood as films that nearly happened. Most Notably there were plans for a third Batman film from Joel Schumacher, with Courtney Love as Harley Quinn and Nicholas Cage as The Scarecrow. Make of that what you will, but personally I think the image of Cage as The Scarecrow is terrifying enough and does not require the use of fear toxin to enhance it.

Although the projects mentioned above do seem interesting what we must consider is that if they had gone ahead we would have missed out on some fantastic films. If Lynne Ramsay had stuck with The Lovely Bones then we wouldn't have We Need to Talk About Kevin, if David Cronenberg had stayed with Total Recall then we wouldn't have The Fly, which is for me one of the best horror films of all time. So we may not have the Ant-Man that we all want to see, or the Watchmen we all know would have been better, or even the Lovely Bones that would have been less problematic, but I'm happier to say that we live in a world where the films that we all know and love exist, as opposed to a world where films we would have had anyway are just that little bit better.

Although this still does not mean I have forgiven Zack Snyder for Watchmen. I am still waiting for a written apology.

First Thoughts of Star Trek Beyond [SPOILER FREE]

It's time to dust off your Spock ears, iron your blue, red or yellow uniform, and set your Phasers to stun, because the third installment of the current Star Trek film series has hit cinemas. 

I was quite busy over this weekend just gone, and by busy I mean quite badly ill, so I didn't manage to do an awful lot other than consume copious amounts of water and pray that whatever demon was inhabiting my stomach would decide to leave. I did however manage to catch one of the first screenings of the latest Star Trek film on Friday evening. So I thought I would take this chance just to share a few quick thoughts about the film as it was one of the most important films of the year, considering not only the hype but also the fact it's celebrating the 50th anniversary of Star Trek.

I admit this post is a little rushed, and that is purely because I have spent most of this weekend in bed, feeling as though my stomach was about to give birth to one of the creatures in Alien, so to make some sort of sense of it I've formed a colour system. I've compiled a list of thoughts I had after seeing the film and I've expanded on each of them, but to make it easier to understand I have created something of a traffic light system. So, the ones listed in red are the elements I didn't particularly like, the ones listed in orange/ amber are the elements I found questionable but I'm willing to overlook them, and finally those listed in green are the elements that I liked. I thought it best to put them in that order, not only because it corresponds with actual traffic lights and thus satisfies my compulsive need for order, but also because it deals with the negatives first so I have more time to focus on the positives, because at the end of the day I did enjoy this film. I wouldn't hail it as a masterpiece, and it is nowhere near as good as the first two films of the reboot series, but there is still a lot to admire and enjoy.

Rushed exposition - I know in films there is never really an easy way to allude the audience to the appropriate knowledge needed to understand the film fully, but parts of this film felt not only rushed, but also rather lazy. The back story of this film's villain is delivered in such a clunky way, it felt as though they were struggling for ideas. However the most annoying piece of exposition came at the very beginning of the film in which the captain's log acts in something of a "previously on Star Trek..." fashion, skimming over important details and listing events that I actually would have preferred to see on screen, either in more films or in a montage. I'm glad we still learned the details we needed to, but it wasn't delivered in the most fulfilling way.

Focus on action - This is something I expected of this film, just purely because J.J. Abrams has left the director's chair and has been replaced by Justin Lin, famed for his recent contributions of the Fast & Furious franchise. Now Justin Lin is something of an action director and doesn't really handle substance well, which is a problem after J.J. Abrams started this film series with two films that had the perfect balance. Don't get me wrong, this is absolutely the best film I have ever seen Justin Lin direct, but there were times when I found that the action sequences dragged on for too long and became quite tedious. It got to the point where I actually wanted certain sequences to end because I was bored of them and wanted to return to the plot. In some ways Justin Lin has failed as his own trade, because he is widely renowned as an action director, and yet he didn't manage to present any action sequences that were better than those we saw in the first two films.

Frequently predictable - When I go to see a new film, particularly one in a science fiction franchise that means a lot to me, I want it to offer something original. I want to experience something new, something unique that is a surprise. So I'm disheartened to say that there were multiple elements of this film that were predictable, too many plot details or moments that I could see way before they appeared on screen, which did take away some of the magic. I don't want to give away any plot details or spoilers, but I will say that in particular there is the use of a Beastie Boys song that was borderline infuriating because it was so obvious it was going to be used.

Obscure pacing - This was one of the key issues I found in Star Trek Beyond because the balance between action and substance is a little dissatisfying. The first third of the film moves at a clunky pace, so it feels like we're just plodding along with exposition and some rather pointless character development that doesn't actually result in anything significant. Admittedly the second and third acts of the film pick the pace up and are more consistent, but there was still too much rushing and dragging (sorry for the Whiplash reference) which did become irritating.

Less of J.J's visual style - This is the old case of not missing something until it's taken away from you, and it's going to sound odd because we've all complained about this at some point, but I did kind of miss the lens flares. I know some people really had a problem with them in the first two films, and I admit they are overused to the extreme, but I guess I could have done with a few thrown in for good measure, just to make the Enterprise look a little more shiny. No big deal though.

Music composition - Again, this isn't really a big deal, but I didn't find the score for this film to be as good as the previous two. I remember when I saw the first two films how the music really crept up on me, particularly with the first film I remember getting goosebumps as the music played at the very beginning. With this film it felt out of place at times and was inappropriately timed, but also felt as though it was just there for the sake of it. Certain sequences have musical accompaniment but don't necessarily need it, so the music is thrown in without improving upon silence.

It didn't necessarily feel like a film - This sounds a little broad, granted, but bear with me. I am not alone in saying this, but honestly this felt more like an episode of a television show, as opposed to a film. I think it was mainly the story line and the production design that made this feel like it belonged on television. The plot itself and the trajectory of the narrative was simple enough that it felt like something you'd see in the original series because it was basic and cliched enough to fill an hour slot on a t.v. schedule. Furthermore the minimalist set design evokes memories of the alien planets present in the original series, so it would not have looked out of place on the small screen on a Saturday evening. I wouldn't necessarily say this is a negative point, it was more just a thought I had during and indeed after the screening.

Screenplay - One of my main concerns for this film was the screenplay, because the trailers were so focused on the action, it seemed as though this film was about to waste the writing talents of Simon Pegg. Thankfully however, the screenplay for this film is genuinely fantastic. Not only is there a lot of humour and witty dialogue between characters, but it also suits the characters perfectly. If there is one thing this film absolutely manages to achieve, it's paying homage to the original series and honouring the source material. Simon Pegg is such a big fan of the series, and I think it shows clearly in his work for this film as he has managed to co-write a screenplay that fits perfectly into the Star Trek universe. It has the right balance of humour and sincerity to make this so much more than just an action flick.

Character development - I think this was one of my favourite elements of this film, because if you push aside the spectacle and the excitement, Star Trek was always about the people, and the relationships they have with each other. In the previous two films we saw a lot of Kirk and Spock, which was brilliant, but in this film we see a lot of more the relationship between Bones and Spock, which was actually rather refreshing. Thus far we hadn't seen an awful lot of Bones, so it was good to see him getting some proper screen time and to see him interacting with other characters because it allows us to learn more about him and to sympathise with him.

Screen time for more characters - As I said before, the first two films were primarily focused on Kirk and Spock, so I was pleased to see that this film is very comprehensive. Even since the first film we've all firmly accepted that the new cast is brilliant, but it wasn't until this film we get to see more of them. Already I've mentioned the increase in screen time for Bones, but I was also very pleased to see more of Simon Pegg as Scotty and more of Anton Yelchin as Chekov. It was of particular importance that we see more of Chekov after the recent news of Yelchin's passing. He was a very talented young actor, and it was a pleasure to see him have a more active role on his last voyage as a member of the Enterprise.

Less sexualisation - This is arguably one of the most important elements of this film. It's not difficult to see that this film has taken a step back to focus on what the original series always strived for: equality. In this film there were no unnecessary shots of the cast in their underwear, nor were there any scenes of Kirk picking up women or in bed with female aliens. It seems as though they've allowed the character of Kirk to mature out of his pubescent phase and return to the character we once knew in the original series. Incidentally I've just started to watch the original series and I came across the episode entitled Charlie X in which we see Kirk teaching the young character of Charlie how to respect women and to treat them as they want to be treated. That is the Kirk we all want to see on screen, and I think we saw more of that in this film than we did in the previous two films.

A strong female character - I cannot stress how important this was to me. I am loving the fact that at the moment more and more films are depicting bad-ass, intelligent women who are more than the match for the male leads. It happened in Star Wars Episode VII, it happened in Captain America: Civil War, and now it happened in this film too with the character of Jaylah, played brilliantly by Sofia Boutella. In the midst of all of the men fighting and hatching plans, it was wonderful to see a strong female character who could fight and defend herself, and whom was also a technological wizard who is extremely intelligent. More writers need to realise that these are the characters we want to see, and I am so glad that this film introduced this character to us. Unequivocally one of the best elements of this film.

I think I could best summarise by saying that I thoroughly enjoyed watching this film and there is an awful lot to like, however the previous two films are still marginally better. This felt like more of a popcorn flick combined with a t.v. episode, whereas the previous two films felt like big and unabashed science fiction epics that were more suited to the big screen. I had my doubts, and to an extent I was correct, but this film was absolutely ten times better than I feared it would be. Some would argue it was one film too many, but I would completely disagree, it is a worthy addition to the franchise and has kept the opportunities open for another installment. While this film attempted to deliver more action, I think it was far more successful at developing the characters and respecting the original series, to deliver a proper crowd-pleaser than is a real advocate for equality.

My experience of watching 'Trainwreck'

Upon finally watching one of 2015's biggest comedies, I find myself feeling like a prize idiot for ever doubting it. 

Until about two weeks ago, I had never experienced any of Any Schumer's work. I knew of her and had seen short clips from various interviews, but I hadn't witnessed any of her acting or writing. That is until I sat down late on a Thursday night to watch the 2015 comedy Trainwreck, written by and starring Schumer. Now I have to admit at this juncture that I have a tendency to surreptitiously judge a film before I have seen it, a crime that I am not proud to admit to but it is an action that many of us partake in. In particular, I tend to be more critical of modern comedies, simply because I have seen a large amount of them and have subsequently been disappointed by a high percentage. It is because of this bad habit, that I feel I owe Amy Schumer an apology.

You see I sat down to watch Trainwreck after quite a shit day, I was in an awful mood and I was looking for something that was easy to watch, required little attention and would probably test my patience. My expectations were watertight; I was expecting to see a film that was mildly funny, a few chuckles here and there but no real laugh-out-loud moments, all leading to a sloppy resolution before the end credits hit and I'm left with an overwhelming feeling that I have wasted my time.  To put it bluntly, I wasn't expecting the film to be very good. And yet, I found that there is actually a lot to like about Trainwreck, and while I sat in anticipation preparing myself for disappointment, it prevails that I thoroughly enjoyed it. 

Far from being the infuriating waste of time that I was expecting to witness, what I instead experienced was a genuinely well written comedy that was strangely melancholic and actually very subversive. Even from the opening minutes of the film the tone is set perfectly with a rather dry sense of humour that the screenplay persistently capitalises on throughout the film. It not only attempts to entertain the audience and make them laugh, it also provides quite intriguing social commentary. From the outset the protagonist is introduced as an easy going professional who make a habit of getting drunk and stoned frequently and whom sleeps with people on a regular basis without wanting to commit to a serious relationship, however the film doesn't necessarily seek to demonise this lifestyle. Instead it feels more as though the film is intent on showing both sides of the coin, by showing how for the individual this lifestyle is functional and enjoyable, but this may change when someone else's feelings come into the equation, and when personal life trickles into the workplace.

My concerns were largely placed in the tone of the film as I feared it may be similar to many other films and simply attempt to make the audience laugh by any means necessary, and yet this film does have a darker side. There are of course countless comedic moments that are successful, but thankfully when the film moves onto more serious topics they are dealt with in a mature and sincere manner. I found that the film really has a beating heart, and we see a vulnerability in the characters, which for me made them seem more human and more relatable. This was not solely due to the writing, although the writing is superb, I would instead draw your attention to Amy Schumer's performance. As someone who was uninitiated to Schumer's acting I can safely say she is a very talented comedic actor, who adapts very well to a multitude of scenarios. In this film we see Schumer as a quick talking confident woman who is a great source of humour both through dialogue and slapstick elements, but then we also see a weakness to her. It was wonderful to see a fantastic comedic performance, but this was counterbalanced very well by serious acting that showed real human emotion and a genuine concern for other people.

Even from my first viewing of this film, it soon became clear that it is a comedy with layers. On the surface there are the usual suspects of slapstick comedy, excessive swearing, graphic sexual discussion and playing off of cultural stereotypes, but if you peel back the layers there is so much more happening with this film. At times it is actually quite thought provoking as the films seeks to provide social commentary, and subversively mock certain elements of modern life. The protagonist works as a journalist for a lads magazine, and during the scenes in which we see her in the workplace it is clear that the portrayal of this environment is almost a pastiche because of how exaggerated but honest it is. The behaviour of her work colleagues and her manager is cringe worthy because as they discuss potential ideas of articles it is glaringly obvious that the shit they're talking about is actually what people want to read. It is elements such as this that provide some of the more intelligent comedy, as Amy's relationships with people and her actions are used to satirically explore other elements of modern life in quite intense detail, such as sexuality, relationships, expectations of women and adults, and the process of becoming a socially accepted adult. 

One of the key elements that made this film really stand out is the characters. When I first started watching this film it reminded me very much of the Bridget Jones films, and I wasn't particularly happy about that because it evoked memories of just how annoying I found those films to be. However, Trainwreck manages to move away from this because it has genuine character development. Bridget Jones has infuriating one dimensional characters that stay exactly the same and basically play off of cultural stereotypes, with a real smug self destructive nature thrown in to make the perfect cocktail of bad writing, but Trainwreck sets up its characters in a particular way and places all of them on a trajectory. The characters we see actually go on a journey and have to face the consequences of their actions, so while there is still a self destructive element to this film, it's delivered with the utmost sincerity so the characters are conflicted and aren't simply polarised into good and bad. Bridget Jones essentially presents caricatures whom would be hated by everyone if they genuinely existed, whereas Trainwreck presents actual people, three dimensional and functional humans who the audience can relate to and sympathise with.  

I think what hit me most about this film is just how relatable it was. Personally I can't sympathise with the character that smokes weed excessively and sleeps around because that's pretty much the antithesis of me, but I could relate to the character of Aaron, played brilliantly by Bill Hader. I didn't relate to him as the perfect heart throb, because again that really isn't me, but I did relate to him as someone who was simply hoping for love to come his way. Throughout the film we see him fall hopelessly in love with someone who isn't at all adjusted to relationships, and as a result he spends a lot of time hoping for them to feel the same way and for them to take it as seriously as he is. And while it may not be pleasant to think about, I think we have all been in that place at some point in our lives; hoping for someone to feel the same way about us as we feel about them. So to see Aaron trying so hard to make a relationship work, to a pitch of near lunacy, was actually quite relatable after recent events, having unfortunately found myself in a similar struggle before.

When I first watched this film, I admit I wasn't exactly in a good place. I'd recently reached a rather abrupt and unpleasant end to a relationship, and there were some similarities between what I experienced and what the character of Aaron experiences in the film. The immaturity in Amy's behaviour, her habit of fooling around with guys without considering their feelings and her inability to take a relationship seriously was all too familiar to me, so the film really hit me quite hard because it was tackling real life situations that I and many people I know have encountered. While Bridget Jones shows us an almost science fiction like world in which utterly repugnant, one dimensional arseholes are somehow desired by others, Trainwreck tackles genuine problems that are faced in modern relationships. This character that could in an almost sociopathic manner, play with people like toys and then run away from responsibility was uncanny. To see Amy physically unable to cope with an adult relationship and simply resort to fooling around with people regardless of their feelings is something that many people are on the receiving end of, so the film felt as though it knew exactly where its footing was, and its roots were so deeply embedded in reality it was alarming how it accurate it was. There are segments of dialogue that read almost exactly the same as certain conversations I and many other have had before, so it was clear that this film was delivering a frank and sincere message through a brutally honest narrative.

It did become increasingly difficult to watch this film as it depicts a man who is putting in effort and trying to make a relationship work, when it's obvious that it's doomed to fail if the effort does not come from both members of the relationship. It was a scenario I was familiar with, and while it is something that has been explored in comedy numerous times, I felt that this film managed to bring something new to the table and tackle the issue in a way that I've possibly not seen before. The arguing and the bickering evoked thoughts of my own experiences and that of my friends too, particularly as one member of the relationship is trying their hardest. I'm not about to shame anyone for their sexual proclivities, but I think it is somewhat seflish and hurtful for a person to engage in sexual activity with other people whilst they are in a relationship with someone, which is something this film explores with a degree of maturity and honesty.

If I am perfectly honest I was expecting this film to quite immature. I wrongly made assumptions that this would the typical 'pie in the face' comedy that America so often provides us with, but in reality it was an intelligent and three dimensional piece of cinema, that understands humans. So often we see comedies in which totally unlikable people treat other people in the most despicable way and yet still get their happy ending without actually changing as a person, which would not happen in reality. With Trainwreck there is a happy ending of sorts, but it's something that the characters have to work towards. The whole film is teeming with honesty and it makes it feel so much more mature, much like some of Woody Allen's earlier work in which we see actual breaks from the comedy that allow melancholia to seep through the cracks. There are moments of this film that actually reminded me of one of the famous quotes from Annie Hall in which the two main characters come to the mutual decision that their relationship is over, and the character of Alvy remarks "a relationship is like a shark, it has to constantly move forwards or it dies. And I think what we've got on our hands is a dead shark" which is such a mature thing for someone to say, to actually admit that their relationship is no longer healthy and to set about moving forwards. That is very much the tone that is present throughout the last act of Trainwreck as we see mature adults taking matters into their own hands and changing something they are not happy with, which was so refreshing to see.

It's strange, because I know I really enjoyed this film, and yet the melancholic elements that were relatable didn't ruin my experience or make me think any less of it. In all honesty I think it made the film more special to me, because at once it managed to speak directly to me as someone in a bad and similar place, and to cheer me up and lift my spirits. It was difficult to see a young man being far too magnanimous for his own good and for his feelings to get trampled on, but the film also brings a flicker of hope. The focus is not solely on dysfunctional relationships and people that make those around them miserable, it's far more focused on moving forwards as a person, focusing on yourself and doing what makes you happy. It wasn't quite as optimistic as films like Silver Linings Playbook or Little Miss Sunshine, but it was enough to make me think "yeah fuck it, it's not all bad news. Live for tomorrow and all that bollocks." And I know some people will be questioning my judgement of this film based on the timing, but I have watched it several times since and my opinion has only been enhanced.

I suppose I can summarise my argument by repeating what I said at the very beginning, I feel as though I owe Amy Schumer an apology. I sat down to watch Trainwreck with a horrible predisposition, and actually found it to be an entertaining and often emotional experience. It was not of the same low substance, lowest common denominator nonsense that largely constitutes modern comedy, but was instead the epitome of the diamond in the rough, a film that truly stands out in an otherwise bleak genre. There is one moment in particular that acts as something of a metaphor which shows this film's place in cinema, and it's a simple moment in which two of the characters sit on a famous bench with a view of the Brooklyn Bridge. While it may not mean an awful lot to many, for me it shows a changing of times, because this shot is meant to pay homage to films such as Manhattan, showing that while once New York was the territory of comedic writers such as Woody Allen, it now belongs to new writers such as Amy Schumer.

This is the time of new writers, and it is films such as Trainwreck that will stand the test of time. 

Forgetting Deadpool

We can all agree Deadpool was great, but let's not forget about other ultra violent, potty mouthed comic book movies designed for adults.

Whether you're a comic book geek like myself or not, I think it was pretty widely accepted that Deadpool was a fantastic film, and thus far it stands as one of the best films of this year. There was so much pressure for the director and the writers to get this film right because Deadpool is such a loved character among comic book geeks and he was completely ruined in a Gavin Hood film which shall go unnamed. He's so iconic to the comics as the funny, fourth wall breaking bad-ass and there were real concerns that they wouldn't be able to adequately translate this into cinema, and yet they completely smashed it out of the park and made one of the best comic book films of all time. So why would I want to forget this? Short answer: I don't. But I do want to shift the focus slightly and for us all to remember that this was not a unique film.

Here's the thing, everyone jumped on Deadpool and claimed it to be such a one of a kind film that's a completely new experience because it's a comic book film with an R rating (fifteen certificate for those of us in the UK). Everyone seemed to be so surprised and excited by the fact an R rated comic book film was a box office success, but how is this a new experience? Don't get me wrong, I think it's great that Deadpool was such a fantastic film and was received so well by cinema audiences, but we've already had quite a few R rated (or higher) comic book films that were just as good if not better. I understand that the box office figures were remarkable in this case, but I don't think Deadpool is quite the revolutionary film everyone is making it out to be. Casing point, I've taken the time to list a few popular R rated films in reverse order based on their release date.

Kingsman: The Secret Service - January 2015 (15 certificate) 

This was arguably one of the best surprises of last year. We all saw the trailers, and it didn't look like it was going to be anything particularly special, just a weird mix of James Bond and Kick-Ass. And yet, it turned out to be one the best action films of our time. Matthew Vaughn is an extremely talented director, and with Kingsman he showed us just what he can do when he's given the chance to make fast paced, gory action sequences, set amongst a hilarious screenplay with adult humour and excessive swearing. And the source material? A graphic novel brought to us by Mark Millar and Dave Gibbons.

Kick-Ass - March 2010 (15 certificate)

Matthew Vaughn and Mark Millar once again featuring as they brought us a fantastic film that had achieved something of a cult status. I can remember when this film was first released it wasn't an immediate success, but gradually people have come to accept it as a fantastic comedy and action film, and one of the most enjoyable comic book films available. The second film isn't exactly great, but the absence of Matthew Vaughn as director is where I would place the film's fundamental flaws. 

V for Vendetta - March 2006 (15 certificate)

It's surprising that so few people referenced this film around the time of Deadpool's release because it is generally considered to be a good film at the very least. It doesn't necessarily stick to the source material as strictly as some people would have liked, but then we must remember that a filmmaker's job is to utilise their own vision, not simply to copy and paste a graphic novel onto the screen. Also, when the source material is written by one of the greatest humans of all time (Alan Moore) a direct transferal is damn near impossible. This was not a comedic choice by any rate because it dealt with extremely heavy topics, but it was still accompanied by strong language and the occasional bloody fight scene, making this a mature and sophisticated adaptation.

A History of Violence - September 2005 (18 certificate)

This is one that many people may not be aware is adapted from a graphic novel written by John Wagner, famed for his contributions to Judge Dredd over the years. It's not exactly about caped heroes or vigilantes, but it is a very mature story that as the title suggests features a heavy amount of violence, among other forms of adult material. While it may not be a flashy superhero film, it is a gritty and captivating drama that created a lot of buzz around the award season, not only for director David Cronenberg who is a legend of cinema, but also for actor Viggo Mortensen whose performance in this film secured his place as one of the greatest actors of our time. This is honestly one of the best films I've ever seen, and it stands as one of the most mature adaptations of a graphic novel, and should not be underestimated. 

Sin City - June 2005 (18 certificate)

I think out of all the films mentioned so far, this is my favourite. It took the brilliant work of Frank Miller and placed it on screen in its raw form as a gritty noir thriller. Every frame of this film looks like it was taken directly from the source material, the visual style is unparalleled. It is of course over the top and violent to the extreme, but it was put to the screen by people who genuinely care about the source material, which is an extremely well written series of graphic novels that are character driven pieces of art. It couldn't have been done without the 18 certificate rating, and anything less than that would have been an insult to the source material and the work of Frank Miller. This film inspired a generation of filmmakers, and truly, there is no film quite like it. 

Blade II - March 2002 (18 certificate)

I'm aware there are three films in this series, and the first film isn't necessarily bad, I just think the second film went in a completely different direction. It took one of the more obscure Marvel properties, and placed it in the hands of Guillermo Del Toro, one of the best and most inventive minds cinema has ever known, with a real flare of creativity and a passion for horror, and they let him roam as free as he needed to. They allowed him to deliver a violent and strange horror film that really was a one off. Some of the things seen in that film can never be recreated and will never be unseen. Personally, I quite like the character of Blade and I think he deserves more of a fair chance than most people will give him, but this second film is undoubtedly his best outing thus far. 

Now I already know by this point that people reading this will be annoyed at my decision to neglect certain films, but I do so with the best intentions. Already I can hear people asking "but what about Watchmen?" and "what about 300?" and the answers to those questions are both very simple. Both of those films are directed by Zack Snyder. And subsequently both films are not up to the mark, and it's a shame because he does have a passion for the source material and is a very visual director, but with both films he failed at his own trade and made some of the worst cinema I've ever witnessed. I'm not just saying this to insult Zack Snyder, I'm saying this because I genuinely care about the source material and I wanted both films to be good. While a film enthusiast such as myself does enjoy to rant about bad films from time to time, I enjoy nothing more than to sit and write about films that I enjoy and appreciate. I really wanted to like 300 and Watchmen, but with both films Snyder proved that he is at best a visual director, and he absolutely cannot handle substance. 

Apologies for the tangent there, but as we move forwards the next question that needs answering is what's next? Well it's interesting because after the success of Deadpool it would appear that there has been something of a call to arms, with more filmmakers wanting to make R rated comic book films, either in an attempt to jump on the financial success of Deadpool or because they genuinely want to make the films that fans want. Already we've seen Zack Snyder wanting to release an R rated extended edition of Batman v Superman which could be interesting to see, and of course they've already announced a Deadpool sequel which is guaranteed to have the same rating. What's more exciting is two films that are already confirmed to have an R rating. Firstly we have an R rated animation of The Killing Joke set for release over the next couple of weeks (more to follow on this blog on a later date!) and next year we're set to have the third and last Wolverine film released, which after recent news will be R rated too. 

In the case of Wolverine I think fans are generally excited that it's set to have a higher certificate rating, and why shouldn't they be? He's a character we all love but we've never seen him in as gritty a form as we see in the comics. We've never seen him in an all out bloody film where we see him go full rage mode as an animal. In the second X-Men film we started to see a glimpse of that with his rampage around the school, but that was just a mere taster of what's to come. And there's even more excitement now it's been confirmed that the film will be a loose adaptation of the famous Old Man Logan story line from the comics, which could work with a lower rating, but we wouldn't really be seeing the real Wolverine unless it had at least a 15 certificate. Either way, I think it's set to be a better film because they're allowing the right people to make mature comic book films, and when this means one of the most popular characters gets to go out with a bang, it gives us all something to look forward to.

It's interesting because there is already talk among fans of which character will be getting an R rated film next, because it's clear they're not going to stop after a couple. I think we've finally reached a stage where the studios know and accept that comic book films are not for just for children, every once in a while it is a relief to see a mature adaptation, because people seem to forget that comics deal with genuinely weighted themes and issues. I'm not trying to suggest all comic book films should have higher ratings because obviously I still want to have fun with the family friendly films that are released, and I'm certainly not about to criticise some of the comic book films I've seen in recent years because they have been very impressive. I certainly don't want to see Quentin Tarantino's take on the Avengers any time soon! I'm merely suggesting that every once in a while it would be good to see an adult rated, mature comic book adaptation, and it looks as though the success of R rated films over the years could very well have brought about a change that will make this a reality.

The ideal scenario from here is that the right characters get R rated adaptations. Already the internet is teeming with comments, hopefully clinging to the idea that Ben Affleck might just make his solo Batman film R rated, which would be interesting to see but personally I don't think Batman would necessarily be improved by the odd jugular slicing and spurt of blood. Christopher Nolan already created terrifying scenes in The Dark Knight, all without a single drop of blood, so I don't necessarily think we need to see that side of Batman just yet. Besides, if they were to make an R rated Batman film then it would absolutely require the right story for inspiration. Personally, I would eventually like to see an R rated Arkham Asylum film, I think the twisted and disturbing images in Grant Morrison's work would be really interesting to see on the big screen. However the R rating would not be appropriate to all stories, so they would need be careful that they're not making films graphic for the sake of it.

If the decision were up to me, the first character I would tackle would be Swamp Thing. After Alan Moore completely reinvented the character and created one of the best gothic romances literature has ever seen, I think it would be incredible to see an unabashed, creepy, and just generally fucked up adaptation of Swamp Thing that is designed for a mature audience. The imagery we see in the Alan Moore run of the Swamp Thing comics is so unique and genuinely haunting, I think it would be great to see this put to the big screen by someone who knows and appreciates practical effects. I know we already had a couple of campy films in the eighties, courtesy of Wes Craven, but now that we have the technology and we have filmmakers with a genuine creative flare for comic book adaptations, I think it's high time audiences received the Swamp Thing film they deserve. 

I think I could best summarise my argument by saying that Deadpool is somewhat of a revolutionary film because it has paved the way for more R rated comic book films to be released, but this is not a sole victory. Instead I would argue that it is the last in a long line of R rated comic book films that have all helped the movement for studios to trust higher rated films. Films such as Sin City and Kick-Ass have been working towards this goal for years now, all it took was one film to completely break the Box Office figures and show them, definitively, that the films comic book geeks want to see can be, and are successful. Honestly I don't want to forget Deadpool because I loved it when I saw it in the cinema. I was overjoyed when the film turned out to be as good as it was and I've watched it numerous times since its DVD release and it just gets better every time I watch it. I just think it's time we all started to look forwards with an open mind, because either way the game has been changed. So my only hope for the future after all of this fuss, is that filmmakers will be allowed to keep making more fantastic comic book films for a mature audience. 

Suicide Squad - What Exactly Are We Looking For?

As the release of David Ayer’s motion picture based on the DC comics is drawing closer, it’s about time we all stopped being negative and started focusing on the huge opportunity this film has. 

As many will be aware, it is nearly time for San Diego to fall into its annual ritual of becoming a tourist hot spot, as Comic Con is nearly upon us. For those lucky enough to have tickets this is no doubt an exciting time, however for a university student such as myself who has a summer’s worth of rent to pay, ruthless observation of online coverage will have to suffice. Already some of the biggest names on the bill have begun announcing their schedules, with many of us hoping to see some worthwhile footage from upcoming releases. One of the biggest studios present is Warner Brothers, who recently released their full lineup. Among the various names, one of the most important is Suicide Squad, the DC adaptation written and directed by David Ayer, set for UK release on August 5^th.

Now this film is of particular interest, not only because it’s a film that many of us geeks have wanted to see for some time, but because there has been a certain level of controversy surrounding it. I remember looking through Twitter on the day that Jared Leto was first announced as Joker, which really split the internet into schisms. Then as the first trailer was leaked there were numerous people (including myself) complaining that it looked too serious and did not look like a fun film. This was not helped by the second trailer which was tonally the polar opposite, with Queen’s Bohemian Rhapsody being used as the soundtrack for a seemingly light-hearted film with copious amounts of humour. It left quite a lot of us confused because the two trailers felt as though they were for completely different films, and it wasn’t exactly clear if this film was going to be action packed fun, or serious and brooding drivel that would fit perfectly into the washed out grey scale DCEU that Zack Snyder is intend on constructing. Thankfully, when the third trailer was released it filled a lot of us with much more confidence, as it seemed they had settled on creating a genuinely fun film that didn’t take itself too seriously.

While many people are already anticipating this film to be a severe let down, personally I am feeling strangely optimistic about it. We’ve seen a lot of footage already but they haven’t alluded to much in terms of plot, which I actually quite like. I would much prefer to go into a film with something of a blindfold on so it can take me by surprise. There are some details they haven’t provided that we can make intelligent guesses at, for instance it’s clear that the Joker is not necessarily the main villain of the film, and we may see a main villain in the form of someone else. Either way, whether we know what’s coming or not, it’s best to keep an open mind. As a rule I always approach a new film with a completely open mind, regardless of any initial thoughts or predispositions, which isn’t exactly easy when the person at the helm is not necessarily a filmmaker I have been particularly nice to in the past. It’s not that I dislike David Ayer, it’s just his work hasn’t had a huge impact on me. I quite liked his writing for Training Day and I am willing to overlook his contribution in the formation of the Fast & Furious franchise, but either way I’m not letting any previously established views of him influence my experience of Suicide Squad.

Through the frustration of people openly attacking the film, which is illogical considering they haven’t actually seen it yet, I think it makes far more sense to remain optimistic. Instead of taking the time to complain about what COULD be rubbish about this film, or reasons why it COULD be bad, what I’ve done is focused on giving this film a fair chance. At the end of the day, this film has a lot of potential and has a tremendous opportunity to be fantastic. With that in mind, I’ve compiled a list of elements I want to see in Suicide Squad, based on what I think would make a good film, and also what I think is achievable given the particulars. They’re not in a specific order, other than those I have prioritised, which are marked (*) before.

Well directed action

This film is being released in the same year as Deadpool, which had some incredibly slick action sequences that were expertly choreographed, but also Captain America: Civil War. The potential problem with this is that Civil War was directed by the Russo Brothers, who with two films have shown that they are a force to be reckoned with. I can’t adequately articulate how talented the Russos are when it comes to directing action, and with Civil War they delivered some of the best comic book related film I have ever seen. Now I’m not trying to suggest this film has to compete with Civil War, but it would be nice to see another film that provides us with high quality action that isn’t just loud, head ache inducing set pieces. From the trailer my initial thought is that they have done a good job with the action, I’m just hoping this is consistent throughout the film and is tonally suited to the fun experience we all want.

A good sense of humour

I know I’ve already touched upon this briefly, but the third trailer filled me with a lot more hope because there were moments that are genuinely quite funny, and that’s how this film should be! Think about it, it’s a film about some of DCs creepiest and weirdest villains being assembled to fight crime that even superheroes won’t go near, and if they misbehave or step out of line then the government has jurisdiction to blow up their heads on the spot. To me, that just screams fun, it doesn’t sound like something that can be taken seriously. I know we’re all expecting to see a lot of action in this film, but at the same time I want to see some genuinely funny exchanges between characters. What we need to remember is they're not necessarily friends, they’re just weirdos who have been bundled together by the government, so they’re going to grate against each other and piss each other off enormously, and I think it’s those scenes that could really place this film above others.

A great ensemble cast

What really makes comic book films with a lot of characters stand out, is the ensemble cast. The two Avengers films have been pretty darn good, and part of that is because the cast consists of actors who are perfect for their roles. On the flip side, when I saw Batman v Superman earlier this year I felt that there were some actors who were absolutely suited to their roles (Ben Affleck, Gal Gadot) but there were too many who were not (Jesse Eisenberg, Jeremy Irons, Amy Adams etc.) which had a negative impact on the film and made it less engaging. In the case of Suicide Squad I don’t necessarily have a problem with the cast list, I wouldn’t claim to be a fan of some of the actors, but that doesn’t automatically mean they’ll be bad in the film. I know some people are worried about Will Smith as Deadshot, but personally I think the real weak links could be Jared Leto as The Joker, Jai Courtney as Captain Boomerang, and Cara Delevigne as Enchantress because I’ve never really liked anything I have seen of them, but I am hoping that they really pull through with this film.

A solid villain

It’s not necessarily an important factor, but it would be nice to see a powerful villain that actually has a plan of some consequence. DC are usually quite good with picking from their rogues gallery, unlike Marvel who in recent years have not been as successful. At the very least I want this film to have a villain that is memorable. At the moment it looks as though The Joker could be a potential villain, but he mainly looks as though he’s going to be there to derail the Suicide Squad from their mission and just cause a little chaos. The real villain as far as I’m aware is a more mystical figure, so I’m placing my money on it being the Tattoo Man, someone who can use the tattoos on their body to create physical objects. I think he would be quite a good villain for the team to take down together and is something different to what we’ve seen before.

*Balance between character and content.

One of the main problems that can often arise with comic book films is that the run time is not enough to cover all of the content needed. In particular Watchmen was nearly three hours long and was still not enough to cover everything in detail, the same as Batman v Superman which had many structural problems because if felt like five different films badly placed together. However, when it’s done properly it can make a film awesome. Casing point, Civil War had one major threat, which was that it had a lot of characters in it, so many of us were worried that not all of the characters were going to get the screen time and development they deserved. Thankfully, they managed to absolutely nail it and make a fantastic film that was perfectly balanced. That’s what I’m hoping for with Suicide Squad because from what I can gather the film is going to have a lot to cover. Not only will this film have its own basic plot, but it seems as though it’s also going to cover the formation of the squad itself, as well as the origin of Enchantress and Harley Quinn, with The Joker and Batman thrown in for good measure. Obviously that’s a lot of characters and a lot of content to cover in one film, so I’m hoping that structurally this film is not too bloated, and manages to give each character the right screen time, so that there is genuine development in both the plot and characters.

*A perfect Harley Quinn

For me this is one of the most important elements of this film, because I absolutely love the character and it’s her first time outing on the big screen so there is so much pressure to get it right. I already love their choice of actor, I think Margot Robbie is fantastic and is absolutely well suited to the role, so I’m just hoping they’ve written her to be the character that we all want to see. She is going to be one of the more fun characters in the film, and it’s the chaotic and poorly disciplined nature behind her character that we’re all used to that makes us love her. She’s not just a sidekick to The Joker, she is an interesting and exciting character in her own right so I think it will be really interesting to see her as a strong female character without as many ties to The Joker. Also, we’ve already got a shred of hope because the studio has practically been given the green light to make a solo Harley Quinn film, which to me shows that they’ve got confidence in the character and in Robbie’s performance, so I am really excited to see just what they’ve done with the character.  

*A completely different Joker

I can't stress how important this is for me, because it is a character I care about so much. In all of fiction I would say without a doubt The Joker is one of my favourite characters, and I love seeing different incarnations of him, so the prospect of seeing a new take on the character is somewhat exciting. I was worried when they first announced Jared Leto as the actor playing The Joker because I admit I do not like him as an actor, but after seeing the trailers I am filled with a lot more confidence because it looks as though Leto has genuinely done something interesting with the character and is taking it to a place it hasn’t been before. And that’s exactly what we need, because the character of The Joker is so complex we don't just want to see a Heath Ledger impression or a Mark Hamill impression, we want to see something original. Because the character is so popular with audiences, there is a lot of responsibility when putting him to film. He wasn’t an original member of the Suicide Squad, so the fact they’ve decided to make him a part of this film is a risky move, because he’s not a character to be taken lightly, he can’t just be thrown in effortlessly. If you're going to put The Joker in a film then it should be because you actually have something contribute, there are no half measures with this character. While I was initially sceptical, I now have a lot more confidence in Leto’s performance and would even go as far as to say I am excited to see his Joker because it looks like a completely new spin on the character.

*Harley Quinn AND The Joker

While it is important to get these characters right individually, it is also incredibly important that this film gets their relationship right. If you’ve seen the characters in the animated series then you’ll be used to a fairly stable relationship that shows at least the basics of a caring partner, but if like me you read the comics, then you’ll undoubtedly be aware that it’s not all roses between this couple. The relationship a lot of us are expecting to see is one of a dysfunctional nature, with Harley being hopelessly in love with The Joker despite how badly he treats her. It won’t be particularly pleasant, but the Stockholm Syndrome element of their relationship is some of the most important characterisation we can see for these two, and if they do it properly in the film then it will really add to the overall experience.

*Wider connections to the DCEU

This might be a little far-fetched, but what DC have been appalling at in recent years is world building. While Marvel have been building a complex cinematic universe that is interconnected with their TV shows, DC have been a little disjointed and have been chasing their own tail so they’re having to play catch up. Now I’m not expecting this film to open up a whole new cinematic universe that is connected to every character, but the inclusion of Ben Affleck does give me a shred of hope that this will somehow link into Batman v Superman and we’ll learn a little bit more about Batman’s past. We already know there’s a defaced Robin outfit in the Batcave, so a little Death in the Family styled story telling wouldn’t go amiss here, and in the comics there’s a lot of tension between Batman and Amanda Waller, so I’m hoping there's a smooth and clear connection between the films so we at least have some universe building.

I’m not exactly going to be taking this list with me into the screening and ticking things off as I go, but it is a loose outline of my expectations of the film and what I would really like to see. I won’t be following it strictly, and equally I will not be disappointed if the film turns out to be completely different, just as long as the finished product is a good film. It’s a shame that so many people are being so negative about the film before seeing it, but that only makes me want it to be even better, so that it’s an enjoyable experience for a geek like me, and it proves the cynics wrong at the same time. 

For now at least, I have faith in this film.

Revisiting Harry Potter - My Top Five Moments

If you've been anywhere near the internet over the last few months you'll no doubt be aware that Harry Potter fans worldwide are reaching new levels of excitement, prior to the release of upcoming projects. In a matter of weeks there's set to be another book release, there's the on stage production of the aforementioned book, and in November cinema audiences will be able to witness the first film in the new series Fantastic Beasts and 101 more ways to make J K Rowling rich, so this is one of the most exciting times to be a Harry Potter fan. With this in mind, I've recently taken the time to revisit the Harry Potter films.

Much like everyone else in my generation, Harry Potter was a huge part of my childhood and has stuck with me, to the point where I now find myself to be a twenty year old university student who has a Gryffindor tie at the ready for any social event with a tenuous link to Harry Potter. I can remember with absolute clarity seeing all eight films in the cinema, as well as the hours I spent reading the books late at night when I should have been sleeping, so I'm proud to say Harry Potter was such a large part of my childhood. However, I know many people who often propose the rather erroneous notion that I am a film snob, so I couldn't possibly enjoy these films. What they're not taking into account is that films are one of things I love most in life, so why would I dedicate so much of my time to write about something I don't like? Granted, I was worried that upon rewatching the HP films I would find that the magic had somewhat faded (pardon the pun) since I was a child, however I actually found that there were still a lot to enjoy.

It's interesting because now that I'm older and I have more of an interest placed in cinema, I tend to focus on a wider range of aspects than I did upon first watching the films as a child. Most notably there is a huge shift in tone as the films progress through the series, not only because of the advancements in plot, but also because the eight films are directed by a number of different directors who obviously all had different visions. Personally, I would cite the third film as the best of the series, I think Alfonso Cuarón is one of the best directors currently working in cinema and really did something different with the source material that kick started the darker path the films eventually take. The first two films are somewhat problematic because not only do they contain some of the worst child acting I've ever seen but because their tone is rather mixed; they were focused on being too family friendly. One moment they're discussing weighted topics such as death, the next they're trying to get cheap laughs by shoving a wand up a troll's nose. They were both very theatrical and could afford to be quite immature, but that doesn't mean there aren't things to be liked. I could write for hours about how I still love the first film and I think the set design and use of practical effects alone is admirable, but for me the films didn't really find their feet until the third.

With all of the current HP talk floating around the internet, and considering I recently revisited the films, what I've decided to do is list my top five moments from across the eight films. Now just to make this clear, I'm going to be talking specifically about the films and certain moments I think were delivered exceptionally well for the big screen. For the purpose of this list I am completely disregarding the books. I'm sure there are other blogs that are written under far better authority that could tackle the books, but personally I wanted to focus solely on the films. 

So without further ado, I would like to present my top five moments from across the Harry Potter film series, and although it was difficult, I have managed to place them in order counting down to my favourite. 

#5. Confrontation at the Shrieking Shack - Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)

It's a choice that not many people would have made and it would scarcely feature on a top ten list let alone a top five list, but I think that only strengthens its place as one of the most underrated moments in the HP series. What often happens with fantasy films it that the visuals and set pieces steal the show, so other elements such as acting and screenplay writing can go unappreciated. What I like about this scene is that we have some of the finest British actors (Alan Rickman, David Thewlis, Gary Oldman, Timothy Spall) all clearly displaying their talents in a rather heated exchange that aids the plot development by alluding to previously hidden details. The scene has some incredible acting, most notably from Gary Oldman who is somewhat absent until this point, and manages to send the tension to new heights through human interaction alone. Plus, the fantastic visuals used for the transformation of Peter Pettigrew are still enough to make anyone question whether the pet animal sat on their lap is secretly a forty year old man in disguise. 

#4. "Obliviate" - Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 (2010)

It's something of a bleak film overall, but there are a number of important moments that really stood out, and I have to admit the opening sequences packs a subtle punch to the chest. As we see the three main characters preparing to leave and go on their journey together without any support it feels quite upsetting because the end is clearly in sight, but there's a particularly important moment for the character of Hermione as we see her erase her mother and father's memories, to remove all trace of her. During this sequence there's a fantastic musical accompaniment from composer Alexandre Desplat that is tonally sincere whilst flirting the line between gentle and brooding, clearly marking this as a turning point. From this moment on it is clear that the characters are about to come face to face with death and are no longer children, as if all of the family friendly moments happened in a completely different franchise. It is a subtle but powerful moment that happens just before the eye of the storm. 

#3. Harry and Hermione dance - Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 (2010)

I suppose this is tailing off of my last point, however it strikes as almost the antithesis. While my previous choice was made because I liked the impact of showing that the characters were no longer children, this particular moment is somewhat out of place. For the uninitiated, this is the moment in which Harry and Hermione are in their tent together listening to the radio, and as the sound of Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds starts to drift out, the two of them begin to dance and laugh together. While it may not seem particularly important, I found that this is a scene that always sticks in my mind. Not only does it slow the pace of the film to a complete halt, but it also shows the audience something they are not accustomed to. In a film that shows young adults having to face up to immeasurable threats and act older than they are, this scene stands as the only moment in which we see them spending time messing around and doing what young people are meant to do. And for me I think it's one of the most important moments in terms of character development, because even when faced with death as a near certainty these young people are still incredibly good friends and are still able to make each other smile. We've seen them grow up on screen and we're reminded constantly that they're best friends, but it's moments such as this that really show the true extent of their friendship. It doesn't involve flashy CGI or made up spells based vaguely on J K Rowling's understanding of Latin, but it is one of the scenes that I will always remember. 

#2. Snape's memories - Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 (2011)

This is probably an obvious choice because it's one of the moments everyone remembers, but there is a bloody good reason for that, and it's because the entire sequence is close to perfection. Not only is it incredibly well written and crucial to the plot, but it is an acting masterclass. I have always maintained that Alan Rickman is one of the most brilliant actors in the HP series, and nowhere is this seen more than during his flashbacks concerning Lily Potter. The raw emotion that he displays is unparalleled to anything we had seen from Snape until this point, and it really aids the development of his character. The entire sequence is a surreal emotional roller coaster that shoots you three times in the chest, removes the bullets, stitches you back up and then throws you straight back into the film as if nothing happened. It's like Stockholm Syndrome; it is heartbreaking and it tears me apart, but I will always watch it because I love it. 

#1. Dumbledore vs Voldemort - Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007)

While my previous choices were mainly concerned with writing and acting, my top choice is one that focuses on the technical side of film making, because it is one of the most visually impressive moments from across the series. Up until this point Dumbledore was always held as one of the most powerful wizards, but we'd never actually seen any evidence of this, much like the seventh Star Wars film in which we are constantly told Luke Skywalker is a bad-ass but all we see is him meditating on a fucking island with a beard that came directly from Download festival. Dumbledore had done nothing, we'd seen him perform minor acts of magic, lighting candles with the wave of a hand like a giant matchstick, but we'd never seen him do anything jaw-dropping. But then as soon as we saw the image of him walking out of the fireplace, and the look of sheer terror on Voldemort's face, we all knew that some serious shit was about to go down. And what did we get? One of the best duels ever put to film, showing what happens when two powerful characters collide in an 'all bets are off' situation. It was colourful, it was entertaining, it was a high level of technical mastery, and was ten times better than anything found in most modern action and fantasy films. Genuinely, I cannot think of a better moment throughout the entire series, it is just spectacular. If this film had been released during the VHS era, this scene would be the one you'd always rewind to watch again before carrying on. 

So there you have it, I've probably angered numerous people on the internet by neglecting certain moments, but this is the list that is most personal to me. While I can be a grump at times and rant about films I dislike, nothing gives me more joy than to praise films that I genuinely like. So it was a pleasure to watch the Harry Potter films again as a jaded twenty year old student with high expectations, and to find that there is still so much to like and admire. They're not perfect by any rate, and they won't be remembered as important pieces of film, but they will stand the test of time as some of the most important films this generation grew up with.