Film Review: 'The Courier'.

Yesterday me and my friend found time to watch a film that we had wanted to watch for quite some time. We managed to find time to watch a spy thriller called 'The Courier', a film about spying during the height of the cold war in the 60s.

Indeed, especially considering that the movie was based on a true story and had a star actor in it (Benedict Cumberbatch), it was an easy decision to give the film a chance. It was more than likely that the movie was going to be entertaining and worth our time. 

Having now seen the film, I have to say that I'm pretty glad that we gave the film a shot. 'The Courier' is pretty well made and entertaining, even though there are some fairly obvious problems - especially in its story - that need to be addressed.

Premise-wise, the movie is about a British businessman Greville Wynne (Benedict Cumberbatch), who at the height of the cold war gets hired by the Mi-6. They feel that he as a salesman with ties to Russia is the only person to bring information from their inside source in Moscow.

Indeed, the Mi6 knows that a high ranking GRU Colonel named Oleg Penkovsky has crucial information about their Soviet leader's intentions. Secretary Nikita Khrushchev is supposedly unstable and might be starting a war with the west, which needs to be prevented.

Quality-wise, when it comes to the film, one of the best things about it is that the movie looks really good. Pretty much every shot in the movie feels authentic (1960s) and it's clear that the producers spent a lot of time finding the right locations to shoot in (shot partly in Prague).

Acting-wise, it has to be said that both leads in the movie are spectacularly good. Both Merab Ninidze who plays Penkovsky and Cumberbatch, who plays the British salesperson-turned-into-spy are absolutely wonderful in their roles.

Story-wise, it has to be said that 'The Courier', from a perspective of a writer and a history enthusiast (especially the Kennedy assassination), even though entertaining, is a bit of a mixed bag. There are some factual, logic and character problems in it that hurt its quality.

By that I mean that one of the biggest flaws in the story is that its stakes aren't actually that 'high' or particularly well defined. There's no real urgency going on in here, even though the film tries to tap dance around this issue quite a bit.

Character-wise, when it comes to these issues, factually speaking there's no evidence that Penkovsky, even though prolific with leaking information, was a benevolent man. He merely did all the leaking to advance his own 'career', once he would eventually try to defect.

Yet another significant historical issue in the film has to do with how it tries - for storytelling reasons - to portray Russia's leader as a nut. It tries to imply that Khrushchev was somehow insane with his ideas (the upcoming Missile Crisis), which is not supported by the facts.

After all, as the film admits in the final part, the reason that Khrushchev put nukes to Cuba was not because he was crazy. He put them simply to protect their ally Cuba (after the Bay of Pigs) and also because the U.S. had already placed their own nukes in Turkey.

In that sense, when you put these issues together, it shouldn't come as a surprise that these flaws end up hurting the movie. Especially when it comes to the last third (story-wise weak defection attempt + imprisonment) they don't make that much sense or feel authentic.

Still, despite problems like these in the story, there's no question that as a whole, the good things outweigh the bad ones in the movie. These positive aspects, like the portrayed comradery between the two leads and the overall atmosphere kept the movie afloat and watchable.

In that sense, when it all is said and done, if you haven't managed to see 'The Courier' yet, I think it's safe to say that you should probably give it a go at some point. You should give the film a chance and not be too discouraged by my criticism of it.

After all, despite its issues, especially considering that it has received good reviews (95% audience fresh at Rottentomatoes.com), that's something to consider too. That's a reason to watch the film and not be too bothered by its flaws that in the end, might not matter too much.

Review: Pixar's animated film 'Luca'.

So when it comes to watching animated movies, it's not a secret that whenever a new animated film is released, I'm going to watch these movies. As long as these films get even remotely decent reviews, I'm more than eager to give them a chance and see how good they are. 

Indeed, the reason that I watch these animated movies and enjoy them is that they help me to forget my worries in life. These films, almost always, have themes, characters and storylines in them that make me happier and less judgemental as a person.

So this time, when it comes to these movies, me and my friend managed to watch Pixar's latest animated film 'Luca'. This is a film that - thanks to the Covid-19 pandemic was just released on Disney+ service and was now available for us both to see.

Story-wise, what we're dealing with here is a 'fish out of water' story, in which two sea monster kids decide to explore life on land. These kids go on an adventure in a nearby town, once they notice that they assume human form when they're out of the water.

Premise-wise, it has to be said that 'Luca' doesn't have the most well thought out concept that Pixar has managed to come up with. The premise, even though not completely awful is something that honestly doesn't make enough sense and feels somewhat clunky.

Indeed, especially in the film's first act when we're introduced to the main characters, the whole thing just doesn't seem particularly compelling. This includes the sea world with its characters (the family of Luca) that are a bit too underdeveloped.

Fortunately, once our kids (Luca & Alberto) get to the new world, start dreaming and start meeting actual people, things get better. The film - as it also gets more colorful - starts to breath and manages to create an atmosphere that feels pleasant for the audience. 

Quality-wise, one of the best things about the movie, since it happens in Italy, is that it explores the Italian culture with actual insight. The makers of the film spent a lot of time making sure that the film is culturally accurate and feels right.

Indeed, my friend who later watched 'Luca' the second time with her Italian friends, told that her friends had genuinely appreciated the film. All those little details and the 'Fellinian' atmosphere that is in the movie is something that they apparently liked a lot.  

Plot-wise, since this was a 'relaxed' movie, it has to be said that the stakes aren't that high. The main story on the land - about the guys wanting to win a Vespa in a contrived competition with their new friend - is a bit too lazy and weak. 

Furthermore, since the main story is not strong, the villain in the movie is also a rather contrived invention. We have a bully in the town, the king of Vespa driving, who with his henchmen tries to beat our protagonists in the competition - which doesn't feel that organic.

Still, when you look at the animated movie as a whole, even though the story wasn't that strong and had some flaws in it, that doesn't mean that these issues were that critical. I'm not saying that the storyline was so bad that it sank the movie as a whole. 

After all, when you - from a positive point of view - look at how colorful, relaxed and childlike the movie managed to be otherwise, these positive aspects clearly outweighed the negative ones in it. It was still enjoyable to watch the movie as a whole.

In that sense, in the end, even though the film could have been better, it's safe to say that if you haven't managed to see Pixar's 'Luca' yet, you should give the movie a chance. You should give the film a chance and not be discouraged by some of its negative reviews.

After all, especially considering that lately Pixar's films have been disappointing (e.g. 'Soul'), 'Luca' is a surprise. It's a positive surprise and shows that even though the story isn't that great, the film can still work as long as those other elements in it are first rate.

'The Tomorrow War' - movie review.

Last week me and my friend found some time to watch together a new movie. We decided to watch a science fiction film called 'The Tomorrow War', a time travel war movie that had just been released on Amazon prime and was now available for us to see.

The reason that we decided to watch the film, that stars Chris Pratt, is that it seemed watchable. Based on its trailer and the reviews that it had gotten, there was a chance that it could be worth our time (80% fresh by the audience on Rottentomatoes.com).

Having now seen the film with my friend, I have to say that I have a somewhat mixed views about the movie. There were things that worked rather well, but there were also things that - especially story-wise - were not good at all and that weren't well thought out. 

So first, when it comes to those things that actually worked in 'The Tomorrow War', I have to say that the premise itself wasn't that awful. The idea that you have people from the future warn us about an upcoming war against alien monsters isn't that hopeless. 

Indeed, when it is also revealed in the first act that we need to almost immediately send troops to fight the future war through a wormhole, that creates a lot of opportunities for the story. There's a lot of potential in the premise that needs to be handled well.

Story-wise, the whole thing gets going when our protagonist, a military contractor played by Pratt leaves his family and takes part in the operation. He's prepared for the 'suicide mission' and after getting futuristic equipment attached to him, is transported to year 2051.

Not surprisingly, when we reach the dystopian future it doesn't take long before things get really heated and the action starts. The monsters that we're supposed to somehow beat are nasty, deadly and can rather easily defeat our brave volunteers. 

Entertainment-wise, the movie manages to be at its best when our troops - including 'Chloe' from '24' - go on a rescue mission to find some samples that would help to defeat the enemy. This is when the movie works rather well and is fairly entertaining and gripping.

Furthermore, when it is revealed roughly in the middle of the movie that Pratt's daughter happens to be his military commander in the future, the movie finds its heart too. We have an actual emotional stake to get things sorted out and to save the mankind.

Unfortunately, even though at this point the story seems to work (if you're able to overlook the logical flaws in the premise), this won't last. The writers start making some genuinely terrible decisions that will seriously hurt the film's overall quality.

By that I mean is that once the emotional arch is concluded at roughly 1h 45 min mark (Pratt & his daughter find the cure, the big boss is dead and the daughter dies), the movie doesn't stop. Instead we get another 30 minute fourth act that makes almost no sense at all.

Indeed, instead of doing its 'aftermath' conclusion in a closing credit montage, the writers decide that the story needs _more_ problems to be solved. They decide that the monsters were here already waiting for us and that their 'nest' needs to be found and destroyed. 

The problem with this - story-wise - is that once the main emotional arch in the movie is concluded - you shouldn't add new arcs to the movie anymore. You can't start over and think that the audience is going to be hungry for some secondary stuff anymore.

After all, once Pratt and his daughter managed to create the poison to kill the monsters, managed to kill the big boss and the daughter dies, that's more or less where the story should have ended. It shouldn't have gone more than 5 minutes after that point.

Not surprisingly, everything that happens in the extra act is just awful. Pratt's dad is back for a new 'arc', some kid figures out where the nest is (!), they have to go solo because the rest of the world won't help (!!) and the crucial poison becomes mostly redundant too.

In that sense, when me and my friend finally reached the end of the movie at 2 hour 15 min mark, it shouldn't come as a surprise that we weren't happy with what we had seen. This was not what we expected to see from the movie as a whole.

After all, when you think about the film, especially considering how - objectively speaking - incredibly stupid the last act was, it was just impossible not to feel disappointed. There were just too many problems that hurt the movie's quality. 

In that sense, in the end, I just wish that the writers would have ended the film when its main emotional arc ended. I wish they would have understood that this is where the heart of the movie was and not spoil it with some additional content that didn't make sense.

Unfortunately for us, that's exactly what they did with the fourth act of the movie. They added stuff that made no sense emotionally and where all logic flew out of the window, so it's no surprise that the film as a whole - as sad as it is - left a bad taste in our mouths.