Let It Freaking Go!

Hello!

Okay, so I haven't posted a review in a month now (oops?) and now I'm going to do a review that many people will  think is bullshit even though in my opinion is the honest truth. So hear my out when I give my views.

Disney's 'Frozen' - released in 2013 - tells the story of Elsa (voiced by Idina Menzel), a princess with the power to turn things into ice by her bare hands, and Anna (voiced by Kristen Bell) her younger sister. When Elsa's powers get out of control, Anna (pronounced Ah-nah. don't even get me started on that) is left teamed up with a snowman named Olaf (voiced by Josh Gad) and a very cute man named Kristoff (voiced by Johnathan Groff), to try and find her sister and save the kingdom they live, whilst mixed up with boy troubles and family feuds.

Right, so here's one of my problem with not just this film, but many others. Animated films like these are great, a good laugh for a  family and especially younger children. But honestly Disney, how many princess films do you need? I wouldn't mind them so much if they weren't extremely degrading and give an image to children that to be princesses we need to have long hair, be able to sing and be skinny. 

Yes, compared to many Disney films it does better in being real life (Anna's hair not being perfect when she wakes up) but me not being a size 6 kinda pisses me off how still all the cartoon princesses are stick thin and are absolutely gorgeous because even though I'm not a 6 year old Disney fanatic, I still feel it could be giving everyone the wrong impression and making people want to look like these fake people to be 'beautiful.'

 

But with that, the one thing Frozen does that other princess films doesn't is give the message that family are important and that we don't just have to rely on boys to 'save us'. This is mainly shown at the end (I won't spoil it for you I promise) and gives the image that family shouldn't be taken for granted.

On the other hand, talking about the ending makes me want to move onto the plot of the film. Yes the plot is slightly more interesting than some films, but it is still disgustingly cliché and for the most part - predictable I'm afraid to admit. Like of course Elsa would get out of control and Anna would go
find her and team up with someone. And of course one of the boys would turn into an arsehole.

The film itself is overrated in all honesty. The plot is not as good as it should be to be completely honest. For me the one thing that salvages the film that has won 62 awards to date, is the soundtrack. The soundtrack is without a doubt the best part of the film, with some lovely songs including 'Do You Want To Build a Snowman' and 'Let It Go', which even though is over played and used way to many times in adverts, make the film watchable and as loved as it truly is. The singing is excellent and really fits with the film.

And finally, I had to make a complaint about the pronunciation of Anna because no matter what anyone says anything spelt A n n a is pronounces An-ah not Ah-nah.

So in conclusion, yes I dislike the film 'Frozen' and yes I will not change my opinion even though the soundtrack is great.

50 Fantastic First Dates

Now comes an extremely biased review that you'd probably all been waiting for. But everyone has a film they can't fault in any way what-so-ever, a film they can watch 40 times and never get bored of it and film that they love more than anything in the entire planet; also known as their favourite film. Well, this one is mine.

50 First Dates (2004) tells the story of committed-shy Henry Roth (Adam Sandler) living on a luxurious Hawaiian island, as he falls in love with the beautiful Lucy Whitmore (Drew Barrymore) to find out that her anterograde amnesia (short-term memory loss) means she forgets him the very next day: meaning he has to try win her love all over again every day.

Anytime I talk to any of my friends about the film, they always bring up the question of "why do you love it so much?" And critics would seem to agree, with a measly (but I feel underrated) 48/100 'Metacritics' score, the film at first glance of a plot and ratings doesn't seem that amazing or out of the ordinary. However, if the film isn't great, why did was it nominated for 15 awards in 2004/2005 winning 6? And why is it still my favourite film 10 years after release?

 

So let's start with the plot shall we? The plot is criticized for being too cliché, but honestly who cares about a clichéd plot if it is absolutely adorable. Honestly, my heart melted at multiple points during the film and you definitely get too easily attached to the plot. It's interesting to see how Henry will try and win Lucy over and in your mind you start to think of ways he could. I loved it. As well as that, there are many sad moments in the film and a really cute ending.

In addition, the film wouldn't be what it was without the once again beautiful acting from the cast. The stand out performance for me was from Barrymore, due to her personality perfectly fitting the role of Lucy. But even with all the cast, you could feel their happiness, pain and you could laugh at their weirdness and their jokes.

For me, the weirdness and the humour made the film what it was. The way even the seal reacts with Henry was enough to crack a laugh with me. The odd, but funny, characters of Ula (Rob Schneider) and Doug (Sean Austin) are both eccentric and hilarious, making you slightly confused and worried about their characters, but at the end of the day they bring a new sense of hilarity to the film.

I can't actually think of much more to say because as I said, this film is my most favourite film of all time even 10 years after it's first release. I can't honestly think of any negatives - maybe because my love of the film has left me stubborn - to complain about. I can't do the film justice in words. I'd recommend the film a million times to someone if they'd never seen it. I've probably watched it 50 times, and still I love to watch it over and over again.

In the words of Henry Roth: "I'm sorry I'm not better looking"

And in the words of Lucy Whitmore: "Can I have one last first kiss?"

A Fault in Our Stars?

So I thought it's about time I post again as well as review this film. I don't even know where to begin with 'The Fault In Our Stars' movie wise, because even with any negatives I'm going to say nothing will account for the fact the movie was so amazing that my friend and I couldn't move or talk for 10 minutes after the ending.

Firstly, I want to apologise for the title, there is no pun I could do with the title what-so-ever ((trust me I googled puns.)) But anyway, the film.

The Fault In Our Stars is a film rendition of the same titled book (The Fault In Our Stars // TFIOS) by John Green. TFIOS tells the story of Hazel Grace Lancaster (Shailene Woodley), a 16 year old girl, stricken with Stage 4 Thyroid cancer with metastasis forming in her lungs, surviving off the experimental drug Phalaxifor and her oxygen tank. She believes her life is written out for her until her mother Frannie (Laura Dern) persuades her to go to a support group, where she meets Augustus Waters (Ansel Elgort) where her life story changes.

Augustus, a 17 year old with one leg and a cancer survivor, and Hazel's not so ordinary love story is portrayed perfectly in the film- their connection really strong and beautiful. However, it isn't just the two of those connections you can feel in the book. All the characters in the book are played beautifully, especially the friendship of Augustus and Isaac (Nat Wolff) and the mother/daughter relationship between Frannie and Hazel. The acting in TFIOS is one of the best cast performances I have ever seen. The performance making the film it was.

But the real star of 'The Fault In Our Stars' is the book-writer himself. The beautiful story is perfectly told by Green, and the plot made me want to watch the film and read the book countless amount's of time. The story has many twists, turns, ups and downs as well as many romantic moments that make you're heart melt. You just can't predict what will happen next, and the film is such an emotional rollercoaster I didn't know what to say.

But with every positive in a book there's a negative. Honestly, I can't really think of many negatives except one, which though isn't a film breaker was a bit of a heartbreak. Personally, when watching it I found they left out some of my favourite parts of the book. Okay I appreciate that a lot of the book was missed out, but why oh why did the writers of the film miss out the part about the swing set advertisement or delete it during the final cut? Even though it wasn't a huge part of the movie, the cuteness and humour swung it to be one of my favourite parts of the book (note the pun haha.)

But aside from that, I honestly cannot fault 'The Fault in Our Stars.' The film is everything I hoped it would be and more, and definitely worth the money spent on the cinema. The acting, plot, connection, humour, heartbreaks and emotions in the film were all outstanding, and I don't know what else to say except if you haven't seen it I don't know what you're doing with your life.

                   It was faultless.

Divergent Heading in The Right Direction?

Okay, so I'll admit that I haven't read the book of Divergent but when watching it with friends that have, I quickly learnt it isn't a movie better than the book.

But too be fair, not many are. For example, The Fault in Our Stars, War Horse and My Sisters Keeper were all better books than films, just on the basis that when reading books you can create your image of the book and it doesn't miss out your favourite scenes.

Divergent, starring Shailene Woodley (Tris) and Theo James (Four) is an action based film set in a universe where people are split into districts (of their choice at a choosing) on the basis of human virtues. They take a test to find which suits them best which works with all but few- the Divergent - who fit in more than one category. Tris being a divergent is warned about the dangers, and at all costs has to try make sure no-one finds out.

Once again, faultless acting from Woodley and James made the film what it was. You felt the characters choices and pains like it was real life which even though is expected in all films sometimes isn't the case. Woodley's personality and slight shyness suits the role of Tris perfectly and James plays Four perfectly too, fitting the role well.

However, the movie plot was far from perfect. It actually told an interesting story and I imagine the book is a complete must read, however the film slightly disappointed due to the fact that in many places I was confused as hell. It's good to be a little confused especially at the start, but asking friends every 5 or 10 minutes what was happening or how something happened or having to explain parts of the film to me probably both wound them up and ruined the movie for me.

And actually some of the scenes were really cute, romantic and heart-breaking, making me 'aw' or make pouty sad faces a few times, however a confusing plot is just unacceptable. And how Tris and Four become a couple so quickly anyway amuses me. It's like one minute he's throwing knives at her and the next he's kissing her senseless.

If you read my last review, you may have gathered I hate a lack of originality which brings me to my next point. The name 'Four'. Okay, so I'm not a world class name maker, but calling a character after a number is both confusing and idiotic. Why? Why would a n y o n e call a characters a number? At first I thought his name was Thor because of a terrible pronunciation, but when I heard it was Four, I had a 10 minute debate with my friends about the idiocy and terribleness of the name. If he had four nipples or four fingers then I may understand the name, but by the love of flapjacks don't ever call a person after a number.

In comparison though, you actually felt an emotional attachment to some of the characters. For example, the evil characters you really hate, the kinder characters you really like. That's how films should be and thankfully 'Divergent' really pulled off the character connection which not many films in my opinion do. The character connection makes the film and in reality any film without this connection will never be a 'top of the box office' film even with an amazing plot, so this aspect of Divergent makes it great.

In conclusion, Divergent was an okay film. There's no other word really I can use to describe it, but amazing acting, character connection and a half decent story evens out the confusion, the terrible names and the fact that the book was indeed better than the film. I would however say to give the film a watch, because even though I personally think there are better films out there, a few times watching it and perhaps reading the book will in fact make the film go from a confusing cinema screening to a fantastic film.

Breaking Up with The Break Up?

'The Break Up', starring Vince Vaughn and Jennifer Aniston tells the story Gary (Vaughn) and Brooke (Aniston), a couple that push each others boundaries so much that the film starts where other romantic comedies finish: a break up.

Where the title lacks in originality (even though it does set the tone of the film), the plot doesn't help the film's Oscar chances either. After another typical 'why can't you do one thing for me?' row, the couple call the relationship quits. However, neither want to sell their luxurious condo or move out, so they decide to live together even though they can't stand each other. How realistic!

Even the way Brooke and Gary meet is a pretentious cliché that many rom-coms possess, but at least they tried to make it less diabolical. But still, Gary buying a random stranger (sitting 7 or 8 seats down from him in a baseball game) a hotdog she didn't want, then trying to insist a date even though she was dating another man- is definitely not the worst start I've seen but that doesn't make it great.

However the film wasn't all awful, there are some more manageable moments that actually made me laugh in the least funny rom-com. Firstly, the reason of their argument. Lemons. The break-up is initially an argument about the amount of lemons that Brooke needs for a centre piece. I was delighted that the writers came up with a random start to a long chain of arguments in the film.

Also, the acting of Vince and Jennifer gives the movie some credibility, and some explanation on how it won two awards. The acting of the two protagonists makes the £10 I spent on the film nearly worth it. The acting makes it feel like they are a real life couple going through the break-up not on screen with a memorised script.

Sadly, the few good things about the film don't personally make up for the fact that the plot and some of the rarely seen minor characters are flawed. In some ways, it's not the idea of the plot that makes the plot horrendous, its the complete difference in job seriousness (Gary being a bus tour guide and Brooke an artist dealer) that does make you wonder to start with why they are together. Gary and Brooke are from two completely different worlds, with two different personalities and hobbies and in reality two people so different wouldn't make it past the first date.

In conclusion, 'The Break Up's' comedy gold, actually turns out to be comedy old in a film where the jokes feel like their from the 1700's. Even though it isn't the worst film I've seen, I wouldn't recommend it unless you love Jennifer Aniston or Vince Vaughn so much that you wouldn't mind enduring 104 minutes of plot disaster and a replaying argument that never seems to end.

<a href="http://www.bloglovin.com/blog/12812173/?claim=r9bbdj77852">Follow my blog with Bloglovin</a>