AliceofX

Not knowing anything about the movie I could immediately tell it was based on a novel just after a few minutes of watching, and it manages to use that perfectly what otherwise could have been clumsy exposition. This film has everything. It's a great character drama, which is created from a great story and great actors, all on the background of rough, beautiful landscapes. In a few words, this is a film about family, with all the tragedies and heartbreak that come with it.

In many ways it's a good film, quite fun at times. It certainly looks gorgeous. But in the end there's just too much dragging it down to be anything but mediocre. For one thing, what does this really have to do with Robin Hood? If anything, it just seems like a ten episode historical drama series that got cut down to two hours, and someone inserted Robin Hood in it for some reason. It's drowning in a sea of characters, none of whom get enough screen time to be fleshed out, or even give one the ability to tell them apart. Plus the historical illiteracy, and the obligatory Christianity is evil narrative, and you have a film that will be enjoyed once and then never seen again.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

I wasn't even sure if I should write this review as I struggled to come up with words to describe it. On the one hand there are some good things about it, quality moments where you really empathise with Zach Braff's character and his feelings. The movie really well captures the numbness of depression. And on the opposite spectrum I really liked Natalie Portman's character as she brought a lot of energy to it. There are some funny scenes and interesting characters but after a while the quirkiness becomes old and stale. Just being random doesn't make it funny. But there is a profound emptiness that comes upon me when I think about the Garden State. It left me feeling nothing, as if I had forgotten half the film and now struggled to remember what was good about it. The film's better moments don't come together to a satisfying whole and the plot just feels unfinished. Overall this is by no means a bad film. But it's one of those movies that you watch when there is nothing better on. It's satisfying as long as you don't expect too much.

Will Smith was good in this film and he created an interesting character. His doctor Omalu was not just a silly accent, as some have called him, but a many layered character with whom you could empathise in his struggles. And I also liked David Morse in his small part but Concussion's biggest problem is that it's really not a people story. It's more concerned about the events and and the people serve more as accessories to them. Also they clearly didn't want to alienate football fans by making this a „football = bad" movie. But how they went about doing this was by having the various characters give „football is great" speeches and it all comes out as lots of tell and little show. If what they wanted to do was show why it matters to so many people they should have made the audiences feel what a majestic game it is. But they don't and the film becomes a boring fence sitter. The best part about Concussion's story is its good themes about religion. Through out the film it talks about how sport has taken the church's place in the modern world and just how inadequate it is in that role. There are some smart things in this story but they are never fully realised. Overall Concussion is a decent film but more fitting for the small screen.

In The Departed every actor plays to his strengths and it's a film that's worth watching just for the performances. The casting is just perfect. Leonardo DiCaprio is at his best playing the kind of character he was born to play. Matt Damon adds his typical humour to the film. But besides that this is a film you would expect from Martin Scorcese in its combination of violence and comedy. It's a gritty crime thriller with just enough pictures of the real world to make it feel realistic. The story is top notch. It keeps you on your toes as you observe its every twist and turn never knowing in whose favour the story might end. The characters play a cat and mouse game with one another with the roles often switching. And of course you can't not mention the music. The film's theme song is one of those catchy tunes that sticks in your head for a long time. Perhaps the only thing I didn't like about the film is the ending which seemed abrupt. Other than that The Departed is a great film and a must see for all crime genre fans.

Frank is one of the funniest films I've ever seen. It is, at its core, a drama film but it has some hilarious eye wetting moments. If only it could have kept that mood through out the film. Towards the end it gets too dramatic and sad and it's way too severe a shift from the previous mood. The only other thing I could say against it is that in the beginning it tries to create a mystery about what Frank's face really looks like. Now that could be interesting, but he is played by Michael Fassbender so I already know what he looks like. So all that seemed pointless. But despite that and the problems of unevenness Frank is still a solidly good film. It's weird and crazy, it explores human creativity. The actors do a good job in creating a bunch of quirky characters that you love to watch while exploring their near surreal world. Overall Frank is a very watchable movie even if it somewhat loses its way towards the end.

The Curse of the Were-Rabbit is one of those rare animated films that can be enjoyed and laughed at even by adults. And it's not due to „adult" humour but by simply being smart and clever. It's as much a comedy as an animated film. My favourite part was the kid horror, for lack of a better term. The sort of Halloween-ized „scary moments" always make me nostalgic for my childhood and this film uses them to good effect. And the clay animation is just adorable. The rabbits particularly are some of the cutest I've ever seen. In many ways this is a film that only the British could make. It creates a quaint little country village where our two main heroes work as pest control. Not being familiar with the original Wallace and Gromit shorts I don't know how accurate the adaptations here are, but nevertheless they are very likable. But what I liked best is that the film didn't try to be too big. Usually films of this type try to add unnecessary character drama or backstories. This plot is not longer than it needs to be, but just right. Overall it is a simple story but there is nothing to complain about in this film.

Well, this was confusing. Somewhere underneath there is a smart story that is unfortunately buried under several plot threads and a revolving door of characters that come and go before you have a chance to know them. Even the main leads don't leave much of an impression on you and nobody's story is really fleshed out. That's my biggest problem is just how short this movie feels. It's like a 2+ hour film that got cut to just the basics of the story. It all feels rushed and hasty. But Hail, Caesar is not all bad. It's an entertaining film with great humour and many laugh out loud scenes. It has a story with some interesting metaphors about religion. An okay film, in short. But since it's the Coen brothers you naturally expect something more. At least something that isn't a confusing mess. I would only recommend this film to people who are already fans of the Coen brothers style. If you are one of them this film might of be of interest to you, but I'm not sure what it would do to anyone else. Overall it is a mediocre film.

In a film like this the last thing you would want is for the film makers to be historically illiterate. Usually it takes a sharp eye to catch that but this film takes no time and right at the very start destroys your confidence in the film's accuracy by calling the north free. That put me on the edge and I couldn't just relax and enjoy the rest of the film. And yet despite that early blunder Lincoln did turn out to be a great film that was superbly acted. It was a film where the main character gave many speeches and told strange tales that went nowhere. Usually saying that would mean criticising the film but here it's made to work. You want to keep watching Daniel Day-Lewis. The movie pulls you in and doesn't let you go until the end. It also looks spectacular. It has the type of gorgeous visuals that you'd want in a grand historical epic. If only it was one, because while the story is good it is somewhat lacking. Generally politics doesn't make for the most interesting story subject and that maybe the films problem. But overall Lincoln is the type of film you would expect from Steven Spielberg in terms of quality and I highly recommend it to fans of historical drama.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

The Sweet and Lowdown will make you believe it is a story about actual people. The narrators and the stranger than fiction portraits of life give a realistic feel to it. It's a typical Woody Allen flick in its combination of humour and interesting story. The movie follows a dislikeable character, played by Sean Penn, who you love to see through out his many failures in life. The film has vibrant characters and that is arguably the best part of it. The only really bad thing I could say against this film is that it doesn't really have an ending. It just goes on until it ends at an arbitrary point. If this were an actual biopic you could understand it as just following history, but as it is it just seems odd. Though it could be said that it just sticks to style. Overall the Sweet and Lowdown is like a familiar meal that is filling while not exactly novel. It's a movie that will be more enjoyed by Woody Allen's fans because while it is funny the plot leaves one feeling empty and longing for more.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

The truth is I actually liked some of the stories of this film and for the most part it was good and visually beautiful. And yet in the end Cloud Atlas is like a fruit that looks gorgeous and juicy from the outside but that you cut open only to reveal green rot inside. The film was utterly ruined by its need to deliver The Message and its anti-religious preaching. Its plot is a thinly disguised vehicle for political propaganda. It is just impossible to enjoy a movie when you are repeatedly being slapped in the face. Leaving that aside, with all its bitter aftertaste, I can still see how it could be justly liked by those already part of the choir. Its many stories are well intertwined and come together nicely, even if you have no idea to what exactly. There lies possibly the movie's biggest fault is that as you ask yourself in the end – what was the point – and you come away with nothing. The film is a plot built around inspirational quotes that sound deep until you actually stop to think about them for a second. Overall Cloud Atlas is a well made film but, and I think the box office reflected this, it's not a film for everyone to enjoy.

This is the part where I would say The Big Short is a movie about this or that, but I'm not sure if I can even call it a movie. It seems more like a high quality docudrama with some parts like something out of a Youtube video. It's very informative if verging on being too wordy. However I'm struggling to find more words for it. Its lack of a people centred narrative makes it hard to compare to other films. The film's main star is facts and hard history and that might be offsetting to some viewers. But to be fair I'm not sure how it could have been done differently. How do you make a movie about such complicated and hard to understand things without giving the audience a bunch of lessons? To the film makers credit The Big Short is a fun film, it certainly won't bore you, which is not an easy feat to manage with such material. It is well acted even if the actors don't have much to do and there are some emotional moments. I think the brightest gem in this is Steve Carell and he's very much the star of the film. Overall The Big Short is a good film, it's enjoyable, but there's not much more to say about it afterwards.

What strikes one about The Revenant is its realism. It gives the feeling that you're actually there as the characters are (literally) breathing unto the camera. It is a gorgeously looking movie that's a love letter to nature. However the cinematography is almost better than the story actually deserves. The problem is that The Revenant drags its feet. It is a two and a half hour film and you feel it easily could have been shortened down to two hours of even less when you look at the actual substance of the story. Its slow movement and too many weird dream sequences can wear one's patience down. That said if you don't mind slow moving films then The Revenant is highly recommendable. It is a quality drama film with solid performances. It is teeming with metaphors that will take many viewings to decipher. The story was good, but I did not like the ending. For all the time that it took to get there the final resolution felt quick. In fact the movie is less satisfying the more it goes on. Overall The Revenant is a spectacle that's a visual joy, but I doubt its for everyone. I'm not even sure whether I liked it and my high score is due more to the film's obvious quality rather than personal favour.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Let's start with the good. The Hateful Eight is very entertaining. If you're a fan of Tarantino's style, not merely gory violence, then you will definitely like it at least. And for a three hour film it didn't feel long, or dragged out. When the credits rolled I was almost surprised that it was already over. Overall it is a good film, for the first half at least. After that is when we come to the bad. Roughly around the second third of the movie all the story that was previously built gets thrown out the window. It goes in a whole new direction and not for the better, because it feels like someone just got bored with making up a mystery so they abandoned everything. The movie feels almost unfinished, especially due to all the weird edits. Then of course there is the subject of violence towards its female character - Daisy. In the Kill Bill films most of the violence towards women was done by other women, it's all part of the same cartoonish world. But here, towards the end, it broke the illusion for me. It took me out of the film completely to see such violence done to a female character. This could have been among my favourite's of this year, but by the end it left a bad taste in my mouth.

Joy is one of those movies that makes you scratch your head. On the one hand it is done by talented people and you can see the bones **** story. But it is basically like a first draft that somebody decided to shoot anyway. For one thing the film has zero subtlety about its themes and metaphors. Zero! It feels like the director is screaming at you with a loudspeaker. And if it still went over your head then don't worry because the movie is so over narrated it feels like the film's makers believe their audience to be morons. That and the fact that this film sacrifices being a compelling tale in favour of being a hagiography of the Strong Independent Business Woman. And yet I couldn't dislike this film, despite its many flaws. What little story there is engaging and Jennifer Lawrence does her best to humanize the character of Joy. All the other characters remain on the level or cardboard stereotypes but Lawrence adds a likeability to Joy that carries this film. I think that in the end it will be a subjective matter whether you like this film or if it strikes a chord with you. But even then Joy can at best be described as mediocre.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Well it was certainly very artistic and certain parts were just gorgeous. However there is not much more to recommend Macbeth. The worst part to me was how the dialogue was spoken, or not spoken since it was mostly whispers and mumbles. Just mumbles and mumbles. Shakespeare's prose just begs to be enjoyed but here I couldn't understand what they were saying half the time. Also they seemed to have no idea what to do with the talking parts and just tried to invent weird action scenes to go with them that felt out of place. Too theatrical is how I would describe this film. It tries to be realistic and set in historical times, but it just makes the theatrical stick out more in awkward ways. Performance wise there is nothing to complain about as everyone did a great job. Overall there are sparks of brilliance here but I just get the feeling that the makers gave up before reaching the goal and the final product is hence mediocre.

The first thing that struck me about Bridge of Spies was just how beautiful it was. The film is gorgeously shot, every frame seems like a painting. But the film's visuals are not the only good thing you can say about it. It is a solid, well acted drama with an engaging story that won't leave fans of the genre disappointed. Overall I have nothing but good things to say about it and I would highly recommend it. There are however some minor nitpicks. The film strikes one as very good but it never rises to excellent when you get the feeling that it could have. The film is done by professionals who know their craft and thus the film is well polished but lacks that special spark, a deeper substance in the story that would make you love it instead of merely liking it, however much. Of course all of that could be merely a question of preference and for some this movie would be satisfying enough. Again, I have nothing bad to say against Bridge of Spies. I thoroughly enjoyed and have already included it in my list of top movies of 2015.

All dressed up and nowhere to go. Paolo Sorrentino's previous film The Great Beauty was among my favourites of 2013. Youth has much of its style, but none of its substance. It certainly looked gorgeous, but left me feeling empty and unfulfilled. The film talks a lot about emotions but it never creates them, just endlessly philosophises about them. Its characters remain not so subtle metaphors, but never real people. There's nothing particularly wrong about Youth and at times it is quite enjoyable, its sin is in not achieving greatness which for a drama of this type is an absolute failure. It wants to be a grand statement about life but has nothing meaningful to say. It is still very watchable, specially if you like films of this type. Michael Caine and Harvey Keitel are what makes it so with their fun portrayal of old friends. Beyond that there's not much else that has stuck to my mind about the film. Overall Youth is not a bad film, but there's nothing recommendable about it.

I remember when back in 2013 the Jobs movie came out. Everything about the film's trailer was "do not see". Still to this day the moment when Kutcher says "we're making Apple cool again" makes me laugh. Right from the start this film looked like they were going to do it right and I was anxiously waiting for it. And even though Steve Jobs wasn't everything I thought it would be it is still a quality drama. Yet I can also see why it was not so commercially successful. It's weird format of taking place before three computer unveilings and the film essentially consisting of conversations with limited action between them. It is by no means a biography of the man's entire life but it does paint a portrait which, like any picture, only reveals some aspects of the person. The film has a great cast who give solid performances. Michael Fassbender creates a character whose tyrannical and devilish behaviour you want to keep watching while longing for a glimpse of the human side. Overall Steve Jobs is a very watchable and engaging film, provided you are already into end of the year Oscar bait drama films.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

I'll start with the absolutely worst thing about Crimson Peak - the jump scares. I didn't expect this from you del Toro! Whoever thinks that jump scares belong in any movie should have their head examined. They're not actually "scary" and if anything they take away from the horror. Also the film thinks that we're morons that need to have repeats of previous dialogues told lest we become utterly confused about the plot. Less bad, but more persistently present, is the bland plot. It's weak and predictable and you pretty much see all the plot twists coming. Which again ties up with my previous complaint, that a plot this simple really does not require holding the audience's hand. And must every movie set in the past have a Strong Independent Woman protagonist. Frankly it's getting tiring of seeing the same character in every film and, dare I say, un-diverse. With that all said, Crimson Peak rests right in the middle where it's not bad or good enough to fall to either side. The best part is in the visuals, especially those of the ghosts which are pretty unique and, unlike the plot, do no feel like we've seen them a million times already. The characters were very likable, which is a shame because with a better plot this could really have been a great film. Overall I enjoyed this film, but I think I'll enjoy it better next time, seeing it on a small screen.

The only really bad thing that comes to mind when thinking about The Walk is the narration. It's overdone to say the least. Rather than showing and letting us feel the events the movie tries to hold the audiences hand by over-describing everything. As if the makers were scared we wouldn't get it and it takes away from the magic of the film. Joseph Gordon-Levitt's accent was silly and over the top. I don't understand why they just didn't get a French guy if they wanted things to be authentic. However it doesn't take from the movie much and somewhat fits with the mood of the film. Other than those things The Walk was very enjoyable and fun. What immediately struck me was how vivid and colourful it is. In an era of the grim and gritty it's a welcome difference. The Walk is a funny film and at times seems like a straight up comedy. So much that you sometimes begin to question is this really based on true events, though that's not really saying anything bad about it. It works for what it is. At times The Walk is almost like a heist film and the setup for the whole thing is very engaging. It is definitely a film that left me with positive emotions and I highly recommend it.

What killed this movie for me the most was their attempt at "docu-dramism" where they tried too much to be almost a documentary rather than a dramatic film. Things are told but never felt. You know some things about the characters but you never get to know them. There is little time spent in establishing them as people. The biggest reason for that is that the film never really settles on a protagonist, but just sort of jumps from person to person. The film would have been a lot better if it had told just one person's story, then maybe it could have created some feeling in the viewer. But besides all that Everest is by no means a bad film. What it does well is give you a sense of the experience of mountain climbing and the mind numbing danger of it all. Everest is not a bad film, especially for a large screen experience, but drama wise it left me wanting more.

What I liked about the film was that, unlike the book, it had more gravitas. You felt the seriousness of Mark Watney's situation. It had more emotion and more human character. The film also had less swearing and crude humour, and I never thought that I would ever be saying that about a book. But the film also inherited some of the books flaws. My biggest dislike is that it lacked a sense of time. You didn't feel just how very long he'd spent on Mars, you were just told that. And I think too much time was spent back on Earth and it really took away from the sense of isolation that should have been there. My final big flaw is the uneveness of the film. I didn't like the beginning of the film as it felt rushed and they were just cramming everything in. The ending however I loved. It was exciting, nerve racking and everything you'd want out of a movie like this. Matt Damon did a great job in correctly portraying everything that was likable about Mark Watney. And it's just nice to see a smart person that isn't another House-esque smug, arrogant Genius. The rest of the actors did a good job as well. Overall I think I liked this movie better than the book. It's very recommendable.

Black Mass is at times engaging and throws you in a world of vivid characters. Depp particularly shows that despite the foibles of his past years he is still a great actor. Yet despite those few gems the movie is coated with a deep layer of mundanity that does nothing but leave you with a sense of emptiness after the movie is done. Black Mass suffers from a common ailment of Based on True Events films in that real stories do not fit nicely into narratives. That's especially true for films that try to span many years. Black Mass, like many such films, feels rough around the edges like it just doesn't have the time to tell the entire story so it just bites off pieces here and there making the finished work look like Cliff's Notes of a much larger story. I didn't feel satisfied with what I got in the end. The movie doesn't focus on any one character or at least paint a portrait of the criminal world. To tell the truth I felt rather disappointed after the movie ended because I expected so much more from this film. I do believe it had the potential for greatness.

Pawn Sacrifice is a good enough drama to leave you well entertained but not good enough to leave a deep, lasting impression. It is terribly uneven for one thing and can't decide if it wants to be a biography of Bobby Fischer or a story of that moment, their game, and it's meaning for that time. Is it about the game of chess or a man's descent into paranoia and madness? It undecidedly wavers between the various points and can't make them come together to a satisfying whole. That said there is nothing particularly bad about Pawn Sacrifice. Even though the story is mediocre the cast all give good performances. Tobey Maguire especially stands out by creating a character that is a brilliant yet arrogant genius slowly loosing his senses, more pitiable than likable. He is the most memorable thing about this film. Paranoia is the one thing that the movie does really well. It creates an interesting atmosphere of fear and distrust. But in the end there is nothing that really shines about this film and that is always kind of sad about biographical films because it is after all someone else's life story that you are using. Overall Pawn Sacrifice is a decent film, solid entertainment, but nothing to make you want to rush to the theatres.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Style over substance is how I would describe The Man From U.N.C.L.E. as that often used expression is the first thing that comes to my mind as I dwell on the character of Napoleon Solo as played by Henry Cavill. Though he is supposed to be the main character he never goes beyond a superficial caricature of James Bond. On the other hand the characters of Ilya and Gaby become more human as the movie goes on. Napoleon Solo on the other hand remains glib. He could practically not be in the movie at all as the story revolves around the romance of Ilya and Gaby and I now struggle to remember what Napoleon Solo was doing in the movie at all. The story of this film is generic with nothing special about, but while I've seen worse I can't remember a film that bored me this much. The Man From U.N.C.L.E. is in that awful middle where it's not good OR bad enough to be entertaining. There are some humorous scenes but the movie can't decide if it wants to be campy funny or serious but funny. Also it feels like a bad prequel or one of those first films of a franchise, that exists only to get the team together, before the second much better film. Hence there are no real stakes to the plot and the origin story is not convincing. Overall my low score is because I can't name single thing about this film that would serve as a recommendation for seeing it.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Southpaw is a film that had a potential to be really good but it failed to achieve that goal. The cast is great and give us good and believable characters and if the film had a better plot they could have really shined. Jake Gyllenhaal gives another great performance and I wish his character could have had a better story. Instead the story is clichéd and very derivative. Some films can make it work despite all that but Southpaw brought nothing to make it truly well liked and is therefore placed amid mediocrity. Without going into plot spoilers I will only say my biggest problem was with the contrived drama. It seemed fake and over Hollywood-ized. It went against the sense of realism that the movie was trying to build. Basically full of those moments where the music gets sad and you're supposed to get sad because they tell you to but you don't because the story has not been built good enough. Which is not to say I didn't enjoy it all. Some parts were interesting but they don't really come together to a pleasing whole. Southpaw might be a good watch at home, on the TV, but for the big screen there is nothing grand about it.

With reviews in the 90% I expected something better. Not even great but at least fun and thrilling. Mission Impossible 5 gave me none of that and as the movie went towards the last half I felt bored. Maybe my view would have been different if I had seen any of the other Mission Impossible films and thus already formed an attachment to these characters but as it stands I felt nothing for them. My problem with Ethan Hunt's character is that he is too uber. Of course you know walking into the cinema that the good guys are going to win. A good action film should challenge that by adding vulnerabilities to the hero, make it seem like he's really fighting for his life. Mission Impossible 5 is the kind of film where the main character walks in, is awesome and you never really feel a sense of danger for him. Benji is probably my favourite character of this film as he is the only one that now sticks in my head. He felt the most human which I can't say about anyone else. Which is not to say the movie is bad, but I found nothing likable in it so gave it five stars as it falls squarely in the middle in that place between good and bad.

I should probably start this review with mentioning that I did not get to see the original English version of Inside Out but a dubbed one rather. I don't know how that affects my experience of it but here we go. I don't want to go into plot details as the trailers avoided all that so I'll just say that Inside Out is a movie about growing up and loss. The two things that always seem to go together. This movie drove me to tears. And judging from the other reviews I was not the only one. Yet, as I drove home, and looked back I realised that the story wasn't that great. There was nothing particularly striking about it. So why was I so in love with it by the end credits? Why was it such a kick in the emotions? Some part of me fears it will not stand the test of time. What will ultimately happen is that you will see Inside Out and it will either touch you deeply or it won't. For the second group I don't know what to say. I guess it is a movie that just needs to be seen for the experience that it is.

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

[SPOILER ALERT: This review contains spoilers.]

Basically bad fan-fiction - that pretty much says it all. If you can't do an action film with a good story at least have one that doesn't get in the way of the action. Terminator: Genisys does the cardinal sin here. Instead of being merely forgettable the story actually makes you stop and think - wait, this makes no sense. So you can't even enjoy it as a dumb popcorn flick. There were some genuinely funny bits in this film, but as I write this merely a day after having seen Terminator: Genisys there is nothing memorable that sticks to my mind. With a 26% score on Rotten Tomatoes I expected it would have at least something in the film to hate and rant about it but the film is entirely forgettable. Other reviewers have remarked that Arnold Schwarzenegger was the best part of the movie and I would have to agree with that opinion. Here he was a lot more interesting than in Terminator 3 and if you are a fan of that character you might be interested in seeing this film. But for fans of the Terminator series I would not recommend this film. Especially if you, like me, loved the second film.

I was never a big fan of Despicable Me (haven't seen the second one) but Minions turning out so mediocre still disappointed me because the trailer promised a fun film that seemed to be a lot better than what we ended up having. The problem is a lack of engaging story-line, there were no real stakes to it. At the start of the film I was fairly amused but by middle I felt bored. If there had been another protagonist to focus on maybe that would have made things better. Like say a character who can actually speak English and who we could root for because the Minions alone can't carry this film. It's now abundantly clear that they belong in the background. Also there was nothing special about Scarlet Overkill. Gru at least was a distinctive character whereas Scarlet was the Strong Independent Woman that we have seen a million times before. So the film also failed in having a memorable villain. So basically if you are an adult and you still have retained your love for animated films then there is nothing for you here. It has a few fun bits here and there but nothing to recommend it for.

Far From the Madding Crowd is based on a book and it feels like it, more so than in other films. Things move so quickly that you can feel there is more behind the story, more depth that a film has no time for. It feels rushed and perhaps if I disliked the movie I might have minded it more, but I did not. Even as I went to bed last night I could not stop thinking about it. That is the one serious flaw that I give to this film, other than that I absolutely loved it. Though that might be due to my pre-existing love for 19th century literature. This is definitely a film I would recommend to lovers of period dramas. Carey Mulligan, Matthias Schoenaerts and Michael Sheen truly shine in this film giving their characters great depth. I felt truly pulled into their stories and their lives. I can already feel this movie will be on my 2015's top movies list.