*NEW* ASSASSIN’S CREED 3D REVIEW *NEW*

For the love of all that is holy, AVOID this movie.

Another failed video game adaptation bites the dust.

When Callum Lynch (Michael Fassbender) explores the memories of his ancestor Aguilar and gains the skills of a Master Assassin; he discovers he is a descendant of the secret Assassins society.

We’re only a couple of weeks into the new year and I already have a nominee for worst film of 2017.

On paper, I honestly thought we had a winner. Oh how wrong I was. What is it about video game movies? Why are they so bad?

They have the fan base, the concept, a plot. All packaged and ready to go and yet it still doesn’t cut the mustard.

I’m a big fan of the AC franchise. It was a crazy premise. BUT when you’re jumping off towers and free-running up buildings while disposing of targets with cool gadgets, who cared?

BUT somehow this dull and meandering affair managed to make that concept seem even more far-fetched and uninteresting.

From the opening 10 minutes, you knew what you were in for. A disappointing, disjointed and poorly CGI’d movie.

Now credit where it’s due. The writers actually kept to the story line. The only problem was that (as a gamer) those were the bits I’d skip. If it didn’t have anything to do with training or the Assassins, that START button was getting a hammering.

It didn’t help that it took itself too far seriously. Cal’s drawn out back story didn’t really set the tempo. And that was the problem, it never really got going!

His mother was bumped off (for no valid reason). We had mindless exposition and dull dialogue as Fassbender did his utmost to keep things watchable.

I still think he was the right choice for the role. I just wish he had better material. I was 30 minutes in and already nodding off!

Even when Cal was picked up by the sinister Illuminati-esque Abstergo Organisation, it was hard going. They managed to make all the fun stuff with the Animus a bloody chore.

A talented cast squandered. Not even Jeremy Irons and Marion Cotillard could save the day. Cotillard was wasted in her role. Anyone could have played her.

Irons did fare a little better and could have been an excellent adversary. BUT he was pushed into the background far too much. And by the time he was brought back for the shambolic finale, he was nothing more than a quick witted panto villain.

Charlotte Rampling was completely unnecessary as the leader of the Illuminati . . . Or whatever she was supposed to be. Brendan Gleeson actually looked like he was on drugs in his meaningless cameo.

There was one thing that bugged the hell out of me the most. What’s the title of the film? ASSASSIN’S CREED. So where the hell were the ASSASSINS?!

The mixed CGI effects and frantic camera work may have been disorienting to watch BUT, at least, it was entertaining.

When the assassins were able to do their thing, it was watchable. The rooftop chase was exactly like the game play. A real shame that we had only two or three sequences. Not enough wall sprinting and hay jumping for my liking.

The 3D was a waste of time. It definitely wasn’t worth the money for bits of wood and the occasional arrow flying out at you. Dreadful.

Every time that blasted eagle soared across Adam Arkapaw’s horribly grainy 15th Century Madrid, it just reminded me how much of an eye sore the visual effects really were.

Even the infamous “leap of faith” was a massive let down. It was either disrupted by a quick flick back to Cal messing around with the Animus or hampered down with blurry CGI.

It failed to impress on both fronts with the present AND the Assassin stuff. Throwing in characters you couldn’t care about.

There was a really flimsy and cliched relationship between the assassins Aguilar and Maria (Ariane Labed) that went no where. No memorable villain. Just a stocky armour-clad henchman and a lechy monk with a really bad bald piece.

Michael Kenneth Williams (The Wire) and his highly unmemorable bunch of Abstergo inmates were a complete waste of time. All they did was moan at Cal and waffle on about the Apple. A stupid relic that can end free will. Yawn.

IT JUST DIDN’T WORK. By the time the closing credits rolled, I felt as empty and angry as the protagonist.

And once Justin Kurzel’s name flashed across the screen, the die was cast. Reuniting with Fassbender and Cotillard to fail with another adaptation. First Shakespeare, now one of the highest grossing video game franchises in the last decade.

Third time’s the charm? I wouldn’t bank on it.

The cast did their best BUT they were always going to fall short. Poorly executed, dreadful CGI, a meandering pace makes this one to AVOID.

The only good thing to come out of this was that it made me want to revisit the old games.

2/5 (Just)

*NEW* THE LIGHT BETWEEN OCEANS REVIEW *NEW*

A wonderfully acted and beautifully shot drama. One of the better ones.

A lighthouse keeper (Michael Fassbender) and his wife (Alicia Vikander) living off the coast of Western Australia raise a baby they rescue from a drifting rowing boat.

I wasn’t the biggest fan of Derek Cianfrance’s The Place Beyond The Pines. At the time of release, I can remember describing it as drawn out over hyped drivel that was screaming for an Oscar. When I heard similar comparisons being made from other critics about this latest offering, it didn’t build up high hopes for me.

BUT I was pleasantly surprised and rewarded with a highly engaging and heartfelt affair.

We follow Tom Sherbourne fresh from the turmoil of the First World War as he takes up the light-keeper job on Janus Island. A man desperate to escape to the furthest part of the world. The sound of gun fire and war planes carrying across the wind. The vast ocean offering little refuge.

I felt the character of Sherbourne was a complete change for Fassbender. To see him play a much more vulnerable and reserved role. Delivering another superb turn.

Adam Arkapaw’s cinematography was breathtaking. It was amazing how Janus Island could look barren and desolate in one frame and beautiful and idyllic the next. Wonderful. Alexandre Desplat delivered another brilliant score that complimented the piece.

The slow burning pace allowed us to empathize with this traumatized veteran who already felt his time was up. That was until he met Isabel (The lovely Alicia Vikander).

You couldn’t fault the chemistry between them (Which is probably why they ended up together in real life). We watched their romance blossom as Tom’s stern demeanour was finally cracked by the inquisitive and youthful Isabel.

As much as the running time may have strung the story line, I was heavily invested in the pair. BUT with any drama, there is always tragedy lurking around the corner. We suffered with them as Isabel went through two miscarriages. Endured the merciless storms that riddled the small island.

Vikander was brilliant as Isabel. The darkness taking away her youth and smile as Tom dug another grave.

Until one fateful storm answered the poor girl’s prayer as a dingy washed up on the shore. A dead man with no papers and a healthy baby girl.

The kid actors that played young Lucy were brilliant. You can’t stop a child going off script and they made the scenes and dynamic that much more natural and entertaining. There were certain scenes where you could tell that Fassbender and the cast were having to improvise.

However as time passes, Tom soon discovers that a grieving widow in the village visits the cemetery mourning the husband and daughter that were lost at sea. Throwing him into a crisis of conscience with moral and ethical implications that could destroy the lives of his own family.

Rachel Weisz was superb as the grief-stricken Hannah. You could feel your own loyalties changing. Understanding Isabel’s loss and reasons for keeping the child BUT also feeling empathy for Hannah who has spent all those years believing her child was gone.

And I’m not sure if there is a rule BUT (of course) being set in Australia, we had Bryan Brown playing Hannah’s wealthy father.

As the inevitable drama unfolded, I didn’t know how it would end (Never reading the bestselling novel. A crime in itself). I was on tenterhooks.

I have to commend Derek Cianfrance for adapting and delivering an emotional story. To convey and capture such emotion so effectively. The grief, the trauma, a mother’s loss. Excellent. Of course that could not have been done without the support of a fantastic cast who played their parts to perfection.

I’m not one for romantic period pieces BUT this is one to watch.

3.5/5

*NEW* MACBETH REVIEW *NEW*

I think I’d rather fill my mind with scorpions than sit through this again.

Despite a powerhouse performance by Fassbender, Justin Kurzel’s adaptation of the renowned Shakespearean play didn’t quite do it for me.

Macbeth (Michael Fassbender), the Thane of Glamis, receives a prophecy from a trio of witches that one day he will become King of Scotland (David Thewlis). Consumed by ambition and spurred to action by his wife (Marion Cotillard), Macbeth murders his king and takes the throne for himself.

Fassbender (Steve Jobs) was brilliant. I couldn’t think of anybody better to take on the iconic role of the demented King. This adaptation brought back school boy nostalgia. Unfortunately NOT in a good way. Macbeth is certainly not the best Shakespearean play to break into for a newbie. This only reminded me of what an arduous chore it was to analyse and decipher the soliloquies back in GCSE English just to get the gist of what was going on.

Adam Arkapaw’s cinematography was sublime. It really made the murky Scottish back drop a sight to see. After a strong and graphic opening with the Thane claiming victory on the battlefield, the film soon set off on a snail’s pace. The elongated panning shots. The long stares. I could feel my eyes drooping.

Maybe I wasn’t as much of a fan as I thought. I preferred Kenneth Branagh’s adaptation of Hamlet. An overtly lavish and grandiose affair BUT at least it was riveting and mesmerizing. For a story of betrayal, greed and madness, not a lot happened. A lot of the gruesome stuff was told in the horribly droll speeches and never shown. That’s not to say I need gore to keep my attention BUT it was incredibly hard going, dull and drawn out.

As much as Fassbender’s performance kept things watchable, I felt Roman Polanski’s 1971 version tackled the subject matter a lot better and was much more engaging and accessible. The screenwriters tried to make little changes BUT it just didn’t work. The witches’ coven, for example. I always remember there being three. Instead we have an ensemble of women and children. BUT what was the relevance? None, apparently. Even more ironic when only three of them spoke.

Paddy Considine (Dead Man’s Shoes) wasn’t in this enough as Banquo. His absence was sorely missed in this lifeless affair. David Thewlis (Seven Years in Tibet) had the easiest job going as Duncan. He didn’t do a bad job for the two scenes he featured in.

Marion Cotillard (La Vie en Rose) was the perfect choice for Lady Macbeth. A role I hoped she would sink her teeth into BUT she was far too passive and weak. I always perceived Lady Macbeth as this devious and influential mastermind. BUT in this adaptation, she did absolutely nothing. A shame. I’m not sure whether it was the writers or Cotillard’s interpretation of the role BUT it didn’t work and she didn’t deliver the lines with enough conviction.

It was strange to see Sean Harris (Prometheus) as a good guy. BUT his demeanour and performance as MacDuff made me root for Macbeth more. By the end of the play, I knew Macbeth had lost it. BUT whether it was down to a lack of chemistry from Harris or too much charisma from Fassbender, the drawn out combat sequence was a real challenge as my loyalty was already decided NOT torn.

I don’t think I’m going to be able to wash my hands clean of this mess. Tough viewing. Any newbies thinking of trying to approach Shakespeare on the big screen may want to steer clear. This is one for the die hards.

2.5/5