To Defend Until My Dying Breath

Everyone has guilty pleasure films. It could be a rom-com or a repulsive comedy, it could be a panned superhero film or a Star Wars prequel. We like them for many reasons: perhaps you are aware they are poorly made but the themes and characters might resonate or connect to you in a way that 'better' films do not. Or perhaps you love them because of how awful they are (Commando?). 

I have selected 14 films that I know are treated harshly by critics and the internet. Some are outright bad films I enjoy, others I think are genuinely quality motion pictures. They are all blockbusters, some belong to franchises and some do not. Because when it comes to divisive films, it is the blockbusters with large fan bases that lead to never ending arguments and thus the creation of opinions that people may struggle to voice if they are a minority. If i was sat in a room with senior critics, I would be backed into a corner by myself in order to defend these films.

1. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (2006)
Rotten Tomatoes rating: 5.95 / 10. IMDb: 7.3. Metacritic: 53 /100

Curse of the Black Pearl is one of my favourite films because it is pure entertainment and escapism. Dead Man's Chest I also absolutely love for the same reason. It is a ludicrously imaginative film, staging set pieces that you would struggle to find in other blockbusters. There aren't many historically set franchises that have as much fun as these films do, even more impressive considering there are no books or comic to base the ingenious creature design and action sequences off. From Bill Nighy's Davy Jones to the triple cannons, it is relentlessly engaging in exploring the mystical mythology of the sea. There's the Kraken, a cannibal island, a three-way sword fight on a moving wheel and a chest with a beating heart in it. The music is top notch, the visuals hold up delightfully well and Johnny Depp is still fantastic. There is nothing wrong with silly. 

2. Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (2007)

Rotten Tomatoes rating: 5.4. IMDb: 7.1. Metacritic: 50 

With slightly lower ratings than its predecessor, At World's End is often considered the weakest of the three. Criticism is aimed at the massive run time and its convoluted plot and constant backstabbing and scheming. And yet that is partly why I am equally fond of this film. The extensive run time makes it feel like an epic culmination to what would have been a very solid trilogy of films, and whilst I never had any problem working out the machinations of the plot (the more convoluted the more interesting), the amount of lore, betrayals and character relations make this a fine blockbuster to re-watch. The action is more sparse, and there is a bit more surrealism to this film (multiple Jacks etc.) but in many ways, the big films that try and be different and individual are going to go down a lot more positively with me then those that stray too close to normality so as opposed to be mundane (PotC 5). And At World's End also brings satisfying resolutions to Will and Elizabeth, British soldiers Mullroy and Murtogg, Barbossa and even Jack, who ends the film alone on a tiny boat, just how we met him in the first film. 

3. The Lone Ranger (2013)

Rotten Tomatoes rating: 4.86. IMDb: 6.4.  Metacritic: 37

The third Gore Verbinski and Johnny Depp film to make the list, The Lone Ranger is noted for being a box office disaster for Disney. It is quite incredible the film got made; a $200+ million budget for a western film? Johnny Depp's global presence was already waning so it seems a bold move. But I'm thankful this was made. For the western genre it injected with unabashed fun. The action scenes are fantastically staged and the train sequence finale when Hans Zimmer's score kicks in is simply so exhilarating it is inevitable to smile. It is bonkers, but Armie Hammer and Depp somehow make it work, and there is also a revisionist melancholy to the movie which elevates it somewhat. It is a fairly damning attack on white settlers, a ballsy message to have in a family blockbuster. Yes it is long, but Tarantino labelled it as one of his ten favourites of 2013 and if that is my only company for liking this film, then that is not too bad. 

4. Transformers: Dark of the Moon (2011)

Rotten Tomatoes rating: 4.86. IMDb: 6.2. Metacritic: 42

Okay this is a guilty pleasure. There is an agreed consensus that Transformers (2007) is a solid popcorn action film and not overly indulgent. Revenge of the Fallen is seen as a massive joke but Dark of the Moon I have always had a soft spot for. Maybe it is because my eleven year old self was wowed by it and over the years have watched it an awful lot, to the point of being adept at quoting large portions of the film. I have zero interest in the human part of this film; they are dull and the film spends too much time in the first act with them. But admittedly Bay nails the Transformers. The CGI is still ridiculously detailed and smooth and the action is ground-shaking. The highway chase, Chernobyl encounter and the massive final battle in Chicago are rip roaring to witness. The kills are brutal and fun, and the score is also solid. The relationship between Optimus Prime and Sentinel Prime is actually quite compelling, and their final scrap is a good 'un, although it does not hit the heights of the forest clash in the second installment. It was badass when I was eleven, and it is probably still badass now. Oh, and Megatron's Mad Max inspired truck design is pretty neat. 

5. Man of Steel (2013) 

Rotten Tomatoes: 6.24. IMDb: 7.1. Metacritic: 55

Man of Steel is a very good superhero film. Watching it now however is actually quite painful; it is a reminder of what the DCEU could have been. If they had roughly followed the Marvel strategy of a few origin stories and then a team up, but kept their Nolan-ised tone and more intellectual storytelling, it would have worked a treat among fans. But in trying to play catch up and also to appeal to the audiences who love the light-hearted thrills of the MCU, Warner Bros. lost something great. Criticism towards Man of Steel concerns this dark tone (a departure from previous Superman films) and the massive destruction sequences of the third act. My main issue with the 'light tone' demand is that the film is set in 2013. The world of 2013 is a lot more hostile and rigid than the world of 1978. Superman's responsibility and power needs to be checked and contained by the governments of 2013, whilst his existence would only ostracise him from society. Clark Kent is different to everyone else and I think Snyder's approach at showing this inner conflict works really well with the setting. He wants to help because he can help, but he knows he will never be able to rest again after; he will always have to be there. The film is rife with religious allegory and philosophy, particularly in the Kryptonian society. And Michael Shannon's General Zod is also just a man wanting to save his planet and people, driven to extremes when it fails. The action is well done, with Snyder speeding it up to really get a feel for how gods fight so that when Supes and Zod come together at the end, it feels like we are witnessing two phenomenally powerful super-beings going at it. The visuals are clean, the score is fantastic and the use of snap-zooms I can actually get behind; emphasising the camera's struggle to keep up with the speed of Superman. As for the destruction scenes, Superman is still coming to terms with his powers and it is impossible for two gods to not break a few buildings. It is a bold picture, but I think in 20-30 years when film historians re-evaluate the superhero decade of the 2010s, Man of Steel's reception will improve due to standing out above the more 'safe' competition. 

6. Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith (2005)

Rotten Tomatoes: 7.28. IMDb: 7.5. Metacritic: 68 

The reviews on the above sites are actually more favourable than other films selected, but I am still including this because the immediate responses to the prequels were often very positive, only for that to decrease with time. And because it is a prequel, Revenge of the Sith is still grouped as a 'bad' film. But I will not stand for it. Yes the acting and dialogue leaves a LOT to be desired ("you are so beautiful" ... "only because I'm so in love" ... "no no because I am so in love with you" ... "so love has blinded you?"), but this is probably the most Star Wars Star Wars film. The imagination is simply off the chain across the two and a bit hours. From General Grievous to Mustafa, the wheel bike to Boga, the wookie vehicles to Order 66, there are so many iconic designs and fresh vehicles, creatures and planets. The action is still the best in the franchise; the opening over Coruscant is still technically impressive and the multitude of lightsaber duels does not feel over done. Anakin and Obi-wan's gigantic fight may slightly drag but the first two-thirds is masterfully choreographed between a master and apprentice who know each other's every over. Yoda gets some awesome moments like flattening the two Red Guards and yes, the meme output from this film makes it tremendously quotable and entertaining, even if that was not the desired purpose. If my childhood was a film, this might be that film. 

7. Godzilla (2014) 

Rotten Tomatoes: 6.65. IMDb: 6.4. Metacritic: 62

This is one of those 'I really liked it' or 'I hated it- not enough Godzilla' type films. And the above scores signify that mixed response, though I still feel that they are a bit conservative. Gareth Evans' Godzilla is Spielberg meets Nolan. It takes it time, teasing the audience visually with the title character in order to create suspense, whilst also being solemn in tone and taking the creature very seriously. And it works for the most part. Perhaps Bryan Cranston should have been in it more, and maybe if Aaron Taylor-Johnson's character was a bit more likable then the film would actually be quite excellent. But because of the sparity of monsters and action, humans are a little more vital in this monster film than they are in others. But when it's good, it's great. The sound design is criminally underrated; the shot of the airport with Godzilla's foot smashing down is so forcefully felt, as is the first roar. Using darkness for the monsters is smart from a visual point of view, meaning the film will age a lot better in terms of its CGI, and also meaning the atomic breath sequence is both stunning and cathartic. It is by no means a favourite film, but this feels under appreciated. 

8. Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019)

Rotten Tomatoes: 5.15. IMDb: 6.1. Metacritic: 48

The criticisms aimed at Godzilla were answered with this sequel, which was then pretty much annihilated critically and commercially (though Endgame contributed to the latter). Not enough Godzilla? Here is loads of Godzilla. The monster fights were neither long enough nor visible enough? Here have dozens. Human characters are boring? Here is Milly Bobby Brown and Kyle Chandler. I did find that the humans in this sequel were a tad more appealing than those in the first, but it is the monster stuff that is the big sell here. For a film called Godzilla: King of the Monsters all I want is Godzilla, monsters, and Godzilla fighting monsters. Like Pacific Rim, I just want big scale fun like a kid tipping his toy box upside down. As a fan of Rodan, Ghidorah and Mothra, this film did them justice. Their musical cues were good (as was the revivial of the OG Godzilla theme) and scenes like Rodan's flight are really cool. Whilst the huge wide shots could have lingered longer when the big beasts collide, the overall photography is pretty and the colour palettes are diverse enough to be refreshing. It is harmless fun and big screen spectacle and the people who did not like it basically missed the point of the film. 

9. Prometheus (2012) 

Rotten Tomatoes: 6.96. IMDb: 7. Metacritic: 65

Another polarising franchise film, Ridley Scott's Prometheus is loved and hated in equal measure. The reason I do not like the sequel, Alien: Covenant, that much is because the studios and crew listened to those that did not like Prometheus, and instead opted for a more straight forward xenomorph dominated action horror. But as I said earlier, blockbusters that are bold and daring get more respect more than those that play it safe. The film is philosophically potent with a lot going on about creation, exploration and colonisation. The practical sets look stunning and it is no surprise that a Scott film set in space is gorgeous to behold. Michael Fassbender is head and shoulders above the rest of the cast with his android David and the last forty five minutes I found equally intense on the second viewing as I did the first. It left the door open for some more fantastic lore and creativity away from the Alien films and it is a shame that we did not get Prometheus 2. 

10. Mission: Impossible 2 (2000)

Rotten Tomatoes: 5.9. IMDb: 6.1. Metacritic: 59

Ghost Protocol, Rogue Nation and Fallout are the most popular of the Mission franchise, in part because the series found its footing and how to make it unique (hint: ludicrous stunts). If Mission: Impossible is a faithful adaptation of the TV series, then M:I 2 is balls to the wall 2000s action. John Woo brings his kinetic style to the most ridiculous film in the pantheon, staging a pretty forgettable story around some wildly entertaining action. I toy with this film if it is a guilty pleasure or not, but I do really like a lot of the stuff in this. The opening scene of Tom Cruise free-soloing a rock face is unbearably palm-sweating and the third act's motorbike chase and fist fight is deliriously fun. The long hair of Cruise, rapid cuts and self-indulgent stunt-work all amalgamates into a terrific Friday evening curry and a beer movie. 

11. Spectre (2015)

Rotten Tomatoes: 6.4. IMDb: 6.8. Metacritic: 60

Skyfall was a juggernaut in 2012, critics and audiences loved it and it grossed over a billion dollars. Sam Mendes had to go bigger for the sequel which, for many, fell utterly short of Skyfall. Which is fair enough; Spectre's villain is a lot weaker and the plot is less interesting than the revenge story line at the heart of Skyfall. But because of this the film seems to be so easily discarded. It is not a bad film. The opening sequence, a four minute tracking shot followed by a helicopter fight is a cracking start to a film that goes big with the set pieces. The car chase in Rome, the brutal fist fight on the train, the plane chase in Austria and the escape from Oberhauser's compound are pure class. If the third act does not deliver on the action front as much, then you can still really enjoy the first two thirds for some quality escapism. The cinematography and direction is still assured, but a slightly hamstrung narrative does not make this a bad film. 

12. The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)

Rotten Tomatoes: 6.54. IMDb: 7.8. Metacritic: 58

13. The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)

Rotten Tomatoes: 6.81. IMDb: 7.8 Metacritic: 66

14. The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies (2014)

Rotten Tomatoes: 6.28. IMDb: 7.4. Metacritic: 59

Grouping The Hobbit trilogy together as they all share similar positive and negatives, they make up the final part of this list. Whilst seen as enjoyable, they are too often cast aside for not living up to the almighty Lord of the Rings and of course for splitting a small book into three parts. Whilst two films would have been a better approach, what we got was more time in Middle-earth with beloved characters. There is an over-reliance on visual effects too, but I love these for being a gentler fantasy trilogy than LOTR. An Unexpected Journey has vast sentimental value, but I also love how it captures that spirit of adventure and the quest; it retains the spirit of Tolkien's novel well. It has heart and warmth and I think it is well paced. The Desolation of Smaug is a rollicking action film with tonnes of spectacle and excitement. Martin Freeman and Benedict Cumberbatch as Bilbo and Smaug is one of the best casting choices in the blockbuster era and when they come together in the third act it makes for tremendous cinema. And The Battle of the Five Armies may go overboard with effects and action, but it is still a satisfying end with some quality set pieces. The geography of the battle and the different sides are also well presented, giving it clarity. They are far from perfect, but they are far from bad. The costumes, props, make-up and sets are impressive and there are many scenes that can go toe-to-toe with some of the best in LOTR. 

Is There a Greatest Year in Film?

Despite not being as big a topic of debate among the film community as others, arguing the case for a greatest or best year in cinematic history is a very interesting one, because depending on your opinions on what constitutes greatness, there are dozens of answers to choose. 

1939 is a well-defended year due to its releases of Gone With the Wind, Wizard of Oz, Mr Smith Goes to Washington and Stagecoach for starters. 

Then there is 1968 which unleashed 2001: A Space Odyssey on the world, as well as Planet of the Apes, Once Upon a Time in the West, Bullit, Rosemary's Baby and Oliver!; all undeniably influential flims in their genres. 

There is a popular choice in 1994, due to its top films being repeatedly represented in audience lists like IMDb Top 250. Shawshank Redemption, Forrest Gump and Pulp Fiction spearhead the argument, backed by The Lion King, Four Weddings and a Funeral, Speed and the triple Jim Carrey punch of Ace Venture, The Mask and Dumb and Dumber. It is a very strong year across all genres. But what it is worth I would say that the following year was even stronger, with 1995 offering some belters: Heat, Casino, The Usual Suspects, Se7en, Toy Story, Braveheart and GoldenEye instantly stand out. But whilst there are some indie gems like Before Sunrise, 1995's best pieces are largely revolved around the crime genre. And whilst they are four stone cold knock outs, I feel a 'best year' needs to have more range and that its genre pictures represent as many genres as possible. 

I will say that my favourite year in movie history is 2003. Return of the King, Finding Nemo, The Last Samurai and Curse of the Black Pearl are Top 20 pictures, and if you throw in Master and Commander, Open Range and guilty pleasures Elf and Love, Actually then a great wealth of my go to films seem to crop together under one annual banner. But again, that is a very blockbuster oriented list and two guilty pleasures, hardly the stuff of objective greatness. 

And whilst 2017 was an impressive year due to a convergence of blockbuster with art (films include Dunkirk, Get Out, Blade Runner 2049, Logan, War for the Planet of the Apes, Baby Driver, Call Me By Your Name, Ladybird, Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri, Paddington 2 and Coco), I still feel that that is too fresh a year to truly unpack its legacy and staying power. And so it came down to two years. 2007 and 2014. 

To help decide I set myself the scenario: if you could only have the films from one year with you to watch for the rest of your life, which would be more beneficial? The answer has to be a perfect amalgamation of comedy and drama, blockbuster and action, animation and romance. If we separate the films into three categories: the Oscar caliber, indie and arthouse, the blockbuster and the genre, then we can determine which of the two years has the greater output and quality inside that output.

From 2007 the arthouse / indie / Oscar caliber films include No Country for Old Men, There Will be Blood, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford, Into the Wild, American Gangster, Zodiac, Juno and Atonement. All very strong entries, with the first three in particular being masterclasses in technique and precision. On the blockbuster front there is Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End, Transformers, I Am Legend, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, 300, The Bourne Ultimatum and Spider-man 3. Yes, some of those aren't critical darlings, but in terms of scale, excitement, action and fun, they are all very serviceable blockbusters. Finally for the genre hits, there is Ratatouille, 3:10 to Yuma, Bridge to Terabithia, Superbad, Mr Bean's Holiday, The Simpson's Movie, Hot Fuzz (!!) Ocean's Thirteen and, purely because of their ironic appeal now, Shrek the Third and Bee Movie. These are popular with audiences with some top comedies being released here. 

Seven years on is 2014. It is fair to say that in this time the cinematic output has increased and therefore more films to choose from. The arthouse / indie / Oscar caliber films from 2014 include Whiplash, Nightcrawler, Boyhood, Birdman, Gone Girl, American Sniper, the immensely Oscar-baity The Theory of Everything and The Imitation Game and, reluctantly, The Grand Budapest Hotel. The first four of those are phenomenal. On the blockbuster front it was a superb year with Captain America: The Winter Soldier, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, Edge of Tomorrow, X-Men Days of Future Past, Godzilla, The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies and, reluctantly, Guardians of the Galaxy, Whilst only really liking three of those, I can understand the popularity for the others and I would rewatch any of them if I only had 2014 films (although I suppose I would have to). On the genre front things are spiced up some more with the almighty Interstellar, John Wick, Big Hero 6, The Lego Movie, How to Train Your Dragon 2, The Equalizer, 22 Jump Street, Fury and the mind-blowing The Raid 2. There was also Transformers Age of Extinction but writing that would only make 2007;s filmography appeal more. 

It is hard to pick and choose here; the titanic There Will be Blood, protected on either side by No Country and Jesse James, looms large. That is a superb trinity of films, and the support from Into the Wild, The Bourne Ultimatum, Ratatouille, Hot Fuzz and the unashamedly bombastic and fun At World's End to have a magnetism. They are peak films in their genres, influential and popular in their own right. But then there is Interstellar, The Raid 2, Whiplash and Nightcrawler. An original science fiction epic, a simply faultlessly executed Indonesian action film, and two hot, fresh and unforgettable indie pictures. The technical achievements for Boyhood and Birdman are worth noting, as is the visual effects work on Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and Interstellar. 

Perhaps I am more passionate on the 2007 side; they are films I love recommending and rewatching yet they are more than favourites too; they are classics. But 2014 seems to have platformed stronger indie films and the Oscar bait is a little more appealing here due to the technical aspects on display. The blockbusters I think have a stronger presence in critics' lists too, so I am starting to think that 2014 may be the greatest year going. 

And writing this solved literally nothing and did not equate to anything more than an internal monologue.  

Box Office Breakdown of 2019

The success of certain films over a year is of great interest to film producers but should also be of note to the public: what they pay to see, and what draws the most crowds will ultimately decide how the big studios will operate over the next few years, and the public, as consumers, can expect what they will be pushed to go and see in the future. 

2019 was a record breaking year on a vast scale; 2015 had the record for most billion dollar grossing films in a year (five) but 2019 is (at the time of writing) on its way to a potential nine films grossing a billion dollars. Avatar was finally dethroned from its worldwide record and we got new highest grossing films in the live-action, animated and R rated departments. Here is the 2019 worldwide list with breakdowns of the performances:

10. Fast and Furious Presents: Hobbs and  Shaw - $758,910,100
Poor Hobbs and poor Shaw: the only film stopping 2019 having a clean sweep of billion dollar grossers. But 3/4 of a billion is not to be sniffed at when considering its a spin-off that is predominantly aimed at teenage boys on their summer holidays. I haven't seen the film but it is clear that the teaming of Dwayne Johnson and Jason Statham was vital for marketing, as well as the semi-tongue in cheek humour and massively overblown set pieces.

9. Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker - $1,005,323,801 (and counting)
Episode 9 could either have been the second film on this list or not at all. It was immensely hard to predict how this film would do: The Last Jedi saw a $700 million decline from The Force Awakens, fan reception was massively divided with threats of a boycott, Solo was a flop and appetite for the brand has steadily declined as the novelty has worn off. And then there is the film itself: neither satisfying for the people who loved TLJ and not satisfying enough for those that hated it. It stumbles about trying to make as many people happy as possible that the final result is a 'meh' film that feels conventional and cowardly and does not fully wrap up the messy sequel trilogy. It is the first of the Disney bunch that I did not feel inclined to go and see again, a sentiment held by a great deal of friends too. It gave Disney their seventh billion dollar hit of the year but this is not a film that will be remembered, and the fact that other films on this list grossed more is enough evidence for a diminishing franchise. Watch The Mandalorian instead. 

8. Aladdin - $1,050,693,953

At the start of the year if someone had said "Joker will gross more than Aladdin" then I would've shrugged and I said "probably." Aladdin had polarising trailers and did not seem like a juggernaut. And then it exploded around the world. Now if someone had said to me in September that "Joker will out-gross Aladdin" I would have scoffed. It seemed like an impossible feat. Both those statements turned out true and the studio executives for both films should be pretty pleased with the two films on this list that I would have argued a year ago would not make it. The film proved Will Smith is still bankable and audiences will see Disney remakes if they keep banging them out. 

7. Joker - 

By far the biggest success story of the year, Todd Phillips' psychological thriller about Arthur Fleck's descent into becoming Joker is a zeitgeist-tapping breakout. The fantastic trailers and marketing kicked off the anticipation for this, and then the post-film-festival controversy and media assault began, drawing the film deeper into the public's perception. This was a film used by the media for scaremongering; in reality it led to people watching it to decide for themselves and have an opinion on it. What followed was a gigantic October opening, and then an impressive -43% drop in its second weekend, showing its staying power and word of mouth. Joker's success can be attributed to a variety of reasons: the media outcry that labelled it as violent and upsetting, the hype around Joaquin Phoenix's potentially Oscar winning performance and, probably most importantly, it is a terrific film. It offers something new and refreshing to younger cinema goers; showing an evolution in the superhero genre. Also, the film's deluded protagonist and smart direction means that not everything in the film is fact, something which in conversations after watching it will only encourage repeat viewings to help your own theory and understanding of the film. Joker is the biggest R rated film ever, and by quite a significant margin at that. The fact that it made over a billion dollars without a Chinese release is phenomenal. Joker is a studio's dream: an old school style drama made on a budget of around $60 million that did not need a Chinese release to become the most profitable comic book film of all time. 

6. Toy Story 4 - $1,073,3948,593

When it opened in America, Toy Story 4 grossed 'only' $120 million over the weekend and at the time landed the biggest worldwide opening for an animated film with $244 million (since overtaken twice). Articles circulated that this was a disappointing result for Pixar, and that it showed a fatigue or lack of love for a new Toy Story film. But is that really the case? Finding Dory made over $130 million in its domestic opening weekend, landing the biggest animated opening. In 2018, Incredibles II destroyed that record with $180 million. It is these two films, recent Pixar sequels to beloved classics, that perhaps set a standard for this fourth installment. The key word there is 'fourth'- Woody and Buzz have had sequels before, and there was an 11 year gap between the 2 and 3, which lead to a juggernaut box office success for the third. The novelty of seeing these characters again decreases the more they are seen; if Incredibles had two more sequels I would predict that they wouldn't open bigger than the second. The novelty fades. And any animated film hitting over $100 million in a weekend is a breakout hit. Unadjusted for inflation, this film actually made slightly more than Toy Story 3 which is what you hope a sequel will do. I am glad this film was a big hit, it's fantastic and a poignant ending not just to Woody and Buzz, but also for Pixar's sequels as this was to be their final one. 

5. Captain Marvel - $1,128,274,794

February seems like a new sweet spot for Marvel releases, with this stand-alone film coming a year after Black Panther accumulated $1.3 billion in the same release window. Again, this had the 'social novelty' of being Marvel's first female led film, similar to the first black-led Marvel film a year prior. The two big factors for this film's success is the female-led USP and that 2018's Infinity War set up Captain Marvel with its post-credits scene; implying her importance and a need to see her origin film before watching Endgame. Because the film itself is average; probably better than most others in the franchise and I found its quieter scenes far more engaging than its spectacle, which seems forgettable. And no, Brie Larson's disastrous comments did not lead to a boycott or box office failure. I would expect more from this character in the future. 

4. Spider-man: Far From Home - $1,131,927,966

In seven months Marvel made $5 billion worldwide. Let that sink in. Far From Home capitalised on Endgame's success big time; using it in marketing and being sold as an epilogue to the Infinity Saga. This was a clever move, butting bums in seats by saying that this was a final bit of closure for characters like Tony Stark. The previous Spider-man film, Homecoming, made $880 million back in July 2017. In that time, Peter Parker got some of the most memorable lines and scenes in the two colossal Avengers films; in many ways being the heart and soul of the story. It was inevitable this film would earn more, and if you add in Jake Gyllenhaal as Mysterio you have a solid recipe for success. Again, this was a mostly fine Marvel film. It had entertaining sequences, comedy and a welcome surprise in its credit scenes. Another new leading face for the MCU moving forward. 

3. Frozen II - $1,267,812,364 (and counting)
Whilst not surprised that it is a gigantic success, I will admit I was taken aback that Frozen II overtook its predecessor. Back in 2013, Frozen was that ubiquitous film with instantly iconic new characters, an inescapable selection of songs and a female friendly property. It played in cinemas in months, complete with sing-a-long versions too. Six years is a while between sequels but promising trailers and familiarity have ensured that Frozen II became another breakout, all the more surprising considering I have not heard the more popular songs being played and sung as much as Let It Go was back in the day. But its a win for female audiences and Disney. 

2. The Lion King - $1,656,813,149
I expected this to crack the top three easily, and I also expected it to become the biggest of the Disney remakes. 1994's The Lion King is unquestionably the most popular Disney animation; it is the highest rated, one of their biggest successes, as an eternally playing London show and is always in conversation for the 'what scenes make you cry' question. Throw in James Earl Jones returning as Mufasa, Beyone as Nala and Donald Glover as Simba, and you have a talented of-the-time cast to go with the striking visuals. Of course audiences wanted to see the story told again and hear the famous score and soundtrack, regardless of critical response. And the prime mid-July weekend is always economically beneficial, giving the tent pole films a good two weeks run before the next summer release. It did not deserve to make this much money as it offered nothing new, but it is obvious how it did. 

1. Avengers: Engdame - $2,797,800,564

A monolith of a film if ever there was one. It has been all too frequently documented how and why this epic conclusion became the highest grossing film of all time. But as briefly as possible here goes. Infinity War was universally loved and praised by audiences and critics; it had a riveting new villain, a shocking, cliffhanger finale and the promise of revenge. Audiences knew this was the end of the story, and the end of some of their characters. The theorising was non-stop and people just could not wait, so they all booked tickets opening weekend. Infinity War had the biggest domestic opening ever with $257 million, and the biggest global opening with around $640 million. Endgame launched to $350 million domestic and $1.2 billion worldwide. That is a ludicrous increase, and a record I just cannot fathom ever being topped. The film was emotionally satisfying, had some of the most rewarding moments in fan-service history, and has a pulsing momentum towards an unforgettable conclusion (especially if you saw it in a packed cinema). Then there was a whole social media movement that aimed at removing Avatar as the no.1 film in favour of something more worthwhile. Is it more worthwhile? Well with Avatar I think more people went to see it, whereas Endgame was perhaps driven more by repeat viewings of its fans. One is a technical gimmick, the other a decade long closure to a generation defining franchise. And yes, Marvel did cheat by adding extra scenes and Far From Home material to later releases in order to get it over Avatar, but then again so did James Cameron. What is interesting is that after those two films is Titanic with $2.1 billion. That means there is a nearly $700 million difference and the top two are separated by a puny $10-20 million. 

1917 (an ode to the one shot)

My favourite scene in 2015's Spectre is the opening shot. The camera starts above a crowded street in Mexico, pushing forwards and down until it finds James Bond. Bond sets off, the camera following him into a building, up an elevator and into his room where upon he lives his female accomplice and steps out onto the rooftop with a gun in hand before setting up to eavesdrop on his targets. It runs at four minutes and supposedly contains four 'cuts' that are seamlessly woven together. The movement of the camera, combined with the score and Bond's casual yet assured physicality, makes for an utterly immersive start. It was achieved through the ambition and precision of its director, Sam Mendes, and its cinematographer, Hoyte van Hoytema. Over four years later and that scene just looked like a trial for the one shot technique, as Mendes' new film, 1917, pulls out the stops to appear as one or two shots. 

Hoyte van Hoytema did not return for the war film, with Mendes opting for the legendary Roger Deakins who he had previously used on Skyfall and Revolutionary Road. Fans of Deakins will know that he is a man of the silhouette and a man of orange light with a greater focus on handsomely crafted stills. Single takes or one shots do not often appear in his work, instead Emmanuel Lubezki is best known for long tracking shots that are invisibly stitched together. When it comes to tracking shots used to tell entire movies there are several examples: Hitchcock's Rope, 2014's Best Picture winner Birdman (Lubezki) and Victoria (2015) are all told in 'one' shot. But Deakins adds another string to his quite entangled bow by not only accomplishing the continuous shots in this film, but by doing it on an entirely different scale. 

With huge sets, swarms of extras and a lot of action, one can only imagine the preparation and rehearsal that went into the shoot. Mendes has how outdone himself here, achieving a technical prowess on the level of Nolan or Kubrick. It is seriously impressive and, most importantly, immersive. This is not a gimmick rather a method or tool to enhance the storytelling. The story tells of two young men sent on a mission behind enemy lines to deliver a message that will save 1,600 soldiers' lives, including the brother of one of the two. But in reality, there are three soldiers. The audience becomes more than a spectator; they are a third soldier following the other two around, taking cover when they do and wincing when they do. 

Much like Dunkirk, every aspect of filmmaking involved is masterful. From the period correct sets to Thomas Newman's trembling score (with a little whiff of Hans Zimmer's work from The Thin Red Line), to the hidden editing and intense sound design. But before the camera there is also a brilliant performance from George McKay, and Dean Charles Chapman continues to fashion himself a hopefully bountiful career post-Game of Thrones. There is also a cornucopia of British talent in small supporting roles: Colin Firth, Benedict Cumberbatch, Andrew Scott, Mark Strong and Richard Madden all step in and leave some sort of impression. 

Towards the end of the film there is an utterly fantastic piece of direction where the audience realises the non-verbal decision playing in a character's head, leading to whitened knuckles as the music begins to rise. It is one hell of a cinematic moment. 

And whilst the more learned film viewers may find themselves trying to look for the joins and cuts in Deakins' camera (and therefore lose some of the intended immersion), the overall look, feel and sound of the film is a transcendent experience. The film has been out a week but to see the cinema gradually get filled out with families of all ages, and to hear the excited conversations as they left afterwards, is magical. There is a beauty to this film and whilst it does not have anything overtly new to say about war, the messages and the way they are emotionally executed is potent enough to draw a tear from the eye. 

By default, one of the best WW1 films going. 

A Selection of My Favourite Movie Shots

1. Mirror shot- Contact
One of those watch-then-rewind shots that comes out of nowhere. I never want to know how this was accomplished but Robert Zemeckis, hats off for the creativity.

2. Descent into the dark- Sicario
Roger Deakins at is best, showing less is more. The beautiful sky, clear silhouettes, pulsing music and the gradual transition into the darkness makes for enchanting cinema.

3. The HALO jump- Mission: Impossible- Fallout
It is well documented how many times Tom Cruise jumped from that plane just to get the perfect shot, but this thrilling sequence has gorgeous twilight skies and is a phenomenal feat.













4. Koba hijacks the tank- Dawn of the Planet of the Apes
https://youtu.be/XjV-wXc8-Fg
(skip to 38 seconds)
Mounting a camera onto the rotating turret of tank proves a genius move, showing vicious ape Koba take control over it whilst giving the audience a marvelous panoramic shot of the battlefield.

5. Las Vegas- Blade Runner 2049
Probably the shot that won Deakins his Oscar, this is wallpaper material at its finest. Minimal yet dripping with colour.

6. The train- The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford
This entire sequence is Deakins at his best but the rippling light from the train, Brad Pitt's swaggering shadow and the symmetry of the tracks beautifully amalgamate.


7. Willard rises- Apocalypse Now
The slow movement, painted face, flashes of lighting and the mist: the apparent completion of Willard's fall. Or is it?



8. Flying past Saturn- Interstellar
This shot needs to be seen on the biggest screen possible. Here it just looks like a smear. But look closely and one will find a tiny silver speck: the Endurance, on its way to a wormhole. It's a beautiful sequence; calm and still yet filled with a sense of wonder and scale that reminds the audience just how alone and insignificant human life is. Wondrous.






9. The Planetarium- La La Land
Some may be turned off by this fantastical shot but others will be mesmerised by the visual poetry on display. The dancing silhouettes and intergalactic back drop makes Mia and Seb the star crossed lovers for the 21st century.

10. Swinging in the snow- Ikiru
Perhaps the most bittersweet sequences committed to celluloid, this shot sees our central hero singing about life whilst swinging alone in the snow in a park that he built just before dying. It is the closure to his story about only finding the power of life when faced with death. It's beautiful in every conceivable way.

 11. Hyper-space ramming- Star Wars: The Last Jedi
The Last Jedi is one of the prettiest Star Wars films, and this unforgettable sequence is probably its zenith. It is a series of stunningly rendered shots that wow visually whilst the sudden depletion of sound makes the image that much more potent. In a full auditorium, the silence was so strong that a guy only whispered "Jesus Christ" and got everyone laughing.

 12. Tornado- Mad Max Fury Road
More breathtaking action, but this time with added sound. The audiences is placed in Max's shoes, watching a car be swept up into a tornado and exploding, as lightning flashes and the crew are tossed to the wind. The whole film finds beauty in destruction, and this moment starts that trend.

 12. Obscuring Henry Fonda- The Ox-bow Incident
A cleverly blocked shot, Fonda's Gil Carter reads out the final words of a wrongly lynched man. His friend's hat conceals the eyes, effectively explaining the blindness of those that did it and the failings of the system as a whole. It is not anything fancy, but it sticks.

13. Drinking milk- Spellbound
The photo does not do it credit, but Gregory Peck drinks milk, with the camera shown looking down it. The milk slowly disappears to reveal the mysterious man before him. It is Hitchcock having fun.






14. Vader arrives- Rogue One
Few shots in modern blockbusters have elicited the same response in a cinema as this did for me. The darkness followed by Vader's breathing was already good enough. The sudden ignition of the lightsaber was godly. The red hallway acts like the elevator doors in The Shining, setting up the forthcoming bloodshed. It is just utterly satisfying.

15. Billy the Kid riding- Pat Garret and Billy the Kid
Sam Peckinpah often creates imagery that just sticks to the brain but this slow pan might be his best work. Billy rides from the left before his shadow merges with the backdrop and is replaced with his reflection in the water. In a film about changing times and the demise of the old, this shot both acts as a metaphor for the whole film and, in many ways, the western genre.

 16. The Revenant
There are too many paintings in this film to choose one, so here are three.

- valley zoom in
The camera starts what seems like miles away, gradually pushing forwards into this monumental landscape. A black spec gets closer and closer and Hugh Glass becomes visible. Much like Interstellar, I love shots that make people seem insignificant, and a love shots of nature. Masterful.

 - a brief rest
An absolutely gorgeous bit of eye candy. Emmanuel Lubezki crafts another wallpaper shot with this twilight photography. And for reasons I cannot quite describe, I have always loved the stick in this shot.

 - reborn
Having spent the night in a horse, Hugh Glass is reborn under the dripping snow. The duration of the still is long, thankfully. Any shorter and I might not have been as aware of it. The sun shines down between two trees, another birth image. The fallen trunk from the night before aligns with the far background. I am running out of adjectives.

Best of 2019

The best films I saw in 2019:

Honourable mentions for Rocketman, Toy Story 4, How to Train Your Dragon 3, The King, The Irishman, John Wick: Chapter 3.

1. Le Mans '66

An absolutely riveting story told through two crowd pleasing performances from Matt Damon and a magnetic Christian Bale. The film is funny, old school and at times thunderous, with the racing scenes being utterly enthralling. The sequence where Bale's Ken Miles is told to go full throttle is euphoric. And then that scene is one upped by the 'perfect lap'. It is neither too fancy or too artistic and nor is it too cliche. It is just a simple story told brilliantly. 

2. Once Upon a Time in... Hollywood 

Another buddy film, this is a Quentin Tarantino paradox; being both indulgent for old Hollywood but also the least indulgent in QT's filmography. The violence only occurs right at the end, the narrative is largely told chronologically... apart from the feet shots this is the least Tarantino film going. Leonardo DiCaprio and Brad Pitt make for two stellar leads, a Paul Newman and Robert Redford for 2019. Margot Robbie, as en emblem of innocence and fun as Sharon Tate, is great, and the sprawling supporting cast all make the most of their short scenes. On first viewing this was unbearably tense, knowing the story of Sharon Tate. Watching her laze around Hollywood made me constantly uneasy, allowing the third act twist to be one of the most cathartic cinematic experiences ever. A hang-out film with top performances and lavish period detail, but this felt like a film made for me: its nods to westerns and back-lot studios being extremely awesome. 

3. Joker 

The hit that nobody saw coming, Joker gassed its way to over $1 billion worldwide and a place in the cultural zeitgeist. Joaquin Phoenix is sensational, the score is grimy and unsettling and the photography is impressive. But its the ambiguity that stays with you; a second viewing reveals and contradicts things from the first viewing. For other films this would be a continuity problem, for Joker, with its unreliable narrator, it makes for thrilling discussion. And to think all that controversy was for nothing. 

4. Marriage Story 

Adam Driver is becoming one of the finest actors of his generation thanks to his work in Star Wars, BlackKklansmen and Silence among others, and Marriage Story will surely land him a Best Actor actor nomination. He is effortlessly emotive, and Scarlett Johansson also stops by to give her strongest performance of her career. Randy Newman backs the story, about navigating a divorce and custody, with gentle piano. Its more a film to watch, feel and be entranced by then one that I can really sell with words. 

5. Ad Astra 

Four of these films are original releases, with Joker being original in its backstory but also derivative of Scorsese classics. These films all reaffirmed my faith in original cinema, and Ad Astra, a gentle science fiction odyssey with a nine figure budget is an example of taking risks, Whilst not the most profitable of films, this is a gorgeous space film. Brad Pitt shines as an introverted astronaut and Hoyte van Hoytema's photogrphy drips with colour and clarity. A chase on the moon is astonishing in its sound design (or lack of) and the opening is edge of your seat. Not many boast the heady themes and philosophy to accompany the set pieces, Ad Astra does. 

Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker (and the pitfalls of poor planning)

In 2015's The Force Awakens we are introduced to Kylo Ren and his helmet. It is intact and well maintained. In 2017's The Last Jedi, that helmet is shattered into fragments in an act of  anger and defiance. And now, in 2019's biggest disappointment The Rise of Skywalker, that helmet is reforged and stuck back together, though the cracks still show. If there were was ever a metaphor for Star Wars' 'sequel' trilogy, then it's Ren's helmet. TFA was made to revive nostalgia for the originals and bring abroad the three generations of Star Wars fans onto a new story. TLJ  effectively retconned its predecessor, obliterating the narrative arc that was set up and trying something new and bold. TROS clutches at the few remaining straws that TLJ didn't eradicate in an attempt to fix and restore some sort of continuity to an overall poorly produced and written trilogy. What went wrong?

I think there is a unanimity that JJ Abrams' TFA is an acceptable Star Wars film; it does retread A New Hope's mythic story but audiences enjoyed it, saw it again and were keen to see where the story headed next. I watched the film several hours before the midnight screening of TROS and whilst there are an abundance of changes I would make (remove Starkiller Base for starters) it is a breezy and fun enough film to sit and enjoy. Then there is TLJ. Unanimity does not apply to this sequel; in fact the only unanimity towards this film is that it is, ironically, divisive. Replacing Abrams for directing duties was Rian Johnson, a talented enough filmmaker. But given both script and behind the camera duties allowed Johnson a reasonable degree of carte blanche and so audiences were given a film that they did not know how to respond to: the heroic Luke was a grumpy hermit, super baddie Snoke was briskly done away with and the film introduced new rules that effectively make you look at other Star Wars films differently. Johnson is a man who likes to challenge genre, to subvert it and the audiences, unlike safe hands Abrams, whose filmography shows more of an appreciation towards George Lucas and Steven Spielberg and the childlike wonder he clearly got from their movies. These two filmmakers are in a way represented by Rey and Kylo Ren: the Jedi who wants to continue and uphold a legacy versus a *Sith* who wants nothing to do with the past. 

TFA made over $2 billion worldwide, becoming the third biggest films ever at that point. TLJ made $1.3 billion. The $700 million decline shows that the novelty of a new Star Wars film had run its course and that audiences were not as enthused toward Johnson's bold, risk taking vision. Cries of 'my childhood is ruined' and 'Disney and Kathleen Kennedy are SJWs that don't know Star Wars' echoed around comment sections. Six months later Solo: A Star Wars Story came out. A lackluster film by all accounts, it neither bombed nor profited and the reactions to these films caused Disney and Lucasfilms to shelve all other projects. TROS was to be the last feature film for a while. 

Was there hope for this movie? Well, I do not think so.

The changing of directors and writers between TFA and TLJ showcased the flaws in this system. A trilogy should be connected and planned if it going to deal with the same conflict over three films. There needs to be at least one constant; one figure with the vision to oversee the project. George Lucas directed and wrote all three prequels, and regardless of their quality, there is undeniably a vision there and the story that wanted to be told was told. Of course, the original trilogy was not so well planned. 1977's A New Hope could be a standalone film and the Vader and Leia reveals were added late into shootings those films. And yes, the originals had three different directors, but George Lucas was always about and wrote the stories for the screenwriters. And that all worked a treat. 

But audiences now are used to intricate, interconnected stories because of the might of the Marvel films. Continuity is vital in franchises. So to take cinema's most beloved property and characters and craft a new set of films without a plan in the age of social media and 'everyone's a critic' is utter stupidity. You know you might have mucked up when the prequels, the most hated big budget blockbusters ever at one point, are now treated with a reverence because of how original they are; Revenge of the Sith is just pure imagination and for Star Wars fans, that can trump things like acting and dialogue. Imagination is pivotal, and the lack of Lucas for the Disney batch is painfully obvious: the planets, vehicles and sets just don't seem as rich and fun anymore. 

Which brings us into TROS. JJ Abrams was brought back to direct the final film, sandwiching Rian Johnson's 'stick-out-like-a-sore-thumb' middle chapter. One can imagine the meetings that occurred after TLJ's response: do they continue with what Johnson did or try their best to revert back to what Abrams originally set up? The answer is a mix of the two and that is where the problems lie (in fairness, TFA did not help matters when it came to setting up the future: Luke going into exile and not wanting to be found but also leaving a map in R2-D2 and with the old guy on Jakku that we know nothing about?). 

In the film's opening crawl we are instantly told that Emperor Palpatine is still alive (unexplained) and has a fleet of Star Destroyers that, with rather small guns, house planet destroying capabilities. No I do not need to know where they came from or who designed them, mainly because the first thirty minutes is so relentless in playing catch-up there isn't time to question anything. Abrams also made a point about how this film sees the new trio of Rey, Finn and Poe together for sustained amounts of time. Great! That would be fun if they actually had established the somewhat convoluted relationships between them all (so Finn we assume really likes Rey, but then there's Rose who likes Finn but she wasn't popular so has been sidelined, Poe and Rey have great chemistry but he likes this other girl from his past and Rey and Kylo have sizzling chemistry and then it looks like Finn and a new Resistance fighter are going to get it on and oh boy this is too much). 

Abrams is a director for audiences, able to make quickly paced crowd-pleasers. But his skill does not include metaphors or ambitious camera work; there is a sense that you are going to get a nice long tracking shot but they seem to cut too early and compared to Johnson's blistering cinematography in TLJ, Abrams' films just seem like any other blockbuster. There are two lightsabre fights between Kylo and Rey, one quite original concept that uses their Force connection, and one on the ruins of a Death Star. The latter felt like the big set-piece fight but there is no John Williams score or excitement to the choreography. I was shocked to find myself less than entertained by it all. And the big final space battle: mediocre. There is a grand Return of the King - Avengers Endgame arrival scene, but in comparison to Rogue One or even the last Lando-in the-Falcon space battle it does not feel as exciting. Then there is the barrage of 'TLJ corrections': Rey is important, Leia is somewhat Force trained, Snoke was just a minion of Palpatine, Luke did make a mistake in giving up and Y-wings are the best bombers. I wonder what Rian Johnson thinks. 

The film is not without some quality mind you so here are some of the films I did like: Chewbacca getting his medal, Luke being able to lift his X-wing out of the water whilst Yoda's theme plays, Sheev Palpatine saying "do it", the lightsabre switcheroo at the end, the final scene, the Luke and Leia training flashback, Rey's training and C-3PO who is that annoying friend you just can't live without, getting most of the laughs and some of the only memorable lines. 

But this is one rushed film, one that doesn't know the best course to run and relies on going along with things rather than questioning them. The best comparison I have for this film is 2017's Justice League. There was a changing of directors, a predecessor with a divided fanbase, and an attempt to fix a lot of the criticisms at the cost of a too-much-too-soon narrative that overwhelms and yet is hard to remember.
It is a travesty to see a series start with promise, with TFA showing that Star Wars was in the hands of people who love it and all it needed was a fresher story. And four years later the charm has fizzled out. You can blame Rian Johnson, or Abrams or Kennedy or Disney, you could even blame the people that hated on George Lucas so much he sold it in the first place. I personally would blame the generational divides that split the fanbase: the people who watched the originals as the kids then hated the prequels, the people who watched the prequels as kids and loved all original six, and the kids that watch these films and hopefully really like them. You cannot please all these groups, and I think the powers that be know this, but at least a coherent, continued story across all three would be a good way to start.