Showing posts with label Martin Freeman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Martin Freeman. Show all posts

July 21, 2025

The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists!

Review #2402:  The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists!

Cast: 
Hugh Grant (the Pirate Captain), Martin Freeman (the Pirate with a Scarf/Number Two), Imelda Staunton (Queen Victoria), David Tennant (Charles Darwin), Jeremy Piven (Black Bellamy), Salma Hayek (Cutlass Liz), Lenny Henry (Peg-Leg Hastings), Brian Blessed (Pirate King), Russell Tovey / Anton Yelchin (Albino Pirate [United Kingdom] / [United States]), Brendan Gleeson (Pirate with Gout), Ashley Jensen (Surprisingly Curvaceous Pirate), Ben Whitehead / Al Roker (Pirate Who Likes Sunsets and Kittens [UK] / [USA]) Directed by Peter Lord (#160 - Chicken Run) and Jeff Newitt.

Review: 
"We had one of those meetings that you have in development departments where there’s 30 books on the table, people discussing if any of them will make a TV series or a movie, and I picked this thing up off the table and I read five pages. It made me laugh so much. Seldom, indeed, have I read anything that’s had so much fun in it so quickly. So I thought, “Well, we’ll do that!” That’s just the start of a very long process because it wasn’t really as much of a story in the book, so that was two years to get the draft together."

Sure, why not. It's been a very long time since I covered a feature made by Aardman Animations*, and this was their fifth one released to theaters and a bit of a return to stop motion, as their last two movies (Flushed Away [2006] and Arthur Christmas [2011]) were done in CG. This movie was planned to be in CG, but their partners in Sony saw the models used as reference that seemed better for stop-motion, albeit with computer generated imagery used for scenery, such as with the sea (at any rate, art of the film does exist to view for oneself). The source material is a book series that English novelist Gideon Defoe first created with The Pirates! in an Adventure with Scientists in 2004 that lasted for five more novels in eight years, and it perhaps is not a surprise to see that Dafoe wrote the screenplay for this film. Outside of the United Kingdom, the movie was released under the title of "The Pirates! Band of Misfits", and it is where you get two different voice actors for select characters. The movie was a mild hit with audiences, but apparently its failure to make more money internationally led to Sony (who apparently had high expectations) not going forward with partnering for a second Pirates movie, which would've apparently been about cowboys. This was the 2nd of two movies Lord (the co-founder of Aardman) has directed, as he since has spent time as an executive producer on a variety of Aardman projects, while co-director Jeff Newitt worked on Chicken Run: Dawn of the Nugget (2023). The next movie made by Aardman was with StudioCanal for Shaun the Sheep Movie in 2015.

I don't really care for using the word "cartoon" for a movie, but I'm sure this type of movie would fall under that label for most people with its intent of just having fun with pirates in the 19th century (1837, specifically) that goes with the flow of living dodos and adversarial queens for 88 minutes. The animation is nice enough to serve as the backdrop for quite a few charming gags (mostly visual) and it clearly will work enough in patience for anybody that got a kick out of Cutthroat Island (1995), despite a few limitations. You can't really take it seriously as a historical movie, but I do wonder if we see that many movies that make light of old dead presidents (some of whom actually owned slaves when in power) as much as others make light of dead monarchs (just to throw one random fact down the hole, Darwin married in 1838 to his first cousin Emma Wedgwood and had ten children). At least Grant* seems to be having a fine time playing a wayward pirate, one that is fairly goofy but endearing enough to go with the evident road to go down in generally good timing (namely dry). Freeman and Tennant accompany him with varying levels of success in timing to react to the teetering absurdity that is fairly dry and yet still sly enough to make it a good bit to go with. Staunton makes for a fairly quality adversary in snooty amusement (as one does when playing a figure of a particular design in rotund-ness). There may be a wide variety of name actors popping in here and there that are mostly fine for tiny gags (it does warm the heart to see a bit role for a booming actor in Blessed). The general line of action for the film most revolves around setting up amusing little situations, whether that involves time spent with, well, scientists and a climax that is relatively engaging in setup to at least give the folks something to be happy with when all is said and done. As a whole, it just is a movie you either roll with in its whimsical type of timing and style, for which it does look quite accomplished in the sense that it never looks tired or too desperate to get the jokes to land. 
 
Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

*Hilariously, this is yet another actor finally featured in a review, it never occurred to me I never saw Hugh Grant in a movie before. Also, I suppose I forgot to mention that Aardman has done a few short films. Here's your cookie.

September 16, 2020

Shaun of the Dead.


Review #1537: Shaun of the Dead.

Cast: 
Simon Pegg (Shaun), Nick Frost (Ed), Kate Ashfield (Liz), Lucy Davis (Dianne), Dylan Moran (David), Penelope Wilton (Barbara), Bill Nighy (Philip), Jessica Hynes (Yvonne), Peter Serafinowicz (Pete), Rafe Spall (Noel), and Martin Freeman (Declan) Directed by Edgar Wright (#971 - Baby Driver)

Review: 
"Maybe directors who are more interested in realism and naturalism come from cities, where they see things on their doorstep every day. But growing up as a kid in a very pretty but ever-so-slightly boring town, where not a great deal happened, encouraged me to be more escapist, more imaginative, and more of a daydreamer."

One needs new directors in every century, or at the very least ones that can be bold in what they want to do about the traditions of the past and be fun about it. Edgar Wright grew up with interest in comics like 2000 AD alongside interest in films that helped influence him such as An American Werewolf in London (1981), Raising Arizona (1987), and several others. He started his venture into film with shorts that began at the age of 14 with Super-8 and S-VHS cameras (Dead Right, for example, was done on his own money as an attempted pastiche of British and American cop films). He graduated with a diploma in Audio-Visual Design from Arts University Bournemouth in 1994 and thereafter got to work behind the camera, with his first feature being the low-budget A Fistful of Fingers (1995) and his first television projects being Mash and Peas and Asylum (both premiering in 1996), with the latter being his first collaboration with Simon Pegg and Jessica Hynes as Wright co-wrote and directed all six episodes further comedic work that eventually led to his most notable television production with Spaced (1999-2001), which he directed all 14 episodes starring Pegg, Hynes, and Nick Frost. It was during the process of the show that Wright and Pegg came up with the idea to do a zombie film (since they both shared an obsession of Dawn of the Dead) that didn't so much want to parody zombie films as much as they did romcom films, with Wright and Pegg serving as co-writers.

What better way to try and do a zombie comedy but to basically do one that seems like a sitcom/satire that just happens to have zombies interrupting from time to time that make a romcomzombie movie where one doesn't notice the apocalypse starting until it's right in front of your face, where lumbering lazy living and zombie could almost be confused. One could brush aside a sudden change of living if they simply are too drunk to notice (which seems awfully familiar then and now, somehow). It takes inspiration from Night of the Living Dead (1968) and Dawn of the Dead (1978) and rolls with being basically near that same amount of quality when it comes to a well-constructed pace for its chase of zombie without being lost in lame gags or excess gore for 99 minutes. There have been quite a few British low-budget horror classics, and this one definitely deserves its own place in that discussion. It all starts with Pegg, our deadpan man for the day who does a pretty good job in terms of timing that rises from sofa-life to direction in zombie-life that we care about fairly well for what needs to be done to draw a chuckle or some zombie dealing. Frost (in his film debut) is capable in complimenting Pegg with entertaining coarseness that gamely helps the first half do quite well in their exchanges with themselves that can be as simple as record-throwing or a scene at the pub about speculation (which I can definitely find pretty relevant when lost enough somewhere to do so). Ashfield does fairly well in carrying along the film with smooth chemistry with the others while Moran does stuffiness just fine along with counterpart Davis, although it is Wilton and Nighy who contribute the most warmth at carefully planned times with Pegg. It is the control from Wright and Pegg to make a film about regular joes and zombies and not have them turn into caricatures that make it a welcome surprise, complete with in-camera transitions and other little distinct things (such as a beating timed to the beat on a particular song of prime favorite band in Queen) well-enough to let us absorb things without being relentless. Honestly, my one little gripe is just the way it ends the proceedings. Maybe it just seems a little too convenient to really seal things up when it comes to its whole siege second half, particularly since it also has to seal up its romantic comedic trappings, which prove a bit better (its last exchange is fairly poignant). On the whole, it is easy to see why this has been regarded a cult classic in some circles, doing quite well for itself in marks of laughter and blood to work on the strength of Wright, Pegg, and Frost in doing something worth enjoyment on any given day.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

February 19, 2018

Black Panther.


Review #1050: Black Panther.

Cast: 
Chadwick Boseman (T'Challa / Black Panther), Michael B. Jordan (Erik Killmonger), Lupita Nyong'o (Nakia), Danai Gurira (Okoye), Martin Freeman (Everett K. Ross), Daniel Kaluuya (W'Kabi), Letitia Wright (Shuri), Winston Duke (M'Baku), Sterling K. Brown (N'Jobu), Angela Bassett (Ramonda), Forest Whitaker (Zuri), Andy Serkis (Ulysses Klaue), Florence Kasumba (Ayo), and John Kani (T'Chaka) Directed by Ryan Coogler (#760 - Creed)

Review: 
The Marvel Cinematic Universe films have had a scope and quality to them that make for a consistently entertaining series of movies, and it is hard to believe that it has been ten years since the release of the film that started it all, Iron Man (#135). While it can be argued that these comic book films do tend fall along traditional formulas, it is the tweaking of certain aspects that make for the successes that have occurred, whether with a tinge of humor or with a tinge of humanity to it. After all, this is the 18th film in the franchise, and while you could equate them to products in a line, at least they are fairly solid products. In the case of Black Panther, this is a good movie that pushes most of the right buttons to make for a solid winner. The best quote that can be said about the movie comes from itself: "Just because something works doesn’t mean it can’t be improved".

As mentioned in my review for Blade (1998), the film had originally been slated for development with Wesley Snipes in mind in the 1990s, although it languished in development for two decades, with Chadwick Boseman eventually being cast in the role in 2014. Black Panther (based off the comic book series of the same name that was originally created by Stan Lee and Jack Kirby) had already been showed on the big screen prior to his own film, as he was introduced in Captain America: Civil War (#796) two years ago, and I remember he had made a fine impression on me. Obviously this film gives Boseman more time to show his character off, and he excels, managing to be an interesting hero with enough gravitas that manages to holds his own in a cast with a good deal of variety. Jordan does a great job, managing to show a good deal of charisma along with fury that makes for an interesting villain that stands out, particularly for a film universe that has not had the best of villain portrayals. Nyong'o and Gurira manage to provide capable performances that are fairly strong along with interesting to watch on screen, each having their own respective moments to shine. Freeman doesn't have much time on screen, but he does provide a satisfactory enough performance. Kaluuya doesn't have a lot to do with his character, but he does the best of what he can. Wright does a fine performance, having some clever charm along with characteristics reminding me of "Q" from the James Bond series while also having some amusing scenes with Boseman. Serkis manages to have a good scenery chewing time, for the time that he gets on screen anyway. The rest of the cast do a fine job in their respective roles and functions, such as Duke and his adversarial but crucial role or Whitaker and his mystical nature.

The themes of the film work to the film's advantage, presenting its arguments without being ham-handed in approach. There are other things deserving praise, such as Rachel Morrison and her cinematography and Ruth E. Carter's costume design, both working fairly well to complement the film, making for a worthy atmosphere to watch. The action sequences are fairly hit and miss; while I do appreciate some of the fight sequences, there are times when it feels a bit too standardized, with the climax serving as mild entertainment when not utilizing too much effects, and the resolution to the film is fairly satisfactory, with its 134 minute run-time being acceptable enough for me. I do appreciate that the movie doesn't try to tie itself to other films of the comic franchise too much (aside from a flashback or so), being a film that is interesting in just showing itself off without lingering too much on little details. Ultimately, this is a film that is a pretty good success, achieving its goals well without betraying its principles.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.