Under the Skin

Known usually for her Hollywood stardom and role in the MARVEL universe, actress Scarlett Johansson's new film, Under the Skin removes her from this familiar niche and places her in quite literally a completely different world of terrifying visuals and a hugely immersive narrative.

At the helm of a white van, Johansson  plays the role of an alien, dolled up with jet black hair, a glamorous fur coat and promiscuous make-up, left to prowl the streets of Scotland searching for potential prey. Despite appearing to seem as though the narrative would lack longevity, Under the Skin is mostly engaging throughout due to its hugely impressive visuals and outstanding soundtrack. Immediately throwing us into the deep end, the film refuses to give us any context of the aliens arrival and continues to leave the audience in the dark throughout, allowing us to decipher a message for ourselves. Daring to be different, this is obvious in the cinematography, opting for hugely long takes, allowing the audience to experience the world though Johanssons eyes, analysing every detail to try and conjure up an understanding of the place around her. Such is made all the more interesting by the actual content of each frame with each shot capable of being still pieces of art , crafted with such care and attention. This coincides with the unbelievably impressive score which keeps you consistently agitated  at what the next scene holds. No matter the on-screen action, the soundtrack alone holds the capabilities of making you feel uneasy even when the protagonist is simply walking down the road in the middle of the day. Both of these come to a head in a poignant early scene  whereby two of the aliens' victims interact with each other, the dark sound is categorically unplaceable and the visuals nightmarish, ultimately resulting in perhaps the most chilling single scene in any film of recent memory.

This creepy atmosphere is successfully sustained throughout, largely due to the terrifyingly realistic tone of the whole film. With a lot of the actors used on the streets of Glasgow being normal passers-by, their inclusion in the film works incredibly well, giving a documentary feel to the opening half of the film especially, as Johanssons character seduces them into her lair. This realism is what truly makes Under the Skin such a triumph, affecting the viewer long-term, altering their perception of reality, as for 90 minutes we believe that we have literally just seen the world through the eyes of an alien, and when the audience finally leaves, what they see around them is confused with the films vision of the world. It has genuine profound effects on the viewer, leaving a blanket of messages on the spectator which eventually seeps under the skin preventing the discard of the film and its values. Such is helped also by the fantastic performance of Scarlett Johansson, forced to carry the film as the only professional actor, done so with incredible power and character, allowing the audience to believe and understand her every decision.

Despite being incredibly hard to decipher, Under the Skin encourages analysis and multiple viewings and such is desired after one has watched the film, eager to once again inhabit the eerie mind of a foreign being. The film is hugely ambitious, inviting a specific demographic of viewer to revel in the unconventional style and hugely minimalist tone and plot, however this certainly pays off, delivering a film rich in hearty messages that is a hugely engrossing and interesting watch.

9/10- A visceral film experience like no other.

Calum Russell

The Amazing Spider-Man 2

Whilst the MARVEL’S the Avengers and Fox’s X-Men have both already found their feet with a grounded storyline and a fully realised cinematic future, the newly rebooted spider-man franchise is yet to fully establish itself as a series worthy of inclusion in the superhero renaissance. Deemed as quite simply ‘OK’ by critics and audiences alike the first film had no real driving force with a poorly crafted protagonist and a similarly awful villain. However, although The Amazing Spider-Man 2 looks to replicate the poor reception of Spider-man 3 (2007) with a large roster of enemies, the film is actually quite the opposite, with relatively solid villains, within a fun and flashy narrative.

Following off from the events of the first film, Peter Parker (Andrew Garfield) is attempting to juggle his responsibilities, tied between the care and protection of girlfriend Gwen Stacy (Emma Stone), or the safeguard of New York City from newly emerged villain Electro (Jamie Foxx).

A lot can be said about a film from its opening sequence, and whilst the original trilogy preferred to begin each film with needless exposition whilst we see Spider-man swing through the city, in Spidey’s newest outing we begin with a genuinely exhilarating and pivotal action sequence; whereby we’re introduced to Parkers birth parents. This immediately sparked intrigue, displaying a more plot-driven film by choosing to put this instead of the web-slinging action scene which follows it. The action itself is both hugely fun, with the inclusion of some wacky humour and one-liners, as well as genuinely impactful with each kick, punch and web to the face feeling as though it would leave a hefty injury, if not an irritating mark. This aids in giving the film a significant sense of peril, an attribute which the MARVEL cinematic universe doesn’t possess, making the audience wary of each and every character as their weaknesses become transparent. Whilst in previous spider-man films his one liners felt overly cheesy and unnecessary, here in the action scenes they are embraced as part of Peter Parkers much realised character, being a cheeky, charismatic teenager. In addition when they’re used win the presence of an engrossing action scene, even the more whimsical ones are ignored. Even the 3-D here seems to work, gloating its effectiveness quite evidently in the truly spectacular swinging sequences, with some POV shots which genuinely feel exhilarating.

Although the action, the villains and Spider-man’s visually awesome web slinger are perceived to be the main selling points of the film, it is in fact the deeper, more intellectual plot of Parkers relationship with Stacey which truly stimulates the audience. Such care for these characters makes us become more involved within the general story as well as the otherwise meaningless action scenes, giving us something to root for, encouraging the protagonist onwards. Such chemistry between the two leads is partly due to the fantastic acting performances of both Andrew Garfield and Emma Stone whose off-screen relationship surely translates in front of the camera.

It is with this initial thrill of The Amazing Spider-man 2 which makes the remainder of the film a little disappointing, introducing villains with little to no development. Despite having three villains, the film delegates their screen time very well with Rhino (Paul Giamatti), the fun yet psychotic convict introduced in the thrilling opening sequence setting up the film nicely for Electro and Harry Osbourne (Dane DeHaan) to take centre stage. It is however when Electro emerges, despite his jazzy transformation sequence, that the film takes a wrong turn, favouring overly flashy action set-pieces and corny dialogue over the central, more interesting story of Parkers personal struggles. Electro is visually very impressive, with bolts of electricity being seen worming through his body as he stands, however his exterior seems to be the films single concern with his inner drive being very poorly developed, despite being nicely introduced in the film’s opening. Electros intentions are hugely unclear and we, as the audience, therefore find it very difficult to connect with him, especially as his blue physique makes him look more like an alien than a human being. His characters simply a little bland, aided certainly by the sporadically poor script, handing talented actor Jamie Foxx clichéd lines that makes his character seem more like a video-game ‘boss’, rather than a grounded villain. This must have a similar effect on other villain Harry Osbourne, who despite holding a nice backstory, with a childhood connection with Parker, is instead wasted with badly constructed motivations which make little sense. In fact his presence in general felt largely rushed, turning form good fiend into evil genius within a matter of days, making him (like Electro) feel more like a cliché.

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 gets a whole lot right and finally puts both Sony and the superhero on the cinematic map after years of ‘ups and downs’. The key to the success of the film is the concentration on character and the pitch-perfect representation of most lead protagonists. It’s just a little bizarre that the same chemistry cannot be said for the films villains who feel like feeble ‘bad-guy templates’ in comparison. That said, this film is a poignant mark for the franchise, and perhaps the most well-rounded Spider-Man film of the whole characters cinematic representation.

7.5/10- Fun, thrilling and fittingly dark, a surprising return to form.

Calum Russell

The Double

Of the talent that has recently emerged from the British film industry, it is that of Richard Ayoade and his debut picture Submarine (2010) which have both been the most poignant successes. His second film, The Double, is quite the test, to see if Ayoade can handle dense narrative's, with a far darker tone, contrasting with his comedic background. Despite holding a very gloomy premise however, Ayoade manages to insert his unique style of comedy as well as an intelligent kick to ultimately make this film an engrossing watch.


 Based on Dyskoyofskys novel of the same name, The Double concerns James (Jesse Eisenberg), an average, if overly timid young man, living in a dystopian world of gloomy surroundings where he seeks the  love of Hannah (Mia Wasikowska) restrained by his lack of confidence. This is until his duplicate, Simon (also played by Jesse Eisenberg) arrives, both helping and hindering his efforts.

Knowing already that Ayoade could tell an accurate portrayal of love, seen in his previous film, this was an unsurprising yet openly embraced feature in The Double, somehow displaying a grounded story within a setting of such absurdity.This is no overreaction, with its world being just as wacky as Wes Andersons and just as eccentric as Terry Gilliam's, with evident inspiration coming from both these directors. Yet, as bizarre as the setting is, unlike Gilliams works which are sometimes a little too detached from reality, The Doubles design is hilariously reminiscent to real life from its foreign and clunky technology to its dark representation of the workspace and the society which surrounds us. This atmosphere is lifted by the inclusion of some undoubtedly dark humour, which, depending on individual taste, will most likely make you leave the film feeling light-hearted, as appose to suicidal; coincidently a prominent theme of the film. Much of this humour comes from the performance of Paddy Considine who is only ever viewed through a television screen on a budget sci-fi programme, but whose corny wit coincides perfectly with the similarly toned programme, acting as light relief which contrasts hilariously with heavy narrative. The narrative itself holds up well throughout, maintaining audience attention mainly through the ways in which it's presented, with the films mesmerising cinematography and hugely inventive choice of sound keeping you stimulated and constantly guessing till the final note.This is aided by the fantastic performance of Jesse Eisenberg who is forced to uphold the whole film, often talking to his doppelgänger eliciting opposite emotions at the same time as maintaining a realistic conversation  to a convincing and comedic degree.

The Double is one of those films which you will not only need to watch twice, but also one which you'll want to watch twice with plentiful detail which makes every viewing unique. It looses its way a little in the closing act, rushing through the previously well told narrative, making the conclusion a little puzzling however not so much so that it makes the film a disappointment. No, The Double is quite the opposite, taking on a heavy and ambitious plot with enough creativity and light heartedness to make a film which should be fairly depressing into one which is surprisingly uplifting.

8.5/10- Hugely inventive and comedically sinister, The Double will keep you thinking for days.

Calum Russell

Captain America: The Winter Soldier- Spoilers

Captain America 2 has just been released pretty much worldwide with to both audience and critical acclaim even being compared to the success of 2012's Avengers. Cap 2 isn't that bad at all, in fact as a standalone film its pretty good, but in a franchise in which we've come to expect so much, this film was a disappointment.

These issues are made more evident through the  the overwhelmingly positive reviews the film is receiving.

• Where was Hawkeye?

Don't lie to yourself, no one really likes hawkeye. Perhaps in the comics yes, with his slick purple attire, but not in the films. His bland and underdeveloped character are both hindrances to a hero already bogged down by an unimpressive power, in comparison to the other Avengers.

Some of his only known background in the films is that he works for SHIELD, so...where is he? His appearance in the film would have been extremely fitting and would've worked in neat collaboration with the whole main cast. Think about it, Nick Fury, Falcon, Black Widow and even Captain America to an extent, don't really have any magnificent powers, Hawkeye would've fitted in with all the characters being seen as an equal in the process. That said, however the appearance of Hawkeye as well as the main three heroes would've been a little too messy, however a decrease in the screen time of the bland Black Widow would've allowed Hawkeye time to at the very least make a cameo. Besides in the film Black Widow wears a pendant of an arrow, harking to Hawkeye's character, and considering the subtle relationship they both have, it's bizarre that he doesn't appear... but don't worry you can catch him in the original Thor... doing literally nothing.

• Stop Tricking us into thinking someone's died 

This is a fairly new trend which has plagued Phase 2 of MARVEL in-particular, appearing in all three of the films so far. An issue with all superhero movies is that we pretty much know for certain that the main character isn't going to die. Whether that's because their film is part of a franchise and we KNOW we're going to see them again (for example in the Avengers 2) or simply that the bad guy is so bad that, for the sake of it being a children's film, they cannot win. This therefore makes it very tricky to create a sense of peril in MARVEL movies as we know that nearly every time the hero is going to come out completely unscathed. MARVEL think they've found a way around this by killing off a main character, before bringing them back minutes later.

This can be seen in Cap 2 when Nick Fury is 'killed'. As he is so pivotal to the story however, the audience knows he isn't dead, therefore there is no point in killing him in the first place, it's simply a waste of time.
Through killing people and bringing them back to life MARVEL is damaging itself creating an atmosphere in their films whereby nothing can go wrong and where there is no sense of peril. This forces us care less for the characters and makes the dramatic scenes far less dramatic, thus making their films on the whole less engaging and entertaining. Imagine if characters actually died in MARVEL movies, especially someone so big like Nick Fury,  the Avengers team would go mental, showing their true selves, making the fight scenes in The Avengers 2 not only entertaining but also emotionally involving.

• The Winter what?

With the hindsight on watching Captain America:The Winter Soldier it is quite obvious who the 'bad guy' is. It isn't this 'Russian Assassin'  that MARVEL has been shouting to us about in trailers and various other media platforms, the main villain is actually SHIELD. This was a great twist, which in a way, inverts the functioning of the MARVEL universe, and what ultimately makes the film an important, if monotonous, addition to the franchise.

 Some of the best scenes in the film involved the bemusement of the SHIELD workers as they looked around puzzled at who to trust, reflecting a sincere crisis which is grounded in real life. The infiltration of SHIELD is led by the fantastic Robert Redford, who is gifted perhaps the best scene in the MARVEL franchise so far, seen when he murders his housekeeper after she overhears a top secret conversation, showing the man's hatred and sadistic drive all through one action. With such a fantastic villain underlying the film, it is ultimately a shame that he's not seen more often, replaced by the dumb military antics of the bland Winter Solider.

 This film would be exactly the same, if not better, without the winter soldier in it, heck he even has a cooler, more characterised counterpart in Hydra solider 'crossbones', who could've quite easily replaced him in his role. His only function in the film is to fire his gun and replicate a, walking, talking cliché, with his final movements being unbelievably foreseeable. His character follows the typical story of a man loosing his memory, as he turns on his best mate, before Captain America reminds him of his previous self through an 'emotional speech', until eventually The Winter Soldier joins Captain Americas side.

 This is furthermore yet another example of a character, dying and coming back to life.

•  Inconsistency

Superhero movies, or more accurately MARVEL movies, follow quite a straightforward formula. Everything's fine, till a villain shows up and demonstrates their power, the superhero is then in disarray, and then  eventually overcomes the evil.

 This was starting to get boring, which was why I was so excited to watch Cap 2, showing a premise of action packed espionage entwined with sinister politics that looked different and more appropriate to Captain America's character. This movie is far from this intelligent exterior which it presents.

 It starts so well, peaking at the 'death' of Nick Fury whereby the audience is completely stunned at the story that's taking place, immediately turning the MARVEL universe on its head. After this however, the film forgets that its political storyline ever existed and resorts to violence to tell its story. Redford attempts to uphold any sense of intelligence in the final few scenes however his plans are thwarted by the heroes who look incredibly childish in comparison to the clever plot. This contrast between the classy first half of the movie and the dumb second half, only highlights this issue further, like three sugar pumped kids hijacked the script, smearing the final pages with their sticky hands and lack of patience, creating a mess.
 This made the movie, not bad, but incredibly frustrating as the potential was evident, however the final performance lacked any kind of impact.




- This movie's not that bad, heck if it was the first of the Phase 2 movies I would have probably quite liked it. But it's not, it's the third in the ongoing MARVEL franchise and the first film where cracks in the MARVEL franchise have started to show, taking few risks, with plot structures which are identical to the last movie. This movie is part of a franchise, meaning these films aren't going to stop being released any time soon. Since this is the case, why not mix things up a bit and leave the heroes on a bad note, where for example, Captain America has been imprisoned , leading to an exciting opening sequence at the start of The Avengers 2 which would establish a great tone for the start of the film and allow for further character development as we see the heroes in a more desperate situation.

Captain America: The Winter Soldier was a good film, but it wasn't great. It's the potential within the film which makes me so annoyed, promising so much but delivering so little. It felt like a mid-point in Phase 2, nothing special, not the worst, not the best just...meh.