The 5 year ‘weight' is over: DreamWorks Animations has answered the prayers of its faithful fans who have been waiting for the third installment in the Kung Fu Panda franchise and yes, it is full of awesomeness! 

Directors Alessandro Carloni and Jennifer Yuh bring to you the new chapter in the life of Po, a Giant Panda who is now the most powerful kung fu warrior in China. This franchise has always been about finding oneself to overcome threats that seem impossible to defeat. Be it Tai Long in the first installment, or Lord Shen in the second; Po has always faced dangers that are larger than life. With the third installment they take the term literally and bring back a villian to life, Kai, who is Oogway’s friend turned foe. Back from the spirit realm, Kai has the power and purpose to capture the soul of every kung fu master in China and reign as the most powerful warrior ever. While on the other side surprises unravel as Po meets his real father, who invites him to a secret village of pandas. Po must now discover the real panda in him, as he meets his kind for the first time and prepare for the battle with Kai at the same time.

Kung Fu Panda has always been on the top of my favorite movies. DreamWorks did a pretty good job with the sequel, but it lacked the element of novelty- It’s always hard to trump the ace. So I never had high expectations for this movie. But this pretty much describes my reaction (P.S. I didn’t pee). If you didn’t feel like clicking that link, let me describe it as … I was blown away! Kung Fu Panda 3 reminds me why I fell in love with the franchise. Everything about the movie is great. I’ll start with the story (as this is what sinks most movies)- Kung Fu Panda 3 is really well written, especially with its story being spun around two antagonists. Kai, played by J.K. Simmons, is a surreal villain true to the definition, while Li (Po’s father), played by Bryan Cranston, walks shades of grey as he tries to win back his lost son. Just like the first part, Po fights a battle, not only with an enemy, but also within him, as he must discover and untap his true potential. Also, there’s more focus on these three characters and their interactions hold the story tightly (there are hardly moments that feel like filler). But the movie doesn’t border seriousness with this like its predecessor; it is high on humour and does not fail to give you a few spurts of laughter. 

I had a chance to see the regular format (and not 3D), so it would be unfair to compare them. But going with a general consensus, that 3D makes it a little darker, I would say I loved the animation in the standard format. The credit goes to Jennifer Yuh, who has not only directed the second and third part, but has also been a part of Dreamworks’ animation department since the the first movie. The colors, technique, direction is all beautiful. It definitely qualifies as movie with best use of split screens (like Scott Pilgrim). The best part is, the animation techniques change and adapt as the story goes through different phases, especially during the action scenes. This brings me to the action, which is always in abundance when it comes to the franchise. Like its prequels, the action scenes are directed brilliantly. Kung Fu Panda 3 is like ‘pizza for your eyes’, i.e. there’s hardly anything else that would make them happier.

With the visuals covered, the only part that remains is the audio. Hans Zimmer continues to create music for the third part, and it is great. There are new tracks and collaboration with artists (you can hear “Wild Ones” by Flo Rida in the trailer). Also the hit song from the first part, “Kung Fu Fighting” (revived by Ceelo Green) is re-revived by a new band, Vamps; which hopefully will continues to be a fan favorite. When it comes to the voice cast, Kung Fu Panda 3 not only manages to bring back all of its old cast but add two Oscar nominees to its list, J.K.. Simmons and Bryan Cranston, both in pivotal roles. Their performances bring fresh voices to the screen while Jack Black once again amazes us with his performance. Also, just cause I got to attend a simulcast of the LA premiere, I’m going to throw in a tidbit: Jack Black and Angelina Jolie got a chance to work with their kids who voice small bunnies and pandas in the movie.

I know that was a long review (and some of you simply jumped to this paragraph for the final word), so here’s the verdict: Kung Fu Panda 3 is an amazing movie that brings back the feelings you had when you watched the first part. It is breathtakingly animated and wonderfully written/directed. So, unless there is a snow storm out there stopping you from going to the theatre, put on those panda ears, pick some popcorn and get ready for the “awesomeness”.

Grade: A

Oh, disaster movies. Here’s the thing about disaster movies: you always know exactly what you’re going to get with one. In every one, the disaster happens, and then the characters have to fight for survival for themselves, their families, etc. It’s a very predictable genre with virtually nothing to add at this point- barring some sort of unforeseen and visionary reimagining of the genre. And, dare I say, I think the majority of people who go to see disaster movies enjoy that because they know exactly what they’re paying for. And if The Finest Hours had stayed within those confines, it would just be another mediocre disaster flick. Instead, it tries to be something more and ends up falling flat on its face.

Chris Pine (Star Trek, Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit) plays Bernard Webber, a member of the United States Coast Guard stationed on Cape Cod. On a cold winter’s day in 1952, a blizzard blows in off the Atlantic Ocean, and two oil tankers, the SS Pendleton and the SS Mercer, are heavily damaged and begin to sink. Bernard is sent out with several comrades from the Coast Guard station (Casey Affleck, Ben Foster) are charged with rescuing the crew of the stricken Mercer. It was one of the most dangerous and daring rescues in the entirety of the Coast Guard’s history (yes, this is one of those ‘based on a true story’ movies). And all the while, Bernard’s fiancé Miriam (Holliday Granger, The Borgias) anxiously hopes he will return home safely.

The Finest Hours has all the standard disaster movie tropes and clichés. There’s peril, there’s the overwhelming power of nature destroying the works of man, more peril, lots of visual suspense, heart-pounding suspense, even more peril… you get the idea. Like I said, it’s a very predictable genre and you always know what you’re going to get.
But where this movie falls flat is the character of Miriam. It’s not that Holliday Granger is a bad actress, but rather that her entire character is completely pointless and superficial to the film. She does absolutely nothing that affects the plot of the movie in any way, and most of her time on screen is spent worrying about her fiancé who we know we get back safely (like I said, all the standard tropes and clichés). In fact, you could completely cut out every scene she is a part of and it would be nearly the exact same movie. In fact, it would probably be a better movie because it would be significantly more streamlined and more action-packed, instead of boring us with unneeded romantic drama- that’s not why people go see disaster movies.

As to why the filmmakers elected to insert such an unnecessary character into this movie, I’m not sure. Perhaps they thought that adding a love interest would help to make the scenes of peril more suspenseful (it didn’t). Perhaps they thought that the internet’s social justice warriors would criticize the movie if it didn’t have any female characters (now they’ll criticize it for having a complete useless female character). Whatever the reason, it drags down what would have otherwise been an unremarkable but passing disaster flick into a slightly worse mediocre disaster flick. I guess the bar’s already pretty low with this one.

Grade: C-

Hey everybody, and welcome back to my weekly series, Carter Sigl's Guide to AnimeLand! I've been on hiatus from writing this series for a while, so I'll give you a refresher in case you're just joining us on this wonderful trip through the world of anime. This series is meant to provide a window into the entire medium of anime, specifically for those whom have little to no experience with it. It can be daunting to begin this journey, even if only through the sheer amount and variety of content available. All the series and films I recommend I've seen personally, and I only recommend the good stuff (naturally). For an even more in-depth examination as to why I'm writing this, check out the introductory article I wrote at the start of the series (a year and half ago!)

Anyway, each Wednesday I'll be writing about a different film or series. However, this week is a special round-up of many of the series and films we've covered in the past (plus a few which are coming soon). Specifically, all these entries are ones that are available via the awesomeness that is Netflix (and no, I'm not being sponsored by them). Of course, not everything I've covered in the past is on Netflix (including Neon Genesis Evangelion and Cowboy Bebop, two of my personal favorites), but much of it is, and a huge number of people have access to it. In addition to Netflix, Hulu and Crunchyroll are excellent platforms for anime.

So, on to the series!

Series at-a-glance:
Genre: Mecha, Action, Comedy
Creators: Hiroyuki Imaishi & Kazuki Nakashima
Studio: Gainax
Length: 27 episodes
Year: 2007

This is the story of a boy named Simon, his big brother Kamina, and how they accidentally dig up a mecha suit and use it to save the universe. It’s utterly ridiculous, extremely hilarious, and completely over-the-top. One of my all-time favorite series, made by the mad geniuses of Studio Gainax.

You can read my full article of Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann here.

​You can watch Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann here.

Series at-a-glance:
Genre: Action, Comedy
Creators: Hiroyuki Imaishi and Kazuki Nakashima
Studio: Trigger 
Length: 25 episodes
Years: 2013-2014

The spiritual successor to Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann (made by many of the same creators) it somehow manages to be even more insane and awesome. This time it’s the story of a girl named Ryuko and a talking school uniform which gives her awesome powers in order to save the world. 

You can read my full review of Kill la Kill here.

You can watch Kill la Kill here.

Series at-a-glance (FMA):
Genre: Fantasy, Action
Creator: Seiji Mizushima, Shō Aikawa, Hiromu Arakawa
Studio: BONES
Length: 51 episodes
Years: 2003-2004

Series at-a-glance (FMA: Brotherhood):
Genre: Fantasy, Action
Creator: Yasuhiro Irie, Hiroshi Ōnogi, Hiromu Arakawa
Studio: BONES
Length: 64 episodes
Years: 2009-2010

Edward and Alphonse Elric made a grave error by trying to resurrect their mother using the science of alchemy. Now they roam the land in search of the Philosopher’s Stone in order to undo their terrible mistake. 

You can read my full review of Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood here.

Click here to watch Fullmetal Alchemist and Fullmetal Alchemist: Brotherhood.

Series at-a-glance:
Genre: Fantasy, but see below
Creator: Yuki Urushibara
Studio: Artland
Length: 26 episodes (season 1) and 20 episodes (season 2)
Year: 2005-2006 (season 1), 2014 (season 2)

Ginko is a wandering doctor and shaman, with the rare ability to see the nature spirits known as mushi with which we share our world. A unique series which often seems like a fantastical nature documentary, with hauntingly beautiful animation. 

You can read my full review of Mushishi here.

You can watch Mushishi (second season only) here.

Genres: Action, Comedy, Chanbara
Creator: Shinichiro Watanabe
Studio: Manglobe
Length: 26 episodes
Year: 2004

​Join vagrant swordsman Mugen, mysterious ronin Jean, and ditzy waitress Fuu as they travel across medieval Japan searching for “the samurai who smells of sunflowers”. Director Shinichiro Watanabe fuses together the classic samurai story with beat-boxing, graffiti, and modern hip-hop music. 

You can read my full review of Samurai Champloo here.

You can watch Samurai Champloo here.

Series at-a-glance:
Genres: Dark Fantasy, Horror, Magical Girl
Creators: Shinbo Akiyuki and Urobuchi Gen
Studio: Shaft
Length: 12 episodes and 1 film
Year: 2011​

The first few episodes of this series try to trick you into thinking it’s a cute show for little girls about friendship and magic. In actuality, it is a dark and twisted tale of madness, despair, and the high cost of hope. 

You can read my full review of Puella Magi Madoka Magica here.

You can watch Puella Magi Madoka Magica here.

Series at-a-glance:
Genres: Drama, Crime, Urban Fantasy
Creators: Takahiro Omori, Noboru Takagi, Ryōgo Narita
Studio: Brain's Base
Length: 26 episodes (season 1) and 36 episodes (season 2)
Years: 2010 (season 1), 2015-2016 (season 2)

The district of Ikebukuro, Tokyo- a city of many stories and many secrets. Durarara!! is the story of three friends named Mikado, Masaomi, and Anri and how they discover those secrets and stories, including those of the city's "color gangs", a "colorless" gang called The Dollars, a pharmaceutical company rumored to be illegally experimenting on people, a mysterious serial killer called "the Slasher", and the urban legend of a black-clad motorcyclist known as "The Black Rider".

My full review of Durarara!! is coming soon!

You can watch Durarara!! here.

Series at-a-glance:
Genre: Cyberpunk
Creators: Naoyoshi Shiotani, Katsuyuki Motohiro, Gen Urobuchi
Studio: Production I.G.
Length: 22 episodes (season 1), 11 episodes (season 2)
Years: 2012-2013 (season 1), 2014 (season 2)

​Set in a near-future version of Japan ruled by a computer network called the Sibyl System, this series follows young detective Akane Tsunemori of the Public Safety Bureau. But in the future, you’re not arrested based on evidence and testimony; you’re arrested (and executed) based on your emotions and thoughts.

My full review of Psycho-Pass is coming soon!

You can watch Psycho-Pass (season 1) here.

Film at-a-glance:
Genre: Science Fiction
Creators: The Wachowskis, Andy Jones, Mahiro Maeda, Shinichirō Watanabe, Yoshiaki Kawajiri, Takeshi Koeke, Koji Morimoto, Peter Chung
Studios: Studio 4°C, Madhouse, DNA, Square Pictures
Length: 8 short films, 101 minutes total
Year: 2003

Neo may be the One, but he’s not the only one fighting against the Matrix. This anthology film features many different directors, studios, and animation styles, but all them trace the less well-known stories of The Matrix universe. 

You can read my full review of The Animatrix here.

You can watch The Animatrix here.

​Series at-a-glance:
Genres: Fantasy, Action
Creators: Urobuchi Gen, Aoki Ei
Studio: Ufotable
Length: 25 episodes
Years: 2011-2012

Wizards would seem to have it all, what with the magical powers and unimaginable wealth. Than what’s so valuable that it would cause them to start killing each other? Why the Holy Grail of course, with the ability to grant any one wish. 

You can read my full review of Fate/Zero here!

You can watch Fate/Zero here!

Series at-a-glance:
Genre: Action
​Creators: Kōichirō Hatsumi, Yasuyuki Muto, Jinsei Kataoka
Studio: Manglobe
​Length: 12 episodes
Year: 2011

​Ganta has had a rough day. First a mysterious man with magical powers massacres his entire high school class. Then he’s blamed for it and sent to a prison which is also an amusement park. And in this prison, you only survive as long as you can keep the guests smiling. 

My full review of Deadman Wonderland is coming soon!

You can watch Deadman Wonderland here!

Series at-a-glance:
Genre: Action, Fantasy, Post-Apocalyptic
Creator: Hajime Isayama
Studio: Production I.G. and Wit Studio
Length: 25 episodes
Year: 2013

With his hometown in ruins, young Eren Yeager becomes determined to fight back against the giant Titans which threaten to (quite literally) devour the human race. 

You can read my full review of Attack on Titan here.

You can watch Attack on Titan here.

Film at-a-glance:
Genre: Fantasy
Creators: Atsuko Fukushima, Shoji Kawamori, Shinji Kimura, Yoji Fukuyama, Hideki Futamura, Masaaki Yuasa, Shinichiro Watanabe
Studio: Studio 4°C
Length: 7 short films (85 minutes total)
Year: 2007

This collection of seven short films often venture into the incredibly strange surreal, from the story of a Chinese boy who finds a paintbrush which can alter reality to some that are barely comprehensible. But all are incredibly beautiful.

My full review of Genius Party is coming soon!

You can watch Genius Party here!

As you can imagine, being the film geek that I am I love to talk to people about movies. Certain topics are particularly interesting to me, and one of those is the reasons for why someone does or does not like a certain movie. I guess that’s basically just film criticism in a nutshell, but I find it fascinating to see which specific details and elements of a movie made up of many details and elements were important enough to leave a certain impression. Generally, most people tend to either generally like or generally dislike a particular film. But occasionally there will be a film that has just one specific detail or elements that colors one’s perception of the entire film. Such it is with Son of Saul.
​
Son of Saul (Hungarian: Saul Fia) is about a man named Saul Ausländer (Géza Röhrig), a Hungarian Jew trapped in a Nazi concentration camp. He and a number of other prisoners work as sonderkommandos- prisoners forced to clean the gas chambers and to dispose of the bodies. One day while cleaning the chambers, Saul finds a boy who miraculously survived the gas, although he is quickly killed by the guards. But rather than be immediately burned like the others, the boy’s body is stored for later study. Saul gets the idea to give the boy a proper burial, usually an impossibility in his environment. In order to do so, Saul will need to steal the body from the medical labs and find a rabbi to conduct the last rights. Meanwhile, Saul’s workmates, cognizant of their impending execution, plot to escape from the camp.

Like I said earlier, there is one single element of this film which overshadows everything else about it, and surprisingly it’s not the fact that it’s a Holocaust film. Rather, it’s the cinematography- nearly the entire film in shot in ultra close-ups of Saul’s face. The camera always follows him, and the background is nearly always out-of-focus. The one benefit to this film style is that it in a way enhances the horror of Saul’s surroundings- seeing the atrocities of a death camp only from the corners of your eyes, so to speak, knowing what’s happening but never getting a clear look at it very disturbing. However, this is outweighed by the fact that the style of the film quickly becomes extremely distracting, not to mention hard to watch. Honestly, my eyes just got tired after staring at it for so long. I was never aware of exactly how much of staring at a screen on the wall watching a movie entails until I watched this movie. Plus, it seemed like the filmmakers put a lot of work and effort into the sets and other elements off the background from what little I saw of it, but I’ll never really know because I never saw any of it clearly.

Röhrig’s acting is quite good, which is a relief because otherwise the film would have been impossible to watch, but to be honest the cinematography of the film is so central and overbearing that it really drowns out every other aspect of it. It may very well be a ‘love it or hate it’ type film, because it won the Grand Prix at last year’s Cannes Film Festival. But what it came down to for me was that it was interesting to watch for about 10 minutes and incredibly distracting and tiring to watch for the other 95. It was certainly a unique experience, but honestly I never want to see another film shot like that ever again.

Grade: C-

Roundtable: I really enjoyed your movie last night. It was really… brutal and intense.

Will Poulter: It’s an intense watch, yeah, that’s for sure. Did you guys feel like- because the run time is two hours 37 [minutes]- did it feel that long?

Roundtable: It felt long but in a good way. Like some movies that are two and a half hours just fly by but this one paced the way it was felt really good, like it fit the scale of the film.

Roundtable: Well, first off, how did this part come to you?

Will Poulter: I read the script probably… five months prior to shooting, or at least the start of the rehearsal. And there was a lot of excitement around it for various reasons, you know with Leo [DiCaprio] and Tom [Hardy] attached and Alejandro [Iñárritu] set to direct. As far as I know the script had been around for several years but hadn’t been made because it was such a big undertaking and the task of making it was so difficult and there were few people who were talented and/or crazy enough to attempt it. What first struck me was how emotionally engaging it was on the page. I mean, even just from reading it I could the sort of intensity you were talking about, it was visceral on paper you know. And in my mind there were no doubts that I wanted to be involved- with Alejandro involved and this sort of cast it can only get better from here. And I certainly certainly wanted to be involved and I sent in a tape and my tape was ok, I wasn’t super happy with it, but I was lucky enough to get a meeting with Alejandro in London and we just had a chat and I was immediately struck by what a compassionate and intelligent man he is and when I got the role I was just really excited and keen to get started.

Roundtable: You mentioned the difficulty of the undertaking- what was it like filming in such remote, inhospitable locations?

Will Poulter: I think we were lucky to shoot it in such inhospitable conditions because it reduced the acting challenge, in a way. There was less to act because in most situations we are very cold and very tired and the terrain really is tough and the gear is heavy. So all of that helped us I think with the performance side of things. And it was really cool to have the environment be so natural not fabricated in any way. Not having to interact with- I didn’t have to interact with any CGI, ever. Other than pointing out the cubs, post-bear attack, I didn’t interact with any CGI whatsoever. That’s a really rare opportunity I think these days. So it was like taking part in the filmmaking process of a bygone era, like the film stylings of old where you would shoot on location with natural light and all real weather elements. And I think that was totally necessary because you wouldn’t get that visceral experience we’re talking about in a studio with a green screen and a wind blower, it just wouldn’t have been the same.

Roundtable: It was obviously a very physically demanding film from what I saw and what you’re talking about- was there any kind of preparation that went into the role before you went out there?

Will Poulter: There was some initial weight-loss stuff and that was something that developed throughout the film because by the end I had to lose quite a lot of weight. There was some bootcamping, where we familiarized ourselves with weapons and the sort of basic tools they would use for survival, and that was fun. But really the best preparation was the rehearsals we did that occurred months before we started shooting.

Roundtable: So you mentioned the shooting with natural light- what’s that like compared to shooting with [artificial] lights?

Will Poulter: It really does redefine the whole film-making process for everyone. Rather than using electricity to light each individual frame and separate and compartmentalize the scene into different moments which you can do over and over again and make adjustments, we were operating in a very small window of time where we would actually be shooting. So that meant rehearsing all day long up until this point and then perform almost a like a live piece of theatre. And every single movement from where you’re standing in the scene to the angle of your head turn to the timing of you picking up a prop like every single thing had to be meticulously planned because there was no “Well we’ll get that from another angle” or “We’ll cut that together with another bit” or “We can adjust the light so you can do that…” I mean, the light was the sun or the moon, so there was no adjusting to that. We adjusted to nature. 

Roundtable: The way that film was shot, because it sounds like it would add a lot more pressure to you and all the other actors because, since you were using natural lighting stuff had to be shot at a certain time of day, and then if people kept messing up their lines or their timing you might have to wait until another day.

Will Poulter: Yeah, it did absolutely add a certain amount of pressure. And I think we did come up against a couple of scenarios where we had such a limited window of time where it would be like we’re on take two or three and be like “We have maybe… one or two takes left and if we don’t get it we’re coming back tomorrow, or we’re coming back on Monday [if it’s the weekend] and this is gonna push the shoot back”. So those pressures were there but for the most part we got them. I think there was one day where we had to come back and finish something off… or maybe that’s me being really forgetful. There’s one big scene that sticks out for that reason. But it did add in a certain amount of pressure, but it gave us a focus too, it gave us fuel and more of a target to aim at even if the target was smaller.

Roundtable: Did Alejandro was his Oscar [for Birdman] while you guys were shooting?

Will Poulter: Yes. You know it didn’t really change anything, it didn’t change anything in him, at least publicly that he expressed. It really just meant a long weekend for us and that was pretty much it. He came back to work an Oscar winner but we already knew how talented he was and how great Birdman was and it was great to see him win and get what we felt he deserved, but he was still totally focused and immersed in The Revenant. Alejandro has been working really hard the last few years on Birdman and on this and he probably already has his next project planned out. He’s a force of nature- pun intended. 

Roundtable: Do you think you would to be in other movies where you were in these remote locations? Did you enjoy doing that or was it just really hard?

Will Poulter: No I did, I found it a really great experience. Now don’t get me wrong, after eight months its tough and it takes its toll. But I did just because it made the process easier from an acting perspective. As much as his approach is difficult, at least from an emotional perspective, it feels real and there’s less to invent. It’s such an experience, such a treat to be able to work in such real conditions. At times when the camera was wider you’re in these huge expanses of wilderness and you can’t even see the camera but you’re just free to act, that’s awesome. For as many times as it’s like THIS close there are times when it was miles away and that was just great.

I must say, I don’t think I ever expected the Western to have much of a comeback. It’s one of the great lost genres of the Hollywood of days of old, and I believe we’re worse off for it. While certainly our contemporary era can’t even come close to competing with previous decades in terms of sheer number of films, I believe that with movies such as No Country For Old Men, There Will Be Blood, and The Hateful Eight, we are already in the midst of a Renaissance of the Western. And I am pleased to report that Alejando Gonzalez Iñárritu’s The Revenant is a fine addition to that lineup.

The Revenant is the above all else the story of one man, a man named Hugh Glass (Leonardo DiCaprio). Glass is a frontiersman of the west, but not a west we know filled with cowboys, outlaws, and the Iron Horse. Glass’ story takes place before all that, in 1823. Glass is a fur trapper, traveling lands which will one day be known as Montana and the Dakotas in search of valuable pelts. He is the navigator for an expedition led by Andrew Harry (Domhnall Gleeson), which also includes a hostile and aggressive man named John Fitzgerald (Tom Hardy), a young boy named Will Bridger (Will Poulter) and Glass’ half-Native American son Hawk (Forrest Goodluck). During their expedition, the party is attacked and decimated by a war party of Natives, losing many men and most of their pelts. They are forced into unexplored territory in an attempt to avoid more attacks, but further disaster strikes when Glass is viciously mauled by a grizzly bear. This causes of a cascade of events wherein Glass is left for dead and Hawk is murdered.

There are two main words which I think describe The Revenant quite well: "brutal" and "beautiful". First thing to note: absolutely do not view this film if you are squeamish about blood or gore. This is a brutally violent film which does not pull any punches- for sake of comparison, think of Oldboy or Only God Forgives. The grizzly scene is particularly gruesome; you see every single way that 700 pounds of muscle and teeth can rip a man apart. The brutality is enhanced even further with Iñárritu’s signature directorial style of really long takes (although they’re used nowhere near the extent that they were in Birdman). In the grizzly scene, for example, the camera does not cut away even once, forcing you to watch every gory detail without any respite.

The Revenant is at its core the story of Glass. Specifically, it is about his quest for revenge. The sheer anger and hatred he possesses is the only thing that keeps him alive, giving him the fuel to claw his way back from virtually certain death in his quest for vengeance. Matching the literal violence and brutality of the film is the emotional hurricane that each character has to live through. Glass is the most obvious about this, but each character has his own scars and demons that he carries with him. Each actor is able to show this turmoil wonderfully, from Hardy’s bitterness to Gleeson’s tormented sense of duty and Poulter’s sheer confusion and anguish. The film is, however, fairly sparse in dialogue, with long periods punctuated only by the subtle score or natural sounds such as rain and running water.

But amongst the violence and brutality of this film there is also amazing beauty. Shot on location in British Columbia, Alberta, and Patagonia, the cinematography of The Revenant is just gorgeous. It showcases incredible natural beauty, and hearkens back to the Westerns of old. Most of the areas featured in the film are extremely remote; often close to half of each day of filming was taken up by getting to and back from the locations. Even more incredibly, The Revenant was filmed without any artificial lighting sources whatsoever- every shot in the movie is lit only by the sun or moon. The film’s CGI is very minimal, used only to add animals to several scenes (I’m still trying to figure out how they filmed that grizzly scene).

The Revenant, in many ways, is just like that lost West it so beautifully illustrates: exceptionally violent and brutal but also exceedingly beautiful. It is this dichotomy, this seeming incompatibility, which makes the film so compelling. It barrels forward like a force of nature, powered by sheer hatred and force of will and tearing apart anything which gets in its way. It's not a film for the squeamish or the faint of heart, but The Revenant is a cinematic experience that I highly recommend. 

​Grade: A+

Oh, what joy, a new Quentin Tarantino film! Now that’s something you don’t get everyday… or every year, or even every other year. I still remember going to the movie theatre in my home town to see Django Unchained when it was first released three years ago- it was the first Tarantino film I saw in a theatre. When I first heard that he was doing another western, I was wondering if it was going to feel repetitive related to his previous film. In fact, The Hateful Eight manages to be a very different kind of western than Django, and in many ways a very different film than most of his recent fare.

Our story begins on a snowy afternoon in Wyoming Territory eight of ten or twelve years after the Civil War. On this winter’s day Major Marquis Warren (Samuel L. Jackson) is bringing some bounty heads in to a town called Red Rock to collect his reward money, but his horse succumbed to the cold. In response, he hails down a passing stage coach whose occupant, John “The Hangman” Ruth (Kurt Russel), happens to be another bounty hunter and an acquaintance of Major Warren’s. He’s also heading to Red Rock, but not with bodies- he’s bringing in a woman named Daisy Domergue (Jennifer Jason Leight) to hang because he always brings in his bounties alive. On the way, they pick up yet another hitch hiker- Chris Mannix (Walton Goggins). Although Warren is hesitant about traveling with the son of a notorious Civil War criminal, Mannix claims to be the new Sheriff of Red Rock, so he and Ruth let him ride with them regardless. But the approaching blizzard prevents the four traveling companions from reaching Red Rock, and instead forces them to stop at a stage coach station called Minnie’s Haberdashery. But rather than encountering the eponymous Minnie, they encounter four strange guests at the establishment: Oswaldo “The Little Man” Mobray (Tim Roth), Joe “The Cow Puncher” Gage (Michael Madsen), General Sandford “The Confederate” Smithers (Bruce Dern), and Bob “The Mexican” (Demián Bichir). But it soon becomes apparent that at least one of these men is not who he says he is, and may in fact be in league with Domergue…
​
The first thing that’s noticeable about The Hateful Eight is much of a throwback to the classic spaghetti westerns it is. It’s quite long compared to his previous works, either 167 or 187 minutes depending on whether you’re watching the standard version or the roadshow version. Part of this is because of the film’s overture and intermission; I will not talk too much about this since much has already been said elsewhere, but suffice to say it feels odd but somewhat satisfying to have an actual break in the movie where you can talk to your friends, buy some popcorn or use the restroom. Compared to Tarantino’s other works, this film starts off quite slow. The whole first half of the film is basically devoid of any violence, and consists mostly of people talking. Although this does seem odd for a Tarantino film, it does make it more in tune with the epic westerns of days gone by, which typically start off slow and build to an explosive conclusion. Plus, it doesn’t seem as out of place due to the film’s genre, which is actually a cross between the western and a mystery film.

Another thing that’s noticeable about this film is its tone. Most of Tarantino’s more recent works (Django Unchained, Inglorious Basterds, Kill Bill) no matter what genre and style they were, always kind of felt like they were comedies in a way. Despite all the violence that occurred, it was all so over-the-top it always just felt completely ridiculous and was often played for laughs. The Hateful Eight is violent, of course, but the violence is of a different kind. It’s much less stylized and much more real, and much more intense when it does occur in the second half of the film. And although the film does retain Tarantino’s trademark absurdity (one exchange in particular between Major Warren and General Smithers springs to mind…), he uses it less for comedy and more to make the audience feel uncomfortable. The result is a movie that’s much more serious than his past fare; I don’t think it’s a spoiler to say that the ending is tragic. The only one of his previous works that The Hateful Eight seems comparable to is his first film, Reservoir Dogs, which (compared to all the others) is much less played for laughs and much more played for drama and tragedy.

The acting of course is fantastic from everyone in the cast. And the writing is just as brilliant as his other films, if slightly more twisted. But the real star of the show here is the cinematography. Tarantino shot the entire film on 70 mm film, and if you get the chance, make sure to see the roadshow version of the show so you can see it projected off 70 mm film. I know it makes me sound like a pretentious film geek, but the 70 mm really does look so much better than digital. And it makes it feel so much more like those classic westerns of days gone by, which was certainly his true goal. Oh, and last but not least, the film’s music! It was was composed by Ennio Morricone, the same Italian musician who did the music for the Dollars Trilogy and Once Upon a Time in the West (among many other great films). The music is absolutely beautiful, but more than that, it makes the movie feel like a true classic western of times gone by.

And that is what’s truly great about The Hateful Eight: it’s a classic 1960s spaghetti western that was made in the 21st century. This is a feat which many (including myself) did not think was possible. But this film (among others) proves that the western genre is not dead. The fact that this film was made by Quentin Tarantino gives it its own unique feel, but it’s still undisputedly made in the traditions of those great lost westerns of days of yore. If you want to experience a lost part of cinema that’s been gone for decades, than take the next stage coach down to your local movie house to see The Hateful Eight right away.

Grade: A+