Advertisements

Gareth Edwards

From the Vault #16: ROGUE ONE: A STAR WARS STORY (2016)

From 2012 onwards, before developing this blog, I wrote a multitude of reviews on the website Letterboxd. In this irregular series called From the Vault, I’m going to haul these earlier reviews out of mothballs and re-purpose them here.

This one is from Dec 19th, 2016, as we close in on Star Wars Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker

For a while, let’s be honest, we didn’t know if the Force was with Rogue One, did we?

The first in Disney/LucasFilm’s attempt to build an extended Star Wars universe, in the vein of Marvel Studios, was for many an anthology story we didn’t need telling – specifically how the Death Star plans came not to be in the main computer at the very beginning of George Lucas’ opus in 1977’s A New Hope. Would it launch a brand new approach to the revived Star Wars franchise or would it be a pointless, bloated stain to sit alongside the painful prequels? All the news of Gareth Edwards being locked out of the editing suite, Tony Gilroy coming in to film extensive reshoots, they all suggested a misconceived project which many would have considered a mistake.

Here’s the great news: Rogue One isn’t just the prequel you never knew you wanted, the kind of prequel which makes the official episodic prequels look increasingly paltry, but it’s also quite possibly almost almost as good as A New Hope itself.

Advertisements

Godzilla: King of the Monsters (2019)

If the release of Godzilla: King of the Monsters has taught us anything, it’s that the expectations of audiences and critics are a fair distance apart.

This is no great revelation. For every serious reviewer of cinema, you will find two casual cinema-goers pop up to remind them “it’s only a movie”. This is completely fine. Some people just enjoy cinema for the experience and don’t study it too closely, bathing in the drama or spectacle. Others like to dissect, unpick, or place into context. Some, admittedly. simply enjoy trashing a project for their own personal, particular reasons, and often reside in the sketchier corners of online fandom. Ultimately, we enjoy what we enjoy for the reasons we enjoy it, but Godzilla: King of the Monsters struck me as the purest exercise in giving the people what they want, Roman-forum style. It is, in the most primal sense, a monster movie. A movie starring monsters. There is so subtlety, no cloak and dagger subterfuge. You see Godzilla in the first frame. All of him. In his prime.

Compare this to Gareth Edwards’ 2014 Godzilla, off the back of which King of the Monsters follows, and we could be in different stylistic galaxies. A key complaint from paying punters in 2014 was that we simply didn’t see all that much of, as the Japanese call him, ‘Gojira’. For a film named after the big guy, he was conspicuous by his absence as Edwards attempted to root his film in human drama around which Godzilla appeared as a force of nature, a towering titanic beast it took a significant amount of the film to reveal. Edwards wanted awe in a different manner to King of the Monsters director Michael Dougherty. He wanted to keep us waiting for Godzilla, and make his entrance a *moment* to take our breath away. For some, this was the wrong approach, and King of the Monsters goes in a very different direction.

King of the Monsters wants you to know, very clearly, that Godzilla and a host of other monsters are what this film is about. The humans are plot devices. It is the *monsters* who are the real characters.