It's the one that started it all isn't it? So of course there is that faction that says that Dr. No is the all time best 007 movie ever made... because credit I guess.
I still like the From Russia with Love v Goldfinger debate.
But what you have in Dr. No is the true, pompous, womanizing, alcoholic, chain smoking, gambling, brand conscious cold blooded assassin 007... you know, the Bond that we are SUPPOSED to have. The Bond that was intended to be written.
He's the ultimate Bond because he's the one that won't hesitate to kill anyone and shows no real remorse over it.
And he is lined up with all the tropes and the over-the-top completely unrealistic plots and villainy that makes 007 so watchable.

_**Say YES to “Dr. No”**_
After an MI6 chief & his secretary are murdered in Jamaica, agent 007 (Sean Connery) is sent to investigate. He teams-up with a boatman (John Kitzmiller) with focus on a mysterious nearby island owned by a shady German-Chinese mogul (Joseph Wiseman). Jack Lord is on hand as a CIA agent and Ursula Andress as a shell diver
Based on Ian Fleming’s 1958 novel, “Dr. No” (1962) was the beginning of the never-ending James Bond franchise and features the common staples: The catchy James Bond theme, the opening gun barrel sequence, the suave protagonist, gorgeous women, ritzy casino gambling, exotic locales, spy devices, action thrills, shaken-not-stirred drinks and a megalomaniac villain.
While this one’s not as ridiculous with the gadgets or action as later installments, somehow Bond’s relatively mundane but increasingly dangerous investigation on Jamaica is compelling as it progresses to the lair of the titular antagonist. It’s no wonder that it was a hit and sparked the espionage hysteria of the ’60s.
Andress stands out on the feminine front, but there’s also Eunice Gayson as Sylvia Trench and Zena Marshall as Miss Taro, both just as beautiful in their own way.
The film runs 1 hour, 49 minutes, and was shot in Jamaica and Pinewood Studios & London, England.
GRADE: A-

The Americans are fools. I offered my services, they refused. So did the East. Now they can both pay for their mistake.
Dr. No is directed by Terence Young and co-adapted to screenplay by Richard Maibaum, Johanna Harwood & Berkely Mather from the novel of the same name written by Ian Fleming. It stars Sean Connery, Joseph Wiseman, Ursula Andress, Jack Lord & John Kitzmiller. Music is by Monty Norman and cinematography by Ted Moore.
And so it all began here, what was until Harry Potter arrived on the scene, the most successful film franchise in history. James Bond, a name that would become synonymous with suave spies, deranged villains, beautiful women, exotic locations, gadgets, cars and sex. Ian Fleming's James Bond novels were big come the end of 1961, yet producers Cubby Broccoli and Harry Saltzman met some resistance from studios. It was never plain sailing, even after release the film garnered mixed reviews, but word of mouth and condemnation by the Vatican and the Kremlin propelled it to being one of the surprise hits of 62/63. At the box office it made £60 million Worldwide, this after being made on a budget of only £1 million.
Plot basically sees Connery's Bond flying out to Jamaica to investigate the disappearance of agent Strangways (Timothy Moxon). Once there he finds a case of murder is to be investigated and evidence points to the mysterious Dr. No (Wiseman), who resides on Crab Quay island, a place feared by the superstitious locals. Bond must keep his wits about him as he gets closer to the truth, for there are many obstacles in his way and not everyone can be trusted. Cue the suave and athletic Mr. Bond getting involved with lovely ladies, dicing with death, making friends, making enemies and just generally being an all round awesome anti-hero.
SPECTRE: Special Executive for Counter-intelligence, Terrorism, Revenge and Extortion.
There are a number of changes from the book and some censor appeasement was required to get the film a certificate enabling youngsters to see the film with an adult. What Dr. No rounds out as is a jolly good spy/action movie yarn. Some of the hints are there for what would make Bond such a profitable and well loved franchise, but there's no sign of the gadgetry, tricks and japes that would fill out so many of the titles that followed Dr. No. Here Bond is just armed with his Walter PPK 7.65MM pistol, Sunbeam Alpine car and his bravado and nouse.
Some future stalwart characters are given modest introductions (M, Felix Leiter, Moneypenny) and Ursula Andress sets the marker for all future Bond girls to follow. Ted Moore's capturing of the Jamaica location is sumptuous, something that really comes to the fore on the re-mastered DVD edition of the film. Connery is supremely cool and fearless, the theme tune and gun barrel opening are already in place, and Terence Young, who directs three of the first four Bond movies, keeps it zippy and suspenseful when story gathers up a flame throwing tank, car chases, fights and a quite brilliant tarantula sequence.
Quite a debut, uneven at times as it begins to find its feet, but even if it wasn't the first James Bond movie it would hold up as an entertaining bit of secret agent shenanigans regardless. 7.5/10

An extraordinary manifesto for not just the longest-running film series to date, but for an entire genre. People often forget just how important in the grand scheme of things a first film is, and how it was so requisite that Sean Connery had to be just right, the Bond girls, the action, music cues, opening scene, credits sequence, etc. Even though recently, Daniel Craig has at least captivated audiences to almost the same extent, he only reminded me of Connery's endearing qualities, and through completely lacking humour and charisma, simply showed by omission why Connery (who had already made five films as Bond before Craig was even born) was so essential in the first place.
Watching my blu from the complete Bond boxed set, it wasn't dated or a lesser experience for me in the slightest. Long may Sir Connery live--the enjoyment his work has given me over the years is inestimable! =)

Kind of a weird type 007 like movie but really funny. Anne Hathaway is really hot in this movie too.

**Get Smart unleashes Steve Carrell's comedic brilliance and makes it one of the most entertaining and hilarious spy films of all time.**
Get Smart is hilarious. Just good clean, hilarious fun. Steve Carrell is in his sweet spot with all kinds of physical comedy and side-splitting sarcasm. This movie feels every bit like a spy comedy starring Michael Scott from the Office, except this time with a much bigger budget than Threat Level Midnight. I don't know how the cast could keep a straight face with Steve Carrell's performance as outrageous and entertaining as it was. Anne Hathaway was an excellent partner reacting to Carrell's nonsense with many of her own clever moments. Having watched re-runs of the original TV show with my grandparents growing up, it was easy to see how the movie honored the show's spirit while increasing the budget, effects, and laughs. Director Peter Segal has a resume filled with goofy films and several of which involve espionage and law enforcement, making him the perfect director for a movie like this. Get Smart's clean humor allows the whole family to enjoy its entertaining plot and dorky lovable characters. Steve Carrell makes Get Smart a comedy I will recommend and rewatch again and again.

It can be just a little bit twee at times, this, but it's still quite an enjoyable look at the inspiration behind J.M. Barrie's timeless "Peter Pan". We start inauspiciously, though, as his latest play garners mediocre reviews. The pressure is on - he (Johnny Depp) must write something successful else risk his relationship with impresario Frohman (the very sparingly used Dustin Hoffman). Luckily, he encounters some children in the park playing with their mother "Sylvia" (Kate Winslet) and there starts a friendship that sees them all, and their dog "Nana", provide him with some much needed food for thought. There are some flies in his ointment, though. The young "Peter" (Freddie Highmore) still craves the return of their late father and her mother (Julie Christie) is entirely unsure of his motives and of his commitment. It's this latter concern that grows more important as he becomes more and more integrated with and fond of this family. Barrie comes up with an imaginative plan that might help the young "Peter" and his mother move on with their lives before we all discover that the children are in for another tragedy sooner than later, too. There's something touchingly straightforward about this drama and that's largely down to the engaging efforts from Highmore and his fellow siblings as they mess about and play at being children, dealing with grief and progress in their own way. There's a sub-plot illustrating his own troubled marriage with "Mary" (Radha Mitchell) which doesn't really add much, indeed, Depp himself doesn't really do much more than gently guide the story along as we watch the power of imagination and good will empower these young people, as it did so many others in "Neverland" and beyond. It's about healing, sure, but it's also about adventure and excitement and the thrills of being alive and young, invincible and immortal.

He is the irrepressible spirit of youth.
Under pressure due to his success, in a token socialite marriage, playwright J.M. Barrie is less than enamoured with his lot. Then whilst out walking his dog in Kensington Gardens, he meets widowed Sylvia Llewelyn Davies and her four young sons, George, Jack, Peter and Michael. It is the start of a long lasting friendship that revitalises Barrie and brings about his masterpiece, Peter Pan.
OK, lets get the grumble out the way, you know the one, the one that so many are quick to mention. No this is not a definitive take on J.M. Barrie and this time in his life. Much like Allan Knee's play, "The Man Who Was Peter Pan", from which this is adapted, there are liberties taken and it's most definitely chronologically unsound.
But this is not a biography is it? This is basically asking what sort of man conceived the magical world of Peter Pan? It's a celebration of childhood, life, whimsically asking us if it's wrong to keep the inner child in us all locked away as adulthood takes control? A tale of comedy blended with tragedy, from which glorious art is born to live long and forever, the kind that will be touching generations long after we have left this mortal coil.
Elegantly crafted by director Marc Forster and his screenwriter David Magee, Finding Neverland could so easily have given way to over sentiment and floundered in the search for emotional kickers. Yet it doesn't because Forster (immeasurably aided by the lush cinematography by Roberto Schafer) has created a quaint Victorian world, a world where fantasy is never far away. What emotion is here (and there is lots of it) sits perfect within this setting. We are actually being asked to be Barrie himself, the makers daring us to not be swept up in the magic being born. Wonderful, wonderful stuff.
Johnny Depp is perfectly cast as Barrie, delicately fusing childish playfulness with inner sorrow, Depp doesn't put a foot wrong. It will be a crime if this multi talented actor doesn't finish his career with the highest acting honour on offer, the Academy Award for Best Actor (nominated three times, including this performance), it's practically impossible to imagine another actor in this generation nailing the role of Barrie like Depp does. Playing off him expertly is Kate Winslet as Sylvia, raw and honest like, it's emotionally driven and gnaws away at the audience's heart strings. Yet it's young Freddie Highmore as Peter that steals the show. Very much the film's heart, his relationship with Barrie has a grace about it, with Highmore (just 12 at the time) able to portray a subtle tenderness that drives the relationship forward.
Nominated for seven Academy Awards (including Best Picture), Finding Neverland won just the one for Jan Kaczmarek's poignant score. It matters not, because to me at least, this will forever be a personal favourite film. Something that just like Peter Pan himself, will never ever get old. 10/10

Some glow up!
2015's 'Minions' wasn't a film I found enjoyment with (6/10, fwiw), but its sequel genuinely entertained thoroughly. It doesn't offer anything truly hilarious, but there were a relatively high number of times where it made me chuckle. I was not expecting anything positive from it, yet it actually pulls through with a fun time. I'd even say it's the best release from the entire franchise.
Steve Carell remains a strong lead for these 'Despicable Me' projects, as does Pierre Coffin - the voice of the Minions, of course! Taraji P. Henson is an excellent addition, as is Alan Arkin. Michelle Yeoh is good value too, but her character is a bit lame unfortunately - a bit of a waste of Yeoh, to be honest. Elsewhere, animation-wise: quality - very vibrant!
Lastly, how many butt shots is too many butt shots? I counted at least 3, 4 perhaps: 3(?) x Minions and 1 x Gru. I hope this isn't Kyle Balda's version of Quentin Tarantino's thing...

**Overall : The Rise of Gru returns the franchise to what it does best.**
Minions: The Rise of Gru feels like the franchise is starting to return to what made it great. Bringing back great characters like Gru and Nefario substantiated the movie providing a stronger connection to the Despicable Me movies than the last Minions film. Great Easter eggs, clever jokes, and fun moments throughout equaled a fantastic new entry in this beloved franchise.

Very good movie, watched with my family and no regrets on it. Recommend to everybody!.

It sure has been a long wait for the sequel (7 years to be precise) but I think it's safe to say that the film does not disappoint. While the film lacks a strong plot and is louder than its prequel, it easily covers up with delightful comedy, a sprinkle of nostalgia and a satisfying dose of lovable Minions!

Eleven year old 'Gru" is asked by his school teacher what he wants to be when he grows up. "A super villain" he retorts - to the derision of his classmates. Little do they know, though, that he has applied to join the "Vicious Six" who have, themselves, just dumped their founder member "Wild Knuckles". They aren't so impressed when he turns up at the interview but he uses his newly designed glue-gun to escape with their all powerful, emerald encrusted, stone. Now the five are on the warpath as he entrusts the stone to his minion friend "Otto", but he manages to swap it for a pebble with eyes so now embarks on a mammoth cycle ride to fetch it back whilst the pursuing villains cause havoc. Luckily, "Wild Knuckles" hasn't given up. He kidnaps "Gru" to get the stone back, but when he realises that he no longer has it, the two form an unlikely, and quite amusing, partnership to retrieve it. I guess I'm just the wrong demographic for this, because although it hits the ground running and never stops for breath, I just didn't really get it. The yellow ovoid creatures are fun, but hardy the stuff of big screen entertainment and the plot reminded me of the recently released "Bad Guys" animation that I didn't much like either. It's my first foray into "Despicable" territory, but the slapstick approach to the whole thing will probably ensure it's my last. Others will love it, I'm sure - the cinema on a Sunday night was packed to the rafters, but this hadn't enough for the grown up in me to remain engaged for long.

"Matt" (Ryan Reynolds) is a bored, ambitious CIA agent looking after a safe house in South Africa desperate for something meatier to do. Then his wish comes true as he finds himself looking after a "most wanted" "Frost" (Denzel Washington). Needless to say, their safe house turns out to be anything but, and now they are chased all over the place unsure who to/not to trust in this is perfectly functional action thriller. Daniel Espinosa keeps it all taut and interesting and the pair make for quite a convincing team on-the-run. Brendan Gleeson and Sam Shepard chip in now and again to a storyline that works quite well too. Worth a watch.

Tries really hard to be a Bourne-like espionage-thriller and while the action sequences aren't as well done, still has some entertaining moments. Ryan Reynolds and Denzel Washington have some great scenes together. Kind of surprised, given it's Universal, there hadn't been a few direct-to-video sequels at this point... **3.75/5**

fast paced action thriller delivers from beginning to end. great performances from Reynolds and Washington. A tense and thrilling reminder of the great three days of the condor (1975)

First off this film is a remake of the 1957 film of the same name.
Casting couldn't have been better for the main characters. The R rating and amount of violence was perfect for the tone of the film. The ending was exactly what the film needed. Not some soft, heroes win feeling most films carry nowadays. One of my favorite films.

Most of the time I hate remakes....but I give a big pass to most Western and War movie remakes.
Mainly that's because, until M*A*S*H early war movies had soldiers that looked like they stepped out of the shower and put on a freshly laundered uniform...you know, instead of the realities of life in combat zones.
And the same goes with Westerns, the cowpokes may be riding the range...yet they look like they had the time to shower, shave, style their hair, and press their clothes.
None of that really sat right with me...at all.
The remake righted that wrong.
And it did it without killing the wonderful Elmore Leonard story the movie was based on and let's be honest, he really has the best ideas for crime and western stories the world has ever seen.

This is the best Western of the 21st Century so far (for mine, just edging out Django Unchained).
Building on the classic movie from 1957, James Mangold's remake adds in much needed scenes to fill plot holes and build nuanced characters that were sorely lacking in the original.
Our hero now, is a man struggling to keep his farm and the respect of his family whilst the "antagonist" (I stretch the use of the word here) is almost tired of his way of life and his "family." Adding in the concept of children to these two was smart thinking on the part of the writers and this really deepens Bale and Crowe's characters.
Speaking of which, both give perfectly nuanced performances here and you can watch their characters grow in response to each other as the movie progresses. Both "sons" (Lerman and Foster) fit into their roles of the naive teen becoming a man, and the unhinged "son" idolising his "father" respectively. The rest of the cast have been perfectly chosen.
The cinematography is stunning at times, but unlike most Westerns, this does emphasize the country - it is more of a silent character here. But when it is shown, it is just gorgeous...seriously, I hadnt seen snow in Westerns until this - but it just looks brilliant.
The score drips with the memories of older, more famous Westerns, but Beltrami makes this one unique. Sound design is also great, even using the heartbeat-like rhythm of the idling train's engine in the final scene.
Everything else is perfect - the lighting, editing, costumes, set design...this does not look like an independently made film that the major studios didnt want to touch. The people who worked on this, really wanted to. And that's also probably why its so good.
THIS is how to remake a movie. Enjoy.

The price of redemption -- READ THIS if you had problems with the ending
This remake involves the capture of a notorious outlaw, Ben Wade (Russell Crowe), who is then escorted to the town of Contention to await the train to Yuma, where he'll be hanged. A desperate rancher, Dan Evans (Christian Bale), hires on for the escort job because he needs the $200 for his family to survive. Wade plays psychological games the entire time trying to corrupt Evans, but things turn out differently.
The cast is outstanding (which also features the beautiful Gretchen Mol and Peter Fonda), the New Mexican locations are great and the score ranks with the all-time best. Most importantly the picture is engaging throughout its 2 hour runtime, not to mention the story gives the viewer a lot to chew on.
The first hour of the film is realistic but what turned me off during my initial viewing was the second hour's mounting implausibilities. Thankfully, most of these can be explained.
One issue is when a man burns to death locked in a wagon carriage. The quibble is that he doesn't scream enough in fiery torment. But watch the scene and you'll clearly hear him yelling in the background. Evan's loss of a limp at the climax is more of an issue, although this can be explained by an adrenaline rush.
One problem I had was that Ben Wade (Crowe) came off as super-human. There was seemingly nothing he couldn't do, even while handcuffed. I suppose this could be explained by the fact that there ARE people who are incredibly gifted to the point of being nigh super-human.
In any event, this is not a realistic Western like, say, "Wyatt Earp" or "The Long Riders." No, "3:10 to Yuma" is a MYTHIC Western with an potent message. If you can't handle strong mythic elements in Westerns look elsewhere.
When I first saw the film I didn't get the ending and it turned me off. But it was clear that there was more to the picture than what first meets the eye so I decided to view it again. It DOES make sense, it's just that you might miss it on your initial viewing because the events flash by so quickly. When you DO see it, it'll blow you away.
***SPOILER ALERT*** DO NOT READ FURTHER UNLESS YOU WANT AN EXPLANATION OF THE FILM!
Wade is a confident and talented man who smugly looks down on others, acting like a disciple of Nietzsche who has no moral obligation to anyone, least of all God. He senses simple purity in Evans and plays the role of tempter, trying to corrupt Evans and win him to his way of thinking. But as they wait in the hotel room it is Evans who "converts" Wade, in a sense. Evans doesn't accomplish this in any type of contrived manner, he accomplishes it simply by being WHO HE IS -- an undefiled, courageous family man who stubbornly refuses to give up on hope, faith, life, righteousness and family.
As they're waiting, Wade sketches a picture of Evans in a book. It is later shown that this sketch was made on an opening page of a Bible. This reveals that Wade came to view Evans as a Christ figure, at least subconsciously, and that Evans is clearly a type of Christ in the story.
What exactly was it that caused Wade to "convert" and support Evans? (1.) He saw in Evans a man that refused to be bought -- a man who refused to be corrupted by filthy lucre, which was something he never experienced before. (2.) Evan's son insisted that there was still some good in Wade despite his wicked history. Regardless of Wade's denial, the kid was right. The idea that SOMEONE saw a glimmer of good in him, that SOMEONE out there BELIEVED in him despite his past evil deeds ultimately moved him and compelled him to support Evans. (3.) Wade turned evil because he was abandoned as a kid. He saw in Evans and his wife a REAL family -- parents who stayed together and refused to abandon faith, hope, righteousness and family come hell or high water. He became convinced that Evans and his family were worth supporting, even perhaps dying for. (4.) Evans made a deal with the Pinkerton that if he successfully got Wade to the train the Pinkerton would make sure Evans' family got $1000, which would bail them out of their hardships. Wade wanted to make sure the family got that money. Somewhere deep inside he wanted to redeem himself of his wicked past and this was the opportunity. This could be the beginning of a new life.
(5.) Wade's relationship with Evans lasted only a few days but he found something that was missing in all his other relationships - a friendship based on respect rather than familiarity or shared events. Great friendships like this can happen quickly similar to love-at-first-sight. Such relationships are conducive to transparency, which explains why Evans reveals to Wade the real reason he lost his leg in the war.
After Evan's brutal death Wade has an even greater revelation: To see a truly undefiled man -- a simple but GREAT man -- murdered by a group of immoral swine fills him with disgust. You can see it on his face. Yes, he should be thankful that his men remained loyal to him but this was about their only redeeming quality. To truly start a new life he would have to be judge and executioner of the corrupted souls who would pull him back down into the slime.
Why did Evans have to die? Because redemption can only be paid via the spilling of blood. It was the price for Wade to live and have a new life.
GRADE: A

When you think about it, which I have been lately, is they weren't paying me to walk away. They were paying me so they could walk away.
3:10 to Yuma is directed by James Mangold and co-adapted to screenplay by Halsted Welles, Michael Brandt and Derek Haas. A remake of Delmer Daves' 1957 film of the same name, it's based on a story written by Elmore Leonard. It stars Russell Crowe, Christian Bale, Peter Fonda, Ben Foster and Logan Lerman. Music is by Marco Beltrami and cinematography by Phedon Papamichael.
After the capture of notorious outlaw Ben Wade (Crowe), a posse is put together to escort him to the town of Contention from where he will be put on the 3:10 train to Yuma prison. Joining this posse is broke rancher Dan Evans (Bale), disabled in the Civil War, Dan is struggling to keep hold of his land and to support his family. Seen as a flop in the eyes of his eldest son William (Lerman), Dan sees this opportunity as a way out of his problems. But with Wade an intelligent foe, and the outlaw boss' gang on their trail, Evans and the posse will do well to make it to Contention alive...
Daves' original film is a fine effort, very much pulsing with psychological beats and cloaked in claustrophobic atmospherics. Backed up by two excellent Western performers in Glenn Ford and Van Heflin, there is many a Western fan who cherish it and never felt it was a genre piece ripe for a remake; myself included. But the logic behind the reasons Mangold and his team put forward for remaking it made sense. A story of great thematics for the adults, and action a go-go for the younger modern film fan. Thus putting a Western back in the headlines at yet another time when the genre was gasping for air. All that was left to do was get two of the modern era's biggest stars to play Wade and Evans - which of course they duly did - and it was good to go. Just don't mess it up was all that was asked of the makers.
Running at nearly half an hour longer than the original, Mangold's movie slots in a new mid-section and changes the ending. The former works a treat as the posse venture through hostile Apache country, meet some ne'er-do-well railroad ruffians, while Wade's gang, led by the supremely fiendish Charlie Prince (Foster), are on the bloody trail. The latter is a huge misstep, both in execution and character development. Most film fans are happy to suspend disbelief in the name of good entertainment, but here we are asked to ignore some impossible athletics while also being asked to swallow a character turn around that beggars belief. Such a shame because up till then the blend of traditional Western character themes such as morality and redemption had dovetailed nicely with the pistol banging and all round breezy action construction. While the father and son axis also gives the narrative some extra bite.
Even bad guys love their mothers.
The performances are also of a high standard. In the support slots Fonda, Foster and Lerman are top dollar. Fonda is all leather faced and gruff as bounty hunter McElroy, Foster does a quality line in sneering villainy, and Lerman, in a tricky role, utterly convinces as the conflicted boy breaking out into a man. But this is Crowe and Bale's movie. Crowe has Wade as an intelligent dandy, a man who loves and understands women, an artist who also has a tongue as quick as his hands are on his guns. We know that Wade is callous, but Crowe ensures that we never know what is around the corner or truly on his mind. Bale puts much dignity into Evans, he's a put upon man, tortured by his failings on the home front, but there is stoic nobility there and as he and Wade venture further on their journey, a grudging respect begins to form and Bale and Crowe really start to put credibility into their characters. And then that last quarter nearly undoes all their excellent work...
In spite of this, 3:10 to Yuma is a good time to be had as a modern Western production with old traditional values. Energetic and never dull from first frame to last, it's recommended on proviso you don't mind unscrewing your head and taking out your brain for the last 15 minutes. 7.5/10

Not quite as good with some outlandish action scenes but like Statham and Kate Nauta (Oregon gal as it turns out) is hot, though she is a model, and her "acting" shows it. Still thought it was fine all in all. **3.0/5 **

Every now and again there is an unexpected advantage in having a cinema membership. This was billed yesterday at our local Cineworld and so, to avoid the biblical torrents outside, I thought - why not? Well I am really glad I did. This is a really enjoyable story about a young, one-eyed, lad "Kubo" who lives with his mother in a cave high above their village where he regularly regales the townsfolk's with his magical stories, augmented by some wizardry with origami characters. His only rule is that he must return to his mother by sundown. She is a curiously detached character, whose dreams provide the substance for the young man's engaging and characterful stories. It is festival time and his elderly friend suggests that he stay a while later and light a lantern so that he may try to chat with his later father. The sun sets and suddenly he is being sought by his two evil, shape-shifting, aunties. His mother manages to stave them off but at considerable sacrifice, and soon young "Kudo" and his friends monkey and beetle must race to find an unbreakable sword and some armour that may offer his some protection from his pursuing grandfather who, it turns out, wants his other eye too! The animation is delicate and charming. From the origami samurai through to the leaf-built boat, this young man uses his powers to stay one step ahead of his nemeses and the whole story is really quite engaging. There are a few combat scenes, but they are short, sharp and sweet. This is really about the relationship between him and his two friends, and as it progresses we soon discover that they are far more than just his travelling companions. Dario Marianelli has provided a good score that mixes the jollity and the menacing and the script delivers some humour to mix well with the adventure. This looks great on a big screen - the animation is vidid and colourful and I was really pleasantly surprised here. Well worth a watch.

Great, creative story.
'Kubo and the Two Strings' is a fun film, I enjoyed it all. I love the animation style that Laika use, they also tend to get the vibe of their stories pretty bang on. This is my favourite work of the studio's so far, at least before I watch 'Missing Link'.
The casting could've been more appropriate, though I'm a believer of anyone playing anyone when it comes to voice roles. Art Parkinson, Charlize Theron and Matthew McConaughey make for an undeniably strong trio. Parkinson and Theron do particularly good jobs, though McConaughey is my standout. Elsewhere, Ralph Fiennes and George Takei are, minorly, involved.
The lovely story and top animation are the biggest takeaways from this. Recommended.

**A boy, a monkey and a giant beetle team up for a quest.**
This is not an old fashioned stop-motion animation. This is a very modern, a hybrid of multiple techniques that includes 3D printing and digital special effects. The directional debut for the producer of 'ParaNorman' and 'The Boxtrolls'. The tale is about a one eyed boy named Kubo, who has been hiding in a seaside mountain cave near a small village from his grandfather, the moon king, ever since his birth, protected by his mother. He grew up listening the stories of a legendary samurai warrior Hanzo. But one day after he himself exposed to the moonlight, the troubles follow. Now his only chance to survive is to find his father's armours and so the quest begins where he teams up with other two.
This is a Japanese story, takes place somewhere in a fictional ancient Japan. Technically, this film was so good, very pleasant for viewing, especially the framerate was higher than normal stop-motion animation. The character models, music, the length of the film, the pace of the narration, all were so brilliant, but not the story. It was average, I mean very, very simple and familiar. Still, it is a very likable film, particularly the children would love it. I'm going to repeat again like I always say while reviewing stop-motion animation films that this kind of films are rare, so when they make one, that automatically goes to a must see list. Whether you're going to like it or not, I hope you won't miss it.
_7/10_

Every once in a while there is family-friendly entertainment that lives up to its wonderment in imaginative storytelling and stunning visual scope. Certainly this is the case with the stimulating yet meditative Japanese animated fantasy-adventure **Kubo and the Two Strings**. Undeniably vibrant and philosophical in committed heart and soul, **Kubo and the Two Strings** is a majestic masterpiece in its colorfully realized presentation that ambitiously binds together opulent elements of ancient Far East folklore, eye-opening anime and origami (the finesse art of paper-folding). The competition for jaw-dropping animation within recent years (or even this year) has been remarkably stellar thus far but Kubo confirms its superiority above the ranks. No one can doubt the masterful film-making technique administered by the film’s director Travis Knight in this glossy, whimsical medieval gem.
As with the majority of adventurous and challenging narratives that seek the high-minded exploratory vibes in its execution, **Kubo and the Two Strings** is about the creative coming-of-age quest of a young boy and the spellbinding encounters that materialize as a result. Knight and screenwriters Marc Haimes and Chris Butler oversees a profound and aesthetically remarkable production highlighted by notable voiceover performers (such as Academy Award-winners Charlize Theron and Matthew McConaughey), stylish and glowing animation and a hypnotic showcase that is an exquisite treat for moviegoers from all walks of life.
Importantly,** Kubo and the Two Strings** is aided by its heralded association with the Oregon-based studio Laika whose treasured reputation in the stop-motion animation process is tremendously noteworthy. Among Laika’s previously outstanding cinematic samples include 2009’s _Coraline_, 2011’s criminally underrated _ParaNorman_ and 2014’s _The Boxtrolls_ so indeed Knight’s superlative **Kubo and the Two Strings** is among exceptional stock. The detailed imagery in **Kubo** is indescribably luscious and the brilliant artistic manufacturing of Laika’s refined flourishes only elevates Knight’s enticing animated vehicle as a compelling journey into the ancient Japanese Edo period mythology.
One can tell that the coveted **Kubo and the Two Strings** is destined to stay true to its mystical leanings especially when the beginning film’s sequence features the caustic quote: ““If you must blink, do it now” …because “if you look away, even for an instant, our hero will surely perish.” As previously mentioned the story takes place in ancient Japan where we find the gifted 11-year old Kubo (voiced by Art Parkinson from “Game of Thrones”) existing with his ailing mother on the outskirts of a nearby village. The young Kubo’s talents is such that he is a natural story-telling magician that can skillfully convey his expressive communication through origami. Kubo enjoys the gesture of entertaining the local villagers. However, his mother advises that Kubo must be home before nightfall. Unfortunately, Kubo does not heed her advice but that is not due to his personal defiance or negligence.
In fact, Kubo’s no-show at home is large in part cue to the dubious agenda of his grandfather Moon Father (Academy Award nominee Ralph Fiennes). In instructing his dastardly daughters to track down their beleaguered nephew the stakes are high especially when Moon Father was instrumental in the demise of his slain samurai father. Hence, Kubo must locate his late father’s magical armor-related belongings and reclaim a sense of honor. The tag-a-longs at Kubo’s side include the woolly-looking snow Monkey (Theron) and buff warrior Beetle (McConaughey). Together, the travelling trio is confronted by beastly specimens and other deceptive supernatural forces en route to the ultimate showdown with his sinister grandfather Moon Father. Armed with resiliency and determination Kubo and his crafty companions face uncertainties that are quite unimaginable to say the least.
**Kubo and the Two Strings** is an astonishing offering that taps into its pulsating pulse with its mild intensity that should not deter the youngsters from fully experiencing the escapist vision of young Kubo and his offbeat sidekicks. Parkinson’s Kubo is idealistic and has a fearless approach to questioning the unassuming world around him. The combination of roguishness and wide-eyed innocence is certainly appealing to the intrigued tots that may view Kubo’s wily exploits as exciting and surreal in the name of his heroic daddy’s destiny. Theron’s acid-tongued Monkey is inspired in grand impishness with snarky flair. As for McConaughey’s flippant gung-ho Beetle he is an odd serving of comical relief and well-intentional courageousness. Fiennes makes for an ideal unctuous rival as his Moon Father is the Darth Vader to Kubo’s impressionable Luke Skywalker blueprint. Also, Academy Award nominee Rooney Mara is wickedly delicious as the scheming aunts–the twin sisters of Kubo’s sickly mother. Rounding out the supporting cast are the supplied voices of Asian contributors such as George Takei’s (“TV Star Trek’s original Sulu”) Hosato, Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa’s Hashi and Minae Noji’s Minae among the Kubo personalities that populate Knight’s dazzling display of a transcendent Japanese-flavored Grimm fairy tale.
Naturally the real selling point for **Kubo and the Two Strings** is the standout computer-generated technology and other incorporated genres of animation that gives this polished fantasy fable its magnificent sheen. Knight, a first-time director whose background as Laika’s primary animator is evidenced in the celebrated animation studio’s first three films, demonstrates the authenticity of his amazing craft courtesy of the stop-motion precision that defines his sensual cinematic landscape.
Overall, **Kubo and the Two Strings** radiates with sweeping charm, boldness, curiosity and depth as it exemplifies the epitome of the awestruck construction of an enlightening, sophisticated feature length animation. The mixture of humor, thrills, drama and tragedy is decidedly triumphant allowing **Kubo and the Two Strings** to flex its reflective, throbbing mysterious muscles.
**Kubo and the Two Strings** (2016)
Focus Features
1 hr. 41 mins.
Starring: Art Parkinson, Charlize Theron, Matthew McConaughey, Ralph Fiennes, Rooney Mara, George Takei, Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa, Brenda Vaccaro
Directed by: Travis Knight
MPAA Rating: PG
Genre: Fantasy & Sci-Fi/ Action & Adventure/Animation
Critic’s rating: **** stars (out of 4)
(c) **Frank Ochieng** 2016

This film is truly a magical and inspiring masterpiece. The music, though not dominating, complements the storyline beautifully, adding to the overall charm of the movie. The writing and creativity behind the themes are exceptional, captivating viewers with their inventiveness and originality.
The film's blend of creativity, excitement, humor, and heartwarming moments creates an unforgettable cinematic experience. It immerses audiences in a world of make-believe, filled with fun and endless possibilities, while also conveying important messages about family and honesty.
I highly recommend this movie for its enchanting storytelling and captivating themes. Among various adaptations, the new interpretation of Wonka in the prequel stands out as a favorite, surpassing previous versions. The Johnny Depp rendition, in contrast, is criticized as being disappointingly lackluster and detrimental to the franchise's reputation.
Overall, this film is a delightful and enchanting journey that resonates with viewers on multiple levels. Its ability to entertain, inspire, and evoke emotions makes it a standout piece of cinematic artistry that is sure to leave a lasting impression.

"Charlie" lives in one room with his mother and four grandparents all sharing the same bed and sustained on a diet of cabbage soup! Then the eponymous chocolatier announces a chance of a lifetime. In only five of the tens of millions of bars of chocolate they produce, there will be hidden a golden ticket. Find the ticket and you win a trip around the factory. Now his family clearly don't have much money so his chances aren't high, especially as he watches the television and sees a collection and spoiled and obnoxious children with equally odious parents snap them all up. What chance when he finds some money on the street that the bar he buys will win? Well that bit of the story hardly requires Sherlock Holmes, but he does receive an intriguing proposal from competitor "Slugworth" before he and his "Grandpa Joe" (Jack Albertson) arrive at the appointed time. Out comes a purple velvet clad gent with a big hat - that's the hugely eccentric "Wonka" (Gene Wilder) who speaks a form of gobbledygook and promises them a trip of a lifetime! There is something of the parable about the ensuing story as the children face tests of character and fall foul of their own excesses with the occasionally quite menacing "Wonka" ensuring that just desserts are dished out to the wrongdoers. It's got to be the ultra-petulant "Veruca Salt" (Julie Dawn Cole) who topped my list of those deserving the compost heap, but "Mike Teevee" (Paris Themmen) wasn't far behind. As we travel through the place we are introduced to the mysterious "Oompa Loompa" people who keep the place running and help him produce the perfect chocolate but the big question is, though, will "Charlie" and "Joe" make it through the challenges of the trip themselves? Wilder is on super form here as he takes them on a moral maze that is just as sugar coated as the candies, and Leslie Bricusse and Anthony Newley have written some of the best songs to grace the silver screen. "Pure Imagination", "The Candy Man" and the delightfully annoying "I Want it Now" from the aptly named "Veruca" all top off a colourful, acrobatic and magical tale of trust and decency that you can't fail to enjoy. Perhaps Roy Kinnear sould have considered drowning at birth?

**Much better than the 2005 film, but I still think it would be more interesting as an animated film.**
When I saw the 2005 film, starring Johnny Depp, I was not satisfied at all: the film seemed more effective as an animation than as a conventional CGI loaded film. However, I was unfamiliar with this one, I didn't know the original book, by Roald Dahl and I only realized all this when I was writing my review of that film, and I immediately decided that I would watch the older film when I could. I saw this film yesterday, and the comparison between the two productions was inevitable.
I still think that an animated film would be more interesting, but I recognize that this production has more charm than the bloated, CGI-clogging overproduction of 2005. Everything seems more realistic and credible, magic is something we can believe in naturally. I understand the appeal that a chocolate factory might have for a child: I lived near one, and just the smell on the street was indescribable. However, this film offers us a spectacle of light, color and joy, and transforms that magical place into a convincing thing that we, for a moment, would love to visit. The cinematography, visual and special effects and the good design of the sets and costumes are essential to achieve this, and everyone is to be congratulated. There's something here that's strangely psychedelic, but that's subtle enough.
Mel Stuart was faithful to the original tale, so the story remains the same: the modest and sincerely good Charlie, the mysterious factory that no one knows, and no one knows how it works without workers, the eccentricities of Willie Wonka, the unnerving songs of the Oompa Loompas, children full of defects and stubbornness, parents overly condescending. The interpretations end up making the difference: Gene Wilder gives us a more affectionate and sweet version of Wonka, less focused on his eccentricities, and the result of his work is a memorable and anthological representation that marked the rest of his career. Peter Ostrum is perfectly convincing in the role of Charlie, and Jack Albertson also shined in his role.
There's really only one problem with this film, at least for me: I can't like the Oompa Loompas at all. In addition to looking like a kind of slave labor (they were supposedly rescued from their country so that they wouldn't all die and accepted to work for their savior out of gratitude), they are annoying with their songs and have a perfectly bizarre look.

Yeah, it's a lot better than the Johnny Depp version isn't it? Probably because this one is fun and entertaining and the Depp one was was a Tim Burton film and felt kind of pretentious didn't it?
Clearly this version doesn't look as visually pleasing, but it makes up for that in earnest heart, a few good tunes, and a titular character that is always delightfully entertaining to watch.
Gene Wilder really sells it without being creepy doesn't he? And the first time you watch it you don't think about it... but it's a really thin line he had to walk to come across as not creepy and still be eccentric and fun and he pulled it off in spades.
I didn't really think about it as a kid, but as an adult (especially with Burton's) it's one of those things where Wilder should have won an Oscar. It was Academy Award worthy and the film was made in '71 where the Academy Awards still meant something.
Gene's devastatingly on target performance aside, this is just a fun film that the family deserves to see and it certainly needs to be lauded over the remake.