La La Land – Overly optimistic or charmingly inspirational?

★★★★★

The term “great” was criminally underused in the film industry over the past year. Captain America: Civil War wasn’t brilliant, it was great. 10 Cloverfield Lane wasn’t a masterpiece, but it was great. While great is a considerably positive term, it’s not the strongest compliment – it leaves room for imperfections.

La La Land isn’t a great film – it’s incredible, spectacular, flawless. 

Hollywood has always struggled to recreate the magic of the musical. There’s an element of charm to Gene Kelly dancing around in the rain or Julie Andrews floating through the mountains of Salzburg that’s tough to replicate. Not only does La La Land succeed in producing that musical magic, it goes above and beyond to provide a real story sprinkled with Golden Age optimism.

After previous success with Whiplash (one of the highlights of 2014), expectations are somewhat high for Damien Chazelle. Whiplash’s direction was a hit, but can he really blow us away again? After all, it was only his second feature film.

Unsurprisingly, he can still blow us away. It’s clear now that Chazelle really understands modern cinema. As was the case with Whiplash, not a single moment is misjudged. Chazelle’s direction is handled with fluidity and care throughout – not a single shot misplaced, not one set piece lost in the moment of excitement. La La Land is a story that flows with perfection.

At the forefront of the show, Ryan Gosling and Emma Stone’s chemistry shines as brightly as ever. The duets, the romance, the dancing, it all feels so right. There’s an element of seemingly unrealistic optimism but that’s idea of La La Land and timeless musicals – the rejection of Modern Cinema realism for the attempt to chase the age-old American Dream, regardless of how many times it wants to chew you up and spit you out. Unfortunately, Hollywood isn’t as fanciful or dreamlike as it seems, the irony of the film’s name. Gosling and Stone perfectly embody the charm and optimism of Gene Kelly and Julie Andrews.

At the heart of any musical, you’ll find the musical numbers themselves. While not every song betters the predecessor, each one captures the moment of the scene to perfection. Produced by Chazelle-favourite, Justin Hurwitz, there’s a similar theme replicated in each track with different effect. At the characters’ highest moments – a fast and upbeat orchestrated performance, and at their lowest – a slow but steady melody. It’s a common musical effect, but it’s handled with perfection and deserves praise. There are moments of pure magic and beauty in the soundtrack that will stay with you long after the film ends.

There are some truly wonderful moments in the musical set pieces, with the standout performance coming from Gosling and Stone’s duet to “A Lovely Night”. A dance routine lovingly crafted to capture the vibes of Singing in the Rain – random periods of bliss, the characters are truly in La La Land in this time.  There’s a clever back-and-forth between the lyrics and the scene itself, whilst the song and characters try to reject the moment, our stars can’t help but be caught up in the atmosphere of the setting.

La La Land is in love with Golden Age Hollywood. The idea of not letting jazz die brought about by Gosling’s Sebastian consistently arises throughout, a clear metaphor for the classics of cinema. The story is tender and handled lovingly, working well as a homage to classic Hollywood.

It can be challenging to recreate the feeling of Hollywood’s classics, working under assumption. The 21st Century seems to be the age of the new musical – High School Musical, Pitch Perfect, Hairspray. They’re indeed new and certainly interesting, but they’ll never be timeless, they’ll never be able to compete with The Sound of Music, Singin’ in the Rain, or The Wizard of Oz. However, Damien Chazelle has crafted something that can be timeless and deserves recognition.

La La Land isn’t your standard 21st Century Musical, it’s a love letter to those that have given up on their dreams, it’s a reminder that the success story is still well and truly real.

Doctor Strange – Does it live up to Marvel’s current standards?

★★★★

With a library of films spanning over 8 years and a total gross of more than $10 billion, it’s tough to see an end to Marvel’s cinematic endeavour to produce modern cinema’s biggest franchise. For every well-known superhero outing – Captain America, Iron Man, The Avengers – it’s the little guys that prove Marvel still has a few tricks up its sleeve.

It seems fitting that Marvel’s latest title – Doctor Strange – exemplifies those tricks with its first outing into the mystical realm of sorcery.

Not known for carrying the weight of a blockbuster on his shoulders, director Scott Derrickson brings professionalism to the table, never seeming out of his depth. Handling the likes of the now cinematic-heavyweight Benedict Cumberbatch, Derrickson provides us with a well-balanced story that doesn’t force too much of the lead actor onto us, allowing time for supporting roles from Tilda Swinton as The Ancient One and Chiwetel Ejiofor as Karl Mordo to blossom and make their characters more 3-dimensional.

It’s a shame that the same cannot be said for Mads Mikkelsen’s forgettable Kaecilius.

For a film that embodies the weird, the spectacular and the strange, it seems that Marvel has fell victim to its usual problems when it comes to the evildoers. There’s no real threat there, no motive. As is the case with every Marvel villain, Mikkelsen’s Kaecilius adds no further depth to the story, he’s just there.

While Mikkelsen’s acting capabilities never come into question, his inevitable downfall comes from the story itself. Kaecilius ultimately fails to be the Yin to Strange’s Yang through a lack of character development not unknown in the franchise’s villain roster.

The usual origin story is handled with creative attention to detail when it comes to the titular character. Strange is given to key origin treatment – the downfall, the rehabilitation of a new life, and the new equilibrium. Our villain, on the other hand, is perhaps brushed over a little too much. There’s nothing to care about, he’s just bad because the plot tells him to be.

Whilst the franchise is well-known for its overuse of a less-than-subtle approach (à la Age of Ultron), Doctor Strange embodies spectacle with just enough stunning visuals to enchant viewers. Through mind-bending destruction and thrilling spell-construction, Doctor Strange is the pinnacle of stunning imagery in Marvel’s library. It’s true that in modern cinema, we have to choose our 3D films wisely; Doctor Strange is one not to be missed.

Doctor Strange is truly stunning when it comes to the visuals, but it’s the lead character – played by an on-form and in-demand Benedict Cumberbatch – that carries the bulk of the film on his shoulders. Coming into the franchise with the most unknown character to date in the cinematic universe, Cumberbatch crafts an instant relationship with the audience through style, wit and charm. Cumberbatch is Doctor Strange and proves that the studio knows the characters it produces on-screen.

Doctor Strange’s first outing on the big-screen is imperfect; the balance between good and evil goes against what a superhero film should be. However, regardless of where the film stands in the villain department, its visuals coupled with a strangely likeable lead produces a film that provides enough magic to satisfy spectacle-seekers and Marvel fans alike.

I don’t even need to tell you to wait for the post-credits scenes.