Victoria & Abdul (2017) - Movie Review

With how much time I spend at the cinemas as opposed to doing pretty much anything else, I end up relying a fair bit on my film intake when it comes to learning certain things. Things like foreign cultures and the history behind them. Because of this, especially when discussing historical films from other countries, I’ve wound up learning more about that history from films than anywhere else. For instance, through watching Bollywood films, I’ve gained a certain level of understanding concerning the cultural strain between the U.K. and India, like the line separating India and Pakistan from Begum Jaan. Of course, there’s also the element of bias to keep in consideration; no matter what is being depicted on-screen, there is always some level of creator bias involved, even with films based on historical details. So, basically, whatever I’ve picked up from films in regards to history is always packaged with an understanding that the real-world events may or may not have actually occurred as shown; it’s a weird tightrope to walk. It’s because of this I tend to be lenient with most biopics, at least in terms of accuracy to the real events, since films that are 100% true to the story are exceptionally rare.

 

tl;dr As we get into today’s film concerning a historical British monarch, I’m not going to focus too highly on historical accuracy; I’ll just stick with efficacy at storytelling as always.

Bridget Jones's Baby (2016) - Movie Review

In 2001, Bridget Jones’s Diary (man, that apostrophe still irks me somewhat; I don’t care about grammatical accuracy, that just looks wrong) served as a major paradigm shift for how rom-coms were realized and set a standard for how they would look for the rest of the 2000’s and even today. With its firmly tongue-in-cheek sense of humour and old-school literary influences, it was the exception to the rule that itself became the rule, bringing a far more irresponsible and mutton-acting-as-lamb recklessness to the status quo. Then the sequel came along and, by sticking to auto-pilot on all counts, was thoroughly annoying and a major let-down. Now we have a long-awaited(?) follow-up to the story that may or may not retcon said sequel The Edge Of Reason out of existence, but as always the Sequel Rules still apply. Rule #6 goes that threequels made 10+ years after the fact have a high probability of being either the best or worst of their respective series (see: Toy Story 3, Terminator 3). So, with all that in mind, how does this go?

Florence Foster Jenkins (2016) - Movie Review

Earlier this month, I went to an interactive screening of The Room at one of my locals. Again. I lost count a while ago, but I’ve definitely reached double digits in how many times I’ve done this already. Under normal circumstances, I don’t go and see movies at the cinema more than once; the only time I can remember doing it was with Spy Kids 3, and that was ultimately because I missed the first few minutes the first time round. I also don’t usually advocate for repeatedly giving money to what is undoubtedly a very, very bad filmmaker, especially not to this degree. However, this is why I have always shown leniency towards films that can be enjoyed by less than legitimate means, and The Room in particular because these are less screenings and more a form of communion. A mass of people getting together that all have the same approach to movie-going as I do is a rarity in today’s day and age, and it is kind of comforting to be able to connect with that many people about something. I bring all this up because the idea of ironic entertainment is hardly a new concept and has been around for a long time, with today’s film highlighting one of the earliest examples of it. I’m coming into this with a certain understanding of the phenomenon that would normally have me on some mental ward waiting list, but I wouldn’t have it any other way honestly. So, with all that said, let’s get started with today’s film.