Horror is a convoluted category of filmmaking that is really challenging to master. It needs an engrossing screenplay, fine directorial work, hypnotising camera work and so on. The characters that can seize the spectator’s mind even after leaving the cinema hall, such rudiments deserve to be reminisced and appreciated by movie buffs. The absence of any of these elements can result in the worst film, and Pari is one such example. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APbgb8gRQ_4   Syed Atif Ali’s directorial venture Pari tells the story of a family of three, comprising of husband Shahram (Junaid Akhtar), wife Mehwish (Azekah Daniel) and their daughter Pari (Khushi Maheen). In search of a peaceful atmosphere to continue his writing, Shahram decides to move with his family to a new house somewhere in Ayubia. After shifting, Mehwish senses some peculiar presence in the new building. Initially, Shahram ignores such eeriness, but eventually, the couple realises that their daughter is the one who is behaving in a weird manner. The evil presence in the haunted house has taken control of their daughter and consequently, supernatural events start to scare them. The rest of the plot revolves around the couple’s endeavour to fight the paranormal, unfolding of a life-altering hidden truth, and religious help to end all this. If one were to ask if Pari managed to meet the high anticipation surrounding this movie, the riposte would be an absolute no. In fact, the film is a random compilation of not-so-horror paranormal scenes and dull characters interweaved with humdrum sound to present a below standard horror flick. I am going to be honest in an uncompromisingly forthright way. The movie is not the spookiest I’ve seen; it is actually quiet terrible. The ambiance and some of the computer-generated imagery in the movie is worth appreciation. However, these are the only two factors that were the main attractions of Pari, given how the storyline was utterly unbearable and feebly ended. Pari’s spine-chilling trailer was nothing but a deceiving technique to snatch away your life’s precious two hours. Promotions advocated the notion that it is Pakistan’s first horror film since the revival of Pakistani cinema. Truth be told, there was nothing attention-grabbing, except for a few visuals and the mountainous area, which gave off an eerie impression to the movie's outlook. The director, Ali, who co-wrote the script with Muhammad Ahsan, unproductively attempted to mingle an anecdote without lucidity and correlation. His efforts left the moviegoers baffled as they struggled to find the missing areas in the movie, along with trying to piece together irrelevant characters such as the ghost boy, mentally disturbed doctor and a nun, that were thrown at them during the movie. Moreover, it was really difficult for anyone to digest Omar Sharif and Gregory Peck as the hospital’s board of directors. The film started with Pari’s substantial character, but soon the focus of the movie shifted to her parents, leaving behind all the uncanny mystery (that had just started to build) in the middle of nowhere. The director’s real focus was to present a mix-chaat plate made up of horror films’ clichéd ingredients, such as an empty rocking chair, no lights, dark corners, candles suddenly blowing out, too many crows, a poster, creepy nun, creaking wooden floors, jump scares, nearby forest and so on. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="480"] Photo: Giphy[/caption] In search of adding creepy scenes and atrocious special effects, Pari was left without a proper innovative storyline and turned into a weakly predictable plot; destroying all the thrill and excitement. Artists like Qavi Khan, Rasheed Naz and Saleem Meiraj were wasted in meaningless characters. All in all, Pari is neither scary nor has a clever plot. Its nonsensical storyline, mediocre songs, inane get-ups and most importantly, the clueless dialogues to ignite arguments about belief and faith will compel you to leave the cinema in the middle of the movie. Ali’s debut film is a huge disappointment because scriptwriters didn’t build the interesting and thrilling aspect of the plot that is required of a horror movie. There is nothing in this absurd movie for moviegoers to enjoy, but it will surely be remembered as Pakistan's worst horror film. All photos: Screenshot

From Airlift (2016) to Rustom (2016) and from Toilet: Ek Prem Katha (2017) to recently released biopic Padman, Akshay Kumar is portraying inspirational characters and filmgoers are loving his selection of movie subjects. His latest thought-provoking venture Padman revolves around a taboo topic – menstruation. The movie skilfully highlights basic hygiene that is necessary during menstrual cycles. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K9ujx8vO_A Based on Twinkle Khanna's short story The Sanitary Man of Sacred Land, Padman is about Tamil Nadu’s Padmashree winner, Arunachalam Muruganantham, a social activist who not only empowered the village women but also created inexpensive sanitary pads. The film has been appreciated all over India for drawing attention to a vital health issue. However, in Pakistan, Padman has been banned due to its “unmentionable sensitive content”. According to Central Board of Film Censors,

“We cannot allow a film whose name, subject and story are not acceptable yet in our society.”

After spending thousands of hours watching films over the years, I rarely come across anything that I haven’t already watched before in a slightly different guise. It doesn’t necessarily mean that we have run out of good cinema. It is just that someone like me who is a prolific movie-watcher hardly gets to experience a work of cinematic art these days, which is truly novel. But to my utter surprise, I did manage to find such a gem and that too in the most unlikeliest of places. Imagine my astonishment when I went in to watch a Marvel movie predicting a typical superhero tale, only to come out marvelling at the sheer originality that my senses were treated to, when the film ended. Sure, it’s a usual Hollywood blockbuster, but I’ll bet Black Panther is nothing like anything you would have ever seen. The Afrofuturistic fare is a hypnotic concoction of the fascinatingly exotic Black culture mixed with some innovatively unique tribal sights and sounds; something that you would never expect to find in a mainstream Tinseltown offering. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xjDjIWPwcPU Black Panther might be the 18^th film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, but it is the first one to feature a non-white male lead. The story starts off shortly after the events of Captain America: Civil War. T’Challa (Chadwick Boseman) returns home to take over his father’s throne in Wakanda, a fictional kingdom that has more to it than meets the eye. To the rest of the world, they are a poor central African country, but thanks to a rare super metal Vibranium, they are discreetly the richest and the most technologically advanced nation on Earth. Black Panthers are the hereditary monarchs of Wakanda who are tasked with guarding the secrets of Vibranium, and T’Challa, following his father’s assassination, is the next in line. It is not all smooth sailing for our latest king as threats are raining down on him left, right and centre. Luckily for our protagonist, the women of the kingdom have got his back. T’Challa’s guard includes the Dora Milaje, an all-female Wakandan Special Force, headed by the fierce Okoye (Danai Gurira), providing the brawn. The brain behind the king is his sister, Princess Shuri (Letitia Wright), who also serves as the chief technology developer. Wisdom is provided by T’Challa’s mother, Queen Ramonda (Angela Bassett) while Nakia (Lupita Nyong’o) is the love interest-cum-spy, who is the eyes and ears of her people in the world outside. We also have a couple of meaty male Wakandan characters in the form of T’Challa’s spiritual advisor, Zuri (Forest Whitaker), and best friend/head of security,  W’Kabi (Daniel Kaluuya) topping the list. T’Challa’s main non-Wakandan ally is the white CIA agent, Everett K Ross (Martin Freeman). While external foes in shape of Ulysses Klaue (Andy Serkis) are early threats to our hero’s reign, it’s the challenge to the throne of a long-lost cousin, Erik Killmonger (Michael B Jordan) – who wants to use the secret Vibranium to arm the oppressed blacks around the world –  that would prove to be most mentally and physically exhaustive for T’Challa. On the face of it, Black Panther is an engaging superhero film with plenty of twists and turns. However, what elevates it from merely good to culturally significant is how the movie manages to subtly and effectively incorporate the Afrocentric issues of racism, colonialism and slavery, without bogging down the screenplay with the whole politics of it. I have already stated this before but the look and feel of the movie is so tremendously unique and mesmerising that it deserves another mention. The amount of imagination that went into making a world that is African at heart but futuristic on its exterior is just mind-boggling. The production design team simply cannot be praised enough for it. Furthermore, the music is also fresh with an innovative mixture of contemporary hip-hop, tribal sounds and an orchestral score providing a distinctive experience to the ears. On the acting front, Chadwick Boseman is the obvious star of the film, but it is the performance of the supporting cast that makes the movie shine. All of the female characters are strong and are acted out commendably. Andy Serkis and Martin Freeman are the two main white acts from the film and you can always count on the duo to give a reliable performance. But despite all the aforementioned powerhouse performers, there is one character that stole everyone’s thunder and that is the brutal yet sympathetic Eri Killmonger. Michael B Jordan was a revelation in Creed but playing the chief antagonist in Black Panther is going to be his true claim to fame. It’s not just his cool looks that will make him a household name; it is how he managed to display his justified rage – an anger which stems from being an oppressed minority in a country like the US. For him, the end justifies the means. So don’t feel bad if you find yourself rooting for him as opposed to our protagonist, trust me, you won’t be the only one doing that. Ultimately, when all is said and done, the true reason why I, or any other dark-skinned person, should really cherish the film is because – no offence intended – our kids would finally get a world where super heroes are not exclusively white. As T’Challa remarks at a point during the film, “What happens now determines what happens to the rest of the world.” All photos: IMDb

Even nearly 45 years after it happened, the famous showdown between women tennis star Billie Jean King and former men’s champion Bobby Riggs remains one of the most well-known fixtures in tennis history. Fans of the sport who are old enough to have witnessed the 1973 match certainly remember the hoopla around the encounter. However, even those of us born years or even decades after the incident took place, are likely to be familiar with at least the bare basics of the contest and how it went down. It’s this sporting event, the circumstances leading up to it, and the people at its heart that are the subject of the film Battle of the Sexes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AWP1K7FaFI The movie is primarily centred on the life of American tennis legend Billie Jean King (portrayed by Emma Stone) and her role in inspiring changes in women’s tennis during the 70s. When a tournament decides to offer women prize money which is eight times lesser than their counterpart’s, despite equal ticket sales, King – who is dissatisfied with both the compensation and the lack of respect being given to sportswomen – takes matters into her own hands and sets up her own tournament for female players. Meanwhile, Riggs (Steve Carell) – a retired former champion who had been one of the world’s top tennis players in the 40s – tries to make his way back into the limelight by challenging 29-year-old King to a match, claiming that he could beat any top female player even at age 55, since the women’s game is inferior to the men’s game. King refuses to play the match, but after Margaret Court (Jessica McNamee) accepts the offer and then loses the contest, King is prompted to accept the challenge in the hopes that she will be able to defeat the male chauvinist that is Riggs, and earn female players the respect they rightfully deserve. Directors Jonathan Dayton and Valerie Faris do a fine job defining the personal and cultural stakes of the event. However, they fail to make the narrative sufficiently gripping and suspenseful. There is too much going on in the movie, and not all of it is equally fascinating. The filmmakers explore King’s passion for tennis, her struggle for women’s rights and equality, her life off the court, and her relationship with her husband (Austin Stowell). The film also shows her extramarital affair with a hairdresser (Andrea Riseborough) which distractingly gets a lot of emphasis in the movie. They also take a look at Riggs’ personal life, his relationship with his wife (Elisabeth Shue), and the impact of his gambling addiction on their marriage. However, the execution starts to feel unfocused as less compelling and interesting storylines are explored at length, while more vital topics and interesting characters only get a perfunctory treatment. Coupled with the uneven tone, the results are less than dazzling. The cast, however, is very impressive; the acting of our lead characters, especially, is top notch. Emma Stone is terrific as the protagonist and does a good job relaying her character’s societal struggles and inner conflicts. In the role of King’s nemesis, Steve Carell also does a great job portraying the colourful, controversial, self-promoting Riggs. In the supporting roles, Sarah Silverman – who plays King’s supporter and co-founder of the women’s team – gives a memorable performance in an otherwise unmemorable project. However, Bill Pullman (in the role of Jack Kramer, whose refusal to pay the women equally spurs King’s actions), Austin Stowell and Jessica McNamee’s characters leave you wishing the actors had been given more to do and had a better chance to make an impact. Its execution could have been less predictable, the camerawork could have been better, the storytelling could have been cleaner, and the direction could have been more focused. On the whole, while Battle of the Sexes benefits from its fascinating story inspired by real events and a terrific roster of actors who bring their characters to vivid cinematic life, the film suffers because of its overlong running time (two hours) and its desire to check too many narratives and ideological boxes. All photos: IMDb

There’s no denying that in recent decades, the spy film genre in Hollywood has shifted drastically towards the slick, fast-paced and action-heavy fare of films, like Casino Royale, The Bourne Ultimatum, Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation and the most recent Kingsman movies. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, since these are all films that have represented the very best of the spy genre as well as the action genre in the past decade. But in the 70s and 80s, spy films had a very different look and feel, and were perhaps more interested in the boiler-pot suspense and intrigue rather than the action and slickness. Red Sparrow, the latest film from Director Francis Lawrence – whose resume includes the first three Hunger Games movies –  feels like a film very much in the spirit of those spy films. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmUL6wMpMWw Based on the book by Jason Matthews, Red Sparrow follows the story of Dominika Egorova (Jennifer Lawrence), a prima ballerina whose life gets a stark reality check when a career-threatening injury effectively ends her dancing career. She is then forced to seek a new avenue to support her ailing mother. By the coercion of her shady and powerful uncle (Matthias Schoenaerts) though, she turns to the Sparrow School, a secret intelligence service that trains young Russians to use their minds and bodies as weapons. After completing the sadistic training process, Dominika emerges as the program’s most dangerous graduate and is immediately tasked with targeting a CIA agent (Joel Edgerton), who threatens to unravel the security of both the United States and Russia. Red Sparrow relies on its deliberate pacing and intricate plotting to flesh out its story, and for the most part, it works. This is a film of quite a few twists and turns and it demands the audience to follow through its many plot machinations with full attention. And while it definitely can get a tad boring at times, it’s also quite enthralling and the steady build-up of suspense and intrigue makes it a rewarding experience by the end. A great deal of the film actually relies on Jennifer Lawrence, and while this isn’t exactly one of her best performances, she still manages to give a really compelling and brave performance playing a role that’s very much against her usual ones. She plays the role of Dominika with a lot of coldness but still manages to make the character come across as an undeniably cunning, intelligent and resourceful person, which I think is precisely the aim here. Her chemistry with Edgerton’s Nate Nash is also very good and really the crux of the film. As far as the rest of the performances are concerned, Edgerton as the CIA operative Nate, Charlotte Rampling as the patriarchal headmistress and Jeremy Irons as the steely-eyed Russian general, all manage to stand out in their own unique ways. Apart from the performances though, the film also happens to be gorgeous, purely from an aesthetic perspective. Cinematographer Jo Willems manages to create a really rich sense of atmosphere, while James Newton Howard’s ominous original score lends the film some of its best moments aswell as a real sense of grandiose. But as engrossing as this film is for the most part, the 141-minute runtime definitely overstays its welcome and your patience begins to wear thin by the end. Moreover, since the film doesn’t have any major set pieces to grab the audience’s attention, it has to rely solely on the story and the performances to do that, which is something the film isn’t always able to do. Keeping that aside though, Red Sparrow is very engrossing and a well-crafted espionage thriller that also happens to be a welcome change of pace from the spy films we are generally used to seeing these days. It’s actually very much in the vein of the John le Carré style spy films like Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy more than anything else, especially in regards to its intricate plotting and how it embraces its graphic elements of violence and sex more than most mainstream blockbusters these days. I think it’s bound to frustrate a number of viewers but if they give it a chance, they might find it to be a rewarding and captivating viewing. All photos: IMDb

The film industry’s heavy-weights joined hands together to give a marvellous treat to filmgoers with a stunning political drama cum biopic, Darkest Hour. The film offers detailed directorial work, electrifying performance, engaging screenplay and most importantly jaw-dropping makeover. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtJ60u7SUSw&t=3s Darkest Hour is mainly suspense. It dexterously interweaves all the relevant episodes in history which we already know about. However, you still want to spare 125 minutes to watch the day to day delineation of Winston Churchill’s early days in office and his sparkling leadership in such precarious moments. For its flamboyant presentation, the film had been nominated for six Academy Awards and has won two of them, for Best Actor and Best Makeup. Based on real life events of World War II and the United Kingdom’s political turmoil, Darkest Hour intelligently covers the background and the administrative upheaval as Churchill, the First Lord of the Admiralty, became Prime Minister of England. He led the nation amidst Nazi invasions of Belgium, Netherlands, and France as they openly threatened to defeat Britain. During May 1940, Churchill’s period in office became a continuous matter of disagreement at governmental level as two totally diverse points of view were clashing with each other. The influential group of people wanted to make a peace treaty with Adolf Hitler to impede Nazi devastation but Churchill’s sturdy mindset was not ready to accept it. However, the newly appointed head of government facing a catch-22 situation must show a substantial character. He must make a fateful decision to save his nation and country’s honour within a short span of time, as German invasion is knocking at the door. In his first speech on May 13, 1940 as the premier, Churchill addressed the House of Commons and shared his course of action for the future,

“I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat. You ask, what is our policy? I will say: It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: Victory. Victory at all costs—Victory in spite of all terror—Victory…”

"If this long island story of ours is to end at last, let it end only when each one of us lies choking in his own blood upon the ground…"

Middle of Nowhere (2012), Selma (2014) and 13th (2016) famed Ava DuVernay is the first African-American director whose work has been nominated for numerous awards, including the Golden Globes Award. This year, she is back with a $100 million live-action, sci-fi fantasy film, A Wrinkle in Time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhZ56rcWwRQ Based on the fiction writer Madeleine L'Engle’s 1962 classic novel of the same name, A Wrinkle in Time is a heartless and clumsy film that covers a tussle between the virtuous and the corrupt. L'Engle in her novel adroitly epitomised the immoral and sinful entities with black objects and dark phenomenon. Her book’s evil characters exhibit their evilness through their red eyes, while the morally upright chaps are actually illustrated by light. They are immersed in a continuous melee with blackness or sinful individuals. In their quest to defeat the darkness, the defenders of light use tesseracts to pass through time and space. The story revolves around a 13-year-old Meg Murry, played by Storm Reid, who was a smart intelligent girl but became depressed and unsocial since her world renowned astro-physicist father, Dr Alex Murry (played by Chris Pine), disappeared. Her physicist mother Dr Kate Murry (played by Gugu Mbatha-Raw) fails to understand the reason behind her rough attitude. Before the disappearance of Alex, Meg’s parents were working on a theory about space, time and mindfulness. Meg’s younger brother, six-year-old Charles Wallace (played by Deric McCabe) introduced the family to a mysterious yet sparkling lady Mrs Whatsit (played by Reese Witherspoon) who mostly talks in axioms and enigmas. Meg and Charles come across two strange confidants of Mrs Whatsit; Mrs Who, played by Mindy Kaling, and Mrs Which, played by Oprah Winfrey. The three mysterious cum supernatural women promise to help Meg find her father. They disclose that his life is in danger from the dark evil cloud known as The Black Thing. Charles, Meg and her class fellow Calvin O'Keefe (played by Levi Miller) travel to a distant planet through a tesseract to find their father. At the new planet, Camazotz, the children uncover the truth about a numinous creature (evil) known as IT. The rest of the plot revolves around the children’s struggle to beat the darkness and rescue their trapped father from the evil force as soon as possible. DuVernay purposefully used high-tech to craft a strikingly extravagant set design in order to captivate the audience. She also hurled the spiritual implication in a more colour-blind approach. The central storyline appears more about faith-based things. As a skilled director, she throughout her movie compelled not only the characters but also the spectators to ascertain few life experiences and moral values that are truly significant in life. Director and writer of applauded Frozen (2013), Jennifer Lee, along with Jeff Stockwell, wrote the screenplay for the film. However, both the screen writers failed to convey the essence of the novel. Their approach to deliver the conceptual lucidity and forethought of the novel diminished the film’s plot to a bit of confusing jiffies. The plot is wholly barren of any thrill or suspense. The weak storytelling discovers all sorts of solutions too hurriedly in the movie. Thus, it kills all the excitement and trepidation of the viewers. The handful of characters keep on muffing and their re-occurrence is unanswerable, which leaves the audience completely puzzled. As far as the performances are concerned, it seems that racially diverse artists are pressed to deliver dialogues in a more monotonous manner instead of musical emissions. Reese Witherspoon, who looked completely engrossed in her character, was still not able to deliver an impressive performance. The rest of the cast, including Oprah Winfrey, delivered dialogues in calculated and snoozing pitches. Deric McCabe adeptly played his character and enhanced the overall effect by adding liveliness to Charles’ intelligent aura. Taking everything into account, A Wrinkle in Time is an overstated, interstellar tale, flavoured with a determined and stimulating illumination of a multi-ethnic life. Unfortunately, its adventurous anecdote doesn’t resonate well. The weak screenplay didn’t help in character development. The focus on important issues like distinctiveness, self-esteem, devotion, bullying are some positive things in the film. Otherwise, the movie is neither “a cup of tea” for adults nor for kids. It is too shallow for mature filmgoers and half-baked for children. If you are a fan of all-time favourites Wizard Of Oz, Alice In Wonderland and Oz the Great and Powerful, then DuVernay’s A Wrinkle in Time will be a sweet-less sugar cream pie that you would never want to taste again. All photos: Disney

It is understandable that when it comes to political correctness in filmmaking, you can’t be too careful in this day and age. One inappropriate casting decision, and you are bashed left, right and centre all over social media, which invariably leads to poor box-office numbers. It is perfectly justified when studios are roasted for absurd whitewashing practices. However, all this racial and gender diversification in movies simply to pander to the supersensitive millennials – who take offense to anything and everything –  is just as absurd as Jake Gyllenhaal playing the Prince of Persia. I am all for strong female characters in movies but – and all the feminists will hate me for this – these roles should not be shoved down our collective throats. Especially when it’s blatantly obvious that the primary objective is simply to indulge the “outrage brigade”, without any regards to the actual narrative requirements. While a lot of recent movies are guilty of the aforementioned, Alex Garland’s Annihilation takes the proverbial cake with its strong female ensemble sci-fi drama. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89OP78l9oF0 Based on Jeff VanderMeer’s terrifying eco-horror novel of the same name, Annihilation kicks off when an unknown object crashes into a lighthouse on the US coastline. It immediately creates a shimmery bubble around the area that mutates all plant and animal life within it, and more importantly, starts seeping into the outside world, which slowly and gradually starts eroding. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: IMDb[/caption] The government swiftly quarantines the whole place, with only the military given access to the affected zone, now dubbed as ‘The Shimmer’. Numerous Armed Special Forces are then sent in to take stock, but no living creature has managed to emerge alive from the area, with Sergeant Kane (Oscar Isaac) being the only exception. He then succeeds in reaching out to his cellular biologist wife, Lena (Natalie Portman), but without any recollection of his time spent inside ‘The Shimmer’, he promptly falls into a coma. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Paramount Pictures[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: IMDb[/caption] Lena – now determined to find out what has happened to her husband – elects to be recruited by the government along with a psychologist (Jennifer Leigh), a physicist (Tessa Thomspon), an anthropologist (Tuva Novotny), and a paramedic (Gina Rodriguez), to embark upon an expedition into the enigmatic quarantined zone. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Paramount Pictures[/caption] Upon entering Area X, our Bechdel-friendly cast is now part of a realm where vanishing colleagues, deadly animals and co-existing with an ominous otherworldly presence is just another day at work. The rest of the story is spoiler territory. A movie which was primarily made to celebrate strong and intelligent women, ironically ends up making them look like total idiots. The writing, which is supposed to be thought provoking, is at a plane which is beyond all levels of absurd. Garland made a strong impression with his debut feature, Ex Machina, as it was a deeply intellectual movie, which is why a lot of film critics were expecting his second film to follow in the same footsteps. But all you get out of Annihilation is one common sense-defying sequence after the other. The worst part? All of it is done at the expense of the female characters we are meant to cherish. Such instances include a team of female scientists being made to enter a zone from where virtually no one has ever returned, and that too without trained military professionals. I mean, we get it, the girls are all brave and gutsy, but there exists an idea known as sensible planning. Even if they were highly desperate to cast a power filled light on the female stars, they could have at least sent them in with a female army unit. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Paramount Pictures[/caption] Also, who in their right mind decides to traverse a mutated area in the waters and on tiny row boats, immediately after being confronted by a vicious alien alligator? Surprise surprise, our band of foolish leading ladies! [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Paramount Pictures[/caption] The aforementioned instances are just two small examples of logic being totally tossed aside in a supposedly smart sci-fi drama. The whole screenplay is just absurd, as opposed to being intriguing. However, let’s give credit where credit is due, for the film is visually stunning. The production design, covering a vibrant flora and fauna, is somewhat similar to the landscape shown in Avatar. The lead actresses are bearable, and do try their best to make something out of the ridiculous script. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: IMDb[/caption] There are much better movies (Blade Runner, The Arrival, District 9, Minority Report, Ex Machina, and so on) out there if intelligent sci-fi is what you are after. They may or may not pass the Bechdel Test, but at least you will not be missing out on a precious couple of hours of your life wasted on illogical garbage, in the name of female gender glorification.

Rani Mukerji’s interesting new movie Hichki hit the theatres recently, and if there is one thing I’d say about her, it is that Mukerji has still got it! This is her first movie in four years, as she was last seen playing a leading role in Mardaani (2014), and yet she is the scene-stealer! If anything, the break proves that despite spending a few years away from the big screen, she still has the acumen to deliver a performance reminding us why she is one of the ‘greats’.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLSaCFlXn-g Directed by Sidharth P Malhotra and produced by Maneesh Sharma, Hichki focuses on Naina Mathur, a young woman who suffers from a rare disease which has made her life publicly tougher and her dream harder to achieve. Suffering from Tourette’s syndrome, Naina aspires to become a teacher, but due to her condition, she is rejected by every educational institute she goes to for an interview. Eventually, however, she lands a job at a school, and somehow, her life becomes an even more daunting challenge. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="480"] Photo: Giphy[/caption] Naina lives a life full of challenges in which she has to juggle between her personal and professional life, and more often than not, the line is quite blurry. The challenges in her personal life are spoiler territory, and will be revealed during the movie. The film itself, however, will teach viewers some important life lessons, especially when it comes to taboo topics such as dealing with illnesses and still trying to live life to the fullest. Moreover, the film also highlights the real-life struggles instructors have to face while teaching inattentive students who are fond of creating a ruckus in class. It is in Mukerji’s character that we find a teacher who we can relate to, and one we all wish we had. Though struggling as a teacher, Naina reminds us,

“There are no bad students, only bad teachers.”

Most people are likely to not have much of a memory of watching Pacific Rim. It came out in 2013, and was a glorified B movie at best, which probably had the simplest and easiest pitch ever made to a movie studio: giant monsters versus giant robots. However, Pacific Rim had a key factor working in its favour. A factor elevating it from the kitschy and forgettable B movie fare it could have been, to an original, stylish and genuinely fun piece of B movie mania (the differences may seem minor, but they were stark). This factor was the influence of writer/director Guillermo del Toro at the helm. I’ve talked before about how every project of del Toro is a labour of love for him, and how he is a director who truly embraces his style, the art-form, and the genre he’s exploring. A combination of both, as well as just enough plot, made Pacific Rim stand out as unique and fresh in the blockbuster movie landscape back then, but I doubt anyone expected there was anything there warranting a sequel. Think again, because in Hollywood, the only thing deciding how many unnecessary sequels a film can get is box-office success, and in the case of Pacific Rim, there was plenty of success internationally. So unsurprisingly, we have Pacific Rim: Uprising, a film whose target market might in fact be the Chinese economy alone. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EhiLLOhVis&t=5s Ten years after the first film, Pacific Rim: Uprising shows a world in the aftermath of the events of the first film, where the Kaiju (giant monsters/alien invaders from another dimension) have been successfully defeated by the Jaegers (essentially giant robots). Now, the Jaegers are either scavenged off for spare parts, or used as a new form of law-enforcement by various world governments. With the original film’s characters having either died or disappeared, Jake Pentecost (John Boyega) comes to the fore when the threat of a new Kaiju invasion seems imminent. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: IMDb[/caption] Son of Stacker Pentecost (Idris Elba) – whose heroic actions saved humanity from the Kaiju in the first film – Jake initially seems like the very opposite of his father, and as a washed-out pilot who sells old tech on the black market, he hardly inspires hope. However, as the Kaiju threat becomes more and more imminent, he is shepherded in by Mako Mori – played by Rinko Kikuchi, one of the few returning characters from the original film. He is made to realise his true potential, and teaming up with Scott Eastwood’s Nate Lambert, he emerges as humanity’s most promising hope against the Kaiju. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Universal Pictures[/caption] [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Universal Pictures[/caption] Pacific Rim: Uprising is, for the lack of a better way to describe it, a truly flawed and mediocre movie. It is impossible not to compare this with the first film, because it recycles so many of the same elements. Del Toro, and many of the actors from the first film, such as Charlie Hunnam, Ron Perlman and Elba as well, chose not to return for the sequel, and their lack of presence is clearly felt here. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: IMDb[/caption] Boyega steps-up as the lead, and while he is an immensely gifted actor, he fails to elevate the film with his charisma and snappy one-liners – as fun as they often are – or to distinguish his character from the carefree rebel archetype we are so used to seeing. Likewise, TV director Steven S DeKnight, whose resume includes Spartacus and a couple of seasons of Daredevil, steps up to the director’s chair. While he can stage some breathlessly fun action sequences, he doesn’t have much of anything going for him or his quartet of screen-writers when it comes to writing or lending his disposable new characters some decent characterisation. In fact, one of the worst things about the film is the myriad of inconsequential sub-plots bubbling in the background, behind the cacophony of robot versus robot, or robot versus alien combat. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Photo: Universal Studios[/caption] Don’t get me wrong, Pacific Rim: Uprising is a lot of fun to watch. I mean who wouldn’t want to see giant robots laying the smack down on giant monsters? But the fact of the matter is that Pacific Rim already did the same in a far superior way, and it actually gave us just enough from the story and characters to invest in. This film could have been much more about the world it is set in, which I thought was a major missed opportunity in the first film. But Pacific Rim: Uprising has none of that, just a few fun action sequences held together by some semblance of a plot.

The powers of nostalgia can be blamed for a number of recent big and small screen projects, including sitcom revivals and movie spin-offs. Similarly, nostalgia is clearly the driving force behind the success of the cinematic adaptation of Ernest Cline’s 2011 novel, Ready Player One. Directed by the great Steven Spielberg, the film is a celebration of the 80s pop culture, by way of a visually ambitious extravaganza with a paper thin story. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cSp1dM2Vj48 The year is 2045, and humanity has chosen to escape its dystopian reality via the virtual world known as the OASIS. Real-life desolation is thus left behind to venture into a digital world, where imagination is the only limit. However, the fate of this simulated world is left in limbo upon the death of James Halliday (Mark Rylance), the co-creator of the OASIS and owner of the world’s biggest company. To determine the future of his creation after his demise, Halliday set up an Easter Egg hunt, hiding three keys inside his game. The first person to finish the quest gains total control of the OASIS, and inherits the programmer’s massive fortune. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Mark Rylance in Ready Player One.[/caption] Among the many people who make it their mission to crack Halliday’s code is our protagonist Wade Watts (portrayed by Tye Sheridan), an orphaned teenager who goes by the avatar Parzival while in the OASIS, and sees winning the quest as a ticket out of his impoverished life. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Tye Sheridan in Ready Player One.[/caption] Of course, a nefarious company known as the Innovative Online industries (IOI), also wants to take over the program, and has amassed an army of players focused on winning the prize. It is thereby up to Wade and his virtual friends – including his best friend Aech (Lena Waithe), as well as Art3mis (Olivia Cooke), the protagonist’s obligatory love interest – to triumph the challenges and stop IOI’s wicked CEO, Nolan Sorrento (Ben Mendelsohn), from taking over the OASIS. [caption id="" align="alignnone" width="600"] Olivia Cooke and Tye Sheridan in Ready Player One.[/caption] There are definitely seeds of an interesting premise here, but unfortunately, they degenerate into a bundle of clichés overloaded with pop culture allusions. The film tries to distract viewers from the predictability of its storyline by turning the proceedings into a game of “spot the reference”. Combine this plethora of cultural nods with properly impressive – although vertigo-inducing busy – visuals, plus some very well executed sequences, and you’d almost be inclined to excuse the triteness of the entire project. That is, until you think about it and realise this isn’t quite the epic adventure it pretends to be. Why is everyone fighting for escapism when they should be fighting to fix the real world instead? Who knows! And why should the potential disruption of a virtual world with advertising – or even the insinuation of data falling into the wrong hands – create a bigger hullabaloo than the actual killing of innocents in the real world? No idea! The heroes of Ready Player One aren’t on a mission to fix real life issues, but to preserve a fantasy that basically gives people a platform to not deal with genuine problems. While the film makes a half-hearted attempt to dodge this criticism at the very end, its proposed solution is too little, too late, and too dumb. To be fair, while Ready Player One is convoluted, it isn’t a complete mess. Spielberg’s world building is doubtlessly masterful, and there are parts of the film that certainly work. A sequence set inside a popular horror movie stands out, and TJ Miller’s villainous henchman, i-R0k, is quite amusing. Plus you really can’t deny the nostalgic charm of seeing some of your favourites from the past randomly pop up throughout the proceedings. However, be warned: don’t expect depth or layers in this virtual world. The heroes are the good guys, whereas the villains are evil, scheming schmucks. There are no real twists. It’s all very, very predictable. The live-action acting by the young leads is passable at best, perhaps because the digital avatars aren’t very engaging, and sometimes make it seem like you’re watching someone play a very expensive-looking video game. The dialogues, too, are cloying. At its core, the whole thing is straight from the young adult dystopian adventure handbook. The film offers the same kind of escapism it champions for much of its exhaustingly long running time. Turn off your mind, indulge in the nostalgic pop culture bombardment, and just go with the cheesy fun if you want to enjoy it. But whatever you do, don’t make the mistake of actually analysing it, or you risk being underwhelmed by the utter banality of it all. All photos: Warner Brothers

More often than not, some of the best films go unseen or get swept under the rug simply because they aren’t in English or don’t have the budget or marketing of big studio blockbusters to reach a large enough audience. These films instead have to rely solely on the buzz they generate to be successful, and while that’s a sad reality, it’s at least comforting to know that such films reach the right audiences who actually make an effort to seek them out. Such is definitely the case for the film in question – Veronica, the Spanish supernatural-horror flick that has gotten plenty of critical acclaim. The movie is already being praised as one of the scariest films of the year, despite getting a surprise release on Netflix with little or no fanfare and very little anticipation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNlMIvKnjOQ Set in Madrid in 1991, the film follows the story of a teenage girl named Veronica, who is forced to take care of her three siblings in the wake of their father’s recent death, with her mother being forced to work all day long to support the family. Still reeling from the death of her father, Veronica decides to one day play Ouija with her two girl friends in the cellar of her school, while all her teachers and classmates are on the rooftop watching the solar eclipse. Upon playing, the girls try to contact their recently deceased loved ones but things go horribly wrong and something happens to Veronica. Soon enough, she starts to feel a strange presence inside her house and fears that these sinister forces may hold an even greater threat to her siblings. After taking advice from the mysterious Sister Narcisa, she sets out to look for a way to break contact with the supernatural forces and save everyone. Slow and suspenseful by design, Veronica takes its time to get going. But once it does, things get very creepy, very quickly. This is a dark and deeply unsettling film that only gets more and more unnerving as it progresses. There are definitely some familiar elements at play that might remind you of horror flicks you have already seen, most noticeably The Conjuring. But kudos to Director Paco Plaza, of the REC series, who elevates this film from what could have been just another ‘supernatural-thriller’ to a film that thrives on its terrifying imagery. Whether it’s a character walking into a dimly-lit room or a shadowy apparition moving in the background, Plaza always finds a way to make a shot visually interesting and thought-provoking (keep your eyes on that background!). And while there is definitely an escalating sense of danger throughout the whole film, every now and then, Plaza sucker-punches the audience with some completely unexpected and supremely terrifying sequences. Acting-wise, Sandra Escacena gives an impressive performance as Veronica. She’s pretty much on her own in this film as she is thrown up against a force of pure evil. She holds the film together with authenticity and the empathy she brings to her brave performance is on its own quite remarkable, considering this is her acting debut. At times, you feel like she is about to completely disintegrate psychologically, yet she still somehow manages to barely keep it together and survive. Plaza and writer Fernando Navvaro also weave a compelling narrative that’s effective with the scares, low on dialogue and gives Plaza the launch pad he requires to dictate the pace of the film with his directing. Horror as a genre is very subjective and people often have trouble deciding exactly what constitutes as scary. That said, there’s very little in Veronica that won’t creep you out. This is a well-crafted and very scary low-budget film that packs quite a punch than it initially lets on. And if the film somehow doesn’t spook you, reading the story it’s based on is bound to send chills down your spine. All photos: IMDb

This Eid we saw the release of many Pakistani movies. With Bollywood movies banned during Eid, Pakistani audience had no choice but to turn their attention to local films. Some movies made the cut and managed to entertain people, others, however, made us run for the exit door. Sadly, the recently released Na Band Na Baraati falls under the latter.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdJFbA0Jtx8 The story revolves around two brothers, Zahid (played by Shayan Khan) and Shahid (played by Mikaal Zulfiqar). Both brothers are happily in love with their respective girlfriends. However, one fine day, their lives change forever. Shahid accidently signs Zahid's nikkahnama, and Ayesha (played by Anzhelika Tahir), who is the latter’s girlfriend, is officially wedded to the former. In all this chaos, Zahid tries to find a way to put things back the way they were, while Shahid has to treat Ayesha as his wife. Ali Kazmi also stars in the movie and is shown to be in love with Ayesha but her father (played by Mahmood Akhtar) doesn’t like him. Qavi Khan plays the mischievous father of the two brothers. Na Band Na Baraati is directed by Mahmood Akhtar, who is a known Pakistani TV actor from the 80s and 90s, and makes his directorial debut with this movie. Unfortunately, his debut movie is a sorry affair and, safe to say, is a comedy of errors. Shayan lacks the hero-like aura and personality; his dialogue delivery and overall performance needs a lot of improvement. Pakistani film industry probably has never seen a hero like him who fails to be convincing in his performance. His dance moves are mediocre, his emotional scenes actually turned out to be hilarious, and his comic scenes were just cringe-worthy. Despite all of this, Shayan takes majority of the screen time, probably because it’s his home production, while Mikaal looks like he is doing an extended cameo in the movie. Mikaal performs averagely in the movie and is probably the only actor who is doing something right. On the other hand, Ali Kazmi’s talent seems to have gone wasted in this movie. He is a good actor but watching him portray a hopeless antagonist will not fit well with his fans. Anzhelika Tahir fails to make a mark in the movie. Her performance is the least of her concerns as she even struggles to pronounce her dialogues correctly. The same problem was faced by Nayab Khan who plays Zoya, Shahid’s girlfriend. You would expect Atiqa Odho and Qavi Khan to teach these youngsters how it’s done, but they too deliver average performances; Qavi also gets on the nerves of the audience because of his annoying character. Akhar as an actor and director fails to sail this ship. He used to be a better actor on television but in this particular film, he ruins his “good actor” reputation. Na Band Na Baraati is badly directe; there are no aesthetics involved in the movie. Even film students can make a better movie than Na Band Na Baraati. The music of Na Band Na Baraati itself is okay, but the way these songs are filmed is terrible. Not even a single song stands out in the film because of the way that it was portrayed. The dialogues of the movie are easily forgettable. A few of them are even copied from films like Sultan, Indrajeet and Raanjhana. So much for banning Bollywood movies! Films like these should be a wake up call for the Pakistani film industry to start making quality movies. Perhaps we should have a censor board that not only looks at controversial content, but judges the movie’s storyline and execution as well. This will only save our precious time and money. A movie that lacks in quality is the reason Pakistani film industry is looked down upon by not just the world but our own people. With its weak content, below average performances, pitiful direction and awful narrative, Na Band Na Baraati is a distressing and boring movie which will easily irritate you. All photos: Screenshots

While Hollywood has always been very fond of remakes and spinoffs, it has more recently developed a fascination with female-centred continuations of beloved cinematic adventures and established franchises. From the 2016 Ghostbusters reboot to the upcoming The Expendabelles, The Hustle and The Rocketeers, several female-led reimagining are bringing old tales back to the big screen with a new twist. An example of this phenomenon currently in cinemas is, of course, the much-talked-about Ocean’s 8, the all-female spin-off from Steven Soderbergh’s Ocean’s trilogy. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFWF9dU5Zc0 The action-comedy is centred on the character of Debbie Ocean (Sandra Bullock) – the younger sister of the (probably) late Danny Ocean – who is trying to pull off one of the biggest jewellery heists in history, while settling a score in the process. Just paroled from prison, Debbie wants to carry out a robbery she had been planning during her five-year stint in jail. Her target is the Toussaint – a $150 million necklace that will be worn by the famous Daphne Kluger (Anne Hathaway) at the lavish Met Gala. To steal the necklace, she assembles a team of skilled crooks: her former partner-in-crime Lou (Cate Blanchett), financially struggling fashion designer Rose Weil (Helena Bonham Carter), profiteer Tammy (Sarah Paulson), jeweller Amita (Mindy Kaling), hacker Nine Ball (Rihanna), and hustler Constance (Awkwafina). Together, the ladies must execute a sophisticated plan to get their hands on the bounty and not get caught in the process. But the heist is never as thrilling as it should be. Ocean’s 8 is a typical, by-the-numbers heist caper that never turns into something special. Directed by Gary Ross, the film is competently made and visually impressive, but not the masterpiece you would expect given the amount of talent attached to the project. There isn’t anything particularly ingenious about its plot. The obstacles are often disappointingly easy to overcome; everything falls into place a little too easily. Plus, as with many heist capers, a lot of the proceedings require so much suspension of disbelief that it gets exhausting. Other than the gender swap, the film brings nothing new to the genre. Its lack of originality may stem from the fact that the movie is in essence the spinoff of a remake, since Soderbergh’s Ocean’s trilogy was itself based on the Rat Pack film Ocean’s 11 (1960), and is essentially following a long-established template. But to their credit, the talented leading ladies at the heart of the film effortlessly elevate the mediocre material they have to work with. Ocean’s 8 is a rewarding opportunity to watch the terrific Bullock and Blanchett working together, their partnership smoothly driving the film. Hathaway steals the show in the guise of an airheaded celebrity whenever she’s onscreen. And Carter is always fun to watch. The rest of the supporting ensemble, however, often doesn’t have as much to say or do and little reason to interact, which gives them a lesser chance to develop their characters and build chemistry. The main cast, on the whole, is stellar. The problem here lies in the dull writing and the fairly standard execution. It’s good to have female presence onscreen, but it would have been even more rewarding to have the same behind the camera. Recruiting a female director and an all-female writing team could have perhaps given the movie a different voice and perspective. The film could have also used some more energy and tension, and more issues that weren’t resolved within 10 seconds. And a bit more amusing banter would have also helped. As it stands, Ocean’s 8 isn’t quite as fun as the trilogy that spawned it, and the heist it’s built upon is perhaps too slick for its own good. But it will help you while away a lazy summer evening, and it will definitely fill the “all-female heist caper” void in your life. All photos: Warner Bros

Talking about the state of horror movies these days is like flogging a dead horse. It’s pointless and something that has shown very little prospect of changing even though films like The Babadook and The Witch have served as promising examples of filmmakers attempting to do something new and different with the genre. So therefore, you can imagine my surprise when something like Hereditary comes around, a film that well and truly earns every hyperbole attached to it. To call it a terrifying film would be to undersell it because it is so much more and for the horror genre itself, it is nothing short of a salvation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6wWKNij_1M The film focuses on the strange and myopic Graham family. Following the death of her mother Ellen, who had been an extremely antagonistic and overbearing presence on her life, Annie Graham (Toni Collette) mourns her loss. Her husband, Steve (Gabriel Byrne) and teenage son, Peter (Alex Wolff), are not especially upset but her 13-year-old daughter Charlie (Milly Shapiro), with whom Ellen was especially close to, feels the weight of the loss. It’s not long after Ellen’s death though that Annie and her family begin to unravel dark and cryptic secrets about their ancestry. And the more they discover, the more helpless they find themselves against this sinister fate they seem to have inherited. The most startling aspect about Hereditary is how unexpected everything in this film feels. What starts off as a slow-burning story of grief and family dysfunction quickly devolves into something far more sinister. The build-up, particularly during the first hour is slow. But once it settles in, Hereditary morphs into a truly terrifying cinematic experience that thrives on its intoxicating atmosphere as well as that feeling of all-encompassing dread, and the mark of its greatness lies in how it continually sandbags the audiences with its increasingly shocking twists and revelations. Like the family at the centre of it, the film is entrenched in this feeling of inescapable ruin. That feeling of impending doom, coupled with the fact that there is nothing that can be done to avoid it. And no once conveys this feeling better than Collette. Her raw and magnetic performance as Annie serves as the centre-piece of the film and there are a few things I can imagine that are as menacing as watching her household crumble and descend into complete madness right before her eyes, all the while watching her slowly disintegrate in mind, body and spirit herself. It’s a crazy, unhinged and brilliant performance, wholly deserving of the heaps of praise being showered upon it. It is also very hard to believe that this film serves as the directing debut of writer/director Ari Aster, who shows such incredible maturity and technical prowess behind the camera and has such an uncompromising vision, that you can easily mistake him for a seasoned filmmaker who probably made three to four films prior to this. Aster’s method of crafting the scariest and most unnerving moments of the film lies in his meticulous camera movements and a slow and steady build-up of tension and suspense, rather than cheap jump scares. And one of the many fascinating things about the film and his construct is how it continuously messes with your perception of what is what, through an ingeniously crafted plot-device. There are a number of themes at the heart of Hereditary, but the most recurring one I can think of is perhaps that of inevitability, which connects directly with the film’s title. That sense of feeling that you can’t stop what’s going to happen. It’s also worth noting that this is one those movies where it’s better to go in with the least amount of information regarding the plot as possible, which is why I tried to discuss as little of the story as possible. This is a dark, sadistic and uncompromising tale of horror that’s undoubtedly destined to become a modern-day classic. But fair warning: it’s not for the faint-hearted. All photos: IMDb

There aren’t many films that you want to review after watching the teaser. When I was approached about reviewing Sanju, in my head I was saying,

“Are you kidding me, of course I’ll do it!”

Ant-Man and the Wasp is the first Marvel release after Avengers: Infinity War. This is the third Marvel entry to feature Ant-Man, after Ant-Man (2015) and Captain America: Civil War (2016). Paul Rudd and the rest of the cast return to reprise their roles, while Peyton Reed returns to direct this sequel too. Only this time around, Reed was involved right from the start instead of taking over from Edgar Wright like he did in the prequel. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_rTIAOohas I strongly believe that those who spoil good movies should be punished, which is why I will try keep myself from committing this sin by giving away as little as I can and keeping this spoiler-free. Ant-Man and the Wasp starts around two years after Captain America: Civil War, when Scott Lang, also known as Ant-Man (Rudd), enlarged to fight alongside Captain America against Team Iron Man in Germany, and ended up being imprisoned under the violation of the Sokovia Accords. Since then, Scott has been under house arrest, with his sentence about to be completed at the end of the two years. The plot of the movie revolves around Lang, aiding Hank Pym (Michael Douglas) and Hope van Dyne, also knows as the Wasp (Evangeline Lily), to rescue Janet van Dyne (Michelle Pfeiffer), Hank’s wife and Hope’s mother, who was accidentally left behind in the microscopic quantum realm when she shrunk between the molecules of a Soviet missile in an attempt to disable it. Hank, Hope and Scott have to come up with a way to rescue Janet, while trying to dodge the FBI and taking down black market dealer Sonny Burch (Walton Goggins) and the Ghost (Hannah John-Kamen), who is able to phase through objects. Goggins (The Shield, Tomb Raider), John-Kamen (Killjoys), Pfeiffer (The Scarface, Batman Returns) and Lawrence Fishburne (The Matrix trilogy) are new additions to the cast. While Goggins is amazing as always, Fishburne and Pfeiffer are just adequate for actors as experienced and talented as themselves. John-Kamen puts a lot of efforts into her character, but the audience is unable to connect with the Ghost, thus her story arc seems a little weak. Rudd carries the movie with his charisma and brilliant comic timing, leaving the audience wanting more in every scene. The scenes between Scott and his daughter, Cassie (Abby Ryder Fortson), are also a treat to watch. Michael Pena as Luis is hilarious and has one scene in particular in the movie that will leave you in splits. The movie has eye-popping visuals, with shrinking and enlarging scenes being very impressive. The action scenes are fantastic, especially the ones in which Ant-Man and the Wasp team up to fight the bad guys together. The movie is a lot of fun and very entertaining, but if you compare it to some of the preceding Marvel entries, you would find Ant-Man and the Wasp to be non-essential. This sequel, although superior to its prequel in many ways, lacks the high stakes Marvel movies usually have. There is no “world coming to an end” or “countless lives at stake” scenario here. It’s just a rescue operation with a few hurdles. It might be understandable that the studio executives decided to release a movie with much lower stakes after the mind-boggling end of Infinity War. If you still don’t know what Thanos can do by snapping his fingers, then I suggest you crawl out of the rock you’re living under. To release a movie that does not have much riding on it could also be a strategy to keep the audiences hungry for the next Avengers movie. In the end, Ant-Man and the Wasp is a movie which you will have fun watching, without worrying whether or not your favourite character will survive. Also, the post-credit scene in this Marvel flick should not be missed at any cost! All photos: IMDb

More than a decade after they first conquered the big screen with what turned out to be an instant Pixar classic, the Parr family is back for their second adventure in Incredibles 2, a return to the world created by Director and Writer Brad Bird that revisits much of the same turf as the original but makes sure it never ceases to be fun. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5qOzqD9Rms Our protagonists – parents Bob (voiced by Craig T Nelson) and Helen (Holly Hunter), and their kids Violet (Sarah Vowell), Dash (Huck Milner) and Jack-Jack (Eli Fucile) – are, once again, dealing with ostracisation. Superheroes are still illegal, forced into hiding by a society no longer willing to support them. But an opportunity presents itself to potentially change the law and bring the supers back when wealthy businessman (and big superhero fan) Winston Deavor (Bob Odenkirk) – along with a little help from his sister Evelyn Deavor (Catherine Keener) – hatches a plan to help the supers return. He enlists Elastigirl on a mission to change the world’s perspective of superheroes and regain the public’s support. With Helen out fighting crime, Bob is left in charge of the house, and has to deal with parenting issues, like Violet’s first date with a boy she likes, Dash’s struggle with math, and infant Jack-Jack’s emerging superpowers. But balancing superhero duties and life isn’t the only challenge the Parrs are about to face. When the villain Screenslaver shows up and starts hypnotising people through screens, it will take one mighty effort to defeat the baddie. The movie is well-executed and clearly made with a lot of skill and care. Visually, Incredibles 2 is impressive and the action sequences are well-made. The voice cast is as effective as they were the last time round. There are laughs sprinkled throughout the film; young Jack-Jack’s escapades, in particular, provide the most amusement. But it all seems very formulaic, like a rehash that doesn’t bring anything new to the franchise. Over the years, Pixar has set such a high standard for itself and made so many quality films, including sequels – like the Toy Story movies, for instance, all three of which are terrific – that we always expect excellence from the studio, but we don’t get enough inventiveness or the same kind of emotional impact here to be truly excited by this chapter. A different story that allowed the characters to explore new grounds would have been more rewarding. The script could have been smarter, the dialogue crispier. There is something quite clichéd about Bob’s ineptness as a stay-at-home dad as well as Helen’s feminist advancements. The idea behind the Screenslaver, too, is a bit on the nose, and the supervillain is more menacing theoretically than practically; ultimately, you’re never in any doubt which side will eventually emerge victorious. Also, why the animators decided Evelyn should look distractingly like Lisa Rinna remains a mystery. Maybe some of the tedium stems from the fact that the cinematic landscape has changed so much since The Incredibles wowed us 14 years ago. Superheroes have oversaturated both the big and small screen in the last decade, so perhaps yet another superhero movie doesn’t have quite the impact now that its predecessor did in 2004. That said, Incredibles 2 is by no means a disappointment. While it doesn’t rank among Pixar’s most inventive endeavours, it is still a solid family adventure that will keep both kids and grownups entertained for nearly two hours (although its running time is, admittedly, a tad overlong). Overall, the journey may be predictable this time around, but it’s still a whole lot of fun. All photos: IMDb

When I watched the trailer of Teefa in Trouble, I was quite disappointed. I was vocal about my disappointment in the trailer review I penned, which didn’t sit well with some Ali Zafar fans who loved the trailer. Some of these fans asked me to watch the movie when it releases and were quite optimistic that I would actually enjoy the movie. Hence, I decided to give it a try but I bought the ticket with zero expectations. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jw5dTVTX9zo The story revolves around Teefa (Zafar) who is a thug-for-hire and is asked to kidnap Anya (Maya Ali) by Butt Sahab (Mehmood Aslam). Anya is the daughter of Butt Sahab’s old friend Bonzo (Javed Sheikh), who breaks his promise of marrying off his daughter to Billu, Butt Sahab’s son. Teefa heads to Poland in order to bring Anya back to Pakistan and thus the trouble begins. The plot of the movie is something you must have watched a gazillion times before, it’s a tried and tested formula and the movie is full of Bollywood clichés, which only pull the movie down. A spoiled pretty girl, a heartthrob, a chance encounter, unfavourable circumstances, a funny sidekick, an overly dramatic mother; it is as if the writers took all the ingredients from movies they used to watch in their childhood and put them all together in this one. However, despite of this, the movie turns out to be quite entertaining. The first half is very enjoyable and leaves you excited for what lies ahead, but the second half is a drag and doesn’t have much to offer. The movie has multiple false endings, which is extremely irritating. I actually saw two gentlemen leave the cinema hall before the actual ending. Teefa in Trouble is Zafar’s debut Pakistani film. Although Zafar is talented as an actor, he was not quite able to flourish in Bollywood. With Teefa in Trouble, the stage was perfectly set for Zafar to shine, and he definitely lived upto the expectations. Zafar carries the whole movie singlehandedly; he’s the life and soul of Teefa in Trouble. His character is quite an interesting one. Teefa is a mix of Batman, Andy Williams, Jim Carrey and Shah Rukh Khan. He can do almost anything and Zafar pulls the character off brilliantly. I don’t think there is anyone else in Pakistan who could have played this part better. Maya does the job, but is unable to be more than just a pretty face in the movie. Faisal Qureshi as Tony does a decent job as the quirky sidekick to Teefa. Although most of his jokes aren’t funny, there are some hilarious moments in the movie because of Qureshi’s unique dialogue delivery. Background score and soundtrack are crucial for a mass entertainer such as this one and Teefa in Trouble gets both of them right. The songs are catchy and the background score is on point. Also, the movie has brilliant cinematography, something that most Pakistani movies lack. But what I was most impressed with were the actions scenes in the movie. The kind of action scenes displayed in the movie are nowhere to be found in Pakistani cinema. To be honest, if the actors were Caucasian, I would have thought the movie was a Hollywood production because of the mindblowing action sequences. The stunts were also flawlessly executed. Teefa in Trouble may not be one of the best Pakistani movies out there, but it sure has set new benchmarks in filmmaking. It has set high standards for Pakistanis and hopefully this will force other filmmakers to meet these standards or better yet, even go a step further and top them. I had no expectations from the movie going in, but when the credits started rolling after an awfully lengthy climax, I knew the movie had entertained me. All photos: Screenshots

Mission: Impossible – Fallout is the sixth iteration in what is now an already established and long-running franchise. It is as synonymous with Tom Cruise as Robert Downey Jr is with the character of Iron Man (Mission: Impossible series of feature films predates Iron Man series mind you). It is directed and produced alike by Christopher McQuarrie, who also directed the franchise’s previous rendition of Rogue Nation in 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiHiW4N7-bo Henry Cavill (The Man of Steel), Vanessa Kirby (The Crown) and Angela Bassett are the newbies joining the franchise with this movie. Actors reprising their roles from previous films include Simon Pegg (Star Trek/Shaun of the Dead), Sean Harris, Ving Rhames, Rebecca Ferguson, Alec Baldwin and Michelle Monaghan respectively. I will try to give away as little as possible in this blog. The story of this chapter starts when an Impossible Mission Force’s (IMF) mission goes appallingly wrong, and Ethan Hunt (Cruise) and his band of teammates must undo what has happened and create a counterbalance to make sure that the proverbial good always triumphs over evil. Furthermore, the plot exhibits Ethan coming head-to-head with the antagonist Solomon Lane (Harris) who is hell bent on unleashing a nuclear attack onto the world, thanks to his anarchist cum megalomaniac disposition which borders insanity at best. Although Solomon doesn’t exude any classical traits when it comes to being the signature bad guy and villain, he seems like all talk and no show. In fact, the real menacing antagonist for Ethan can be the moustache-sporting August Walker (Cavill) who is CIA’s Black-Ops assassin. He is put in charge to “watch” and supervise Ethan’s team to make sure they don’t mess up. However, without spoiling anything, let’s just say that Ethan and Agent August don’t always see eye-to-eye. Ethan would rather be on his own rather than be “hawk-eyed” by a CIA watchdog all the time. As CIA chief Erica Sloan (Bassett) so eloquently puts it in the movie,

“If Ethan is a scalpel who’s tactical and exhibits finesse in his work, Agent August is a hammer exerting sheer blunt force trauma in order to get the job done.”