Donald Trump’s likely legacy? China.

(Reposted from December 2019)

It is unlikely that Donald Trump’s legacy will receive plaudits for much of his domestic or foreign policy. He is an incompetent and solipsistic liar, who continuously pours fuel on fire with his impulsive and erratic decision-making. But unlike any president before him, he has stood up to China and has finally woken up Washington to the reality of the authoritarian state’s ambitions.

Democrat front-runner Joe Biden recently mocked Trump’s tariff policy, suggesting that China were ‘not bad folks’ and ‘not competition for us’. It is exactly this mentality held by the US establishment for years that has allowed China to thrive without accountability.

Trump has a clear rationale to aggressively target China with tariffs. Since China’s inclusion in the WTO in 2001, they have failed to honour their commitments to open up its economy to foreign investment and adhere to the WTO’s rules-based system. They have merely slid backwards while reaping WTO benefits of low tariffs, access to the WTO dispute resolution mechanism, influence on future global trade rules, and freedom for its state-owned companies to operate globally.

Meanwhile, China has committed systemic intellectual property theft, for years striving to obtain trade secrets and valuable information in important industries to gain an edge over western firms. Chinese companies have achieved this through hacking and bribing and China’s government have turned a blind eye. China has also dumped and unfairly subsidised goods such as steel and aluminium, violating WTO rules and damaging US companies. Promises in 2001 to open up its markets were also left to dry as any foreign company in China must adhere to foreign ownership restrictions that force them to form joint ventures with Chinese companies and share their technology. China’s unfair practices have allowed them to facilitate the development of their own tech strategies, substantially benefitting their own companies (often state-owned) at the expense of the rest of the global market.

It has also contributed to its economic growth, to an extent where the economic concern is now intertwined with national security concerns. Xi Jinping has translated China’s wealth into military strength, imposing into the South-China Sea. Their technological prominence and state involvement in the leading Chinese tech companies has sparked allegations of hacking, global surveillance and improper use of AI. China’s Belt-and-Road initiative is a neo-colonial project, which gives developing nations overly-generous loans for infrastructure projects. Ports and airports are at risk to Chinese ownership when the inevitability of defaulting occurs.

Despite the obvious evidence of Chinese malpractice, successive presidents have been weak in countering malpractices, instead of believing that China would eventually liberalise, or that they would not be an issue. While Trump was wrong to neglect it, Obama’s Trans-Pacific Partnership with Asian states would have not addressed China directly but only would have circumvented the issue. Obama also placed his own tariffs and won several WTO cases, but during his tenure, China only continued to steal IP and violate trade rules. Conventional means of trade disputes and dovish diplomacy has long been insufficient. Trump, for all his flaws and desire to simply please his base, grasps this reality.

Tariffs are globally frowned upon. It is unsurprising that Trump’s policy is attacked by economists. But putting on an economist’s hat blinds us from understanding the harsh geopolitical nature of the conflict. The free market is great when everybody follows the rules, but China’s size and hegemonic status makes encouraging compliance and fair trade practice an impossible goal.

The unilateral force of a tariff programme is a viable political strategy as China, not the US, has more to lose in a trade war. China cannot match Trump’s tariffs on a dollar-for-dollar basis, as it imports far less than it exports to the US. Moreover, the trade war is already resulting in a restructuring of China’s compact supply-chain, as foreign companies have relocated their production lines to competitors such as Vietnam, Malaysia and Indonesia. With slow economic growth, China will find it difficult to withstand the effects of a trade war, especially if it is compounded by the pressure of a growing middle class and issues of democracy.

 The trade war does not hurt the US nearly as much. China’s primary retaliatory target has been US farmers, by placing tariffs on soybeans and other agricultural imports. This may have harmed their profits, but farmers still support Trump. They are frustrated with China’s inconsistent purchasing, as well as frequently cancelling or refusing shipments of corn or grains. They also view Trump’s policy as short-term pain for long term gain, perhaps a message that Trump has failed to communicate to the broader populace.

When looking at the trade war in a broader context, usual criticisms of effects to US exporters and consumers are not relevant to the macro question of whether these tariffs can change the behaviour of China. Therefore, it is reasonable to devise a policy that may require the US to withstand some pain, especially when more liberal and open policies towards China have failed. Trump must explain that there is a larger long-term interest in the trade war and that with strong economic growth and low inflation, the US will be stronger in resisting the effects of tariffs than its adversary.

It certainly does not help that Trump makes his trade war difficult to defend. He knows nothing about trade. He makes multiple errors, and lies about the US not feeling any effect. He also has tariffed allies, such as Canada and the EU on more meagre concerns, and in some cases, such as Mexico, he has used tariffs as a political tool. His cosying up to authoritarians such as Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-un has made his allies unwilling to take him seriously and he has aggravated diplomatic relationships with aggressive and unreasonable demands from Asian partners. He has ordered Japan and South Korea, arguably the states most concerned about China, to pay 400% more for US military presence within both states with limited justification. Trump’s treatment of foreign policy like a business fails to grasp the importance of alliances and the impossibility of tackling China alone.

For his policy to be genuinely effective in the long-term, he must, therefore, muster broad coalitions with allies rather than frustrate them. Many nations are concerned with the way China is acting – India only recently pulled out of a multilateral trade deal including China in fear of inadequate safeguards against Chinese dumping. If Trump can enforce a clear tariff strategy while simultaneously working positively with western counterparts and collaborating with Asian allies to mitigate the global threat, China will be increasingly pressured to abide by the rules. His neglect of TPP that has left the remaining parties to edge closer to China demonstrates his failure to do so.

It can be reasonably argued that the damage has been done by Trump’s arrogance and wretched diplomacy. If that is the case and if Trump cannot survive 2020, then possibly a new face can apply an aggressive China policy while working with allied nations to build pressure on the Chinese leadership. Nonetheless, Trump has at least brought the issue to consensus in Washington and increasingly to Europe, now recognised as the primary threat to the global order. Perhaps his personality and impotence have rendered his tariff strategy more defective than it really is.

 

Investor-State Dispute Settlements – the anti-globalist’s scapegoat

ISDS has become a dirty acronym in trade. Frequently perceived as a tool for corporations to exploit states at the expense of the public interest, it is a prime target for anti-globalists and anti-capitalists. Elizabeth Warren has long lambasted it for providing a ‘huge handout to global corporations while undermining American sovereignty’ and has committed to ensuring it never sees the light of day in future trade deals. Additionally, 150,000 Europeans signed a petition demanding its removal from the now dead TTIP. Yet, despite being the means of dispute settlement within trade agreements for decades, exaggerated rhetoric – that ISDS simply serves corporate interests and harms the state’s ability to govern, is misleading and unproductive.

Investor-state dispute settlements provide a vital function in the international legal order, providing a mechanism for investors to sue states for alleged discrimination and breach of trade agreements. Many nations, notably developing nations, lack the basic protections to ensure foreign corporations can confidently invest in them. ISDS aimed to fill this vacuum, offering an external legal system to comfort investor fears of corruption and discrimination, simultaneously facilitating greater foreign investment for poorer states. The system also removes pressure off domestic courts, providing a substantial benefit for more developed states. Yet, while ISDS improves the enforceability of international law, its provision for claims for investors have created the perception that it is a fundamentally unfair and exploitative system.

Such a demeaning reputation is epitomised by ISDS’s effect on issues of public concern –obstructing the regulation of the environment, public health and labour standards, providing an easy platform for critics to incite widespread support. Prominent cases such as Phillip Morris’ lawsuits against Australia and Ecuador for inaugurating plain-packaging and successful claims by Italian bondholders against Argentina for defaulting on its sovereign debt have been frequently used to form the basis of backlash towards ISDS. In reality, many of these cases, like Phillip Morris, fail, or are rare.

This does not suggest that ISDS is a perfect dispute mechanism system. Often vague definitions in treaties have allowed corporations to stretch the meaning of terms such as ‘investment’ and ‘fair and equitable treatment’. While these have contributed to the backlash towards ISDS, a complete overhaul of the system is disproportionate when existing treaties can be altered and future ones can clarify the definitions of these terms.

Another common attack of ISDS is focused on the allegedly biased judges that arbitrate disputes. As panels partially consist of arbitrators appointed by the investors themselves, the allegation follows that investors will only appoint arbitrators who have been favourable to them in the past. Arbitrators are also seen to be biased as a result of their previous roles as counsel in similar cases they would arbitrate, and the interchanging of these roles is seen as facilitating procedurally illegitimate decisions. Despite the mere appearance of bias, these criticisms are based on assumptions of how the courts operate and minimal empirical evidence exists to suggest the procedure has created biased courts.

Misleading criticism based on the substantive and procedural flaws of ISDS has generally originated from NGOs and academia, who have successfully swayed public opinion on TTIP and TPP. While President Trump has answered their prayers, albeit for his own protectionist justifications, the outrage over ISDS was a disproportionate one.

Yet, such ISDS ‘backlash’ is a more complex phenomenon that has manifested as a result of broader concerns about globalisation. As globalisation has become a more diffuse target, anti-globalists need something more tangible to blame. Despite arguably more damaging effects of TTIP and TPP such as job losses and lowering of wages, ISDS forms a more convenient focal point to express fears of infringement of sovereignty and increasing power of multinational corporations. Therefore, citing rare but consequentially damaging ISDS judgments such as the Italian bondholders case, or unsuccessful but shocking claims such as the Phillip Morris cases, along with biased arbitrators, forms a clearer and more persuasive narrative.

Complete abolition of the system will deprive investors with genuine claims from seeking recourse and discourage foreign investment, notably in developing countries. There is a greater case for reform, as some scholars have advocated for a ‘World Investment Court’ – a centralised court to ameliorate procedural and substantive issues that have plagued ISDS’s reputation. Rather than investor-chosen arbitrators, the court would employ judges, selected through the WTO by states, to avoid perceived bias, and the court would also have a lower and appellate body to develop precedent and consistent decision-making.

Ultimately, prospects of a world court will be determined by the willingness of a collection of states to adhere to the system. To be embraced broadly, the mechanism must meet the interests of states and claimants, or disputes may avoid the system. The proposal also risks politicising the state-based appointment process, especially within the shadow of the trade war. Whether the court can even supersede these hurdles first depends on the expansion of the WTO which is required for the court’s creation.  However, to suggest expansion while the institution is in decline, at risk of not having a quorum of judges and even an US exit, is an optimistic and almost laughable goal.

Reforms may have to be conducted at a bilateral, or regional level. There are greater prospects for the creation of regional or agreement-specific courts, shown by the EU’s court proposal and the EU-Vietnam treaty. However, many states have already alleviated their own concerns of ISDS by guaranteeing protection within agreements to limit investor exploitation. For example, new agreements are increasingly adopting ‘enterprise-based’ definitions of investment, which only include investments within the host state, rather than previous all-encompassing asset-based definitions. More narrowly drafted ‘fair and equitable’ clauses, to prevent broad interpretations, are now more common. States have also included ‘carve-outs’ to prevent investors from suing on public policy issues, including tax and tobacco-based claims, as seen in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPATPP).

We must be wary of groups and politicians such as Elizabeth Warren, who are adamant that ISDS is manipulative tool for corporations, even though the US have not experienced ISDS claims against them. Suggesting complete abolition of ISDS, simply because it is ‘pro-investor’ is not a sustainable approach to trade disputes. Piecemeal changes are arguably more practical and direct solutions, to ensure investors have protection that does not go beyond what is reasonable.  As states are increasingly aware of ISDS provisions, these drafting changes may be incorporated into large-scale agreements, already demonstrated by CPATPP. This way, anti-globalists will struggle to have a strong claim against future trade deals that involve ISDS.

Repost: Solidifying the Conservative Court

Brett Kavanaugh’s course to becoming the 102nd Justice of the Supreme Court was by no means a simple feat. Arguably one of the dirtiest, most arduous, and contentious confirmations in US history, the result was a huge boost for Donald Trump and the Republican party, who will be reassured to see a more conservative court promoting their positions on social and political issues.

With the ability to strike down or uphold laws, the make-up of the Supreme Court is imperative for both political parties. Democrats favour ‘loose-constructionist’ judges, who view the US constitution as an evolving document, whereas Republicans prefer ‘originalists’ or ‘strict-constructionists’, who view the constitution formalistically, not subject to judicial activism. So far, Trump has replaced two judges with strong conservatives – Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh. However, whilst Gorsuch replaced a strong conservative, Kavanaugh replaced Anthony Kennedy, a softer conservative who was often the swing vote on contentious issues, voting with liberals on gay marriage and abortion. With Kavanaugh in his place, the court has shifted to a clearer 5-4 conservative-leaning court, concerning progressives who believe he will erode established social rights.

Democrats fear that Kavanaugh’s inauguration threatens the legalisation of abortion established in Roe v Wade as Kennedy has voted for abortion rights on a number of occasions. While Kavanaugh, a devout Catholic, has not encountered abortion case law during his judicial career, Trump was determined to appoint a pro-life judge and thus would have questioned Kavanaugh on his stance. However, earlier this year, Kavanaugh sided with liberal judges in refusing to review lower court decisions that banned certain states from denying Planned Parenthood Medicaid funding, possibly signalling sympathy towards abortion rights. Progressives have cautioned that the decision was based on procedural matters and that Kavanaugh may instead be trying to keep a low profile early on in his tenure following his contentious confirmation fight.

Although Kennedy wrote the majority opinion to legalise same-sex marriage in Obergefell v Hodges in 2015,  it is unlikely that the replacement of Kavanaugh’s will threaten court recent precedent after three years. Instead, the court is more likely to focus on religious liberty, which Kavanaugh has defended on numerous occasions, such as voting against the federal government’s mandate for religious employers to cover contraception for employees. This, alongside Kavanaugh’s Catholic beliefs, may suggest that in ‘religious refusal’ cases the court will lean towards religious freedom, continuing what progressives label as ‘the right to discriminate’. Kennedy, despite voting for religious freedom in the recent ‘gay cake’ case, reaffirmed protection for gay rights, stating that religious liberty cannot always prevail in every case. With the Kavanaugh’s inauguration, the court may go further in future similar cases, explicitly stating that religious freedom is protected by the first amendment.

Trump’s motive for nominating Kavanaugh however, may be one of personal protection. Under investigation by Robert Mueller for coordinating with Russia during the 2016 campaign, Trump could potentially be subpoenaed to testify regarding his role. Whether Mueller is able to do this will most likely depend on the Supreme Court, and it comes as no surprise that Kavanaugh dislikes criminal investigations into sitting presidents. As a former Staff Secretary to George Bush, Kavanaugh is a fervent believer in executive power, once arguing that the court’s ruling to release the Watergate tapes may have been “wrongly decided”. It is likely therefore that Kavanaugh will prove to be a lifeline for Trump in his determination to prevent further investigation into his activities.

Yet, Kavanaugh may not be the Democrats’ greatest concern. With two liberal justices, Ruth Bader-Ginsburg (85) and Stephen Breyer (80) nearing the end of their careers, a Trump re-election and retention of the Senate in 2020 could give the president the opportunity to entrench the conservative nature of the court for decades, thanks to judicial life tenure. As the majority of Senate seats up for re-election are Republican, Trump will need to carry his party to success if he wishes to further solidify the bench.

In the meantime, while Kavanaugh’s legacy is yet to be known, Republicans will be relieved that “Reagan’s worst mistake” in nominating Anthony Kennedy has been rectified, and that conservative interests remain dominant in the highest court of the land.

This article was written in December 2018 and originally published in The 2019 Dicta Magazine.

Meet Cory Booker, the Hero of the people who won’t beat Trump

Brett Kavanaugh’s inexorable confirmation will become the most significant change to the US Supreme Court in the 21st century – and depending on his impact to the coming decades, it may potentially be the most important in any of our lifetimes.

Yet, with the primary season looming, (now in the ‘invisible invisible’ primary stage as my politics teacher once put) the confirmation hearings for the D.C Appeals Court judge has provided Democrat presidential hopefuls with the opportunity to take advantage of the free airtime to demonstrate their aptitude to primary voters.

None other than Cory Booker, the constantly angry-looking and bulging-eyed junior senator from New Jersey. Tipped for some time as the young, charismatic and progressive darling to face Trump in 2020, his desire to make a statement is understandable. Yet, his grandstanding this week is further evidence that Booker is all show and a wannabe hero of the people.

The former Newark Mayor, justifiably grilled Kavanaugh on issues such as Trump’s expectations of loyalty, however, he left other senators stunned by threatening to risk expulsion from the Senate hearing by illegally releasing confidential emails regarding racial profiling sent by the judicial nominee in 2001 and 2002.

The embarrassing reality for Booker, however, was that the emails weren’t confidential and were known to be accessible to the public – and he reportedly knew that this was the case. To further hammer the nail in the coffin, the content of the emails included Kavanaugh expressing opposition to racial profiling post-9/11, rather than supporting it, which Booker implied with his theatrics.

The heroic Booker made sure to take full responsibility for his legal and unpunishable act, becoming a martyr to the cause. Quite humorously, with a sense of adolescent pride and self-adulation, he expressed that his actions amounted to ‘the closest thing to an I am Spartacus’ moment, which was mocked by Republicans politicians and commentators alike.

On this day in 71B.C. the Thracian gladiator Spartacus was put to death by Marcus Licinius Crassus for disclosing confidential scrolls. When informed days later that in fact the Roman Senate had already publicly released the scrolls, Crassus replied “Oh, ok, my bad”.

— Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) September 7, 2018

In this Trumpian age, where Democrats believe they need a progressive hero to represent a range of voters feel unhappy with Trump’s policies and actions, Booker certainly likes to pose himself as one. Yet, when Booker’s past acts of support for various causes are examined further, it becomes difficult to pin down where he stands.

Booker, the largest Democrat recipient of pro-Israel money and a close friend to the Israel lobby, has flip-flopped on pro-Israel positions and sided with progressives on issues such as supporting the Iran deal and rejecting the move to recognise Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

He was also a progressive hero when he testified against his own colleague Senator Jeff Sessions during his confirmation hearing for Attorney General, winning liberal hearts despite previously presenting the Congressional Gold Medal to participants of the 1965 march for voting rights in Selma with Sessions months earlier. Then a couple of days after, he angered progressives by supporting an amendment to a bill that lowers prescription costs, highlighting his tendency of being too close to businesses and Wall Street. Unsurprisingly, he has been criticised for taking a stand against ‘feel-good social issues,’ regardless of his past positions, but sticking with big money anywhere else – and you can only get a sense of deja-vu.

He may not be as artificial as Clinton was, but his malleability when it became necessary and his façade of a principled politician who stands up for what is right is disconcerting for the Democrats’ chances in 2020. It may prove expedient in attaining progressive support in the more ideological primaries, but if 2016 taught us anything, it is unlikely to convince and fool voters the Democrats vitally require in 2020. Booker’s grandstanding reputation easily has the potential to be exploited by Trump similarly to how he exploited ‘Lyin’ Ted’, ‘Weak Jeb’, and ‘Crooked Hillary’ – the Democrats need a mentally stronger candidate to tackle Trump’s childish rhetoric and name-calling.

Cory Booker may be a great orator and successful politician, but unless he discards the imaginary creation that is Cory Booker, he will struggle to win over the voters that Hillary lost.

15 Most Anticipated Movies In 2016

2016 is finally here and as you cool off from Star Wars fever there are several films to look forward to this new year. 2015 presented us with record-breaking films such as Jurassic World but mainly Star Wars: The Force Awakens and action blockbusters with Mad Max: Fury Road. This year looks to be an even bigger year full of comic book movies, returning franchises as well as original offerings. This is our picks of the top 15 most anticipated movie of 2016.

15. Bourne 5 (July 29th)

Paul Greengrass and Matt Damon reunite to bring Jason Bourne back. Additional cast members include Alicia Vikander and Tommy Lee Jones. We don’t know much about the film as of yet but we do know that Greengrass knows how to make a good Bourne film and we can’t wait for it.

14. The Nice Guys (May 20th)

Shane Black directs this action comedy starring Russell Crowe as a LA detective buddying up with rookie cop Ryan Gosling, investigating the suicide of a fading porn star. We know this would be an exciting buddy cop movie as shown from Shane Black’s famous Lethal Weapon. The trailer looked hilarious and we’re looking forward to the comedy sides of Ryan Gosling and Russel Crowe which looks to be a great team-up.

13. Star Trek Beyond (July 22nd)

When the first trailer dropped last month it got unnoticed due to the Star Wars frenzy, but those who caught it had mixed reactions. However, the first two films directed by J.J. Abrams were great and highly entertaining. With Abrams off the director seat, Fast and Furious director Justin Lin takes on this third movie. Star Trek Beyond still retains its strong cast including Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana and Simon Pegg. The film also adds Idris Elba as the villain and Kingsman’s Sofia Boutella. We can tell from the trailer that this would be a very fun Star Trek outing.

12. Assassin’s Creed (December 21st)

Video game movie adaptations have mostly been disappointing.  Assassin’s Creed looks like an exception because of its cast and its story. Michael Fassbender is the lead in this film with Marion Cotillard and Jeremy Irons. A great cast like this should mean the acting should be powerful. Players of the video game franchise know that the story is very interesting, so we hope that it stays true the material with story and script. Video game movies end up poor due to being altered too much.

11. Ghostbusters (July 18th)

Does Ghostbusters need a reboot? Probably not but if we are, this looks like the perfect way to do it. An all female lead of great comedic actresses and Bridesmaids & Spy director Paul Feig. Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig, Leslie Jones and Kate McKinnon (who both are brilliant in Saturday Night Live) are our Ghostbusters. It doesn’t get more promising than this, this will be very enjoyable to watch.

10. Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (November 18th)

A movie based on a textbook owned by Harry Potter. Interesting. Four-time Harry Potter director David Yates and Harry Potter series producer David Heyman brings the wizarding world back. Not to mention the screenplay has been written by none other than J.K. Rowling. You just know that this film will be great and successful. The film will show us how wizarding life was in 1920s New York starring Eddie Redmayne as Newt Scamander. We hope to be wowed in this magical journey once again when Fantastic Beasts arrives later this year.

9. Doctor Strange (November 4th)

Marvel and Benedict Cumberbatch, any film that both are linked with we’re sold. Marvel Studios bring the mystical and magical side of the MCU with Doctor Strange directed by Scott Derrickson. Neurosurgeon Stephen Strange discovers a world of magic after surviving a car crash that gives him powers. Benedict Cumberbatch looks brilliant as Doctor Strange from first official photos released and we cannot wait to see this side of Cumberbatch and the MCU.

8. Finding Dory (June 17th)

It’s been nearly 13 years since we saw Nemo, Marlin and Dory and now they’re finally back this year in Finding Dory. We go through a journey through the ocean once more in search of Dory’s family. Ellen DeGeneres is back to voice the forgetful Dory with Albert Brooks also reprising his role as Marlin. Finding Nemo grabbed many hearts and was highly successful so we don’t expect that this film won’t have a huge audience. Pixar hardly disappoints with their features, we sure hope it won’t be any different this summer where we remember to just keep swimming.

7. The Jungle Book (April 15th)

Disney’s live-action version of The Jungle Book helmed by Jon Favereau looks to be a visual masterpiece from the first trailer released, showing realistic CGI of the animals we all knew from our childhood and the jungle scenery. This has a stellar cast of beloved actors such as Billy Murray as Baloo, Ben Kingsley as Bagheera and Scarlett Johanson as Kaa. This film looks to be loved by children as well as adults as watch Mowgli’s journey in the jungle.

6. X-Men: Apocolypse (May 27th)

Bryan Singer takes the director’s seat once again after his brilliant return to the X-Men franchise with X-Men Days of Future Past and this looks like an even bigger film. The world’s first and most powerful mutant Apocalypse (Oscar Isaac) awakens after thousands of years and recruits Magneto & other mutants to create a new world order. Charles Xavier/Professor X (James McAvoy) with Raven/Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) lead a team of young X-Men, including Jean Grey and Cyclops, to help prevent Apocalypse from wiping mankind. Despite some mixed views on the look of Isaac as Apocalypse, this film looks promising with a huge cast of talented actors and a lot of action.

5. Deadpool (February 12th)

The Merc with a mouth is finally getting his own film with Ryan Reynolds starring as the hilarious, deadly anti-hero (We do not speak of X-Men Origins: Wolverine). It looks like this film stays true to its material and everyone is loving what they’re seeing so far. Getting a R rating is what it this character needs and this creates more excitement for this film. This could be the funniest Marvel movie and can hopefully boost Fox’s morale after the hugely disappointing Fantastic Four. We can’t wait for the moments  of him breaking the fourth wall and the rude humour. This is going one hell of a fun movie.

4. Suicide Squad (August 5th)

Suicide Squad is a new take on comic book movies as it focuses on a group of villains instead of heroes. Directed by David Ayer, this film has created a lot of buzz from their comic con trailer and their ensemble cast with Will Smith as Deadshot, Viola Davis as Amanda Waller, Margot Robbie playing Harley Quinn and Jared Leto as The Joker. Amander Waller creates a team of villains called Task Force X assigned to a secret government mission. This film looks so dark and gritty, we’re hoping to see some memorable performances here especially from Jared Leto, who has big shoes to fill from the late Heath Ledger, and Margot Robbie who looks to be the perfect casting for Harley Quinn.

3. Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (December 16th)

Star Wars: The Force Awakens delivered and fans would love more and we’re getting it. Rogue One is a Star Wars Anthology movie set before the events of Episode IV: A New Hope, following a group of resistance fighters and their mission to steal the plans for the original Death Star. Directed by Gareth Edwards and starring Felicity Jones as the lead role, supported by Forest Whitaker, Mads Mikkelsen, Alan Tudyk and more. We’re also hoping for a cheeky cameo from Darth Vader.

2. Captain America: Civil War (May 6th)

Captain America: The Winter Soldier is arguably one of the best or the best film in the Marvel Cinematic Universe and Civil War could be just as good. The Russo Brothers are back to direct this third Captain America film which initially is Avengers 2.5 since all of them are present, apart from Thor and Hulk. Members of the Avengers take sides when the government plans to regulate the team after the events from last year’s Age of Ultron, one team led by Steve Rogers/Captain America (Chris Evans) who’s against it, and the other led by Tony Stark/Iron Man (Tony Stark) who supports it. It’s even more exciting as we see the introduction of Black Panther (Chadwick Bosman) and MCU’s Spider-Man (Tom Holland). It’s going to be an emotional battle between friends and we can’t wait.

1. Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (March 25th)

It’s Batman and Superman on the same screen for the first time, of course this was going to be the most anticipated movie. At first, there were many mixed views of Ben Affleck being cast as Batman for this film, but as we saw more footage from trailers, views became positive and we are very excited to see what Ben Affleck will bring. Following the events from 2013’s Man of Steel, Batman isn’t too fond of Superman and thinks he’s a threat and BOOM….Batman v Superman. Awesome. We also get to see the big screen debut of Wonder Woman played by Gal Gadot, who looks brilliant from what we’ve seen so far.  Henry Cavill returns as Superman in the film which sets the stage for 2017’s Justice League (hence Dawn of Justice), we’re all hyped to to see this, so this is a no brainer of it being one of the top grossing films of 2016.

Star Wars: The Force Awakens Review

It’s finally here. Star Wars The Force Awakens is the next chapter in the Star Wars saga set 30 years after the events of Return of the Jedi. This has been the most anticipated movie of this year and so had very high expectations as J.J. Abrams brought in the old guard of the saga united with a new cast for a new generation of fans. From his previous films such as Star Trek and its sequel and Super 8, Abrams knows how to create great films, and he did it again. Star Wars The Force Awakens is one of the most entertaining films these past few years. Not just a great Star Wars movie but a great movie in general.

Newcomer Daisy Ridley stars as Rey, a scavenger on the desert planet of Jakku. She eventually runs into Finn played by John Boyega, a stormtrooper that was part of The First Order, which is the new division that replaced the old Empire, who decided to leave them because something inside doesn’t feel morally right with him anymore so he leaves. Rey and Finn start an adventure that leads them to Han Solo, with Harrison Ford reprising the role, who helps The Resistance locate Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill). While this is happening there’s a villain on the rise named Kylo Ren (Adam Driver) who has taken major inspiration from Darth Vader. He with The First Order also wants to find Luke Skywalker.

The new cast members to this saga are great additions. John Boyega displayed a lot of charisma and energy as Finn. You can tell that Boyega was excited to be a part of this as he gave a great performance. He transitioned from comic relief, which were hilarious moments, to drama with ease. Oscar Isaac as Poe Dameron was instantly likable, he’s just an awesome guy and definitely the best pilot in the galaxy. Isaac brought charm and fun to his performance. However, he didn’t have enough screen time than we had hoped for when we first saw him.

The real stand-out is Daisy Ridley as Rey. She is such a breath of fresh air and is arguably the heart of this film. An excellent discovery of an unknown actress, being her first film, she is brilliant and her performance was so genuine bringing excitement and curiosity in her character which was a very well written and an individualized character. Daisy Ridley brought her name to this franchise very well making Rey one of the most beloved and best Star Wars characters as well as a very strong female lead character. The chemistry between Boyega and Ridley was electrifying and both proved to be the best people to continue this franchise.

Speaking of beloved characters, move aside R2-D2 because BB-8 is here and just perfect. Not only does he play a key role in this film, he’s also just as adorable and clever as we hoped. The film wisely incorporated fine humour with this character, his ability to emote so clearly is fantastic. Also, the fact that he’s a practical character makes everything that’s done with him incredibly entertaining.

It was such a delight to see the returning cast again. Harrison Ford as Han Solo was just great. He wasn’t just there as a cameo to kick in nostalgia for the fans, he had a very integral role in this film. He didn’t just play Han Solo how we all knew him since Return of the Jedi, he played an aged Han Solo who lived 30 years who’s now wiser and has had history; a very well developed character that plays true to what fans know and love about him. Similarly with Carrie Fisher returning as Princess Leia now General Leia, the scenes between Han and Leia were poignant and special, you can see that a lot has happened in the past 30 years as you can see a bit of remorse in their scenes. The scenes between Han and Chewbacca (Peter Mayhew also reprising his role) were just brilliant and nostalgic. The banter between them is fresh and ridiculously funny and you feel their friendship again. Mark Hamill does well to project so many emotions in his performance.

Moving on to the villains, there was some skepticism on Kylo Ren and that he’ll just be another version of Darth Vader. That wasn’t the case. Adam Driver gave such an amazing performance as Kylo Ren making him a compelling villain, not only is he evil and intimidating, he is motivated, and you can see that very clearly and understand his actions and why he’s doing them. He’s human and is a character with emotional depth that you actually sort of care about which Driver did very well to display and not make him look one dimensional. Captain Phasma (Gwendoline Christie) had become a fan favourite before the release, due to her amazing look and that she’s the first female villain in the franchise. However, she was majorly underused in the film which was disappointing.

The Force Awakens is a visually stunning film, using practical effects whenever possible and also perfectly merging them with CGI. Abrams’s direction and visual style were stellar, as his camera movement in action scenes gave the audience a thrilling experience. Unlike the last six films, the action sequences here are lot more gritty and violent giving them more realism.

The film does do very well to respect their predecessors, however there were moments where scenes respecting the original trilogy wasn’t subtle enough and it was noticeable that the scenes were structurally similar. That isn’t enough to hinder one’s enjoyment watching the film but  it may distract some true hard fans.

Star Wars The Force Awakens shows how Star Wars is done- righting all the wrongs from the prequels, understanding what the fans want, bringing the franchise back to form. It’s everything that  was promised for a Star Wars film and even more, with returning beloved characters from the original trilogy and brilliant new characters all bringing heart and action, taking fans through an emotional journey. The Force Awakens is such an entertaining theatrical experience, launching a new generation of fans and characters while still paying nods to the old as well as making us want more of the new.

Rating: 9.4/10

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation Review

Tom Cruise is back with the fifth instalment of this thrilling franchise, Mission: Impossible – Rogue Nation. This is what’s great about the Mission Impossible films; Tom Cruise. Even after turning 53 (let that sink in) he does his own stunts in all his films, and he gives his all every time. It’s why this franchise has survived not only for nearly 20 years, but got better with every film. Director Chris McQuarrie had the daunting task of following Ghost Protocol, which was brilliantly directed by Brad Bird, and he gave possibly the best one yet. This film was full of action and beautifully shot sequences.

With the IMF team disavowed by the CIA, Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) is out in the cold as a new threat known as The Syndicate emerges, a sinister group of rogue spies who’s intent is to destabilise the global economy through terror attacks. Ethan goes covert with his team; Benji (Simon Pegg), Brandt (Jeremy Renner) and Luther (Ving Rhames), travelling across the world to track down The Syndicate. Joining forces with them is Ilsa Faust (Rebecca Ferguson), an ass-kicking renegade British agent who’s loyalties lean between Hunt and the Rogue Nation.

Tom Cruise’s devotion is conveyed through the brilliance of the film, and unsurprisingly so, as  he’s one of the most committed actors working today, not just in regards to his physical aspects of his films and performing death-defying stunts, but he always gives a stalwart performance every time he takes, and this one was no different. He nails the humour, drama and of course the action. In Ghost Protocol, he climbed the tallest building in the world, the Burj Khalifa, and now he’s hanging off the side of an airborne plane. Older yet bolder, nothing can stop the daredevil that is Tom Cruise. He also does his own stunts during the thrilling motorcycle chase which was probably one of the best high-speed motorcycle chases ever on screen; it was so exhilarating.

Simon Pegg is brilliant as Benji- he allows them to have comic relief without compromising the tension in the espionage moments and the thrills in the action scenes exemplifying that he’s a viable part of this franchise. Jeremy Renner has his moments to shine, and it’s pleasing to see Ving Rhames back as Luther and has more screen time, as he only had a cameo in Ghost Protocol. He’s an original key member so it was nice to see his character’s and Hunt’s chemistry again. Alec Baldwin is also in this film as CIA chief Alan Hunley and he delivers as well.

Newcomer Rebecca Ferguson is the one to watch, she is just a total bad-ass. She plays an integral role in most of Cruise’s stunts. Ferguson is talented, sexy and lethal, flaunting her combat skills more than her beauty. She proves her mettle as a future action star by delivering a memorable breakthrough performance.

Now with all the previous Mission Impossible films, the biggest issue this series has had is crafting a compelling villain, Mission Impossible 3 had the best one with the late Phillip Seymour Hoffman, Ghost Protocol’s villain was weak and that was the worst aspect of that great movie. This film’s villain played by Sean Harris is very chilling, had motivation and was well acted. He wasn’t an incredible villain which is fine as it works for this movie as you’ll understand along with Hunt why he has to be stopped. Director McQuarrie did an impressive job in making the fifth film in this franchise, which is always a worry as, a total success. He raises the stakes and creates nail-biting tension. The action sequences from Cruise, literally, hanging off a plane to a Mexican style stand-off at the Vienna Opera to an underwater heist, and then transitioning to a high-octane motorcycle chase. It gets intense and keeps the audience excited throughout.

Mission Impossible Rogue Nation is a blend of the previous films but just even more action-packed and just better; and worth saying that it’s the best in the franchise. This film is an expertly crafted spectacle with stunning action set pieces, great performances and balanced blend of humour and suspense. This franchise is about missions being impossible, the real impossibility is that these films exceed expectations and just get better and better. Audience’s adrenaline would be rushed in every breathtaking stunt sequence and it’ll be worth every penny.

Rating: 9/10

Ant-Man Review

Ant-Man is the twelfth offering from the Marvel Cinematic Universe and, like Guardians of the Galaxy, it caused a lot of skepticism but also anticipation for the arrival of Earth’s tiniest hero. Despite fans scratching their heads upon the release of this film, it has definitely been the most surprising. Ant-Man is one of Marvel’s best standalone films. It was such an unexpected success. This is both action-packed and funny and director Peyton Reed done a great job bringing a tone that feels like an exciting heist film.

Paul Rudd stars as Scott Lang, an ex-con who wants to reform his ways and re-establish his relationship with his daughter. He’s recruited by the original Ant- Man, scientist Hank Pym, played by the brilliant Michael Douglas, to succeed him in the suit which has the ability, as hinted, to shrink to ant size. Along with his daughter Hope (Evangeline Lilly), he wants prevent his former protégé Darren Cross (Corey Stoll) from using his secretive shrinking technology as an instrument of war.

One of the reasons why this film worked is its spot-on casting. Paul Rudd is great as Scott Lang; naturally likable and has great comedic delivery, he gives it his all to his performance. Michael Douglas brings seriousness to the film but also there’s hints of playfulness to his character. You believe his motives and how he really cares for his daughter, Hope. Evangeline Lilly brings the emotions to the film as Hank’s daughter. T.I and Michael Peña are Lang’s criminal companions and are brilliant comic relief. Especially Michael Peña, as Luis, who shined in this film. He was terrific – everything he said had great timing and was funny, especially the scenes with Peña’s “he said, she said” monologues which were particularly memorable.

However there were flaws in this film, the beginning felt slightly rushed and the villain which was the main flaw. Corey Stoll is a talented actor, as seen House of Cards, and he does a solid job playing Darren Cross/Yellowjacket. It’s been the same with other Marvel films; the villain always lacks in character development. But Cross’ alter-ego Yellowjacket gave exciting action sequences which were one of the highlights of the film, the action was very creative; transitioning from ant size to human size and from humour to tension.

Visually, the film is stunning to look at. The CGI effects were executed well in giving a fun visual treatment and it’s one of the few films that’s satisfying in 3D.

This is the funniest film Marvel has produced, it was hardly ever thought that a film about a man shrinking to ant size would be made, insane as it sounds, and the film poked fun at that which was brilliant, it’s difficult to respect its subject matter and make fun of it and it was done really well. Due to a great cast, in-tune director and an enjoyable plot, Ant-Man succeeds just like Guardians of the Galaxy did and brilliantly so. The tie-ins to the MCU were enough to keep it cohesive and didn’t rely on them too much to keep the story going. Despite its bumpy opening and not so memorable villain, Ant-Man was a great, entertaining, standalone Marvel film with strong performances, thrilling action scenes, a well-told story and was just genuinely funny.

Rating: 8.5/10

Jurassic World Review

How can one top Jurassic Park? One of the most successful and iconic films of the 1990s. It’s not easy and let me tell you, Jurassic World most certainly did not, which is obvious, however it was a worthy sequel to the 90s blockbuster. 22 years has passed since the events of Jurassic Park. John Hammond’s dream is realised in Jurassic World, a fully operational theme park predominantly focused on artificially created dinosaurs. The film centres around brothers Zach (Nick Robinson) and Grey Mitchell (Tye Simpkins), who fly to the park to visit their aunt, Claire (Bryce Dallas Howard), who is the operations manager of Jurassic World. The biologically engineering company InGen created a new genetically engineered hybrid dinosaur called Indominus Rex — what could go wrong? Everything, of course. They seek the help of the park’s Velociraptor trainer Owen Grady, played by Chris Pratt, to save the day. This has all the action you expect from a good blockbuster with great special effects. It’s what you expect from a monster movie and that’s what this is.

I had high expectations watching this because I loved Jurassic Park, so when John Williams’ famous Jurassic Park theme came on I was filled with nostalgia and was 4 again. However, this film didn’t fully exceed my expectations – it wasn’t a great film but it  certainly wasn’t terrible either. This was a good summer popcorn flick with the suspense and clichés. Jurassic World is fun and cathartic, it pays enough homage to the original to keep fans scrambling to register them and enough action to keep the new and younger viewers entertained.

The performances in the film overall was pleasant, Pratt and Dallace Howard played their roles fairly well, and the two brothers also admirably suited to their characters. However just the characters were quite one-dimensional and cartoonish; Bryce Dallas Howard is the really uptight, detached business woman who needs everything scheduled and wears high heels, which leads me to the most impressive element of Jurassic World- how Bryce Dallas Howard managed to majestically sprint through the forests throughout the action, refusing to let go of those Sam Edelman heels, it amazed us all. Chris Pratt is the macho trainer who understands the dinosaurs and takes charge, and Vincent D’Onofrio’s character, Hoskins, the shifty security force leader, who wants to weaponize the dinosaurs. The film just lacked the pivotal balance of character development, which is purely down to the writing of the film. The dialogue was disappointing and occasionally made us laugh from its corniness.

Now, there was some comic relief in the film,  and Jake Johnson did well in providing them. Some of the comedic parts were rather funny, however what didn’t work was when there was a real moment that completely failed at being a real moment because people watching it were laughing as it was executed as cheesy and cringy, it thus became accidental comic relief, especially the last line which was laughable. Aside from that, the film was certainly enjoyable and entertaining.

Despite the flaws of the script there was a lot of entertainment in this film. Director Colin Trevorrow did well crafting a sequel to a flawless classic as well as introducing a new generation of cinema-goers to this franchise. As a summer blockbuster, this will be top this year, for sure, since it’s now the highest opening of all time. With a decent cast, stunning effects and just enough nostalgia to tickle the hair on your arms, Jurassic World is a really fun summer film.

Rating: 7.8/10

Welcome to Absolute Scenes

Hello and welcome to Absolute Scenes. This is a blog done by myself, Fletch, and my good friend Deniz. This is just a short introduction to the blog, we hope to get proper posts up soon. We’ll be posting about sport, and anything that really catches our interest. Thanks for reading, and we hope you’ll stick around.

-Fletch