Oscars 2016

oscars-universityobserver-ie

The 2016 Oscars were a mixed bag, because once again they got it wrong in a number of key categories. To be fair, they got it right a few times too. In fact, this year’s Oscars reminds me of the Katy Perry song Hot n Cold: “Wrong then it’s right, black then it’s white…” Actually very little was black about the Oscars this year, but let’s not go there…

Here, in time honoured tradition, are my thoughts on the main winners.

Best Picture: Spotlight – Wrong. The best film of last year by far, Inside Out, wasn’t even nominated in this category. Not that I expected it to be as animated films are still not treated with the respect they deserve (despite rare exceptions, such as when Beauty and the Beast received a nomination). Of the nominees, The Revenant was probably the best film. However because so many Academy voters don’t bother actually seeing films in the cinema (relying instead on DVD screeners), The Revenant may have suffered in this respect, as it really, really needs a big screen. By contrast, Spotlight is far less overtly cinematic, and will lose little on television. It is a solid film, but not remarkable enough to deserve a best picture win.

Best Director: Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu (The Revenant) – Right. Whatever else one might think of The Revenant, the direction cannot be faulted. Shot entirely in natural light, from that astonishing early pass-the-POV shot, to spectacular bear mauling and the seemingly unending trudge through shivering wastelands, Inarritu ensures his film is the most aggressively cinematic contender in the pack. Must-see-on-the-big-screen kudos guaranteed.

Best Actor: Leonardo DiCaprio (The Revenant) – Wrong. Whilst I think DiCaprio is a fine actor, he really should have won for his turn in The Departed. This role, by contrast, is pure Oscar bait. Lots of “uglying up” and suffering for your art (a very “committed” performance), but whilst he is perfectly good in the role, I much preferred Michael Fassbender’s less showy but understated and powerful performance in the criminally undervalued Steve Jobs.

Best Actress: Brie Larson (Room) – Right. A superb performance at the centre of a powerfully emotional film.

Best Supporting Actor: Mark Rylance (Bridge of Spies) – Right. Spielberg’s Bridge of Spies was almost as underrated as Steve Jobs, and it’s great to see Rylance getting the acclaim he deserves.

Best Supporting Actress: Alicia Vikander (The Danish Girl) – I cannot comment as I have yet to see The Danish Girl. However Vikander is one of my favourite current actresses, purely for her roles in A Royal Affair and Ex Machina.

Best Original Screenplay: Tom McCarthy and Josh Singer (Spotlight) – Wrong. This absolutely should have been Inside Out, by far the most original mainstream film of last year.

Best Adapted Screenplay: Adam McKay and Charles Randolph (The Big Short) – Wrong. Carol would have been my choice.

Best Cinematography: Emmanuel Lubezki (The Revenant) – Wrong. The Revenant looks fabulous, but Roger Deakins should have got this purely for that twilight, metaphorical descent into the underworld shot in Sicario. Then again, Deakins should have won a number of times already, most notably for The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. On that occasion, I genuinely thought Academy voters were blind.

Best Documentary: Amy – Right, although Cartel Land was arguably equally deserving.

Best Animated Film: Inside Out – Right. In an exceptional year for animation, Inside Out deserved to win not only in this category, but in the best picture category.

Best Sound Editing: Mad Max: Fury Road – Right I suppose, although The Force Awakens was equally deserving.

Best Sound Mixing: Mad Max: Fury Road – As above, really.

Best Film Editing: Mad Max: Fury Road – And again, as above.

Best Foreign Language Film: Son of Saul – I cannot comment as I have yet to see any of the nominees. I was surprised The Assassin did not get a nomination though. Or A Girl Walks Home Alone at Night for that matter.

Best Music Score: Ennio Morricone (The Hateful Eight) – Wrong. Of the nominees, the right choice. But I wanted Michael Giacchino to win for Inside Out, and he didn’t even get a nomination.

Best Production Design: Mad Max Fury Road – Right. The design in that film was incredible, so no argument from me.

Best Visual Effects: Ex Machina – Wrong. Of the nominees, a decent choice. But I wanted Ant-Man to win for that bath sequence alone, and it didn’t even get nominated.

Tune in again next year to see if the reforms they put in place will make any difference as to whether a deserving best picture actually gets voted for. In this category the Academy gets it wrong almost all the time, and this year was no exception.

Flashbacks

studies

Novelists are often advised not to write flashbacks. Or at least, if we do, we are told we’d better be a seasoned genius, not a wet-behind-the-ears first time novelist.

Like all other advice of this kind, I take it with a pinch (and occasionally a sack) of salt. Flashbacks are like any other narrative device. They can be done well or badly. I have not used them before unless you count a framing device in Children of the Folded Valley, in which case, the bulk of the novel is a flashback, technically speaking.

However, in a novel I wrote last year entitled The Irresistible Summons, I finally took the plunge and included flashbacks when I could think of no better alternative. The three chapters in question are staggered throughout the first half of the novel, and gradually reveal vital backstory that could only otherwise be told by one character to another in a lengthy explanation of something that took place in her childhood. This would have been less dramatic, and it would also have robbed the story of the emotional power I wanted it to contain.

There then comes the thorny question of where to place the flashbacks amid the main narrative so it feels seamless and not an intrusion. This proved fiendishly tricky, but with a bit of rewriting and other jiggery-pokery, I think I got away with it. The three individuals who have read early drafts all agreed that the flashbacks were both integral and well-placed. Cue huge sigh of relief from yours truly.

So yes, whilst flashbacks are a difficult trick to pull off, they are sometimes worth including in my view.

Film Review – Bone Tomahawk

la-et-mn-bone-tomahawk-review-20151023

“Not for the faint of heart” and “strong stomach required” seem slightly inadequate as warnings for Bone Tomahawk, an unsettling and effective western/horror hybrid from writer/director S Craig Zahler. So yes, let’s get the warnings out of the way upfront: contains extremely graphic 18-certificate scenes of violence, blood, gore and dismemberment. Think The Searchers meets an early 1980s video nasty like Cannibal Ferox.

To his credit, Zahler knows how to use such extreme gore very effectively. Early potentially gruesome sequences are restrained in comparison with the latter segment of the film. Instead, Zahler wisely builds his story slowly, opening with an unsettling sequence of two murderous thieves inadvertently violating the taboo of a Native American burial ground and thus incurring their wrath. However, this group are not any known Native American tribe but rather a savage, nightmarish, cannibal breed known as troglodytes by both other Native Americans and western settlers alike. They are a seemingly supernatural, demonic menace; entirely other, resembling orcs rather than humans. And they are very, very deadly.

Seeking vengeance, the troglodytes kill one of the two thieves then pursue the other to a nearby town. The surviving thief is promptly arrested by Sheriff Hunt (Kurt Russell) with disastrous results leading to captives being taken by the troglodytes. A rescue mission is promptly undertaken by Hunt, his deputy Chicory (Richard Jenkins), a bigoted but enigmatic wealthy Indian killer called Brooder (Matthew Fox), and Arthur (Patrick Wilson) a temporarily crippled cowhand who insists on going because his wife Samantha (Lili Simmons) was one of those captured.

During their quest, the film takes time to get to know these flawed but fascinating characters, and consequently the audience ends up really rooting for them. Performances are all solid, with Kurt Russell being the clear stand-out. Even Fox’s Brooder, who obviously draws some inspiration from John Wayne’s character in The Searchers, is compelling albeit repellent. Also, because utter barbarism is what they are up against, whatever shades of grey exists amongst the posse seems positively squeaky clean in comparison. In short, this does what The Hateful Eight did not despite being the technically more proficient movie: it gives us someone to root for.

Then, as I mentioned earlier, it gets violent. Really violent. And gory. Really gory. You might end up watching from between your fingers, but Bone Tomahawk is a very satisfying genre bending movie for those who have the constitution for it. I’d say it’s destined for cult status.

Film Review – The Assassin

TheAssassinCannes

Loosely based on a seventh-century Chinese folk tale, The Assassin concerns royal executioner Yinniang, who has a crisis of conscience during the dying embers of the Tang Dynasty, when the Emperor tried to regain control over increasingly defiant provinces.

The first thing to report is that the film is one of the most superbly shot in recent memory, and really must be seen on a big screen. Filmed in mostly Academy ratio 1:33 format, the extra height allows director Hou Hsiao-Hsien and cinematographer Ping Bin Lee some truly magnificent compositions. From the opening monochrome prologue to the dazzling title card shot – a melancholy sunset over a pond – to candlelit interiors where figures are glimpsed lurking behind veils, and spectacular outdoor images of silver birch, cliffs, mountains, mist covered rivers and remote settlements in both golden sunlit and bleak winter landscapes, this is the textbook definition of achingly beautiful.

Featuring impeccable, restrained performances, The Assassin certainly will test the patience of some audiences, especially those expecting an action packed saga akin to Ang Lee’s Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon or Zhang Yimou’s Hero or House of Flying Daggers. This is a much quieter affair, though no less effective in its very limited fight scenes. In fact, they are arguably all the more dramatic for being interspersed with long but compelling tableaux sequences of silence or slow conversation, often consisting of lingering static shots.

Themes of honour, love vs duty and political skulduggery are all intriguingly explored, along with a hint of black magic and the supernatural. That said the plot can be a touch hard to follow at times, with exposition taking a backseat to atmosphere. The symbolism of plants, costumes and colour may also be lost on western viewers unfamiliar with the cultural semiotics in tales of this kind. However, even if you lose your way a little with the story and symbolism, this is a subtle and sublime film worth getting lost in. Not one for the casual cinemagoer perhaps, but definitely highly recommended to the seasoned cineaste.

Get Children of the Folded Valley FREE – for five days only!

Get my most successful novel Children of the Folded Valley absolutely FREE on Kindle from Amazon – for five days only!

Folded Valley cover

Here is the blurb from the back of the book:

During a journey to visit his estranged sister, James Harper recalls his childhood growing up in a mysterious valley cut off from the outside world, as part of a cult called the Folded Valley Fellowship.

In this seemingly idyllic world, the charismatic Benjamin Smiley claimed to be protecting his followers from an impending nuclear apocalypse.

But the valley concealed a terrifying secret.

A secret that would change Smiley’s followers forever.

Here is a sample of the many raves reviews (mainly from the Amazon page):

“I don’t usually leave reviews but I felt so strongly about encouraging people to read this fantastic book. It had me captured from start to finish. At one stage in the book I actually thought it was a true story.” – Paul, Amazon.

“The use of re-written religious doctrine to control, govern and frighten is particularly chilling… Full marks to Simon Dillon for this creative and highly readable novel.” – Around Robin, Amazon.

“Creepy and unnerving. Kept me gripped the whole way through.” – Lucyboo, Amazon.

“I couldn’t put it down.” – Bukky, Amazon.

“Really well written, well thought through, compassionate… Full of empathy.” – Over, Amazon.

“So well written, you could believe it was a memoir.” – Shelley, Amazon.

“A perturbing and very original story… The ending is magnificent.” – Joan, Goodreads.

Of course, if digital books aren’t your thing, print copies can be ordered here (alas, not free).

Film Review – Deadpool

deadpool-gallery-03-gallery-image

To quote Vyvyan from The Young Ones: “Even mindless violence seems boring today.”

I am not familiar with the Deadpool source material, but given the sheer level of foaming at the mouth from those I know that devour comics, I was intrigued to see the film that many of them are proclaiming to be a masterpiece. After viewing it however, I must confess I am rather at a loss to explain their enthusiasm.

Clearly director Tim Miller is aiming for the disreputable tone of anarchic, iconoclastic movies like Kingsman: The Secret Service, or more obviously Kick-Ass, with all manner of f-word laden gratuitous violence, sex and a string of potty-mouthed jokes. Consider yourself duly warned: Deadpool is absolutely not for children.

The threadbare plot involves a sort-of origin story told in flashback detailing how Wade Wilson (Ryan Reynolds) came to be Deadpool, after volunteering for experimental surgery when he is diagnosed with terminal cancer. Prior to this we see him meet, have vigorous sex with and fall for Vanessa (Morena Baccarin – Brody’s wife from TV’s Homeland). This romance would more effective were it not for the fact that I find Wade an incredibly irritating character. By contrast, Vanessa is much more likeable, even if she does effectively come off as a nerd’s fantasy girlfriend.

Along the way, Wade brushes shoulders with Colossus and Negasonic Teenage Warhead from the X-Men franchise, cue stupid “meta” jokes about not being sure whether Professor Xavier is Stewart or McAvoy these days, or that the studio couldn’t afford additional X-Men for this film. Frankly Deadpool’s spoofy self-awareness, which includes fourth wall breaking and a ton of smug, self-congratulatory, self-consciously hip jokes, becomes really quite wearing. Give me old fashioned proper storytelling any day.

I don’t mind films being offensive, but Deadpool felt as though it were trying too hard to be offensive for no good reason. Instead it came off as tiresome and frankly a bit boring. It lacks the satirical bite and unexpected charm of the afore-mentioned Kick-Ass which had surprising depths beyond its mindless violence and Daily Mail baiting child actors spewing obscenities. The only time I really laughed in Deadpool was during the self-deprecating opening credits (“Directed by an Overpaid Tool”, “Starring a British Bad Guy”, for instance).

Perhaps I am in a minority as everyone else in the cinema guffawed heartily at every new penis joke. But much as I love to indulge my puerile sense of humour, on this occasion I failed to be amused. I get that Wade Wilson is meant to be an anti-hero, but he just isn’t a very interesting one. Really he’s just obnoxious and annoying. Like the film in general.

Valentine’s Day Special: Ten great gory scenes

Today, because it is Valentine’s Day, I am offering a little counter-programming: an article about gore in movies.

Wild_Bunch_remake_featured_photo_gallery

Blood and gore in film can be used a variety of ways – to repulse, to add authenticity, dramatic punch, or sometimes to scare, and even for darkly comic purposes. I make no apology for defending the well-deployed use of blood and gore in film, regardless of what some of my fellow believers think about such things (although I do sometimes wonder if they have actually read the Bible, which is, in parts, an absolute bloodbath).

So here are ten great gory moments on film, in no particular order of merit:

The Omen – Let’s start with my all-time-favourite decapitation scene (yes, I have one of those). David Warner’s unfortunate neck/pane of glass interface is shown from multiple angles in one glorious moment of gory ecstasy. Horrible, unforgettable and (like the rest of the film), impossible to take seriously.

Witness – The murder scene early in the film is an outstanding example of dramatic justification for graphic imagery. When it was first shown on BBC1, the film was cut to remove the two bloodiest shots, which to my mind made the scene about a tenth as powerful (I had previously seen it uncut). Director Peter Weir even now wonders if he went a bit too far, but I don’t think he did.

The Godfather – The first really nasty scene in Francis Ford Coppola’s gangster epic occurs when a movie mogul refuses to play ball with a mobster lawyer leaning on him on behalf of the Don. The result? A horse’s head left in the mogul’s bed. Gruesome, terrifying, dramatic, and slightly absurd.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan – Parasitical, mind controlling worms burrow their way into (and later out of) the ears of Chekhov and Captain Tyrell. Although censored in the UK to obtain a PG certificate, there was a famously gruesome treat for UK children in the 1980s when the film was shown on ITV in its uncut version.

The Wild Bunch – I find it almost impossible to choose between the massacres that bookend Sam Peckinpah’s western masterpiece, but for sheer bloody, invented-modern-screen-violence, slo-mo squib bursting spectacle, I’m going with the finale. An influence on everything from John Woo’s Hong Kong thrillers, to just about every Hollywood action movie ever since.

Breaking Bad – Yes, this is a TV series so technically shouldn’t be on this list, but there is a particular shot at the end of series 4, involving a bomb and a drug kingpin, that will remain forever scarred in the memories of those who have seen it. As gruesome dramatic flourishes go, this one is truly remarkable.

A Prophet – Twenty minutes into this extraordinary French prison drama is a murder so bloody, so messy, so utterly horrific and potentially alienating to the viewer, that I couldn’t help but watch from between my fingers. And yet, by the time the end credits rolled, I had to admit that the film overall would have been less powerful had the scene’s extreme content been toned down.

Raiders of the Lost Ark – The only reason Steven Spielberg’s film gets away with a PG certificate is because the villains are Nazis. Throughout the course of the film they are stabbed, shot, burned, blown up, run over and chopped up by plane propellers. And that’s before we even get to the notorious ending, when God sends the Angel of Death to melt their faces in spectacularly bloody fashion. As satisfying today as the time you saw it as a child and cheered gleefully, whilst wondering just why the heck your parents had allowed you to see it.

Saving Private Ryan – Spielberg again, but this time with a much more serious story, recreated with staggering attention to detail. The opening massacre at Omaha Beach on D-Day is, according to veterans, phenomenally authentic. When striving for an accurate depiction of warfare I believe it is irresponsible not to make it horrifically gruesome, and this scene alone changed the way war movies were made from that point.

Alien – I started this list with a horror movie, so let’s end with one. The “chest-burster” scene with John Hurt is now so well known that it is difficult to imagine the impact on an unsuspecting viewer (which I was, the first time I saw it). I often say that a great horror film needs just one spectacularly bloody moment to establish the threat, and this is certainly such a moment. Director Ridley Scott wisely kept the remaining deaths almost entirely off-screen, because it made them much scarier. The viewer has already seen what this creature is capable of, so there is no need to show it again.

There are loads more examples I could have included in this list. For instance, I can hardly believe I didn’t include any zombie movies or Japanese horror. Can’t believe I left out Scanners and Carrie either. And I’ve omitted “comedy” gore (eg Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Shaun of the Dead, early Peter Jackson movies like Bad Taste and Braindead). Perhaps I should make another list, just for the comedy stuff…

Film Review – The Iron Giant (Signature Edition)

giantandhogarth

First things first: if you have not seen The Iron Giant, Brad Bird’s criminally underrated animation masterpiece from 1999, find a screening of this incredibly welcome re-release near you and check it out immediately. The film inexplicably bombed at the box office in 1999, despite excellent reviews. I saw it with my wife, during our honeymoon, at an otherwise deserted screening during the original release. Since then repeat viewings have confirmed it as my personal favourite animated film of all time.

Very loosely based on Ted Hughes’ novel The Iron Man (which I also highly recommend), The Iron Giant is set in 1957 at the height of the Cold War when paranoia about the Red Menace gripped America. After a gigantic robot crash lands in Maine, he is unable to recall who he is or why he is on Earth. The giant subsequently encounters lonely boy Hogarth, and a great friendship begins. Unfortunately, military backed US government investigator Kent Mansley is also aware of the giant, and believing it could be Russian wants to shoot first and ask questions later.

Bird gets top marks since frankly his direction here equals that of Spielberg. It’s no accident, or bad thing, that in places The Iron Giant reminds one of E.T. The Extra Terrestrial. The superb 2D hand-drawn animation, presented in beautiful widescreen, really, really benefits from being seen at a cinema. Certain shots, such as the opening in space, or the giant’s menacing first appearance behind Hogarth in the top right hand corner of the frame, or the wide angle of the giant stomping away from Maine having been warned that people aren’t ready to see him yet, simply do not have the same impact on television.

The vocal work is terrific, including Jennifer Aniston, who I normally have an irrational dislike of, as Hogarth’s widowed mother (it is hinted that Hogarth’s father died in the latter part of World War II). It also includes Vin Diesel as the giant; his greatest role as far as I’m concerned. On top of that, the late Michael Kamen contributes a suitably stirring music score that enhances the laughter, thrills and tears that ensue as the plot moves towards its inevitable, tragic climax.

In retrospect, perhaps there are certain factors that might have caused the film to flop. For a start, it was originally released at the same time as Toy Story 2 and Tarzan, which had much bigger marketing campaigns, Burger King tie-in meals, and so on. The Iron Giant is a more subversive offering, especially in the way it gently pokes fun at 1950s sci-fi B-movies (“Darn, a perfectly good brain wasted!”), McCarthyist Communist alarmism and the Cold War propaganda of the time (for example the notorious “Duck and Cover” information films about what to do in the event of a nuclear strike).

More importantly, the film contains an unfashionable and deeply committed pacifist message. When the giant is attacked by US troops, it reacts defensively, at one point turning itself into a War of the Worlds type killing machine. Consequently, despite the fact that this is a tremendously heroic adventure story, it is also, crucially, a film that for once does not invite children to cheer at violence. Another unconventional element in the story is that Hogarth is the teacher/mentor figure, not any adult or even the giant. He explains to the giant about morality, life, death and the ability to choose good over evil.

(Spoilers follow)

With regard to the latter point, this extended version (dubbed the Signature Edition) can now be added to that very select list of extended editions whereby the new scenes really do enhance the already brilliant original. The first of the two new scenes involves an additional exchange between Hogarth’s mother and Dean, the scrap dealer/modern artist with whom Hogarth conspires to keep the giant a secret, and with whom Hogarth’s mother eventually becomes romantically entangled. This scene merely paves the way a little more for the outcome of that particular subplot.

However, the second of the two new scenes is far more critical, in that it underscores the main theme of the story. The giant has a mysterious nightmare which hints at his hitherto unknown past. Ambiguity remains to a certain extent, but just enough information is revealed to give additional weight to his ultimate choices. The giant might have been designed as a planet conquering killing machine, he might have been sent for that purpose, but he is not obliged to fulfil that role. He can choose to be something else (for example, the giant poignantly decides he would rather emulate Superman).

Another excellent thing about The Iron Giant is the way it explores the potential both for great good and great evil within human nature. Despite initial terror at discovering a huge alien robot inside the forest, Hogarth conquers his fear and saves the giant from electrocution, thus initiating their friendship. By contrast, Kent Mansley’s continual tirades of cowardice and fear-mongering are corrosive, paranoid and delusional to the point that he is prepared to recklessly order a nuclear strike on the giant, despite the fact that by that point the military have seen the giant is defensive only, reacting only when they fire on it.

Of course, this leads to the famous, tear-inducing “You stay, I go, no following” moment, whereby the giant takes on a Christ-like role and sacrifices himself to save everyone (even Mansley). Really, for a family film The Iron Giant could hardly grapple with weightier issues, and if anything this new version is even more brave, brilliant and deeply moving than the shorter cut.

In summary, do yourself a favour and see this at the cinema. I know it’s a cliché to talk about great fun for all the family, but The Iron Giant really is one of the very, very best films for people of all ages ever made.

Film Review – Goosebumps

lead_960Goosebumps, based on the popular children’s novels by RL Stine, could have so easily been terrible. As it happens it is a good notch above average, thanks to a witty screenplay by Darren Lemke, who plays the risky “meta” card with just about enough wit to get away with it.

The plot isn’t based on any one Goosebumps novel, but instead invents a story involving all of them. Recently bereaved teen Zach (Dylan Minnette) moves to the small town of Madison, Delaware with his mother (Amy Ryan), in an attempt to start a new life. He strikes up a friendship with girl-next-door Hannah (Odeya Rush), only to be told by her mysteriously overbearing father (Jack Black) that he should stay away from her and their house. Of course, circumstances are contrived for Zach to ignore this warning. As a result he subsequently discovers that Hannah’s father is in fact RL Stine (here’s the “meta” card I mentioned earlier), and that his typewritten Goosebumps originals will unleash real monsters in the world if unlocked. The latter point Zach only discovers after accidentally opening one…

Enjoyable mayhem ensues, with enough monsters to satisfy the most scare-crazy child. Highlights include the abominable snowman, a werewolf, zombies, a very nasty levitating poodle, an army of psychopathic garden gnomes, a giant preying-mantis, and a deeply unsettling ventriloquist puppet which come to life (as ventriloquist puppets have been known to do throughout cinema and television history, in everything from Dead of Night to classic Doctor Who story The Talons of Weng Chiang).

Clearly director Rob Letterman enjoyed Gremlins as a child, because that is what Goosebumps frequently resembles, especially in one kitchen set scene involving the afore-mentioned garden gnomes.  It also has that high-concept 1980s movie feel, with resourceful teenagers dispensing the nasties in all manner of ingenious ways. There is a surprising amount of wit to spare between CGI monster set pieces, especially in one scene involving a policeman and his over-zealous rookie, and another nice running gag about Stephen King. Performances are all decent (with Jack Black surprisingly restrained), and Danny Elfman contributes a suitable score akin to what he frequently writes for Tim Burton.

There are some rough edges, and plot logic goes out of the window as soon as the first monster appears, but quite honestly it hardly matters. Goosebumps is an agreeably deranged bit of scary monster fun.

Adverbs: The Work of the Devil?

adverbsOne frequently reads writing advice to the effect that adverbs are the source of all evil. Some of these articles are so vehement I actually checked the Bible to see if adverbs were a result of Adam and Eve eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in the book of Genesis.

My own, rather more liberal view on adverbs is simple: if you use them to clarify, no problem.

For example, in “Simon smiled happily” the “happily” is superfluous. On the other hand “Simon smiled cruelly” could work well, depending on the context of course. If Simon is busy sadistically torturing a victim, then “cruelly” would also be superfluous as his sadistic acts speak for themselves. On the other hand such a sentence could work if the expression turns a scene. Perhaps you think Simon is a good guy then all of a sudden he smiles cruelly, indicating bad things to come.

Another example: people can sigh for different reasons. “Simon sighed…” Contentedly? Wearily? Reluctantly? Again it depends on the individual scene in which Simon sighs, but sometimes adding the adverb helps.

In short, for me, good use of adverbs is no bad thing. As usual it is all about context.