Hi All (that may massively overestimate the number of people who ever read this... perhaps I should say 'hello you' instead. What the hell - I'm sticking with optimism!)
I've taken the step and moved over to wordpress.
I can now be found here:
http://strangerthanflicktion.wordpress.com/
Please come and join me over there. The LFF is coming up so the blog will soon be busy again.
Lack of updates this year can all be blamed on the Olympics as I took part in the Opening Ceremony. One word. Amazing!
Sunday, 23 September 2012
Sunday, 26 February 2012
Oscar 2012 Predictions
Best Picture
"The Artist" Thomas Langmann, Producer
Actor in a Leading Role
Jean Dujardin in "The Artist"
Actor in a Supporting Role
Christopher Plummer in "Beginners"
Actress in a Leading Role
Viola Davis in "The Help"
Actress in a Supporting Role
Octavia Spencer in "The Help"
Animated Feature Film
"Rango" Gore Verbinski
Art Direction
"Hugo" Production Design: Dante Ferretti; Set Decoration: Francesca Lo Schiavo
Cinematography
"The Tree of Life" Emmanuel Lubezki
Costume Design
"The Artist" Mark Bridges
Directing
"The Artist" Michel Hazanavicius
Documentary (Feature)
"Pina" Wim Wenders and Gian-Piero Ringel
Documentary (Short Subject)
"The Tsunami and the Cherry Blossom" Lucy Walker and Kira Carstensen
Film Editing
"The Artist" Anne-Sophie Bion and Michel Hazanavicius
Foreign Language Film
"A Separation" Iran
Makeup
"The Iron Lady" Mark Coulier and J. Roy Helland
Music (Original Score)
"The Artist" Ludovic Bource
Music (Original Song)
"Man or Muppet" from "The Muppets" Music and Lyric by Bret McKenzie
Short Film (Animated)
"A Morning Stroll" Grant Orchard and Sue Goffe
Short Film (Live Action)
"The Shore" Terry George and Oorlagh George
Sound Editing
"Drive" Lon Bender and Victor Ray Ennis
Sound Mixing
"Hugo" Tom Fleischman and John Midgley
Visual Effects
"Rise of the Planet of the Apes" Joe Letteri, Dan Lemmon, R. Christopher White and Daniel Barrett
Writing (Adapted Screenplay)
"The Descendants" Screenplay by Alexander Payne and Nat Faxon & Jim Rash
Writing (Original Screenplay)
"Midnight in Paris" Written by Woody Allen
Thursday, 26 January 2012
The Oscar nominations and a sense of disappointment
Well now, that was kind of disappointing, wasn’t it? The films are rather dull and there were no real surprises in the acting nominations (Gary Oldman aside). There is a yearly accusation that the Oscars are pretty dull but this is the first year I can recall when I have failed to be excited by so many elements of the awards. I admit that this may have something to do with the fact that I haven’t seen many of the Best Picture nominees (3 to be exact) and therefore many of the big hitters, but by this point of the year I have usually seen (or at least been excited about seeing) most of the expected nominees. They just haven’t really sparked my imagination this year. I admit that I was sorry to miss The Tree of Life and I’ve heard enough good things about Midnight in Paris to hope to catch it at some backwater cinema but few of the nominees really grabbed me in a way to make me rush to the cinema on opening night.
It disappoints me that there are no real envelope pushers in amongst the Best Picture list. I’m not naïve enough to think that Oscar has ever really been about such a thing but (although it has tried on occasion) but I wonder if the voters often look for ‘Oscar-worthy’ films rather than good films (how else can we explain the inclusion of Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close?) Is this an old-fashioned vote? Is there a collection of old-timer academy members running the show and when the (currently) younger crop take over we’ll see a change in the scheme of things and braver films rewarded?
But they have been in the past; certainly the recent past. There Will Be Blood and No Country for Old Men were hardly hand-wringing Oscar classics and yet they lead the race and had all the form during the precursors. Oscar also has a tradition of rewarding ‘brave’ acting performances (beautiful made ugly – Charlize Theron, Nicole Kidman; controversial storylines – Halle Berry, Tom Hanks; disability – Daniel Day-Lewis, Dustin Hoffman) and yet there is a distinct lack of this kind of nomination this year, Rooney Mara aside.
Perhaps, after a few years of trying to look cool and edgy (Crash, Precious, No Country for Old Men), the academy have decided it is time to reward some of the good old-fashioned pieces of work – family fare; relatively gentle and undemanding films. Could this explain the snubbing of Bridesmaids and Girl with the Dragon Tattoo when it came to Best Picture? Wasn’t the reason for extending the list to 10 to reward these ‘outsider’ films? The non-Oscary box-office and critical successes? And in a year that presents only 9 nominees for Best Picture this is particularly baffling and rather a slap in the face for films across the board. Were there really only 9 good films this year? Sorry. Were there really only 9 Oscar-worthy films this year?
It certainly does seem like there’s a theme this year – nostalgia and Hollywood glamour. This has happened before (the Western year, the Lord of the Rings year) so shouldn’t come as much of a surprise. It really feels like they wanted to reward those films that celebrated cinema and old-fashioned film making. Hugo and The Artist, the biggest successes nomination wise, both celebrate the history of film, War Horse is a back-to-basics, luscious Spielberg movie (plus a reward for doing what he does best rather than throwing in his lot with new technologies for Tintin), Michelle Williams and Kenneth Branagh are playing iconic Hollywood legends, Woody Allen is a former glory boy back to his best and Meryl Streep, well Meryl Streep was in a film so bound to get nominated.
Theme aside I still think it's a pity that Drive was not nominated (more on the snubs at a later date); it's sad that so many challenging and rewarding films fell by the wayside as they so often do in big ceremonies. The Oscars don't mean much to a lot of people but I've always loved them in a predictable kind of way while looking to the Independent Spirit Awards for the interesting winners.
But I've only seen 3 of the 9 'best pictures of the year' so what would I know? Come back in a week and I may be proclaiming War Horse to be the greatest thing I've ever witnessed. But I don't think so. Come on Oscar voters. Throw up a couple of surprises on the big night and you've got every chance of winning me over again.
Sunday, 22 January 2012
The Help
Tate Taylor has created a bright, broad and sassy film that probably won't be bothering Oscar as was predicted given the subject matter due to a lack of hand-wringing (although Octavia Spencer is gathering well-earned steam) but it is good fun, moving and worthy of much praise.
The Help is the story of the civil rights movement boiled down to the basics. Aibileen and Minny are maids working in Jackson Mississippi - an area not exactly known for its liberalism - who come forward with their stories for a book to be written from the perspective of the coloured maids of the town. The writer is a wealthy while girl, Eugenia 'Skeeter' Phelan, who has been encouraged by a publisher to write about what disturbs her and hits upon this topic after her best friend writes a bill to make it a requirement for all homes with coloured help to have a separate outdoor bathroom for them to use as they carry different diseases. With the civil rights movement hotting up the publisher encourages her to complete the writing "before it all blows over".
While the tone may be a little too light for some (I'm currently reading the book and even only 72 pages in there is more depth and darkness) Taylor has succeeded in showing the lives of these women as they work in the houses of people who become enemies and those that become friends. Through Aibileen and Minny we see both sides of this experience as their work goes unappreciated and their skills belittled, at least until Minny finds a somewhat happier household to work in.
As the villain of the piece Bryce Dallas Howard brings a sickly sweet brittleness to Hilly Holbrook and makes her genuinely dangerous, smiling through her threats and slowly but surely destroying people's lives. Octavia Spencer is absolutely wonderful has the outspoken, sassy Minny - a woman who knows her place but doesn't have to be happy about it. She bubbles with attitude but is a big softy underneath as we get to witness and enjoy while her relationship with Jessica Chastain's outcast Celia Foote develops (another brilliant Chastain performance - what a year she's had!). Emma Stone is little more than the reporter of events but the friendship with the woman who raised her is an integral part of the plot and Stone convinces as the courageous girl who won't sit back and let people fob her off with half-truths and weak excuses.
But Viola Davis is the emotional centre of the film. Her middle-aged, vastly experienced Aibileen is downtrodden and heartbroken but stoic and strong. Hers are the eyes through which we see the others and hers is the courage which changes the course of the film. Viola Davis played another put-upon, sore-hearted woman in Doubt and moved me to tears in one scene so it is just wonderful to see her carrying this film with such warmth and depth of character.
Taylor's glossy adaptation is a thoroughly enjoyable watch - 3.5/5
The Help is the story of the civil rights movement boiled down to the basics. Aibileen and Minny are maids working in Jackson Mississippi - an area not exactly known for its liberalism - who come forward with their stories for a book to be written from the perspective of the coloured maids of the town. The writer is a wealthy while girl, Eugenia 'Skeeter' Phelan, who has been encouraged by a publisher to write about what disturbs her and hits upon this topic after her best friend writes a bill to make it a requirement for all homes with coloured help to have a separate outdoor bathroom for them to use as they carry different diseases. With the civil rights movement hotting up the publisher encourages her to complete the writing "before it all blows over".
While the tone may be a little too light for some (I'm currently reading the book and even only 72 pages in there is more depth and darkness) Taylor has succeeded in showing the lives of these women as they work in the houses of people who become enemies and those that become friends. Through Aibileen and Minny we see both sides of this experience as their work goes unappreciated and their skills belittled, at least until Minny finds a somewhat happier household to work in.
As the villain of the piece Bryce Dallas Howard brings a sickly sweet brittleness to Hilly Holbrook and makes her genuinely dangerous, smiling through her threats and slowly but surely destroying people's lives. Octavia Spencer is absolutely wonderful has the outspoken, sassy Minny - a woman who knows her place but doesn't have to be happy about it. She bubbles with attitude but is a big softy underneath as we get to witness and enjoy while her relationship with Jessica Chastain's outcast Celia Foote develops (another brilliant Chastain performance - what a year she's had!). Emma Stone is little more than the reporter of events but the friendship with the woman who raised her is an integral part of the plot and Stone convinces as the courageous girl who won't sit back and let people fob her off with half-truths and weak excuses.
But Viola Davis is the emotional centre of the film. Her middle-aged, vastly experienced Aibileen is downtrodden and heartbroken but stoic and strong. Hers are the eyes through which we see the others and hers is the courage which changes the course of the film. Viola Davis played another put-upon, sore-hearted woman in Doubt and moved me to tears in one scene so it is just wonderful to see her carrying this film with such warmth and depth of character.
Taylor's glossy adaptation is a thoroughly enjoyable watch - 3.5/5
Monday, 19 September 2011
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
"I made a mark"
Tomas Alfresdon, on the back of a very strong showing with Let the Right One In, follows up with a brave imagining of John le Carré's well-loved and oft adapted novel. At least he had the blessing of the author, who told him: "Please don't do the book, it already exists". This latest work has strengths similar to those of his breakthrough outing but in the same way, a few question marks remain.
The film revolves around the world of British secret agents of the early 70s but James Bond, this ain't. Despite growing up in Sweden, Alfredson was "breastfed" on British TV (which he proved by reeling off a number of production house themes and icons in the Q&A) and spoke of memories of "damp tweed". You can certainly see where he got his inspiration for this rather grey adaptation. Writer, Peter Straughan, also got in on the act claiming that, while James Bond worked in a world of black and white, le Carré's is a world of grey. And there's a lot of it on screen: overcast skies, grey buildings and even greyer men.
The central character, George Smiley (Gary Oldman), is ousted from these dull surroundings by these dull men in rather humiliating circumstances but is soon called back to investigate them and discover that they are maybe not quite so dull after all......
Smiley is given no real back story. indeed, he is barely given an introduction, walking silently through the opening scenes of the film; presented as a loner, an observer. He spends a great deal of the film in silence, does Gary Oldman, but he is always in command of this most difficult of performances. When he finally does open up into a most wonderful monologue you can't help but sit forward in your seat, leaning in for a more private audience with a master.
Smiley's main accomplice in this spy-spying-on-spies thriller is Benedict Cumberbatch's Peter Guillam. Rather a ladies man by all accounts, Guillam is from a new generation of agents but still fits in with the suited and silent brigade of those who came before him (albeit with a rather trendier haircut). The real youth of the piece is Ricki Tarr (a brilliant performance from Tom Hardy). He is the slightly more flashy of the set - going off-mission when he spies an opportunity (even if it is work related) with a pretty girl. Tarr is the emotional heart of the film, engaging and moving as he finally gives up on trying to keep his heart out of it. As for the other suits? We barely get to know them. We see them in meetings, in varying states of stress and distress, but we spend little time with them as Smiley focuses on their activities and we are encourage to watch but not to know. Toby Jones does the best of the four but even he seems to have very little screen time. Last but not least is Mark Strong as Jim Prideaux. Straughan told me that his was the character he most connected with when reading the book but I didn't find that that transferred to the screen. The character flits in and out of the story and feels almost an afterthought on many occasions.
As with Let the Right One In, Alfredson does a good job of focusing on the human aspects rather than anything too flashy (indeed Straughan spoke of concentrating on who the real victims of this quest for information are). This is where the strength of Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy lies. Absolutely, the attention to 70s detail is outstanding and the production design sticks to its brief brilliantly, but when focusing on Smiley and Tarr, this is when the film comes into its own. But there is very little pace to the piece and it lacks the one vital element for a thriller - suspense. There is only really one scene in which your palms get a little sweaty. In fact, as the film comes to its conclusion it feels rather deflating. The ending feels rushed and the film lacks the emotional punch to move it from the 'good' to the 'great' category.
Alfredson is expert at playing out a beautiful human story against a slightly inhuman backdrop and Tinker Tailor is a quiet, stately consideration of life as a loner, an observer. If only they hadn't had to squeeze the plot in. It isn't a thriller in much the same way that Let the Right One In wasn't a horror and it feels disappointing at the end not to have had more heart-racing moments. Despite being a very well put together piece, I fear I won't remember it in for long.
Too much damp tweed and not enough thrill. A rather empty thriller - 7/10
Tomas Alfresdon, on the back of a very strong showing with Let the Right One In, follows up with a brave imagining of John le Carré's well-loved and oft adapted novel. At least he had the blessing of the author, who told him: "Please don't do the book, it already exists". This latest work has strengths similar to those of his breakthrough outing but in the same way, a few question marks remain.
The film revolves around the world of British secret agents of the early 70s but James Bond, this ain't. Despite growing up in Sweden, Alfredson was "breastfed" on British TV (which he proved by reeling off a number of production house themes and icons in the Q&A) and spoke of memories of "damp tweed". You can certainly see where he got his inspiration for this rather grey adaptation. Writer, Peter Straughan, also got in on the act claiming that, while James Bond worked in a world of black and white, le Carré's is a world of grey. And there's a lot of it on screen: overcast skies, grey buildings and even greyer men.
The central character, George Smiley (Gary Oldman), is ousted from these dull surroundings by these dull men in rather humiliating circumstances but is soon called back to investigate them and discover that they are maybe not quite so dull after all......
Smiley is given no real back story. indeed, he is barely given an introduction, walking silently through the opening scenes of the film; presented as a loner, an observer. He spends a great deal of the film in silence, does Gary Oldman, but he is always in command of this most difficult of performances. When he finally does open up into a most wonderful monologue you can't help but sit forward in your seat, leaning in for a more private audience with a master.
Smiley's main accomplice in this spy-spying-on-spies thriller is Benedict Cumberbatch's Peter Guillam. Rather a ladies man by all accounts, Guillam is from a new generation of agents but still fits in with the suited and silent brigade of those who came before him (albeit with a rather trendier haircut). The real youth of the piece is Ricki Tarr (a brilliant performance from Tom Hardy). He is the slightly more flashy of the set - going off-mission when he spies an opportunity (even if it is work related) with a pretty girl. Tarr is the emotional heart of the film, engaging and moving as he finally gives up on trying to keep his heart out of it. As for the other suits? We barely get to know them. We see them in meetings, in varying states of stress and distress, but we spend little time with them as Smiley focuses on their activities and we are encourage to watch but not to know. Toby Jones does the best of the four but even he seems to have very little screen time. Last but not least is Mark Strong as Jim Prideaux. Straughan told me that his was the character he most connected with when reading the book but I didn't find that that transferred to the screen. The character flits in and out of the story and feels almost an afterthought on many occasions.
As with Let the Right One In, Alfredson does a good job of focusing on the human aspects rather than anything too flashy (indeed Straughan spoke of concentrating on who the real victims of this quest for information are). This is where the strength of Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy lies. Absolutely, the attention to 70s detail is outstanding and the production design sticks to its brief brilliantly, but when focusing on Smiley and Tarr, this is when the film comes into its own. But there is very little pace to the piece and it lacks the one vital element for a thriller - suspense. There is only really one scene in which your palms get a little sweaty. In fact, as the film comes to its conclusion it feels rather deflating. The ending feels rushed and the film lacks the emotional punch to move it from the 'good' to the 'great' category.
Alfredson is expert at playing out a beautiful human story against a slightly inhuman backdrop and Tinker Tailor is a quiet, stately consideration of life as a loner, an observer. If only they hadn't had to squeeze the plot in. It isn't a thriller in much the same way that Let the Right One In wasn't a horror and it feels disappointing at the end not to have had more heart-racing moments. Despite being a very well put together piece, I fear I won't remember it in for long.
Too much damp tweed and not enough thrill. A rather empty thriller - 7/10
Thursday, 8 September 2011
Let's all get excited about the London Film Festival
With the announcement of the full programme for this year's London Film Festival I have found myself wondering what I was thinking booking a holiday for the final week (this may very well scupper my chances of seeing the Surprise Film), taking a part in a musical with evening and weekend rehearsals in October, and moving house - therefore seriously depleting my LFF fund. The consequences of these decisions are even more disappointing as this is my first year of BFI membership and I was looking forward to putting it to good use.
However, these are the confines in which I work so, having scoured the programme online, the films I am planning to rush to buy tickets for are as follows:
50/50
Darwin
the Exchange
Hara Kiri
King Curling
Martha May Marcy Marlene
Mourning
Shame
(Surprise Film (if at all physically possible!)
Take Shelter
I will not be trying to see We Need to Talk About Kevin despite all of the brilliant things I've been hearing about it as it has a release date of October 21st anyway and despite the exceptional limitations I'm working with this year I'll be trying to see the same kind of selection of international and independent films that are unlikely to get a wide release post-festival. I'd love to see The Ides of March but I just don't think I can fit it in.
I was surprised to see that The Help is not listed and my immediate suspicion was that it might be the Surprise Film but as it is due to hit UK screens on 28th October I reckon that's less than likely.
Anybody else going and think I'm potentially missing something spectacular? And what are people's thoughts for the Surprise Film?
However, these are the confines in which I work so, having scoured the programme online, the films I am planning to rush to buy tickets for are as follows:
50/50
Darwin
the Exchange
Hara Kiri
King Curling
Martha May Marcy Marlene
Mourning
Shame
(Surprise Film (if at all physically possible!)
Take Shelter
I will not be trying to see We Need to Talk About Kevin despite all of the brilliant things I've been hearing about it as it has a release date of October 21st anyway and despite the exceptional limitations I'm working with this year I'll be trying to see the same kind of selection of international and independent films that are unlikely to get a wide release post-festival. I'd love to see The Ides of March but I just don't think I can fit it in.
I was surprised to see that The Help is not listed and my immediate suspicion was that it might be the Surprise Film but as it is due to hit UK screens on 28th October I reckon that's less than likely.
Anybody else going and think I'm potentially missing something spectacular? And what are people's thoughts for the Surprise Film?
Sunday, 5 June 2011
Win Win
"Whatever the fuck it takes"
With Win Win Tom McCarthy, he of outsider films The Station Agent and The Visitor, shifts his attention to a family man at the centre of his community. However, much like Finbar McBride and Walter, Paul Giamatti's Mike Flaherty is forced to reassess after a new person enters his life. This person is Kyle, a 16-year-old runaway attempting an escape from life with his drug-addicted mother and Kyle, it turns out, has a talent which Mike may be able to put to use to better his own life. For Mike is the local High School wrestling coach and a community lawyer and equally successful at both - that is to say, not very. His family seem blissfully oblivious to his law firm's troubles despite the constantly dropped hints like his unhappiness at the idea of hiring professionals to carry out work he feels he can do himself (lavatory fixing, tree felling).
Win Win is the story of an everyday guy making bad decision after bad decision but even while you hold your head in your hands and pray for him to stop, you revel in the comedy of the situation. But when Kyle's mother arrives on the scene Mike's life is once again turned on its head as he finds that his bad decisions can't be ignored forever. Melanie Lynskey brings a brittle presence to this rather gentle comedy and in forcing Mike's hand delivers the dramatic element of the script, yet McCarthy manages to avoid the cloying cliches of the genre, bringing the story to a satisfactory feel-good ending without the sense of disappointment which follows when a witty film sinks into sentiment.
Paul Giamatti is excellent as the good guy gone surprisingly (and rather pathetically) bad. He underplays everything allowing the more colourful characters to grab the attention and none do this better than his friends Stephen (Jeffrey Tambor) and Terry (Bobby Cannavale), an hilarious duo of best intentions and ego. Cannavale gets most of the big laughs as the overgrown spoilt man-child dealing badly with the breakdown of his relationship and suffering from some overly nostalgic form of midlife crisis.
But special mention must go to debutante Alex Shaffer. His Kyle is subdued and gentle whist hiding a lot of pain and great strength underneath. The impact that he has on and the relationship he builds with his adoptive family is genuine and moving.
A gentle character-driven comedy that ticks all of the best McCarthy boxes.
- 8/10
With Win Win Tom McCarthy, he of outsider films The Station Agent and The Visitor, shifts his attention to a family man at the centre of his community. However, much like Finbar McBride and Walter, Paul Giamatti's Mike Flaherty is forced to reassess after a new person enters his life. This person is Kyle, a 16-year-old runaway attempting an escape from life with his drug-addicted mother and Kyle, it turns out, has a talent which Mike may be able to put to use to better his own life. For Mike is the local High School wrestling coach and a community lawyer and equally successful at both - that is to say, not very. His family seem blissfully oblivious to his law firm's troubles despite the constantly dropped hints like his unhappiness at the idea of hiring professionals to carry out work he feels he can do himself (lavatory fixing, tree felling).
Win Win is the story of an everyday guy making bad decision after bad decision but even while you hold your head in your hands and pray for him to stop, you revel in the comedy of the situation. But when Kyle's mother arrives on the scene Mike's life is once again turned on its head as he finds that his bad decisions can't be ignored forever. Melanie Lynskey brings a brittle presence to this rather gentle comedy and in forcing Mike's hand delivers the dramatic element of the script, yet McCarthy manages to avoid the cloying cliches of the genre, bringing the story to a satisfactory feel-good ending without the sense of disappointment which follows when a witty film sinks into sentiment.
Paul Giamatti is excellent as the good guy gone surprisingly (and rather pathetically) bad. He underplays everything allowing the more colourful characters to grab the attention and none do this better than his friends Stephen (Jeffrey Tambor) and Terry (Bobby Cannavale), an hilarious duo of best intentions and ego. Cannavale gets most of the big laughs as the overgrown spoilt man-child dealing badly with the breakdown of his relationship and suffering from some overly nostalgic form of midlife crisis.
But special mention must go to debutante Alex Shaffer. His Kyle is subdued and gentle whist hiding a lot of pain and great strength underneath. The impact that he has on and the relationship he builds with his adoptive family is genuine and moving.
A gentle character-driven comedy that ticks all of the best McCarthy boxes.
- 8/10
Sunday, 29 May 2011
Hanna
"Run little piggy"
Joe Wright's endlessly stylish cat-and-mouse film is a wonderful move away from the period dramas people may associate him with (how many people actually saw The Soloist after all?). His visually appealing take does justice to Seth Lochhead and David Farr's location-packed script, the emphasis always falling on where Hanna is which greatly influences who she is.
Hanna is an assassin - and a young one at that. Her whole life has been a training camp in which her father instills the rules she must follow to stay alive, "You must always be ready. Even when you're sleeping", but not the skills she needs when she finally comes up against that unknown quantity - other people.
Saoirse Ronan handles the difficult leading role of the youthful assassin with aplomb. It is a very physical role without much scripted opportunity to show the inner workings of the child, yet she brings real heart to the character and her new, confusing, experiences with civilisation are played with just the right amount of awkwardness and curiosity.
The plot is drip-fed to the audience. We're kept in the dark about the reason for the hunt for quite some time and even then new information hijacks us along the way. In fact it appears that we are discovering things at about the same rate as Hanna herself, who remains in the dark about important plot points almost until the bitter end.
Eric Bana is very good as the father who has chosen to raise his daughter very much to his own design; in such a way as to make it impossible for her to make an informed decision about her life's direction. It may seem strange and would make his character difficult to sympathise with were it not for the warmth with which he plays it. Cate Blanchett is rather a weak link with a drifting accent and a slightly-too-driven character to get to grips with when we are told so little about her (what is her obsession with her teeth all about?). However, I do wonder if the accent shifts are a character decision as she appears to get more Southern as she tries to come across as warm and caring.
The real star of the show is Tom Hollander's wearer of short-shorts extraordinaire, Isaacs. Equal parts camp and creepy he edges ever closer to his prey with ever more well-contained joy. It is yet another utterly brilliant performance to add to Hollander's seemingly never-ending list of extraordinary characters. Yep, I love that guy.
Really though, Hanna is a film in which the style, production design and score (a brilliant piece of work by the Chemical Brothers consisting of pounding beats and haunting nursery rhymes) carry much of the weight. Wright uses locations brilliantly, moving from snow to desert, populated urban areas to abandoned, overgrown sites with ease. And this movement allows us to see the characters at their most comfortable and completely out of their depth which only allows us to understand them better. As Hannah graduates from life with her father to the harsh landscapes of the compound and the desert, and then to the (much more dangerous) locales of urban life, we see that Wright is even more adept at pulling together different visual styles than his heroine is at adapting to the new constraints and information in her life.
Stylish with some very interesting performances - all underscored excellently by The Chemical Brothers - 8/10
Joe Wright's endlessly stylish cat-and-mouse film is a wonderful move away from the period dramas people may associate him with (how many people actually saw The Soloist after all?). His visually appealing take does justice to Seth Lochhead and David Farr's location-packed script, the emphasis always falling on where Hanna is which greatly influences who she is.
Hanna is an assassin - and a young one at that. Her whole life has been a training camp in which her father instills the rules she must follow to stay alive, "You must always be ready. Even when you're sleeping", but not the skills she needs when she finally comes up against that unknown quantity - other people.
Saoirse Ronan handles the difficult leading role of the youthful assassin with aplomb. It is a very physical role without much scripted opportunity to show the inner workings of the child, yet she brings real heart to the character and her new, confusing, experiences with civilisation are played with just the right amount of awkwardness and curiosity.
The plot is drip-fed to the audience. We're kept in the dark about the reason for the hunt for quite some time and even then new information hijacks us along the way. In fact it appears that we are discovering things at about the same rate as Hanna herself, who remains in the dark about important plot points almost until the bitter end.
Eric Bana is very good as the father who has chosen to raise his daughter very much to his own design; in such a way as to make it impossible for her to make an informed decision about her life's direction. It may seem strange and would make his character difficult to sympathise with were it not for the warmth with which he plays it. Cate Blanchett is rather a weak link with a drifting accent and a slightly-too-driven character to get to grips with when we are told so little about her (what is her obsession with her teeth all about?). However, I do wonder if the accent shifts are a character decision as she appears to get more Southern as she tries to come across as warm and caring.
The real star of the show is Tom Hollander's wearer of short-shorts extraordinaire, Isaacs. Equal parts camp and creepy he edges ever closer to his prey with ever more well-contained joy. It is yet another utterly brilliant performance to add to Hollander's seemingly never-ending list of extraordinary characters. Yep, I love that guy.
Really though, Hanna is a film in which the style, production design and score (a brilliant piece of work by the Chemical Brothers consisting of pounding beats and haunting nursery rhymes) carry much of the weight. Wright uses locations brilliantly, moving from snow to desert, populated urban areas to abandoned, overgrown sites with ease. And this movement allows us to see the characters at their most comfortable and completely out of their depth which only allows us to understand them better. As Hannah graduates from life with her father to the harsh landscapes of the compound and the desert, and then to the (much more dangerous) locales of urban life, we see that Wright is even more adept at pulling together different visual styles than his heroine is at adapting to the new constraints and information in her life.
Stylish with some very interesting performances - all underscored excellently by The Chemical Brothers - 8/10
Saturday, 28 May 2011
Meek's Cutoff
"I think this was written long before we got here"
Kelly Reichardt has created a creeping trawl of a film in which we watch three families traipsing across the Omaha Trail in search of riches and a new life. This search is clearly not going well as we join them far enough into the journey for them to be questioning their guide, Stephen Meek (Bruce Greenwood). In fact, as the film lingers on it becomes less about a search for the gold-filled promised land than a quietly desperate endeavour to find water, trust and humanity in these less than humane conditions.
There are many interesting elements to this film which can be taken as either praise-worthy or criticisms depending on the mood that takes you while watching. For instance, the static camera-work, the lack of dialogue, any real drama, character development. I think a lot of these are praise-worthy but unfortunately the coming together of these elements did not meld to form an engaging enough film for me.
The idea that I really got the most out of was that this wasn't a story put to screen but part of one. That these characters are fully formed and without need of explanation thrilled me. That they continue to travel without needing to 'grow' in front of our eyes excited me greatly. This film is not so much a drama as a dip into the reality of the character's lives; very much warts and all.
This is where the lack of dialogue comes into play. These people are trekking, they aren't chatting. When they do, it is something that needs to be said. Seeing the women walking alongside the wagons, their dresses blowing violently about them in the desert wind, working their fingers to the bone to clean and cook on the road and staying out of the 'men's business' is a slice of reality that seems hard to watch. These people aren't here for our entertainment. They're here to survive and they are going to try to do that the best way they can - by getting on with things.
The look of the film is striking. A great deal of the footage focuses on the movement of the caravan; the camera remaining still as they walk slowly across the horizon. The lengthy silences mean that you have to rely on the visuals for character information and plot details to emerge. There are moments where you almost want to look away because the camera has been still with so little happening for so long. Inevitably this is when the important things happen. There is excellent use of real lighting and indeed utter darkness. I think I saw William Patton's face clearly only once during the film. His whispered, tense conversations with his wife (Michelle Williams) take place in such deep darkness that the dialogue was really brought to the fore.
Unfortunately not all of the characters are completely convincing which the film clearly relies upon due to dropping us into this episode of their lives. Zoe Kazan's hysterical Millie and her husband (an unusually disappointing Paul Dano) seem slightly over the top.
A fine piece of art but not engaging enough as a film. However, if I see a better, more fitting ending this year I will be very, very surprised (and very excited) - 7/10.
Kelly Reichardt has created a creeping trawl of a film in which we watch three families traipsing across the Omaha Trail in search of riches and a new life. This search is clearly not going well as we join them far enough into the journey for them to be questioning their guide, Stephen Meek (Bruce Greenwood). In fact, as the film lingers on it becomes less about a search for the gold-filled promised land than a quietly desperate endeavour to find water, trust and humanity in these less than humane conditions.
There are many interesting elements to this film which can be taken as either praise-worthy or criticisms depending on the mood that takes you while watching. For instance, the static camera-work, the lack of dialogue, any real drama, character development. I think a lot of these are praise-worthy but unfortunately the coming together of these elements did not meld to form an engaging enough film for me.
The idea that I really got the most out of was that this wasn't a story put to screen but part of one. That these characters are fully formed and without need of explanation thrilled me. That they continue to travel without needing to 'grow' in front of our eyes excited me greatly. This film is not so much a drama as a dip into the reality of the character's lives; very much warts and all.
This is where the lack of dialogue comes into play. These people are trekking, they aren't chatting. When they do, it is something that needs to be said. Seeing the women walking alongside the wagons, their dresses blowing violently about them in the desert wind, working their fingers to the bone to clean and cook on the road and staying out of the 'men's business' is a slice of reality that seems hard to watch. These people aren't here for our entertainment. They're here to survive and they are going to try to do that the best way they can - by getting on with things.
The look of the film is striking. A great deal of the footage focuses on the movement of the caravan; the camera remaining still as they walk slowly across the horizon. The lengthy silences mean that you have to rely on the visuals for character information and plot details to emerge. There are moments where you almost want to look away because the camera has been still with so little happening for so long. Inevitably this is when the important things happen. There is excellent use of real lighting and indeed utter darkness. I think I saw William Patton's face clearly only once during the film. His whispered, tense conversations with his wife (Michelle Williams) take place in such deep darkness that the dialogue was really brought to the fore.
Unfortunately not all of the characters are completely convincing which the film clearly relies upon due to dropping us into this episode of their lives. Zoe Kazan's hysterical Millie and her husband (an unusually disappointing Paul Dano) seem slightly over the top.
A fine piece of art but not engaging enough as a film. However, if I see a better, more fitting ending this year I will be very, very surprised (and very excited) - 7/10.
Thursday, 26 May 2011
13 Assassins
"Total massacre"
Before seeing 13 Assassins my only experience of a Takashi Miike film was watching the first half of Audition - you know, the boring half - and turning it off because it was, well, boring. So when it was suggested to me that I watch 13 Assassins I was concerned not only by the 2+ hours (ok, only +6 minutes) running time, but the information coming my way that almost half of that, if not more, was given over to a battle sequence. An hour? Of Samurai fighting? I must admit, I was not under the impression that this was going to be my thing....
How wrong I was. How very wrong.
13 Assassins is an epic of Shakespearean proportions. All stilted, polite conversation - even when debating how to go about taking out the enemy - dark rooms and darker deeds, good vs. evil, all on the most humanistic of levels.
Admittedly the film takes a while to really get going but, as with Audition if I'd stuck with it, the slow build leads to an immense climax. But even before the battle Miike has you on the edge of your seat. He walks the line between the gruesome and the subtle very well; there is evidence of torture in a scene which shifts the film into 'horror' terrain and a brief but brilliant moment later in which it rains blood. But even in the battle scenes are not all about the gore. The sequences are choreographed and shot with great invention (did I mention the raining blood?) with each of the assassins featured in their own fights against seemingly undiminishing numbers of aggressors yet without it feeling episodic.
Miike also focuses on the characters enough for each personality to come through, especially during the trek through the mountain forest, lightening the mood brilliantly through Yûsuke Iseya's joyously wild-eyed performance. Masataka Kubota (Ogura) is also one of the highlights as an inexperienced Samurai.
So it turns out this was indeed my thing. I'll be looking up more of Miike's work in the future and preparing for one hell of a ride.
Epic in the most glorious of ways. So full of detail it's probably worth another 10 watches - 9/10
Before seeing 13 Assassins my only experience of a Takashi Miike film was watching the first half of Audition - you know, the boring half - and turning it off because it was, well, boring. So when it was suggested to me that I watch 13 Assassins I was concerned not only by the 2+ hours (ok, only +6 minutes) running time, but the information coming my way that almost half of that, if not more, was given over to a battle sequence. An hour? Of Samurai fighting? I must admit, I was not under the impression that this was going to be my thing....
How wrong I was. How very wrong.
13 Assassins is an epic of Shakespearean proportions. All stilted, polite conversation - even when debating how to go about taking out the enemy - dark rooms and darker deeds, good vs. evil, all on the most humanistic of levels.
Admittedly the film takes a while to really get going but, as with Audition if I'd stuck with it, the slow build leads to an immense climax. But even before the battle Miike has you on the edge of your seat. He walks the line between the gruesome and the subtle very well; there is evidence of torture in a scene which shifts the film into 'horror' terrain and a brief but brilliant moment later in which it rains blood. But even in the battle scenes are not all about the gore. The sequences are choreographed and shot with great invention (did I mention the raining blood?) with each of the assassins featured in their own fights against seemingly undiminishing numbers of aggressors yet without it feeling episodic.
Miike also focuses on the characters enough for each personality to come through, especially during the trek through the mountain forest, lightening the mood brilliantly through Yûsuke Iseya's joyously wild-eyed performance. Masataka Kubota (Ogura) is also one of the highlights as an inexperienced Samurai.
So it turns out this was indeed my thing. I'll be looking up more of Miike's work in the future and preparing for one hell of a ride.
Epic in the most glorious of ways. So full of detail it's probably worth another 10 watches - 9/10
Sunday, 13 March 2011
The Adjustment Bureau
“All I have are the choices I make”
Well that’s what you think. According to George Nolfi’s directorial debut, based on a short story by Philip K. Dick, you may think you made those choices but there is every chance your path through life has been adjusted by a secret organisation that exists solely to lead you to your preferred (by the ‘Chairman’) conclusion.
Matt Damon plays David Norris, a young congressman running for senate in New York when, on the night of the election, he comes across beautiful and invigorating Elise (Emily Blunt) who alters his path entirely. His following meetings with her seem to be the working of fate but indeed fate has other plans and will seemingly stop at nothing to keep them apart.
The Adjustment Bureau has many good things going for it, not least a deftness of touch and lightness of tone, that make it excellent weekend viewing fodder. It isn’t too taxing, the leads are charismatic with good chemistry and the film zips along at a nice pace.
If the film suffers from anything it is the current E4-esque obsession with ‘x’ meets ‘y’ marketing. It may not have been so bad had the films chosen by Total Film not been such inappropriate comparisons. It is much too light to bear much resemblance to Bourne once you look past Matt Damon’s above the title credit, and comparing anything to such a recent behemoth as Inception can rarely lead to anything other than shooting oneself in the foot.
This misrepresentation leads to such complaints as I have heard regarding the ‘thriller’ aspect of the film. Yes, it is a thriller, but the Adjustment Bureau itself doesn’t seem to offer much threat other than keeping the two potential lovers apart for the rest of their lives. Other threats are made but for most of the film you forget about them. The film is more of an adventure rollercoaster and does perfectly well for itself on these terms.
Matt Damon once again puts his everyman charm to excellent use managing to successfully portray that most fictional of characters – a likeable politician. Emily Blunt shows off some truly impressive dance moves and, when not losing her head in the confusion of it all, brings out all the requisite strength and effortless charm of Elise.
I will admit to complete bias when I say that Thomas Newman provides the film with a beautiful score; driving the more thrilling aspects along and wonderfully underscoring the more romantic moments. The cinematography is less in-your-face than gritty Bourne-like thrillers tend to be lending the film a more commercial look. It feels more open, cleaner. Even in its darkest moments it manages to look pretty.
All in all The Adjustment Bureau is a perfectly capable adventure story which I would happily watch again should it pop up as a 9 o’clock showing on Film 4. It’s that kind of film; easy, watchable and interesting enough to keep you entertained for the full running time if not a little longer.
Not going to revolutionise film-making in the way Bourne and Inception did and it’s unfair to expect it to. Excellent popcorn-movie making – 7/10
Well that’s what you think. According to George Nolfi’s directorial debut, based on a short story by Philip K. Dick, you may think you made those choices but there is every chance your path through life has been adjusted by a secret organisation that exists solely to lead you to your preferred (by the ‘Chairman’) conclusion.
Matt Damon plays David Norris, a young congressman running for senate in New York when, on the night of the election, he comes across beautiful and invigorating Elise (Emily Blunt) who alters his path entirely. His following meetings with her seem to be the working of fate but indeed fate has other plans and will seemingly stop at nothing to keep them apart.
The Adjustment Bureau has many good things going for it, not least a deftness of touch and lightness of tone, that make it excellent weekend viewing fodder. It isn’t too taxing, the leads are charismatic with good chemistry and the film zips along at a nice pace.
If the film suffers from anything it is the current E4-esque obsession with ‘x’ meets ‘y’ marketing. It may not have been so bad had the films chosen by Total Film not been such inappropriate comparisons. It is much too light to bear much resemblance to Bourne once you look past Matt Damon’s above the title credit, and comparing anything to such a recent behemoth as Inception can rarely lead to anything other than shooting oneself in the foot.
This misrepresentation leads to such complaints as I have heard regarding the ‘thriller’ aspect of the film. Yes, it is a thriller, but the Adjustment Bureau itself doesn’t seem to offer much threat other than keeping the two potential lovers apart for the rest of their lives. Other threats are made but for most of the film you forget about them. The film is more of an adventure rollercoaster and does perfectly well for itself on these terms.
Matt Damon once again puts his everyman charm to excellent use managing to successfully portray that most fictional of characters – a likeable politician. Emily Blunt shows off some truly impressive dance moves and, when not losing her head in the confusion of it all, brings out all the requisite strength and effortless charm of Elise.
I will admit to complete bias when I say that Thomas Newman provides the film with a beautiful score; driving the more thrilling aspects along and wonderfully underscoring the more romantic moments. The cinematography is less in-your-face than gritty Bourne-like thrillers tend to be lending the film a more commercial look. It feels more open, cleaner. Even in its darkest moments it manages to look pretty.
All in all The Adjustment Bureau is a perfectly capable adventure story which I would happily watch again should it pop up as a 9 o’clock showing on Film 4. It’s that kind of film; easy, watchable and interesting enough to keep you entertained for the full running time if not a little longer.
Not going to revolutionise film-making in the way Bourne and Inception did and it’s unfair to expect it to. Excellent popcorn-movie making – 7/10
Saturday, 26 February 2011
Oscar Predictions
Disclaimer: I want The Social Network to win Best Film so much that I originally put it in my predictions. But I fear the Academy will not see past the historical drama pull of The King's Speech so I have chosen that in the knowledge that if it wins I'll have got the prediction right, and if The Social Network claims the grand prize I'll be, quite frankly, bloody thrilled.
Actor in a Leading Role
- Javier Bardem in “Biutiful”
- Jeff Bridges in “True Grit”
- Jesse Eisenberg in “The Social Network”
- Colin Firth in “The King's Speech”
- James Franco in “127 Hours”
Actor in a Supporting Role
- Christian Bale in “The Fighter”
- John Hawkes in “Winter's Bone”
- Jeremy Renner in “The Town”
- Mark Ruffalo in “The Kids Are All Right”
- Geoffrey Rush in “The King's Speech”
Actress in a Leading Role
- Annette Bening in “The Kids Are All Right”
- Nicole Kidman in “Rabbit Hole”
- Jennifer Lawrence in “Winter's Bone”
- Natalie Portman in “Black Swan”
- Michelle Williams in “Blue Valentine”
Actress in a Supporting Role
- Amy Adams in “The Fighter”
- Helena Bonham Carter in “The King's Speech”
- Melissa Leo in “The Fighter”
- Hailee Steinfeld in “True Grit”
- Jacki Weaver in “Animal Kingdom”
Animated Feature Film
- “How to Train Your Dragon” Chris Sanders and Dean DeBlois
- “The Illusionist” Sylvain Chomet
- “Toy Story 3” Lee Unkrich
Art Direction
- “Alice in Wonderland”
Production Design: Robert Stromberg; Set Decoration: Karen O'Hara - “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1”
Production Design: Stuart Craig; Set Decoration: Stephenie McMillan - “Inception”
Production Design: Guy Hendrix Dyas; Set Decoration: Larry Dias and Doug Mowat - “The King's Speech”
Production Design: Eve Stewart; Set Decoration: Judy Farr - “True Grit”
Production Design: Jess Gonchor; Set Decoration: Nancy Haigh
Cinematography
- “Black Swan” Matthew Libatique
- “Inception” Wally Pfister
- “The King's Speech” Danny Cohen
- “The Social Network” Jeff Cronenweth
- “True Grit” Roger Deakins
Costume Design
- “Alice in Wonderland” Colleen Atwood
- “I Am Love” Antonella Cannarozzi
- “The King's Speech” Jenny Beavan
- “The Tempest” Sandy Powell
- “True Grit” Mary Zophres
Directing
- “Black Swan” Darren Aronofsky
- “The Fighter” David O. Russell
- “The King's Speech” Tom Hooper
- “The Social Network” David Fincher
- “True Grit” Joel Coen and Ethan Coen
Documentary (Feature)
- “Exit through the Gift Shop” Banksy and Jaimie D'Cruz
- “Gasland” Josh Fox and Trish Adlesic
- “Inside Job” Charles Ferguson and Audrey Marrs
- “Restrepo” Tim Hetherington and Sebastian Junger
- “Waste Land” Lucy Walker and Angus Aynsley
Documentary (Short Subject)
- “Killing in the Name” Jed Rothstein
- “Poster Girl” Sara Nesson and Mitchell W. Block
- “Strangers No More” Karen Goodman and Kirk Simon
- “Sun Come Up” Jennifer Redfearn and Tim Metzger
- “The Warriors of Qiugang” Ruby Yang and Thomas Lennon
Film Editing
- “Black Swan” Andrew Weisblum
- “The Fighter” Pamela Martin
- “The King's Speech” Tariq Anwar
- “127 Hours” Jon Harris
- “The Social Network” Angus Wall and Kirk Baxter
Foreign Language Film
- “Biutiful” Mexico
- “Dogtooth” Greece
- “In a Better World” Denmark
- “Incendies” Canada
- “Outside the Law (Hors-la-loi)” Algeria
Makeup
- “Barney's Version” Adrien Morot
- “The Way Back” Edouard F. Henriques, Gregory Funk and Yolanda Toussieng
- “The Wolfman” Rick Baker and Dave Elsey
Music (Original Score)
- “How to Train Your Dragon” John Powell
- “Inception” Hans Zimmer
- “The King's Speech” Alexandre Desplat
- “127 Hours” A.R. Rahman
- “The Social Network” Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross
Music (Original Song)
- “Coming Home” from “Country Strong” Music and Lyric by Tom Douglas, Troy Verges and Hillary Lindsey
- “I See the Light” from “Tangled” Music by Alan Menken Lyric by Glenn Slater
- “If I Rise” from “127 Hours” Music by A.R. Rahman Lyric by Dido and Rollo Armstrong
- “We Belong Together” from “Toy Story 3" Music and Lyric by Randy Newman
Best Picture
- “Black Swan” Mike Medavoy, Brian Oliver and Scott Franklin, Producers
- “The Fighter” David Hoberman, Todd Lieberman and Mark Wahlberg, Producers
- “Inception” Emma Thomas and Christopher Nolan, Producers
- “The Kids Are All Right” Gary Gilbert, Jeffrey Levy-Hinte and Celine Rattray, Producers
- “The King's Speech” Iain Canning, Emile Sherman and Gareth Unwin, Producers
- “127 Hours” Christian Colson, Danny Boyle and John Smithson, Producers
- “The Social Network” Scott Rudin, Dana Brunetti, Michael De Luca and Ceán Chaffin, Producers
- “Toy Story 3” Darla K. Anderson, Producer
- “True Grit” Scott Rudin, Ethan Coen and Joel Coen, Producers
- “Winter's Bone" Anne Rosellini and Alix Madigan-Yorkin, Producers
Short Film (Animated)
- “Day & Night” Teddy Newton
- “The Gruffalo” Jakob Schuh and Max Lang
- “Let's Pollute” Geefwee Boedoe
- “The Lost Thing” Shaun Tan and Andrew Ruhemann
- “Madagascar, carnet de voyage (Madagascar, a Journey Diary)” Bastien Dubois
Short Film (Live Action)
- “The Confession” Tanel Toom
- “The Crush” Michael Creagh
- “God of Love” Luke Matheny
- “Na Wewe” Ivan Goldschmidt
- “Wish 143” Ian Barnes and Samantha Waite
Sound Editing
- “Inception” Richard King
- “Toy Story 3” Tom Myers and Michael Silvers
- “Tron: Legacy” Gwendolyn Yates Whittle and Addison Teague
- “True Grit” Skip Lievsay and Craig Berkey
- “Unstoppable” Mark P. Stoeckinger
Sound Mixing
- “Inception” Lora Hirschberg, Gary A. Rizzo and Ed Novick
- “The King's Speech” Paul Hamblin, Martin Jensen and John Midgley
- “Salt” Jeffrey J. Haboush, Greg P. Russell, Scott Millan and William Sarokin
- “The Social Network” Ren Klyce, David Parker, Michael Semanick and Mark Weingarten
- “True Grit” Skip Lievsay, Craig Berkey, Greg Orloff and Peter F. Kurland
Visual Effects
- “Alice in Wonderland” Ken Ralston, David Schaub, Carey Villegas and Sean Phillips
- “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1” Tim Burke, John Richardson, Christian Manz and Nicolas Aithadi
- “Hereafter” Michael Owens, Bryan Grill, Stephan Trojansky and Joe Farrell
- “Inception” Paul Franklin, Chris Corbould, Andrew Lockley and Peter Bebb
- “Iron Man 2” Janek Sirrs, Ben Snow, Ged Wright and Daniel Sudick
Writing (Adapted Screenplay)
- “127 Hours” Screenplay by Danny Boyle & Simon Beaufoy
- “The Social Network” Screenplay by Aaron Sorkin
- “Toy Story 3” Screenplay by Michael Arndt; Story by John Lasseter, Andrew Stanton and Lee Unkrich
- “True Grit” Written for the screen by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen
- “Winter's Bone” Adapted for the screen by Debra Granik & Anne Rosellini
(Original Screenplay)
- “Another Year” Written by Mike Leigh
- “The Fighter” Screenplay by Scott Silver and Paul Tamasy & Eric Johnson;
Story by Keith Dorrington & Paul Tamasy & Eric Johnson - “Inception” Written by Christopher Nolan
- “The Kids Are All Right” Written by Lisa Cholodenko & Stuart Blumberg
- “The King's Speech” Screenplay by David Seidler
Sunday, 20 February 2011
Animal Kingdom
"You've done some bad things, sweetie."
A 2010 Australian crime drama, Animal has taken its sweet time getting to these shores but it turns out to be more than worth the wait. David Michod has created a sophisticated, striking and genuinely tense film following the Cody family through the eyes of newly initiated member, J. Thrown in with this close-knit collection of criminals and his optimistic, all-knowing Grandmother, J's life suddenly sinks to the underworld.
The film is claustrophobic - even the excellent Antony Partos score makes you feel as though you are underwater - and shocking in a brilliant and brave way, without the need for graphic and gratuitous violence. This is not an angry crime film, thundering its way through the script at a terrific volume; it is quiet, subtle and really gets under your skin. There is a constant sense of foreboding and the lengthy silences, use of slow-motion and generous, lugubrious pacing, means that it is a film which sits in the pit of your stomach and will settle there for quite a while after the final frame.
The cast deliver strong performances across the board but the stand out is Ben Mendelsohn. His fugitive 'Pope' is underplayed to the point of slacker boredom yet he is one of the most menacing characters you are likely to meet this year. An unremittingly emotionally violent man, 'Pope' is the kind of guy you would avoid even at his friendliest. Yet his menace always lies just beneath the surface and Mendelsohn plays it to perfection.
Newcomer James Frecheville handles the central role with great control. His J is described by Michod as 'our tour guide' and his place on the edge of the family unit is played with stillness - as though making himself as small as possible will keep him out of his uncle's way. Jacki Weaver also excels as the matriarch of this unpalatable family. A woman with Lady Macbeth tendencies, Weaver is bright, sunny and terrifying all at the same time.
Animal Kingdom hits the ground running with its first shot and though it is sedate and stately in its pacing, it is gripping, humorous and moving; a film that will stay with you long after the credits roll - 9/10
A 2010 Australian crime drama, Animal has taken its sweet time getting to these shores but it turns out to be more than worth the wait. David Michod has created a sophisticated, striking and genuinely tense film following the Cody family through the eyes of newly initiated member, J. Thrown in with this close-knit collection of criminals and his optimistic, all-knowing Grandmother, J's life suddenly sinks to the underworld.
The film is claustrophobic - even the excellent Antony Partos score makes you feel as though you are underwater - and shocking in a brilliant and brave way, without the need for graphic and gratuitous violence. This is not an angry crime film, thundering its way through the script at a terrific volume; it is quiet, subtle and really gets under your skin. There is a constant sense of foreboding and the lengthy silences, use of slow-motion and generous, lugubrious pacing, means that it is a film which sits in the pit of your stomach and will settle there for quite a while after the final frame.
The cast deliver strong performances across the board but the stand out is Ben Mendelsohn. His fugitive 'Pope' is underplayed to the point of slacker boredom yet he is one of the most menacing characters you are likely to meet this year. An unremittingly emotionally violent man, 'Pope' is the kind of guy you would avoid even at his friendliest. Yet his menace always lies just beneath the surface and Mendelsohn plays it to perfection.
Newcomer James Frecheville handles the central role with great control. His J is described by Michod as 'our tour guide' and his place on the edge of the family unit is played with stillness - as though making himself as small as possible will keep him out of his uncle's way. Jacki Weaver also excels as the matriarch of this unpalatable family. A woman with Lady Macbeth tendencies, Weaver is bright, sunny and terrifying all at the same time.
Animal Kingdom hits the ground running with its first shot and though it is sedate and stately in its pacing, it is gripping, humorous and moving; a film that will stay with you long after the credits roll - 9/10
Saturday, 12 February 2011
True Grit
"That didn't pan out."
Joel and Ethan Coen are reunited with The Dude himself for a remake of True Grit. (As with Brighton Rock the directors have contended that they have returned to the original novel for a fresh look at the source material rather than directly remaking the first cinematic take).
Hailee Steinfeld plays Mattie Ross, an intelligent and determined 14 year old out to avenge her father's death. Asking the sheriff for advice she is pointed in the direction of Rueben 'Rooster' Cogburn, and man of "true grit" - an ageing, belligerent Ranger seemingly as likely to take up the trail as to go sober. But there is another Ranger already on the case and keen to get his man - La Boeuf (Matt Damon).
This unlikely trio are the centre of the film around whom other characters briefly flit around the periphery. Due to this blink-and-you'll-miss-them nature, the film relies heavily of the chemistry and charisma of these three and, although each puts in a solid performance, there is nothing terribly remarkable about them. That this should be the case despite their surroundings and situation is indicative of the overriding problem with the film. It feels episodic, it is strangely bland - everything about the film feels solid but a bit lacklustre - and while the script offers a few moments of comedy, the rest of the film falls rather flat. It just feels rather lightweight.
If there is one element of the script in particular which lends itself to humour it is the fact that, on first viewing, you will probably not catch it all. While Mattie is well-spoken, clear and concise, Rooster is a verbose, opinionated drunk and almost completely unintelligible at times, and the addition of La Boeuf's acquired speech impediment only increases the difficulty.
Jeff Bridges is a committed, uncompromising Rooster, Hailee Steinfeld a confident and engaging Mattie, and Matt Damon provides some excellent broad comedy but I found the cameo performers more convincing and enjoyable. Barry Pepper puts in a great turn as Lucky Ned Pepper, Josh Brolin undergoes a great vocal change as Tom Chaney and Domhnall Gleeson (Moon) probably delivers the most moving performance in the film.
The screenplay feels a little undecided. Some of the language feels a little forced and while Rooster and La Boeuf get some good lines most go to the smaller roles and, as their appearances are brief, this leaves the script feeling a little bare.
The film looks glorious in places, Roger Deakins capturing the sparse American scenery wonderfully just as he did in No Country for Old Men, but there are a couple of moments where the editing choices seem quite strange and it doesn't look as classy as I expected. There is something about it that feels a little slipshod, a little slung together and the natural, quirky stylings of the Coen brothers are replaced by an odd ambiguity.
I don't think True Grit will stay with me for long and I wouldn't rush to watch it again to remind myself - 7/10
Joel and Ethan Coen are reunited with The Dude himself for a remake of True Grit. (As with Brighton Rock the directors have contended that they have returned to the original novel for a fresh look at the source material rather than directly remaking the first cinematic take).
Hailee Steinfeld plays Mattie Ross, an intelligent and determined 14 year old out to avenge her father's death. Asking the sheriff for advice she is pointed in the direction of Rueben 'Rooster' Cogburn, and man of "true grit" - an ageing, belligerent Ranger seemingly as likely to take up the trail as to go sober. But there is another Ranger already on the case and keen to get his man - La Boeuf (Matt Damon).
This unlikely trio are the centre of the film around whom other characters briefly flit around the periphery. Due to this blink-and-you'll-miss-them nature, the film relies heavily of the chemistry and charisma of these three and, although each puts in a solid performance, there is nothing terribly remarkable about them. That this should be the case despite their surroundings and situation is indicative of the overriding problem with the film. It feels episodic, it is strangely bland - everything about the film feels solid but a bit lacklustre - and while the script offers a few moments of comedy, the rest of the film falls rather flat. It just feels rather lightweight.
If there is one element of the script in particular which lends itself to humour it is the fact that, on first viewing, you will probably not catch it all. While Mattie is well-spoken, clear and concise, Rooster is a verbose, opinionated drunk and almost completely unintelligible at times, and the addition of La Boeuf's acquired speech impediment only increases the difficulty.
Jeff Bridges is a committed, uncompromising Rooster, Hailee Steinfeld a confident and engaging Mattie, and Matt Damon provides some excellent broad comedy but I found the cameo performers more convincing and enjoyable. Barry Pepper puts in a great turn as Lucky Ned Pepper, Josh Brolin undergoes a great vocal change as Tom Chaney and Domhnall Gleeson (Moon) probably delivers the most moving performance in the film.
The screenplay feels a little undecided. Some of the language feels a little forced and while Rooster and La Boeuf get some good lines most go to the smaller roles and, as their appearances are brief, this leaves the script feeling a little bare.
The film looks glorious in places, Roger Deakins capturing the sparse American scenery wonderfully just as he did in No Country for Old Men, but there are a couple of moments where the editing choices seem quite strange and it doesn't look as classy as I expected. There is something about it that feels a little slipshod, a little slung together and the natural, quirky stylings of the Coen brothers are replaced by an odd ambiguity.
I don't think True Grit will stay with me for long and I wouldn't rush to watch it again to remind myself - 7/10
Thursday, 10 February 2011
The Fighter
"I want my family. What's wrong with that?"
David O. Russell's third feature with Mark Wahlberg follows a familiar path - underdog sportsman coming good - but the sport itself takes a back seat as the film focuses on the indisputably intriguing family life of its hero.
Micky Ward is a boxer inspired to fight by his older half brother, Dicky, a former Welterweight who has lost his way thanks to drug addiction. Despite this Dicky trains him and their mother (irrepressibly played by Melissa Leo) manages his career. As the film progresses Dicky's life spirals out further out of control and the family struggle to come to terms with their situation.
Let's start by saying that despite what you might be hearing, Mark Wahlberg is not really the leading man in this film. Ok, so his may be the character around whom the situation revolves, but if you are looking for a leading performance, Christian Bale provides all of the entertainment and a great deal of the heart as well as seeming to command the greatest proportion of screen time. This could be because a great deal of Wahlberg's scenes take place in the ring (where he puts in one hell of a performance) and when the story does focus on him he is left playing the situation rather than a fully formed character. It is a pity that this is how it plays out as he does end up coming across as rather dull and anyone who's seen I Heart Huckabees or The Departed will know that he can fill a screen with a big personality and quirky persona when it's asked of him. Sadly it is not asked of him here and he gets lost in the background even as the light is shining on him in a film crammed with defiant characters (Micky's 7 sisters included - used to excellent comic effect throughout) and he winds up rather forgettable.
Christian Bale has praised this 'quiet' performance for allowing his own performance to work and while it may assist his scene stealing activities but from the opening frame his mesmeric, tempestuous, yet considered performance is a force to be reckoned with and entirely of his own making. Melissa Leo comes closest to keeping pace yet it is Amy Adam's Charlene, with her single-minded and straight talking manner, that makes for the perfect sparring partner.
For a film immersed in 'loud' acting the soundtrack is likewise brilliantly overwhelming. Songs blare across dialogue and the decibels reached by the crowd during the fights themselves work more effectively than 3D ever could to make you feel like you're there while the switch between the looks - from film to TV footage for the fights and back again - assists in taking you directly into the viewing experience of the family gathered around the telly.
It does all seem rather familiar, though. Christian Bale gives a performance worthy of many a re-watch but the film tends to lose impetus when he disappears from the screen. The family are clearly vintage film material but they are set against the sporting tale it can feel a bit seen-it-all-before despite the good intentions and hard work of cast and crew
See it for Bale, Adams and a great script - 8/10
David O. Russell's third feature with Mark Wahlberg follows a familiar path - underdog sportsman coming good - but the sport itself takes a back seat as the film focuses on the indisputably intriguing family life of its hero.
Micky Ward is a boxer inspired to fight by his older half brother, Dicky, a former Welterweight who has lost his way thanks to drug addiction. Despite this Dicky trains him and their mother (irrepressibly played by Melissa Leo) manages his career. As the film progresses Dicky's life spirals out further out of control and the family struggle to come to terms with their situation.
Let's start by saying that despite what you might be hearing, Mark Wahlberg is not really the leading man in this film. Ok, so his may be the character around whom the situation revolves, but if you are looking for a leading performance, Christian Bale provides all of the entertainment and a great deal of the heart as well as seeming to command the greatest proportion of screen time. This could be because a great deal of Wahlberg's scenes take place in the ring (where he puts in one hell of a performance) and when the story does focus on him he is left playing the situation rather than a fully formed character. It is a pity that this is how it plays out as he does end up coming across as rather dull and anyone who's seen I Heart Huckabees or The Departed will know that he can fill a screen with a big personality and quirky persona when it's asked of him. Sadly it is not asked of him here and he gets lost in the background even as the light is shining on him in a film crammed with defiant characters (Micky's 7 sisters included - used to excellent comic effect throughout) and he winds up rather forgettable.
Christian Bale has praised this 'quiet' performance for allowing his own performance to work and while it may assist his scene stealing activities but from the opening frame his mesmeric, tempestuous, yet considered performance is a force to be reckoned with and entirely of his own making. Melissa Leo comes closest to keeping pace yet it is Amy Adam's Charlene, with her single-minded and straight talking manner, that makes for the perfect sparring partner.
For a film immersed in 'loud' acting the soundtrack is likewise brilliantly overwhelming. Songs blare across dialogue and the decibels reached by the crowd during the fights themselves work more effectively than 3D ever could to make you feel like you're there while the switch between the looks - from film to TV footage for the fights and back again - assists in taking you directly into the viewing experience of the family gathered around the telly.
It does all seem rather familiar, though. Christian Bale gives a performance worthy of many a re-watch but the film tends to lose impetus when he disappears from the screen. The family are clearly vintage film material but they are set against the sporting tale it can feel a bit seen-it-all-before despite the good intentions and hard work of cast and crew
See it for Bale, Adams and a great script - 8/10
Wednesday, 9 February 2011
The King's Speech
"I had to throw a few extra ones in so they knew it was me."
Tom Hooper's dramatisation of Prince Albert/King George VI's struggle with not only his speech impediment but also finding himself suddenly thrust into the royal limelight is a warm, humorous and classy film.
Colin Firth (Oscar-bound, surely?) gives a vanity-free performance; all dry mouthed and infuriated, his Bertie fluctuates between bemusement an frustration at his birth rights, privileges and a country's expectations and needs. The film offers a fascinating glimpse into the public and private faces of a royal couple forced into a position they did not necessarily expect as Bertie's brother's abdication leaves him in a position he never truly thought he would face, and Firth is genuinely moving in the scenes in which his fears truly begin to show through.
Helena Bonham Carter's regally feisty Elizabeth is a wonderful study in these public and private royal faces. She brings a great deal of humour to the film, especially in the moments in which she switches from Elizabeth to 'Your Royal Highness' in the blink of an eye. She brilliantly portrays how, of the two of them, she is oddly more at home with the royal aspects of her life, having been trained rather than born into it.
Geoffrey Rush, however, is the real heart and soul of the film, breaking down Bertie's stubborn disapproval with some gentle stubbornness of his own, slowly but surely creating an environment in which Bertie can finally express himself.
The look of the film is cleverly focused on Bertie's isolation. He is only truly positioned in the centre of the frame when acting on behalf of the monarchy. The rest of the time he is unceremoniously squeezed into the side and corners of shots, awkwardly trying to find his place and clearly uncomfortable in his position - both physical and emotional.
Alexandre Desplat's gentle, lilting score aids the tone brilliantly, delivering warm, simple melodies that enhance the light, lyrical feel of the film.
A thoroughly enjoyable watch filled with great performances and pulled together with wonderful cinematography for a very classy film - 9/10
Tom Hooper's dramatisation of Prince Albert/King George VI's struggle with not only his speech impediment but also finding himself suddenly thrust into the royal limelight is a warm, humorous and classy film.
Colin Firth (Oscar-bound, surely?) gives a vanity-free performance; all dry mouthed and infuriated, his Bertie fluctuates between bemusement an frustration at his birth rights, privileges and a country's expectations and needs. The film offers a fascinating glimpse into the public and private faces of a royal couple forced into a position they did not necessarily expect as Bertie's brother's abdication leaves him in a position he never truly thought he would face, and Firth is genuinely moving in the scenes in which his fears truly begin to show through.
Helena Bonham Carter's regally feisty Elizabeth is a wonderful study in these public and private royal faces. She brings a great deal of humour to the film, especially in the moments in which she switches from Elizabeth to 'Your Royal Highness' in the blink of an eye. She brilliantly portrays how, of the two of them, she is oddly more at home with the royal aspects of her life, having been trained rather than born into it.
Geoffrey Rush, however, is the real heart and soul of the film, breaking down Bertie's stubborn disapproval with some gentle stubbornness of his own, slowly but surely creating an environment in which Bertie can finally express himself.
The look of the film is cleverly focused on Bertie's isolation. He is only truly positioned in the centre of the frame when acting on behalf of the monarchy. The rest of the time he is unceremoniously squeezed into the side and corners of shots, awkwardly trying to find his place and clearly uncomfortable in his position - both physical and emotional.
Alexandre Desplat's gentle, lilting score aids the tone brilliantly, delivering warm, simple melodies that enhance the light, lyrical feel of the film.
A thoroughly enjoyable watch filled with great performances and pulled together with wonderful cinematography for a very classy film - 9/10
Sunday, 6 February 2011
Black Swan
"My sweet girl"
Darren Aronofsky follows up his fantastic 2008 film The Wrestler with another depiction of an artist striving for perfection. Not only are these films linked by subject but the style is also very similar - handheld camera work, obsessive close-ups of the art itself to the exclusion of everything else and prolonged stalking camera shots of the principal character.
Natalie Portman is ballet dancer Nina Sayers, a girl with perfect technique but not much character as much in life as in her dancing. Her route to leading roles is fraught with obstacles including the arrival of Lily (Mila Kunis) to the company.
As a whole the film starts rather 'Odette' with introductions to the sweet Nina's oddly innocent homelife and classes with the company she has been loyal to, seemingly without much reward. However, with the introduction of a new production of Swan Lake, we follow the journey from audition to performance around which she is slowly but surely losing her grip on reality, and the picture dissolves into a deranged, breathless 'Odile' of its own.
It is worth noting that Aronofsky sets up Nina's fragile mental state from the very outset of the film, not as a direct response to the casting of the ballet. A brief glance into the adjoining carriage of her subway car leads her to suspect that there is a girl out there who looks just like her. This becomes a recurring theme (and special effect) and visually the casting of Mila Kunis as the young pretender and Winona Ryder as the dancer not exactly willingly passing the torch is excellent. The special effects throughout are well used and quite extraordinary; from the face-replacement creation of doppelgängers to skin conditions and injuries they range from the wonderfully subtle to the truly grotesque.
The same cannot really be said for the film itself. There is not much subtlety involved in either the script or indeed the acting but that is the beauty of the piece. All of the feelings of oddness are brought about by the fleeting moments of confusion and paranoia, and outbursts of showy voilence experienced by the central character; a clearly mentally stunted, neurotic young girl.
Natalie Portman is thoroughly convincing and takes herself to some wonderfully extreme places. The innocent side of Nina can become grating but it does make for an extraordinary alteration as she slides closer and closer to mania. Mila Kunis is excellent as the 'looser' of the two, really embodying the free spirit that Nina could never be. Barbara Hershey also convinces as Nina's outlandishly pushy mother, veering from oppressively supportive to dangerous.
Black Swan is a film during a viewing of which you shouldn't necessarily engage your brain. If you fully accept its misgivings you will be taken on one hell of a thrill ride but if there are any niggling doubts you will find it difficult to see past the clunky plot devices, awkward scripting and performance cliches. For, even though I really enjoyed the film, I have since struggled with the belief that Nina simply wouldn't have been cast in the Odette/Odile role. No one (not even herself) thinks she can convince as the black swan and it seems highly unreasonable to think that the director would risk the name of his company on a girl he clearly doesn't believe will pull it off.
That aside I genuinely enjoyed the descent into madness (although as the film wore on I did find myself experiencing some crippling performance anxiety as the opening night got closer for Nina) and the manner in which it was achieved.
A terrific, grotesque, grandiose achievement - 9/10
Darren Aronofsky follows up his fantastic 2008 film The Wrestler with another depiction of an artist striving for perfection. Not only are these films linked by subject but the style is also very similar - handheld camera work, obsessive close-ups of the art itself to the exclusion of everything else and prolonged stalking camera shots of the principal character.
Natalie Portman is ballet dancer Nina Sayers, a girl with perfect technique but not much character as much in life as in her dancing. Her route to leading roles is fraught with obstacles including the arrival of Lily (Mila Kunis) to the company.
As a whole the film starts rather 'Odette' with introductions to the sweet Nina's oddly innocent homelife and classes with the company she has been loyal to, seemingly without much reward. However, with the introduction of a new production of Swan Lake, we follow the journey from audition to performance around which she is slowly but surely losing her grip on reality, and the picture dissolves into a deranged, breathless 'Odile' of its own.
It is worth noting that Aronofsky sets up Nina's fragile mental state from the very outset of the film, not as a direct response to the casting of the ballet. A brief glance into the adjoining carriage of her subway car leads her to suspect that there is a girl out there who looks just like her. This becomes a recurring theme (and special effect) and visually the casting of Mila Kunis as the young pretender and Winona Ryder as the dancer not exactly willingly passing the torch is excellent. The special effects throughout are well used and quite extraordinary; from the face-replacement creation of doppelgängers to skin conditions and injuries they range from the wonderfully subtle to the truly grotesque.
The same cannot really be said for the film itself. There is not much subtlety involved in either the script or indeed the acting but that is the beauty of the piece. All of the feelings of oddness are brought about by the fleeting moments of confusion and paranoia, and outbursts of showy voilence experienced by the central character; a clearly mentally stunted, neurotic young girl.
Natalie Portman is thoroughly convincing and takes herself to some wonderfully extreme places. The innocent side of Nina can become grating but it does make for an extraordinary alteration as she slides closer and closer to mania. Mila Kunis is excellent as the 'looser' of the two, really embodying the free spirit that Nina could never be. Barbara Hershey also convinces as Nina's outlandishly pushy mother, veering from oppressively supportive to dangerous.
Black Swan is a film during a viewing of which you shouldn't necessarily engage your brain. If you fully accept its misgivings you will be taken on one hell of a thrill ride but if there are any niggling doubts you will find it difficult to see past the clunky plot devices, awkward scripting and performance cliches. For, even though I really enjoyed the film, I have since struggled with the belief that Nina simply wouldn't have been cast in the Odette/Odile role. No one (not even herself) thinks she can convince as the black swan and it seems highly unreasonable to think that the director would risk the name of his company on a girl he clearly doesn't believe will pull it off.
That aside I genuinely enjoyed the descent into madness (although as the film wore on I did find myself experiencing some crippling performance anxiety as the opening night got closer for Nina) and the manner in which it was achieved.
A terrific, grotesque, grandiose achievement - 9/10
Friday, 31 December 2010
Review of the Year - 2010
New films watched – 62
At the cinema – 32
At home – 30
Average score – 7.25
Best Films of the Year
At the cinema:
1st Inception
2nd The Hurt Locker
3rd The Social Network
At home:
1st The Lives of Others
2nd In the Loop
3rd Gran Torino
Films that let the side down:
At the cinema:
1st Salt
2nd Eat Pray Love
3rd She’s Out of My League
At home:
1st Lesbian Vampire Killers
2nd Horsemen
3rd Public Enemies
(I have just realised that I watched all three of those cinematic let downs with the same friend.
Oh dear.
Oh dear.
To be fair though, I did also see two of the top three with that same person.)
Looking at the list of disappointing films on that list there are a couple of things I should note: 1 – I don’t like traditionally ‘girly’ films. 2 – At least with Eat Pray Love I knew that the reviews had been bad and would never have watched it had the film we wanted to see been available. Sometimes I go to the cinema knowing that a film is bound to be terrible but there is a part of me that wants to see just how bad it can get.
So just how bad can it get? Well, I watched one film this year that truly lowered the bar, the standard and, indeed, the tone. Step forward Lesbian Vampire Killers. A film I reviewed as “an insult to lesbians, vampires and killers everywhere”. It got a whopping 2/10 from me.
Meanwhile Salt was by far the worst thing that I saw at the cinema. It was laughably bad, insultingly stupid and the point where (MINOR SPOILER) Angelina Jolie disguised herself as a man (END MINOR SPOILER) was just ridiculous. There came a point about halfway through the film where someone reading their iPhone (something that generally irritates me to the point of rage) became more entertaining.
As foreign films went it was a good year for Scandinavian films with A Somewhat Gentle Man, Let the Right One in, Super Brother and Rare Exports all scoring well. A Somewhat Gentle Man was my favourite film at the London Film Festival and I thought Let the Right One in was a touching adaptation of a book I had really enjoyed (and, I will admit, been terrified by).
There are still a number of 2010 films that I need to catch up with:
Another Year
Monsters
Catfish
Of Gods and Men
Then we’re into 2011 releases and the best thing about January? Oscar-bait season! Bring on The King’s Speech, Black Swan, 127 Hours, Never Let Me Go, True Grit…..
I can’t wait!
Sunday, 26 December 2010
Rare Exports: A Christmas Tale
“They’re defrosting him”
My friend Chris: not big on Christmas. Proper bah-humbuggy in fact. So as his this-is-not-a-Christmas-present-I-just-chose-this-time-of-year-to-thank-you-for-your-friendship gift I surprised him with a trip to see Rare Exports as a fairly anti-Christmas treat.
The set-up is as follows:
Santa is not who you think he is. He is far keener on punishing the naughty children than in rewarding the good. A young boy, Pietari, gets it into his head that the man behind the myth is about to be released from his mountain prison and sets about protecting his house and trying to persuade the locals that he is not just a kid with an excellent imagination.
I was expecting a horror movie but instead it is much more of a kid’s adventure story. Pietari is the leader of the crusade against Santa and his story is very much the centre of the film. The plot is fairly simple (taken from two YouTube shorts: Rare Exports Inc and The Official Rare Exports Inc Safety Instructions) and even at 83 minutes it feels a bit lightweight for the length but, that being said, there are many element of this film that made it a very enjoyable watch. The richness of the cinematography makes every close-up/slow motion shot/extended zoom worth watching and the lighting is used to great effect in the frozen wilds of Finland. The score is also excellent with soaring boy sopranos and lush strings playing off against fairly sparse scoring elsewhere. The film is very comedic – almost every moment I expected to be frightening turned out to be a lead up to a witty punch line – and the script is played beautifully by the small cast. Onni Tommila as Pietari has one of the cutest faces I have ever seen and he gives an excellent performance as the little boy facing his fears.
A bit lightweight but enjoyable and witty – 7/10
Tuesday, 30 November 2010
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part One
“They are coming”
I‘ll start this by saying that I love the Harry Potter books. Really love them. Queued up at midnight for book 7 love them. So I am always aware that the films are not quite going to live up to the novels and try to judge them accordingly.
Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part One, or Harry Potter and The Darkest Film Until Part Two Comes Out, does pretty well at transferring the action from page to screen. However, it does not quite succeed in carrying the emotional content over with it.
The book drips with a slow build of tension. The first part of the book (away from Hogwarts) takes so long that you, along with the characters, almost forget what the point of it all is. As tends to be the case, the film makes this episode look like it passes in about three weeks. This in turn makes each turn of events seem much easier to come by and loses the sense of urgency that creeps in when something big happens. It is funny that one of my friends said that the film dragged a lot and yet I felt that it needed to drag more in order to really achieved the slowly wilting optimism that JK so wonderfully conveys in the novel.
This sense of urgency is vital to the drive the emotional journey of the characters. The moment in the book when the Death Eaters attack the wedding is a truly spine-chilling moment exactly because you have seen all of the build up to the day and really settled into life with the Weasleys and this opportunity for a happy event despite the terror encroaching further upon them with every moment that passes. In the film there is barely any time to see the wedding before it is being ripped apart. Also missing is the sense that Dumbledore is no longer a trustworthy source of information for Harry. He spends much of the book severely doubting his beloved mentor and this is never even mentioned in the film. And then there is the moment when Ron disapperates from the camp in the forest (the most horrifying part of the book - but that's probably just me...). This means that he can never come back once Harry and Hermione m ove on as the collection of spells that they cast to avoid detection will also create a barrier that will keep Ron at bay, but there is no real feeling that this is the case in the film. Ok, so Hermione is clearly upset that he has gone, but there is no real indication that this is potentially the end of his part in the journey. I know that most people who watch the films will have read the books and know the outcome of this situation but they could have tried a bit harder at conveying the finality of Ron’s decision. Even on my second reading of the novel my heart sunk at the moment he went so I think they should have been able to make more of this in the film.
Criticisms aside I think that the film does do its best with the source material. The action scenes are creative and blisteringly edited and the animation used for the story of the Deathly Hallows is absolutely beautiful. The trip into the Ministry of Magic is particularly well handled with a terrific performance from Peter Mullan and good comic moments mixed with emotional scenes and high tempo action. The cinematography and production design are gorgeous in the portrayal of the two different magical worlds – Malfoy Manor is wonderfully bleak and darkly gothic and the various places that Harry, Ron and Hermione set up camp are at once vast and claustrophobic.
Emma Watson is much improved as Hermione. Her tendency to over-emote has been (somewhat) reduced and she delivers a touching performance. The addition of the scene in which she erases her parents’ memories lends real weight to her repetition of the spell in the café in central London. (That being said, she is still a rubbish shouter). Dan Radcliffe is as solid as ever but Rupert Grint, as is usually the case, comes out on top once again in this film. He has always been the strongest of the main three youngsters and is certainly the most capable when it comes to emotional range (and having a good old shouting match).
My final remark has to be on something I am finding truly difficult to justify: the addition of that awkwardly odd dance routine. I can see what they were trying to achieve - a lightening of the tension and an opportunity to see the real bond between Harry and Hermione - but, to be horribly honest, it’s not like they’d really succeeded in building a huge amount of tension in the first place and I couldn’t help feeling that, after deciding to split the film in two so as not to lose any major plot elements, this was an entirely unnecessary use of time when they had dropped other, more frightening/interesting, key moments from the book.
All in all a pretty good addition to the filmic world of HP and a fun watch but lacking in urgency – 7/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)