After “Young Sherlock Holmes” where we followed the detective's adventures as a young boy, and “Basil The Great Mouse Detective” where we followed his adventures as a mouse, Sherlock Holmes gets another reinvention as a action film hero in this uneven romp from director Guy Ritchie. Robert Downey Jnr plays the eponymous London detective, with Jude Law taking sidekick duties as Dr Watson. The two are drawn into a strange plot involving the mysterious Lord Blackwood (Mark Strong,) a villain previously hung for murder who appears to have come back from the dead and is embarking on a devious plot that is bad news for the citizens of London.
The plot is pretty flimsy and and the three screenwriters responsible seem to realise this as they pay minimal attention to the story and concentrate more on the lead characters. Robert Downey Jnr does a good job as Sherlock Holmes, an eccentric genius who's very handy with his fists in this interpretation. Downey brings across the detective's two sides, the buffoonish clown and the intelligent sleuth, very well and is a pleasure to watch on the screen. Jude Law has a drier role as Dr Watson but he brings a down to earth quality that helps anchor the film in reality. Mark Strong makes a menacing if one note villain but he's sadly given too little screen time to make much of an impact. The pretty Rachel McAdams makes a forgettable appearance as a sort of love interest to Sherlock Holmes. Her character is a bit of a mess, she is not in the film long enough to get any romantic frisson going between herself and Holmes, and sadly McAdams acting is sub-par and fails to bring across any emotions or motives. She appears to be shoehorned into the film to offset the “Boys Own” feeling the majority of the film has.
Director Guy Ritchie does a solid job of controlling the chaos on screen. He handles the action scenes fairly well, especially the all action finale which includes a well done fight on a partially built Tower Bridge. Although the films' marketing pitches it as a action film there's more talking than fighting. Unfortunately the film falls a little flat when there's no action on screen, the pacing is uneven and some of the scenes can drag. Thankfully the main meat of Sherlock Holmes, the sleuthing, is handled well and it's entertaining to see Holmes piece together the clues. There's also some fun scenes where Holmes will play out in his mind how he's going to take out a bad guy (aiming for weak spots, predicting his moves.) We see these thoughts Holmes is playing out in his mind, and then we see it again as Holmes actually carries out his plan.
The cinematography and set design is excellent, with Victorian London brought vividly to life. There's also a good soundtrack by Hans Zimmer. Overall Sherlock Holmes is a decent effort at breathing new life into the detective although the uneven pacing and the villain not getting enough time to make a strong opponent to Holmes does let things down.
Monday 28 December 2009
Thursday 17 December 2009
Review - The Incredible Hulk
Ang Lee's 2003 take on the big green brute was a strange affair, a methodical look at a man desperately grappling with the demons within him while chucking in some action sequences where a big CGI monster runs around throwing tanks at helicopters. Although the film was a misfire it at least tried to do something different and had decent performances from Eric Bana and a scenery chewing Nick Nolte. This film is not a sequel to Ang Lee's effort but instead a retelling of the Hulk story. Sadly it's a rather bland and unoriginal affair which doesn't take full advantage of its talented cast.
Edward Norton plays Bruce Banner/The Hulk. The film opens with a brief recap of how the unfortunate Bruce takes part in a experiment that goes wrong, which leaves him turning into a big green brute whenever he gets angry. We join Bruce in Brazil, where he is searching for an antidote for his unusual condition. Unbeknownst to him he is being chased by the fanatical General Ross (William Hurt) who wants to capture Bruce for experimentation in creating a new breed of super soldier. Ross has brought in ruthless and slightly unhinged soldier Emil Blonksy (Tim Roth) to help capture Bruce. They eventually find Bruce who promptly goes on the run and ends up back in the States, and running into his former girlfriend Betty Ross (Liv Tyler) who was present at the fateful experiment. Bruce continues his work to cure himself of the Hulk while trying to avoid the clutches of General Ross and Blonsky, who eventually becomes a hulking mutant himself called The Abomination.
The plot is straight forward and dispenses with the character development element that Ang Lee's movie went for, instead concentrating on wham bam action sequences. Sadly the action just isn't very exciting. Like in Ang Lee's film the Hulk is completely CGI generated, but he isn't very convincing. His first appearance is shrouded mainly in darkness which actually works quite well, but a big daylight scene in the middle of the movie looks unnatural. The CGI overall is mediocre which detracts from the enjoyment of the action scenes. The final showdown between the Hulk and the Abomination is fairly well done and exciting in parts, but it's a rather dull slog before we get there.
The acting ranges from average to poor. Edward Norton, who also had a hand in the script, is not a very engaging Bruce Banner and comes off as a bit of a dullard. Tim Roth, normally quite an intense actor, is oddly subdued as Blonsky, and never seems as dangerous as his character implies. William Hurt does a good job as General Ross, giving a suitably cartoony performance which plays well. He also sports a rather fabulous moustache. Liv Tyler is largely awful as Betty, providing an astonishingly wooden and wimpy performance. She isn't served well by the script but that's no excuse for such a poor performance.
This film really should have been called “The Mediocre Hulk.” The script and story, credited to Zak Penn, serves little purpose other than to lurch from one action scene to the next. Director Louis Leterrier seems to have a knack for directing action but is let down by poor special effects. A special effects free chase across Brazilian rooftops works well, but nearly every recent action film has a free running scene so it comes off a little tired. Even the music is unmemorable except for a nice but brief little nod to the Incredible Hulk TV show theme. Considering all these factors along with the average acting it's hard to recommend The Incredible Hulk.
Edward Norton plays Bruce Banner/The Hulk. The film opens with a brief recap of how the unfortunate Bruce takes part in a experiment that goes wrong, which leaves him turning into a big green brute whenever he gets angry. We join Bruce in Brazil, where he is searching for an antidote for his unusual condition. Unbeknownst to him he is being chased by the fanatical General Ross (William Hurt) who wants to capture Bruce for experimentation in creating a new breed of super soldier. Ross has brought in ruthless and slightly unhinged soldier Emil Blonksy (Tim Roth) to help capture Bruce. They eventually find Bruce who promptly goes on the run and ends up back in the States, and running into his former girlfriend Betty Ross (Liv Tyler) who was present at the fateful experiment. Bruce continues his work to cure himself of the Hulk while trying to avoid the clutches of General Ross and Blonsky, who eventually becomes a hulking mutant himself called The Abomination.
The plot is straight forward and dispenses with the character development element that Ang Lee's movie went for, instead concentrating on wham bam action sequences. Sadly the action just isn't very exciting. Like in Ang Lee's film the Hulk is completely CGI generated, but he isn't very convincing. His first appearance is shrouded mainly in darkness which actually works quite well, but a big daylight scene in the middle of the movie looks unnatural. The CGI overall is mediocre which detracts from the enjoyment of the action scenes. The final showdown between the Hulk and the Abomination is fairly well done and exciting in parts, but it's a rather dull slog before we get there.
The acting ranges from average to poor. Edward Norton, who also had a hand in the script, is not a very engaging Bruce Banner and comes off as a bit of a dullard. Tim Roth, normally quite an intense actor, is oddly subdued as Blonsky, and never seems as dangerous as his character implies. William Hurt does a good job as General Ross, giving a suitably cartoony performance which plays well. He also sports a rather fabulous moustache. Liv Tyler is largely awful as Betty, providing an astonishingly wooden and wimpy performance. She isn't served well by the script but that's no excuse for such a poor performance.
This film really should have been called “The Mediocre Hulk.” The script and story, credited to Zak Penn, serves little purpose other than to lurch from one action scene to the next. Director Louis Leterrier seems to have a knack for directing action but is let down by poor special effects. A special effects free chase across Brazilian rooftops works well, but nearly every recent action film has a free running scene so it comes off a little tired. Even the music is unmemorable except for a nice but brief little nod to the Incredible Hulk TV show theme. Considering all these factors along with the average acting it's hard to recommend The Incredible Hulk.
Review - The Happening
M. Night Shyamalan's latest is a technically awful but oddly watchable horror, which Shyamalan calls a “B-Movie.” Whether he decided it was a B-Movie while filming or after he viewed the final cut is unknown. The film opens with a surprisingly creepy scene in New York, where people in Central Park all come to a standstill at the same time, walk a few steps backward and then promptly kill themselves via the most convenient means. This strange and horrible situation sweeps throughout the city, with nearly the entire population attempting to off themselves, including a memorable scene with construction workers hauling themselves off a building. The action then moves to Philadelphia, where Elliot and Alma Moore (Mark Whalberg and Zooey Deschanel) find themselves swept up in this bizarre suicide epidemic. We follow them as they desperately try to make sense of this “happening,” and avoid ending up getting affected themselves.
Despite the interesting premise the script and story is a schlocky mess. None of the characters speak like normal people, they all speak like a narrative in a book. The story doesn't really go anywhere and requires a huge suspension of disbelief. In these types of films characters are always doing silly things but I did have a bit of trouble getting emotionally invested in a scene where the characters have to run away from the wind. Yes they run through a field with the “wind” blowing and trying to catch up behind them. Difficult to explain, mind blowingly stupid to watch. The acting is horrific, which is a shame as Whalberg and Deschanel aren't bad actors. I don't know if it was a stylistic choice by Shyamalan but the actors read their lines like they're on a cue card behind the camera and they only rehearsed five minutes before filming the scene.
But despite the poor acting, simplistic script and silly story, The Happening does have two things going for it. The first is the excellent music by James Newton Howard. The second is the shocks sprinkled throughout the film. Shyamalan does understand what makes a good scare and the suicide scenes, although far fetched, are just tongue in cheek and creepy enough to work. There's also a couple of effective shocks outside the suicide scenes as mankind falls apart at the hands of the epidemic and paranoia sinks in.
Clocking in at 90 minutes The Happening is to brief and goofy to be a bore to watch. There's no doubt this is a poor effort and the over the top suicide scenes and occasional shocks don't make up for the failings in the script and acting. I wouldn't go out of my way to watch this film but if it's on late night TV, which is probably the rightful home for a film like this, it might be worth catching, if only for the silly death scenes.
Despite the interesting premise the script and story is a schlocky mess. None of the characters speak like normal people, they all speak like a narrative in a book. The story doesn't really go anywhere and requires a huge suspension of disbelief. In these types of films characters are always doing silly things but I did have a bit of trouble getting emotionally invested in a scene where the characters have to run away from the wind. Yes they run through a field with the “wind” blowing and trying to catch up behind them. Difficult to explain, mind blowingly stupid to watch. The acting is horrific, which is a shame as Whalberg and Deschanel aren't bad actors. I don't know if it was a stylistic choice by Shyamalan but the actors read their lines like they're on a cue card behind the camera and they only rehearsed five minutes before filming the scene.
But despite the poor acting, simplistic script and silly story, The Happening does have two things going for it. The first is the excellent music by James Newton Howard. The second is the shocks sprinkled throughout the film. Shyamalan does understand what makes a good scare and the suicide scenes, although far fetched, are just tongue in cheek and creepy enough to work. There's also a couple of effective shocks outside the suicide scenes as mankind falls apart at the hands of the epidemic and paranoia sinks in.
Clocking in at 90 minutes The Happening is to brief and goofy to be a bore to watch. There's no doubt this is a poor effort and the over the top suicide scenes and occasional shocks don't make up for the failings in the script and acting. I wouldn't go out of my way to watch this film but if it's on late night TV, which is probably the rightful home for a film like this, it might be worth catching, if only for the silly death scenes.
Thursday 10 December 2009
Review - In Bruges
I've only visited Bruges once. A quaint little medieval town in Belgium, it was a nice place to wander around but I was glad to leave after spending half a day there. In this entertaining and violent comedy thriller, hitmen Ray and Ken (Colin Farrell and Brendan Gleeson) have to spend two weeks there. They are awaiting instructions from their boss Harry (a barnstorming Ralph Fiennes) after a hit they performed went horribly wrong. Ken is entranced by Bruges and falls in love with the architecture and people. Ray doesn't hide his hatred of Bruges and can't wait to leave. I sympathised with Ray more.
While awaiting instructions from Harry, Ray and Ken learn more about Bruges, the people there, and about themselves. Their backstory is told in well crafted flashbacks, and their escapades in Bruges are funny and interesting. Ray finds himself falling in love with local drug dealer Chio (Clémence Poésy) while Ken falls in love with Bruges itself. Things eventually escalate so that Harry ends up visiting the boys which leads to a violent and shocking finale.
Bruges makes a good looking backdrop for the film and the cinematography is excellent, really making good use of the scenery Bruges has to offer. The script by Martin McDonagh, who also directs, is very good. There's a sly and often subtle sense of humour running throughout, even when things start getting bloody. The characters are sensitively handled and the acting is excellent– Farrell initially has a brash exterior which is seemingly impenetrable but we discover over the course of the film how fragile and conflicted he really is. Gleesen plays his role as a sort of father figure to Farrell and it comes off well. Fiennes gets to chew up the scenery in a largely one note role as a psychotic gangster. He's a lot of fun though and really makes an impression in the small amount of screen time he's given.
I thoroughly enjoyed In Bruges, its low key but funny humour and obvious love for its characters working really well on screen.
While awaiting instructions from Harry, Ray and Ken learn more about Bruges, the people there, and about themselves. Their backstory is told in well crafted flashbacks, and their escapades in Bruges are funny and interesting. Ray finds himself falling in love with local drug dealer Chio (Clémence Poésy) while Ken falls in love with Bruges itself. Things eventually escalate so that Harry ends up visiting the boys which leads to a violent and shocking finale.
Bruges makes a good looking backdrop for the film and the cinematography is excellent, really making good use of the scenery Bruges has to offer. The script by Martin McDonagh, who also directs, is very good. There's a sly and often subtle sense of humour running throughout, even when things start getting bloody. The characters are sensitively handled and the acting is excellent– Farrell initially has a brash exterior which is seemingly impenetrable but we discover over the course of the film how fragile and conflicted he really is. Gleesen plays his role as a sort of father figure to Farrell and it comes off well. Fiennes gets to chew up the scenery in a largely one note role as a psychotic gangster. He's a lot of fun though and really makes an impression in the small amount of screen time he's given.
I thoroughly enjoyed In Bruges, its low key but funny humour and obvious love for its characters working really well on screen.
Review - The Notorious Bettie Paige
This biopic of famed 50's pin-up Bettie Paige unfortunately falls short of the mark. The film tells Bettie's story from her troubled childhood to her transition into starring in adult photographs and films, earning her the nickname of the “Pin-up Queen of the Universe.” After the US Senate starts a crackdown on these lewd photographs we follow Bettie as she leaves the adult photograph industry and the public eye behind and eventually becomes a born again Christian.
Gretchen Moll plays Bettie, and is the highlight of this uneven film. She throws herself fully into the role and is entertaining as the young, innocent and bubbly pin up girl. The supporting cast are also good with Lili Taylor and Chris Bauer putting in enjoyable turns as adult photographers Paula and Irving Klaw. Sadly while the acting is above par, the directing by Mary Harron and writing by Mary Harron and Guinevere Turner is rather mediocre.
The main problem I found with the film is that we learn very little about Bettie as a person. Like the Andy Kaufman biopic “Man in the Moon,” the film is quite happy to re-enact scenes from Bettie's life but never give any further insight about her character. Bettie's troubled childhood is glossed over, even though she was abused by her father and as a teen was gang raped. Absolutely no screen time is given to how this affected Bettie. Even during her modelling career we're never allowed a deep look into Bettie's character – the film is just happy to re-enact the process of how the photos were taken and the films made. The only aspect of Bettie's life the film does touch upon is her religious beliefs. There's a nice scene where Bettie is asked what God thinks about her posing nude. She replies that God must want her to pose nude or he wouldn't have given her this “talent.” It's the only part of the film that gives a little insight into Bettie as a person and it's a shame the rest of the film couldn't follow this scenes example.
Bettie Paige in real life was a very private person, so it's possible the reason the film doesn't reveal much about Bettie's thoughts is that she has never spoken about it in public. Unfortunately the direction and cinematography don't do much to make up for the weakness of the script. Filmed mainly in black and white the film looks rather lifeless – it's flatly lit and the direction is rather dull. The film is punctuated with scenes in Miami which are filmed in a lush 50's Technicolour style – these scenes look great and add some much needed life to the film. But overall “The Notorious Bettie Paige” is a disappointment. The life of a bright and bubbly individual has been turned into a rather stoic and workmanlike film.
Gretchen Moll plays Bettie, and is the highlight of this uneven film. She throws herself fully into the role and is entertaining as the young, innocent and bubbly pin up girl. The supporting cast are also good with Lili Taylor and Chris Bauer putting in enjoyable turns as adult photographers Paula and Irving Klaw. Sadly while the acting is above par, the directing by Mary Harron and writing by Mary Harron and Guinevere Turner is rather mediocre.
The main problem I found with the film is that we learn very little about Bettie as a person. Like the Andy Kaufman biopic “Man in the Moon,” the film is quite happy to re-enact scenes from Bettie's life but never give any further insight about her character. Bettie's troubled childhood is glossed over, even though she was abused by her father and as a teen was gang raped. Absolutely no screen time is given to how this affected Bettie. Even during her modelling career we're never allowed a deep look into Bettie's character – the film is just happy to re-enact the process of how the photos were taken and the films made. The only aspect of Bettie's life the film does touch upon is her religious beliefs. There's a nice scene where Bettie is asked what God thinks about her posing nude. She replies that God must want her to pose nude or he wouldn't have given her this “talent.” It's the only part of the film that gives a little insight into Bettie as a person and it's a shame the rest of the film couldn't follow this scenes example.
Bettie Paige in real life was a very private person, so it's possible the reason the film doesn't reveal much about Bettie's thoughts is that she has never spoken about it in public. Unfortunately the direction and cinematography don't do much to make up for the weakness of the script. Filmed mainly in black and white the film looks rather lifeless – it's flatly lit and the direction is rather dull. The film is punctuated with scenes in Miami which are filmed in a lush 50's Technicolour style – these scenes look great and add some much needed life to the film. But overall “The Notorious Bettie Paige” is a disappointment. The life of a bright and bubbly individual has been turned into a rather stoic and workmanlike film.
Sunday 6 December 2009
Review - Slumdog Millionaire
When released in 2008, Slumdog Millionaire became a sleeper hit, doing good business at the box office and sweeping the 2009 OSCARS. It's not surprising to see why – director Danny Boyle handles the drama, comedy and pathos in the well written script well, backed up with a very talented cast and exotic Indian scenery.
The film opens with a young Indian man named Jamel (Dev Patel) being tortured by the police. It transpires that Jamel has just finished filming an episode of “Who Wants to be a Millionaire,” and he has made it to just one question away from the 20 million rupee top prize. However there are suspicions as to how a poor “slumdog” got that far, and the police want to find out if he's cheating and how. Through flashback we discover how Jamel knows the answers to the quiz questions, and also learn about his turbulent life.
The flashbacks start from when Jamel is five or six years old, living in the slums with his brother Salima. After a tragic incident where their mother is killed, they go on the run and are eventually taken to a camp where they are trained to beg. There they meet Latika, who Jamel instantly has an attraction too. We follow the three characters lives which end up going in very different directions, along the way learning how Jamel picked up the knowledge he'd eventually use on the quiz show and we discover why he his on the show in the first place.
Danny Boyle directs the action at a cracking pace, and the script is both funny and dramatic. The early childhood scenes work the best. The child actors are fantastic, completely believable and very watchable. Emotionally the script and action veers all over the place, with everything from heartbreaking scenes to gross out jokes. Unfortunately as the characters get older the situations get a little more contrived, especially when gangsters get involved. The film retains a fair level of grittiness, especially during the early childhood scenes. As the film goes on the grittiness is lost a little, and although the situations the characters find themselves in get progressively more dangerous they seem a bit fake and don't have the edge found in the first half of the film. The Indian scenery is fabulous throughout and there's also an fantastic soundtrack.
It's hard not to get enveloped into Jamil's story and the final act is a real nail biter. Although Slumdog is marketed (in the UK at least) as an almost family friendly “feel good” film, it's actually quite a grim movie at times. It's not afraid to explore the dark side of human nature, and the oppressing grittiness of living in the slums themselves. These are themes Danny Boyle has handled before and done well, and they come across well in this film. If like me it's taken you a while to get round to seeing this film, don't delay it for too long – it's well worth watching.
The film opens with a young Indian man named Jamel (Dev Patel) being tortured by the police. It transpires that Jamel has just finished filming an episode of “Who Wants to be a Millionaire,” and he has made it to just one question away from the 20 million rupee top prize. However there are suspicions as to how a poor “slumdog” got that far, and the police want to find out if he's cheating and how. Through flashback we discover how Jamel knows the answers to the quiz questions, and also learn about his turbulent life.
The flashbacks start from when Jamel is five or six years old, living in the slums with his brother Salima. After a tragic incident where their mother is killed, they go on the run and are eventually taken to a camp where they are trained to beg. There they meet Latika, who Jamel instantly has an attraction too. We follow the three characters lives which end up going in very different directions, along the way learning how Jamel picked up the knowledge he'd eventually use on the quiz show and we discover why he his on the show in the first place.
Danny Boyle directs the action at a cracking pace, and the script is both funny and dramatic. The early childhood scenes work the best. The child actors are fantastic, completely believable and very watchable. Emotionally the script and action veers all over the place, with everything from heartbreaking scenes to gross out jokes. Unfortunately as the characters get older the situations get a little more contrived, especially when gangsters get involved. The film retains a fair level of grittiness, especially during the early childhood scenes. As the film goes on the grittiness is lost a little, and although the situations the characters find themselves in get progressively more dangerous they seem a bit fake and don't have the edge found in the first half of the film. The Indian scenery is fabulous throughout and there's also an fantastic soundtrack.
It's hard not to get enveloped into Jamil's story and the final act is a real nail biter. Although Slumdog is marketed (in the UK at least) as an almost family friendly “feel good” film, it's actually quite a grim movie at times. It's not afraid to explore the dark side of human nature, and the oppressing grittiness of living in the slums themselves. These are themes Danny Boyle has handled before and done well, and they come across well in this film. If like me it's taken you a while to get round to seeing this film, don't delay it for too long – it's well worth watching.
Review - The Science of Sleep
French director Michael Gondry, who has graduated from music videos to feature films, tackles another unusual take on a classic love story, much like his previous feature “Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.” Stéphane Miroux (Gael García Bernal) has moved from Mexico to Paris at the insistence of his widowed mother. He finds a dreary job at a calendar publisher, where his sexist, pigish boss Guy (Alain Chabat) constantly chides him, but is also oddly supportive and friendly towards him. Stéphane's rather humdrum life is made more exciting when Stéphanie (Charlotte Gainsbourg) moves in to the apartment opposite. Stéphane initially has an eye for Stéphanie's room mate but soon falls in love with Stéphanie herself, and desperately tries to woo her.
As we follow Stéphane's attempts to romance Stéphanie we learn a lot about both characters. Stéphane's father has passed away and this haunts Stéphane greatly. His over-active imagination leads to vivid dreams where his fears and hopes are brought to life in surreal ways. Amongst the themes explored in his dreams are his relationships with his family, including his deceased father, his co-workers and with Stéphanie. These are tackled well and although they are fantasy sequences there's truth and realism to them. Stéphanie also appears to have a vivid imagination, putting it to practical use creating whimsical and inventive art. She is also somewhat withdrawn and introverted like Stéphane, but as the film goes on she seems more willing to come out of her shell unlike Stéphane who frequently retreats to his dream world.
Stéphane's highly stylised dream sequences are a highlight of the film. Using a mixture of live action and stop motion they are witty and really bring across the unique other worldly feel that dreams have, where the extraordinary seems ordinary and everything is not quite what it seems. Outside of the dreams the film is amusing and entertaining, and Stéphane's and Stéphanie's tale is a charming one. At least until the last half hour, where Stéphane, his romantic advances repeatedly rejected by Stéphanie, becomes more self centered, difficult and arrogant (Stéphanie just calls him “creepy”.) The final act will divide viewers and some will be annoyed by Stéphane acting like a spoiled child – stamping his feet until he gets his own way. Other viewers (including myself) will recognise that's just how people behave sometimes – they may not realise how annoying they're being.
Despite the polarising final thirty minutes, Science of Sleep has a lot going for it. As well as excellent leading performances from Bernal and Gainsbourg, there's a colourful supporting cast, a pleasant soundtrack and lovely French scenery. All of this combines to make The Science of Sleep an enjoyably arty movie.
As we follow Stéphane's attempts to romance Stéphanie we learn a lot about both characters. Stéphane's father has passed away and this haunts Stéphane greatly. His over-active imagination leads to vivid dreams where his fears and hopes are brought to life in surreal ways. Amongst the themes explored in his dreams are his relationships with his family, including his deceased father, his co-workers and with Stéphanie. These are tackled well and although they are fantasy sequences there's truth and realism to them. Stéphanie also appears to have a vivid imagination, putting it to practical use creating whimsical and inventive art. She is also somewhat withdrawn and introverted like Stéphane, but as the film goes on she seems more willing to come out of her shell unlike Stéphane who frequently retreats to his dream world.
Stéphane's highly stylised dream sequences are a highlight of the film. Using a mixture of live action and stop motion they are witty and really bring across the unique other worldly feel that dreams have, where the extraordinary seems ordinary and everything is not quite what it seems. Outside of the dreams the film is amusing and entertaining, and Stéphane's and Stéphanie's tale is a charming one. At least until the last half hour, where Stéphane, his romantic advances repeatedly rejected by Stéphanie, becomes more self centered, difficult and arrogant (Stéphanie just calls him “creepy”.) The final act will divide viewers and some will be annoyed by Stéphane acting like a spoiled child – stamping his feet until he gets his own way. Other viewers (including myself) will recognise that's just how people behave sometimes – they may not realise how annoying they're being.
Despite the polarising final thirty minutes, Science of Sleep has a lot going for it. As well as excellent leading performances from Bernal and Gainsbourg, there's a colourful supporting cast, a pleasant soundtrack and lovely French scenery. All of this combines to make The Science of Sleep an enjoyably arty movie.
Wednesday 25 November 2009
Reviews - Pixar Round Up Part Two
Finding Nemo – Pixar's next film moved away from the more grown up themes and dark side that Monsters Inc provided and is more of a straight forward kids movie. Luckily it's a kid films with plenty of charm and warmth, although it makes fewer concessions to adult audience members then previous movies. This entertaining tale of a clownfish desperately trying to find his son who has gone missing is filled with memorable characters and scenes, including a great turn from Ellen DeGeneres. It stands out as one of Pixar's best looking movies – the Australian coast is brought to vivid, lush life, but overall it feels aimed more for the younger audience.
The Incredibles – Pixar had a go at mixing in more dramatic and action elements along with their usual comedic elements in this enjoyable effort. Filmed in widescreen the film is a stunner from the Metropolis city landscapes to dense jungle scenery. The Incredibles was the first Pixar film to star an all human cast, and rather than going for realism the cartoony look of the cast pays off handsomely. The story and writing, about a family of superheroes who must work together to fight a new threat trying to take over a world where superheroes are outlawed, is great. Writer and director Brad Bird handles both the over the top action and the more personal family scenes well. The film doesn't have as much humour as previous Pixar efforts but this is still a very enjoyable romp from a studio now very comfortable with their craft.
Cars – After watching Cars I was left with a feeling I seldom have after watching a Pixar movie -disappointment. Cars is a film that unfortunately just doesn't deliver – the laughs are few, the drama falls flat, and while the film looks good (again filmed in widescreen) the scenery is a little uninspired. The characters are fun but at just under two hours Cars is far too long for it's slight story about a racing car lost and damaged in the backwater town of Radiator Springs, and his journey back to the racetrack for the race of his life. What may have been a entertaining eighty minutes is dragged out and it long outstays its welcome. The film made an absolute fortune in merchandise so a sequel is on the way. Hopefully Pixar will inject more humour and shorten the running time to make an enjoyable movie.
Ratatouille – Cars may have been a bit of a dud but Pixar pulled out all the stops for Ratatouille, a funny, charming winner of a film that ranks as my favourite Pixar movie. A simple story about a French mouse who dreams of being a chef, and gets to live that dream via an unwilling human volunteer, the combination of witty writing, assured direction and superb animation lift this film up high. Any evidence of its troubled production (the original director was replaced during production) is not evident on screen. All the characters are fantastic and well voiced, but special mention goes to Peter O'Toole who puts in a memorable performance as a sour faced restaurant critic. An absolute delight.
Wall-E – A film set in a post-apocalyptic Earth starring a lonely, rubbish collecting robot who is seemingly the only inhabitant of Earth left doesn't exactly sound like a heartwarming family feature but somehow Pixar pull it off. Wall-E may not have the best jokes or the strongest plot but it has bags and bags of charm. The first half of the film features precious little dialogue but it doesn't need it, everything that needs to be said is animated in silent perfection. After this brave first half the film falls into more generic territory for the second half involving a space marooned colony of humans, but it's still highly enjoyable and very imaginative. Wall-E himself is a delight of a character and it's a pleasure spending time with him. A great, touching film.
That rounds up my thoughts on the Pixar stable of films. As you can probably tell I have a lot of love for these movies (except for Cars.) But when a collection of films contain as much humour, warmth, excitement and good old fashioned story telling as these do, it's hard not to be entranced by them. It's also been fun watching Pixar's writing, directing and technical prowess improve with each film. I'm looking forward to 2010 and beyond where we'll get to see Toy Story 3, The Bear and The Bow and Newt, which has the sort of simple story Pixar handle very well. And of course there's also Cars 2 which will hopefully be a big improvement on the first film.
The Incredibles – Pixar had a go at mixing in more dramatic and action elements along with their usual comedic elements in this enjoyable effort. Filmed in widescreen the film is a stunner from the Metropolis city landscapes to dense jungle scenery. The Incredibles was the first Pixar film to star an all human cast, and rather than going for realism the cartoony look of the cast pays off handsomely. The story and writing, about a family of superheroes who must work together to fight a new threat trying to take over a world where superheroes are outlawed, is great. Writer and director Brad Bird handles both the over the top action and the more personal family scenes well. The film doesn't have as much humour as previous Pixar efforts but this is still a very enjoyable romp from a studio now very comfortable with their craft.
Cars – After watching Cars I was left with a feeling I seldom have after watching a Pixar movie -disappointment. Cars is a film that unfortunately just doesn't deliver – the laughs are few, the drama falls flat, and while the film looks good (again filmed in widescreen) the scenery is a little uninspired. The characters are fun but at just under two hours Cars is far too long for it's slight story about a racing car lost and damaged in the backwater town of Radiator Springs, and his journey back to the racetrack for the race of his life. What may have been a entertaining eighty minutes is dragged out and it long outstays its welcome. The film made an absolute fortune in merchandise so a sequel is on the way. Hopefully Pixar will inject more humour and shorten the running time to make an enjoyable movie.
Ratatouille – Cars may have been a bit of a dud but Pixar pulled out all the stops for Ratatouille, a funny, charming winner of a film that ranks as my favourite Pixar movie. A simple story about a French mouse who dreams of being a chef, and gets to live that dream via an unwilling human volunteer, the combination of witty writing, assured direction and superb animation lift this film up high. Any evidence of its troubled production (the original director was replaced during production) is not evident on screen. All the characters are fantastic and well voiced, but special mention goes to Peter O'Toole who puts in a memorable performance as a sour faced restaurant critic. An absolute delight.
Wall-E – A film set in a post-apocalyptic Earth starring a lonely, rubbish collecting robot who is seemingly the only inhabitant of Earth left doesn't exactly sound like a heartwarming family feature but somehow Pixar pull it off. Wall-E may not have the best jokes or the strongest plot but it has bags and bags of charm. The first half of the film features precious little dialogue but it doesn't need it, everything that needs to be said is animated in silent perfection. After this brave first half the film falls into more generic territory for the second half involving a space marooned colony of humans, but it's still highly enjoyable and very imaginative. Wall-E himself is a delight of a character and it's a pleasure spending time with him. A great, touching film.
That rounds up my thoughts on the Pixar stable of films. As you can probably tell I have a lot of love for these movies (except for Cars.) But when a collection of films contain as much humour, warmth, excitement and good old fashioned story telling as these do, it's hard not to be entranced by them. It's also been fun watching Pixar's writing, directing and technical prowess improve with each film. I'm looking forward to 2010 and beyond where we'll get to see Toy Story 3, The Bear and The Bow and Newt, which has the sort of simple story Pixar handle very well. And of course there's also Cars 2 which will hopefully be a big improvement on the first film.
Saturday 14 November 2009
Review - Somers Town
This entertaining little curio was originally supposed to be a short promotional film for Eurostar until director Shane Meadows extended it into a (barely) feature length film. Filmed in evocative black and white, Somers Town follows the lives of two new arrivals to the eponymous area of London – young polish boy Marek (Piotr Jagiello) who has just moved with his dad, and youngster Tomo (Thomas Turgoose) who has come to Somers Town from Nottingham, to escape his life there.
Somers Town is very much a character driven so luckily Marek and Tomo are interesting to follow. We learn about Marek's problems at home living only with his dad, who would rather get drunk with his Polish builder buddies than spend some time with his son. Tomo also suffers from problems at home as well, although these are never explicitly seen on screen. While near opposites, with Marek quiet and thoughtful, and Tomo loud, brash and liable to speak before he thinks, their eventual friendship is a believable one and brought humorously and vividly to life by the two young actors. They are both bought together by a mutual bond, being new in the area and having difficult home lives. Shane Meadows populates the film with a smattering of entertaining minor characters, the highlight being wideboy London tinker Graham (Perry Benson.) Two other important stars of the film are the great soundtrack, and Somers Town and the surrounding area itself. In black and white the area loses its unappealing grubbiness and exudes a strange sort of charm.
Clocking in at around seventy minutes, the film doesn't give itself the chance to outstay its welcome. In fact, and I haven't written this about a film for a long while, I wouldn't of minded if the running time was a little bit longer. I felt the finale came on a bit too quickly and the film still had a bit more to say. Overall though Somers Town is a very entertaining low key little film.
Somers Town is very much a character driven so luckily Marek and Tomo are interesting to follow. We learn about Marek's problems at home living only with his dad, who would rather get drunk with his Polish builder buddies than spend some time with his son. Tomo also suffers from problems at home as well, although these are never explicitly seen on screen. While near opposites, with Marek quiet and thoughtful, and Tomo loud, brash and liable to speak before he thinks, their eventual friendship is a believable one and brought humorously and vividly to life by the two young actors. They are both bought together by a mutual bond, being new in the area and having difficult home lives. Shane Meadows populates the film with a smattering of entertaining minor characters, the highlight being wideboy London tinker Graham (Perry Benson.) Two other important stars of the film are the great soundtrack, and Somers Town and the surrounding area itself. In black and white the area loses its unappealing grubbiness and exudes a strange sort of charm.
Clocking in at around seventy minutes, the film doesn't give itself the chance to outstay its welcome. In fact, and I haven't written this about a film for a long while, I wouldn't of minded if the running time was a little bit longer. I felt the finale came on a bit too quickly and the film still had a bit more to say. Overall though Somers Town is a very entertaining low key little film.
Review - Bolt
By 2008, with Pixar and Dreamworks dominating the computer generated film market, Disney's own in-house animation studio seemed to have fallen to the wayside after making the switch from traditional animation to computer generated features. Previous releases Chicken Little and Meet the Robinsons didn't reach the same popularity of Toy Story or Shrek. However along came “Bolt” which did generate a fair bit of buzz and was a hit for the studio. Watching the film it's easy to see why it's a success: Bolt is a entertaining family movie with a strong cast of characters and excellent animation.
Bolt (voiced by John Travolta) is a lovable pooch starring in a action-adventure television show with his owner Penny, who is voiced by Disney tween favourite Miley Cirus. In the show Bolt is a superdog with a host of special powers, such as the ability to bend bars, stop cars with his forehead and a superbark which causes all kinds of destruction. The only thing he can't do is fly, which as Bolt points out would be “ridiculous.” Bolt has no idea that all his adventures are being filmed for a TV show and that his super powers are all fake special effects. In Truman Show-esque style Bolt is kept on set at all times and is oblivious to the outside world. Inevitably through a series of mishaps Bolt is flung into the real world and ends up in New York, and he embarks on a journey back to Hollywood to save Penny who he believes is in great peril. Joining him on his journey is sly, sarcastic cat Mittens (a solid voice job from Susie Essman) and Bolt's number one fan, an excitable hamster named Rhino (excellently voiced by Mark Walton.)
Bolts adventure back to Hollywood is a funny and exciting one. As well as the likeable and well acted characters of Mittens and Rhino, Bolt meets a host of other characters along the way, the highlight being three wiseguy pigeons he meets in New York. All the characters are expertly animated, with Disney's usual attention to animal detail translating well to CGI, the pigeons in particular with their wide eyes and twitching necks are well realised. The fast paced action sequences which make up a fair portion of the film are also very good, and manage to bring across a sense of peril and excitement often missing from CGI generated action sequences.
The plot is fairly predictable and there are few surprises - in true Disney fashion lessons are learnt and fears are conquered. But with the likeable characters, winning humour and involving action sequences Bolt is a fun ride while it lasts. Ironically after finally getting the hang of making a solid, enjoyable CGI film, Disney animation under the direction of John Lasseter are making the move back to traditional animation, starting with the upcoming “The Princess and the Frog.” While I'm all for this, I'd be happy to see further CGI releases from the studio if they follow the same standard of quality as “Bolt.”
Bolt (voiced by John Travolta) is a lovable pooch starring in a action-adventure television show with his owner Penny, who is voiced by Disney tween favourite Miley Cirus. In the show Bolt is a superdog with a host of special powers, such as the ability to bend bars, stop cars with his forehead and a superbark which causes all kinds of destruction. The only thing he can't do is fly, which as Bolt points out would be “ridiculous.” Bolt has no idea that all his adventures are being filmed for a TV show and that his super powers are all fake special effects. In Truman Show-esque style Bolt is kept on set at all times and is oblivious to the outside world. Inevitably through a series of mishaps Bolt is flung into the real world and ends up in New York, and he embarks on a journey back to Hollywood to save Penny who he believes is in great peril. Joining him on his journey is sly, sarcastic cat Mittens (a solid voice job from Susie Essman) and Bolt's number one fan, an excitable hamster named Rhino (excellently voiced by Mark Walton.)
Bolts adventure back to Hollywood is a funny and exciting one. As well as the likeable and well acted characters of Mittens and Rhino, Bolt meets a host of other characters along the way, the highlight being three wiseguy pigeons he meets in New York. All the characters are expertly animated, with Disney's usual attention to animal detail translating well to CGI, the pigeons in particular with their wide eyes and twitching necks are well realised. The fast paced action sequences which make up a fair portion of the film are also very good, and manage to bring across a sense of peril and excitement often missing from CGI generated action sequences.
The plot is fairly predictable and there are few surprises - in true Disney fashion lessons are learnt and fears are conquered. But with the likeable characters, winning humour and involving action sequences Bolt is a fun ride while it lasts. Ironically after finally getting the hang of making a solid, enjoyable CGI film, Disney animation under the direction of John Lasseter are making the move back to traditional animation, starting with the upcoming “The Princess and the Frog.” While I'm all for this, I'd be happy to see further CGI releases from the studio if they follow the same standard of quality as “Bolt.”
Tuesday 10 November 2009
Reviews - Pixar Round Up Part One
As I've reviewed Up I may as well give my two cents on other films from the Pixar stable. If you don't wish to read my brief thoughts on their films here's a summary: all of them are excellent except Cars (although the Cars merchandise is pretty good.) Anyway without further ado:
Toy Story – Pixar's first film was a wonder when released and still holds up well today. Not only was this film a technical marvel when it was first released but it was backed up with an original and funny story, memorable characters and a witty script. Tom Hanks and Tim Allen bring a liveliness and believability to the characters of Woody and Buzz Lightyear. Pixar chose a great subject matter for a computer generated film – it's hard to imagine all these toys being brought to life in a live action film. They also avoided the trap of creating “human” looking characters, going for a deliberately cartoony style, avoiding the creepy “uncanny valley” effect of films such as The Polar Express. But the most important thing is that Toy Story is just plain fun for both children and adults, a genuine family film.
A Bug's Life – Toy Story is a tough act to follow, and A Bug's Life doesn't really reach the heights of its predecessor. But there is plenty to enjoy here: filmed in glorious widescreen it looks a treat and the voice acting especially by Kevin Spacey is entertaining. Unfortunately the story is rather slight and the characters are very two dimensional. The film is geared more towards a younger audience than Toy Story and some parents may get bored by the proceedings. I enjoyed it immensely though, maybe I am just a big kid at heart!
Toy Story 2 – Essentially offering more of the same as the first film, Toy Story 2 is an absolute treat to watch and one of Pixar's better efforts. The only flaw I could find is a overly saccharine song halfway through the film which always leaves me cold. The rest of the film is great though, and Joan Cusack and Kelsey Grammer are clearly having lots of fun in their guest roles. Plenty of gags, both verbal and visual, and a hi-octane finale make this one a classic.
Monsters Inc – Pixar seemed to grow up a little with this film. The story and humour isn't as obvious and breezy as Toy Story and A Bug's Life. The characters seemed more rounded – they have hopes, dreams and ambitions (even if they are monsters.) Even the villain seems more grown up – he's cold, calculating and unpredictable. All these things make Monsters Inc an enjoyable watch, and although the themes are darker Pixar play it just right so kids and adults can enjoy.
Toy Story – Pixar's first film was a wonder when released and still holds up well today. Not only was this film a technical marvel when it was first released but it was backed up with an original and funny story, memorable characters and a witty script. Tom Hanks and Tim Allen bring a liveliness and believability to the characters of Woody and Buzz Lightyear. Pixar chose a great subject matter for a computer generated film – it's hard to imagine all these toys being brought to life in a live action film. They also avoided the trap of creating “human” looking characters, going for a deliberately cartoony style, avoiding the creepy “uncanny valley” effect of films such as The Polar Express. But the most important thing is that Toy Story is just plain fun for both children and adults, a genuine family film.
A Bug's Life – Toy Story is a tough act to follow, and A Bug's Life doesn't really reach the heights of its predecessor. But there is plenty to enjoy here: filmed in glorious widescreen it looks a treat and the voice acting especially by Kevin Spacey is entertaining. Unfortunately the story is rather slight and the characters are very two dimensional. The film is geared more towards a younger audience than Toy Story and some parents may get bored by the proceedings. I enjoyed it immensely though, maybe I am just a big kid at heart!
Toy Story 2 – Essentially offering more of the same as the first film, Toy Story 2 is an absolute treat to watch and one of Pixar's better efforts. The only flaw I could find is a overly saccharine song halfway through the film which always leaves me cold. The rest of the film is great though, and Joan Cusack and Kelsey Grammer are clearly having lots of fun in their guest roles. Plenty of gags, both verbal and visual, and a hi-octane finale make this one a classic.
Monsters Inc – Pixar seemed to grow up a little with this film. The story and humour isn't as obvious and breezy as Toy Story and A Bug's Life. The characters seemed more rounded – they have hopes, dreams and ambitions (even if they are monsters.) Even the villain seems more grown up – he's cold, calculating and unpredictable. All these things make Monsters Inc an enjoyable watch, and although the themes are darker Pixar play it just right so kids and adults can enjoy.
Monday 9 November 2009
Review - Up 3D
Disney/Pixar's latest offering is another winner. A simple fable, it's told with a warmth, humour and technical excellence that makes it stand out as one of Pixar's best. Up tells the story of grumpy senior Carl Fredrickson (Ed Asner) who has recently lost his wife and is soon to lose his home. Facing being moved into a retirement home after an unfortunate incident with building contractors who are after his home, Carl ties seemingly hundreds of balloons to his fireplace which send his house skyward. His goal is to reach Paradise Falls, where his childhood hero Charles Muntz (Christopher Plummer) visited many years back in search of a mythical bird but never returned. Tagging along unwittingly for the trip is a young boy scout named Russell. Amazingly the house does reach Paradise Falls where Carl and Russell run into a pack of talking dogs, a giant bird (who Russell christens as Kevin), and even Muntz himself, whose mysterious intentions are soon made clear to Carl and Russell.
From the heartbreaking first few minutes to the exciting and sentimental finale, Up is an absolute joy to watch. The main characters are perfectly judged and well played by the voice actors. Carl's story is a sad one and his dealing with being alone and old age is sensitively handled and rather touching. Russell is an excellent comic foil – wide-eyed, lovable and who refreshingly is written to behave like a kid and not a wisecracking grown-up in a kids body. He's the perfect antidote to Carl's grumpiness. Muntz is an entertaining “boo hiss” villain who gets some surprisingly creepy scenes. Pixar have somehow managed to create well rounded non-human characters as well. The dogs, equipped with collars which speak out their thoughts, are hilarious. Kevin, a giant bird with a fondness for Russell, provides the cute factor. Even though “he” is speechless he still gets the chance for some dramatics and character growth as the story progresses.
The story and direction by Pete Doctor and Bob Peterson (who also voices the two main canine characters) is thrilling, sentimental and dramatic in equal measures. It's played at just the right level so that both children and adults will enjoy. The film appeals to the mind, the heart and the eyes. For the mind there's the characters growth and depth, we really get to know what makes these characters tick, and learn about their fears, struggles and hopes. For the eye there's the colourful and well realised scenery and superbly animated characters, and for the heart there's everything from the tearjerker montage which opens the film to the rollercoaster thrills of the finale.
Up was filmed using Disney's Digital 3D system which is what the film was presented in at the viewing I attended. The danger with 3D films in the past is that the colours could end up muted due to the 3D glasses. However like the earlier “Monster Vs Aliens” Up manages to retain its bright colours and the film looks great in digital presentation. Pixar had a tough job following Ratatouille and Wall-E but have pulled through with a fantastic film which just about everybody will enjoy.
From the heartbreaking first few minutes to the exciting and sentimental finale, Up is an absolute joy to watch. The main characters are perfectly judged and well played by the voice actors. Carl's story is a sad one and his dealing with being alone and old age is sensitively handled and rather touching. Russell is an excellent comic foil – wide-eyed, lovable and who refreshingly is written to behave like a kid and not a wisecracking grown-up in a kids body. He's the perfect antidote to Carl's grumpiness. Muntz is an entertaining “boo hiss” villain who gets some surprisingly creepy scenes. Pixar have somehow managed to create well rounded non-human characters as well. The dogs, equipped with collars which speak out their thoughts, are hilarious. Kevin, a giant bird with a fondness for Russell, provides the cute factor. Even though “he” is speechless he still gets the chance for some dramatics and character growth as the story progresses.
The story and direction by Pete Doctor and Bob Peterson (who also voices the two main canine characters) is thrilling, sentimental and dramatic in equal measures. It's played at just the right level so that both children and adults will enjoy. The film appeals to the mind, the heart and the eyes. For the mind there's the characters growth and depth, we really get to know what makes these characters tick, and learn about their fears, struggles and hopes. For the eye there's the colourful and well realised scenery and superbly animated characters, and for the heart there's everything from the tearjerker montage which opens the film to the rollercoaster thrills of the finale.
Up was filmed using Disney's Digital 3D system which is what the film was presented in at the viewing I attended. The danger with 3D films in the past is that the colours could end up muted due to the 3D glasses. However like the earlier “Monster Vs Aliens” Up manages to retain its bright colours and the film looks great in digital presentation. Pixar had a tough job following Ratatouille and Wall-E but have pulled through with a fantastic film which just about everybody will enjoy.
Sunday 1 November 2009
London Film Festival - Ajami
The final film of the festival for me was the one I was looking forward to the most. An interesting sounding thriller set in the slums of the Jaffa neighbourhood, where Jews and Palestinians uneasily live side by side. It's a dangerous place where violence can and does happen, often suddenly and unexpectedly. The film opens with one of these acts of violence, where a young boy washing the family car is gunned down by youths on a moped. It's revealed that this is a gang killing, and also that the murderers have gunned down the wrong youth, mistaking him for their intended target. What follows is a tense, thoughtful pot-boiler as we find out how this shocking act of violence affects different characters in the neighbourhood.
Despite the fast paced and violent opening, the rest of the film is more deliberately paced, with the focus more on talking than on action. That's not to say it's boring – the script and direction by first time filmmakers Scandar Copti and Yaron Shani is engaging and thoughtful. The film is split into five chapters, which do not play in chronological order. Unfortunately playing the story out of order doesn't really add anything and I think it would have worked better as just a linear story. However it doesn't detract to much from the enjoyment of the film.
Despite the undeniably gritty setting and sometimes grim events Ajami is a characteristic and entertaining film. The characters are well drawn out, and their stories and actions are sometimes witty, sometimes tragic and often raise difficult questions. There's a sweet romantic subplot which helps soften some parts of the film, although it seems be forgotten about towards the end. The finale is also a bit too melodramatic, and doesn't have quite the dramatic punch it's aiming for.
Ajami was well worth watching and I'm not surprised to see it won the London Film Festival's Sutherland Trophy. What could have ended up being an Israeli version of City of God actually ends up having its very own strong identity and style.
I was lucky enough to see Ajami at the Phoenix cinema, a lovely single screen cinema in East Finchley which is currently going through a long renovation. The last film I saw there was Rushmore back in 1998 and the cinema had come along a long way since then, with a great looking foyer and refurbished art deco panels in the auditorium. There's still work to do though. Do make a visit there if you can, they usually have special screenings as well as the latest releases. Take a look at their website: http://www.phoenixcinema.co.uk.
Thursday 29 October 2009
London Film Festival – Mugabe and the White African
My third visit to the London Film Festival and it was back to the BFI Southbank to view Mugabe and the White African. Arriving at the BFI a large crowd was waiting outside the auditorium ready to go in, and a lot of them seemed to know each other. Turns out the stars of the documentary, the crew and their friends and families were all there as this was the first time the documentary had been screened in the UK. We were treated to a short introduction by the films producers, and promised a “surprise” at the end of the screening. As I already noticed the stars of the documentary were in the audience I had a good feeling what the surprise would be.
As for the documentary itself, it was a rather strange affair. The subject matter was fascinating. The film follows Mike Campbell, a white African farmer in Zimbabwe who is desperately trying to stop his farm being taken away from him by Robert Mugabe's Zanu PF party. Despite threats, vandalism and even being kidnapped along with other members of his family, Mike continues to fight to keep his farm which he has owned for over 20 years. He eventually takes his case to the South African Development Committee (SADC) who give a monumental ruling that he can keep his farm. It's an interesting story, and Mike and his family are amazingly strong characters who make for a great subject for a documentary.
Unfortunately, the presentation of the documentary brings down the impact of the documentary. The main problem is that the directors have overdone the presentation. Many of the scenes appear to have been staged, with glossy presentation and a distracting melodramtic score playing over the top. While done for dramatic effect I actually felt it distanced the audience from what was happening and it was sometimes hard to be emotionally attached to what was happening on screen because of the over the top presentation. The film is frequently punctuated with footage of Zimbabwe nature and wildlife. These scenes are initially quite pleasent but soon become overplayed, start to feel unnecessary and threaten to kill the pace of the movie. Towards the end of the movie these nature shots are used less and less and the tension and emotion on screen noticeably ramps up.
The best scenes of the film are the hidden camera segments. One highlight is a secretly filmed confrontation with the son of a Zanu PF government minister, who claims Mike should hand over the farm to him. It is a raw, fascinating and dangerous few minutes which raises emotions that the glossy, stagy scenes just can't provide. If the film was just a camera crew following the family, I feel it would have made for a far more interesting and emotionally charged documentary.
There's no doubt that Mike's crusade is an important one, and this film should be seen by as many as possible despite the flawed presentation. After the screening the “surprise” was a 45 minute Q&A session with the directors, producers and Mike Campbells son-in-law. This gave a fascinating insight to what life was like for Mike Campbell and family post-SADC judgment, and sadly not a lot had changed. In fact if anything things had got worse. Mugabe effectively ignored the SADC judgement, Mike had his farm burned down and their staff are regularly threatened and even beaten by Zanu PF officials. Mugabe and the White African may not be perfect film-making, but the subject matter makes this one of the more important documentaries of recent times. If you don't get the chance to catch it in the cinema it will be shown on Channel 4 next year.
As for the documentary itself, it was a rather strange affair. The subject matter was fascinating. The film follows Mike Campbell, a white African farmer in Zimbabwe who is desperately trying to stop his farm being taken away from him by Robert Mugabe's Zanu PF party. Despite threats, vandalism and even being kidnapped along with other members of his family, Mike continues to fight to keep his farm which he has owned for over 20 years. He eventually takes his case to the South African Development Committee (SADC) who give a monumental ruling that he can keep his farm. It's an interesting story, and Mike and his family are amazingly strong characters who make for a great subject for a documentary.
Unfortunately, the presentation of the documentary brings down the impact of the documentary. The main problem is that the directors have overdone the presentation. Many of the scenes appear to have been staged, with glossy presentation and a distracting melodramtic score playing over the top. While done for dramatic effect I actually felt it distanced the audience from what was happening and it was sometimes hard to be emotionally attached to what was happening on screen because of the over the top presentation. The film is frequently punctuated with footage of Zimbabwe nature and wildlife. These scenes are initially quite pleasent but soon become overplayed, start to feel unnecessary and threaten to kill the pace of the movie. Towards the end of the movie these nature shots are used less and less and the tension and emotion on screen noticeably ramps up.
The best scenes of the film are the hidden camera segments. One highlight is a secretly filmed confrontation with the son of a Zanu PF government minister, who claims Mike should hand over the farm to him. It is a raw, fascinating and dangerous few minutes which raises emotions that the glossy, stagy scenes just can't provide. If the film was just a camera crew following the family, I feel it would have made for a far more interesting and emotionally charged documentary.
There's no doubt that Mike's crusade is an important one, and this film should be seen by as many as possible despite the flawed presentation. After the screening the “surprise” was a 45 minute Q&A session with the directors, producers and Mike Campbells son-in-law. This gave a fascinating insight to what life was like for Mike Campbell and family post-SADC judgment, and sadly not a lot had changed. In fact if anything things had got worse. Mugabe effectively ignored the SADC judgement, Mike had his farm burned down and their staff are regularly threatened and even beaten by Zanu PF officials. Mugabe and the White African may not be perfect film-making, but the subject matter makes this one of the more important documentaries of recent times. If you don't get the chance to catch it in the cinema it will be shown on Channel 4 next year.
Wednesday 28 October 2009
London Film Festival – Castro
After the sombre The Milk of Sorrow the night before, I was hoping Castro, an Argentinian film categorised as “Experimenta” by the BFI, would be a more fast paced affair. It was. In fact the entire movie is essentially one long chase sequence. The plot, what there is of it, centres around the eponymous Castro, a grumpy chap who is literally running away from his problems the entire film. He's running away from his nagging girlfriend who desperately wants him to get a job. When he eventually finds a job delivering mysterious parcels he has to run either with or from his colleagues. Finally he's unknowingly running away from mysterious characters who have been sent by his ex-wife to find him.
The plot really isn't important. The story is flimsy at best, the characters receive little development and we're never given any real reasons why these events are happening. But what Castro does well and what makes it so enjoyable is the fast paced and funny slapstick and mayhem happening on screen, handled with a expert hand by director Alejo Moguillansky. The film is essentially a string of comic scenarios, joyously played by the talented cast. With the smooth camera work and grubby South American city backdrop it has the look of a modern movie, but the curiously retro jaunty piano soundtrack coupled with the classic slapstick routines sometimes gives the film the feel of a Laurel and Hardy or Buster Keaton movie.
Castro is by no means a top flight film. Filmed on digital, the colours are harsh and unflattering, it's like watching camcorder footage (it wouldn't surprise me if it was filmed on camcorder.) As mentioned the plot is flimsy and the slightly surreal finale is disappointing. But at a tidy ninety minutes this funny, entertaining film doesn't outstay its welcome and was well worth a watch.
The plot really isn't important. The story is flimsy at best, the characters receive little development and we're never given any real reasons why these events are happening. But what Castro does well and what makes it so enjoyable is the fast paced and funny slapstick and mayhem happening on screen, handled with a expert hand by director Alejo Moguillansky. The film is essentially a string of comic scenarios, joyously played by the talented cast. With the smooth camera work and grubby South American city backdrop it has the look of a modern movie, but the curiously retro jaunty piano soundtrack coupled with the classic slapstick routines sometimes gives the film the feel of a Laurel and Hardy or Buster Keaton movie.
Castro is by no means a top flight film. Filmed on digital, the colours are harsh and unflattering, it's like watching camcorder footage (it wouldn't surprise me if it was filmed on camcorder.) As mentioned the plot is flimsy and the slightly surreal finale is disappointing. But at a tidy ninety minutes this funny, entertaining film doesn't outstay its welcome and was well worth a watch.
London Film Festival – The Milk of Sorrow
For the past week the 53rd London Film Festival has been taking place across various venues in the capital. There have been plenty of big name films this year including three George Clooney premiers, however as I'm not a BFI member and am also poor I saw none of the big films. My approach to the London Film Festival was to browse through the programme, see what sounded interesting, pray there were some seats left and book a ticket. In the end I ended up seeing four films, the first being The Milk of Sorrow.
It sounded interesting, to me anyway. A Peruvian film which was the winner of the Golden Bear at this years Berlin Film Festival. The screening was taking place at the Vue West End which I was looking forward to visiting as it has a very cosy bar. Naturally the bar was closed for a private function when I was there though. The screening took place in a “intimate” (read: small) screen. We were lucky enough to get a brief introduction from the cinematographer of the film. She provided some brief background about the story of the film but didn't say much about the making of the film itself. It was nice to see her there and made the screening feel a bit more special.
The film revolves around Fausta, a young Peruvian girl whose mother has suffered through terrible atrocities during wartime in Peru. A Peruvian myth is that women who were raped or tortured during wartime carry their sorrow in their breast milk, which is passed on to their daughters. Indeed the cinematographer informed us in her introduction that the direct translation of the original Peruvian title is “The Frightened Tit.” Fausta's mothers ordeal has a profound affect on Fausta herself. Terrified and confused she has inserted a potato in her nether regions to stop what happened to her mother happening to her. We follow Fausta as she deals with her mothers death, and we follow Fausta's growing of character as she takes on a job as a maid to raise enough money to give her mother a decent send off. We also get to know about Fausta's home life, where she lives with her uncle, aunt and cousins.
Fausta's journey is largely intriguing but the film moves at a sometimes glacial pace. This suits the story for the most part as a film about a young girl with a potato in her initimates dealing with the death of her abused mother is not going to be a knockabout farce. But unfortunately the slow pacing does occasionally threaten to kill the film dead. Luckily the superb cinematography means there's also something wonderful to look at even if not much is happening story wise. The film is also punctuated with lively scenes of Peruvian life. These scenes, especially the ones revolving around the weddings that Fausta's uncle and aunt help organise, are filled with a humour and energy that left me with a buzz that helped me get through the slower parts of the film.
Director Claudia Llosa has produced a worthy film which gives a sometimes fascinating look at a part of the world that is rarely seen in Western cinema. The insight into Peruvian folklore and culture is interesting and come across on screen well. A lovely soundtrack featuring traditional guitar playing and unaccompanied singing add to the drama.
Although the cinematographer was supposed to return at the end of the screening to answer questions she never reappeared, which was a shame. It was a good start to the festival nonetheless.
It sounded interesting, to me anyway. A Peruvian film which was the winner of the Golden Bear at this years Berlin Film Festival. The screening was taking place at the Vue West End which I was looking forward to visiting as it has a very cosy bar. Naturally the bar was closed for a private function when I was there though. The screening took place in a “intimate” (read: small) screen. We were lucky enough to get a brief introduction from the cinematographer of the film. She provided some brief background about the story of the film but didn't say much about the making of the film itself. It was nice to see her there and made the screening feel a bit more special.
The film revolves around Fausta, a young Peruvian girl whose mother has suffered through terrible atrocities during wartime in Peru. A Peruvian myth is that women who were raped or tortured during wartime carry their sorrow in their breast milk, which is passed on to their daughters. Indeed the cinematographer informed us in her introduction that the direct translation of the original Peruvian title is “The Frightened Tit.” Fausta's mothers ordeal has a profound affect on Fausta herself. Terrified and confused she has inserted a potato in her nether regions to stop what happened to her mother happening to her. We follow Fausta as she deals with her mothers death, and we follow Fausta's growing of character as she takes on a job as a maid to raise enough money to give her mother a decent send off. We also get to know about Fausta's home life, where she lives with her uncle, aunt and cousins.
Fausta's journey is largely intriguing but the film moves at a sometimes glacial pace. This suits the story for the most part as a film about a young girl with a potato in her initimates dealing with the death of her abused mother is not going to be a knockabout farce. But unfortunately the slow pacing does occasionally threaten to kill the film dead. Luckily the superb cinematography means there's also something wonderful to look at even if not much is happening story wise. The film is also punctuated with lively scenes of Peruvian life. These scenes, especially the ones revolving around the weddings that Fausta's uncle and aunt help organise, are filled with a humour and energy that left me with a buzz that helped me get through the slower parts of the film.
Director Claudia Llosa has produced a worthy film which gives a sometimes fascinating look at a part of the world that is rarely seen in Western cinema. The insight into Peruvian folklore and culture is interesting and come across on screen well. A lovely soundtrack featuring traditional guitar playing and unaccompanied singing add to the drama.
Although the cinematographer was supposed to return at the end of the screening to answer questions she never reappeared, which was a shame. It was a good start to the festival nonetheless.
Tuesday 27 October 2009
Hi there!
You've managed to stumble across my blog before I've even had the chance to add any meaningful content. Your curoisity impresses me. Come back in a few days and there may be some content waiting for you.
David.
David.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
