Total Pageviews

Showing posts with label Thriller. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Thriller. Show all posts

Sunday, October 2, 2011

Red State

Kevin Smith is no stranger to controversy. In fact, most of his career has been bathed in hordes of media attention over some of his more notorious features - from Clerks' potty mouth to Zack and Miri Make  A Porno's banned original posters. Say what you will about the man's talent but make no mistake, Kevin Smith is not marketing movies, he is marketing himself. Right now, I'm struggling to think of another director that receives the same obsessive fanbase as Mr. Smith. Through various means on online outlets, he regularly updates them with everything going on in his private life. Through regular live tour dates across America and Europe fans can even literally reach out and touch him with their fingertips. Why he has inspired such an intense and loyal following is beyond me; he has, like most directors a fairly mixed filmography. A few hits, a few duds and outside Clerks absolutely no great movies. I feel that the reason he commands such a fanbase is down to relatability. Kevin Smith wants you to think he is one of you. Some regular small town dude done good. He talks movies, makes dick jokes and openly expresses his views just like anyone of your mates. This comraderie however can only extend so far. When he first came on the scene all those years ago, I found he had a fresh compelling and unique voice in cinema. Recent years have seen him grow stale, almost as if he is running out of ideas. Even his direction shows no signs of improving. He openly admits to being a writers director, not a directors writer. As a result he has never been able to mature as a film maker or even explore different avenues in the art. Or rather unwilling to do so. This inability to ever grow has flummoxed me over the years. There will always be those who love the man, but the 90's was a long time ago now, and his oeuvre shows signs of waning. Anyways, in what seems to me like a desperate ploy to garner media attention at this years Sundance, he held an auction for this film in question. Somewhat surprisingly however it was he himself who purchased the rights to sell and distribute Red State for a mere $20 and offered to take it on a screening road trip of sorts. Talk about enterprising. Many observed that the man was finally imploding, that his rallying of fans to come out and support the film smelled of desperation. Especially after many of the reviews were less than glowing. Well, in a rather surprising turn around of my initial preconceptions, I actually rather liked Red State.


The film is a heavy handed and not too subtle attack on the fundamentalist Phelps family, ie, America's most hated family and just how religion can drive people to do some of the most heinous things in life. When talking the film up at the script stage, Smith spoke of how it was a horror movie. This is not really true of the final product; it may start as darkly tense genre picture that flirts with torture porn, but then it swiftly morphs 180 degrees into a full on 'Waco' style siege film. We begin with three horn dog teens looking to pop their cherry. Looking online they see an older lady willing to oblige them not very far from where they live. Somewhat excitedly they arrive at her door only to be drugged and kidnapped. Their captors are religious zealots, hell bent on violently ridding the world of homosexuals and other such 'blasphemers' that don't fit in with their view on what the Bible says about the world. So far, we are in standard horror movie territory, except we don't actually care about the three guys. In fact, the film doesn't really have any character you can cheer for; something I'm sure Smith fully intended. So as word swiftly gets out at what  these evangelical terrorists are up to, the FBI intervene in a hail of gunfire and brimstone as the film suddenly switches gears. It's clear we're in a Kevin Smith film (the dialogue is frequently Smith-esque) but one very different to any we have seen before. The man must be applauded for trying something completely different to anything he has ever done before and for the first time fighting the urge for non stop fart gags and to allow himself to develop as a filmmaker. The film is very nicely shot throughout and has a pleasing gritty and grimy handheld aesthetic which chimes nicely with the various themes the film discusses. It must be said that Smith doesn't aspire to subtlety and lays out his views for all to see like a hammer to the head. All those years ago he explored religion in Dogma; here he full on attacks it. It is just a shame that the film doesn't more acutely handle this, as a better grasping could have yielded very impressive results. This seems like Smith chickened out ever so slightly and doesn't ever fully commit to the themes he puts forward by the climax. Sure, the typically charismatic Michael Parks delivers a lengthy sermon (thankfully cut down from the reported 20 minutes from the original Sundance cut) but a little more care and precision would have hammered home just what Smith - the writer wants to say. There are many that won't appreciate it. As stated earlier, it isn't the most tenuous experience you may have all year, but it is memorable. It has an almost Grindhousey feel to proceedings and have plenty of gore soaked action in between all the firefights. With this Smith surprised me. After Cop-Out I suspected the man had lost the passion. His View Askew-niverse had lost charm long ago and he seemed a man desperately searching for a voice he had lost. With this, it seems he has found it again. Hopefully by his next project (his mooted swansong Hit Somebody) he can continue to grow and confidently expand upon what he has done here. Basically, he needs to get out from the cushion of all his fans and show everyone he still knows how to make a film without relying on himself to sell it. As a proud independant filmmaker he will discover their are plenty more ways do so, than exhausting his celebrity.

Verdict: 6/10
A sometimes too bluntly delivered tone threatens to overtake proceedings and if Smith had shown just a bit more faith in his script then this could have been a glorious comeback. As it stands it is a successful change of direction and one in which for the most part is an interesting oddity. Not as bad as initial reviews might have pegged it, but not anything truly remarkable either.

"Red State" Trailer

Monday, September 26, 2011

Drive

How does Ryan Gosling do it? The man is in front row to be my hero of 2011. His acting talent grows ever more intriguing and varied with each role he undertakes and he has a great eye for picking fantastic parts in great films. Blue Valentine  is quite possibly one of my favourite films this year, this week he is in two notable release (the other being Crazy Stupid Love) and with George Clooney's The Ides of March garnering serious oscar buzz for later on in the year the mans star wattage shows signs of growing ever brighter. Hands in the air, I have a serious man-crush on the guy. However here he achieves greater acclaim for making a quilted sports jacket with a gold scorpion on the back while mysteriously chewing a tooth pick look like just about the most stylish thing you may see all year. Drive is for all it's hints of loneliness and existentialism is far more concerned with smooth and pretty surfaces. Like Gosling's unnamed character, the film might have torrents of emotion running underneath, but it rarely lets them out. Unless to cave someone's head in that is. Drive might be ultimately shallow and even perhaps contrived at times in it's storytelling but when everything is handled as well as it is, it's hard not to fall in love with it's arthouse/action stylings. Dutch director Nicholas Winding Refn (him off ultra violent and questionably pretentious fare like Bronson or Valhalla Rising) deserves applause for delivering stale plot threads and characters through anything but standard means. Through every frame, the film brims with gorgeous images and subdued, yet vibrant colours. The story goes that upon Gosling and Winding Refn's first meeting, the heavily medicated director, recovering from a cold, burst into tears in a flood of inspiration at hearing REO Speedwagon on the radio. This was their 'Driver'. A lonely guy who drives around on his own all night listening to 80's pop music. True to his word, Drive is the perfect marriage of 70's/80's car chase 'heist gone wrong' thrillers, updated with a cool indie sheen. And it's all breathless, adrenaline inducing stuff.

From it's credits of retro indie beats mixed with pink font you know there is something striking in store. Gosling plays the Driver with no Name who works as a Hollywood stuntman while moonlighting as a getaway driver at night. His life is one of solitude and never getting too close to anybody. That is until new neighbour Irene (Carey Mulligan) moves in with her son and the two strike up a relationship. As the Driver begins to melt his hard exterior and get close to this new family, his violent past comes crashing back into everyones lives. Along the way, supporting characters are filled out by fantastic character actors from Breaking Bad's Bryan Cranston (his usual reliable self), Ron Perlman (having great fun), Oscar Isaac (about the only one who escaped from Sucker Punch untainted) Christina Hendricks (fans of Mad Men will not be happy with her limited screen time) and the usually typecast Albert Brooks. Brooks in particular is mesmerizing. Usually seen in childrens fare and nice guy roles, here he plays the psychotic main antagonist to fantastic effect. Interestingly, he is infused with layers making his violent actions all the more shocking and unpredictable. Surely an oscar nod can't be far off? And then there is Gosling. Given little to no lines throughout, Gosling gives a hypnotic and quietly powerful performance and one that is sure to be remembered in cult circles for years. Winding cast his film perfectly and everyone delivers in their respective parts. That is, apart from Mulligan. A usually fantastic talent, she is never less than entrancing in anything I have seen her in prior. Unfortunately here she seems distractingly miscast and is given little or nothing to do. One minor flaw in a fantastic film. Spontaneously prone to breaking out in hyper violence as it is in 80's synths, the film is certainly one of the more memorable you will see. Gorgeously shot and impeccably acted, Winding Refn has crafted one of the best of the year with scenes that will stick with you for a long time after. An art house version of an action film and one that is filled with as much quiet moments of introspection as it is in gun fights and car chases. Channeling the vibe of Bullitt and early Michael Mann, Drive is every bit as exciting and interesting as that might expect. While it's title might suggest revving auto parts; what it in fact refers to, is the driving force behind decisions and what consequences they may take.

9/10
Stylish, exciting and frequently adrenaline pulsing stuff, this takes the stale notions of what a crime movie might usually entail and turns them into a far more interesting and memorable experience. It may not be deep, but Winding Refn handles the atmosphere perfectly and delivers one of the sure to be favourites of the year.

"Drive" Trailer

Sunday, September 4, 2011

Kill List

There is a stunning sense of dread that permeates every frame of Kill List. It is unfair to call the film an outright horror - although things do get mighty horrific, building steadily to more disturbing happenings; the film rather, is it's own thing completely. It's own curious oddity. That underlying tension throughout proceedings helps subvert genre. Parts gritty drama, hit-man thriller and buddy comedy, the film is every bit as original as you might expect from such a blend. Taking such stale staples of cinema as it's starting point, Kill List then uses them to mould an increasingly bizarre, violent and disturbing tale and is one that come it's end, will leave a cold grasp on you. In fact that is perhaps where the film may get it's true power from; in letting some of it's more subtler character beats and plot developments mature in your head, you realise just what director Ben Wheatley and his cast have crafted. This is a film that makes you work for it and you will only get out what you put in. But if you're prepared to go the distance - and Kill List goes to some pretty dark places, then you will have one of the more original hard hitting films this year. Somewhat unfairly, the film has been proclaimed to almost 'instant classic' status by some reviewers; a move that while it will surely help it's box office, can only leave most somewhat underwhelmed by such a high benchmark. Not to say the film isn't good enough, rather it would seem that the film is simply too small for the masses. This is something that works best as a more cult finding. Those who discover it knowing as little as possible will be those whom the film works best on. I would even go so far to suggest not even reading this review for fear of only adding to the hype machine, but I digress......

Focusing on the minutiae of British suburban life, we open on Jay (Neil Maskell) and wife Shel (MyAnna Buring). Locked in a passionately violent marriage, the stress of bills and mortgages are taking their toll as their young son Sam (Harry Simpson) watches on helplessly. So far, so regular, until we discover Jay has the far from regular job as a hit-man. Eight months after what seems a disastrous job in Kiev, Jay reluctantly takes on another job with cohort and best mate Gal (an excellent Michael Smiley): the titular list. Of course in films, that 'one last job' is never a good idea and pretty soon, the two find themselves in increasingly murky territory as each hit on their list leads them down darker alleys. The cast are all uniformly excellent. Wheatley and the cast spent almost as much time improvising various takes as with scripted material and the result is incredibly effective. Maskell and Buring's relationship is painfully conveyed to almost too realistic effect. A couple that bicker and fight, only to make up seconds later; it is obvious to everyone but them, that they should not be together. At the heart of things however, is Jay and Gal. As the two embark on their murderous road trip, they paint a memorable couple. Killers with their own set of moral codes; they are fiercely loyal to each other. The two actors do a fine job in making the audience believe the bond between the two. Their core relationship also leads to some of the more wittier moments; never too far off it seems and perfectly breaking up all that tension and misery in between. However, as the List becomes unofficially longer, and the boys realise they are in over their heads there is only more and more unresolved questions stacking up. Who exactly is the man who hired the guys in the first place? Why do Jay's targets continually thank him before each murder? What exactly is that mysterious symbol scribbled on the back of the mirror in Jay's bathroom? All and none of these questions are answered. Mystery surrounds every corner of Wheatley's story and while he may not give a solid answer to any of them, you can rest assured that he has provided enough hints prior to let you connect the dots. It is also safe to say a second viewing will be almost as enlightening as the first, and help clear up some of the mystery. Throughout, Wheatley effortlessly builds tension. Though not much at all may be happening, there is a sea of violence just waiting to explode at any time. All this is only built on by the films atmospheric soundscapes, breathing deep unease into the images. Overall the film is an incredibly peculiar chiller. Not outright horror, drama or crime/thriller, it is hard to categorise.  Instead of this being a hurdle, the film uses this confusion to build a very original and disturbing tale, although definitely not for everybody. If you let the film work on you, by the time the lights come up you may be shocked, confused and just a little bewildered, but no less stunned. But don't listen to me, you're better off taking the film on it's own merits and finding out for yourself.

Verdict: 8/10
A frequently disturbing and odd film that effortlessly blends genres to stunning effect. Some will bemoan the lack of cohesion come it's end, but everyone else will be taken on a very uneasy and murky ride through the underside of British suburbia. Darkly comic and very unsettling, it is an experience you might not be able to shake soon after.

"Kill List" Trailer

Wednesday, July 6, 2011

Cell 211

Cell 211 opens with quite possibly, the single most shocking image you may see all year. While it immediately sets up tough questions and an anticipation of heavy themes for the film to follow, the film instead takes a completely different path. I was expecting a politically charged, yet intimately haunting prison drama. What I was met with was a full-on, highly commercial, yet no less smart thriller. While it slightly betrays the weighty ambitions of such a harrowing opener, it nontheless grabs your attention and draws you into proceedings straight away. Juan (Alberto Ammann) shows up a day early for his new job as prison officer to make a good impression and winds up stuck inside after a huge cell riot. Forging an unhealthy alliance with head honcho Malamadre (a fantastic Luis Tosar) he is forced to pretend he is a new inmate, while those on the outside struggle to find a way to get him out. The film carries it's fair share of contrivances in plot (why is Juan's heavily pregnant wife putting herself in danger, how does Juan keep getting away with his communications to the outside, why are the inmates so quick to initiate Juan into their cause?) which threaten to overtake proceedings and push it into dubious territory, but director Daniel Monzón manages to keep everything on the rails. In fact the film is incredibly tense for most of it's running time and keeps the audience on it's toes throughout. The film won eight Goya Awards (Spanish Oscars) upon it's release in 2009 in it's native Spain. While it is hardly ground breaking stuff, it is very well made and acted and features plenty of nail biting moments along the way. Before it's undercooked climax is abruptly reached, it has you hooked every step of the way. Alas it seems that come the end, the budget swiftly ran out, leaving the feeling of wanting so much more for it's grandiose end, that never fully arrives. Other than that, this "Die Hard" in a Prison' is fantastically engaging stuff and is already facing the inevitable Hollywood remake, just around the corner. Catch it now; Hollywood won't top this Bad Mother too easily.

Verdict: 7/10
A hair raising and frequently exciting thriller that flirts with bigger themes, but is more than content to simply be a straight forward action/prison movie. All the cast are fantastic and despite it's slightly disappointing climax, there is much here to enjoy on a Saturday night.

"Cell 211" Trailer  

Monday, May 9, 2011

Hanna


Refreshingly and somewhat misleadingly, Focus Features decided to release this film at the very start of the Summer Blockbuster Season. I had settled myself into the notion that the next few months would find me becoming ever more disillusioned with the studio system and grow more and more tired of CG effects. Which is fine by me; you have to take the bad with the good as they say. The last thing I was expecting was a film like this. For all of the things I had resigned myself to that I would not see on screens for the next three to four months, I found suddenly alive on screen in front of me. This was the breath of fresh air I didn't know I needed and far and away, the most original film I have seen this year so far. That it also packs in great action, stunning performances and great directing only proves that when a film like this comes along, it must be savoured. I knew the plot of "Hanna" and knew that director Joe Wright was stepping out of his comfort zone of period melodramas, along with it's very interesting cast. Somewhat unfairly though, I did not really register the film on my radar. This is such a shame, as it is a fantastic and ready made cult classic, just waiting to take on extra resonance in the coming years. This is a film that will get better the more it is watched I imagine. For all the things that the film had going against it, so too does it's titular hero. Hanna was the underdog everybody underestimated.

Events kick off in the wilderness of Finland. We are introduced to our heroine and her father Eric (Eric Bana) as she is rigorously trained as a killing machine. Completely shut off from the world, Hanna is someone who knows so much and so little all at once. Everything about the world she knows has only been experienced or read in a book. And yet, this is one who knows how to hit a small animal from miles away with a handgun and can speak over a dozen languages. As Hanna suddenly finds herself out in the world, chased by Cate Blanchetts wonderfully evil and corrupt CIA agent Marissa Wiegler, she must learn to adapt to her new surroundings. Along the way she meets a travelling and liberal British family who take her in. For as much as Hanna knows how to take care of herself, she cannot look after herself. It is in these scenes that the film truly reveals itself. Beginning as a cold and very odd Jason Bourne meets Fairytale of sorts, the film soon softens as our understanding of Hanna, and her to the world grows. Wright makes this progression wonderfully; the many varied locations throughout the film could serve as an insight into what our heroine is feeling at that moment. As Hanna's personality thaws, so too does her background; moving from the wastes of Finland to the warm and crowded streets of Morocco and so forth. Throughout, Wright manages to mix subtle and sometimes humorous character detail with fantastic action. The film features two of the most heart stopping action scenes to be beaten this year; in one Hanna must elude those on her trail at a ship container factory and in another, Eric Bana faces off with agents in a stunning six minute tracking shot. As our lead the sixteen year old Ronan does an incredible job. With her snow white locks, pale face and piercing blue eyes, she is a ready made icon. She handles Hanna's uncertainty and growing interest in the real world excellently while still believably beating the crap out of anyone who gets in her way. Bana provides steely reserve and strength and Blanchett is the 'boo-hiss' evil queen, of the fairytale. However, most impressive of all is Tom Hollander as the camp, yet psychopathic Isaacs whom Wiegler hires to go after Hanna. With his two skin head neo nazi subordinates, dressed in tight 70's tennis shorts and peroxide blonde hair, he somehow manages to cut a very imposing figure.

Wright films all the action in a very European manner; this is not some glossy American action free for all extravaganza as it might have been. Events and pacing are measured accordingly to what the story needs. Some might bemoan the slow mid section, but it is here where the film truly worked its wonders for me and brings to mind just what a good job Wright et al did. The film might sound preposterous, but after a few moments alone with Hanna in the wilderness you will know that Wright has a vision for the film and that shines through in every scene. What caught me off guard was that I was not expecting a film to carry any trademark personality or grit, nothing to get my teeth into. Wright takes full advantage of the films idiosyncrasies and turns out something that is part "Run Lola Run", last years "The American" (with a genuine plot it is only fair to point out) and the previously mentioned Bourne films mixed with Hans Christian Andersons best tales. What the interesting thing is, is that it is fruitless to compare the film to many others as it is the rarest of rare: a truly original Summer action film. The action crackles, the music (by The Chemical Brothers no less) pulsates and the bravado of original vision is on full display as Joe Wright officially steps up to the plate, as one of the most interesting directors working today.

Verdict: 8/10
At times both odd and enthralling, director Wright turns in his most accomplished film so far, and the most unconventional action genre mash up you may see all year.

Monday, April 4, 2011

Source Code


There will inevitably be some who feel a little cheated by Duncan Jones' new film. With his 2009 cult classic "Moon", Jones very successfully created a very original and low budget science fiction drama which offered plenty of room for thought and urged you to replay scenes in your head to work out its many hidden depths. In traversing his new film, doing the same again will only point out some glaring plot holes upon its denouement. It should be made clear that Jones has not set out to make 'Moon .2'. "Source Code" is an obviously more commercial piece, more concerned with its high concept set-up, than answering many of the questions it asks in its plot. Now this is by no means a bad thing as I will tell you, rather it is something that must be expected when going into see this film. While there are many out there who might see this as the first eventual slide into crowd pleasing commercialism from Jones, they should first look at what he has crafted here, rather than base it on expectations they have for his career. Judge the film on its own merits and you will be very rewarded. Those going into "Source Code" having not seen the directors previous work, and therefore having no expectations apart from wanting to see a good film will be very satisfied indeed. "Source Code" is not "Moon" but it is the most clever and engaging blockbuster since "Inception".

Now a synopsis of the plot without passing into spoiler territory will be difficult (not to mention very hard to describe) so I will give the bare minimum. Capt. Colter Stevens (Jake Gyllenhaal) wakes up on a moving train amongst strangers, not knowing how he got there. Events get more confusing as Colter realises he is actually inhabiting the body of a different man, one that the commuter sitting opposite, Christina (Michelle Monaghan) seems to recognise as Sean Fentress. Then the entire train blows up killing everybody onboard. Stevens suddenly wakes up talking to Capt. Goodwin (an always luminous Vera Farmiga) and Dr. Rutledge (Jeffrey Wright). Your confusion is as great as Stevens when he is told he is to be continuously sent back into the body of Sean, to find out who was behind the bombing of that train which occured just outside of Chicago earlier that morning. With us so far? So this sets up an engaging "Groundhog Day" dynamic as Stevens must contend with the same repeated scenario again and again, in the hopes of saving a lot of people. Gyllenhaal is fantastic and the best I have seen him in a while. He plays Stevens growing confusion and panic very well and helps ease us into this world caught on an endless loop. In fact, while it's repetitious nature does occasionally become trying every now and again, it is the performances that help keep you involved. It is only Wright who seems to overact his part a little too much, and doesn't help any of his exposition and already far fetched dialogue with his delivery. But then, this is the Bowie Jr. show, and Jones proves that "Moon" was no fluke. The man has genuine chops behind the camera and easily overcomes that 'difficult second film' curse.

If there is one common thread that seems to be developing in his work it is in Jones' fascination in themes of existentialism and what it means to be 'you'. This gave "Moon" a lot of its emotional weight and it does much the same here. In fact, Jones' biggest success is in succesfully traversing big budget effects shots while still never once forgetting the all important human story, so important to its structure. As a result the film is disarmingly emotional; something I never expected from a science fiction film about exploding trains. After this Jones' career will only grow ever more exciting. He is the sci-fi genres new saving grace. He can do thoughtful low budget affairs with big issues, and he can do more action and effects driven features just as effortlessly. Now with his pick of Hollywood, we have the emergence of a genuine true talent and along with Neill Blomkamp, science fictions new saviours, both offering something the genre is in desperate need of. Vision.

Verdict: 8/10
Duncan Jones overcomes second feature jitters, complicated CGI effects and a 'think-about-it-too-much-and-it-makes-no-sense' plot to deliver an exciting and original science fiction film. The cast deliver and the film has genuine emotion to go with its explosive thrills.

Monday, March 14, 2011

The Resident


No matter how derivitive and unoriginal a film sometimes might be, you can still, against your better nature find yourself getting kinda swept up with it. Now don't get me wrong, there is nothing in this film that is memorable or truly original, but for what the film does, it does it well. Following on from the likes of "Single White Female" and particularly "Pacific Heights", "The Resident" is a film about a dangerous obsession of another. Here it is Hilary Swanks Doctor who falls victim to her new landlord, the unnervingly sweet, but shy Max, played by Jeffrey Dean Morgan. Simply put, the film prays on the trust we sometimes give to others without ever fully knowing who they are. Max seems nice, but anyone watching within the first ten minutes will tell you that all is not what it seems. There is a system of peep holes Max watches Juliet unbeknownst to her. Even when Juliet leaves her apartment, Max does some very wrong things in her bath tub. His dangerous obsession grows ever more violent and intrusive. Of course facades soon fall and we discover Max's true psychotic nature all too late. Generic, very much so, but the film features typically solid performances from its two leads. The handsome and naturally charasmatic Dean Morgan playing a loner psycho was initially something I thought was going to fail to convince, but he managed to convert me very early into the film. This the second film in Hammers newly renewed production company after "Let Me In". So far both films have delivered on what they set out to do and hopefully promises more interesting horror from them in the future. Nice also, to see the face of Hammer, Christopher Lee back again, here playing Max's grandfather. It is only Lee Pace who is unfairly wasted here. Playing Swanks ex-boyfriend he is given next to nothing to do and as anyone who has seen the visually stunning "The Fall" will know, he is far better than seen here. Other nice additions are that it's shot by Guillermo Del Toros regular cinematographer, Guillermo Navarro. The film looks gorgeous as is typical of his work. John Ottman also more than ably scores the film in keeping with the high standard of his previous soundtracks. In the end, these aren't huge things, but go some way in adding to my enjoyment of the film. Everything about this film is predictable, but it handles its cliche ridden conventions well, and is done with style. It could be seen as the equivalent of junk food; it's not good for you and you feel terrible when it's done, but was fun while it lasted.

Verdict: 5/10
Cliches and predictability stalk this film at every turn, but it handles its conventions well and does it to the best of its ability. Completely unmemorable, but slightly effective nontheless.

Monday, January 24, 2011

Black Swan


Awards season is always the best time of the year to go to the cinema. It may be odd when you consider it, but releasing most of the years great films over two or three months, is incredibly encouraging. Each week you can be sure to find a very worthy film in your cinema. There are however, a few downsides to this. By distributers holding onto their strongest film for a very specific release date, it casts a very obvious dearth on the rest of the year. The year is top ended, with the majority of great films getting released from December to February. Not to say there will be no more great films this year, it would just be more welcoming for more of these worthy efforts getting released in the Summer time, when Blockbuster fatigue is setting in. And of course, just as it can get quite tiring after a while reseeing all the explosions and shallow characterisation the Summer has to offer, it can also get samey reliving all the more classic and serious minded films the Awards Season has in store. I find it all the more strange then, that "Black Swan" is one of those films being considered for awards. Not to say it is undeserving of its awards success, far from it, but it just seems most of these films are more often than not 'safe'. Not to take away from any of them, as this is never necessarily a bad thing, it just seems blatantly obvious as to what films are going to be favoured by the Academy and get nominated and win awards. "Black Swan" is completely and unashamedly polarizing. Just as many people going into it will detest it as those to proclaim it to be a breathless work of art. Moreso than that, when was the last time you saw a film win awards that featured extreme violence, jump scares, and a full on no holds barred lesbian scene? This is not any film however. This is a film by Darren Aronofsky, and any glance over his body of work shows perfectly what we have in store here. "The Wrestler" may have brought him more mainstream success, but it has not for one second changed his sensibilities. His films split a fine line through the audience. They are more often than not, searingly brutal, uncomfortable to watch, quite upsetting and visually majestic. You may not have enjoyed the ride he has brought you on, but at the very least, you will not be able to shake it off for days. This is a tradition he upholds in glorious style, with "Black Swan".

Ballet dancer Nina Sayers (Natalie Portman) lives a sheltered and very protective existence under her Mothers (Barbara Hershey) wing. When she is finally picked to appear as the lead in the new production of 'Swan Lake', it seems all her years of practice have finally paid off. However, Thomas (Vincent Cassel) her sexually manipulative director, says Nina is too technically perfect in her dancing skills. While this is perfect for the White Swan side of the character, she does not know how to lose herself in the moment to fully engage as the Black Swan. This is embodied in Lily (Mila Kunis), a new younger upstart, who fits the Black Swan role perfectly. She is everything Nina secretly wishes she could be; confidant, sexually ambitious and dances gracefully and carefree. Pressure comes from everywhere: her so called 'friends', her Mother, her director who may or may not be abusing her and Beth (Winona Ryder), the aging dancer Nina recently replaced. The immense pressure coming from all angles causes Nina's psyche to crack. Of course this could all be intentional. Is Nina's quest from shy, unassuming 'nice' girl to vampish and psychotic seducer what she needs, in order to fully inhabit the Black Swan character, and win the adulation she craves? The film, at the very least is intense. Led by Portman's stunning turn, the film begins quite melodramatically and grows ever more nightmarish and terrifying as more and more of Ninas psyche comes undone. Everywhere she looks is an oppressive force looking to corrupt the innocent star. However as it turns out, Nina's greatest enemy may in fact be herself. In every scene mirrors dominate the frame, with a mysterious doppelganger skirting around the edges. It's no coincidence that Thomas' repeated orders for Ninas technique is to 'lose yourself'. Paranoia and vivid, walking hallucinations dominate proceedings and all the while Nina struggles to keep it all together. The film is very effective in showing Ninas floundering mental state, and all the more disconcerting for it. You may not want to experience something so vividly dissected, but you will not be able to tear your eyes from the screen come its gloriously deranged climax.

Of course, this is Aronofsky through and through. The film shares parallels with his previous feature "The Wrestler", something the director himself acknowledges. As he himself puts it, 'Wrestling some consider the lowest art—if they would even call it art—and ballet some people consider the highest art. But what was amazing to me was how similar the performers in both of these worlds are. They both make incredible use of their bodies to express themselves'. Aronofsky again takes pleasure in detailing the routine behind the scenes injuries of these show people. Their bodies take as much a beating as their heads and hearts do. Aronofsky shoots in a similar style to that film, yet as "Black Swan" goes on, it throws subtlety out the window in favour of shocking violence and terrifying ghosts, haunting our heroines mind. Interesting also to note, that Aronofsky gave its so called 'low art form' of the wrestling world, a far more subtle and heartbreaking emotional experience; while for ballet, the 'higher art form', he goes to great extremes in making everything visually heightened and wildly excessive. This is part of his genius. His is surely one of the best visions in Hollywood right now. His films are not ever nice or pleasant, but they always make the audience feel. In fact "Black Swan" also shares some parallels with his sophomoric effort "Requiem For A Dream". Both films feature underlying themes of how fragile the mind can be, and both race towards a nightmarish and disturbingly surreal conclusion. In fact it is probably for the best Aronofsky has not yet crafted an out and out horror film as of yet; the results might simply be too much to take. Anybody who has witnessed "Requiem For A Dream" can tell you just how terrifying it portrays drug abuse; likewise here, there are some scenes that will have you looking out from behind your popcorn. And yet the overall film, never descends into horror cliche. As unsettling and creepy as it threatens and indeed does get, it is grounded in our heroines performance, and her reality. Losing ones mind is something most people fear. Aronofsky knows how to take basic and very real human fears and turn them into nightmares on screen.

Portman gives an incredible performance. She puts absolutely everything into her performance and not just into the dancing, so stunningly photographed by Aronofsky regular Matthew Libatique. The dichotomy of her character is also enforced by the real life Portman; we all know she has what it takes to be nervous and fragile Nina, but what about that rarely tapped, darker side? It doesn't matter because Portman nails both. Aronofsky always gets incredible performances out of his actors. After the career best turns he coaxed from Ellen Burstyn in "Requiem" and Mickey Rourke in "The Wrestler" would be be unreasonable to add Portman to that list? No, here she shines brighter than ever before, and taken out of her normal comfort zone so much as she is here, shows what a courageous actor she is. This film calls for some outrageous scenes and situations to be in, and without Portmans convincing veneer, the audience would be lost in the jumbled mess of this persons mind. Cassel aides as a very sly and slimy director. His actions and power to manipulate others minds and bodies is ugly to watch, but nontheless entrancing. Kunis also gives a fantastic performance as the woman who may or may not be out to steal Ninas role for herself, while Barbara Hershey terrifies as the passive-aggressive Mother. It is through Nina she lives now; all her dreams and failures are on Ninas back and with her constant nagging and treating her daughter like a little girl, it is obvious that even without the ballet underlying the drama, Nina would still be teetering on the edge of sanity.

The film is stunningly filmed. It has images and scenes that stick in the memory long after the final lights have died down. Aronofsky goes for grandiose in every performance and scene. As events spiral towards a breathtaking and original climax, no matter how much you want to, you will not be able to tear your eyes from the screen. The dance sequences are majestically filmed and the underlying grace and beauty of ballet, is contrasted brutally with Aronofsky's hard edged presentation of it. It is quite possible, you won't see anything like this for a while. For his next gig, Aronofsky is helming the new 'Wolverine' film. Charged with the saving of a franchise as big as that shows the faith in his talent. Looking at his films when he started no one could have predicted they would be awards favourites, mainstream successes, or even blockbuster extravaganzas. How such a searingly inventive, extreme and original director achieved this must show that maybe it is in fact the world that is losing its mind, and not Darren Aronofsky.

Verdict: 85%
Divisive, terrifying, putrid, ugly, depressing, exuberant, theatrical, original, thrilling, shocking, exciting and remarkable. Vintage Aronofsky then.

Sunday, October 10, 2010

Buried


There appears to be a new sub genre getting ever more popular amongst film makers. That is the single location and very claustrophobic thriller. Very recently we had the horror "Devil" set entirely in a stalled elevator where one of its five occupants is a seemingly malevolent entity. In early January of next year Danny Boyles eagerly awaited follow up to "Slumdog Millionaire" is the shocking true story of an extreme sports fanatic getting his arm stuck under a boulder and resorting to desperate risks for his survival. The film "127 Hours" promises a stunning emotional roller coaster ride upon its release. Now however we have Rodrigo Cortés thriller "Buried". A film that takes a huge risk in setting itself entirely within a coffin. Cortés' genius lies in his unfaltering committal to his story. While such a small and confining space could make for a very dull nights entertainment for some films, "Buried" surprises in being one of the most heart stopping exciting films of the year, making stunning and very cinematic use of its small spaces.

Paul Conroy awakes to find himself living every persons worst nightmare. He has been buried alive in a coffin and it is in here that we will spend the next 95 minutes. A normal blue collar truck driver, Reynolds plays the everyman with stunning conviction. He is the embodiment of being caught in the wrong place at the wrong time. It is during his work in Iraq that he gets taken hostage by terrorists and finds himself in this terrifying predicament. With only the very low light of his lighter and mobile phone left for him, Paul must find a way out before time runs out. The unrelenting claustrophobia is evident from the start. The scarceness of oxygen is palpable amongst the audience as much as it is Paul, such is the films effect. You can feel the scratchy sand on your face and feel the walls closing in as time is running out. Kudos must be payed to Cortés for mining the concept for all its worth. He wrings plenty of ingenious camera angles and tense obstacles out of our heroes 'situation'. How the film never once grows dull or outstays its welcome is a huge success for Cortés and his team. Sound design is fantastic adding to the nerve shredding terror along with one of the best scores of the year, enhancing the excitement and tension.

However, a film like this would live or die on its central actor. It is he who the audience spends every second with and were they not up the task, the film would feel considerably longer than its 90 or so minutes. While casting someone like Ryan Reynolds in this part might initially seem disjointing, it is all the more stunning at how well he pulls it off. An actor known more for his looks and his razor sharp timing and moter mouth skills; a film like this goes almost entirely against image by casting him in dark shadows and having him react to anonymous voices on the end of his phone for much of its running time. Reynolds never once fails to captivate. It shows plenty of more strings to his bow and if there is any justice, Reynolds will be nominated come the awards season.

Cortés may be trying to make a statement with his film. The maddening ineffectiveness of those Paul turns to for help casts a damning eye over the American Government and murky Political implications of the Iraq war. Thankfully he does not let this over-power the story, rather aide and move it along. However, if his intentions were in showing the dark side of those in charge of helping American soldiers and workers in Iraq, then why paint the Iraqis themselves as such psychotic individuals. A minor criticism in an otherwise expertly maintained and stunning thriller. Reynolds gives an incredible one man performance and Cortés mounts a very claustrophobic yet very exciting small space for our hero to escape from. Along with a delicious sense of dark humour, all involved turn in one of the most memorable films of the year.

Verdict 82%
A Hitchcockian thriller that the man himself would have been proud to put his name on, Rodrigo Cortés takes its very simple premise to its extremes and delivers a fantastic cinematic experience.

Friday, October 8, 2010

The Town


Ben Affleck has made a startling career transformation in a mere seven years. It was 2003 in which "Gigli" was released, an International box office flop that had Affleck rendered a laughing stock. Parody was everywhere; with Affleck it was just too easy and like shooting fish in a barrel. That career low, coupled with his disastrous marriage to Jennifer Lopez almost left his career in tatters. Stunning then that in just two films, Affleck has completely turned his fortunes around. No longer do people wonder how much more talented his original writing partner Matt Damon is, or if Affleck ever even had any input into "Good Will Hunting"? Now his name is a byword for smart and intelligent adult dramas that are actually entertaining movie fodder for a Saturday night. He entertains the masses, but does not ask them to switch off their brain to do so. He respects character and plotting and does not shy away from harsh or gritty themes. All this, from that guy in "Reindeer Games".

Affleck again returns to the seedy underbelly of his hometown of Boston. In his previous film, ''Gone Baby Gone'' he presented very unsavory characters that would sell their own child for drugs or money. He depicted just how tough the streets are and how easy it is to get lost in their moral murkiness. With ''The Town'', he presents us with 'Charlestown'', a small neighbourhood in the Boston locale, which we're told houses most of the criminals responsible for the 300 or so bank robberies committed there every year. It is here that we open on Doug MacRay (Ben Affleck), as he and his team rob a bank. Affleck shows his progression as a filmaker from the off, as this expertly mounted and brilliantly planned heist, is echoed in Afflecks Directing skills. In fact each of the three or so major action scenes are all brilliantly orchestrated. Events are feverous and hectic but never do the audience lose track of what is happening on screen. Its shoot-outs in particular rank as some of the best I have seen in years. As MacRay and his team take hostage Claire, (Rebecca Hall), a young bank teller, MacRay then takes it on himself to keep tabs on her, to make sure she does not give away any details she may have witnessed about MacRay and his masked group, to Special Agent Adam Frawley (Jon Hamm). As Doug and Claires relationship begins to grow, Doug soon realises that this may not be the life for him after all. But with the screws tightening from the FBI closing in and tension within the group itself, will he actually be able to make it out of Charlestown alive?

The ensemble cast are all superb. Affleck knows talented actors and litters his film with them. Hamm continues his role to superstardom as the very cunning and calculating Special Agent. In one scene in particular he jumps from slyly charming, to steel and beady eyed malice in a heartbeat. However Affleck does not drown his film with out and out bad guys. Characters here carry shades of grey to them. So while Frawley may be the antagonist, he is not all bad. Only Postlethwaite carries any of the panto 'boo and hiss' trappings of his villainous turn. Possibly the best performance of the film belongs to Renner as Jem, Dougs best friend. Exhibiting all the intensity that got him an Oscar nomination for ''The Hurt Locker'', his role provides a lot of the tension and emotion. A pent up ball of fury that may erupt at any time, his most heart stopping and stand out moment comes when he accidentally stumbles upon Doug and Claire on a date. His is a character borne out of his tough upbringing. Violence is all he knows and is the only way he knows how to express himself. He may not exhibit the remorse Doug has for his actions, but there is still something entirely sympathetic about him. A product of a rough and rotten upbringing, his downfall began at a young age when he killed another kid because he 'didn't like the look of him'. Under Renner's skilled wing, Jem isn't just the homicidal maniacal caricature he could easily have been, but something far more more sad and layered. Tension in the group comes from him at heart feeling threatened by Halls character. He doesn't want to lose his buddy and half brother and on these streets, family is everything. So when Doug tells him how he's 'getting out', what else can Jem do but fight? He is nothing outside of Charlestown and the prospect of existing in a world outside of it is too scary. Jealousy stems from Dougs ability to at least try to leave, something Jem could never do.

And then there is Affleck the actor. While this is undoubtably the best he has been in years, it is still outmatched by his skills behind the camera. One of the biggest strengths is the films ability to still seem fresh and entertaining when the the plot and themes are anything but. Boston crime in film is so common now, it could form a sub-genre onto itself. With Afflecks previous film, ''Gone Baby Gone'', it is also joined by ''Mystic River'' and ''The Departed'' in the familial stakes. That the film also shares parallel themes with the 1995 classic ''Heat'' and ''Point Break'', shows that Affleck is hardly treading on new ground here. It is this which while is certainly a big plus, it also means the film is prevented from 'classic' status. Events here have been covered plenty of times before and the film will offer you nothing new in the way of crime thrillers. It will however, offer a very solid and exciting evenings entertainment with some of the best ensemble acting in recent memory. Affleck should be applauded for making films for adults once again, and the films strong showings in both the US and Europe show that they are more than ready for films that don't have to rely on special effects to be a commercial hit. That Affleck has also changed the publics perception of his talent is astounding in itself. Tell anyone walking out of ''Forces of Nature'', that that actor will be writing and directing some of the finest and mature films appearing in cinemas in 10 years from now and they might have been liable to laugh in your face. In fact, I might have too.

Verdict: 79%
Ben Affleck cements his new found reputation as a very talented Director, with this expertly crafted and exciting crime drama. He builds on his Directing skills while also providing a more than solid nights entertainment. Expect to see this nominated for its outstanding cast come the awards season.


Saturday, August 21, 2010

Knight And Day


With "The A-Team" last week, it surprisingly found itself under heavy comparison with other similarly themed films of this year "The Losers" and "The Expendables". Quite odd seeing that all were produced and released around the same time showing that none of them can be accused of ripping off each other. Hollywood has a history of releasing similar films during the same year. You only have to look to "Deep Impact" and "Armageddon", "Antz" and "A Bugs Life", and "Dantes Peak" and "Volcano". Which brings me to "Knight And Day". While the wise-cracking, tough guy action ensembles seems to be one of the filmic trends of the year, then so too, is the action, romantic comedy. Joining "Knight And Day" this year was "The Bounty Hunter" and "Date Night". These films all offer the same things and cynically, could be looked as simply ticking off boxes for multiple demographics. Action and excitement for him and sweet romance for her. Comedy is the thing that can link these two conflicting themes together. You can't blame Hollywood for trying really, as it seems a sure thing to get both genders to the same movie, as opposed to being dragged along to "Sex & The City 2" or "Iron Man 2" by your other half depending on your sex. The result for all films in this mould have all been the same. In struggling to balance so many conflicting themes, and trying to appeal to such a broad audience something gets lost or falls behind in the final mix.

Tom Cruise plays Roy Miller, a spy on the run from his own agency and accused of going rogue. Cameron Diaz is June Havens, a sweet simple, girl next door. Through events they are brought together on the same flight. June is believed to be with Roy and as a result, the two are forced to go on the run together, getting into various scraps and scrapes all over the world, all the while harboring a 'will they, won't they' relationship. Peter Sarsgaard turns up as the agent tracking Cruise's and Paul Dano gets a fleeting part as a junior scientist genius. Despite the talents of those supporting actors, both are wasted. Focus is kept primarily on our leads and as a result, the film lacks a decent antagonist or MacGuffin. Why get actors of that caliber only to have them so wasted in their respective roles? Lucky then, that Cruise and Diaz share decent chemistry. This is the only film of the Summer relying on simple star power to sell to audiences. It does not carry the hype of other films falling back on iconic characters, or previous tried and tested material. Thank goodness then that both leads deliver. Diaz is as spunky and proficient as she has been in a while while Cruise provides the main draw to the films charm. This is as likeable and charismatic as he has been in years. He has far too many knockers in the world and despite what many think of his private life, the fact remains that he is never less than reliable and constantly delivers decent performances. Here he is affable and charming and shows just why he has managed to stay on top of his game for so long. That the film was not a huge runaway hit in the States (despite the fact it has made twice its budget back internationally) shows that his wattage might unfortunately be dipping. I myself still thinks he has what it takes to carry a major motion picture and when he is on form there are few who can match his charisma.

Director Mangold has been steadily working in wildly different genres for the past few years now. To take a look at his CV shows just how versatile he is. Results from him are never less than watchable. Here in his first major Hollywood release he proves very adept at handling the many action scenes. However there are points when the laughs just doesn't seem to blend with the large body count on screen. While remaining fairly bloodless (censorship is odd like that) Cruise still manages to mow down his fair share of agents and other interceptors after our two heroes. Another problem is the fact that while Cruise is one of the main reasons to see the film, he is absent for a large chunk of the films third act, leaving Diaz to carry the film on her own. The comedy dries up and events grow tiresome waiting for Cruise to appear again (the film paints him as an almost super-hero agent, completely incapable of getting badly injured). So while the action crackles along, Cruise shines and Diaz acts her best 'normal girl caught up in this mess' the film never rises above watchable. Shame as there was certainly talent in front and behind the camera. The final result seems wasted.

Verdict: 51%
Cruise reminds just how adept and competant he is at the action, laughs and old fashioned leading man status and Diaz shows genuine chemistry with her fellow co-star, but supporting characters are wasted, the plot soon wavers and the incredible body count is at odds with the films comedy and romance. Mangold is a talented Director but lets events get out of control and the result becomes tiresome. That final bike chase is good fun though.

Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Inception


Christopher Nolan works above almost every other Director working today. He exists with a rare few, who seem to achieve the impossible with almost every film they direct. His films are at turns, brain bustingly clever and original, but most important of all, entertaining. He does not pander to his audiences; rather trusts that a clever and original story well told will be all they need to grasp onto the world he puts them in. Don't forget that Nolan never tries to wrong foot or trick his audience (The Prestige aside), rather he is just asking them to go along with his characters for the ride. His stories are straight forward. His own original spin he puts on them, is what separates them from the norm. Whether it be "Memento's" detective story told backwards, "Insomnia's" shifting good/bad guy dynamics, "Batman Begins" audacity in (for once in it's long history in cinema) focusing on the highly complex title character, "The Prestige's" box of tricks non-linear narrative or "The Dark Knight's" obsession with how far can a hero stoop to stop an enemy threatening everything he stands for, Nolan tells conventional stories, in the most unconventional ways. In his new film "Inception" he does so in ways far more daring and thought provoking than anything he has explored before. In fact, there are things in "Inception" which I have never seen attempted in cinema before. Nolan has always loved playing with time and daring linear subterfuge, along with audiences perceptions of that which he puts on screen before them. Here he almost outdoes himself on everything he has achieved before. Not bad work considering he has yet to make a bad film and his last, is one of the highest grossing of all time. I will say off the bat that I consider "Inception" a masterpiece. I show nothing but unashamed love for this film. It plays on levels far beyond what Blockbuster entertainment should be and offers epic visuals, Art House cinema could never have the budget to muster. Apologies for those unhappy with the arse licking that is going on display here and for those who disagree with this review, however I will go on to describe just how and why "Inception" is the best and most important film this year.

For those who haven't yet seen this film I will say bypass this review. The films success is best achieved knowing as little as possible and just letting the world this film has to offer unfold around you. The plot exists in a world where 'dream-sharing' exists. This allows people to break into the dreams of certain 'marks' to then steal important information which can then be in turn used against them. We follow dream expert Dom Cobb (DiCaprio), as he and his specially assembled team, then break into a persons mind, for that one last elusive job. Of course there is far more going on than this, which would be too cruel to spoil here. That the film has plenty of surprises up its sleeve is an understatement. It is the most original heist movie you might ever see. DiCaprio is very ably joined by Joseph Gordon-Levitt as his right hand man, new 'Mad Max' Tom Hardy as a 'dream forger' and Ellen Page as 'the architect'. Page in particular acts as the audiences introduction into the world while also balancing an emotional counterpoint, crucial to DiCaprios character. We learn what the rules are, how it works and what the dangers are of dream sharing through her. Irish actor Cillian Murphy turns up as the unassuming 'mark' who DiCaprios team are trying to subconsciously break into. Ken Watanabe impresses as the client who originally offers the job to Leo's team along with the tantalising prospect of Leo's character finally being able to return home upon its successful completion. Marion Cotillard shocks (however to speak much about her part, would spoil too much of the story) and even Michael Caine turns up in a small role as Leo's professor. The cast are all uniformly excellent. Nolan works his ensemble so that everybody gets something to do and is very memorable in their own right, without ever losing track of the overall story. Murphy in particular entices (and is given the only other character arc of the story other than Leo's) as the young entrepreneur struggling to come to terms with the death of his Father. No mean feat considering he has a lot to do throughout films running time. Hardy also impresses and gains most of the films laughs as the sly Eames, while Gordon-Levitt is given the most awe-inspiring action beat of the film, as one of the most original fist fights ever staged is conducted in a revolving hallway. Even as the screws tighten, and the film grows ever more action packed and tense, Nolan never loses sight of character and emotion. Some have crticised the film as while being technically stunning, lacking in emotion and depth. How this could be argued is beyond me. It is Nolans most emotional film to date and this drives the entire narrative. It is about one man trying to get home to see his family. It is about the dark secrets of regret and angst that everyone carries around deep inside them. It is about learning to let go of the past and come to terms with your world as it is now. In essence, it is all about emotion. That, and huge explosions.

Nolan had been working on the script for over 8 years. It was only with the astounding worldwide and critical success he had with 'The Dark Knight' that he suddenly discovered how to complete it. The fact that he also was given over $170 million to achieve his vision, I'm sure also helped. Forever fascinated with the inner workings of the mind, Nolan loves making his audience think. When the film was first announced it came with the tantalising prospect as being 'a sci-fi thriller set within the architecture of the human mind'. 'What the hell could it be about?!' we all pondered aloud to each other. This again is part of the Nolan way; he never once set out to deceive us. This is exactly what the film is about. That it is that and so much more may not come apparent until seeing the film itself. The story is very straight forward and apart from a few brief flashbacks is almost completely linear. But this is where something quite extraordinary happens as Nolan, within the rules he has set for himself in his dream world (as most of the film is set) is able to stage sequences on top of each other, each set in different realms of the same dream. If it sounds complicated, it isn't as Nolan ensures that in between all the car chases and gun fights, the story is kept resolutely clear at all times. The only thing is that the story is so unlike anything we've seen in quite a while and provides almost limitless ideas for the film and our own minds to follow, and as a result, is quite a mind bender. Nolan has the audacity to at some stages of the film work 4 different action scenes on top of each other, in 4 different dream realms all at once. That each dream level has longer stages of time than the one prior, means that he plays around with time in a way that I have never seen attempted before in a film. I believe this (in the same way "Memento" was noted for) ability to play around with readily established timelines and means of telling a story in such an original manner deserves to be studied for many years to come. Nolan really is that good. Or that may just be the arse kissing I warned you about earlier again.

Leonardo DiCaprio, for the second time this year is a revelation. From his beginnings as the heart throb of the month well over a decade ago now, he constantly challenges and exceeds expectations in every role he commands. In fact his earlier film this year "Shutter Island" could work as a nice (brain bending) double feature with "Inception" as both films deal in similar themes of warped reality and distorted perceptions about what we believe to be real around us. Here he offers untold depths and distressing memories and regrets about the past. However, what separates it from his detective in "Shutter Island" is that the audience gets to physically travel into his subconscious, to better understand the inner workings of him and his traumatic past. His complex and very weighty emotions is what drives the plot. That "Shutter Island" is my second favourite film this year speaks wonders about his talent and ability at picking stand out parts. I am however sure at this stage that he must be aching to do a comedy after all these po-faced roles.

So arse licking all over, what we are left with is a stunning thriller. In a year seemingly devoid of originality and excitement in the theatres, Christopher Nolan has once again captured what films full of good story telling, acting and originality can achieve and it is far more than 3D or mindless CGI can muster. Nolan doesn't make movies for the Summer, he makes films for the ages as all the best auteurs do. In the lacklustre year of cinema it has been, along with excitement generated by "The Dark Knight", Nolan had a lot of hype to live up to. Maybe that he exceeded it is not surprising, seeing as he has done it so many times already, but that the film is a success in all the unforseen ways it is, should be applauded. In selling their biggest film of the summer without any previous tie-in to any film or comic before it, Warner Bros. took a huge risk which paid of handsomely for them. The film never pauses for one moment and yet incorporates character and emotion seamlessly into its narrative to stunning effect. It's most minor criticisms stem from not much characterisation from those after Murphy or DiCaprio, and its long running time. All of this is insignificant however. Nolan once again achieves the impossible in cinema in glorious fashion. This is a film to be watched and studied many times over, to work out its many stunning idiosyncrasies. It is a film that will not leave your mind after first watching it. It is a film as this review will tell you, I love. If we see any film until Nolans 'Batman 3' that even comes close "Inceptions" excitement and stunning film making, then we will be very lucky indeed. This is not a dream, "Inception" is indeed, far and away the best film you will see this year.

Verdict: 91%
Christopher Nolan returns with an epic study of emotion, regret and loss. His first original work since 'Following' over a decade ago, and it's a belter. Shot with Cinematographer Wally Pfisters stunning eye, another classic score by Hans Zimmer and the most exciting action you may yet see all year, Nolan is back showing was can be done with the magic of cinema.

Friday, July 9, 2010

Predators


The tagline to 'Predators' is 'fear is reborn'. Rather apt on the audiences part, as it seems that despite the first entry to the saga back in 1987, Fox has been churning out films starring the mandibled, Rastafarian, space-psycho ever since, with each one hugely lowering in quality from the last. It is a saga that never got going. This can also be applied to the (admittedly more successful) saga that 'Predator' shares most in common with: 'Alien'. In owning two of the best movie monsters from recent years, Fox seem so intent on screwing up their legacy as to wondering how those original films ever even turned out to be as good as they were in the first place. Including the excretable 'Alien Vs. Predator' films, these entries have at least 3 classics between them ('Alien', 'Aliens' and 'Predator'). In 3 sagas which altogether includes 9 films over the course of 4 decades shows Fox really has lost what made those films so special in the first place. However, with the news in mid 2009, that Robert Rodriquez had shown interest in reviving the 'Predator' franchise and giving the first one a sequel it deserved show that Fox may be waking up. This coupled with recent news that Ridley Scott is to direct (with an idea/script from James Cameron?) an 'Alien' prequel, show that Fox may have finally decided to stop squandering these monsters, and put them to use in films worthy of their forebears. However, talk about the 'Alien' franchise is for another day, as first out of the cage is Rodriquez's effort. Alluding itself with James Camerons classic sequel title, by adding an 's', immediately shows Rodriquez's intentions. This is a saga to be treated with respect. The respect it owes to both the original 1987 effort, and its many fans, that have sat through too many poor treatments of their monster to finally give up hope. Rodriquez claims he is the man that could save it.

First things first, it should be noted, that the original 'Predator' is by no means a stone cold masterpiece in certainly not the same way the first two 'Alien' films are. While on many levels an extremely tense and exciting ride, it also features some horrid lines of dialogue and some questionable levels of male flesh (pun intended) on show, even in a place as hot as the South American jungle. From the start these films were quite trashy and forgettable. What elevated the original was the design of the Predator, (now a classic monster in my mind) and the set pieces; particularly Arnies heroic last stand against the creature. In the 80's, Arnold Schwarzenegger had killed and destroyed all that there was to. Nothing could stand in his way and no one could stand up to even coming close to defeating him. That this is partly why the film works, is one of the main reasons all the sequels haven't; until the Predator came along, we all believed Arnie could never be defeated. But here was a more than formidible foe, which bested Arnie and his team on almost every level, and almost destroyed them all easily. This is one of the main reasons the first is as successful as it is. The second one may not be as bad as we all seem to remember, however two major mistakes it made was casting a portly Danny Glover in the lead and focusing far too much time on the monster itself (we have never actually been given a name for the creature in any of the films). This took away from the group dynamic of the first, and the tension of not knowing what our heroes were up against. That the sequel was by no means as big a hit as the first meant the franchise was stalled. Fox obviously had no idea what to do with it. Thank God then, that Rodriquez did.

Originally written in 1994, the script was only recently dusted off from the inner vaults in the Fox studios which got everyone remembering how great the Predator was and still is, as a movie monster. So Rodriquez polished off the script and hired the unfortunatley named Nimrod Antal to direct. Fans were cautiously optimistic. It is a relief then after all that, to announce that 'Predators', while by no means approaching the excitement on the first is a step in the right direction. The fact that it is the second best film in the series, (though from its prequels that may have been not that hard to do), does show that Fox are headed in the right direction. Indeed, Rodriquez and Antal have fashioned a very entertaining nights fodder down the mutiplex, one that pays respect to the original, while also being unique and original in itself to be a stand alone entry in the series. So a series that was becoming quite a laughing stock, is brought back from the brink, and not in the nick of time. But is it enough to sustain its running time and lift it above the many other mediocre efforts of the Summer thus far? The answer unfortunately is 'almost'.

The films main selling point is that it is set on a different planet from ours. In getting back to the team-based dynamic of the first, we follow a group of Planet Earths best cold blooded killers, each plucked randomly it would appear, as they struggle to comprehend what is going on around them. Indeed the films title could also apply to our main characters; back home, they themselves are all predators. So in order to survive, our team is going to have to learn to work together. Of course this is all before any appearance of three-pronged laser sights appear aiming at anyone. Chief among them is Adrien Brodys 'Royce' as the hesitant leader of the group. Antal and Rodriquez wisely spend time with the characters so we can identify each one, and get some nice character detail before the havoc ensues. Included, we have a member of the Japanese Yakuza, a member of a Mexican drug cartel, Russian militia, an American death-row prisoner and a South American sharp shooter. As broad as their backgrounds are, it also unfortunately also stems to the characterisations themselves. It isn't long before Brody realises that they are being hunted, and are on a game preserve, albeit one covering the entire planet. The Predators it would seem, drag their prey here, in order to hunt and become more efficient killers. Carnage ensues. Relatively straight forward, as any 'Predator' movie should be, this wisely focuses on characters before the creatures show up bringing back a sense of tension missing from every entry into the series since.

The film has a few more tricks up its sleeve along the way and keeps the viewer engaged for most of its running time. However, one of its main problems, ironically lies in its direction. Scenes of action are sometimes clunkily handled and while Antal is a million miles ahead of any of the directors of the 'Alien Vs. Predator' movies, you can't help but wish Rodriquez had stayed in the directors chair on this. Another problem lies in its script itself. Throughout its running time, the film shows flickers of originality and welcome bouts of humour. Unfortunately, these moments are too few and as the film goes on, it grows less exciting. What is good is the cast. Brody here easily proves himself as a tough guy, spouting some pretty bad-ass lines of dialogue; any doubts about whether or not the skinny dude from 'The Pianist' can hold an action role convincingly, will be fully put to rest, come the films climax. He is ably supported by everyone from a scene stealing Walter Goggins as a shank wielding inmate, to a nice cameo from Laurence Fishburne which unfortunately, is over all too soon. Topher Grace shines as a Doctor with a secret and Alice Braga keeps up the 'Predator' tradition, of having a South American woman, who knows more about the alien creatures than anyone else does.

One of the biggest successes of the film is actually making the Predators threatening again. After the cartoonish depiction of them in previous films, we have finally got back to the root of what made these guys so memorable in the first place. For seeing, appreciating and mainly remembering the potential the Predators have, Rodriquez should be thanked. That it never fully hits the heights of the first one is regrettable, but a sure sign that they are back on track, and that the inevitable sequel, will put rights to that.


Verdict: 61%
Robert Rodriquez reboots the stalled franchise just about. Set pieces never quite deliver the intensity they deserve and it slightly runs out of steam towards the end. But for an entertaining night of B-Movie monster entertainment, which is all the franchise ever set out to be, you will not be dissappointed. Oh, and that ace shot of Brody covered in lasers from the trailer? Sorry to disappoint you, but is sorely absent from the final film.

Friday, March 26, 2010

Retrospective - 'Inside' (À l'intérieur) 2007


How do I recommend this film? It is quite possibly one of the most shocking and downright disturbing films of recent years. Its blood soaked hands possitively burst out of the screen and grab you by the throat such is its effect. It is a film that stays with you long after you see it. Many of you will be sickend by its gore and violence. Many of you will simply not be able to watch it. How then, can I rate this so high and proclaim it as one of the best horror movies of the last decade? Of course, someone telling you 'you won't be able to take it', only makes most people want to see something even more. Just don't say I didn't warn you. 'Inside' was initially released in its native France, very surprisingly, in 2007. So why am I reviewing it now? Well part of this blog is to provide information about films that you may or may not have heard of. So while a lot of you probably have not seen this, I can safely and one hundred per cent say that you have never seen anything quite like this before.


The film is set on Christmas Eve. Sarah (Alysson Paradis) is heavily pregnant. She is still recovering (physically and emotionally) from the death of her husband only 4 months before. She is to have an induced labour the next day and is understandably, quite anxious about it. However, this is all before a mysterious woman (Beatrice Dalle) comes knocking late in the night and refuses to go away. You see, this strange lady wants Sarahs child, and will stop at nothing to get it. This film is incredibly stripped down. There is something so simplistic about a heavily pregnant woman in such peril, I'm surprised that other films have not taken advantage of it before; tension is a given with it. And what tension. This begins almost instantly with such nerve shredding terror, and does not let up for its entire running time. You simply have no idea where this film will go next, such is its visceral rawness. And the places it takes you, well it will simply be far too much for some. Which brings me to my next point. The violence.


I am a fan of horror. While I have reviewed a few here before, I believe that the good ones are very far and few between. Before viewing this film, I had some preconceived notions about what the genre should feature. Less is always more, the lower the budget the better and under no circumstances, should the film ever rely on gore. This film gloriously tears up any ideas I previously had about it. It is easily one of the most vicious films I have ever seen. It begins quite violently and gets more and more over the top gory as it goes on. Previous reliance on gore used to be at the cost of tension, I believed. Here it enhances it. Before the film is over you are left watching through fingers at disbelief at the carnage. Why is this though? When watching it, I found myself torn in whether I actually liked the film or not. I had been advised on the similarly violent 2008 gallic-horror 'Martyrs' before I watched 'Inside'. These are quite similar films and yet having such conflicting opinions for the two is quite odd. That the former had received very positive praise from critics and that also in my opinion, you have to seek out the best horrors yourself, I eagerly checked out it out. 'Martyrs' was, for me a sleazy exercise in shock tactics. Centering on the dreaded 'torture-porn' sub-genre, it offered me next to nothing. Shocking, just for the sake of it. 'Inside', is quite possibly, more violent and yet affected me so much more. I can't quite pin-point where and why my opinions differ on the two films. And with this escalation of screen violence, where does this leave violence in movies to go and what can be acceptable for audiences?


So why then, is this film so good? Well it is shot beautifully. First time directors Alexandre Bustillo and Julien Maury ensure every scene carries a sense of menace, and the pacing of it is impeccable. It's eerie use of primary colours recall a sense of the 70's classic 'Susperia' along with its soundtrack, enhancing the shocks greatly. Its relentless assault on the senses is due to its pacy editing. For such a low budget film, it looks great. Make-up and many of its special effects are top class. So while it is very technically proficient, why does it carry such an emotional punch? This could be down to its two female leads. Both are played with great devotion and conviction in their parts. Dalle cuts a very imposing figure in her gothic, black dress and Paradis must be applauded for receiving quite possibly, the most punishment any character has gone through in a film in recent memory. 'Home invasion' films are unnerving simply by what they stand for. Our home is the one place we feel safe and can relax. Add in the very primal fear of pregnancy and you have ready made effective themes for the audience to relate to. The house is the one place Sarah is safe; the womb is the only place her unborn child is safe. We are already rooting for Sarah from the start just for the terrifying predicament she finds herself in. It is ambiguous in all the right places (is the 'Woman' a real, or supernatural presence?) and all characters carry just the right shades of grey to them; Sarah already blames the death of her husband on her unborn child, so consequently, does she want to fight as hard for her, and its survival?


Gore aside, this film is incredibly tense. Its mayhem and carnage is well handled, but were it not for its eerie unpredictability, it would not have near the effect it does. It is very, very scary. Minor criticisms center on some comically inept and stupid police officers added to the mix, for no other reason it seems, than to up the body count. Hopefully, you will be too wrapped up in the film to notice, but they are good examples of characters that 'live in the film world' and do certains things that will have some people screaming at the screen in disbelief. It also becomes almost too blood soaked by the climax. This for me did not take away any of the movies enjoyment. Come the end, you will have been through an experience like no other. Some may not have liked what you have seen, but one thing is for certain, you will not be able to shake this films effect on you.


Verdict: 85%

An stunning achievement in modern horror. If you find yourself jaded by the genre, then this film is for you. Most people will be put off by the endless and shocking violence, but when it is handled as well as this, you cannot fight the primal effect it has on the viewer. I urge you to seek it out, wherever you can find it.


Trailer:

Tuesday, March 16, 2010

The House of the Devil


As stated elsewhere on this blog, I suggested that the best horror movies are the ones you have to find yourself. As a huge fan of the genre, I began to get extremely disillusioned with it; there were simply not enough good films being made. All these efforts were cynical, studio based gore spectaculars. Cheap enough to make, and yet easy to recuperate costs. They seemed to rely on apparant 'shocking' violence at the expense of tension and terror. Some appallingy used a misguided CGI presence to threaten the protagonist. The art of how to truly scare people was lost. At least so I originally thought. That was until films across the seas started scaring up great attention. In no particular order, foreign films like 'The Orphange', 'Let The Right One In', 'REC' and 'Inside' all bloody terrified me!! They were unpredictable, tense and best of all, genuinely scary. If these films all seemed to do their job, then it had still been a while since I had seen anything American even approaching something remotely creepy. 'Drag Me To Hell', while enormous fun, was the equivalent of a rollercoaster; simply put, it didn't freak me out. Was the American horror movie dead? 29 year old Director Ti West didn't seem to think so.


It was only recently I had seen that 'The House of the Devil' was being released in the UK this week. I myself first saw this a few months ago, and cannot recommend it enough. But before any readers rush out and see it, I feel I must warn you that it is that which is almost unthinkable in this day and age: a slow burning horror! This is almost certainly not going to be to everyones taste, but if you like what I tell you about the film, then definately check it out. This film definately needs attention. It doesn't have big name stars, or any studio marketing behind it, but for any old school horror fans, it is unmissable. The film is set in the early 80's and absolutely revels in it's attention to detail. Director West, uses this as endearing nod to the previous masters of the genre he honours and in no way does this become a cynical tool. Simply put, the film breathes 1980's culture. Whether or not this is in the shamelessly retro freeze frame opening credits, synth based score, or minor object details; (hello block Walkman!) show an unassuming person the film and they would never guess it was made last year. This provides much fun for the viewer, even as the film grows in tension. Unfortunately, a film as small as this cannot benefit from a full round up of the plot. It's a sort of 'the less you know about it, the better movie', so I will give only a small bit away. College student Samantha is low on funds. She can't make rent for the brand new house she has just rented and has barely enough money to eat. So when a babysitting job at a house on the remote outskirts of town comes along, it seems too perfect. Sam urgently accepts it.


As stated earlier the film is incredibly slow burning, in fact some might accuse this film as an hour and a half of nothingness. To do that, is an extreme disservice to the direction and script, not to mention great work of the cast. It is a tiny, and very simple project, but nontheless effective for it. Fans of old 60's, 70's and 80's horror such as 'Rosemary's Baby', 'The Shining', and 'Suspiria' will lap everything up. Those expecting cheap thrills and non stop gore, will not find it here. This film has an excellent build up of tension. A lot of this features lead actress Jocelin Donahue doing not very much at all. West however, offers up nail biting unease with every tiny creak in the floorboard, or flicker of a shadow that you think you may or may not have seen. In fact, West plays the film so that you're not entirely sure if these creepy occurances are not just in Samanthas head-is it just paranoia, or are there some other dark forces at work here? West takes his time to get there, but never once loses sight of the goal: to make the audience as uncomfortable as possible. With so much care and effort on making us scared of what might happen, when the action finally explodes, it can't possibly live up to what we have been tantalisingly teased with for the past hour, as nightmarish as it turns out to be. Those early details of a house thought to be empty are just too relateable and it is conveyed very well here. Donahue and the rest of the small cast do a great job. As mentioned none are particualarly recogniseable from anything, but this adds to the unpredictability of where it all might go. Old cult faves like Dee Wallace and the simply terrifying Tom Noonan pop up along the way to make the ride as creepy as possible.


That the very young West has created a horror film this mature and confidant in itself is very commendable. Many directors his age might have sold out with a 'Saw' movie or two, and it is remarkable that he managed to get his vision of the film made at all, with no studio interference. It marks him out as a talent to watch in the future. In a genre that by it's essance is the almost defination of crowd pleasing, this isn't it. Most of these films thrive on giving the audience what they want, this thrives on keeping it from them, for as long as possible. It's terror comes from a place of no irony as more recent efforts might have been. He simply wants to terrify you. If you have the patience and value your classic horror then you will want to join him for the ride.


Verdict: 79%

A great exercise in a low budget horror throw back to the 80's. Some may argue that not enough happens, but those are missing out on the directors intentions. If you go along with it, prepare for a shaky walk around your house as you turn all your lights on afterwards.....


Trailer: (Warning: Certain Spoilers of scenes and very poor indication of movies themes and plot)