Oh man I've been slack, again. I'll start my catch up by writing about the two best movies I've seen which are currently out at the cinema.
The Descendants
The Descendants recently won the award for best Drama at the Golden Globes, although it would probably better fit into the category that is sometimes referred to as "dramaedy", or comedy drama. Anyone who has seen director Alexander Payne's other movies such as Election and Sideways would be familiar with his seem less blend of the two genres. We start the film with George Clooney's character presented with a decision about what to do with a section of Hawaiian land his family has inherited from their DESCENDANTS (hence the film's title, right?) all the while trying dealing with the fact that his wife is in a coma from a water skiing accident and his two daughters playing up like brats.
The story is then turned on it it's head with the revelation that Clooney's wife had been cheating on him, and what follows is his journey to locate the guy she'd been sleeping with whilst attempting to re-connect with his daughters (the later of which probably comes about a bit too easily given the original setup.)
Unlike other movies similar to The Descendants the story never loses any momentum, remaining engaging from beginning to end. The characterisations are all extremely strong, the script is intelligent and funny, and yes, George Clooney probably does give the performance of his lifetime, while the rest of the cast are also good. It does suffer slightly from some mild formulaic elements and unusually fast transformation of his daughters behaviour, although for the most part it actually rises above these issues with it's wholly unsentimental approach to a story about family being able to rise above the worst situations when they bond and work together.
**** 1/2 out of *****
Hugo
When I heard that Martin Scorsese's new picture was going to be adapted from a children's book and in 3D I really didn't know what to think. The trailer didn't really help things either, however I shouldn't have known not to doubt Scorsese, who has made one of his best films in a while. In fact, what the trailer makes look like a whimsical, kids fantasy could be better described as a love letter to cinema set amongst beautiful production design and cinematography, and the best use of 3D since Avatar.
We start by following Hugo, who lives at a railway station in France operating the clocks. He spends the rest of his time stealing food and other items to fix a broken automaton (or robot). We soon find out that through his back story that he has been abandoned at the train station by his uncle after his father dies, and Hugo keeps the clocks running under the belief it will help him evade the station inspector (played by Sacha Baron Cohen in his usual humorous manor). When Hugo meets Isabelle (played by Chloe Grace Mortez) they make a discovery that changes the course of the movie, and I wont say any more to avoid spoilers.
As mentioned above, Hugo is a visually stunning movie, and the opening sequence alone is almost worth the price of admission. On top of this the movie has a very strong emotional heart and good message about finding your purpose in life and never letting go of your dreams, which is presented in a completed organic and un-cliched fashion. There are loads of references to classic cinema scattered throughout which blend very nicely into the narrative, and while these and other elements may put Hugo a bit above the heads of the audience trailer would be have you believe the film is targeting, this is certainly one of the most original and best films of 2011.
***** out of *****
Coming next, all the other movies I've been watching lately.
Tuesday, 7 February 2012
Monday, 23 January 2012
Oscars - Best Picture Nomination Predictions
So, the Oscar nominations are being announced 5.38 am PST time. I have no idea what that equates to in Brisbane time, and I certainly can't be bothered figuring it out. Needless to say it will be sometime in the next 24 hours, and I thought I'd try my hand at predicting the best picture nominations. One of the reasons I'm doing this is that last year I correctly predicted all ten nominations, yet didn't record my predictions anywhere, and subsequently have no record or proof of said excellent prediction skills. This year will be even more difficult to pick, however, given that the Academy has changed the nomination format again after only two years. This year instead of ten films definitely being nominated, at least five films HAVE to be nominated but it COULD be as many as ten. In other words it will be somewhere between five and ten films. So I'll do this prediction a little differently.
If only five films are nominated they will be.....
The Artist
If someone had told me last year that the favourite to win best picture the following year would be a silent black and white French film I would have either assumed they were joking or crazy. But here we are. It appears that just about everyone thinks The Artist will take the main prize home, possibly because it's something different yet accessible, possibly because people appreciate the classical film making approach, or possibly because it's a great movie. I haven't seen it as it's not even out here yet, and while I don't usually fully embrace films that are overly gimmicky I'm pretty excited to see it when it comes out in February.
The Descendants
It won the award for best drama at the Golden Globes, which if recent history is anything to go by means it will be nominated for best picture at the Oscars but wont win. On top of that it's received loads of critical acclaim and IS one of the best movies of the year (I'll review it in my next entry), so it's a shoe in.
Hugo
As with The Descendants, it is one of the best reviewed films of the years and has loads of Oscar buzz, so it's lock in for a nomination. I've been slack and haven't gotten around to seeing it yet, but am muchly looking forward to doing so. You can bet your bottom dollar on this, The Descendants, and The Artist all being nominated.
Midnight in Paris
I'm slightly less confident about this one than the previous three, however the Oscars always needs the obligatory slightly off beat comedy in their best picture recognitions to show they're not a bunch of old stiffs who are all about the drama movies, and Woody Allen's new treasure will do nicely.
Moneyball
Probably the movie I feel least confident about putting in the top five, however the Academy loves rewarding intelligently written films that are based on true stories like this one, so I think it will be in there. Plus it has Brad Pitt in it.
.... but I think eight films will be nominated in total, with the next three being....
The Help
The Academy also loves recognising movies about people standing up against racism and injustice. It makes them feel like they're progressive, tolerant people and gives them a nice warm fuzzy feeling inside ( I assume.) Plus it's gotten pretty good reviews. I missed it at the cinema but will check it out when it comes to DVD in February.
Drive
Not alot of Oscar buzz for Drive however it has received overwhelmingly positive reviews from critics. This would be a different sort to be nominated, however I've noticed a slight trend in recent years for more trendy or "cult" movies to be recognised. I personally thought it was a tad overrated, but the majority disagree.
War Horse
My award for most obvious Oscar bait of the year, War Horse wasn't exactly a critical darling, however it IS exactly the kind of classical film making the Academy loves to award, and with the Spielberg director's credit attached I think the Academy will find it too hard to resist taking the bait.
...however if ten films happen to be nominated the next two will be...
Girl With The Dragon Tattoo
Another one I've yet to see, David Fincher's adaptation of the beloved novel has been gaining a tremendous amount of critical acclaim. The reason I think it will miss out is I'm sure there will be a contingent amongst Academy voters who loathe the whole Americans remaking foreign films thing, especially so soon after the original film came out, and will refuse to vote for it.
The Tree of Life
I hope with all of my being that the best film of the year (entirely objective statement of course) scrapes in for a nomination, but I can't see it happening. While I'm sure there will be a number of Academy voters that will vote the film quite highly, the new system means you have to get a certain number of votes to qualify for a nomination, and I think the love it or hate it nature of The Tree of Life will mean it wont quite get enough.
So there we go, and I'll be very curious to see how my predictions play out. I've got about 8 or 9 films to write ups for at the moment, so hopefully I'll get some spare time and do that soon.
If only five films are nominated they will be.....
The Artist
If someone had told me last year that the favourite to win best picture the following year would be a silent black and white French film I would have either assumed they were joking or crazy. But here we are. It appears that just about everyone thinks The Artist will take the main prize home, possibly because it's something different yet accessible, possibly because people appreciate the classical film making approach, or possibly because it's a great movie. I haven't seen it as it's not even out here yet, and while I don't usually fully embrace films that are overly gimmicky I'm pretty excited to see it when it comes out in February.
The Descendants
It won the award for best drama at the Golden Globes, which if recent history is anything to go by means it will be nominated for best picture at the Oscars but wont win. On top of that it's received loads of critical acclaim and IS one of the best movies of the year (I'll review it in my next entry), so it's a shoe in.
Hugo
As with The Descendants, it is one of the best reviewed films of the years and has loads of Oscar buzz, so it's lock in for a nomination. I've been slack and haven't gotten around to seeing it yet, but am muchly looking forward to doing so. You can bet your bottom dollar on this, The Descendants, and The Artist all being nominated.
Midnight in Paris
I'm slightly less confident about this one than the previous three, however the Oscars always needs the obligatory slightly off beat comedy in their best picture recognitions to show they're not a bunch of old stiffs who are all about the drama movies, and Woody Allen's new treasure will do nicely.
Moneyball
Probably the movie I feel least confident about putting in the top five, however the Academy loves rewarding intelligently written films that are based on true stories like this one, so I think it will be in there. Plus it has Brad Pitt in it.
.... but I think eight films will be nominated in total, with the next three being....
The Help
The Academy also loves recognising movies about people standing up against racism and injustice. It makes them feel like they're progressive, tolerant people and gives them a nice warm fuzzy feeling inside ( I assume.) Plus it's gotten pretty good reviews. I missed it at the cinema but will check it out when it comes to DVD in February.
Drive
Not alot of Oscar buzz for Drive however it has received overwhelmingly positive reviews from critics. This would be a different sort to be nominated, however I've noticed a slight trend in recent years for more trendy or "cult" movies to be recognised. I personally thought it was a tad overrated, but the majority disagree.
War Horse
My award for most obvious Oscar bait of the year, War Horse wasn't exactly a critical darling, however it IS exactly the kind of classical film making the Academy loves to award, and with the Spielberg director's credit attached I think the Academy will find it too hard to resist taking the bait.
...however if ten films happen to be nominated the next two will be...
Girl With The Dragon Tattoo
Another one I've yet to see, David Fincher's adaptation of the beloved novel has been gaining a tremendous amount of critical acclaim. The reason I think it will miss out is I'm sure there will be a contingent amongst Academy voters who loathe the whole Americans remaking foreign films thing, especially so soon after the original film came out, and will refuse to vote for it.
The Tree of Life
I hope with all of my being that the best film of the year (entirely objective statement of course) scrapes in for a nomination, but I can't see it happening. While I'm sure there will be a number of Academy voters that will vote the film quite highly, the new system means you have to get a certain number of votes to qualify for a nomination, and I think the love it or hate it nature of The Tree of Life will mean it wont quite get enough.
So there we go, and I'll be very curious to see how my predictions play out. I've got about 8 or 9 films to write ups for at the moment, so hopefully I'll get some spare time and do that soon.
Saturday, 7 January 2012
Mission Impossible, War Horse & Others
Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol
I've enjoyed the Mission Impossible films up to this point, although the franchise has never really excited me that much. However, when I heard that the fourth film in the series was to be the live action debut of director Brad Bird (of Pixar fame) i was more than a little optimistic. My optimism, I discovered, was not unfounded, because what we have here is a likely contender for best action film of 2011.
In a way Ghost Protocol reminds me of the best of the older Bond films, as it is full cool gadgets, multiple exotic locations, beautiful women and a bad guy determined to destroy the world for some ridiculous reasons. The many set pieces throughout the film perfectly filmed, and each action scene is almost a work of art unto itself. The script is funny and intelligently written, making a few knowing jabs at tired action cliches, and they even give a couple of characters there own mini arches within the main storyline. What more could you want from an action film, right?
Well, unfortunately, a couple of things. For one, the villain is a bit lame, and if you were to compare him with Phillip Seymour Hoffman's loathsome baddie from Mission Impossible 3 he really seems to be lacking a lot of the qualities that make memorable movie villains (personality for one.) Secondly, I've found that the action films I tend to enjoy the most are ones where there is something on the line personally for the good guys. To use Mission Impossible 3 as an example again, there Ethan not only had to stop the bad guys from succeeding in their evil scheme, but also had to rescue his wife. Here he is simply trying to prevent all out nuclear war, and important job no doubt, but with nothing personally at stake for him it takes away from the drama a bit.
But forget about the negatives, this is a fantastic popcorn film with some amazing action scenes, and if the series continues in this manner then MAYBE (very big maybe) one day it will rival the Bond series.
**** out of *****
War Horse
And the award for most obvious Oscar bit of 2011 goes to..... C'mon, you know I'm right. When I first saw the trailer I immediately thought four things; 1. Oscar bait, 2. Sentimental and emotionally manipulative, 3. I will still end up seeing the movie and 4. It will nonetheless be a good movie. All four of those statements proved accurate, however further to point 4, while it was a good movie it was a fair way off being a great movie.
The pros? I really liked the storytelling device of showing World War 1 through the eyes of the horse as it went from person to person, which also means we get to meet a number of different characters. The movie is very beautifully shot, and the battle scenes all look pretty impressive. You also get the feeling of being taken on a big, epic journey, which always tends to suck me in The cons? Besides the sentimentality factor the characterisations are all fairly bland, and while enough time is spent showing the bond between main character Albert and his horse for you to care about that relationship, there's no real reason to care about Albert as a Character. While I enjoyed the storyline it suffers from being a tad predictable, and John Williams' score is pretty obnoxious.
So should War Horse be nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars this year? No. Will it inevitably be nominated anyway? Probably. Will it be a blight on the Academy if it is nominated? Not at all.
***1/2 out of *****
Hobo with a Shotgun
I guess this review is kind of pointless as the title of the title gives away whether you're going to enjoy the movie or not. You're either the kind of person who would enjoy spending an hour and a half watching a movie called Hobo with a Shotgun or you're not. But, for what it's worth, here's my two cents.
Hobo with a Shotgun originally began as a fake trailer submitted to a competition run by Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez for their Grindhouse project, and is the second fake trailer from the project to be turned into a feature length film after Machete. While Machete was more of a stylistic tribute to grindhouse cinema, Hobo with a Shotgun appears closer to being an actual grindhouse film, complete with bad acting, cheesy production values and tacky dialogue.
Despite this, it kinda works. The hobo character is portrayed quite sympathetically, and through his relationship with a prostitute he tries to help I actually cared about his predicament. The over the top violence wont leave gore fans wanting, and the movie even attempts to offer some political commentary on crime and homelessness, and actually doesn't do a terrible job. This is what it is.
*** out of *****
Cowboys & Aliens
Yes, the movie does feature both cowboys and aliens, but do you think they could have come up with a more subtle title? While I had a certain amount of fun with this decent but completely forgettable sci-fi/western crossover, on reflection the movie just made me mad. It's not THIS movie specifically, but it just got me thinking about how sick I am of these "not bad" summer blockbusters. They cost heaps to make, often go on to make heaps of profit, yet all they are is "not bad." People go out and see these movies in droves because they are marketed well and feature big name stars, yet the most common response you'll hear is "yeah, it wasn't bad." They could be watching a movie that a director is passionate about and has poured their heart and soul into, but instead settle for by the numbers movies like this which are just another notch in the director's belt. And all you'll hear them say is that it "wasn't bad."
On a more positive note, this film wasn't bad.
*** out of *****
I've enjoyed the Mission Impossible films up to this point, although the franchise has never really excited me that much. However, when I heard that the fourth film in the series was to be the live action debut of director Brad Bird (of Pixar fame) i was more than a little optimistic. My optimism, I discovered, was not unfounded, because what we have here is a likely contender for best action film of 2011.
In a way Ghost Protocol reminds me of the best of the older Bond films, as it is full cool gadgets, multiple exotic locations, beautiful women and a bad guy determined to destroy the world for some ridiculous reasons. The many set pieces throughout the film perfectly filmed, and each action scene is almost a work of art unto itself. The script is funny and intelligently written, making a few knowing jabs at tired action cliches, and they even give a couple of characters there own mini arches within the main storyline. What more could you want from an action film, right?
Well, unfortunately, a couple of things. For one, the villain is a bit lame, and if you were to compare him with Phillip Seymour Hoffman's loathsome baddie from Mission Impossible 3 he really seems to be lacking a lot of the qualities that make memorable movie villains (personality for one.) Secondly, I've found that the action films I tend to enjoy the most are ones where there is something on the line personally for the good guys. To use Mission Impossible 3 as an example again, there Ethan not only had to stop the bad guys from succeeding in their evil scheme, but also had to rescue his wife. Here he is simply trying to prevent all out nuclear war, and important job no doubt, but with nothing personally at stake for him it takes away from the drama a bit.
But forget about the negatives, this is a fantastic popcorn film with some amazing action scenes, and if the series continues in this manner then MAYBE (very big maybe) one day it will rival the Bond series.
**** out of *****
War Horse
And the award for most obvious Oscar bit of 2011 goes to..... C'mon, you know I'm right. When I first saw the trailer I immediately thought four things; 1. Oscar bait, 2. Sentimental and emotionally manipulative, 3. I will still end up seeing the movie and 4. It will nonetheless be a good movie. All four of those statements proved accurate, however further to point 4, while it was a good movie it was a fair way off being a great movie.
The pros? I really liked the storytelling device of showing World War 1 through the eyes of the horse as it went from person to person, which also means we get to meet a number of different characters. The movie is very beautifully shot, and the battle scenes all look pretty impressive. You also get the feeling of being taken on a big, epic journey, which always tends to suck me in The cons? Besides the sentimentality factor the characterisations are all fairly bland, and while enough time is spent showing the bond between main character Albert and his horse for you to care about that relationship, there's no real reason to care about Albert as a Character. While I enjoyed the storyline it suffers from being a tad predictable, and John Williams' score is pretty obnoxious.
So should War Horse be nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars this year? No. Will it inevitably be nominated anyway? Probably. Will it be a blight on the Academy if it is nominated? Not at all.
***1/2 out of *****
Hobo with a Shotgun
I guess this review is kind of pointless as the title of the title gives away whether you're going to enjoy the movie or not. You're either the kind of person who would enjoy spending an hour and a half watching a movie called Hobo with a Shotgun or you're not. But, for what it's worth, here's my two cents.
Hobo with a Shotgun originally began as a fake trailer submitted to a competition run by Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez for their Grindhouse project, and is the second fake trailer from the project to be turned into a feature length film after Machete. While Machete was more of a stylistic tribute to grindhouse cinema, Hobo with a Shotgun appears closer to being an actual grindhouse film, complete with bad acting, cheesy production values and tacky dialogue.
Despite this, it kinda works. The hobo character is portrayed quite sympathetically, and through his relationship with a prostitute he tries to help I actually cared about his predicament. The over the top violence wont leave gore fans wanting, and the movie even attempts to offer some political commentary on crime and homelessness, and actually doesn't do a terrible job. This is what it is.
*** out of *****
Cowboys & Aliens
Yes, the movie does feature both cowboys and aliens, but do you think they could have come up with a more subtle title? While I had a certain amount of fun with this decent but completely forgettable sci-fi/western crossover, on reflection the movie just made me mad. It's not THIS movie specifically, but it just got me thinking about how sick I am of these "not bad" summer blockbusters. They cost heaps to make, often go on to make heaps of profit, yet all they are is "not bad." People go out and see these movies in droves because they are marketed well and feature big name stars, yet the most common response you'll hear is "yeah, it wasn't bad." They could be watching a movie that a director is passionate about and has poured their heart and soul into, but instead settle for by the numbers movies like this which are just another notch in the director's belt. And all you'll hear them say is that it "wasn't bad."
On a more positive note, this film wasn't bad.
*** out of *****
Monday, 2 January 2012
Melancholia, Tin Tin & Arthur Christmas
Melancholia
Melancholia is the first film I've seen from controversial Danish director Lars Von Trier, which is a little embarrassing to admit, but nonetheless I had no idea what to expect. It starts with a series of images depicting the end of the earth as it collides with another planet (not a spoiler, happens right at the start of the movie!) which are rather beautifully presented and hauntingly paired with the prelude with Richard Wagner's Triston and Isolde opera. The film then shifts to events that occurred before the earth's doom, and is split into two parts named after two characters, sisters Justine and Claire.
In the first part, titled "Justine", the titular character, played brilliantly by Kirsten Dunst, has just gotten married and the scene is set at the wedding reception. It's a rather upper class affair and has been paid for by Justine's wealthy brother in law, played by Kiefer Sutherland. It soon becomes clear that Justine is suffering pretty badly from mental illness, and the wedding reception is played out like one of those disaster comedies where everything that could go wrong during an high brow event does go wrong, except here it's played out for dramatic effect rather than laughs. It's all quite awkward and painful to watch, all the while the planet known as Melancholia is getting closer to earth.
The second part is named after Claire, who is played by Charlotte Gainsbourg. In contrast to her sister Justine Claire appears to be quite mentally stable and is living on easy street with her wealthy husband. As the possibility that Melancholia will collide with earth becomes more real, however, we see Claire slowly start to lose the plot.
I think it's fair to say that Melancholia is a flawed masterpiece. I don't think I've ever seen a less accessible science fiction dealing with the end of the world, yet it handles the subject in with more poignancy and in a more relatable manner than the big Hollywood blockbuster. By focusing on just two people rather than the mass hysteria would come with such a situation it allows us to engage with the characters in a more organic way, and gives a realistic insight into the way people deal with the inevitability of death given their current circumstances.
On the other hand, Melancholia has some pacing issues and feels uneven, especially during the Wedding section of the film, which goes on a bit too long and could have done with some tighter editing. However, this is only a small issue, and the final sequence is one of the most brilliant I have ever seen on film, and really rammed home the importance to me of seeing some films at the cinema. I cannot imagine the intensity of this scene being replicated at home without Wagner's score crashing through the cinema speakings, followed by the eerie darkness and silence that prelude the end credits.
****1/2 out of *****
Arthur Christmas
Saw this one a couple of days before Christmas, partly because I had had read good reviews and partly just because I was in the festive spirit. Arthur Christmas is about a guy named Arthur, who is the son of Santa Claus. Santa is about to retire, and when he hangs up the boots the role is Santa Claus is meant to be going to Arthur's older brother. While Steve appears to be much more organised and suited to the job than Arthur, he doesn't have the same kind heart and love for Christmas as Arthur. When one child's toy is accidentally not delivered Arthur must come to the rescue before Christmas morning, as the rest of his family see as less than important.
While Arthur Christmas, in a way, is a fairly standard family Christmas fare with tired themes of the true meaning of Christmas and sacrifice and love trumping selfish ambition being in play, it actually manages to rise above the average Christmas movie with it's nice looking animation, interesting and likable characters and comedic elements. It also adds a little something extra by introducing the idea of the Santa Claus family being sort of like a monarchy and Santa using all sorts of modern gadgets. You may never see it pop up on any "Best Christmas Movie" lists that always come out around the holiday period, but you could do alot worse than adding this one to the play list come December 2012.
***1/2 out of *****
The Adventures of Tin Tin
I was a massive Tin Tin fan when I was growing up, and I read almost every comic and saw most of the cartoon series, however I hadn't given the franchise much thought in years when along comes Steven Spielberg with this animated (motion capture if you want to be technical) big screen adaption. The storyline for this outing is a combination of three or four of the comic books, but is a fairly standard Tin Tin adventure with our favourite reporter investigating a possible big story, stumbling onto something more sinister than he first thought, and then travelling all over the place and interacting with different people in an attempt to save the day.
It feels as though Spielberg was really inspired by his own Indiana Jones films here, as Tin Tin has the same sense of unapologetic adventure, and the action scenes all look really good in the 3D motion capture format. The script is quite funny in parts, and the characters all maintain the same charm as they did in the comics. The film suffers some from some pacing issues early on, as we barely given a second to absorb the setting the action has already started, and more could have been done to establish the character. Also, there's never really much of a feeling that there's anything at stake, meaning there's no real tension created at any point and no real reason to root for the good guys. However, this was an extremely fun ride and a good popcorn movie that I can imagine would have a wide ranging appeal, so any criticism of this film is pretty much redundant anyway.
***1/2 out of *****
Melancholia is the first film I've seen from controversial Danish director Lars Von Trier, which is a little embarrassing to admit, but nonetheless I had no idea what to expect. It starts with a series of images depicting the end of the earth as it collides with another planet (not a spoiler, happens right at the start of the movie!) which are rather beautifully presented and hauntingly paired with the prelude with Richard Wagner's Triston and Isolde opera. The film then shifts to events that occurred before the earth's doom, and is split into two parts named after two characters, sisters Justine and Claire.
In the first part, titled "Justine", the titular character, played brilliantly by Kirsten Dunst, has just gotten married and the scene is set at the wedding reception. It's a rather upper class affair and has been paid for by Justine's wealthy brother in law, played by Kiefer Sutherland. It soon becomes clear that Justine is suffering pretty badly from mental illness, and the wedding reception is played out like one of those disaster comedies where everything that could go wrong during an high brow event does go wrong, except here it's played out for dramatic effect rather than laughs. It's all quite awkward and painful to watch, all the while the planet known as Melancholia is getting closer to earth.
The second part is named after Claire, who is played by Charlotte Gainsbourg. In contrast to her sister Justine Claire appears to be quite mentally stable and is living on easy street with her wealthy husband. As the possibility that Melancholia will collide with earth becomes more real, however, we see Claire slowly start to lose the plot.
I think it's fair to say that Melancholia is a flawed masterpiece. I don't think I've ever seen a less accessible science fiction dealing with the end of the world, yet it handles the subject in with more poignancy and in a more relatable manner than the big Hollywood blockbuster. By focusing on just two people rather than the mass hysteria would come with such a situation it allows us to engage with the characters in a more organic way, and gives a realistic insight into the way people deal with the inevitability of death given their current circumstances.
On the other hand, Melancholia has some pacing issues and feels uneven, especially during the Wedding section of the film, which goes on a bit too long and could have done with some tighter editing. However, this is only a small issue, and the final sequence is one of the most brilliant I have ever seen on film, and really rammed home the importance to me of seeing some films at the cinema. I cannot imagine the intensity of this scene being replicated at home without Wagner's score crashing through the cinema speakings, followed by the eerie darkness and silence that prelude the end credits.
****1/2 out of *****
Arthur Christmas
Saw this one a couple of days before Christmas, partly because I had had read good reviews and partly just because I was in the festive spirit. Arthur Christmas is about a guy named Arthur, who is the son of Santa Claus. Santa is about to retire, and when he hangs up the boots the role is Santa Claus is meant to be going to Arthur's older brother. While Steve appears to be much more organised and suited to the job than Arthur, he doesn't have the same kind heart and love for Christmas as Arthur. When one child's toy is accidentally not delivered Arthur must come to the rescue before Christmas morning, as the rest of his family see as less than important.
While Arthur Christmas, in a way, is a fairly standard family Christmas fare with tired themes of the true meaning of Christmas and sacrifice and love trumping selfish ambition being in play, it actually manages to rise above the average Christmas movie with it's nice looking animation, interesting and likable characters and comedic elements. It also adds a little something extra by introducing the idea of the Santa Claus family being sort of like a monarchy and Santa using all sorts of modern gadgets. You may never see it pop up on any "Best Christmas Movie" lists that always come out around the holiday period, but you could do alot worse than adding this one to the play list come December 2012.
***1/2 out of *****
The Adventures of Tin Tin
I was a massive Tin Tin fan when I was growing up, and I read almost every comic and saw most of the cartoon series, however I hadn't given the franchise much thought in years when along comes Steven Spielberg with this animated (motion capture if you want to be technical) big screen adaption. The storyline for this outing is a combination of three or four of the comic books, but is a fairly standard Tin Tin adventure with our favourite reporter investigating a possible big story, stumbling onto something more sinister than he first thought, and then travelling all over the place and interacting with different people in an attempt to save the day.
It feels as though Spielberg was really inspired by his own Indiana Jones films here, as Tin Tin has the same sense of unapologetic adventure, and the action scenes all look really good in the 3D motion capture format. The script is quite funny in parts, and the characters all maintain the same charm as they did in the comics. The film suffers some from some pacing issues early on, as we barely given a second to absorb the setting the action has already started, and more could have been done to establish the character. Also, there's never really much of a feeling that there's anything at stake, meaning there's no real tension created at any point and no real reason to root for the good guys. However, this was an extremely fun ride and a good popcorn movie that I can imagine would have a wide ranging appeal, so any criticism of this film is pretty much redundant anyway.
***1/2 out of *****
Thursday, 22 December 2011
Recent Cinema Viewings
From recent rentals to recent cinema viewings, this entry will go from one extreme to the other. You'll see what I mean in a second.
Burning Man
Showing in only one cinema (from what I can see anyway) in the whole of Queensland means that Burning Man will probably be seen by about 12 people, which is a real shame as I think it's currently one of the best films of the year.
Staring Matthew Goode, who has achieved some fame for appearing in the likes of Watchmen and A Single Man, this Australian film begins with a series of unrelated sequences which, for about half an hour, leaves you feeling completely lost. Once everything comes together though it's clear that the the impact intended was for the viewers sense of confusion and disorientation to mimic the same frame of mind the central character was going through after suffering personal tragedy.
Once the nature of his situation is revealed, which I wont get into as I think the movie will work best if you don't know, it then begins on his emotionally draining yet very moving story, moving back and forward in the time line to before, during and after the incident. The performances are all brilliant, and the heartbreaking story has some good dark humour mixed in as well to lift the otherwise sombre mood. Beautifully shot with incredible attention to detail, this is an amazing achievement. I'm leaving my prejudice against Australian movies behind for good.
***** out of *****
Immortals
A Greek mythology themed action movie filmed in a style inspired by 300? Yeah, I didn't have much interest in seeing this, however I got invited by my mate Dayle so I thought I'd go and check it out, as I stand by the notion that every movie deserves a chance. The story is pretty basic Greek mythology stuff, which will hold your interest just enough between the many over the top and bloody action scenes. I still maintain that if you're not going to bother too much with character, plot or dialogue in an action film then you need to make the action scenes as over the top as possible to compensate, and that is indeed what is on display here. If a thought provoking drama is what you're after look elsewhere, but if you have a desire to see blood spilt in numerous different ways over and over and over again then, Immortals will suit you down to the bone.
*** out of *****
Jack and Jill
Ok, to explain how I ended up seeing this film. Me and my buddy Ben were trying to figure out what move to see. He wanted to see Moneyball, however as I'd already seen it I was less than enthusiastic, however would have been willing to see it again. Whilst going through the session times of possible movies we could see Jack and Jill came up. I said there was no Chance we were going to see that, however Ben then planted the idea in my mind that seeing it could provide for an amusing experience if we could enjoy lauging at how bad it was. I mulled the idea over in my head, and when we got to the cinema he let me decide; Moneyball or Jack and Jill. I think he was pretty angry with my decision....
If you're unfamiliar with Jack and Jill, it is Adam Sandler's new movie where he plays the normal Adam Sander character PLUS his own annoying twin sister. Yep, it's as bad as it sounds and much worse. Not only is there not one funny line in the entire film, but we have to sit through endless amounts of blatant product placement, celebrities embarrassing themselves by appearing in cameos, cheap last minute attempts at sentimentality, and, perhaps worst of all, the sad realisation that Al Pacino's career is now reduced to appearing as an insane version of himself in this bullocks.
I'm half convinced that Adam Sandler is just playing a big practical joke on everyone and doing a kind of parody of himself, because there mere notion that any human would find this film even mildly appealing is a massive insult to all mankind. I'm not even one of Adam Sander's many haters, and usually enjoy his movies, but this, UGH, what more can I say. It's puerile and certainly not worth wasting anymore time talking about.
No Stars
Burning Man
Showing in only one cinema (from what I can see anyway) in the whole of Queensland means that Burning Man will probably be seen by about 12 people, which is a real shame as I think it's currently one of the best films of the year.
Staring Matthew Goode, who has achieved some fame for appearing in the likes of Watchmen and A Single Man, this Australian film begins with a series of unrelated sequences which, for about half an hour, leaves you feeling completely lost. Once everything comes together though it's clear that the the impact intended was for the viewers sense of confusion and disorientation to mimic the same frame of mind the central character was going through after suffering personal tragedy.
Once the nature of his situation is revealed, which I wont get into as I think the movie will work best if you don't know, it then begins on his emotionally draining yet very moving story, moving back and forward in the time line to before, during and after the incident. The performances are all brilliant, and the heartbreaking story has some good dark humour mixed in as well to lift the otherwise sombre mood. Beautifully shot with incredible attention to detail, this is an amazing achievement. I'm leaving my prejudice against Australian movies behind for good.
***** out of *****
Immortals
A Greek mythology themed action movie filmed in a style inspired by 300? Yeah, I didn't have much interest in seeing this, however I got invited by my mate Dayle so I thought I'd go and check it out, as I stand by the notion that every movie deserves a chance. The story is pretty basic Greek mythology stuff, which will hold your interest just enough between the many over the top and bloody action scenes. I still maintain that if you're not going to bother too much with character, plot or dialogue in an action film then you need to make the action scenes as over the top as possible to compensate, and that is indeed what is on display here. If a thought provoking drama is what you're after look elsewhere, but if you have a desire to see blood spilt in numerous different ways over and over and over again then, Immortals will suit you down to the bone.
*** out of *****
Jack and Jill
Ok, to explain how I ended up seeing this film. Me and my buddy Ben were trying to figure out what move to see. He wanted to see Moneyball, however as I'd already seen it I was less than enthusiastic, however would have been willing to see it again. Whilst going through the session times of possible movies we could see Jack and Jill came up. I said there was no Chance we were going to see that, however Ben then planted the idea in my mind that seeing it could provide for an amusing experience if we could enjoy lauging at how bad it was. I mulled the idea over in my head, and when we got to the cinema he let me decide; Moneyball or Jack and Jill. I think he was pretty angry with my decision....
If you're unfamiliar with Jack and Jill, it is Adam Sandler's new movie where he plays the normal Adam Sander character PLUS his own annoying twin sister. Yep, it's as bad as it sounds and much worse. Not only is there not one funny line in the entire film, but we have to sit through endless amounts of blatant product placement, celebrities embarrassing themselves by appearing in cameos, cheap last minute attempts at sentimentality, and, perhaps worst of all, the sad realisation that Al Pacino's career is now reduced to appearing as an insane version of himself in this bullocks.
I'm half convinced that Adam Sandler is just playing a big practical joke on everyone and doing a kind of parody of himself, because there mere notion that any human would find this film even mildly appealing is a massive insult to all mankind. I'm not even one of Adam Sander's many haters, and usually enjoy his movies, but this, UGH, what more can I say. It's puerile and certainly not worth wasting anymore time talking about.
No Stars
Wednesday, 21 December 2011
Recent Rentals
As promised, just took me a while.
Fast & Furious 5
The fifth installment in the Fast and Furious franchise is the first one I've seen. I haven't bothered with any of the others as I'm not even close to being what you would call a car enthusiast, plus Vin Diesel is a bit of a tool. I had no plans to see this one either, however after reading good reviews and hearing that they had shifted the foucs of the film from car racing to instead being a heist film I decided to check it out.
The story seems to sort of follow from the previous films, not that I would know, with Vin Diesel and Paul Walker's characters on the run from the law for some reason. They end up in Brazil and decide to do "one last job" or someother such cliced nonsense and rip off this rich business guy. The business due is completely evil and corrupt though, so it's ok. This then leads to them recruiting a team, and at this point you pretty much know what kind of movie you've got. You know, one of those "We're putting a team togeather to achieve such and such a goal, you in?" If these shennanigans weren't enough, they also have The Rock AKA Dwayne Johnso relentless cop character on their tail.
Despite this movie being nothing new it was actually pretty enjoyable. The characters were all adequetly fleshed out, the action set pieces were suitablly over the top and exciting and The Rock's performance as a bad arse never say die cop was great. Looks like they'll probably be a sequel, so as long as they keep going in the same vain as this film we could be looking at a successful re-boot of sorts taking the franchise in a new direction.
***1/2 out of *****
Green Lantern
I skipped this one when it was at the cinemas as I thought it was going to be a bit of a disaster. Not being familar with the comics I only had the trailer to guide my expectations, and that made it look like a kids movie set in a bizarre world of green and purple aliens, and the special effects didn't do much to win me over either. Upon viewing the film these inital concerns were confirmed, and the film also sufferes from sub par script and a romantic subplot involving Blake Lively that had about as much life to it as a crematorium. Despite this, Ryan Reynolds brings his usual charasima to the titular superhero character which helps keep the film from sinking, and there are enough action scenes to keep us entertained. I also enjoyed the story of a regular everyday guy suddenly finding himself completely out of his depth and in a position of immense importance, but I think I'm a bit of a sucker for those kind of storylines. In summary, it was better than I thought it would be.
*** out of *****
Sleeping Beauty
No, not the Disney animated classic, but rather an Australian arthouse film that screened in competition at the Cannes Film Festival this year. In fact, I'd be horrified if the former movie's target audidence saw even a moment of this film, which focuses on a young lady in need of money and the lengths she will go to get it.
Sleeping Beauty takes the "less is more" approach to storytelling, which if done correctly can make for a very natural and satisfying expierence, however here it makes for a dull and completely pointless one. It appears the director doesn't understand the difference between subtle character development and revealing absolutely nothing so we can't connect to and care about the events unfoding at all. The two main elements that the film appears to be trying to explore are the aforementioned lengths a person will go to for money and the hidden sexual desires that men keep buried well beneath the surface, yet it does it in such a cold and detached manner that they left no impact whatsoever.
While I admired the cinematorgragy and apprecited the fact that the film was offering something original, it was ultimately a boring, pretentious and soulless mess. Don't bother with this epic waste of time.
* out of *****
Battle: Los Angeles
Aliens are invading and the army has to stop them. That's all you need to about Battle: Los Angeles as that's all there is to it. Doesn't sound very satisfying? That's probably because it's not. So how could this festering turd pile actually have worked?
Well perhaps give the lead character some sort of story arc. Perhaps he has a son that he's trying to get home to. Maybe this could be his last mission before going home to his son for good. Maybe then he finds out that the government had known about the possibility of aliens attacking for ages but kept it so top secret that nothing was done about it, which makes him super angry Our hero could even have a strained relationship with his son, and he ends up sacrificing himself to save the day, which earns his son's eternal love and respect after a tearful good bye. You could even throw some social commentary about the aliens being no worse than humans when they've invaded or colonised countires etc. If it sounds familar that's because it's the same storyline always used for these sort of films, and usually it works. It wouldn't have been a great movie but lets face it, this wasn never going to be. It would have at least been passable. What did we get instead?
Introduce a few stock standard characters who all seem to be a carbon copy of each other for about 20 minutes, followed by "We've got some meteores coming." "What, they're aliens?" BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG "Generic war speech" BANG BANG BANG BANG "I don't know if this guy has what it takes" BANG BANG BANG BANG - THE END. Ugh. Even if they had delivered the action in carefully choreographed set pieces rather than just endless chaos the lack of any soild storytelling could be excused. Some of the special effects and action scenes are OKAY but that's it. A simply awful example of flim making.
1/2* out of *****
Fast & Furious 5
The fifth installment in the Fast and Furious franchise is the first one I've seen. I haven't bothered with any of the others as I'm not even close to being what you would call a car enthusiast, plus Vin Diesel is a bit of a tool. I had no plans to see this one either, however after reading good reviews and hearing that they had shifted the foucs of the film from car racing to instead being a heist film I decided to check it out.
The story seems to sort of follow from the previous films, not that I would know, with Vin Diesel and Paul Walker's characters on the run from the law for some reason. They end up in Brazil and decide to do "one last job" or someother such cliced nonsense and rip off this rich business guy. The business due is completely evil and corrupt though, so it's ok. This then leads to them recruiting a team, and at this point you pretty much know what kind of movie you've got. You know, one of those "We're putting a team togeather to achieve such and such a goal, you in?" If these shennanigans weren't enough, they also have The Rock AKA Dwayne Johnso relentless cop character on their tail.
Despite this movie being nothing new it was actually pretty enjoyable. The characters were all adequetly fleshed out, the action set pieces were suitablly over the top and exciting and The Rock's performance as a bad arse never say die cop was great. Looks like they'll probably be a sequel, so as long as they keep going in the same vain as this film we could be looking at a successful re-boot of sorts taking the franchise in a new direction.
***1/2 out of *****
Green Lantern
I skipped this one when it was at the cinemas as I thought it was going to be a bit of a disaster. Not being familar with the comics I only had the trailer to guide my expectations, and that made it look like a kids movie set in a bizarre world of green and purple aliens, and the special effects didn't do much to win me over either. Upon viewing the film these inital concerns were confirmed, and the film also sufferes from sub par script and a romantic subplot involving Blake Lively that had about as much life to it as a crematorium. Despite this, Ryan Reynolds brings his usual charasima to the titular superhero character which helps keep the film from sinking, and there are enough action scenes to keep us entertained. I also enjoyed the story of a regular everyday guy suddenly finding himself completely out of his depth and in a position of immense importance, but I think I'm a bit of a sucker for those kind of storylines. In summary, it was better than I thought it would be.
*** out of *****
Sleeping Beauty
No, not the Disney animated classic, but rather an Australian arthouse film that screened in competition at the Cannes Film Festival this year. In fact, I'd be horrified if the former movie's target audidence saw even a moment of this film, which focuses on a young lady in need of money and the lengths she will go to get it.
Sleeping Beauty takes the "less is more" approach to storytelling, which if done correctly can make for a very natural and satisfying expierence, however here it makes for a dull and completely pointless one. It appears the director doesn't understand the difference between subtle character development and revealing absolutely nothing so we can't connect to and care about the events unfoding at all. The two main elements that the film appears to be trying to explore are the aforementioned lengths a person will go to for money and the hidden sexual desires that men keep buried well beneath the surface, yet it does it in such a cold and detached manner that they left no impact whatsoever.
While I admired the cinematorgragy and apprecited the fact that the film was offering something original, it was ultimately a boring, pretentious and soulless mess. Don't bother with this epic waste of time.
* out of *****
Battle: Los Angeles
Aliens are invading and the army has to stop them. That's all you need to about Battle: Los Angeles as that's all there is to it. Doesn't sound very satisfying? That's probably because it's not. So how could this festering turd pile actually have worked?
Well perhaps give the lead character some sort of story arc. Perhaps he has a son that he's trying to get home to. Maybe this could be his last mission before going home to his son for good. Maybe then he finds out that the government had known about the possibility of aliens attacking for ages but kept it so top secret that nothing was done about it, which makes him super angry Our hero could even have a strained relationship with his son, and he ends up sacrificing himself to save the day, which earns his son's eternal love and respect after a tearful good bye. You could even throw some social commentary about the aliens being no worse than humans when they've invaded or colonised countires etc. If it sounds familar that's because it's the same storyline always used for these sort of films, and usually it works. It wouldn't have been a great movie but lets face it, this wasn never going to be. It would have at least been passable. What did we get instead?
Introduce a few stock standard characters who all seem to be a carbon copy of each other for about 20 minutes, followed by "We've got some meteores coming." "What, they're aliens?" BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG "Generic war speech" BANG BANG BANG BANG "I don't know if this guy has what it takes" BANG BANG BANG BANG - THE END. Ugh. Even if they had delivered the action in carefully choreographed set pieces rather than just endless chaos the lack of any soild storytelling could be excused. Some of the special effects and action scenes are OKAY but that's it. A simply awful example of flim making.
1/2* out of *****
Tuesday, 6 December 2011
New stuff
Yep, here we go again. I've got too many to get to so these reviews are going to be short and lazily written, but really what's new there (BURN.... myself?) Anyway...
Moneyball
I'll just come right and out and say that this film kicked all kinds of arse, but with Aaron Sorkin as the scriptwriter (who of course wrote The Social Network) what more what one expect. Based on a true story, Brad Pitt's character (I really can't be stuffed with character's names) is the manager of the Oakland Athletics baseball and employs a fellow working with another team, who is played by Jonah Hill, who has a theory about recruiting players based purely on their stats, thus saving money going after the marquee players and being able to compete with the much richer clubs such as a the New York Yankees.
And that is the basic plot in a nutshell. Where the movie works so well is of course in the script, which is Aaron Sorkin's usual mix of intelligent dialogue and humour, the performances (I think this is probably the best performance I've seen Jonah Hill give) and the character study of Billy Beane (fine I looked the name up.) While it's a sports movie the movie is more concerned with what goes on behind the scenes, and you could say it's a sports movie for people who don't like sport.
I'd almost go as far as to say this is the Social Network of 2011, not because they have the same scriptwriter, but because both films focus on a man obsessed with an idea. While Mark Zuckerburg was obsessed with the technology and the changes in the way people related to and communicated with each other, Billy Beane was obsessed with changing the way the game of baseball was played. It doesn't have quite the same depth of storytelling as The Social Network, but the added touch of Billy's relationship with his daughter and her final message to him; stop obsessing, "Just enjoy the show" put the icing on one very enjoyable ride.
****1/2 out of *****
The Ides of March
The new directorial effort directed by and staring George Clooney is about two politicians competing to become the Democrats Candidate for an upcoming election. George Clooney falls on the more on the left side of politics while his opponent is more conservatively minded. Ryan Gosling is working on Clooney's campaign, and is wide eyed, optimistic and believes in what he's doing, and you'd be guessing correctly if you thought that didn't attitude didn't last for the whole film.
The film starts at a steady pace but somewhere along the line plats the pedal to the floor and never really lets up to the end. We follow a series of twists, allegiances and betrayals which, along with the loss of innocence of the main character makes this feel less like your average political drama and more like The Godfather, minus the people being whacked of course. I've read a few negative things about this film, mainly over at the cess pit of humanity known as the IMDB message board, and I can't really understand why. This is an intelligently written, edge of your seat style drama, with another brilliant performance from Ryan Gosling and a protagonist that takes us on a journey that may spew forth cynicism regarding politics, but at the same time may be a little closer to reality than we would like to believe.
****1/2 out of *****
Midnight in Paris
I keep hearing that Woody Allen's new films are no good and that he's lost the plot recently, however I must keep seeing the right movies almost all the newer Woody Allen films I've seen have been gold, including this one. It has all the usual Woody Allen charming dialogue, interesting characters and unpredictable plot turns, and plenty of beautiful shots and scenery of central Paris. Midnight in Paris has Owen Wilson playing the typical Woody Allen character, as he continually goes back in time at Midnight (whilst being in Paris - GET IT!) and meets several famous artists from the past such as Pablo Picasso and F Scott Fitzgerald, and gets tips on his writing from Ernest Hemingway. At the same time his fiance, played by Rachel McAdams, seems more taken with a wannabe intellectual friend of hers with a ten foot poll up his arse.
Even though Owen Wilson is just playing Owen Wilson, like he usually does, for some reason he just fits the Woody Allen character so well. The Woody Allen movie that this probably resembles the most would be the Purple Rose of Cairo, due to the fantasy elements of both movies, and considering the quality of that movie I think that comparison is a good thing. In Roger Ebert's review he said he considers Allen to be a treasure of the cinema and I couldn't agree more. There's so much whimsical fun to be had here and I hope he never stops making movies, until he, you know, dies.
**** out of *****
Attack the Block
An unusual choice to open the Brisbane International Film Festival this year, this British film sci-fi action film centres around a street gang attempting to stop an alien invasion. Errr... yeah. Don't expect an Independence Dayesque film that's for sure. The aliens look pretty cool and it's a pretty fun action film with the usual British wit mixed in, however the film seems to be trying to elevate itself further by looking at the social problems surrounding street gangs, although I'm not sure this is fully explored enough and kinda doesn't work for me. However, that aside, I enjoyed this alot. And that's all I have to say on this one.
***1/2 out of *****
Inside Man
A Spike Lee film, or "Joint", from a few years ago that's been sitting in my DVD collection for ages and I finally got around to watching, Inside Man is about bank robbers who've taken a group of people hostage. The main bank robber is Clive Owen. Denzel Washington is the cop assigned to negotiate with the robbers. Jodie Foster is a woman hired to protect the interests of the bank manager, who is hiding a dark secret. Willem Dafoe is in there somewhere too. So it's got a good cast, and it moves at a frenetic pace with enough twists to keep the viewer entertained and intrigued. At the same time it attempts to offer social commentary and explore questions of morality, although like the above film these feel a bit tacked on and not like an natural extension of the storyline. Well worth checking out though.
***1/2 out of *****
Limitless
Alright, almost there. The central character is Limitless is played by Bradley Cooper, who has found himself in a bit of a funk until he comes across a drug that allows people to unleash their full potential and his life completely turns around. A cool concept however the full extent to which someone could utilise such a drug is never fully realised, and it descends into a bit of a standard action fare at the end. You could say the film is LIMITED (HAHAHAHAHA!) in it's execution. On the plus side it has Robert De Niro in it.
*** out of *****
Sanctum
Based on a true story about a bunch of adventurers stuck in a cave, who end up yelling at each other with every cliched line in the book. I guess the moral of the story is not to go into caves? Had it's moments, but ultimately was a waste of time.
** out of *****
And that's that. I currently have Green Lantern, Fast & Furious Five, Battle: Los Angleas and Sleeping Beauty on rental, so those reviews will be up..... sometime.
Moneyball
I'll just come right and out and say that this film kicked all kinds of arse, but with Aaron Sorkin as the scriptwriter (who of course wrote The Social Network) what more what one expect. Based on a true story, Brad Pitt's character (I really can't be stuffed with character's names) is the manager of the Oakland Athletics baseball and employs a fellow working with another team, who is played by Jonah Hill, who has a theory about recruiting players based purely on their stats, thus saving money going after the marquee players and being able to compete with the much richer clubs such as a the New York Yankees.
And that is the basic plot in a nutshell. Where the movie works so well is of course in the script, which is Aaron Sorkin's usual mix of intelligent dialogue and humour, the performances (I think this is probably the best performance I've seen Jonah Hill give) and the character study of Billy Beane (fine I looked the name up.) While it's a sports movie the movie is more concerned with what goes on behind the scenes, and you could say it's a sports movie for people who don't like sport.
I'd almost go as far as to say this is the Social Network of 2011, not because they have the same scriptwriter, but because both films focus on a man obsessed with an idea. While Mark Zuckerburg was obsessed with the technology and the changes in the way people related to and communicated with each other, Billy Beane was obsessed with changing the way the game of baseball was played. It doesn't have quite the same depth of storytelling as The Social Network, but the added touch of Billy's relationship with his daughter and her final message to him; stop obsessing, "Just enjoy the show" put the icing on one very enjoyable ride.
****1/2 out of *****
The Ides of March
The new directorial effort directed by and staring George Clooney is about two politicians competing to become the Democrats Candidate for an upcoming election. George Clooney falls on the more on the left side of politics while his opponent is more conservatively minded. Ryan Gosling is working on Clooney's campaign, and is wide eyed, optimistic and believes in what he's doing, and you'd be guessing correctly if you thought that didn't attitude didn't last for the whole film.
The film starts at a steady pace but somewhere along the line plats the pedal to the floor and never really lets up to the end. We follow a series of twists, allegiances and betrayals which, along with the loss of innocence of the main character makes this feel less like your average political drama and more like The Godfather, minus the people being whacked of course. I've read a few negative things about this film, mainly over at the cess pit of humanity known as the IMDB message board, and I can't really understand why. This is an intelligently written, edge of your seat style drama, with another brilliant performance from Ryan Gosling and a protagonist that takes us on a journey that may spew forth cynicism regarding politics, but at the same time may be a little closer to reality than we would like to believe.
****1/2 out of *****
Midnight in Paris
I keep hearing that Woody Allen's new films are no good and that he's lost the plot recently, however I must keep seeing the right movies almost all the newer Woody Allen films I've seen have been gold, including this one. It has all the usual Woody Allen charming dialogue, interesting characters and unpredictable plot turns, and plenty of beautiful shots and scenery of central Paris. Midnight in Paris has Owen Wilson playing the typical Woody Allen character, as he continually goes back in time at Midnight (whilst being in Paris - GET IT!) and meets several famous artists from the past such as Pablo Picasso and F Scott Fitzgerald, and gets tips on his writing from Ernest Hemingway. At the same time his fiance, played by Rachel McAdams, seems more taken with a wannabe intellectual friend of hers with a ten foot poll up his arse.
Even though Owen Wilson is just playing Owen Wilson, like he usually does, for some reason he just fits the Woody Allen character so well. The Woody Allen movie that this probably resembles the most would be the Purple Rose of Cairo, due to the fantasy elements of both movies, and considering the quality of that movie I think that comparison is a good thing. In Roger Ebert's review he said he considers Allen to be a treasure of the cinema and I couldn't agree more. There's so much whimsical fun to be had here and I hope he never stops making movies, until he, you know, dies.
**** out of *****
Attack the Block
An unusual choice to open the Brisbane International Film Festival this year, this British film sci-fi action film centres around a street gang attempting to stop an alien invasion. Errr... yeah. Don't expect an Independence Dayesque film that's for sure. The aliens look pretty cool and it's a pretty fun action film with the usual British wit mixed in, however the film seems to be trying to elevate itself further by looking at the social problems surrounding street gangs, although I'm not sure this is fully explored enough and kinda doesn't work for me. However, that aside, I enjoyed this alot. And that's all I have to say on this one.
***1/2 out of *****
Inside Man
A Spike Lee film, or "Joint", from a few years ago that's been sitting in my DVD collection for ages and I finally got around to watching, Inside Man is about bank robbers who've taken a group of people hostage. The main bank robber is Clive Owen. Denzel Washington is the cop assigned to negotiate with the robbers. Jodie Foster is a woman hired to protect the interests of the bank manager, who is hiding a dark secret. Willem Dafoe is in there somewhere too. So it's got a good cast, and it moves at a frenetic pace with enough twists to keep the viewer entertained and intrigued. At the same time it attempts to offer social commentary and explore questions of morality, although like the above film these feel a bit tacked on and not like an natural extension of the storyline. Well worth checking out though.
***1/2 out of *****
Limitless
Alright, almost there. The central character is Limitless is played by Bradley Cooper, who has found himself in a bit of a funk until he comes across a drug that allows people to unleash their full potential and his life completely turns around. A cool concept however the full extent to which someone could utilise such a drug is never fully realised, and it descends into a bit of a standard action fare at the end. You could say the film is LIMITED (HAHAHAHAHA!) in it's execution. On the plus side it has Robert De Niro in it.
*** out of *****
Sanctum
Based on a true story about a bunch of adventurers stuck in a cave, who end up yelling at each other with every cliched line in the book. I guess the moral of the story is not to go into caves? Had it's moments, but ultimately was a waste of time.
** out of *****
And that's that. I currently have Green Lantern, Fast & Furious Five, Battle: Los Angleas and Sleeping Beauty on rental, so those reviews will be up..... sometime.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)