Glorious 39
This is the latest Brit indie film from Stephen Poliakoff who has recent specialised in TV. The cast is an assembly of some of the best British talent: Romola Garai (the central performer who recently appeared on TV as Emma), Bill Nighy, Julie Christie, David Tennant, Christopher Lee, Charlie Cox and Jenny Agutter among others. Consequently the acting is good and the direction is good maintaining tension for the first 3/4 of the film. The plot is a kind of 1930s 39 Steps, and espionage thriller about a group of people who don't want Britain to go to war with Germany (not because of ideology but because they don't want a war) so are attempting to remove any opposition to the Chamberlain government. Romola Garai and her boyfriend Charlie Cox find out about this but are helpless when everybody they tell dies. The downfall of this film is that it tries to be indie, it tries to defy convention when if it had decided to go with the conventional ending it could have been a fantastic film. Unfortunately it tries to be different and distinctive and unfortunately falls flat at the end with an ending that serves little point when it could have been the spy film of the decade.
The Informant
Steven Soderbergh must be close to winning the prize for the worst year in cinema. His biopic of Che Guevara was released too late for the Oscars and split in 2 both parts of which flopped at the box office (so badly they finished before I had a chance to see either) after lukewarm reviews and a realisation that very few people are actually fascinated with Che Guevara and lots of people don't consider him the good guy. After that he made this film which has flopped to the extent that I caught its last showing at my cinema 2 weeks after release. I can see why too. The Informant is about a man who appears to be a whistleblower on corporate corruption but end up having also stolen millions from his company and being a compulsive liar. The film presents itself as light-hearted but ends up spending too much time trying to help you understand its complex story to make you laugh and gimmicks such as the Matt Damon voiceover that never says anything to do with the plot becomes stale after a while. This film feels a bit like Soderbergh is trying to do what he did with Oceans 11 except that it lacks the style and coolness of Oceans 11 and lacks the jokes to be a comedy. Parts of the film in music and camera angles are as though Soderbergh is sending up 70s spy film (James Bond at least twice) but these are not more than vague references to films that very few people watched and even fewer remember, not stylish or funny enough and to be honest slightly boring, 6/10.
Law Abiding Citizen
Gerard Butler is obviously the cheapest "name" actor in Hollywood as he is churning out mediocre films at an alarming rate. The plot of this film is that Gerard Butler's home is broken into by 2 assailants; he is knocked unconscious while his wife and daughter are murdered. James Foxx's career driven prosecutor, afraid of the prospect of losing, gets one of the offenders to testify against the other resulting in one of the perpetrators getting the death penalty and the other going free much to the anger of Gerard Butler who sees this as an injustice. 10 years later the execution of the convicted killer goes wrong and ends up being much more painful than it should have been. Shortly after the other killer is brutally killed and Gerard Butler confesses to the crime and is imprisoned. However, killings continue and it becomes clear that Gerard Butler wants to bring down the legal system that denied him justice but how s he doing it from prison. The film plays out its plot well, there is a sense that Butler and Foxx are doing for the pay check not the quality of script but the film is executed well enough. The opening scenes are more violent than necessary and if the film had understood that it isn't that good and inserted a bit more fun into the mix it would have been improved. The quality of twist at the end was always going to decide the quality of this film an it is quite good, 6/10.
Where The Wild Things Are
Max, a young boy, gets angry at his Mum, runs away to an island populated by wild things. They make him their king and together they build a fort, however, things don't go to plan and Max decides to leave and go home. Spike Jonze directed music videos before films, the trailer was a music video and this film has a sense that he wants it to be a music video. The film does some things well, the wild things are wild and have their dark side and everything about the films looks brilliant. However, the lack of plot tells in the film, there is not enough fun and enjoyment in the film, the poetic elements of the filming don't quite work and the film ends up being a serious examination of childhood when childhood is meant to be about fun and innocence. I needed to be able to enjoy the film and I didn't 5/10.
Avatar
This is the one we have been waiting for, the special effects adventure to end all special effects adventures. The plot is basically the evil military company wants the resources under the home of the peaceful forest dwelling Navi who won't leave their home. Sam Worthington uses an Avatar (Navi body) to spy on the Navi and ends up liking them falling in love with one of them and leading them to battle the vastly technologically superior humans. Visually the film is fantastic, all the money that went into technology was well spent. The rest of the film is standard blockbuster fare, well executed and very enjoyable. The film is also very well acted from a comparatively little known cast and has illusions from Iraq to global warming. If the film has faults they are these: at almost 3 hours it is a little over long for a not incredibly complex plot and the final battle where they are saved by mother nature is a bit of a stretch. A great film nonetheless, 8/10.
Thursday 3 December 2009
November Films
Twilight: New Moon
The Twilight series is the film executive's dream. The first film was successful despite having no "big" name actors, very few special effects, a poor script, no plot and is completely resistant to all bad reviews. The first film, which I didn't review in this blog due to the fact that I didn't bother to see it in the cinema (although I did finally see it on DVD) had one attraction which was that it was so bad that it was very funny in places. The second in the series has a new director (Chris Weitz) and some new cast (Michael Sheen and Dakota Fanning) and is better. The film starts slowly but once it gets going it is funny in places, particularly the cinema scene, and there are some action sequences, particularly the forest scene, that are good. Having said that the key cast is very poor, the plot is terrible and the result of the film not being quite so bad also means that it is less laughable. All these flaws, however, you know going into the film, going into the film you know there will be a dim girl, vampires and attractive men showing off their torsos and that's exactly what you get, 6/10.
The Men Who Stare at Goats.
This is a comedy about a journalist (Ewan McGregor) who goes on a trip into Iraq in 2003 with a retired psychic warrior or Jedi (George Clooney). Over the course of the trip the journalist finds out all about the Us Army's Jedi programme, its founder (Jeff Bridges) and the ambitious soldier who brings it down (Kevin Spacey). This is a fun romp poking fun at all the Iraq war films and the US military as well as a lot of Colod War spy thrillers. Clooney is on form as his Jedi warrior, playing it entirely dead pan as is Bridges who is fantastically realised as the hippie army commander and Kevin Spacey the ambitious youngster. The film falls down in that it is constantly being silly but never really makes you laugh hard. There are very few actual jokes, one liners or bits when you are meant to laught the film is just silly and for a film which is an unadulterated comedy it is not quite enough. A good film but could be funnier, 7/10.
Taking Woodstock.
This is the story of an intelligent, popular Jewish boy who turns down his prospects of a successful lifestyle to resurrect his parents failing farm/hotel by persuading the town to hold the Woodstock music festival. The film for the first 3/4 is a charming and funny story of a new graduate who turns down the opportunity to move to San Francisco and pursue his dreams to save his Polish immigrant parents hotel from bankruptcy and explores his relationship with his parents. The acting is good, Imelda Staunton and Henry Goodwin are particular highlights with good support from Liev Schreiber. The final part where the festival actually takes place is slow with no particular plot and a pointless and unfunny drug trip with Paul Dano. The film tries to capture the Woodstock sub culture by including lots of drugs and nudity which goes over the top and distracts from the central point of the film which is a much more moral story about parental relationships and money. This could have been a great film but ultimately is just unfulfilled potential, 6/10.
A Christmas Carol
Robert Zemekis has been working motion capture technology ever since it became viable in an attempt to make everyone else catch on. With the upcoming Tintin films, made with updated mocap technology developed for Avatar, maybe it will but Zemekis has made the Polar Express, Beowolf and now Christmas Carol without really showing the technology to be any better than real life or making any really good films in the process. I will admit that the bar for a good adaptation of A Christmas Carol is very high with great versions from Alistair Sim, Patrick Stewart and the best of them all from the Muppets it was always going to be hard to make this good. Zemekis goes for over the top accents and action sequences to try and bring a new flavour to this film. However, the fun bits of this aren't funny and the serious bits aren't sad, the film fails to draw in the viewer. The ghosts, particularly the ghost of Christmas past, are poorly presented and Jim Carrey is not on great form as Scrooge. Bearing in mind the quality of the previous adaptations of this Dickens novel you need to have a good idea and a new perspective to bring on this tale if you want to tell it, Zemekis has no new ideas just a new technology toybox and technology alone does not make great films, 4/10.
The Twilight series is the film executive's dream. The first film was successful despite having no "big" name actors, very few special effects, a poor script, no plot and is completely resistant to all bad reviews. The first film, which I didn't review in this blog due to the fact that I didn't bother to see it in the cinema (although I did finally see it on DVD) had one attraction which was that it was so bad that it was very funny in places. The second in the series has a new director (Chris Weitz) and some new cast (Michael Sheen and Dakota Fanning) and is better. The film starts slowly but once it gets going it is funny in places, particularly the cinema scene, and there are some action sequences, particularly the forest scene, that are good. Having said that the key cast is very poor, the plot is terrible and the result of the film not being quite so bad also means that it is less laughable. All these flaws, however, you know going into the film, going into the film you know there will be a dim girl, vampires and attractive men showing off their torsos and that's exactly what you get, 6/10.
The Men Who Stare at Goats.
This is a comedy about a journalist (Ewan McGregor) who goes on a trip into Iraq in 2003 with a retired psychic warrior or Jedi (George Clooney). Over the course of the trip the journalist finds out all about the Us Army's Jedi programme, its founder (Jeff Bridges) and the ambitious soldier who brings it down (Kevin Spacey). This is a fun romp poking fun at all the Iraq war films and the US military as well as a lot of Colod War spy thrillers. Clooney is on form as his Jedi warrior, playing it entirely dead pan as is Bridges who is fantastically realised as the hippie army commander and Kevin Spacey the ambitious youngster. The film falls down in that it is constantly being silly but never really makes you laugh hard. There are very few actual jokes, one liners or bits when you are meant to laught the film is just silly and for a film which is an unadulterated comedy it is not quite enough. A good film but could be funnier, 7/10.
Taking Woodstock.
This is the story of an intelligent, popular Jewish boy who turns down his prospects of a successful lifestyle to resurrect his parents failing farm/hotel by persuading the town to hold the Woodstock music festival. The film for the first 3/4 is a charming and funny story of a new graduate who turns down the opportunity to move to San Francisco and pursue his dreams to save his Polish immigrant parents hotel from bankruptcy and explores his relationship with his parents. The acting is good, Imelda Staunton and Henry Goodwin are particular highlights with good support from Liev Schreiber. The final part where the festival actually takes place is slow with no particular plot and a pointless and unfunny drug trip with Paul Dano. The film tries to capture the Woodstock sub culture by including lots of drugs and nudity which goes over the top and distracts from the central point of the film which is a much more moral story about parental relationships and money. This could have been a great film but ultimately is just unfulfilled potential, 6/10.
A Christmas Carol
Robert Zemekis has been working motion capture technology ever since it became viable in an attempt to make everyone else catch on. With the upcoming Tintin films, made with updated mocap technology developed for Avatar, maybe it will but Zemekis has made the Polar Express, Beowolf and now Christmas Carol without really showing the technology to be any better than real life or making any really good films in the process. I will admit that the bar for a good adaptation of A Christmas Carol is very high with great versions from Alistair Sim, Patrick Stewart and the best of them all from the Muppets it was always going to be hard to make this good. Zemekis goes for over the top accents and action sequences to try and bring a new flavour to this film. However, the fun bits of this aren't funny and the serious bits aren't sad, the film fails to draw in the viewer. The ghosts, particularly the ghost of Christmas past, are poorly presented and Jim Carrey is not on great form as Scrooge. Bearing in mind the quality of the previous adaptations of this Dickens novel you need to have a good idea and a new perspective to bring on this tale if you want to tell it, Zemekis has no new ideas just a new technology toybox and technology alone does not make great films, 4/10.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)