Tag Archives: Film Review

Cinema, Reviews

DAWN OF THE PLANET OF THE APES (2014) – FILM REVIEW

2 Comments

DAWN OF THE PLANET OF THE APESFILM REVIEW BY PAUL LAIGHT

**SPOILERS AHOY**

Film great. Humans crap.

In my last review I compared going to the cinema like going to a restaurant.  For this review I am going to use another tenuous analogy and say going to the cinema is my equivalent of going to Church.  The director/writer/filmmakers are in my eyes GOD!  The actors are the Priests spreading the word while the popcorn is the body of Christ with Tango or Coca-Cola as the blood. Not that I drink fizzy drinks or sugary  any more as I am currently winning an ongoing dispute between my will power and several unhealthy food addictions.

Anyway, what I’m saying is the Cinema is my holy sanctuary — it means THAT much to me. So if you want to use your phone (texting or going online) or talk about something on your phone such as the latest photo of your own arsehole then I will strike down upon thee with furious vengeance! Well I will ask you to shut up or get out!

In the war between humans’ and apes I was already on the Apes’ side following the excellent blockbuster Rise of the Planet of the Apes  (2011) and even more so after witnessing its’ superlative sequel. Indeed, with the insane ongoing wars, environmental issues, pollution, fracking, plane crashes, arms dealing, dodgy press, corrupt governments, genocide and other disasters such as selfish phone wankers talking at the cinema perhaps it’s time for a change on Earth; a clean slate maybe?  Maybe the apes and other animals deserve a chance of owning this planet and giving peace a chance; something humanity seems incapable of sustaining.

If you didn’t know the Planet of the Apes franchise originated from Pierre Boulle’s wonderfully conceived 1963 novel La Planete des singes  and spawned a plethora of films, merchandise, TV shows, comics, novelisations, comic books, posters and even an animated series.  In the late 60s and 70s they didn’t just milk the cash cow they drained the blood and sold off its’ organs and body parts to an ever hungry audience thirsty for another instalment.

Irrespective of the sloping quality of the various guises it took the intelligence raised in the original source and gave us some serious action and brain-food encompassing themes and historical events such as: Darwinism; dystopic and apocalyptic future visions; civil and social unrest; slavery; man’s inhumanity to animals; medical experimentation; the Vietnam and Cold war; civilisation versus savagery; anthropology; The Frankenstein myth; space and time travel; and many other socio-political and science fictional motifs.  It’s a conceptual and cultural phenomenon. And Dawn of the Planet is a wonderful addition to the series.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes begins a few years AFTER Caesar led the apes’ escape from captivity depicted so entertainingly in Rise of the Planet of the Apes. He, his wife and children are now living in reasonable harmony in a huge commune of orang-u-tan, gorillas and chimpanzees.  As suggested at the end of the first movie humans have succumbed to a virus which has wiped them off the planet leaving only those with vascular immunity still alive.  These are lead by family man Malcolm (Jason Clarke) and Gary Oldman’s Dreyfus; a man — who like many others — has lost his family to the virus and subsequent societal breakdown. The dramatic meat of the story begins to cook when the apes are disturbed by a party of humans looking for a new energy source via a Dam in the forest.

The film is a real slow-burner as it establishes the rivalry between the apes and humans as they initially form an uneasy truce before outright war eventually begins.  Indeed the first hour or so is very much given to establishing character dynamics with Caesar’s (phenomenal Andy Serkis) leadership of the apes questioned by the scarred Koba (brilliant Toby Kebbell).  This too is reflected in the more peaceful Malcolm seeking to avoid war and co-exist with the apes as opposed to Dreyfus who sees them as nothing more than savage beasts.  Thus the four main protagonists are very rounded and keenly drawn although one criticism of the film is the lack of a powerful female character and one may say, Oldman aside, the humans are a little bland overall. An accusation I cannot say about the apes who are rendered incredibly by the massive special effect team at WETA.

By allowing the slow build up characters, spiked by some in-fighting in each of the camps, the tension rises and anticipation of the battle rises to fever pitch.  It is Koba who precipitates the war as he is driven by his anger at being experimented on by humans’ years before.  While Caesar leads with majesty and quiet authority, Koba is driven by revenge, pain and hate and this passion drives him to attack the humans with full ape force.  What follows is one of the most memorable set-pieces I have seen at the cinema this year with apes smashing down the human compound with violent abandon.  The image of a dual-gunned Koba rampaging on horseback as fire burns behind him is a cinematic moment which will stay in my memory for sometime.

Matt Reeves is an excellent genre filmmaker and he maintains the great standard set by Rupert Wyatt from Rise of the Planet of the Apes. Reeves, the writers, cast and his battalion of special effects people have produced an intelligent blockbuster which keeps the drama burning throughout culminating in a stupendous battle sequence at the end.  The film is a portent telling us once again that humans will reap suffering if they continue to tamper with nature in the name of progress.  It also reflects the importance of family, acceptance and tolerance of others in order find peace; war and in particular gorilla warfare (sorry) is not the way forward.  There’s one soppy and jarring bit of script coincidence where Caesar goes back to the house he grew up in but that was not enough to ruin another excellent film inspired by Boulle’s literary classic. Those still haunted by Tim Burton’s atrocious 2001 effort will be very grateful for this entry in the franchise. Altogether now: Hail Caesar! Hail Caesar!

Cinema, Reviews

THREE DAYS TO KILL (2014) – FILM REVIEW

4 Comments
3DAYS0

 

THREE DAYS TO KILL (2014) – FILM REVIEW BY PAUL LAIGHT

**CONTAINS SPOILERS – ALTHOUGH NOT MUCH TO SPOIL AS THE FILMMAKERS HAVE DONE THAT ALREADY**

For me going to the cinema is very much like going to a restaurant: the trailers are the starter; the movie is the main course; the director is the chef and the popcorn and sweets are dessert. To continue the analogy I would describe 3 DAYS TO KILL (2014) as a complete dog’s dinner. Given I have witnessed by chance a dog eat its own vomit and horse excrement – different dog on different occasions – this is probably the nicest thing I can say about the film.

3DAYS6

3 DAYS TO KILL is another of those EuropaCorp B-movie action genre thrillers from the Luc Besson stable which have proved very popular to audiences seeking heady thrills, explosions, testosteronic fist-fights, car chases, post-ironic-tight-clothed femme fatales, dastardly bad guys plus the added whiff of xenophobia  thrown in.  Some of which, such as The Transporter (2002), Taken (2008) and District 13 (2004) are actually very entertaining. Yet, Eurocorp have also produced some excellent genre movies giving inexperienced directors a foot up in the industry e.g. Tell No One (2006). But like many studios for every hit there is big fat turkey.

3DAYS3

Talking of turkeys this movie is one severely undercooked bird.  The ‘chef’ McG, who killed the Terminator franchise reboot and ruined the well-cast Spy v Spy romantic action thriller This Means War (2013), has to be one of the most consistently poor directors around.  Because he takes two very familiar plots —

1)  Dying Secret Service Agent/hired killer (Kevin Costner) is given a chance to live longer by super-sexy but plastic Amber Heard if he does one last job in Paris.

2) Dying Secret Service Agent/hired killer (Costner) tries to redeem his past failings as a father by rebuilding his relationship with his ex-wife (Connie Neilsen) and teenage daughter (Hailee Stansfield) who lives – guess where?!?!  Paris is where!!

— And fails at every stage to bring them to the boil satisfactorily. The tone of the piece was all over the shop. One minute I think I was meant to be laughing and the next minute I think I was meant to be adrenalized and the next minute I was meant to be sad.  But I felt nothing. Added to the plot elements mentioned was a sub-plot involving an African family squatting in Costner’s apartment. But this only slowed down the story even more and was an extraneous redemptive device Costner’s character didn’t need.

3DAYS4

Now I love a good spy movie. I also enjoy familial dramas. But it takes a skilled writer and director to make this work together. In fact 3 Days to Kill is one of those films where you genuinely wonder whether the filmmakers knew what they were doing.  Frankensteinian in concept with bits and pieces nicked from different genres and films, yet like Frankenstein it’s disfigured, falling apart at the seams and essentially a dead film walking.

3 Days to Kill, Kevin Costner

There are positives about the film and one of them is that the film ends. Having said that the opening set-piece is pretty good and Costner is dependable in the kind of role Liam Neeson has made his own in recent years. There’s an amusing scene with a stereotypical Italian Accountant in a rare moment when the family and spy plots actually worked well together. Plus there are a couple of well-choreographed car chases too.

3days7

However, in between the action we suffer long dull scenes between Costner’s father and his daughter played by Hailee Stansfield. To be honest I doubt a Bergman or Kubrik in their prime could save this rotting fetid stew of a script which the writer’s cooked up in less than the 3 day’s it takes to kill McG’s career. Here’s hoping anyway.

Cinema, Reviews

X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST (2014) – FILM REVIEW

Video 1 Comment

X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST (2014)

**CONTAINS MASSIVE SPOILERS**

Well, this was fun.  Having enjoyed the X-MEN: FIRST CLASS (2011) movie immensely I was looking forward to this one despite Bryan Singer’s mildly wonky recent directorial releases VALKYRIE (2008) and the okay Jack and the Beanstalk CGI-fest JACK THE GIANT SLAYER (2013).  Of course, Singer’s technical ability is second-to-none and his skill in creating a memorable action set-piece has never been in question but I found his recent films uninvolving and strangely undramatic; especially Valkyrie. But perhaps that was because we knew the mission to kill Hitler was doomed thus suspense was lacking in that particular narrative.

x-men_day-of-future-paston_norton-wallpaper

Anyway, no such concerns here with this sparkling time-travel, past-and-present fusion of historical and future events story.  I was genuinely gripped from the brilliant opening scene which establishes a set of all-conquering villainous machines called The Sentinels which — in the future — have taken over the earth and are wiping out both mutants and humans alike.  Cue Wolverine being sent back in time by Magneto and Professor X to convince the two respective younger versions of them to change the events which caused the Sentinels to rise to power.

If it seems a bit Terminatoresque it’s because it is completely the same story with some Back to the Future nods thrown in too.  But Simon Kinberg’s screenplay (from Matthew Vaughan/Jane Goldman’s story in turn inspired by 1981 Uncanny X-Men comic book narrative by Chris Claremont and John Byrne) wears it’s influences proudly and gets us into the story so quickly that the time travel element becomes more structural rather than thematic.  For me, Hollywood blockbusters are like rollercoasters and I’m looking for a thrill ride. From the get-go this ride was awesome and just did not stop!

wolverine

One may even describe the structure as like Citizen Kane meets Magnificent Seven as our conduit Wolverine must assemble his team that include the now desperate junkie figure of Xavier (James McAvoy) and his faithful pet/assistant Beast/Hank McCoy (Nicholas Hoult).  Xavier has essentially given up and Wolverine must persuade him to join the cause thus giving Jackman a chance to show his “sensitive” and persuasive side before unleashing those bulging muscles on his foes once again. I wanted a bit more time with X the Junkie because McAvoy is a likeable and commanding actor as shown by his recent stirring performance as good, bad, mad and ugly cop Bruce Robertson in disturbing black comedy Filth (2013). But to no avail as we then rapidly move onto the getting Magneto (the always brilliant Michael Fassbender) into the plot.

This is where the film goes all Mission Impossible as Magneto is being held a mile underground at the Pentagon penitentiary. Enter my favourite character of the whole film Quicksilver (Eric Peters) as his speedy skills are used brilliantly in the quest to set Magneto free.  The rescue scene gives rise to probably the best set-piece I’ve seen in the cinema all year and like the Captain America fight scene in the lift it is full of surprises and humour.  The use of slow motion, special effects, sight jokes, music by Jim Croce etc. had my heart in my mouth and adrenalin rushing through my body – although that could have been the vat of coffee I drank that day.  Nonetheless this sequence typifies why I go to the cinema and that is for maximum big screen impact in moments like this.  Shame on you if you watched this on illegal download via your laptop.  Dear filmmakers – thank you! Please take a bow!!

With the team assembled they must then take down the ever gorgeous Mystique (Jennifer Lawrence) who is waging a one-mutant campaign against unscrupulous arms dealer, mutant-hater, and wonderfully named Bolivar Trask (Peter Dinklage).  As typified by Mystique’s arc the whole film gives some great little moments of depth and motivation to the characters  without losing pace in the plot and action overall. In fact, it’s  perfect storm of a movie with plot, action, effects and so many fine actors at the height of their star working perfectly with established cast members of the older X-Men films such as Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen.

This is grandstand genre filmmaking at its’ finest taking all the best elements from the previous films and throwing them into a potent and heady cinematic mix.  I love time-travel narratives as well as the melding of actual historical events and figures such as the appearance of President Nixon and references to the Kennedy assassination.  The final set-piece at the White House brings all the plots and subplots together in an outstanding action-packed denouement. For sheer entertainment value and for all X-Men and comic-book fans this is definitely recommended. So watch this on a big screen as that’s what it deserves. I recommend the Vue Cinema Westfield Screen 6 or Wimbledon Odeon Screen 4.

This is an 8/10 movie but 9/10 on the big screen!!

XMEN2
Cinema, Reviews

BRICK MANSIONS (2014) – FILM REVIEW

Video Leave a comment
Brick_Mansions_Poster


Now, I probably should explain that my rule for this blog is to review EVERY film I see at the CINEMA!   So, why did I go to see this ridiculous excuse for a film at the picture house? Well, mainly because I am an addict and I was getting cold turkey because I hadn’t been to the cinema in a while (10 days) and needed a fix.  But rather than getting the good gear I ended up with a pale shadow of a hit from D-movie BRICK MANSIONS.

It’s my own fault I was tired and chose something that wouldn’t test my intelligence too much. And while it’s a well-edited, pacy film with some okay plot twists throughout there is no way I could recommend this to anyone with one-tenth of a brain and still retain the incredible respect my fans have for me.

It’s a remake of an earlier Luc Besson written/produced movie called District 13 (2004); the kind of unpretentious, slickly crafted and brainless film  Besson’s production arm has been churning out with regular abandon for years.  Arguably the best of these are The Transporter and Taken series which rely on the ample talents of Jason Statham and Liam Neeson to propel the action and narratives.  Paul Walker, alas, is no Statham as he doesn’t have the former diver’s brutish personality or scrapping skills and neither does he have Neeson’s actorial stature, style or  power for smashing up generic bad guys.

Ultimately Paul Walker is such a generic an actor the best way to describe him would be like that of a poor man’s Paul Walker. My favourite film of his was a fun Tarantino knock-off called Running Scared (2006). I urge you to see Running Scared as it is a brilliant twisty-turny, explosive GTA-esque little thriller also starring under-rated Vera Farmiga.  Of course, Walker’s star shines well in the American  movie version of Top Gear; the cash-making-franchise-behemoth-Fast-and-Furious series.

Having said that Walker is/was very likeable, good looking and while lacking in personality his bright blue-eyes carry Brick Mansions along at but overall fail to mask the execrable direction, embarrassing dialogue over-dubs and dreadful acting of his co-stars, notably the RZA who is so wooden his next role should be <insert wooden furniture based pun/analogy here>.  The film does have a plot which is pretty much lifted from Escape From New York (1981).   But it’s nowhere nearly as good as the Carpenter classic although it does feature some fine parkouring skills from master of the physical art David Belle;here playing a nippy career criminal at odds with the RZA’s ridiculous mob boss. These various characters fight, jump over, run, get handcuffed and strap bombs to each other in the deprived, urine-soaked hell-hole called Brick Mansions; a segregated part of Detroit which homes just criminals and lower-runged members of American society.   There’s a piss-poor attempt at social commentary and critique of corrupt officials and politicians but basically it’s laughable.

Walker plays another in a long line of maverick cops but what lets this film down is he has no code or specific set of skills (like Statham/Neeson) or even characterisation and it’s left to the parkour-man Belle to give the action some oomph. I mean it’s entertaining enough, has some crunching violence and fun fight scenes but I was laughing unintentionally at times especially when the RZA was trying to play the tough guy.   The film’s biggest crime is it has no suspense or defined look and the whole thing had all the visual flair of a daytime soap opera.  It would have benefited (like Escape From New York) from some stylish noir night scenes but alas there are little or none

As epitaphs go to the sadly departed Paul Walker, Brick Mansions, is a desperately poor excuse for a movie. Thankfully the James Wan-helmed Fast and Furious 7 will somehow repair Walker’s mixed-bag of a CV.  Which probably tells you how bad Brick Mansions is.

Cinema, Reviews

CALVARY (2014) – FILM REVIEW

Video Leave a comment
calvary3

CALVARY (2014) – FILM REVIEW

**Contains clips and spoilers**

There are many, many different kinds of films and filmmakers who come from innumerable backgrounds, places and cultures. They have also had a variety of paths to making films such as: film school, television, scriptwriting, novels, plays, stand-up or sketch comedy, being rich or even working in a video-shop. Certain filmmakers have a distinctive visual and thematic style and if using the historical parlance one may call them auteurs. Such a list may include: Hitchcock, Scorcese, Godard, Coppola, DePalma, Spielberg, Kurosawa, Hawks, Lee, Campion, Cronenberg, Kubrik, Coen Brothers, Lean, Lynch, Almodovar, Allen, McQueen, Ramsay, Polanski, Ray, Chaplin, Wilder, and Michael Bay. That last one is a joke by the way.

calvary

These greats would make some of the greatest films of our times – some formalistic and artistic masterpieces others emotional and heartrending character pieces and others comedic. They’ve also made great films which maybe I didn’t enjoy first time round or didn’t understand but later come to love or appreciate. Of course, you’re asking yourself: what has this got to do with John Michael McDonagh’s dramatic film CALVARY (2014) – I’m not sure to be honest. What I would say is that this film has received much critical acclaim according to the posters I saw and I’m sure reviews will be very good, but, on first watch I didn’t enjoy it that much. It’s billed as dark comedic drama but I didn’t find it funny enough or dramatic enough and while it was a great opening the plot wasn’t enough to sustain a feature film.

calvary2

Calvary – named after a site immediately outside Jerusalem’s walls where Jesus was crucified – opens brilliantly when Father James Lavelle (acting behemoth Brendan Gleeson’s) is taking confession. He is then threatened by an unknown parishioner and informed he is going to be murdered in just over a week’s time. This sets in motion a potentially interesting “whodunnit” plot with which to structure the story and introduce an ever-increasing set of quirky and troubled rural characters. Gleeson’s Priest is not externally bothered by the threat and even admits to his superior he may know who it is. Thus, any suspense is rendered redundant throughout really.


Over the next week with Judgment Day approaching Father Lavelle comes into contact with a brilliant ensemble cast including: Dylan Moran (Black Books), Aiden Gillen (Game of Thrones), M. Emmet Walsh (Bladerunner, Blood Simple), Chris O’Dowd (IT Crowd, Crimson and the Petal, Bridesmaids), Domnhall Gleeson (Harry Potter, Judge Dredd), Isaach De Bankole (Casino Royale) and the always memorable Pat Shortt (Garage) etc. Each character could potentially be a suspect but there’s no real narrative urgency as, while very well performed, the ‘suspects’ don’t really do very much dramatically. Don’t get me wrong there are some wonderful one-liners in the script and Aiden Gillen’s cynical Doctor impressed me. But even his character was aware of his own redundancy in the piece during a verbally erudite and metatextual joust with Father Lavelle. Throw into the mix Kelly Reilly – as Lavelle’s suicidal daughter – and you get another character on the edge of a nervous breakdown that you don’t really care about.

I really enjoyed John Michael McDonagh’s first film THE GUARD (2011), also starring Gleeson with Don Cheadle and another motley crew of quirky characters. But that had more heart and humour than Calvary which almost collapses under the weight of its’ own pretensions. Perhaps, because I’m not Catholic or Irish I did not get many of the cultural and religious references. However, I certainly got the themes of guilt, death, revenge, existential detachment and I also understood the severity of the historical crimes perpetrated by Catholic Priests against children and Irish citizens. Indeed, the film quite rightly deals with this sensitively giving a voice to the victims of these heinous crimes.  Even the ending — which is superbly staged — left me slightly confused and desiring more of a surprise or narrative reversal.

Ultimately, this was a superbly written and acted piece rather than a fully-fledged satisfactory storytelling experience. The quality of the writer’s ideas, dialogue and themes outweighed the humour, drama and suspense. Good use is made of a terrific cast and beautiful Irish coastal landscapes but overall I felt detached from the characters due to the over-authorial nature of the film. I felt like I was watching a film rather than a proper story and could hear the writer speaking rather than the characters. But, I have been wrong about other great films and filmmakers in the past and have come to appreciate them more on second or third viewings. Calvary could just be one of those films.

Cinema, Reviews

UNDER THE SKIN (2013) – FILM REVIEW

Image 7 Comments

UNDER THE SKIN (2013)  – FILM REVIEW

UNDER THE SKIN (2013) - FILM REVIEW - PAUL LAIGHT

**Contains plot + interpretative spoilers**

UNIQUE filmmaking comes along every so often into the Multiplexes. This is cinematic Art of the highest quality, a sheer visual treat and an unnerving and very memorable experience.

NAKED and nameless at the start Scarlett’s character is a literal void or blank; her birth begins with an eye filling the screen backed by ambient, eerie and almost silent noise.  We then find her — against a stark white background — removing the clothes of a seemingly dead woman as she appears to steal her identity.

DEATH hangs over the film she is dropped at a grim rotting house located somewhere in Scotland and provided with a white van with which to seduce and kill unsuspecting men.   Her only contact here is a male “handler” or “pimp” on a motorcycle who cleans and collects her victims after she has led them to their demise.

EROTICISM initially drives the film as an often naked Scarlett becomes the focus of our gaze.  But her murderous actions render all sexual feelings redundant as we become accomplices to her crimes.

RELATIONSHIPS between Scarlett and the men is at the heart of the narrative. She connects with them coldly relying on her looks to hook them in then ends their lives and seemingly passes them onto her handler.

TORMENTED by her actions Scarlett becomes trapped by her mission. The story hinges on how the character becomes affected by her actions.  She slowly connects with her prey and ultimately becomes the hunted having gone absent without leave.

HORROR arrives not from shock tactics but the slow build-up of tension as events occur at a glacial pace. The scene on the beach is one of the most horrific I have seen at the cinema in recent years. Hack cuts and slashing music so prevalent in modern horror is eschewed in favour of strangeness, visual imagination and intense performances.

EERIE and unnerving the score is atmospheric while the dialogue is stripped naked and bare. Nothing is forced. The film is both highly stylised but seems natural simultaneously. You only have to look at Glazer’s work on music videos and adverts to know nothing is by accident.

SCARLETT Johansson is incredible under fantastic direction from Jonathan Glazer. My understanding is many of the scenes were improvised with untrained actors supporting her. She uses her sexuality to great impact but also shows an intensity perhaps not seen in her other performances.

KILLING and murder is shown in an incredibly imaginative way; shot in a dark room where she strips and leads the men to a weird liquid where they drown.  This is very surreal and symbolic. What this symbolises is down to the audience to decide. Like the rest of the film the makers deny us easy explanations refusing to spoon-feed meaning and reason into our Hollywood factory-fattened guts.

INTROSPECTIVE and moody the film really moved me. Scarlett’s character is a tragic figure who gains our eventual sympathy from being used, sexualised and pursued by men. She doesn’t want to be a murderer and desires herself humanity and attempts escape but finds she is unable to get away from an oppressive, pervasive patriarchy. This is reflected by a stunning ending that will haunt me for some time.

NOT quite a non-narrative film this is a surreal treat which while linear owes much to the work of David Lynch and Luis Bunuel. Based on Michael Faber’s novel I understand the lead character is an alien killing men for their flesh but this is totally left out of the movie version.

UNDERSKIN4

I am happy that a British independent film got a proper release. I would hazard a guess Jonathan Glazer’s poetic, visceral and disturbing mood poem has found distribution amongst the popcorn strewn, coke-guzzling reaches of the Odeons and Vues due to the impressive presence of bona fide movie star and sex symbol Scarlett Johansson.

Overall, I wasn’t sure about Under The Skin (2013) after I had seen it. But like all great art it stayed with me and I could not get it out of my mind. And I still can’t. It’s not a super-hero film. It’s not a date movie. It’s not a 3-D CGI sick-fest. It’s pure, pulsing, hypnotic cinema of the highest quality that – IN MY OPINION – is about the exploitation of foreign sex workers brought to this country without hope, humanity or identity.

UNDERSKIN5

 

Articles, Cinema, Ten Things

TEN THINGS I HATE ABOUT YOU #1 – ZACK SNYDER’S MAN OF STEEL

Video 1 Comment

“I made “Watchmen” for myself. It’s probably my favorite movie that I’ve made. And I love the graphic novel and I really love everything about the movie. I love the style. I just love the movie and it was a labor of love. And I made it because I knew that the studio would have made the movie anyway and they would have made it crazy. So, finally I made it to save it from the Terry Gilliams’ of this world.”  ZACK SNYDER


TEN THINGS I HATE ABOUT YOU #1 – MAN OF STEEL (2013)

This new strand for my blog is a chance for me to vent spleen and displace and transfer dissatisfaction with my own life onto a movie or moviemaker who has pissed me off.  Welcome ultra-all-technique-no-substance-human-photocopier-film-hack Zack Snyder!

Now, I’m just a lowly Office drone working in South London but when Snyder attacked my cinematic mate Terry Gilliam I felt the need to step in and have a go back.   Gilliam’s recent output has been sparse but overall he’s also been involved in some of the most intelligent, original and imaginative films of my lifetime:  Monty Python and the Holy Grail (1975), Jabberwocky (1977), Time Bandits (1981), Brazil (1985), The Fisher King (1991), 12 Monkeys (1995),  Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998).

Snyder on the other hand has directed three enjoyable facsimile-films (Dawn of the Dead (2004), 300 (2007), Watchmen (2009) all derived from other more talented artists ideas. But after that he has directed some right turkeys notably Sucker Punch (2011) which I can safely say is one of the worst films I have ever seen.  It’s so bad it’s not even so bad it’s good.  AND HE STILL GOT THE MAN OF STEEL GIG!!  Here’s 10 reasons why I hate Man of Steel.  There could’ve been more.


#1 – MAKING GOOD ACTORS LOOK BAD

Firstly, Henry Cavill was a great choice as Superman and the supporting cast comprising of Russell Crowe, Michael Shannon, Amy Adams, Kevin Costner, Diane Lane etc. were well chosen but the performances aside from Cavill just seemed off to me in both timing and tone.  Shannon especially just came across as totally misdirected. Watch him in Revolutionary Road (2008)  and Boardwalk Empire to see how good he can be.


#2 – POOR CONSTRUCTION

The ghost of Batman Begins (2005) hangs heavy over the David S. Goyer’s screenplay structure. But where the back-and-forth cutting between past and present seemed to work with Nolan’s film I don’t think it worked at all well in MoS.    It’s an amazing looking jigsaw but with the pieces put in the wrong order.  To me the most interesting part of the film from a character point-of-view was the early stuff with young Kal-El growing up and these scenes were brilliant but thrown away so Snyder could crow bar in more explosions and soulless CGI set-pieces.

#3 – LOIS LANE

Lois is a strong character in the original comics and previous Superman films. But she was so poorly introduced that the she never ever recovered in MoS. Not so much a character but more a pawn in the plot, dramatic damsel-in-distress (why did Zod take her on the ship), or vessel to reveal background information about Kal-El; present in scenes physically but without emotional resonance.  A waste of one of my favourite actresses Amy Adams.


#4 – BAS-EL EXPOSITION AND OTHER AWFUL DIALOGUE

This film has some of the worst dialogue I have heard in a movie ever!  You might say that Snyder didn’t write it but as he’s helming the ship he has final say.  And in this instance the filmic boat sank.  Characters speak in either unrealistic “movie-speak” notably Costner’s surrogate father and I don’t mind that because I know this is a comic-book world and can handle statements like:

“He sent you here for a reason, Clark. And even if it takes you the rest of your life you owe it to yourself to find out what that reason is.” 

But what I cannot stand is characters telling us out aloud their jobs or back-stories or events already seen.  Crowe’s character pops up throughout to reveal history and updates the audience on important plot points even though we have already seen his planet explode at the start.  Further, we’re told Lois Lane has won the Pulitzer Prize IN THE DIALOGUE!  Show us a plaque or her getting an award!  WHATEVER HAPPENED TO SHOW NOT TELL!!  SHOW NOT TELL!!

#5 – OVERALL STYLE & PACE

Snyder has the timing of a teenage pregnancy.  I tried to watch MoS on Blu-Ray again recently but had to turn it off before the end as it is unwatchable.  Snyder went TOO Avatar from the start in my view – Crowe riding some stupid flying beast.  He also copied many of the mistakes he made with Sucker Punch such as over-blown action set-piece on top of over-the-top CGI firework fest without characters we care one bit about.   Any elements of subtlety and nuance are raped by computer images smashing and crashing through in a destructive fit-inducing-ADHD-driven nightmare.

#6 – WHY SO SERIOUS?

Aside from a couple of moments such as the bar-room truck driver’s ride being dismantled there is very little humour in MoS.   It tries so hard to emulate the tone of the Dark Knight but fails miserably and the decision to try and make Kal-El some kind of Christ-like figure was woeful. This is a comic book movie and should be fun!   Marvel’s movies are full of humour. I understand that it doesn’t have to be zingers and punchlines throughout but there’s more humour at a funeral than in MoS.

#7 – NOT SO MUCH PLOT HOLES AS PLOT CAVES!

My theory on the disappearance of the Malaysian plane is that it flew into and vanished into the abyss of Man of Steel’s screenplay which has more black holes than the whole of space.  It’s a joke really as we get the scenes where Zod’s army of rebels suddenly turn up to wreak havoc on Earth with some ridiculous unbelievable flashback telling us how they got there. Plus, how does Clark get on the Arctic expedition having only just worked at a bar?  Plus, how convenient that two soldiers would talk about a top secret find within ear-shot of our hero. Plus, would Kal-el really let his father die?  Plus, given our media-driven society could Kal-El/Superman really have lasted that long without coming under some kind of scrutiny or investigation beforehand.  Need I go on?


#8 – TOO MUCH STORY

Man of Steel is like a series of long, long, long sentences without proper punctuation. It basically crammed the stories of Christopher Reeve’s Superman 1 and 2 into Man of Steel and the whole film suffers in my view.   As aforementioned the boy’s childhood is skimmed over with a few really good scenes stuck into flashbacks and Lois Lane’s and Kal-El’s relationship is rushed in favour of launching us into an over-extended final act of ridiculous action.  By the end of the film I was exhausted.   I like big block-busting-roller-coasting-comic book films when they are done right. Iron Man (2008) and Avengers Assemble (2012) showed what a blast comic book films could be but they had humour, wit, pacing, action, charismatic actors all well directed and many more assets that Snyder’s piss-poor effort lacked.

#9 – UNBELIEVABLE UNBELIEVABILITY

Aside from the scenes when he was a kid I just didn’t believe any of it.   Emotionless, insipid and draining it felt like one long extended video-game with someone else holding the controls.  And while it looked great the action had no tension or suspense either. The phrase “less is more” is definitely NOT applicable here.  Plus, the overly science-fiction feeling of the film did not work for me.  In J. Michael Straczynski’s screenwriting book he talked about writing fantasy and sci-fi and said that as a writer you must strive to make believable unbelievability.  Whedon got this right with Avengers Assemble (2012) as did Lucas with Star Wars (1977) as did Terry Gilliam is the majority of his work.  In some ways I think the computer-generated movie era has lost that magic I witnessed when growing up.  Perhaps I’m to blame having seen too many movies. Who knows?  I just didn’t believe Man of Steel.

#10 – WE COULD HAVE GOT ARONOFSKY!

Here’s how:

“Over at Warner Bros., studio chief Jeff Robinov‘s fierce loyalty to director Zack Snyder is being tested June 14 with the $225 million Man of Steel. The relationship dates to the 2007 hit 300, even though Snyder’s three subsequent Warners films – Watchmen, Legend of the Guardians: The Owls of Ga’Hoole and Sucker Punch – disappointed. However, while giving him Man of Steel (over the other finalist, Darren Aronofsky), Robinov took out insurance with producer Christopher Nolan, the studio’s most important filmmaker (Batman, Inception). “Chris had the confidence in Zack, and based on the movie I’ve seen, Chris was spot-on,” says Warners president of domestic distribution Dan Fellman.”

So we could have got Darren Aronofsky for Man of Steel but instead got Zack Snyder.  Who is going to save us from the Snyder’s of the world?!?    Lord help us!

Cinema, Reviews

12 YEARS A SLAVE (2013) – Film Review by Paul Laight

Video 3 Comments

12 YEARS A SLAVE (2013) – Film Review by Paul Laight

**THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS + CLIPS**

The artist/director Steve McQueen is a very important filmmaker and his films to date include the searing character study of Bobby Sands in Hunger (2008) and the pulverising sex-addict study of Shame (2011).  His latest epic is another intense offering based on the 1853 memoir by Solomon Northup, a New York State-born free man who was kidnapped in Washington, D.C. in 1841 and sold into slavery.  Indeed, in just 3 feature films McQueen has proven himself a genuine cinematic artist and a beacon of real quality and must-see drama.

Whereas Sands in Hunger was driven by political motives and Sullivan in Shame unable to control his animal instincts then Northup’s character is a family man, a proud and free individual living with his wife and child in Washington.  It is there that the story cross-cuts with later events and Solomon’s unjust capture into slavery. He is a dedicated family man and his character is epitomised at the beginning when he turns down the sexual advances of a female captive; my understanding being he could not compromise his fidelity despite being imprisoned in this Louisiana hell.

From the start you’re really rooting for Northup as he is shown to be intelligent, musical and scholarly gentlemen both proud and faithful.  His kidnapping is a press-ganging of the most heinous kind as he led away from Washington with the promise of lucrative work then tricked when seemingly at his most content. The subsequent journey through the plantations of New Orleans is a most despicable crime against humanity and McQueen shows this is many scenes of physical, verbal and mental abuse perpetrated against Northup and other characters.  Here pain and suffering has never looked so beautiful with stunning cinematography by Sean Bobbitt. It’s a story of sunshine and pain with McQueen utilizing Northup’s life microcosmically in regard to the slave movement as a whole.

The cast are incredible from Chiwetel Ejiofor, in the leading role of Northup to evil slave-zealot Michael Fassbender, benign yet complicit Benedict Cumberbatch and many more including Paul Dano, Lupita Nyong’o, Sarah Paulson, standing out in supporting roles. It has received nine Academy Award nominations including Best Picture, Best Director for McQueen, and Best Actor for Ejiofor, and Best Supporting Actor for Fassbender, and Best Supporting Actress for Nyong’o and I would be shocked if it doesn’t win something.

McQueen treats the subject matter with the reverence and power it deserves and literally paints a brutal, inhumane and devastating set of images with which to tell the story. He often favours long takes notably the scene where Solomon hangs clinging by his toenails to life. This is a stand-out iconic scene and it is too much to bear because we have so much invested in Solomon’s character by this stage and really want his suffering to end.  But that’s where Fassbender’s Epps enters the play and the intensity is ratcheted up and then some.

For well over an hour 12 Years a Slave is majestic filmmaking of the highest quality. Northup’s characterisation is incredible, however, this is to the detriment of the other characters who dip in and out of the narrative notably Benedict Cumberbatch’s Ford, who to me was the most interesting of the white slavers as he appeared to be a compassionate man trapped within a vicious societal circle of hate.  Fassbender’s maniacal Epps I feel deserved a better introduction because even though the actor is once again breath-taking I felt the performance MORE than the actual character.  The two wives of the slavers were one-dimensional and interchangeably evil, plus, I was disappointed Paul Dano’s character left the narrative too early.  The major casting disappointment is the glory-hunting role Brad Pitt gave himself as the kind Canadian carpenter who assists Northup in his quest to escape.  Pitt is a great movie star and I love his work but he’s too big in my opinion to appear so late in such a story as this.  I was deeply involved only to suddenly be reminded I was watching a Hollywood movie.

Steve McQueen is a master craftsmen and has made a near-flawless work of cinema even though I must admit the ending left me very frustrated.  There is power and emotion for all to see but I wanted more satisfaction for Northup’s character and some kind of retribution to be dealt to his captors. McQueen had cooked up such an intense soup of pain and suffering I wanted more of a release. Indeed, it seemed quite a passive denouement to me especially when compared to a film such as Glory (1989) and the Roman Slave action epic Spartacus (1960). However, this is a more personal epic and the filmmakers have clearly stayed true to the honour of the original book so my personal desire for cinematic revenge on the slavers will just have to be met by Tarantino’s dancing-horse-bad-ass-Blaxploitation-Western Django Unchained (2012) I suppose.

Cinema, New Releases, Reviews

THE WOLF OF WALL STREET (2013) – Paul Laight’s Movie Review

Video 3 Comments

THE WOLF OF WALL STREET (2013) – Movie Review

**THIS REVIEW CONTAINS MASSIVE SPOILERS + MOVIE CLIPS PLUS REFERENCES TO SEX, DRUG USE, GREED & BRILLIANT FILMMAKING**

To say The Wolf of Wall Street has its coke and eats it is a massive understatement. It’s black-belt-bukakke movie-making of the highest order. A voracious sexy beast of a film which showers the audience with one incredible scene of excess after the other.  To put it bluntly: it’s Goodfellas fucks Scarface and Wall Street then gives birth to a movie bastard of epic proportions.

Based on a memoir by disgraced human scum Jordan Belfort –  a drug-addicted-sex-addicted-thieving-stockbroker-par-excellence – The Wolf of Wall Street  follows the same rise-and-fall structure of mafia classic Goodfellas as DiCaprio’s Belfort schemes and sells his soul to power up through the snakes and ladders of Wall Street.  As the superlative scene with Matthew McConaghey demonstrates the Stock Exchange is a “fugazi” – a fake.  The main aim is to make more and more money while screwing the investors.  The best traders are wolves in a vicious snakepit swimming with sharks ripping off a house of fools.

As Belfort’s firm Stratton Oakmont becomes out of control so does his wealth as he and his motley crue of traders manipulate and connive and deceive to create a monstrous company of wolves who regale in dwarf-throwing, blow-jobbing, lude-swallowing mania.  The extreme is only halfway for these people.  The superb cast including: DiCaprio, Margot Robbie, Jean Dujardin and Jonah Hill, play these venal cunts with such charm and humour you often find yourself complicit with their nefarious behaviour almost willing the characters to push further and further with their depravity.

But as the drug use, debauchery and money increased so did my hatred for these greedy capitalist pigs.   On the one hand I was enjoying the rollercoaster ride of the story but on the other I was horrified at the fact such people and behaviour exist on this planet.  That is the skill of the filmmakers though:  making these Wall Street monsters likeable, funny, believable and human.  Indeed, Belfort himself is ultimately a sorry figure shown to be a monstrous addict who is powerless to stop himself from indulging in every drug and hooker under the sun.  But Scorcese and DiCaprio don’t give Belfort any kind of redemption. He’s still a massive prick at the end of the film; a free prick walking the earth but just not as rich as he once was.

Martin Scorcese is one of the greatest living filmmakers still working today and The Wolf of Wall Street feels like a greatest hits package combining all of the finer ingredients from his other films.  You’ve got the classic swooning camera moves;  the direct address to camera; cat-and-dog couples fighting as seen in Casino and Goodfellas; the boat-in-peril sequence as seen in Cape Fear; the multi-character voiceovers;  the dumb criminals putting themselves in the shit;   characters turning on each other and ratting each other out as seen most recently in The Departed; plus many many more.   But whereas Scorcese used to deal with outsiders and oddballs like Travis Bickle or Rupert Pupkin he is now dealing with Insiders, Gods and members of the Master-Race.  Aside from Kyle Chandler as the dedicated FBI Agent there are no honest characters in this film and at times the it feels like a depressing advert for the greed-is-good-Gordon-Gekko-philosophy.

Personally, I wanted a little more focus on the kind of crimes that were being committed plus more of comeuppance or death for Jordan Belfort.  But in real life he essentially got away with everything having served a pretty short sentence for his “pump and dump” machinations; mainly because he became a dirty rat.  I suppose the subtext of the film does ask the audience:  does this monster deserve a second chance?

But this is NOT a heavy analysis of socio-economic morality and values but rather a bullet-paced black comedy filled with cracking scenes and razor-sharp one-liners delivered by a stellar cast. There are some great big performances and fine supporting players like: Joanna Lumley, Matthew McConaghey, John Bernthal, Rob Reiner and Spike Jonze to name a few.  But this is Leonardo DiCaprio and Martin Scorcese’s film. As they demonstrated in The Aviator, The Departed, Shutter Island etc.  they are a formidable team.  DiCaprio deserves an Oscar for sheer consistency of performances but the Belfort character has already had enough success in his lifetime and threw it all away because of greed. Surely awarding an Oscar to such a heinous character would be TOO MUCH wouldn’t it?  But as this film demonstrates TOO MUCH is never enough!

Cinema, New Releases, Reviews

AMERICAN HUSTLE (2013) – Paul Laight’s Film Review

Video Leave a comment

AMERICAN HUSTLE (2013) – Film Review

I was looking forward to seeing American Hustle for a number of reasons:

1)  The brilliant ensemble cast featuring Christian Bale, Amy Adams, Bradley Cooper, Jeremy Renner, Jennifer Lawrence, Louis C.K. etc. excited me greatly.

2) I love David O. Russell’s film-works such as Flirting With Disaster (1996), The Fighter (2010), Three Kings (1999) and Silver Linings Playbook (2012). I even liked I Heart Huckabees (2004), I think.

3) I love ‘con’ movies; the twisty-turny-step-sister of the crime thriller genre.  My favourites include:  The Sting (1973), Matchstick Men (2003), House Of Games (1987), The Grifters (1990) and my all-time favoritest the Argentinian con-film Nine Queens (2000).

So in short I really really wanted to enjoy American Hustle and must say I did greatly.

The plot in a nutshell finds 1970s confidence-tricksters Irving Rosenfeld (Bale) and Sydney Prosser (Adams) ripping off small businessmen behaving like a High Street Bank for lowlifes.  Their behaviour mirrors the sub-prime market of the Noughties; robbing the skint to fund an extravagant and hedonsitic lifestyle.  In short they are scum; in Prosser/Adam’s case very sexy scum.

Eventually, like the greedy-bastard banks Rosenfeld and Prosser go bust when they are nicked by Bradley Cooper’s hyper-permed-FBI agent, Richie DiMaso.  In order to avoid jail they agree to become ‘bait’ to help capture some bigger fish including Jeremy Renner’s family and community driven politician, Mayor Carmine Polito. That’s where the fun really begins as all manner of cons, sleight-of-hand, bribes, palm-offs, seductions, stake-raising twists and turns begin as each character tries to outwit the other with crazy scheme piled upon crazy scheme.

The film opens with a hilarious set-piece as Christian Bale’s Rosenfeld goes to work by applying his rather extravagant stunt-hair. In fact, the wig work in this film is a joy and while it’s cheap and easy pickings at the expense of stupid 70s hair and clothes I loved it. Bale is very theatrical in this movie and I would describe his performance as a masterclass in over-the-top restraint.  The application of the wig and display of his paunch are his equivalent of Laurence Olivier’s hunchy Richard III:  “An Oscar! Oscar! My dignity and six-pack for an Oscar!”

Indeed, like O. Russell’s other movies this is a real actor-fest.  He just winds them up and lets them go in one entertaining scene after another.  Amy Adams is a real vulnerable-hot-like-fire-cold-bitch while Jennifer Lawrence steals the show with her ditzy-loose-cannon-flick-hair-nut-job portrayal of Rosenfeld’s wife.  Bradley Cooper follows up his great work in Silver Linings Playbook with a fine comic turn as the delusional and over-ambitious DiMaso.  While the most naturalistic and believable character and in turn empathetic portrayal is Renner’s politician. There’s some great support too especially from Louis C.K and Jack Huston.

One would probably argue that this is more of a comedy than a drama as the film retains a sense of fun throughout with some great physical performances and a sparkling script littered with zinging one-liners.  But there is some meaty drama and a serious subtext to the movie, and like O. Russell’s Three Kings which mixed humour with war, American Hustle has a message. Admittedly it is quite well hidden amongst the wigs and funny accents but that message is America is built on the con and that while everyone is trying to out-do each other perhaps they should just work together.   The law, the gangsters, the politicians and the business folk of the United States are all on the take and the American dream is simply a pyramid scheme built on sand.  That’s what I got from it anyway.

David O. Russell takes genre movies and applies a wonderful sense of chaos to the order allowing his actors free reign to express themselves.  His films are like watching Barcelona play football inasmuch as you’re really enjoying the pretty patterns being made by the players and then bang – the ball’s in the net! This is indeed Champions League movie-making with O. Russell’s wonderful style of direction giving all the cast their moment in the sun to shine with wonderful over-the-top characterisations, wigs, costumes and performances.

American Hustle is an entertaining movie which had the audience I watched it with laughing throughout. It works best as a crime-comedy with a bit of suspense; as well as being a mildly damning indictment the American dream. Ultimately, this film shoots, hits the mark and scores!