Captain Phillips

I'd heard good things about this film but it was actually better than I had imagined. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it's great, probably the best new film I've seen this year. A lot has to do with Tom Hanks. I never thought I'd say this, but his performance was brilliant. For much of his career, I'd had him down as a jobbing everyman, appearing in formulaic, populist fare and so I'd actively avoided him. Under the astute guidance of director Paul Greengrass however, Hanks rips this film open by downplaying the role of Richard Phillips, real-life tanker captain. No histrionics, no money-shots. Just a paunch, some grey hair and a number of stares and glances that tell us exactly what he's thinking.

Greengrass is responsible for giving Hanks his head and 'under-directing him'. When asked on Wittertainment how you direct Tom Hanks, Greengrass replied "Get out of the way. Let him get on with it". And it worked, as did the prepping of the pirates, four lads who'd never acted on film before. They're also solid, especially Barkhad Abdi as the leader/captain. Greengrass has done this before with Bloody Sunday and United 93 - stripping away all the artifice of the performances and making us think we're watching a documentary. The fact that he also knows how to ratchet up the tension and move the story along at a nice old click proves he's one of the best directors knocking about right now.

The story itself hardly needed any dramatisation. The first container ship of it's size to be boarded by Somali pirates who then kidnapped the captain, precipitating a showdown with the US navy. Writes itself really but credit must also go to the writer Billy Ray for not gilding the basic outline too much (no hand-wringing relatives, no sentimentality, no meat on the bones).

Keeping a tale like this balanced may have been eschewed by others but Greengrass gives fairly equal time to both parties - the tanker crew and the pirates. Maybe the film could be read as a critique of globalisation (Hanks and Greengrass beg to differ on this) and I reckon this is underlined when Hanks says to Abdi, "There's got to be something other than being a fisherman or kidnapping people" and he replies, "Maybe in America, Irish. Maybe in America".

Quality all round. Check it out.

Gravity

Saw this for free in Kobe at a preview screening, so I've still never paid for a Sandra Bullock film. Well done me. She's alright in this, to be fair, and she needs to be, as it's pretty much a two-hander with Clooney as the other hand.

So where to start.....? Probably the visuals. They are suitably spectacular and they'll sweep the boards at the major awards ceremonies. The 3D was fine and didn't give me a headache (unlike The Hobbit) - I even flinched from the screen a couple of times. More impressive was the stillness, the lack of sound. Even when disaster was pitching up all around, we (and presumably the astronauts) don't realise it until we actually see the speeding metal debris. The lack of a whizzy, zoomy, bangy, boomy soundtrack is shocking and, I reckon, the standout point of the film.

Storywise, it's fairly basic and I'm reasonably impressed with the pared-down nature of the plot. Without spoiling too much, it's fundamentally - DISASTER! - GO THERE - BUGGER! OK GO THERE - END. It would have been tempting to overblow the whole narrative and another director may have done so, but not a steady hand like Cuaron. Ninety minutes or so for an epic technical feat like this must have taken great restraint or.......

......it's quite possible that the budget was spunked on the Framestore people (responsible for the visual effects) and they scrimped a little on the writing. That's where the film lets itself down slightly for me. Some of the ideas are pretty old hat; Clooney is the experienced old veteran ready to retire, Bullock is the new recruit, not really up to speed with things, later having a kind of epiphany with a random stranger. Some of the dialogue is quite corny, especially Clooney telling stories of his past to anyone who will listen. And the central 'message' is a bit hackneyed with a slight whiff of religion in the air.

So maybe I was expecting too much because although I was gobsmacked by the technical aspect of it, I wasn't that moved. It is a pretty immense effort though and I'd recommend seeing it, if only for the spectacle of the opening sequence.

Oh, and Bullock falls over again. Damn you, Gravity!

Elysium

Elysium. A conception of the afterlife that developed over time and was maintained by certain Greek religious and philosophical sects and cults. Initially separate from the realm of Hades, admission was initially reserved for mortals related to the gods and other heroes. Later, it expanded to include those chosen by the gods, the righteous, and the heroic, where they would remain after death, to live a blessed and happy life, and indulging in whatever employment they had enjoyed in life. (Thanks again Wikipedia)

This space-station world, at odds with the filthy, poverty-riddled Earth mainland seems a sound stepping off point for a really meaty Sci-fi satire, or at least a social conscience drama. So why is it so unsatisfying? I'll see if I can work this out in the next few paragraphs (I'm still not quite sure, if I'm honest).

Due to the need to pick over the bones of this film, there'll be some spoilers to follow.

I reckon Elysium is let down quite a lot by its 3rd act. As a quick outline, the 1st act is mainly scene-setting, exposition, introducing characters, etc. Stomach-churning flashback sequence aside, this is the strongest part of the film. It ends with a hostile, 'STOP THE BOATS' defence of Elysium (or Abbot's Brave New OZ), sanctioned by Jodie Foster's government Minister, who consequently earns a political rebuke. This pisses her off a bit and makes her ropey dialogue go out of sync on a few occasions (bad ADR, I guess).

The 2nd act goes over Matt Damon's fatal work-related injury (wouldn't have happened under a Labor government) and his attempts to get himself to Elysium and patched up quick-smart (illness seems to be a thing of the past there). Again, a pretty solid act, which also expands on Sharlto Copley's introduction from act 1. He plays a very exaggerated hard case operative who Foster uses for her dirty work. There are some nice examples of Blomkamp's stylistic mechanics and munitions here as Damon and Copley square up to one another. Gritty, dusty and odd, though Copley acts as though he's in another film. He really chews the scenery, whereas the rest of the cast seem to be playing it very seriously. He even has to shout "That's what I'm talking about!" like Will Smith in a bad cop actioner from the 90's. The SAF accent is good to hear though. This act ends with Damon accepting the lift to Elysium, where he's joined by an old love interest AND HER SICK DAUGHTER. More motivation, Matt? The upper case means I'm shouting at the screen here, in case anyone doesn't get it;)

3rd act. Here's where Elysium loses its way. It turns into a saccharine mess, like Blomkamp ate too many jelly babies and then threw up on his keyboard. The perfunctory climactic fight scene has nothing new to add to this old device - it even looks glittery (!) - and right after this the music begins to soar with faux emotion as the old love interest spirits her daughter (IN SLOW MOTION) to the machine that will save her life. Meanwhile, the data code protection that Damon has been carrying in his enhanced head is about to make him the sacrificial Futurism Jesus. Add a Utopian ending with shiny robots helping to heal Earth's poor masses and a return to the sepia-toned flashback of Damon's NUN-ASSISTED childhood and you get a noble failure of a film.

A real shame, as District 9 was quite good and kept its message running throughout. Hopefully, Blomkamp's next film, Chappie, will have more prawn and less sugar.

Star Trek into Darkness

Nerd disclaimer. I quite like the whole Star Trek world/universe, specifically The Next Generation and DS9, even Voyager had its moments. With that in mind, I didn't take much convincing about the quality and punch of the first 'rebooted' Star Trek back in 2009. The second film in the new series continues the style of its predecessor, probably because it comes from the same writers and director (Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman and J.J. Abrams, with Damon Lindelof also getting a writing and producing credit for this new film).

Most of the Enterprise crew get something to do here, Kirk and Spock hogging possession, of course, but Scotty, Bones and Uhura all have important scenes. Once again though, the villain comes away with the film (I was reminded of Iron Man 3 in this regard) as Benedict Cumberbatch was bloody top notch. Trekkies (Trekkers?) will have already guessed the name of his character and also noticed one scene - possibly more - lifted from another Star Trek film. I'm being willfully vague here to avoid ruining any surprises, but then again, any non-trekkies probably won't give a shit.

Two items of note: The early scenes (just after the obligatory opening sequence action set-piece) where Noel Clarke pops in and out seem very out of place. The children's hospital in the countryside really belonged to another film. Odd. Or maybe I'm being too near-sighted. There might be a 'pay-off' in the next installment of the franchise.

Secondly, and this is a mere curiosity, the poster at the top of this entry apparently owes something to a painting called "Wanderer above the Sea of Fog" by Caspar David Friedrich (1818). And here's a pic.

I see it a bit. Or it's just a bloke standing on a rock with his back to us. But then this link may be more convincing. (Thanks to tor.com)

Oh, I've only now noticed that I haven't really given my view on this film. Ummm, good fun. I enjoyed it. Not a ball-tearer and the three acts are a bit sign-posted but, like I said, good fun. Good night.

World War Z

World War Zed? World War Zee? I'm naturally inclined to go with the former but there's a fair reason to go with the latter, namely the book this film is based upon was written by an American, Max Brooks. Also Zee rhymes nicely with Three, suggesting this is the second sequel to 'The Great War' (aka WW1). Anyway, I digress. Onto the film itself.

In preparation for this screening, I read the aforementioned book and quite enjoyed it. I was also ready for the vast differences between the book and the film. These didn't really matter too much in the wash up. The changes from the book to the screen were mainly due to necessity, with one major exception - that being the decision to finger China as the source of the zombie plague being carefully switched to the less lucrative box-office zone of India. Cynical? Maybe, but no real damage to the film.

Other changes have created slightly more controversy. The major issue has been with the 'fast' zombies. This again is an obvious narrative tweak - slow (normal?) zombies would not have engendered as much panic in such a short time as required by the length of the film. The book itself was really just a collection of interviews - the action having taken place a few years earlier.

Another large, important change was the decision to have a lead character, played by Brad Pitt. There's no such character in the book (at the very least, he's off screen/page for the majority of the book) but a feature film of this magnitude needs a key player to hover around. Understandable.

Irrespective of these changes, I enjoyed World War Z. It's daft, bombastic and a lot of fun, in a serious, po-faced kind of way. I liked the pro-UN stance and the slight demonising of the CIA (David Morse's toothless nutter character is a little gem) and the film is littered with actors from various countries. Without giving too much away, the broad outline sees Pitt head off around the world in search of an answer to the cause of the plague (another narrative device that differs from the book) and some of the countries mentioned would make a strange football World Cup Z. In no particular order: Belarus, Israel, South and North Korea, Wales, India, the U.S. and South Africa. I fancy a zombie apocalypse before that particular combination of quarter-finalists.

Good night.....if you can.

Mid-year report - 2013

So here are the ten best films I've seen so far this year (up to June 30). This time round, I'm only picking films I've seen for the first time. In order, they are:

1. Wish You Were Here
2. The Imposter
3. We Need to Talk About Kevin
4. Argo
5. Even the Rain
6. Iron Man 3
7. The Kid with a Bike
8. Django Unchained
9. 500 Days of Summer
10. The Pirates! In an Adventure with Scientists





And here's the offal. Worst first.

1. Intouchables
2. The Tree of Life
3. You Will Meet a Tall Dark Stranger
4. Life of Pi
5. Mamma Mia!
6. Morning Glory
7. Ted
8. Hara-Kiri: Death of a Samurai
9. Amazing Grace
10. Haywire

Cannes 2013

The Cannes Film Festival of 2013 has just finished with the Palme d'or going to a French film called La Vie d'Adèle - Chapitre 1 & 2 (Blue is the Warmest Colour) by Abdellatif Kechiche. Seems to be a 3 hour lesbian romance starring Lea Seydoux. I'm on board.















The Grand Prix went to the Coen Brothers for Inside Llewyn Davis, which has garnered some pretty good reviews. I'll watch anything they do but the setting doesn't really grab me (1960's New York folk music scene).

Here are the other films that were vying for the top awards.

• BEHIND THE CANDELABRA directed by Steven SODERBERGH
• BORGMAN directed by Alex VAN WARMERDAM
• GRIGRIS directed by Mahamat-Saleh HAROUN
• HELI directed by Amat ESCALANTE
• INSIDE LLEWYN DAVIS directed by Ethan COEN, Joel COEN
• JEUNE & JOLIE (YOUNG & BEAUTIFUL) directed by François OZON
• JIMMY P. (PSYCHOTHERAPY OF A PLAINS INDIAN) directed by Arnaud DESPLECHIN
• LA GRANDE BELLEZZA (THE GREAT BEAUTY) directed by Paolo SORRENTINO
• LA VÉNUS À LA FOURRURE (VENUS IN FUR) directed by Roman POLANSKI
• LA VIE D'ADÈLE - CHAPITRE 1 & 2 (BLUE IS THE WARMEST COLOUR) directed by Abdellatif KECHICHE
• LE PASSÉ (THE PAST) directed by Asghar FARHADI
• MICHAEL KOHLHAAS directed by Arnaud DES PALLIÈRES
• NEBRASKA directed by Alexander PAYNE
• ONLY GOD FORGIVES directed by Nicolas WINDING REFN
• ONLY LOVERS LEFT ALIVE directed by Jim JARMUSCH
• SOSHITE CHICHI NI NARU (Like Father, Like Son) directed by KORE-EDA Hirokazu
• THE IMMIGRANT directed by James GRAY
• TIAN ZHU DING (A TOUCH OF SIN) directed by JIA Zhangke
• UN CHÂTEAU EN ITALIE (A CASTLE IN ITALY) directed by Valeria BRUNI TEDESCHI
• WARA NO TATE (Shield of Straw) directed by Takashi MIIKE

The films that I'm keen on from this list are Le Passe, La Grande Bellezza and maybe Michael Kohlhass and Only God Forgives.

Check out all the winners here.

Iron Man 3

This Japanese poster seems to suggest this will be the last outing for the titular Iron Man/Tony Stark character (さらば　- 　アイアンマン。= Farewell Iron Man) but as long as the box office continues to ching-ching, I'd say that's a premature assumption. Certainly, he'll reappear in the next Avengers movie at least. And I kind of hope he doesn't disappear. He's one of the most likeable 'superheroes' I've seen - a flawed smart-arse who runs like a 'suit' avoiding the rain and reacts to surprises with either a cocked eyebrow or a look of exasperated acceptance. All credit must go to Downey Jr. for this - he's good in other films but this is his Harry Potter or Alan Partridge, he may never be able to shake this role.

But the film itself? I'd have to say it's better than it's immediate predecessor but not quite as good as the original. Kind of what you'd expect from a third installment. The script has some gems but at the same time seems to play it a little safe, especially towards the end. I do like the fact that the thematic slant seems to be against 'big business' rather than any foreign foes, the whole series has been ostensibly set up this way. This is part of the reason I despised Captain America so much - that and the main character is a prime twat.

By far the highest card Iron Man 3 pulls is this fella below. Ben Kingsley as The Mandarin is immense and it sits just below Don Logan in Sexy Beast as his best creation. He really is fantastic, I can't think of a better comic book movie villain (X-Men's Magneto, maybe....). Guy Pearce is quite good too as a live action rendition of Syndrome from The Incredibles. You'll get the idea once you've seen the film - I don't think that's a spoiler. An enjoyably clever popcorn flick. Worth a look (if only for Kingsley).

Short thoughts

Here are some brief appraisals of a few films I've seen so far this year, cinema trips not included. Some of them have been for my ongoing movie lesson but most have been for my leisure.

• Ted  (2012) Seth McFarlane - Not half as funny as it wishes to be and annoyingly referential.

• Haywire (2011) Steven Soderbergh - Boring 'covert ops' action film from a very over-rated director. I don't understand how he always seems to attract the big(-ish) name stars to appear in his films. I can't recall actually liking any of his movies.

• The Hunger Games (2012) Gary Ross - A bit slow to get going and, of course reminiscent of Battle Royale but watchable enough for a lark. First part of another fucking franchise as well.

• The Tree of Life (2011) Terrence Malick - Eye-burningly terrible. My wife accused me of making her watch 'a two hour screen saver'. Guilty as charged. I can never get back the time that I wasted watching this dross.

• Wish You Were Here (2012) Kieran Darcy-Smith - Really gripping story and well played by all, especially Joel Edgerton. Clever and believable.

• The Imposter (2012) Bart Layton - Doco that plays like a fiction about a nutter who adopts the lives of certain missing persons. Still don't know if the whole film is a put-up job or not but it's definitely worth a gander.

• Life of Pi (2012) Ang Lee - Quite well made and dazzling on the surface but a polished turd is still a turd.

• Looper (2012) Rian Johnson - Not the worst time travel flick but a little underwhelming. And just the merest of logical questioning undoes the whole plot.

• The Dictator (2012) Larry Charles - As broad as you'd expect with some pretty woeful misfires (massive boob assassin, anyone?). Not as painfully funny as Borat, or even Bruno, yet still plenty of giggles, thanks mainly to Sacha Baron Cohen's clumsy timing.

• Mamma Mia! (2008) Phyllida Lloyd - Somewhere beyond awful sits this oddity. So far beyond that it comes out the other end inversely judged. Somewhere where the spectrum of quality reverses up itself. Still better than Moulin Rouge though.

• Intouchables (2012) Olivier Nakache, Eric Toledano - Dire, soft-pedalling 'odd couple' drama that had me gaping at all the lifeless cliches on show. Need more time to thoroughly dissect the corpse. Francois Cluzet should be ashamed of himself. An American remake ominously approaches.

• Network (1976) Sidney Lumet - A bit preachy but still packs a punch with great performances throughout. Nice to watch as a slice of history - an era of American film-making that wasn't purely cash driven.

Django Unchained

The second of my two trips to the cinema while I was back in Aus, this time I enjoyed the surprisingly tranquil surrounds of the Bunbury Grand Cinema. The film was Quentin Tarantino's latest, Django Unchained and I had a pretty good time while watching. It was only a few days later that a few reservations began to leak out.

Now, I quite like Tarantino as a film-maker. He's smart and he knows his film history. Pulp Fiction was one of the movies that defined the 1990s and Reservoir Dogs and Jackie Brown are brilliant. I didn't like Kill Bill (1 or 2) and I've yet to see Death Proof but Inglourious Basterds was great fun. So that basically leaves us with Django. And (of Tarantino's work) I reckon it's just above the Kill Bill films in quality. Well, maybe quality is the wrong word - more like.....heart or emotion. As with much of his portfolio, Django comes across as a cocky, smirking movie, one that's a little too clever for its own good.

I get the knowing nods to cheesy exploitation films of the 1970s. I understand the majority of the cameos from average old actors/directors/stuntmen, etc. I can see why he wants to pay homage to film history. But please, Quentin, that's enough. Homage is becoming haemorrhage (my thanks to dictionary.com) and I think he's better than that. Perhaps he's just a product of our modern culture. Maybe he's watched so much (top drawer and bottom) that he's had no time to experience things for himself and he therefore needs to ape previous works.

That said, Django wasn't terrible. There were some good performances (Cristophe Waltz especially) and some of the scenes were handled with style, in keeping with Tarantino's visual methods. But overall it was too muddled. Jamie Foxx was just okay, Di Caprio was just under okay - too much oomph, almost popped a vessel - and Samuel L. Jackson was an oddity (I couldn't understand his character's motivation - possibly my ignorance of U.S. slavery history). It was too long, many scenes dragged in order to show off Tarantino's 'clever' writing. This worked for me in Basterds, probably because I was more interested in that particular historical period but it didn't fly here. I felt that it was overly verbose - much like this review.

On that note, I shall edit here. Thank you and good night.

Argo

One of my two trips to the cinema while back in Australia, I saw this at Cinema Paradiso in Northbridge (where once upon a time I used to get the odd free entry courtesy of the Pig Strangler). It seems to have retained its indie charm though not its old price listings - $17 for a ticket and $4.50 for a choc bomb! Welcome to Perth.

Argo is Benna Fleck's 3rd directorial effort and he seems to be growing into a pretty solid film-maker. He must have done his research regarding pacing (helps to have a good editor) and atmosphere. I've never really been a fan of his acting or presence on screen but he obviously knows how to get a performance from actors. In fact, I think he's a better actor when he's directing himself (or maybe he's just getting older and more familiar). The cast is fine all round, especially the relatively less well-known group on the periphery of the crisis. Their performances lend a pseudo-documentary feel to the whole thing, especially in counterpoint to the funnier, flashier Hollywood scenes with John Goodman and Alan Arkin.

The aforementioned crisis is this little number that took place at the end of the 1970s and isn't often used as material for Hollywood dramatisations. The whole story sounds pretty preposterous but, according to declassified documents, it's generally accurate (albeit with a little tension building thrown in at the end). And it works for the most part. I was reasonably gripped as the story played out and only mildly annoyed at all the American whooping for joy as it reached it's conclusion. There is a sub-plot involving Affleck's character's family situation and while this fleshes out his role a bit, it doesn't really add much to the narrative. This aside, it's a fairly tight film with some nicely edited transitions (eg. spinning glass paper weight ---- to ---- record playing on a turntable).

The final credit sequence is a nice touch. The actual stills (I trust they are real) and passport photos of the protagonists are juxtaposed with the film's renditions and, as a self-congratulatory pat on the back for the set and costume designers, it works quite well. Jimmy Carter even makes an 'audio' cameo to lend the film some more authenticity. Meaty and enjoyable, a juicy lamb doner for your eyes and ears.

Best and Worst of 2012 - End of Year report

Here are the ten best films that I watched in 2012. This follows on from the mid-year report and as you'll note, there have only been a few changes from that list (see pic below for one example). Once again, this list is made up of films that I watched in the past year - new or old, first time viewings or repeats. In the future I may settle on only first time viewings.

1. Blade Runner
2. Casablanca
3. Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy
4. There Will Be Blood
5. Delicatessen
6. Vertical Ray of the Sun
7. The Descendants
8. The Apartment
9. The White Ribbon
10. Rise of the Planet of the Apes



And here are the duds.


1. Mighty Joe Young
2. I Come with the Rain
3. Invictus
4. Wedding Crashers
5. John Carter
6. A Christmas Carol (2009)
7. Young Sherlock Holmes
8. The Spanish Apartment
9. Me and Orson Welles
10. The Iron Giant