Seven Psychopaths  (2012)    65/100

Rating :   65/100                                                                     110 Min        15

A piece of avant garde screenwriting from writer/director Martin McDonagh, in his first film since he found success with the wonderful ‘In Bruges’ (08), though it does feel as if here he was struggling with writer’s block and decided to incorporate that directly into the film. It follows Colin Farrell’s Marty as he tries to complete a screenplay entitled ‘Seven Psychopaths’ and ends up being given inspiration from several characters in the real world. It’s nowhere near as darkly, and somewhat controversially, funny as ‘In Bruges’, but McDonagh does successfully create some interesting characters and a unique story. These characters are brought to life by a wonderful cast including Sam Rockwell, Woody Harrelson and Christopher Walken, who, in particular, is a joy to watch. Be prepared for more of the same bleak and uncompromising violence that featured in ‘In Bruges’.

Sightseers  (2012)    51/100

Rating :   51/100                                                                       88 Min        15

A black comedy from ‘Kill List’ (11) director Ben Wheatley that actually has more credit as an unlikely romance story than anything else. If you’ve watched the trailer then you get a very accurate snapshot of the sort of laughs that Wheatley was aiming for, and it has its moments, but perhaps best to think of it as a lesser version of ‘In Bruges’ (08) meets similarly downsized ‘The Killer Inside Me’ (10) and ‘Falling Down’ (93). Both the leads, Alice Lowe and Steve Oram, who also wrote the screenplay together, do well, but by far the best thing about the film is the cinematography, with lovely wide angle shots of rolling mists over the Yorkshire hills contrasted with early morning sunshine and green pastures, all as the protagonists tour the area in their caravan leaving behind them a trail of destruction….

Rise of the Guardians  (2012)    73/100

Rating :   73/100                                                                       97 Min        PG

‘Rise of the Guardians’ features an all star team-up of Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, the Sandman and Jack Frost – all chosen by ‘The Man in the Moon’ to become the guardians of the safety and well being of children on Earth. The latest animation from Dreamworks, it’s the perfect introduction to the holiday season for cinema going families with kids, and the sharp and colourful graphic work together with an entertaining moral story, replete with pantomime bad guy Jude Law (as the Boogeyman), should provide a decent hour and a half’s entertainment for adults as well. The fairies, in particular, are most awesome.

Criticism has been lain against it for lacking soul, which is a problem with a lot of animations issuing forth from Dreamworks. However, I think enough of an effort has been made to label that a little unjust, although The Red Dragon admits slight bias in favour of the cute, and slightly overused, fairies and it is certainly true that the bulk of the piece remains the frothy, whirly, kaleidoscope of flashy action sequences that the production company favours so highly. Fun nonetheless – look out toward the end for the not so subtle nod to the head of the company’s previous work….

Silver Linings Playbook  (2012)    75/100

Rating :   75/100                                                                     122 Min        15

Bradley Cooper and Jennifer Lawrence star as two psychologically and emotionally disturbed individuals whose lives become intertwined, both sharing a recent trauma and each believing the other to be more unhinged than themselves. Bradley Cooper gives a really fantastic performance, as does Robert De Niro playing his OCD father. Jennifer Lawrence doesn’t wholly convince as someone who’s not quite the full shilling, but I think that is the point, rather than being in the same boat she is acutely aware of how she comes across to others – a foil to Cooper’s character who is mostly oblivious to the social consequences of his condition, and there is no denying she imbues the role with her strong screen presence; at times like a rattled, but still perfect, porcelain doll in search of a soulful remedy to countermeasure her carnal, desperate, desires. Moving, often amusing, and deserving of the accolades it’s bound to garner it is also laced with the spirit of the title, and has a very well selected soundtrack in accompaniment.

Based on the 2008 debut novel of Matthew Quick but with a shift from New Jersey to Philadelphia, David O. Russel (‘Three Kings’ 99, ‘The Fighter’ 10) both wrote the screenplay and directed the film, having a special interest and relationship with the material as his own son is both bipolar and has OCD, which may be why the whole film feels sympathetically grounded in reality.

End of Watch  (2012)    59/100

Rating :   59/100                                                                     109 Min        15

From writer/director David Ayer, this is very much the opposite of his 2005 flick ‘Harsh Times’, and stars Jake Gyllenhaal and Michael Pena as two LAPD patrol men buddying up and busting crime in downtown Los Angeles, ‘district 13′, and it opens with a pretty awesome rallying call in the form of a voice-over from Gyllenhaal as their squad car hones in on a couple of gangbangers. Initially, the whole film is shot as a largely handheld camera piece, with our view switching between pinhole cameras on the officers’ uniforms, Gyllenhall’s handheld, and the camera on their vehicle. This creates a major problem with the film, as with others in the genre, as the beginning quickly becomes ‘end of ability to watch’ with shaky cam taken to extremes and time wasted justifying and talking about the various cameras. It’s not necessary to contain the footage of these films within the confines of the characters’ own photography equipment, the viewer should be in mind at all times and there is no reason at all not to switch between the handhelds and more traditional views. Eventually, the director seems to come to the same conclusion and ditches some of the handheld footage, which actually makes all the shaky use from before fairly pointless.

As the action begins to ramp up things get much more interesting. It’s where this style of filmmaking can be really effective, as we experience first hand the thrills and horrors of their occupation from their own point of view, and we really root for them as they deal with all manner of undesirables. These events are interspersed with ‘chum time’ as we get more insights into their private lives and their camaraderie. It’s unfortunately a little obvious and hackneyed, and initially slightly awkward to boot, though the actors seem to settle more into it as the film progresses, possibly as they become more familiar with each other in their roles. Some wonderful tension is created, but the flaws continually diffuse what could have been a much more intense and acute thriller.

The handheld filmmaking style, which really began to filter into the mainstream after the success of ‘The Blair Witch Project’ in 99, seems almost to be allowing ‘Realism’ into Hollywood via the back door. It has largely been confined to horror, where it continues to be refined by the likes of ‘Paranormal Activity’ 07 (featuring security cameras rather than handheld ones), in which series numbers 2 & 3 were arguably the best, and the actually pretty darn scary ‘Insidious’ (10). It could be that with this style of horror movie it has run its course – ‘Paranormal Activity 4’ (12), and the very similarly styled ‘Sinister’ (12) with Ethan Hawke were both very predictable in terms of when the scare was coming and in what form it would take, as well as how everything would end up. However, as evinced at times by ‘End of Watch’, Hollywood filmmakers still have a lot of unexplored territory to put to good effect with the technique, so long as they don’t shoot themselves in the foot by obsessing over it unnecessarily. For a couple of good uses of handhelds see horror film ‘Quarantine’ (08 – itself a remake of the also very good Spanish film ‘Rec’ 07), ‘Project X’ (12) which was kind of a feel good film done in an unexpected way, and ‘Troll Hunter’ (10), a Norwegian film which was beautifully shot and put together.

Nativity 2 : Danger in the Manger!  (2012)    50/100

Rating :   50/100                                                                     105 Min        U

This is the sequel to 2009’s children’s film ‘Nativity!’ and it once again focuses on the kids of St. Bernadette’s primary school. Any film that has the subtitle ‘Danger in the Manger’ deserves a little credit straight off the bat as far as The Red Dragon is concerned – the rest of the film though is likely to divide parental opinion. The first film was a surprise hit, proving entertaining for children and adults alike. Here, the presumably busy with ‘The Hobbit’ Martin Freeman has been replaced with primary school teacher David Tennant, who tries to provide the voice of reason as his classroom assistant takes the kids, including one baby, on an increasingly dangerous and unlikely trek to reach a Christmas singing competition in Wales, much in the style of an ‘X Factor’ for primary schools. The adventure is deliberately over the top but nonetheless features such stunts as the whole gang going white water rafting with the hapless baby strapped to someone’s chest. The Red Dragon also considers there to be a bit too much of the singing at the end. If your kids dislike ‘The X Factor’, or are wont to copy what they see on the big-screen (especially if you also have a small baby), then give this one a miss. Otherwise, not as good or as wholesome as the first one, but probably decent enough to entertain the family if there’s nothing else showing. Or if you don’t fancy sneaking your kids past the ushers to go and see ‘Skyfall’.

Gambit  (2012)    61/100

Rating :   61/100                                                                       89 Min        12A

This really isn’t very funny at all. A remake of the 1966 film of the same name that starred Michael Caine and Shirley Maclaine, it bares precious little in common with its predecessor and spent the better part of two decades in development hell before finally being helmed here by Michael Hoffman (‘Restless Natives’ 85) and features a perhaps degraded over time script from the Coen brothers.

It stars Colin Firth as an art expert who is intent on defrauding the boss he hates, played by Alan Rickman, with the help of Cameron Diaz sporting a rich Texan accent, which takes most of the film to get used to. Stanley Tucci makes an appearance as a German rival to Colin Firth, and the talented and roundly respected cast are what finally lift the film someways from the doldrums of the truly awful first half. It won’t have you laughing much, but it may leave you with a smile on your face by the end of it. Not quite the beaming, bedazzling smile of Cameron Diaz, but a smile nonetheless.

The Twilight Saga : Breaking Dawn Part Two  (2012)    58/100

Rating :   58/100                                                                     115 Min        12A

‘Breaking Dawn – Part Two’ is a reasonably fulfilling conclusion to the Twilight Saga. Unfortunately, it suffers massively from the decision to separate the story from the final novel into two films. It begins with Kristen Stewart exploring her new found ‘self’ and then builds toward the inevitable climax, but everything else, including the central love triangle and vampiric dilemma, has already been resolved. You could literally edit out an entire hour from part two and not miss anything, apart from some of the nice scenic shots which feature throughout. In fact, the cinematography has been chosen to directly mirror the red, white and black colours of the book covers and it works pretty well as a direct tie in, and although a little more flare to properly define it in its own right may not have gone amiss it still creates an impressive atmosphere and background.

Diehard fans of the series upset at it all coming to a close may be consoled by the fact that the makers of the films have been in talks to possibly continue the story beyond that of ‘Breaking Dawn – Part Two’, but regardless, this finale will be largely remembered for one particular, unique moment. There was a palpable reaction in the cinema from the midnight audience viewing it, and whether or not you enjoy the film will largely hinge on how you feel about it. The Red Dragon, although not familiar with the books, considers it a rather brave decision given the popularity of the franchise. Indeed, a reel of classic film excerpts shown at this year’s Oscars ceremony featured a clip from Twilight and although it first seemed a little odd, it was justified given its extraordinary fan base and success, and most people whether they admit it or not will probably find something to like amongst the five film saga. The Red Dragon’s own opinion is that he rather enjoyed the carnage….

Skyfall  (2012)    95/100

Rating :   95/100                       Treasure Chest                      143 Min        12A

Skyfall is very, very good. Part of its success is that it at times has you thinking ‘goodness I’m bored’, and ‘doesn’t Daniel Craig look way older in this one than in the last two’. The former attribute avoids the pitfall of many an action movie – trying to constantly outdo the last scene and ‘ramp up the action’ to the point where what should be a story becomes an avalanche of machine gun flashes and damsels in distress being propelled through the air by grenades that have hair stylists as secondary functions. The filmmaker must play tricks on the viewer’s mind in order to captivate it properly. Here it’s done in a number of ways, the plot slows, then gradually becomes more intriguing. The music matches this pace, with long stretches that have no music at all, allowing for the appreciation of more nuances in the acting as well as the feeling that we are watching real people rather than scripted movie stars.

Within this framework, it’s the acting that’s really allowed scope to carry the whole, and Judi Dench and Javier Bardem really deliver here. Don’t be at all surprised to see both of them nominated in the best supporting category again this awards season. It is the difference that a great deal of, no pun intended, intelligence into the piece has made. From the Broccoli’s decision to hire an Oscar winning director in the shape of Sam Mendes, and nine times Oscar nominee Roger Deakins as director of photography (who is a true master of his craft, evinced by several of his films: ‘True Grit’ in 2010, ‘No Country for Old Men’ in 2007 and ‘The Shawshank Redemption’ in 1994 to name but a few), to their whole outlook with regard to revamping the franchise, beginning with ‘Casino Royale’ in 2006.

Part of that outlook is evident here, as we see a beat up version of Bond, far removed from the suave, unruffled, and ridiculously cheesy Bond of past movies. In some of the novels Bond was at times much more human and fragile, and that certainly is how the opening of Skyfall feels. It’s almost like subverting the symbol of movie land masculinity. There is a scene where Bond has to go through a medical exam – it would have been wonderful to have seen him go through an STD test as well. One can imagine Q, ‘em, we may have to add a few to the number of women that have died as a result of having had intercourse with you 007…’. It would make sense for the future of the franchise to see a Bond musing on the family he never had, or indeed discovering a hitherto unknown son, or twenty. So long as none of them are called Mutt…..

Skyfall then is a well crafted and bold statement from the crew who worked on it. An engaging tale that reinserts Bond as a real person fighting modern day enemies, and one that leaves the audience thirsty for more. There is more than one nod to previous films in the franchise along the way too. Though, as is always the case when you encounter a film that you really enjoy, there are the inevitable parts where you wish they’d said this instead of that, or omitted that line, or why did he do x instead of y. For example, one scene has Bond receive his new weapon in an open case from Q whilst they admire some of Turner’s work in the National Gallery. The National Gallery which, oddly enough, has cameras covering every single part of the public space and security warders on constant patrol around no more than two or three rooms each. It doesn’t take MI6’s finest to work out this is not really the best place for the handing over of live arms and a nice chit chat to go along with it (although the moment does go well with the last scene the pair of them, Craig and Ben Whishaw, shared onscreen together in ‘Layer Cake’ 04). These things are though consistent with the other two instalments of the new Bond franchise. If you watch the keys Bond presses to insert the password for the money in ‘Casino Royale’ you’ll notice they do in fact not match what he later states the password to be. The Red Dragon, upon realising this, figured Bond was one step ahead of the game…

Spoiler alert!

To go into the specifics of Skyfall in a little more detail, the opening of the film has a few things that could have been tweaked. Like the way bond states he’s trying to stop the downed agent’s bleeding, and all he does is dab his wound with a grotty looking cloth. Then when Moneypenny shoots him, she has ample time to let off another round with that rather deadly looking weapon she’s holding and actually hit the now sitting duck bad guy. Probably best, as they acknowledge, she takes up an office job afterwards. These details make the feel of the opening sequence, although the stunts are good and it is actually Daniel Craig on the train travelling at fifty miles an hour, more like an episode of ‘Spooks’ than a big budget film. Having said that, The Red Dragon was thinking as Bond faces the bad guy in the forklift truck ‘O yeah, like he wouldn’t get shot through the glass’, and then he does. Great!

They are running through the same streets and along the same rooftops in Istanbul as Maggie Grace and co do in ‘Taken 2’ (12), which is interesting. If I’m not mistaken Clive Owen appeared on them too in ‘The International’ (09), interesting if one influenced the other, or if Turkey has realised a good business opportunity. Unfortunately, there are shadows of Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy here, as there are in many films now. This is especially noticeable with the music as they are besieged in Skyfall at the end, but also the concept of the criminal mastermind who plans to be captured for some greater purpose (also with Loki in the ‘The Avengers’ 12), and the explosives under the city, though ‘The Dark Knight Rises’ would probably have been filming around the same time as ‘Skyfall’. It’s not a major complaint, enough of the rest is completely original.

For The Red Dragon, the feeling that this film was a little special didn’t really begin until the fight sequence with the lights of Shanghai’s advertising in the background, a poetic death to the skilled enemy assassin. From then on in it really got interesting. Even with the first face to face scene with the next Bond girl soon to bite the dust. Said Bond girl’s acting caliber seemed to be in question, until you realise there is a lot more going on, that feeling of ‘That’s rubbish…O, I see…’, almost fooling the viewer, is a very effective trick. Speaking of which, could he not have done all his heroics before Javier Bardem shoots her?!  Similarly, surely with some trusted people at MI6 clued up to Bond’s plan at the end they could have sent some reinforcements! ‘It’s OK, there’s a shotgun up there and a Scotsman, more than enough for some terrorists!’.

The Red Dragon would very much like to know if that was a real, venomous scorpion on Bond’s arm when he’s busy becoming an alcoholic and unnamed substance abuser. Whilst Daniel Craig was a real action man on the set (which really adds depth to the film when you realise it’s actually him you’re seeing doing the stunts), Havier Bardem has stated that he is a “big believer in stunt doubles”, I wonder if prior to ‘No Country for Old Men’ he could have envisioned himself as a Bond villain, as famously the Cohen brothers had to work hard to convince him he could play the bad guy, in what would later become his Oscar winning role.

For The Red Dragon, what is by far the most interesting part of this film though, and one reason it has scored so highly, is the fact that James Bond’s heritage is definitively shown to be Scottish! This gets a massive thumbs up from The Red Dragon. Earlier in the film, it did jar slightly when there was a reference to Britain and then very quickly afterward when Bond is playing word associations he gives ‘England’ as his response to country. There seemed to be a hint of double standards going on. However, at the same time his home of Skyfall is mentioned. So, is it perhaps that as a spy he has eradicated his own personal story, and so his claim to be English is to throw anyone else off the scent of his true backstory? Or does he, the character, want to forget his own childhood and its trauma, and prefers to think of himself as English? We aren’t given enough details to tell.

We see the graves of his mother and father who we know from the novels, and from previously in the film franchise, were Swiss and Scottish respectively – this lineage was introduced in the novels by Fleming as a nod to Sean Connery’s interpretation of the Bond character in ‘Dr .No’ (62), and Fleming mentioned once in a magazine article that Bond was born in Glencoe, Scotland, the site of an infamous massacre in Scottish history, and where several of the scenes in the film were shot. The specific house of ‘Skyfall’ however, is new. It may be a reference to the home Fleming’s family owned in the Scottish highlands (both his father and grandfather were Scottish, from Fife and Dundee respectively) but where previous film and novelised tales of his early years differ, here we learn he grew up there, in what appears to be an ancestral home. He also lets us know he always hated the place when he burns it, but we don’t know why. It seems odd, growing up there he can’t have known many other places so why hate it so much? Was he abused? Did he have a hand in the deaths of his parents?! Expect to see this looked at in more detail in future instalments with Daniel Craig as Bond.

It is curious to consider the timing of this introduction to the legend of James Bond. Before the next film is released, the referendum for Scottish independence will have taken place. Is this inclusion in the story linked to the politics of the day? His reference to England also means he can continue to represent England should Scotland vote to go her own way, and his dual Scottish/English background may be placed as a sort of cinematic cement on the fabric of the United Kingdom. Political annalists are expecting the biggest independence voting demographic to be the ‘Braveheart’ (95) generation, those who were growing up when the film was released, underpinning the emotive power of cinema and the age old adage ‘life imitates art’. After all, an integral part of the franchise is that 007 is a British agent (as an update to this, on the weekend before the referendum the filming schedule for the next Bond film was released – due to begin December 6 2014. Also Finland’s independence day, incidentally. RD 2.12.14). It may be that the people behind this multi-billion dollar (circa twelve with inflation taken into consideration) institution would consider a break up of the country he represents as a negative…

In any case, the revelation of more of Bond’s formative years, regardless of the exact details, adds a lot to the film, and to the depth of the character that will continue to be depicted over the next two films. Eight more films down the line, the Daniel Craig years may be remembered as the most definitive guide as to the fleshed out character of Mr Bond. A guiding template of his past, to better shape his future.

On the Road  (2012)    17/100

Rating :   17/100                                                                     124 Min        15

I’m not sure, but maybe, just maybe, this is one of the worst films ever made. Walter Salles’ interpretation of Jack Kerouac’s ‘On the Road’ is much more like a porno with various scenes of drug taking thrown in than anything close to good storytelling. It begins by trying to be way, way too cool, with both Sam Riley and Garrett Hedlund’s accents (who play Sal Paradise and Dean Moriarty respectively, and along with Kristen Stewart form the story’s main menage a trois) being heavily affected and theatrical, as if they’ve been instructed to make love to themselves while they talk, and several examples of shaky cam overuse. The characters all seem to be lacking any of the innate backstage fear of humanity, they all love one another immediately and with large degrees of pretentious self gratuity.

The story meanders aimlessly, as do the characters – screwing one another vicariously and partaking in all sorts of drug aided threesome activities. To the point where there is no real story, where the audience may find themselves so disaffected by the silhouettes of characters as to lose any real interest in what happens to them, and perhaps wonder why anyone would want anything to do with them in the first place. Then, it simply becomes a parade of pointlessness interspersed with erotica in order to keep the audience’s attention, which is the lowest form of filmmaking. It was the wrong director for this film. The Brazilian director’s most famous film prior to this was ‘The Motorcycle Diaries’ (04), telling the story of a young Che Guevara as he travelled around South America on a beat up old motorcycle with his friend, trying to eventually reach a leper colony to gain medical experience. Here, he is interpreting the most defining work of the ‘beat generation’ of the post war period, a work that is autobiographical (Sal Paradise is Jack Kerouac) and focused on one man and his friend’s search for meaning and definition, travelling across America and flying in the face of conventional culture as they did so. As a culture of fear spread across America in the wake of the cold war, this search for freedom and identity versus traditional American family values resonated and the work became a landmark identifier for a generation, eventually transmogrifying into the anti-military counter culture of the hippie revolution in the 1960s.

One can imagine Walter Salles growing up as a student, a ubiquitous poster of Che Guevara on his wall, experimenting with pot and romanticising about the 50s. However, he has pretty much nothing in common with the characters he loves so much. He comes from money, lots of money, in fact his father was the head of one of the most powerful banks in the whole of South America. He has stated he spent five years researching this film. He really has to elaborate on that. It sounds like nonsense, but he did actually travel the same route as Paradise does in the novel, and made a documentary about it along the way. However, Kerouac and his pals were completely flat out broke, living on the edge, clueless about how their lives would find meaning and value, and indeed how they would even like them to turn out. Salles had no financial worries, had a very clear idea of what he was trying to achieve, and was already a success in his field. His trip becomes then a nice holiday, a completely, fundamentally different experience from Kerouac and co. This difference transfers directly into the film and its contrast with the novel.

They also cast the wrong men for the lead roles. Kristen Stewart fits her role perfectly (no comment on why that might be) and the film is successful in delivering a sense of sexual frisson throughout, together with scenes that the film will be remembered for, and that are guaranteed to induce some involuntary displays of discomfort/awkwardness in cinema audiences. Do not go and see this with family. Though, if you’re female, watching it with two males for company might be interesting…

It’s also painfully long, 124 mins, but it feels more like four hours.


Quotes

‘Can I watch you guys screw?’   Kristen Stewart/MaryLou