Tag Archives: M

Mama  (2013)    67/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   67/100                                                                     100 Min        15

Decent horror film with a few moments of palpable fear, exec produced by Guillermo del Toro (‘Pan’s Labyrinth’, ‘Hellboy’) after seeing director Andres Muschietti’s Spanish language short film of the same name. The eponymous mama appears in traditional tattered rags and multi-flex atrophied limbs, whereupon she decides to become the protector of two young girls, which is all well and good to begin with but eventually leads to relationship problems with other family members, and some much needed counselling. Many clichés, but also various successful attempts to avoid cliché – we end up with the buxom female (in this instance a convincingly gothed up Jessica Chastain) as the central adult focus, with ample cleavage as her most visible weapon, but as she avoids monstrous devourment (apparently, despite The Red Dragon using this for years, this is not a real word. It has to start somewhere though…) we are spared endless pointless chases, the ghost pretty much just gets on with it when it can be bothered, or rather when it is bothered. One of the hand drawn pictures in the girl’s bedroom is pretty scary, featuring some sort of creepy zombified Goofy. Hmm, yes try not to look at that actually (you can see it above).

Movie 43  (2013)    57/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   57/100                                                                       90 Min        15

A highly unusual film, featuring a stellar cast in a series of gross-out comedy sketches. To my knowledge there isn’t anything else quite like this, especially not with the sheer number of stars in it – something that has possibly lent the film its title. Four years in the making, and with different directors (including Elizabeth Banks, James Gunn and Brett Ratner) for each skit, the movie is given structure by a group of kids searching the internet for the fabled ‘Movie 43’, whereupon they encounter each of the different episodes. The American version of the film has this framework removed entirely, and in its place is a sketch with Dennis Quaid trying to pitch his ideas for a movie to exec Greg Kinnear, and each idea becomes one of the sketches in the film.

If gross-out comedy is something you religiously try to avoid, then there is nothing here that would merit a change of heart. If you’re not completely put off by the theme, then you will probably find at least something to have a decent laugh at. It’s the sort of film where you are unlikely to be tickled by most of it, but every segment will have a few different people in the audience in hysterics, possibly enhanced somewhat by the knowledge no one else around them is actually laughing. Perhaps most deserving of a chuckle if it’s a full house and you’re with your friends, including the ones that will endure the whole film and yet stoically refuse to laugh at any point as a matter of principal.

It’s the brain child of Peter Farrelly, one half of the Farrelly brothers (Bobby being the other), the duo behind ‘Me, Myself and Irene’ (2000), ‘There’s something about Mary’ (98) and ‘Dumb and Dumber’ (94), which should give you some indication as to the level of humour. The sketches have been assembled in the right order, with the weakest ones in the middle, though be sure to stay through the credits for the last one ‘Beezel’, a titular character who proves to be one of the best and most memorable in the whole film (it’s the part directed by Gunn) … Also, look out for the son who has to try and act not turned on by his mother, Naomie Watts, coming on to him. Difficult.

If nothing else the film does lend itself to a pretty awesome quiz question, albeit one difficult to truncate…

P.S. The pic above is of Gerard Butler as a leprechaun. Obviously.

Midnight’s Children  (2012)    3/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   3/100                                                                       146 Min        12A

Based on his novel and produced, narrated, and written by Salman Rushdie, this fairly epic in length and scope tale follows the woes and fortunes of children born on the stroke of midnight as India gained her independence from the United Kingdom. This historical event occurred on the 15th August 1947, and on the preceding day the independent Muslim states of East and West Pakistan were created, with predominantly Hindu and Sikh India atwixt the two, all from territory previously controlled by the British. Thus the birth of these children occurs at a unique moment in history, and the story revolves around a special spiritual significance given to their inception.

Which is all fine and well. The film begins in a traditional way, telling the back story of the narrator’s family (he is himself one of these children) and it’s quite a nice, gentle introduction. Then, however, one of the secondary characters does something so horrendously evil, with so little reasoning behind it and, as we will come to learn, so hopelessly out of character, that a palpable break in the story is created. As we realise this evil deed was pure narrative artifice, the break becomes an ever increasing abyss between the audience and the whims of the storyteller, as he introduces ever increasing layers of whimsy and mysticism surrounding the birth of midnight’s children. Their arrival on the earthly plane at the time of India and Pakistan’s new dawn invites legitimate questions over what the author is trying to say, what the overall message may be, or whether or not there are simply several undercurrents all with some sort of legitimacy of their own. As the story continues to degenerate into an almost Bollywood version of ‘Heroes’, we realise that it’s just complete nonsense.

The tale would have been much more effective, not to mention meaningful, with the simple evisceration of all the spiritual mumbo-jumbo and a focus on the real gritty and fascinating history. The complete and dismal failure of the movie is by far and away the fault of Salman Rushdie himself, although the filmmaking does begin to falter and let itself down in the last third as well, which doesn’t help. A few points for simply illustrating some of the history, though complaints have been raised over the depiction of Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi, and it will be interesting to see how it’s received in India upon its general release there later this year. A Canadian/British movie, filmed in Sri Lanka under a false title to avoid protests from extreme parties in both India and Pakistan, the novel it’s based on won several prestigious accolades, one can only assume most of its content was lost in translation.

Melinda and Melinda  (2004)    59/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   59/100                                                                       99 Min        12A

Woody Allen begins his picture with a discussion of whether or not life is essentially comedic or tragic. This occurs as a conversation between friends having drinks, and the point is made that it perhaps simply depends on one’s point of view. The director then illustrates this through the rest of the film by telling one story in two different ways, each with the central character of Melinda (played by Radha Mitchell).

It’s an interesting point. How often do we see in romantic comedies fairly tragic events being glossed over – perhaps using comedy to alleviate circumstance is a wonderful thing, thus the phrase ‘you have to laugh don’t you?’. Unfortunately for the sake of the film, the two stories have parallels but are actually quite different from each other, somewhat defeating the purpose of the exercise. The tragic storyline is most definitely more tragic than the comedic one. Some of the technical ploys stay true to the purpose, the use of music telling us to be in a good mood, the different cinematography to put a slightly glossier sheen on the comedic story etc. But the main flaw is too large, though the individual stories do hold the viewer’s attention for the most part.

Midnight Express  (1978)    74/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :  74/100                                                                      121 Min        18

Possibly Alan Parker’s most famous film, the true story of William Hayes who tries to smuggle some hashish for his friends back home in the States from Turkey in 1970 and, well, he doesn’t make it. The screenplay won Oliver Stone an Oscar for 1978 and for the first half the film holds your interest whilst remaining nothing special. There’s even a decidedly odd homoerotic moment that stands out completely askew from the rest of the narrative as Parker fumbles his opportunity to show the gay relationship that Hayes actually did engage with, but throughout the film the Turkish characters and Parker’s decision not to translate what they are saying proves to be one of the more interesting elements. It helps create the sense of complete alienation that the main character feels, and each of the Turkish actors seem to have so much individual character of their own it’s almost like a sci-fi (Stone has since apologised for his overwhelmingly negative depiction of all the Turks in the film). The use of sound, particularly of a heart racing, works quite well here too.

Prison films are a staple of cinema and sadly how good they are can sometimes be marked by how harrowing and brutal the portrayal of the experience, as well as how much we identify with the character’s struggle. ‘The Shawshank Redemption’ (94) regularly and deservedly features on many people’s ‘best films ever’ list, but worth also checking out is the classic ‘Kiss of the Spider Woman’ (85) and the recent British film ‘Offender’ (12). Here there is no disappointment in the drama stakes as the hellish downfall of reality for the main character continues to gather pace. Brad Davis plays the lead, with Randy Quaid and John Hurt for company. A fairly shocking insight into the Turkish legal system of the 70’s, a country that, prior to the credit crunch of 2007 and the resultant financial crisis, was desperate to join the European Union and was repeatedly met with concerns over not just its geographical position straddling the political divide between Europe and the Middle East, but also over its constant alleged, and widespread, human rights abuses.