Tag Archives: Movies

I Origins  (2014)    74/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   74/100                                                                     106 Min        15

This is hardly the first time I’ve said this, nor is it likely to be the last, but the trailer for this spoils a major element of the film, essentially telling us what’s going to happen to a central character, which is a real shame although the film nevertheless manages to be both intriguing and thought provoking. Ian (Michael Pitt) and Karen (Brit Marling) are two young scientists investigating the biological evolution of the eye, when Pitt falls in love with the artistic and free spirited Sofi (Astrid Bergès-Frisbey) who sparks not only romance but also provides the kindling that sheds a light on a more spiritual outlook on life than the somewhat cold rigour Ian is used to. Ultimately, this leads them to examine in detail the old adage of the eye being the window to the soul as they question whether the seemingly random colour pattern of our irises may have a deeper significance.

This has a lot in common with the likes of ‘Transcendence‘ and ‘Lucy‘ where we have a somewhat far fetched story, but one that has enough tangents with real possibles that it remains interesting and presents questions that the audience can go off and try to research answers to if they feel so inclined – here though the focus is on the story and characters, rather than special effects as in the other two films. It’s the old clash of science and philosophy and it’s always fascinating to consider how much one has influenced and penetrated the other and yet the amount we ‘know’ in a scientific sense is always dwarfed by that which we have no answers to, the quintessential questions of life and death. The classic example of debunking astrology as nonsense, and yet science tells us the atoms in our bodies were once burning away at the hearts of stars somewhere in the universe and so that idea of some kind of cosmic interconnectivity is not as nonsensical as it first seems (I’m not saying I believe in astrology I should point out, although the Chinese have a better system than the Zodiac anyway, as they have a DRAGON in it).

The film is written and directed by Mike Cahill, who worked with Marling before on ‘Another Earth’ (11) and as with that film there are shades of pretension that it could have done without. Such as Karen dramatically writing screeds of information on the window panes instead of just using paper like a normal person, and Ian smoking throughout many scenes in the first half of the movie – since smoking makes thousands of people every year go blind it seems very unlikely a studious eye researcher and biologist would take it up in this day and age. Pretentious. They also go on a trip to India, but really this is to drive the story forward rather than being justified by the statistics they use – they could easily have sought the proof they were after closer to home. Some more ropey science together with these errors doesn’t detract too much from the story overall so long as you find the central hook conceptually interesting to begin with.

What We Did on Our Holiday  (2014)    77/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   77/100                                                                       95 Min        12A

Based on the successful TV show ‘Outnumbered’, which began in 2007 and aired its final episode this year, writers and directors Andy Hamilton and Guy Jenkin have adapted their take on dysfunctional family life for the big screen, as we follow the comedic and fundamental misadventure of the McLeods visiting their patriarchal roots in the highlands of Scotland for their summer vacation. Ad-libbing featured prominently in the show (the adults having scripted lines and the kids just being handed rough notes on the day) and it certainly looks like they have kept true to this spirit as the three young children (played by Emilia Jones, Bobby Smalldridge and Harriet Turnbull) easily steal the show, especially the youngest Jess (Turnbull), as we watch them behave in a believably childlike way but also show signs of maturity and understanding that seem to exceed those of their bickering and possibly soon to be divorced parents (David Tenant and Rosamund Pike). Billy Connolly plays the terminally sick grandfather and he is his usual wonderful self – he was also recently on tour in Scotland and performed solo on stage for two and a half hours without a single break – impressive for anyone never mind someone in their early seventies with advanced Parkinson’s, something which he relished making fun of too. There’s a nice warmth to this film and, most importantly, it is genuinely very funny, and it ought to be a reasonably safe bet to please the entire family with.

The Riot Club  (2014)    68/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   68/100                                                                     107 Min        15

A vile film brimming with vile characters, but a good one nevertheless. Laura Wade adapts her own 2010 play ‘Posh’ for the big screen and together with director Lone Sherfig (‘An Education’ 09, ‘One Day’ 11) weaves a tale of toffy nosed excess amongst an elitist society of prigs at Oxford university, the titular Riot Club, almost certainly based on the real life Bullingdon Club (which the current British Prime Minister, David Cameron, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, were both members of). We enter the main story at the same time as the two central characters do, with Miles (Max Irons) and Alistair (Sam Claflin) beginning their time at uni and quickly coming to the attention of the established RC who only recruit the very crème de la crème of the males on campus, effectively sourcing the best looking and most affluent available. Alistair is arrogant, snooty, calculating, evil and essentially everything you imagine an upper class snob would aspire to be like, contrasting with Miles who is naïve and excited at being singled out for membership but is essentially good at heart, something which also garners him the amorous attentions of the delectable Lauren (Holliday Granger).

We see a little of their very laddish exploits, which largely seem repugnant more than anything else (pretty sure if I joined a group and they broke into my room, ransacked it and then spunked over my notes, that group’s membership would swiftly be reduced by at least one), and the potentially corruptive interplay of group dynamics predominantly rears its ugly head, but the staging of the film is mainly a direct extrapolation of its theatrical origin and politics frequently takes centre stage. Indeed, it is no surprise whatsoever that this was released the weekend after the Scottish independence referendum as the heart of the movie takes place in a restaurant where the group debauch themselves and consistently rub up against the Scottish proprietor (Gordon Brown), resulting in increasingly difficult scenes to watch.

Equally, the nationality of the landlord, who employs his daughter (Jessica Brown Findlay) and is shown to be fairly jovial and proud of his business, is quite deliberate as not only do the Riot Club espouse absolutely everything that we the Scots hate about the English, but they also represent everything the English hate about the English, and indeed everything the rest of the entire world hates about the English for that matter (indeed, whenever anyone from Scotland refers to the English in a negative context we mean these twats, not people from England generally. It’s important to make this distinction), stemming from this much ingrained marker of arrogance as a sort of national symbol – one that has long been the backbone of the money laden elite traditionally filling the halls of power in every walk of the British establishment, and still very much holding Westminster in thrall today.

The film has a modern day setting, which hammers home the point that it is still a current issue despite being somewhat associated with an aloof aristocracy of centuries past, and the film is well acted to the point that it may be difficult to shake off some of the character associations with the performers. A drama of blood privilege that highlights the lunacy of the gulf between the people that run Britain and the majority of the people that live in the country.

The Giver  (2014)    58/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   58/100                                                                       97 Min        12A

Bland, and almost self-defeatingly too simple, this may yet satisfy some of its intended early teenage audience, although it certainly pales in comparison with the much more adroit adaptations of other teen franchises like ‘The Hunger Games’ (2012) and ‘Divergent‘. Based on Lois Lowry’s hugely successful 1993 novel of the same name, which spawned three sequels and found its way onto the recommended reading list of many primary schools, expectations were understandably high for this relatively late translation to the big screen, especially considering the casting of acting goliaths Meryl Streep and Jeff Bridges – although Streep’s role is almost identical to Kate Winslet’s in Divergent, in that she plays the female authoritarian at the helm of a dystopian future human civilisation and her actual screen time is very limited.

Bridges plays the ageing and indeed retiring ‘Giver’ in this society, whose role had been to experience human emotion, vitality and creativity in all its wonder and devilry in a community where the other humans do not experience any of what we would take for granted – rather, theirs is the loss of individual identity for the gain of being part of a cohesive unit. Also operating as a retainer of the memories of mankind, the Giver’s role is partly to just exist in case the others should require access to the wisdom he is a custodian of and so he has a unique role to play in their world, yet it is one also fraught with peril and secrecy and the time has come for the passing of the torch onto a younger candidate – Jonas (Brenton Thwaites), who must come to deal with the socially isolating nature of the work chosen for him by the state, and also contrast what he learns with the neutered bliss that everyone else seems to think they are living in – then there’s the mystery of what happened to the previous hopeful for the job, and what could lie beyond the edges of their known world … (they live in isolation in the clouds, much like on the tepui of southern Venezuela)

Visually, seasoned director Phillip Noyce (‘The Quiet American’ 02, ‘Rabbit-Proof Fence’ 02, ‘Salt’ 10) has decided to show us the world as Jonas initially sees it, so a huge early section of the film is in black and white before Jonas experiences colour for the first time, and although there is a logic to the decision it isn’t great for the audience and will doubtless leave those unfamiliar with the plot thinking perhaps something has gone wrong with the screen. The story has so much potential scope and yet what the film delivers is entirely humdrum – the not in the least bit surprising conclusion trundles towards us with a number of ropey moments, chief amongst them what a baby is subjected to at one point and unreasonably survives, and it seems fair to say that the novel offers more than this does – when we see Taylor Swift appear as one of the secondary characters the priority for financial success over artistry seems clear. At times an easy distraction, but it certainly should have been something more than that.

Wish I Was Here  (2014)    0/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   0/100             COMPLETE INCINERATION            106 Min        15

The cloying title matches the substance of this entirely egocentric vanity project from ex Scrubs actor and smug twat Zach Braff, for whom this is his second time directing a feature film after 2004’s ‘Garden State’ although Braff is probably more famous for beating up a twelve year old kid the following year after his mates set him up for Ashton Kutcher’s ‘Punk’d’ and he didn’t exactly take it in the right spirit. Co-writing this with his brother and casting himself in the leading role he plays, wouldn’t you know it, one of two brothers – a struggling actor full of questions as to the meaning of his life as his father (Mandy Patinkin) is diagnosed with terminal illness and his wife (Kate Hudson) operates as the primary bread winner. We read from this then a large degree of autobiography, and when we couple that with the fact Braff funded the film via Kickstarter it’s difficult not to see this as someone asking the public to pay for him to make a film about how hard his life is, and it is equally difficult to sympathise with actor (Scrubs wasn’t exactly a minor success) or character as in the grand scheme of things the family portrayed are far from living on the bread line.

Braff has no children in real life, and this would explain the quite hopeless father figure he presents onscreen – which is partly a failed attempt to generate comedy, but allowing his young son to sleep with a charged power tool under his pillow and being unable to resist snide dope references in front of the kids make it all but impossible to see anything other than the immaturity of the filmmaker at the fore rather than any pretence at drama or storytelling. A fudge to drive events sees one of Hudon’s work colleagues make a few creepy comments to her, personifying his male member, but when she tells her husband later she describes it in such a way that gives the concrete impression he whipped it out and pestered her with it – leading to consequences which effectively destroy the rest of this guy’s life, and the audience are supposed to think this is great and justified. Josh Gad plays the brother and both he and Hudson are punching way, way below their weight here  (in fact the role of the wife is so awful it should really have gone to someone still in drama school) as we are continually bombarded with clichéd garbage and even some CGI sci-fi daydreams, where Braff is the hero, that are shoddy and inflated enough to leave you in desperate want of a paper bag to vomit into – Patinkin as the father is the only thing of any merit at all in the entire film. Sometimes there’s a good reason the studios say no to a project, and this is a prime example of how not to go about making the transition from acting to directing.

A Walk Among the Tombstones  (2014)    66/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   66/100                                                                     114 Min        15

Gestating for many years, Lawrence Block’s 1992 novel finally reaches the big screen with Liam Neeson as central character Matthew Scudder, a recovering alcoholic operating as a private detective some years after deciding to leave the NYPD. Neeson was apparently Block’s top choice for the role (Harrison Ford was reportedly attached to the project at one point) and it’s easy to see why, with a string of very successful ‘Liam Neeson versus’ films in his recent back catalogue, Non-Stop being the most recent example, and this time he’s up against COMPLETE SCUMBAGS in the guise of crooks that abduct girls and collect the ransom money but then butcher their captives anyway, so there is a somewhat gleeful element of – ‘Liam Neeson is on your case, you are totally fucked’.

The film opens very strongly, with a visceral scene of violence that fits completely the rather macabre title and sets up what is to follow very promisingly indeed. As the mystery unfolds it’s easy to get caught up in it, although unfortunately it never again reaches the intensity of the opening ten minutes. Come the end, it feels like the story is clutching at straws – trying to remain interesting whilst delivering something original, but only really succeeding at very average padding to round the film off with. Part of the problem is it begins with a very Dirty Harry esque character who then goes on a redemptive arc, which may be realistic, considerate and even gritty in its own right, but it’s also a little tedious when the narrative is trying to create scenarios to then justify the retribution or violence that the character is trying to avoid. Good enough to merit future adaptations of Block’s work though (Jeff Bridges previously played Scudder in ‘8 Million Ways to Die’, back in 1986), and a decent directorial effort from Scott Frank, better known for his work on screenplays, such as ‘Malice’ 93, ‘Out of Sight’ 98, ‘Minority Report’ 02 and The Wolverine. Also with Dan Stevens and David Harbour.

Pride  (2014)    76/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   76/100                                                                     120 Min        15

A fantastic, moving and historically fascinating British drama chronicling the gay community of London’s attempt to help the Welsh miners picketing in 1984 as part of the larger nation-wide miner’s strike, one which encapsulated a major attack on the Thatcher government of the day and whose outcome would affect the fabric of British commerce forevermore. The community see a commonality between their struggle for the promotion of gay rights and the fight that the miners are engaged in, and when their good intentions are originally rebuffed they decide to take their money direct to the source – rural Wales, where not everyone is quite as liberal and pleased to see them as they would have hoped.

Lots of good performances from the likes of Dominic West, Bill Nighy and Imelda Staunton, and a particularly strong one from Ben Schnetzer playing the leader of the London group whose single minded determination drives forth the entire narrative. The story also introduces some of the earliest diagnosed British victims of HIV, and the contrast between what happens to the people it mentions is worthy of a film in its own right. This is one of the best treatments of inclusivity and equality in recent memory, with great moments like when one of the local Welsh girls breaks out into song in a crowded hall and everyone feels compelled to join in, as well as a fascinating political backdrop that certainly has strong echoes with the Tory government in power now, as well as interesting titbits of information, like how the same seam of coal runs along the Atlantic connecting Wales, Spain and North America.

Love, Rosie  (2014)    70/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   70/100                                                                     102 Min        15

No one could have been more surprised than me to discover this is actually a very solid film, detailing the travails of two friends who grow up together and fall in love – neither willing to bridge the dangerous chasm of potential romance and risk all by admitting it. Instead, they both hook up with randoms before making plans to go and study together overseas. Unfortunately, male random dastardly sticks a bun in Rosie’s oven, throwing something more substantial than a spanner in the works for the star-crossed lovers.

Chronicling events for the pair over the next decade or so, this in many respects tells the same story as ‘One Day’ (11) but not only is it miles better, it’s also based on Cecelia Ahern’s second novel ‘Where Rainbows End’ (renamed ‘Love, Rosie’ for the States – Ahern’s debut novel was the already immortalised on film ‘PS, I Love You’) which was published in 2004 and thus predates David Nicholls’ 2009 novel One Day. There are a few forgiveable silly moments here, but what really sells the film is the strength of the two leads – namely Lily Collins as Rosie Dunne and Sam Claflin as Alex Stewart, both giving very sympathetic and engaging performances that had a number of people shedding tears in the audience, and for once I didn’t feel like laughing at them.

Magic in the Moonlight  (2014)    57/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   57/100                                                                       97 Min        12A

Woody Allen’s latest oddly bears a lot in common thematically with the short film ‘A Most Complex Form of Ventriloquism‘ (it’s not outwith the realm of possibility that he viewed the film and was influenced by it – I believe it played in at least one festival in the States), set as it is in the 1920’s and focusing on Colin Firth’s Stanley Crawford, a notable stage magician with an equally infamous acerbic wit and sarcastic/pessimistic view on life, who is requested by an old colleague (Simon McBurney) to attempt to debunk Emma Stone’s alarmingly adept and attractive young Sophie Baker, who seems in possession of the gift of second sight – but is she the real McCoy?

Unfortunately, we can tell very quickly how things will unfold and there is nothing especially meritorious about the inevitable and arguably unfounded romance between the leads that develops, as Sophie manages to squeeze out some youthful vitality and hope that there could be an afterlife from Stanley. Firth is a natural at playing the gentleman and Stone equally so the ebullient Sophie, but the wit Stanley displays is more akin to that which people politely get used to and ignore rather than laugh at directly or under their breath and as such the comedy element falls decidedly dead. If you are in any way familiar with Woody Allen then you can unfurl the plot in two seconds, and we see not only the familiar motives from his work that also drew him to that of Ingmar Bergman, such as his fear of and obsession with death (indeed, it is most likely Bergman’s 1958 classic ‘The Magician’ played a role in coming up with this film), but also perhaps less muted shades of his own personal life as we see an older and successful male become victoriously infatuated with a much younger female. The set design and costumes are wonderful, but the lacking human connection and story leave the whole thing feeling stilted, like a sad ornament overly polished out of sheer boredom.

Fury  (2014)    54/100

Posted on by
Reply

Rating :   54/100                                                                     134 Min        15

When a film purports itself to be ‘The most realistic war film ever’ it had better be able to put its money where its mouth is, and alas this could quite easily qualify as the one of the most UNREALISTIC war films of all time. Screenwriter and director David Ayer is one of the most childish writers working in Hollywood today, and his obsession with nonsensical violence evinced by his previous films ‘Sabotage‘ and ‘End of Watch‘ continues – in a normal film a character might open a box and find a new clue, or something that sparks an emotional trigger for them and a moment of reflection, in a David Ayer film that box is guaranteed to contain not only pictures of a family member skull fucking genetically modified babies but also pieces of remaining flesh tanned for personal use. He can get away with this to an extent with a war film and the associated potential for real and visceral horror, but when we see the inside of a tank at the beginning of the film and the remains of someone’s face on the metal, looking like a fried egg, we realise he just can’t help himself.

Not to say that’s necessarily unrealistic, rather unlikely granted, but it is the following which render the film silly – 1) The soldiers do not fire weapons, they fire lasers. I kid you not, green laser fire (red for the Allies) issues forth from the German troops looking for all the world like a scene from Star Wars (ironically, this is to show the use of tracer fire which helped gunners and infantry adjust their aim and was certainly used extensively by both sides in the war, it’s just been taken to a daft extreme here). 2) The tactics are at best dubious. We see three tanks versus one and the three of them just bunch together instead of trying to use both flanks. 3) Reason number 2 is taken to the point of lunacy as (this is a spoiler so you might want to jump to the next paragraph, but it was also used as the main selling point in the trailer if you’ve seen it – another thing they shouldn’t have done) we watch Brad Pitt opt for a stand-off between his immobilised single tank versus several hundred SS troops. During this event daytime becomes night in less than about forty seconds and Pitt and his four strong crew have ample time to leave and fight another day, or indeed come up with a better plan, but they all decide to stay largely because it is Brad Pitt saying they should and they are all afraid of him. It’s not heroic, or exciting – IT’S JUST FUCKING STUPID. I also have a large doubt over whether or not that tank has a 360 degree firing arc with its machine guns when the hatch is down, I rather suspect it doesn’t making the decision even worse.

The fictional story takes place in Germany toward the end of the Second World War with the very beleaguered and war weary crew of the tank ‘Fury’ receiving a new greenhorn gunner (Logan Lerman) who has never even been inside a tank before which enrages them all, and they proceed to slap him around the head at every opportunity. Lerman actually does the best out of everyone in this film for managing to react/act to the treatment he gets appropriately for his character – as a performer it can’t have been easy to temper his responses to the right level, and he consistently delivers on what is the core character arc of the story as he bonds with Pitt’s veteran whose soul has been ravaged by violence, death and stress to the dangerous brink of perhaps losing sight of himself completely. Pitt does a reasonable job of anchoring the piece but his performance is hampered by ridiculous hero worship from Ayer as well as having more than a few ropey lines of dialogue to try and do something meaningful with.

It is within the work of the wardrobe and art direction departments that a very high level of authenticity has been achieved – it looks fantastic (laser shows aside) and the tanks used were real ones from museums and collectors which are more or less the correct models for the time. The rest of the crew are played by Shia LaBeouf, Michael Peña and Jon Bernthal and they had to live in the tank for a week together before shooting began (LaBeouf reportedly refused to wash himself to help achieve a new level of ‘realism’. I’m surprised nobody fired real bullets at him too). Despite the egregious setbacks there is still a definite satisfaction to be gained from some of the action scenes, and here Ayer the director definitely outstrips Ayer the writer – it’s really the ludicrous and utterly forced central decision by the characters and the ensuing battle that destroys the credibility of the entire film.