|
FILM REVIEWS
|
PADDINGTON
Bear witness – this is how you bring a childhood classic to the screen
“No bears were harmed in the making of this film”, read the closing credits of Paddington.
As funny as this may be, nothing could accurately resume the film better.
Everyone (don’t lie) was trepidatious… Paddington seemed like it was going to be yet another shameless and creatively barren attempt at updating a beloved literary figure, a CGI revamp that would result in the tarnishing of a childhood darling. After all, there was precedent: Garfield, Thunderbirds, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Postman Pat… All have fallen to this updating trend and had failed to rekindle any sparks or enthusiasm.
Additionally, Colin Firth, who was originally cast to voice Michael Bond’s creation, walked away from the project only a few months before the release date…
Cautioned seemed warranted.
However, against all odds, Paddington is fantastic.
Paddington tells the tale of how the titular ursine from darkest Peru (now voiced with brio by Ben Whishaw) ends up in London and tries to find a home. He has been brought up on marmalade and idealised notions of British manners. Through a series of unfortunate events, our hero finds himself on a cargo ship and ultimately alone in Paddington train station. There, he quickly observes that, unlike what he’d been told, “hardly anyone wears a hat or says hello”…
His luck serendipitously changes for the better when he encounters the Brown family. Kind-hearted Mrs. Brown (Sally Hawkins) and her son Jonathan (Samuel Joslin) both warm to the bear and, against the hesitant wishes of the uptight Mr. Brown (Hugh Bonneville) and the easily embarrassed Judy (Madeleine Harris), bring the bear back home. Of course, things don’t go swimmingly: Paddington is clumsy and his antics incur the wrath of nosy neighbour Mr. Curry (Peter Capaldi) and the interest of taxidermy-hungry Cruella De Ville figure, Millicent (Nicole Kidman).
While the entire cast are all spot-on (special mention for Ben Whishaw’s boyish charms, which makes you wonder why he wasn’t the first choice for Paddington’s voice), Paddington’s main strength resides in the hands of writer / director Paul King. His previous work on The Mighty Boosh didn’t make him an obvious choice for this project. However, King and co-writer Hamish McColl have crafted a very witty script, which merges elements of slapstick, Monty Python-esque dialogue, some Wes Anderson whimsy (the dollhouse aesthetic in the Brown house) with some surprisingly poignant moments. Anyone who doesn’t have "something in their eye” for Paddington’s end revelation about where he considers ‘home’ is dead inside.
While the film is sweet-natured and family-friendly, there are copious amounts of sly references for older audience members and film lovers (MI-4 and Indiana Jones are but two of the many winked at). Also, while Paddington’s version of West London is just as Disneyfied as Amelie’s Paris was, this ode to acceptance doesn’t forget to subtly remind the viewer of Bond’s original story, with nods towards the child evacuees with labels around their necks during WWII… The script cleverly allows these moments to shine through, making the film terrific fun for children and a funny yet resonant parable about immigration and the failings of xenophobia for older viewers.
From start to finish, Paddington is cheeky and cheesy in the right doses and manages to be a touching modernization of the beloved children’s character. It is full of heart and the equivalent of a festive, fire-smouldering hug.
“No bears were harmed during the making of this film.” Indeed not. However, one bear with a worrying marmalade habit was successfully brought to life for the first time on the big screen. More please.
- D - 10/12/14
WHITE GOD
(FEHER ISTEN)
Planet of the Pooches
Lili and Hagen are the best of friends and quite inseparable.
However, things get complicated when Lili has to go live with her father who dislikes Hagen and manages to separate the two friends.
Despite looking for Hagen, life goes on for Lili as she develops a crush for a lad she meets during band practice.
Things are different for Hagen: he is lost without Lili and begins a downward spiral that leads him to the murky depths of Budapest’s criminal world. He ends up sold into slavery, beaten and trained to be a clandestine fighter.
Despite his successful attempts to escape from the clutch of his captors, he is caught and tossed behind bars. Nearing death’s door, he manages to rouse up the other prisoners and ignite a somewhat revolutionary spark. The hardened Hagen and the prisoners refuse the hand life has dealt them and break their shackles. They all begin to seek revenge on those they deem responsible, on those who are guilty of their sufferings, on all those who betrayed them.
This includes Lili.
Oh, by the way – Lili is a pre-pubescent girl and Hagen is a Labrador crossbreed.
This Hungarian film won the Un Certain Regard prize at Cannes this year (the dogs playing Hagen were also awarded the Palm Dog Award *) and has rightfully been selected as Hungary’s entry for the Best Foreign Language Film at next year’s Oscars.
Director Kornel Mundruczo has crafted a bizarre film that begins as a family melodrama and ends up as a cross between The Planet of the Apes and The Birds. Except this time, it’s as if we're rooting for the birds, who here, unlike in Hitchcock’s masterpiece, have a certain humanity about them…
The film criticizes our inhuman cruelty towards animals (some scenes echo certain fascist tendencies humanity has displayed throughout history), as well as satisfyingly functioning as a metaphor for racial oppression, a satire about the marginalization of minorities (Hagen is referred to as a “mongrel” and “half-breed” on many occasions) and a cautionary tale.
While you cannot ultimately detach the narrative from its potent allegorical content, the thematically pregnant White God never forgets to fully work as an often harrowing film about a dog trying to survive. The audience is engrossed in the canine protagonist’s plight and the performances given by the dogs are astonishing. Specifically, the two Labs playing Hagen (Luke and Body) manage to convey so much via the smallest of gestures and facial expressions. It’s both heartbreaking and very, very impressive.
As if that weren’t enough, the director gradually injects certain horror tropes as the film progresses, complemented by some expertly choreographed scenes featuring over 100 dogs and the excellent effects department, which managed to create scenes of barbaric violence. While fake, certain scenes of animal cruelty are genuinely upsetting. The ones showing beatings and illegal dog fights are particularly well shot in depicting brutality. Despite the redemptive feral uprising and the hopeful finale, dog lovers be warned: some scenes will have you squirming.
Many will not be able to look past elements of melodrama and fantasy littered throughout and will not recognize the film as a fable. In failing to do so, some spectators might perceive the film as too heavy-handed. However, the only thing White God suffers from is its length; it clocks in at nearly two hours when a shorter runtime could have been sufficient. This minor niggle aside, nothing prevents Mundruczo’s strange film from being a well-acted, often upsetting and always engaging experience.
White God opens and ends with poetry: a quote by Rilke to begin (“Everything terrible is something that needs our love.”) and a poetic Pied Piper-esque beat to finish. The film’s beautiful final shot, where humans and animals are quite literally on the same level, confirms it as the best kind of cinematic fable, a multi-layered one you won’t forget in a hurry… no matter how much you may want to.
- D - 03/12/14
* : Yes, The Palm Dog Award is a thing and has existed since 2001. The prize is awarded every year at the Cannes Film Festival. As its name suggests, it is given to the best performance by a canine / group of canines (live or animated). Past recipients include Dug from the Pixar film Up, Boss from Tamara Drewe, The Artist’s Uggie and Banjo / Poppy from Sightseers. As previously stated, Luke and Body received the award for White God. It is also worth mentioning that the closing credits of the film thank each dog by name and also states that no animals were harmed during the training or filming. Just in case some scenes got you worked up or scared…
THE HUNGER GAMES:
MOCKINGJAY PART 1
The odds are just about in its favour...
They did it for the pubic wizard with The Deathly Hallows split.
They did it for the angsty vampire and the dead-eyed teen who can’t seem to close her bloody mouth with Breaking Dawn Parts 1 & 2.
They’re about to do it for Veronica Roth’s Divergent saga, with their last instalment, Allegiant, scheduled to be cut in half.
The pattern is not so much emerging as it is sadly engrained…
Yes, it seems you just can’t escape the current cinematic trend when it comes to adapting a popular literary saga: the final book must be cut in half by the time it hits the silver screen.
Why, you ask? Well, many will have you believe it’s for storytelling purposes, because that last literary tome is just too damn meaty for one film… Some will affirm it’s to prolong the excitement and treat the cinema-goer with an additional big screen experience.
The truth is that Swedish one-hit wonder Meja warned us way back in 1998: it’s all ‘bout the money.
The studio execs have now mastered the dark art of bloating-up final stretches in order to milk the cash cow for all it’s worth. It is therefore no surprise that even the star pupil of the adaptation group has succumbed to it: Suzanne Collins’ Hunger Games trilogy has now become a cinematic quadrilogy, with the penultimate book, ‘Mockingjay’, getting the two-part split.
So, will The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Pt. 1 prove or disprove the money-grabbing trend?
The reveal of Effie's new hairdo had the rebels slightly shell-shocked...
Let’s cast our minds back to last year’s second chapter…
Katpiss Neverclean… I mean Katniss Everdeen (the first is actually Jennifer Lawrence’s nickname on set – don’t say I don’t spoil you with film trivia) has escaped the arena of the 75th Hunger Games and was on her sedated way to District 13. She now has to be convinced and groomed by District 13’s President Alma Coin (Julianne Moore) and Plutarch Heavensbee (the late, great Phillip Seymour Hoffman) to be the postergirl of the revolution. She needs to become the titular Mockingjay in order to unite the other Districts and overthrow the despotic President Snow (Donald Sutherland).
However, the PTSD-suffering Katniss is haunted by the fact her off-camera friend / on-camera boyfriend (relationship status: it’s complicated) Peeta is currently a prisoner of the Capitol. Her willingness to accept her role as the Joan of Arc-like “face of the revolution” might prove to be more of a headache than the rebels had hoped…
The recent Kim K pics had President Coin's pity...
This first instalment works in part thanks to the faithful tackling of certain themes present in the book and due to the acting chops of the saga’s main protagonists. Returning director Francis Lawrence, along with screenwriters Peter Craig and Danny Strong, have successfully made Mockingjay Pt. 1 a solid war film about the (ab)use of propaganda. It is a not-so-veiled political and media satire, with the inclusion of propaganda videos (“propos”). These work bleakly well within the context of the darkest instalment yet, where media serves war and cameras uncomfortably linger on corpses.
As for the players, Jennifer Lawrence remains as watchable as ever, Sam Claflin and Liam Hemsworth both rise to the challenge of having more material to work with, Mahershala Ali (playing Commander Boggs) is a welcome addition to the cast and Jena Malone’s screentime is sorely missed. The true standouts this time are the menacing Donald Sutherland and Julianne Moore. The latter makes her Hunger Games debut and is flawless in her portrayal of the icily cryptic President Coin.
However, the sad fact remains that for all its strengths, Mockingjay Pt. 1 doesn’t feel like a worthy successor to its far superior predecessor, Catching Fire. Regardless of the effectively built tension (especially in the excellent assault sequence near the end) and the claustrophobia created by this chapter’s grey colour palette, there is nothing here that justifies the two film split. Collins’ last novel, the most thematically pregnant book though it may be, could feasibly have been - and deserved to be - a 3-hour epic instead of a two-part finale with a watered down first act.
The ninja rebel look was all the rage in District 13
The Hunger Games: Mockingjay Pt. 1 is not a bad film, far from it. It just feels like necessary foundations, like the cinematic equivalent of a solid support act before the long-awaited headliner takes to the stage. The film is undeniably overstretched and one gets the impression it will only fully work when watching it back-to-back with Part 2. On its own however, this chapter sadly cements the fact that the two-part trend is a commercial fad that has nothing to do with improving the narrative and everything to do with bean counting.
A genuine pity, as the saga could have gone down in annals as one of the great trilogies… This film proves we’ll have to settle for a great but uneven quadrilogy.
Here’s hoping that Mockingjay Pt. 2 will satisfyingly complement this all-prologue-no-payoff third one, make up for that shoddy cliffhanger and shake off the pesky feeling that the franchise peeked last year. ETA November 2015 for Katniss’ final bow.
- D - 22/11/14
** PS: One thing that does not disappoint (and somewhat redeems the general impression of this third chapter) is Mockingjay Pt. 1’s soundtrack. Each Hunger Games film’s OST impresses and gets better each year, becoming a safe bet for soundtrack aficionados. This year’s compilation includes some terrific tracks from Lorde, CHVRCHES and The Chemical Brothers. Seek it out and make sure to skip that godawful Grace Jones track – you won’t regret it. **
INTERSTELLAR
2014: A Nolan Odyssey
SPOILER FREE…
THAT BEING SAID, IF YOU WANT THE FULL INTERSTELLAR EXPERIENCE,
BEST TO READ THIS AFTER HAVING SEEN IT
(PLEASE FIND SECOND-VIEWING UPDATE AT THE END OF THE ORIGINAL REVIEW)
THAT BEING SAID, IF YOU WANT THE FULL INTERSTELLAR EXPERIENCE,
BEST TO READ THIS AFTER HAVING SEEN IT
(PLEASE FIND SECOND-VIEWING UPDATE AT THE END OF THE ORIGINAL REVIEW)
-.-. .... .-. .. ... - --- .--. .... . .-. / -. --- .-.. .- -. / ..-. .. .-.. -- ... / .- .-. .
I was going to continue in Morse, but sanity kicked in…
Christopher Nolan's films are always an event and the last time he ventured into the sci-fi genre, we got Inception.
Now that’s what you call setting the bar high.
Shrouded in secrecy, like many of his projects, Interstellar is the director’s ninth full length feature and arguably his most divisive to date.
In the not-too-distant future, Earth is a dying planet. There is a food shortage and diminishing resources force many to become farmers in order to survive. One of these is former NASA pilot Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) who lives with his two children (Timothée Chalamet, Mackenzie Foy) and his stepfather (John Lithgow). His daughter, Murph, believes a ghost resides in her room, one which leaves her messages. One of these leads Cooper to find a secret NASA base, where his previous mentor Professor Brand (Michael Caine) is planning an expedition through a wormhole in space, à la Event Horizon. The mission: to find another hospitable planet for the human race and understand what happened to the other previous expeditions. Conveniently, Cooper is the perfect pilot for the upcoming galaxy search, which includes Brand’s daughter (Anne Hathaway), two other astronauts (Wes Bentley, David Gyasi) and two droids named CASE and TARS. He reluctantly leaves his children behind and dons the space suit from The Right Stuff for the greater good…
I was going to continue in Morse, but sanity kicked in…
Christopher Nolan's films are always an event and the last time he ventured into the sci-fi genre, we got Inception.
Now that’s what you call setting the bar high.
Shrouded in secrecy, like many of his projects, Interstellar is the director’s ninth full length feature and arguably his most divisive to date.
In the not-too-distant future, Earth is a dying planet. There is a food shortage and diminishing resources force many to become farmers in order to survive. One of these is former NASA pilot Cooper (Matthew McConaughey) who lives with his two children (Timothée Chalamet, Mackenzie Foy) and his stepfather (John Lithgow). His daughter, Murph, believes a ghost resides in her room, one which leaves her messages. One of these leads Cooper to find a secret NASA base, where his previous mentor Professor Brand (Michael Caine) is planning an expedition through a wormhole in space, à la Event Horizon. The mission: to find another hospitable planet for the human race and understand what happened to the other previous expeditions. Conveniently, Cooper is the perfect pilot for the upcoming galaxy search, which includes Brand’s daughter (Anne Hathaway), two other astronauts (Wes Bentley, David Gyasi) and two droids named CASE and TARS. He reluctantly leaves his children behind and dons the space suit from The Right Stuff for the greater good…
Interstellar is a lot of things. First and foremost, it is Nolan’s most epic film to date, in terms of scale and themes. It is a family drama, a mediation on where humanity fits in the greater universe and a grandiose visual experience that needs to be seen on the biggest screen you can get to. To anchor it in more cinematic waters, if Super 8 was J.J. Abrams’ unapologetic homage to Spielberg, then Nolan’s Interstellar is a love letter not only to The Beard but also to Stanley Kubrick: the director has taken the emotional spirit of the first and intertwined it with the latter’s cerebral boldness. Nolan intentionally and cheekily winks at Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey on more than one occasion, not only with space travel, that circular space station but also with monolith-looking robots.
Whereas this blend of influences, itself mixed with Nolan’s directing flare should have created one hell of a film, it has sadly amounted to a whole that is not the sum of its awe-inspiring parts.
The dusty earth-bound first segment wets the appetite: it introduces survivalist themes, meditation on revisionist history and is laced with a strong ecological message that is well handled by Nolan. He explores how humanity can be at most enterprising when it is backed into a corner: the human race has the capacity to adapt and survive, especially if it bears the ultimate responsibility in the downfall of its home planet.
The film then truly takes off (pun intended) when the space segment begins. It is in this middle part of the film that wormholes are entered, potential planets are explored and twists unveiled. There are moments of chilling silence which beautifully contrast with composer Hans Zimmer’s often overbearing organ-heavy score. Rarely has space felt so impressive and if you thought last year’s Gravity was mind-blowing, just wait until you enter Nolan’s black hole (bite your lips). Full marks to director and his cinematographer Hoyte Van Hoytema, who came to the director’s attention with the brilliant Let The Right One In and who will be taking care of Bond 24.
Interstellar is at its best during these first two thirds, when it tackles the exploration of new worlds and focuses on the search for a new refuge. It manages to simultaneously be a thinking man’s ode to discovery and a hugely entertaining thrill ride, especially when Plan A and Plan B betrayals are revealed.
However, as previously stated, Interstellar is not the sum of its parts and fails to be a fully satisfying whole.
People will whine about the film’s length. It is 168 minutes long but it needs this bum-punishing length in the same way Gravity needed its brief runtime. Last year’s was a space romp; this year’s is a space odyssey (again, pun intended).
Many will complain about how exposition-heavy it is. That is undeniable, but not many films explore audacious concepts like Nolan’s does. Verbosity is here a necessity.
These criticisms aren’t the problem. As typical as it is to place the blame in the hands of the scriptwriters, therein lies the rub.
Co-scripted by the director and his brother Jonathan and inspired by the works of physicist Kip Thorne, the script weighs the film down with seemingly deep but in fact soap-operatic dialogue (Brand’s cringe-worthy speech about love being the only thing that “transcends time and space”), poor characterization (the supporting cast are overshadowed on more than one occasion by the Bill Irwin-voiced TARS) and rather weak plot devices which are heavily patience-testing.
Above all, there is an abundance of awkward beats which sadly make Interstellar clumsily melodramatic. It often feels like Nolan has reacted to the (false) criticism of not being an emotional director and has overcompensated by tugging at the heartstrings a bit too hard. Whereas some emotionally-loaded moments are heartbreakingly terrific, such as McConaughey’s reactions when his character sees videos of his children rapidly growing up because of an intergalactic time lapse, the heavy-handed use of Dylan Thomas’ poem ‘Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night’ is the main offender here. It is a superb poem that fits well within the narrative, as it is about the defiant nature of the human spirit. However, no matter how poignant, it is an obvious choice of verse and its clunky repetition feels like the audience are being bullied into sheading a tear.
But even these blemishes are not detrimental to the overall appreciation of the film.
What is detrimental is Interstellar’s ending, the details of which won’t be revealed here. It is safe to say that nuance goes out the window and the denouement turns the film into a full-on corny melodrama that clashes with the superior lead up. The third act sees the dialogue get bogged down by talks of fifth-dimensional physics, future humans and contrived musings on love. As fascinating as these topics are, it’s handled in a terribly ponderous way, leading to a final deus ex machina resolution that is so overly-sentimental and contrived that comparisons with the 1997 Robert Zemeckis film Contact (which also starred McConaughey and was also based on many of Kip Thorne’s ideas) are unavoidable.
For all its strengths, of which there are many (McConaughey is spot-on as the intrepid everyman; Mackenzie Foy runs away with every scene she’s in; a Hollywood A-lister makes a distracting yet entertaining entrance; the set and production designers outdid themselves…), Interstellar just can’t hide from its flaws. The ideas are there, but where Nolan’s past films managed to reconcile ambitious ideas with strong narrative command (think back to Memento, The Prestige or Inception), the storytelling towards the end of the film just can’t do the material justice.
Ultimately, ambitious visuals and themes cannot eclipse the shortcomings of a film’s script, particularly when it descends into full-on silliness in the last twenty minutes.
Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey was heavily criticised when it came out in 1968. Nowadays, it’s regarded as genre-defining masterstroke and one of sci-fi’s measuring sticks. While Nolan’s ninth is more obviously heavy-handed and flawed than some of his previous films, it could very well be the case that Interstellar becomes more highly regarded with additional viewings and with the passing of time. Or perhaps the blemishes will only be reinforced and thus continue to highlight how engrossing it all was until its final act and how the film should have ended in that trippy fifth-dimension…
What is for sure is that Interstellar is definitely worth seeing. It shows that Nolan is one of the few directors who can elevate the blockbuster to these spectacular heights. He’s proven it before with his Dark Knight trilogy and Inception and has proven once more with Interstellar to what extent he has boundary-pushing aspirations for big budget films. In this respect, his newest venture is an undeniable success, one that both sci-fi and film enthusiasts in general will appreciate… Even if Inception did it better.
Interstellar remains a jaw-dropping cinematic spectacle and a hugely ambitious film. It just fails to be a stellar one.
... ..- -.-. .... / .- / ... .... .- -- . / .- -... --- ..- - / - .... . / . -. -.. .. -. --.
- D - 09/11/14
** SECOND-VIEWING UPDATE **
I felt that Interstellar, despite its bladder-punishing length, deserved to be seen a second time. I was harsh in my review above and felt I owed Christopher Nolan’s ninth a second chance.
Verdict: I feel I was duly harsh.
My criticisms remain: it could have been significantly improved without the overly-sentimental ending, with more restraint when it comes to the jarring organ-heavy score and with a greater discernment regarding the dialogue. Post-second viewing, the bookshelf dimension contains some necessary explanations but also some of the most laughably cheesy lines yet heard in a Nolan film.
I wish to reiterate that Interstellar is undeniably a terrific sci-fi film, a cautionary tale with ambition aplenty. It is nonetheless a frustrating one, especially when knowing that the director usually scrupulously manages every detail… A few important tweaks here and there, and a stellar film it could have been.
- D - 11/11/14
GONE GIRL
The Lady Vanishes
** SPOILER FREE REVIEW – IF YOU HAVEN’T SEEN OR READ GONE GIRL,
IT’S SAFE TO READ ON. NO PLOT TWISTS ARE REVEALED. **
IT’S SAFE TO READ ON. NO PLOT TWISTS ARE REVEALED. **
David Fincher is no stranger to challenging literary adaptions. From Chuck Palahniuk’s ‘Fight Club’, Robert Graysmith’s ‘Zodiac’, all the way to F. Scott Fitzgerald’s ‘The Curious Case of Benjamin Button’ and Stieg Larsson’s ‘The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo’, this is a director that has never shied away from a challenge… and the results have rarely disappointed.
For his next project, Fincher decided to adapt Gillian Flynn’s bestselling novel ‘Gone Girl’, a twisted thriller that, amongst many things, toys with the notion of the reliable narrator.
In the interest of keeping this review spoiler-free, the barebones plot goes thusly: Nick (Ben Affleck) comes home on the day of their fifth anniversary and finds his wife, Amy (Rosamund Pike), missing. There are signs pointing to a struggle and a possible abduction. As he searches for his missing wife, Nick becomes the police’s (and the public’s) chief suspect in what is now considered to be Amy’s murder. Where is Amy? Did Nick kill his wife? Is her head in a box, thus completing the seven deadly sins?
For his next project, Fincher decided to adapt Gillian Flynn’s bestselling novel ‘Gone Girl’, a twisted thriller that, amongst many things, toys with the notion of the reliable narrator.
In the interest of keeping this review spoiler-free, the barebones plot goes thusly: Nick (Ben Affleck) comes home on the day of their fifth anniversary and finds his wife, Amy (Rosamund Pike), missing. There are signs pointing to a struggle and a possible abduction. As he searches for his missing wife, Nick becomes the police’s (and the public’s) chief suspect in what is now considered to be Amy’s murder. Where is Amy? Did Nick kill his wife? Is her head in a box, thus completing the seven deadly sins?
Brass tax: Gone Girl is a layered and gripping film that will stay with you for a while, much like the source material. It is a faithful adaptation of the latter, which makes sense considering the screenplay was penned by the novelist herself, a rare occurrence in the film business. Refreshingly, both Fincher and Flynn sidestep the pitfalls liked to this. Indeed, a faithful adaptation could be seen as being both a blessing and a curse: it could imply that novices will be satisfied but that the loyalists will be disappointed, knowing the twists and turns of the book… Then again, deviate too much from the source material, and the hardcore fans will be arming themselves with the pitchforks burning torches. It’s a tightrope, but Gone Girl’s direction and script up the tension, the humour and the intricate richness of the material in order to make it work.
Fincher has a steady and dexterous grasp on the proceedings. This is complemented by his collaboration with his cinematographer of choice, Jeff Cronenweth, the latter making this new film an eerily beautiful watch. Above all, Fincher manages to make Gone Girl a thematically rich experience via the use of misdirection and Hitchcock-like suspense (aided in no small part by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross’ dread-inducing score). The pulse-racing murder investigation thereby simultaneously manages to be a portrait of post-recession America, an exposé on the masks we wear, a cynical critique of the corrosive effects of marriage (and even parenthood), a mordant satire of sensationalist media as well as a potent dig at our voyeuristic tendencies (in the same vein as Hitchcock’s Rear Window). These last two elements even lead to a surprising amount of humour: much like Fight Club channelled bleak humour to dig at consumerism, Fincher introduces some funny moments here to incisively critique our often artificial and hypocritical culture, one which precludes having “genuine souls” because it promotes being “a collection of personality traits selected from an endless automat of characters”.
Fincher has a steady and dexterous grasp on the proceedings. This is complemented by his collaboration with his cinematographer of choice, Jeff Cronenweth, the latter making this new film an eerily beautiful watch. Above all, Fincher manages to make Gone Girl a thematically rich experience via the use of misdirection and Hitchcock-like suspense (aided in no small part by Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross’ dread-inducing score). The pulse-racing murder investigation thereby simultaneously manages to be a portrait of post-recession America, an exposé on the masks we wear, a cynical critique of the corrosive effects of marriage (and even parenthood), a mordant satire of sensationalist media as well as a potent dig at our voyeuristic tendencies (in the same vein as Hitchcock’s Rear Window). These last two elements even lead to a surprising amount of humour: much like Fight Club channelled bleak humour to dig at consumerism, Fincher introduces some funny moments here to incisively critique our often artificial and hypocritical culture, one which precludes having “genuine souls” because it promotes being “a collection of personality traits selected from an endless automat of characters”.
The casting is spot-on, with Ben Affleck once more proving all naysayers wrong and Rosamund Pike finally getting a leading role that befits her talent. The perfectly cast Affleck expertly makes his character both likeable and the right amount of suspicious, and Nick Dunne is one of his strongest turns alongside his performances in Argo and the underrated Hollywoodland.
However, as the title states, the titular ‘girl’ is the centre of attention: Pike makes Amy everything she needs to be, a leading lady Hitchcock would have had wet dreams about. From Bond girl to Gone Girl (thank you, I’m here all week), Pike’s star has steadily risen and it is here she gets a chance to fully shine, thanks to her unnerving portrayal. It’s a role of a lifetime and she makes the most of it, ensuring that the Academy will most probably knock on her door come nomination-hour…
As for the supporting players, Carrie Coon is on scene-chewing form and stands out as Margo, Nick’s twin sister. It is also worth mentioning how refreshing it is to see some against-type casting, specifically with Tyler Perry and Neil Patrick Harris, who both show they are capable of so much more when escaping their comedic comfort zones. The gummy bear-throwing Perry in particular is somewhat of a revelation, proving once more that Fincher has a terrific eye for these things and that Perry is a very decent actor when he’s not making lowest common denominator ‘comedies’ brimming with tasteless stereotypes.
However, as the title states, the titular ‘girl’ is the centre of attention: Pike makes Amy everything she needs to be, a leading lady Hitchcock would have had wet dreams about. From Bond girl to Gone Girl (thank you, I’m here all week), Pike’s star has steadily risen and it is here she gets a chance to fully shine, thanks to her unnerving portrayal. It’s a role of a lifetime and she makes the most of it, ensuring that the Academy will most probably knock on her door come nomination-hour…
As for the supporting players, Carrie Coon is on scene-chewing form and stands out as Margo, Nick’s twin sister. It is also worth mentioning how refreshing it is to see some against-type casting, specifically with Tyler Perry and Neil Patrick Harris, who both show they are capable of so much more when escaping their comedic comfort zones. The gummy bear-throwing Perry in particular is somewhat of a revelation, proving once more that Fincher has a terrific eye for these things and that Perry is a very decent actor when he’s not making lowest common denominator ‘comedies’ brimming with tasteless stereotypes.
For all its strengths, Gone Girl has a few dips here and there. Neil Patrick Harris brings the creepy goods as one of Amy’s old flames but his character sadly comes off as too one-dimensional to fully impress. Maybe the absence of one character in particular, which did not make the cut from novel to screen, adds to this shallow impression regarding his character.
Additionally, the final act of this harrowing film doesn’t quite translate from page to screen as well as the rest of the material. While Fincher and Flynn have simply and effectively transformed the book’s alternating twin-perspective construction into flashbacks (the present is the investigation and Nick’s perspective while the past is the origins of the relationship and Amy’s viewpoint), there is something off about the third act. While the reader was engrossed until the last page, the implausible nature of certain twists seem strangely magnified on celluloid, leading to a level of disbelief that not even Fincher can quite pull off. Perhaps a few departures from the page could have been judicious when dealing with the string of revelations.
That being said, there is an important diary-shaped omission at the end, showing that both Fincher and Flynn understood alterations had to be made. Also, Flynn’s novel is a pulp thriller and the director does not try to make his film anything else; he understands the nature of the source material and does not shy away from it. Once you accept that his focus is not so much on shaping a credible whodunit, like Se7en or Zodiac, but more on the dark thrills that lead to satire, the film becomes fully satisfying.
Additionally, the final act of this harrowing film doesn’t quite translate from page to screen as well as the rest of the material. While Fincher and Flynn have simply and effectively transformed the book’s alternating twin-perspective construction into flashbacks (the present is the investigation and Nick’s perspective while the past is the origins of the relationship and Amy’s viewpoint), there is something off about the third act. While the reader was engrossed until the last page, the implausible nature of certain twists seem strangely magnified on celluloid, leading to a level of disbelief that not even Fincher can quite pull off. Perhaps a few departures from the page could have been judicious when dealing with the string of revelations.
That being said, there is an important diary-shaped omission at the end, showing that both Fincher and Flynn understood alterations had to be made. Also, Flynn’s novel is a pulp thriller and the director does not try to make his film anything else; he understands the nature of the source material and does not shy away from it. Once you accept that his focus is not so much on shaping a credible whodunit, like Se7en or Zodiac, but more on the dark thrills that lead to satire, the film becomes fully satisfying.
If Fincher’s The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo was the self-proclaimed ‘Feel-Bad Movie Of Christmas’, Gone Girl is his 'Feel-Bad-And-Prepare-Yourself-To-Be-Put-Through-The-Motions-Movie. (Granted, not quite as catchy as the former’s publicity tagline…) Also, for those who see it with their significant other, make sure it’s not a first date or that the relationship isn’t on any shaky ground; you’d come out looking at your partner with a slight sense of unease and prepped for a lengthy conversation regarding genuine and adopted attitudes. What is sure is that regardless of whoever you choose to see Gone Girl with, you will end up drained by the end of it. That is the power of Fincher’s intelligent filmmaking and Gillian Flynn’s gasp-inducing narrative. Gone Girl succeeds in immersing the audience in a pulpy and satirical thrill ride which portrays the darkest sides of the human nature, a sensation which even extends outside the cinema. Case and point: it is fascinating to see how the film has already rekindled a certain amount of 'controversies' or debates, previously witnessed when Flynn’s book was released. Who’s truly to blame? Does it promote feminist empowerment? Is it misogynistic? Is it guilty of trivializing rape?
Ultimately, it is a neo-noir fiction done right and while it doesn’t have the menacing impact of Se7en or the procedural depths of the flawless Zodiac, it shows to what extent Fincher is peerless with this sort of material. 'Enjoy'.
- D - 08/10/14
Ultimately, it is a neo-noir fiction done right and while it doesn’t have the menacing impact of Se7en or the procedural depths of the flawless Zodiac, it shows to what extent Fincher is peerless with this sort of material. 'Enjoy'.
- D - 08/10/14
HORNS
Hell hath no fury like a cinemagoer horned...
Daniel Radcliffe’s post-Harry Potter career has seen the actor take some bold choices: The Woman In Black proved he could shake off the image of the pubescent wand-waver in a very solid horror film and Kill Your Darlings saw him stretch his chops by playing poet Allen Ginsberg. He has even managed to come out unscathed of What If, a fun yet overly formulaic romantic comedy. Now, here comes another bold move from the actor: teaming up with Alexandre Aja (the director behind the slasher Haute Tension, the B-movie exploitation flick Piranha 3D and the underrated Maniac) for an adaptation of Joe Hill’s novel, 'Horns'.
Horns tells the tale of a young man, Ig Perrish (Radciffe), who is accused of his girlfriend’s murder. He is hounded by the press and as he struggles to defend his innocence in the eyes of his community, things take a turn for the strange. One morning, he discovers a pair of protracting horns growing from his temples… His devilish new look also comes with a special set of powers: the horns force anyone in contact with Ig to truthfully blurt out their darkest thoughts and act on their unfiltered impulses. He would be foolish not to harness the horny powers and use them to sleuth around for the true murderer…
Aja’s film is one of two halves: the titillatingly bezerk first and the uninspiring OTT second. The first embraces the Kafkaesque premise and adds some effective humoristic elements to boot. There is much fun to be had in the sudden candid confessions of our protagonist’s entourage, from unhinged doctors, cutthroat journalists, all the way to homoerotic tendencies within the police force… However, the superior-yet-often-clumsy first half is utterly undermined by what follows: the darkly comic tale becomes a stale murder investigation, interspersed with elements of teen romance, ending up as a bland horror flick in its weak finale. It is this last act in particular that quite clearly shows that neither scriptwriter Keith Bunin nor the director knew in which direction to take the film and therefore decided to throw in grating voiceover narration and a resolution that takes itself far too seriously for its own good. It’s a real shame, as Horns started off as a self-aware gothic fable and completely lost its nerve at the halfway mark. If only it had kept its tongue-in-cheek tone the whole way through… Horns might have become a cult classic.
For all Horns’ shortcomings, no one can fault Radcliffe’s performance. He convincingly adopts the American twang and the actor gives it his all, making his portrayal of Ig the best thing on screen. His performance is the only one that truly stands out: Juno Temple is given nothing to do as Merrin, a Laura Palmer-esque figure that everyone deifies, while too much screen time is given to weak supporting players such as Joe Anderson, playing Ig’s brother, and the bland Max Minghella, who is completely miscast as Ig’s best friend. Only veteran actors David Morse and James Remar get brief moments to shine, the latter in particular as Ig’s father, who unknowingly confesses his true feelings to his son.
Sadly, all of Radcliffe’s efforts are not enough to save the film from its clunky tonal shifts, its telegraphed plot (removing any enjoyment from the whodunit segment, since the real killer’s identity is practically signposted from the get-go) and the very clumsy dialogue. All in all, a promising premise turned into one hell of a mess.
- D - 05/10/14
Horns tells the tale of a young man, Ig Perrish (Radciffe), who is accused of his girlfriend’s murder. He is hounded by the press and as he struggles to defend his innocence in the eyes of his community, things take a turn for the strange. One morning, he discovers a pair of protracting horns growing from his temples… His devilish new look also comes with a special set of powers: the horns force anyone in contact with Ig to truthfully blurt out their darkest thoughts and act on their unfiltered impulses. He would be foolish not to harness the horny powers and use them to sleuth around for the true murderer…
Aja’s film is one of two halves: the titillatingly bezerk first and the uninspiring OTT second. The first embraces the Kafkaesque premise and adds some effective humoristic elements to boot. There is much fun to be had in the sudden candid confessions of our protagonist’s entourage, from unhinged doctors, cutthroat journalists, all the way to homoerotic tendencies within the police force… However, the superior-yet-often-clumsy first half is utterly undermined by what follows: the darkly comic tale becomes a stale murder investigation, interspersed with elements of teen romance, ending up as a bland horror flick in its weak finale. It is this last act in particular that quite clearly shows that neither scriptwriter Keith Bunin nor the director knew in which direction to take the film and therefore decided to throw in grating voiceover narration and a resolution that takes itself far too seriously for its own good. It’s a real shame, as Horns started off as a self-aware gothic fable and completely lost its nerve at the halfway mark. If only it had kept its tongue-in-cheek tone the whole way through… Horns might have become a cult classic.
For all Horns’ shortcomings, no one can fault Radcliffe’s performance. He convincingly adopts the American twang and the actor gives it his all, making his portrayal of Ig the best thing on screen. His performance is the only one that truly stands out: Juno Temple is given nothing to do as Merrin, a Laura Palmer-esque figure that everyone deifies, while too much screen time is given to weak supporting players such as Joe Anderson, playing Ig’s brother, and the bland Max Minghella, who is completely miscast as Ig’s best friend. Only veteran actors David Morse and James Remar get brief moments to shine, the latter in particular as Ig’s father, who unknowingly confesses his true feelings to his son.
Sadly, all of Radcliffe’s efforts are not enough to save the film from its clunky tonal shifts, its telegraphed plot (removing any enjoyment from the whodunit segment, since the real killer’s identity is practically signposted from the get-go) and the very clumsy dialogue. All in all, a promising premise turned into one hell of a mess.
- D - 05/10/14
MAPS TO THE STARS
Hellywood
Question: What spews out of Hollywood’s bowels when David Cronenberg administers a gut punch?
Answer: Dysfunctional families, desperate and self-absorbed divas, corporate greed, hellish behaviour and even cruelty to dogs.
We’re far from the City of Angels…
Has-been and neurotic actress Havana Segrand (Julianne Moore) is fighting for a role in a remake of Stolen Waters, a melodrama in which her late mother, a renowned actress in her time, starred in. She frequently seeks the help of therapist / self-help guru Stafford Weiss (John Cusack), who helps her through her past traumas. Stafford has a wife (Olivia Williams) and a celebrity son (Evan Bird), a child star who has already been to rehab before his thirteenth birthday. Finally, a mysterious burn victim Agatha (Mia Waikowska) arrives in Hollywood after a prolonged exile. Through a series of meetings, via an encounter with a limo driver (Robert Pattinson), she becomes Havana’s PA. The loop is looped and as one character so eloquently puts it: “People don’t enter our lives randomly. We call them.” For better or for worse, these characters have called each other and their lives will intertwine…
More rewarding than Cronenberg’s previous film, 2012’s Cosmopolis, and easily his best since A History of Violence, Maps to the Stars is a satirical portrayal of Hollywood that deals with the past coming back to haunt the present. However, unlike past films that have peeled the layers of Hollywood’s façade, this one holds no punches – in fact, rarely has tinseltown appeared so hellish.
Cronenberg fills the screen with traditional images, including the Walk of Fame, the Hollywood sign, even the young-girl-comes-to-Hollywood-by-bus cliché and infuses Bruce Wagner’s dark tale about hidden pasts haunting (often literally) its protagonists with images of fire, water, Paul Eluard mantras and a shoddy special effect towards the end which ruins an otherwise surprisingly disturbing scene.
While it’s always a joy seeing Waikowska, Cusack and Williams on screen (Pattinson barely registers in a wafer thin part), the true standouts here are Evan Bird and Julianne Moore. The first plays Benjie, young brat who makes Justin Bieber look positively reserved. As for Moore, it’s not difficult to understand why she bagged the Best Actress award at this year’s Cannes festival. Her performance as Havana is mesmerizing and just might be her career best… and that’s saying a lot, considering her filmography. She is utterly believable as a Hollywood narcissist, a character that embodies the self-obsessed and cold nature of the star system.
This odd story of detestable characters doomed to repeat the past would make an interesting double bill with David Lynch’s Mulholland Drive. What it lacks in Lynchian surrealism, Maps To The Stars makes up for with hefty doses of disturbing moral bankruptcy and bleak humour. It is at its heart a twisted family drama that doesn’t quite satisfy on a narrative level but one that does fully work as a parable for the shortcomings of fame and how no amount of money and gloss can hide murky pasts.
- D - 30/09/14
Answer: Dysfunctional families, desperate and self-absorbed divas, corporate greed, hellish behaviour and even cruelty to dogs.
We’re far from the City of Angels…
Has-been and neurotic actress Havana Segrand (Julianne Moore) is fighting for a role in a remake of Stolen Waters, a melodrama in which her late mother, a renowned actress in her time, starred in. She frequently seeks the help of therapist / self-help guru Stafford Weiss (John Cusack), who helps her through her past traumas. Stafford has a wife (Olivia Williams) and a celebrity son (Evan Bird), a child star who has already been to rehab before his thirteenth birthday. Finally, a mysterious burn victim Agatha (Mia Waikowska) arrives in Hollywood after a prolonged exile. Through a series of meetings, via an encounter with a limo driver (Robert Pattinson), she becomes Havana’s PA. The loop is looped and as one character so eloquently puts it: “People don’t enter our lives randomly. We call them.” For better or for worse, these characters have called each other and their lives will intertwine…
More rewarding than Cronenberg’s previous film, 2012’s Cosmopolis, and easily his best since A History of Violence, Maps to the Stars is a satirical portrayal of Hollywood that deals with the past coming back to haunt the present. However, unlike past films that have peeled the layers of Hollywood’s façade, this one holds no punches – in fact, rarely has tinseltown appeared so hellish.
Cronenberg fills the screen with traditional images, including the Walk of Fame, the Hollywood sign, even the young-girl-comes-to-Hollywood-by-bus cliché and infuses Bruce Wagner’s dark tale about hidden pasts haunting (often literally) its protagonists with images of fire, water, Paul Eluard mantras and a shoddy special effect towards the end which ruins an otherwise surprisingly disturbing scene.
While it’s always a joy seeing Waikowska, Cusack and Williams on screen (Pattinson barely registers in a wafer thin part), the true standouts here are Evan Bird and Julianne Moore. The first plays Benjie, young brat who makes Justin Bieber look positively reserved. As for Moore, it’s not difficult to understand why she bagged the Best Actress award at this year’s Cannes festival. Her performance as Havana is mesmerizing and just might be her career best… and that’s saying a lot, considering her filmography. She is utterly believable as a Hollywood narcissist, a character that embodies the self-obsessed and cold nature of the star system.
This odd story of detestable characters doomed to repeat the past would make an interesting double bill with David Lynch’s Mulholland Drive. What it lacks in Lynchian surrealism, Maps To The Stars makes up for with hefty doses of disturbing moral bankruptcy and bleak humour. It is at its heart a twisted family drama that doesn’t quite satisfy on a narrative level but one that does fully work as a parable for the shortcomings of fame and how no amount of money and gloss can hide murky pasts.
- D - 30/09/14
A MOST WANTED MAN
The Constant Hoffman
Many audience members will go into this latest John Le Carré adaptation with a pre-established sense of melancholia and already won over, considering it is its leading star’s swansong. However, no matter how excellent Phillip Seymour Hoffman’s performance is in A Most Wanted Man, Anton Corbijn’s cerebral film as a whole doesn’t manage to fully capitalize on its leading man’s nuanced turn…
The chess game of an intrigue begins with Issa Karpov (Grigoriy Dobrygin) washing up (literally) on the shores of Hamburg port. Ever since the 9/11 attacks, which were planned in the German city, the city has become a hub of surveillance and the arrival of the Russian-Chechen refugee leads to suspicion and red flags aplenty: either Karpov is genuinely looking to escape his past or he is a jihadist trying to set up ties with prominent figures funding terrorism. Moreover, if it is the latter, should he be arrested or used as bait in order to uncover the bigger terrorist web?
At the heart of this debate is German spymaster Gunther Bachman (Philip Seymour Hoffman), CIA operative Martha Sullivan (Robin Wright), idealistic immigration attorney Annabel Richter (Rachel McAdams) and banker Thomas Brue (Willem Dafoe), who holds the key to Issa’s late father’s millions. All have their agendas, overt or covert. So, who is playing who and why?
As labyrinthine as it may sound, the execution of A Most Wanted Man is quite straightforward, disappointingly so at times. This translates in the impression that the film occasionally plods along without much ambition. However, the director makes up for it by relying not only on the author’s trademark approach to the material (deglamorization of the spy world, focusing on the nuts and bolts of the job) but by leaning heavily on Hoffman and his acting chops. He plays George Smiley’s pasty and more dishevelled counterpart to perfection. His world-weary attitude is measured by the amount of whiskey tumblers he downs and the cigarettes he chain smokes, and at no point can you take your eyes off of Hoffman’s subtle embodiment of such a louche yet sorrowful character.
It’s a real shame that while Hoffman and his co-stars elevate the film (special mention to the excellent Nina Hoss, the sturdy Willem Dafoe and the criminally sidelined Daniel Bruhl), the slightly clunky dialogue and the lack of tension - apart from the adrenaline shot in the final 15 minutes – drags the overall film down. Moreover, even Corbijn’s precise direction and the spot-on aesthetics can’t save the film from failing to fully engross.
So, while A Most Wanted Man has many qualities, chief amongst which the performances, it doesn’t quite manage to deliver the goods in the way previous Le Carré adaptations have, namely The Constant Gardener and Tomas Alfredson’s almighty Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. Both of these mesmerized due to their complex plots and while they had the same slow-burning dramatics as A Most Wanted Man, they boasted a more palpable sense of tension and an involvement with the protagonists that subtly got under the skin. Corbijn’s film feels too detached to provoke the same jolt those two did. That being said, A Most Wanted Man is a solid espionage film worth seeing, if only for Hoffman’s last leading man performance (his last appearances on the silver screen will be in the closing chapters of the Hunger Games saga in a supporting role), reminding film lovers how mesmerizing a screen presence he was and to what extent his passing remains a tragedy for his craft. A Most Regretted Man.
- D - 18/09/14
The chess game of an intrigue begins with Issa Karpov (Grigoriy Dobrygin) washing up (literally) on the shores of Hamburg port. Ever since the 9/11 attacks, which were planned in the German city, the city has become a hub of surveillance and the arrival of the Russian-Chechen refugee leads to suspicion and red flags aplenty: either Karpov is genuinely looking to escape his past or he is a jihadist trying to set up ties with prominent figures funding terrorism. Moreover, if it is the latter, should he be arrested or used as bait in order to uncover the bigger terrorist web?
At the heart of this debate is German spymaster Gunther Bachman (Philip Seymour Hoffman), CIA operative Martha Sullivan (Robin Wright), idealistic immigration attorney Annabel Richter (Rachel McAdams) and banker Thomas Brue (Willem Dafoe), who holds the key to Issa’s late father’s millions. All have their agendas, overt or covert. So, who is playing who and why?
As labyrinthine as it may sound, the execution of A Most Wanted Man is quite straightforward, disappointingly so at times. This translates in the impression that the film occasionally plods along without much ambition. However, the director makes up for it by relying not only on the author’s trademark approach to the material (deglamorization of the spy world, focusing on the nuts and bolts of the job) but by leaning heavily on Hoffman and his acting chops. He plays George Smiley’s pasty and more dishevelled counterpart to perfection. His world-weary attitude is measured by the amount of whiskey tumblers he downs and the cigarettes he chain smokes, and at no point can you take your eyes off of Hoffman’s subtle embodiment of such a louche yet sorrowful character.
It’s a real shame that while Hoffman and his co-stars elevate the film (special mention to the excellent Nina Hoss, the sturdy Willem Dafoe and the criminally sidelined Daniel Bruhl), the slightly clunky dialogue and the lack of tension - apart from the adrenaline shot in the final 15 minutes – drags the overall film down. Moreover, even Corbijn’s precise direction and the spot-on aesthetics can’t save the film from failing to fully engross.
So, while A Most Wanted Man has many qualities, chief amongst which the performances, it doesn’t quite manage to deliver the goods in the way previous Le Carré adaptations have, namely The Constant Gardener and Tomas Alfredson’s almighty Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. Both of these mesmerized due to their complex plots and while they had the same slow-burning dramatics as A Most Wanted Man, they boasted a more palpable sense of tension and an involvement with the protagonists that subtly got under the skin. Corbijn’s film feels too detached to provoke the same jolt those two did. That being said, A Most Wanted Man is a solid espionage film worth seeing, if only for Hoffman’s last leading man performance (his last appearances on the silver screen will be in the closing chapters of the Hunger Games saga in a supporting role), reminding film lovers how mesmerizing a screen presence he was and to what extent his passing remains a tragedy for his craft. A Most Regretted Man.
- D - 18/09/14
WISH I WAS HERE
Garden State: The Adult Years
Wish I Was Here is Zach Braff’s first directorial effort in 10 years, following 2004’s Garden State. His debut has been the subject of much easy derision over the years, but it remains a terrific coming of age film, one which appealed to sentimental dreamers who have no shame in shedding a tear now and then in dark cinemas and who write film reviews when they're drifting in and out of their Scrubs-like fantasies.
*Cough cough*
Moving on.
Braff plays Aidan, an out-of-work actor and family man who only manages to make ends meet because his wife Sarah (Kate Hudson) supports the family by working in a dead-end job. Religious and difficult patriarch Gabe (Mandy Patinkin) pays for their two children’s private Hebrew school and when he tells his family of his terminal cancer, the payments stop. He instead puts the school money towards experimental treatments. Aidan must now homeschool Grace and Tucker (Joey King and Pierce Gagnon), struggle with finding acting work, deal with the imminent death of his father and somehow manage to reconcile his brother (Josh Gad) with his dad before it’s too late.
After 10 years, not much has changed. In fact, Wish I Was Here could bear the tagline ‘Garden State: 10 Years On’. Braff stars and directs this project, which was co-written with his brother Adam, and is interested in tackling much of the same themes: it’s about families, whether dreams should be given up after a certain point and trying to find your place in the world. Whereas these themes successfully translated to the screen in Garden State, Wish I Was Here can seem to be burdened with a lot of force fed wisdom (“the bravest thing we’ll have to do in life is face the end of it” / “We can all get stuck for a chapter”…) and an overabundance of sentimentality.
The first act works best, especially when it (often humoristically) addresses facets of the Jewish faith. It’s a rare occurrence to see this particular faith openly questioned, especially with a great number of Hebrew customs and traditions refreshingly shown in a critical light. Sadly, the film progressively drags due to its repetitive attempts to tug a bit too hard on the heartstrings. Parts work but subtlety goes out the window with insistent platitudes and obvious music cues. That isn’t to say that the soundtrack isn’t excellent - it is - but the song choices hammer across moments which feel as though they could have been signposted in the screenplay as ‘Emotionally Resonant Moment - cue: Badly Drawn Boy track’.
Fortunately, these criticisms are balanced out by solid performances, specifically Joey King and Pierce Gagnon, who play Aidan’s children, and a great turn from Mandy Pantinkin, who manages to make an unsympathetic character quite endearing. Even the usually irritating Kate Hudson makes her character fully believable, especially when she confronts her husband about their marriage and how it revolves around solely supporting his dreams and forgetting hers. Needless to say, it’s great seeing Braff on the big screen once more, as well as quite a few of the Scrubs alumni (Donald Faison, Alexander Chaplin, Michael Weston, Bob Clendenin) and Jim Parsons for some brief crowbarred or extended cameos.
Those who enjoyed Garden State will appreciate Wish I Was Here as its underachieving younger brother. Even the aforementioned sentimental dreamers *cough* will find it hard not to recognize that the familiar script can be a smidge too heavy handed in its sentimentality. As for those who found Garden State forcibly twee, they will find Braff’s sophomore effort a self-indulgent affair. However, even if you side with this second opinion, it is undeniable that this uneven but sweet film about taking control of your life and moving into adulthood nonetheless manages to entertain, chiefly thanks to its performances, humour and heartfelt intentions.
A welcome but less memorable return from Braff.
- D - 14/08/14
*Cough cough*
Moving on.
Braff plays Aidan, an out-of-work actor and family man who only manages to make ends meet because his wife Sarah (Kate Hudson) supports the family by working in a dead-end job. Religious and difficult patriarch Gabe (Mandy Patinkin) pays for their two children’s private Hebrew school and when he tells his family of his terminal cancer, the payments stop. He instead puts the school money towards experimental treatments. Aidan must now homeschool Grace and Tucker (Joey King and Pierce Gagnon), struggle with finding acting work, deal with the imminent death of his father and somehow manage to reconcile his brother (Josh Gad) with his dad before it’s too late.
After 10 years, not much has changed. In fact, Wish I Was Here could bear the tagline ‘Garden State: 10 Years On’. Braff stars and directs this project, which was co-written with his brother Adam, and is interested in tackling much of the same themes: it’s about families, whether dreams should be given up after a certain point and trying to find your place in the world. Whereas these themes successfully translated to the screen in Garden State, Wish I Was Here can seem to be burdened with a lot of force fed wisdom (“the bravest thing we’ll have to do in life is face the end of it” / “We can all get stuck for a chapter”…) and an overabundance of sentimentality.
The first act works best, especially when it (often humoristically) addresses facets of the Jewish faith. It’s a rare occurrence to see this particular faith openly questioned, especially with a great number of Hebrew customs and traditions refreshingly shown in a critical light. Sadly, the film progressively drags due to its repetitive attempts to tug a bit too hard on the heartstrings. Parts work but subtlety goes out the window with insistent platitudes and obvious music cues. That isn’t to say that the soundtrack isn’t excellent - it is - but the song choices hammer across moments which feel as though they could have been signposted in the screenplay as ‘Emotionally Resonant Moment - cue: Badly Drawn Boy track’.
Fortunately, these criticisms are balanced out by solid performances, specifically Joey King and Pierce Gagnon, who play Aidan’s children, and a great turn from Mandy Pantinkin, who manages to make an unsympathetic character quite endearing. Even the usually irritating Kate Hudson makes her character fully believable, especially when she confronts her husband about their marriage and how it revolves around solely supporting his dreams and forgetting hers. Needless to say, it’s great seeing Braff on the big screen once more, as well as quite a few of the Scrubs alumni (Donald Faison, Alexander Chaplin, Michael Weston, Bob Clendenin) and Jim Parsons for some brief crowbarred or extended cameos.
Those who enjoyed Garden State will appreciate Wish I Was Here as its underachieving younger brother. Even the aforementioned sentimental dreamers *cough* will find it hard not to recognize that the familiar script can be a smidge too heavy handed in its sentimentality. As for those who found Garden State forcibly twee, they will find Braff’s sophomore effort a self-indulgent affair. However, even if you side with this second opinion, it is undeniable that this uneven but sweet film about taking control of your life and moving into adulthood nonetheless manages to entertain, chiefly thanks to its performances, humour and heartfelt intentions.
A welcome but less memorable return from Braff.
- D - 14/08/14
THE BABADOOK
If it’s in a word or it’s in a look, you can’t get rid of the Babadook…
Following the death of her husband in a car crash, widowed Amelia (Essie Davis) is finding it hard to discipline her unruly six year old Samuel (Noah Wiseman). Indeed, her son’s outbursts are becoming increasingly violent and he promptly gets kicked out of school. The reason behind his behavior seems to be linked to his nightmares about a shadowy figure coming to kill them both.
Just when things couldn’t get any more stressful, a morbid children’s book called Mister Babadook mysteriously turns up on Samuel’s shelf. As mother and son start reading, the troubled boy is convinced the titular protagonist is the figure he’s been dreaming about…
Is this a case of childhood imagination gone awry? Is Amelia progressively losing it? Has a boogeyman really been summoned?
Brass tax, dear reader: if you watch one horror film this year, make it this Australian debut from Jennifer Kent.
The plot is familiar (We Need To Talk About Kevin meets The Others with some Polanski-like dread thrown in for good measure) but everything from the powerful performances (Davis is quite simply superb), the less-is-more approach, Radoslaw Ladczuk’s perfect cinematography to the excellent sound design and disturbing iconography makes The Babadook an assured and darkly memorable fairytale.
The director takes the traditional tropes regarding childhood fears and the ‘are they mad or is there really a monster?’ act and knowingly toys with the audience by adding a psychological dimension to the proceedings. She also masters the escalation of tension and builds dread in a naturalistic way, without at any point regressing to cheap jump scares (what Nigel Floyd refers to as “cattle prod cinema”). As if that wasn’t enough, Kent injects themes of grief and motherhood, finally topping it all off with a metaphorical ending that fully satisfies.
So far in 2014, The Babadook is on par with Elliot Goldner’s The Borderlands as this year’s most expertly crafted and unsettling horror film. Seek it out, repeat the rhyme and let it in - you won’t regret it.
- D - 11/08/14
Just when things couldn’t get any more stressful, a morbid children’s book called Mister Babadook mysteriously turns up on Samuel’s shelf. As mother and son start reading, the troubled boy is convinced the titular protagonist is the figure he’s been dreaming about…
Is this a case of childhood imagination gone awry? Is Amelia progressively losing it? Has a boogeyman really been summoned?
Brass tax, dear reader: if you watch one horror film this year, make it this Australian debut from Jennifer Kent.
The plot is familiar (We Need To Talk About Kevin meets The Others with some Polanski-like dread thrown in for good measure) but everything from the powerful performances (Davis is quite simply superb), the less-is-more approach, Radoslaw Ladczuk’s perfect cinematography to the excellent sound design and disturbing iconography makes The Babadook an assured and darkly memorable fairytale.
The director takes the traditional tropes regarding childhood fears and the ‘are they mad or is there really a monster?’ act and knowingly toys with the audience by adding a psychological dimension to the proceedings. She also masters the escalation of tension and builds dread in a naturalistic way, without at any point regressing to cheap jump scares (what Nigel Floyd refers to as “cattle prod cinema”). As if that wasn’t enough, Kent injects themes of grief and motherhood, finally topping it all off with a metaphorical ending that fully satisfies.
So far in 2014, The Babadook is on par with Elliot Goldner’s The Borderlands as this year’s most expertly crafted and unsettling horror film. Seek it out, repeat the rhyme and let it in - you won’t regret it.
- D - 11/08/14
GUARDIANS OF THE GALAXY
I-iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii’m... hooked on a feeling
Dr. Ross Geller shall once more be paraphrased:
Marvel Studios are pros. They know what they’re doing. They take their time. They get. The job. Done.
Marvel has delivered this year’s second MCU helping and tenth all round installment in their meticulously orchestrated masterplan… and it stands alongside The Avengers and Iron Man 3 as one of the most entertaining in the series so far.
Guardians of the Galaxy is completely set in space, thereby distancing itself from past MCU films and the usual suspects within it. The space-opera follows the adventures of a bunch of misfits who end up joining forces to prevent a mysterious orb from falling into the hands of hammer-wielding Ronan The Accuser (Lee Pace), who has ties with intergalactic bastard and Avengers-bothering overlord Thanos (Josh Brolin).
The motley crew is composed of Han Solo-esque Peter Quill (Chris Pratt), green-skinned assassin Gamora (Zoe Saldana), revenge hungry warrior Drax (Dave Bautista) and a bounty hunting duo composed of a monosyllabic tree Groot (Vin Diesel) and a wisecracking, trigger-happy raccoon (Bradley Cooper).
Sound weird? It is.
In fact, this space oddity (wink wink) stands out because Marvel has let director James Gunn make it his own, ie: a colourful and cheekily impertinent Red Dwarf / Star Wars / Firefly mongrel. Gunn and his co-writer Nicole Perlman have not only confidently knocked it out of the park, but have gotten away with murder. Their script is brimming with offbeat gags, Footloose references, self-deprecating jabs at the MacGuffin (the orb is described as an “Ark of the Covenant, Maltese Falcon kinda thing”) and enough cheeky repartee and risqué humour to make Marvel’s very own Tony Stark dizzy with envy.
Gunn excels in balancing the impressively adult content (that jizz joke in particular) with more family-friendly slapstick fun, but also manages to inject some Guillermo del Toro-style universe building aesthetics along the way. As if that wasn’t enough, the film also satisfies thanks to impressive CGI battles, a soundtrack that would give Tarantino wet dreams and the fact the plot seamlessly drives the MCU mythos forward (the Infinity Stones are named; the Collector returns; Thanos speaks!) while managing to stand on its own two feet.
The cast are all terrific, with Pratt rivalling Robert Downey Jr for onscreen charisma and Bautista proving that some wrestlers can act, especially with the on-running gag that Drax is oblivious to metaphorical language. However, the rodent and the plantlife are the stars here, giving Han and Chewie a run for their money. Cooper is hilarious and surprisingly self-loathing as Rocket while Diesel, who can only express himself via variations on the phrase “I am Groot”, still manages to create buddy chemistry with his comrade. These two should be fan-favourites for quite a while and show to what extent the special effects team should be showered with praise for their creations.
While Guardians of the Galaxy is undeniably linear (baddie covets power source – good guys must stop him), the villains sadly under-developed and the denouement a tad too easy, the overall leftfield charm and tongue in cheek tone of the film redeems any wrongdoings. In fact, there is the distinct and overriding impression that the filmmakers are in on the joke, including certain pitfalls of the script.
Refreshingly daring, aesthetically impressive and consistently funny, Guardians of the Galaxy is nothing short of 2014’s most entertaining and weirdest blockbuster thus far, proving that Marvel end up dwarfing the competition when they take a gamble and don’t take themselves too seriously.
“Guardians of the Galaxy Will Return”? Now there’s something to be excited about.
- D - 08/08/14
Marvel Studios are pros. They know what they’re doing. They take their time. They get. The job. Done.
Marvel has delivered this year’s second MCU helping and tenth all round installment in their meticulously orchestrated masterplan… and it stands alongside The Avengers and Iron Man 3 as one of the most entertaining in the series so far.
Guardians of the Galaxy is completely set in space, thereby distancing itself from past MCU films and the usual suspects within it. The space-opera follows the adventures of a bunch of misfits who end up joining forces to prevent a mysterious orb from falling into the hands of hammer-wielding Ronan The Accuser (Lee Pace), who has ties with intergalactic bastard and Avengers-bothering overlord Thanos (Josh Brolin).
The motley crew is composed of Han Solo-esque Peter Quill (Chris Pratt), green-skinned assassin Gamora (Zoe Saldana), revenge hungry warrior Drax (Dave Bautista) and a bounty hunting duo composed of a monosyllabic tree Groot (Vin Diesel) and a wisecracking, trigger-happy raccoon (Bradley Cooper).
Sound weird? It is.
In fact, this space oddity (wink wink) stands out because Marvel has let director James Gunn make it his own, ie: a colourful and cheekily impertinent Red Dwarf / Star Wars / Firefly mongrel. Gunn and his co-writer Nicole Perlman have not only confidently knocked it out of the park, but have gotten away with murder. Their script is brimming with offbeat gags, Footloose references, self-deprecating jabs at the MacGuffin (the orb is described as an “Ark of the Covenant, Maltese Falcon kinda thing”) and enough cheeky repartee and risqué humour to make Marvel’s very own Tony Stark dizzy with envy.
Gunn excels in balancing the impressively adult content (that jizz joke in particular) with more family-friendly slapstick fun, but also manages to inject some Guillermo del Toro-style universe building aesthetics along the way. As if that wasn’t enough, the film also satisfies thanks to impressive CGI battles, a soundtrack that would give Tarantino wet dreams and the fact the plot seamlessly drives the MCU mythos forward (the Infinity Stones are named; the Collector returns; Thanos speaks!) while managing to stand on its own two feet.
The cast are all terrific, with Pratt rivalling Robert Downey Jr for onscreen charisma and Bautista proving that some wrestlers can act, especially with the on-running gag that Drax is oblivious to metaphorical language. However, the rodent and the plantlife are the stars here, giving Han and Chewie a run for their money. Cooper is hilarious and surprisingly self-loathing as Rocket while Diesel, who can only express himself via variations on the phrase “I am Groot”, still manages to create buddy chemistry with his comrade. These two should be fan-favourites for quite a while and show to what extent the special effects team should be showered with praise for their creations.
While Guardians of the Galaxy is undeniably linear (baddie covets power source – good guys must stop him), the villains sadly under-developed and the denouement a tad too easy, the overall leftfield charm and tongue in cheek tone of the film redeems any wrongdoings. In fact, there is the distinct and overriding impression that the filmmakers are in on the joke, including certain pitfalls of the script.
Refreshingly daring, aesthetically impressive and consistently funny, Guardians of the Galaxy is nothing short of 2014’s most entertaining and weirdest blockbuster thus far, proving that Marvel end up dwarfing the competition when they take a gamble and don’t take themselves too seriously.
“Guardians of the Galaxy Will Return”? Now there’s something to be excited about.
- D - 08/08/14
