Showing posts with label movies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label movies. Show all posts
Saturday, 4 May 2019
Crooklyn
This semi-autobiographical directed by Spike Lee, and co-written by Lee and his siblings, Cinque and Joie Susannah. The film is set over the spring and summer of 1973 in a tough but close-knit neighbourhood in Brooklyn, New York, and focuses on nine year old Troy Carmichael (Harris) growing up with four rowdy brothers and her troubled by loving parents: Strict school teacher Carolyn (Woodward), who holds the family together, and ambitious but naive musician Woody (Lindo), who had some success with pop music covers in the past but now wants to concentrate exclusively on his own music.
The film is colourful, lively and is unusually light for a Spike Lee film, however there is still plenty of grit. The neighbourhood is populated with eccentric characters, children play on the stoops and the street, everyone knows what is going on with everyone else and more often than not look out for each other, but it is tough, and there is always a threat of violence, although having said that, it's more likely to be a light punch rather than a gunshot. The film is visually inventive. Troy goes to stay with relatives in the South, which she finds very disturbing and disorientating, and these scenes are filmed in widescreen without anamorphically adjusting the image, which gives it a strange elongated look. The performances are great, Alfre Woodward, Delroy Lindo and Zelda Harris are all superb, and the Carmichael family do feel like a real family, and your left wondering what happens to them after the film. Spike Lee has a part as the neighbourhood glue sniffer Snuffy. It's a loose film, without a strong plot, and feels quite baggy and episodic. It's warm, funny, gritty and real, with a fantastic soundtrack of early '70s soul music.
Sunday, 8 July 2018
A Clockwork Orange
Near future England: Teenage gang leader Alex (played by Malcolm McDowell) leads his three friends (or "droogs") on nightly rampages of theft and savage violence against whoever is unlucky enough to encounter them. Tiring of Alex's arrogance, his friends set him up to be arrested after their latest attack goes fatally wrong. Alex is convicted and sentenced to fourteen years in prison. After two years inside, Alex is submitted to an experimental treatment called the "Ludovico Technique" which is intended to cure criminality by making the subject unable to act violently. Alex is released after the treatment and soon finds that where he was once the predator, he is now the prey.
Released in 1971, written and directed by Stanley Kubrick, and based on the 1962 novel by Anthony Burgess, this is hugely controversial film is now acclaimed as a modern classic. It is still a shocking film, in fact I would say that it would probably not get made today. because it would just be too problematic. Not necessarily because of the on-screen violence, which is heavily stylised and more shadowplay than graphic blood and gore, but because we are invited to like and sympathise with a brutal, unrepentant rapist and murderer. The entire film is shown through Alex's eyes, and he breaks the fourth wall with his voice-over narration (addressing the audience directly as "my brothers and only friends"). The first part of the film, depicting Alex's crimes is heavily stylised, whereas the latter part of the film, where Alex becomes the victim, the violence is much more realistically depicted thereby inviting the audience to enjoy Alex's rampages at a distance, but to sympathise with his own sufferings. Which is, of course, how Alex would see it. Also there is the towering performance of Malcolm McDowell as Alex, alternately threatening and innocent, it is a career best performance, and he is in pretty much every scene of the film.
The film is relatively faithful to the novel, although it discards the final chapter of the original, British version of the book. There are some odd elements in regards to the book, in which Alex's age is stated as being fourteen. Malcolm McDowell was in his late twenties when he made the film, and yet he is constantly referred to as a child, despite being clearly an adult.
The film depicts a very seventies future, and it really is a product of it's time and place, it feels more like an alternate early seventies than a futuristic piece. The novel was written in an invented slang called "Nadsat" and this is memorably retained in the film, although toned down. Burgess invented nadsat because he felt that if he wrote it in then-current slang then novel would feel dated as soon as it was published, and he was right.
The film was famously withdrawn from release in Britain by Kubrick himself and was not legally available there until after his death.
It is still a troubling, shocking and powerful experience.
Released in 1971, written and directed by Stanley Kubrick, and based on the 1962 novel by Anthony Burgess, this is hugely controversial film is now acclaimed as a modern classic. It is still a shocking film, in fact I would say that it would probably not get made today. because it would just be too problematic. Not necessarily because of the on-screen violence, which is heavily stylised and more shadowplay than graphic blood and gore, but because we are invited to like and sympathise with a brutal, unrepentant rapist and murderer. The entire film is shown through Alex's eyes, and he breaks the fourth wall with his voice-over narration (addressing the audience directly as "my brothers and only friends"). The first part of the film, depicting Alex's crimes is heavily stylised, whereas the latter part of the film, where Alex becomes the victim, the violence is much more realistically depicted thereby inviting the audience to enjoy Alex's rampages at a distance, but to sympathise with his own sufferings. Which is, of course, how Alex would see it. Also there is the towering performance of Malcolm McDowell as Alex, alternately threatening and innocent, it is a career best performance, and he is in pretty much every scene of the film.
The film is relatively faithful to the novel, although it discards the final chapter of the original, British version of the book. There are some odd elements in regards to the book, in which Alex's age is stated as being fourteen. Malcolm McDowell was in his late twenties when he made the film, and yet he is constantly referred to as a child, despite being clearly an adult.
The film depicts a very seventies future, and it really is a product of it's time and place, it feels more like an alternate early seventies than a futuristic piece. The novel was written in an invented slang called "Nadsat" and this is memorably retained in the film, although toned down. Burgess invented nadsat because he felt that if he wrote it in then-current slang then novel would feel dated as soon as it was published, and he was right.
The film was famously withdrawn from release in Britain by Kubrick himself and was not legally available there until after his death.
It is still a troubling, shocking and powerful experience.
Thursday, 5 July 2018
Sometimes They Come Back
In 1990, high school history teacher Jim Norman (Tim Matheson) returns to his childhood home town for the first time in 27 years, with his wife Sally (Brooke Adams) and young son Scott (Robert Hy Gorman).
In 1963, nine year old Jim (Zachary Ball) and his fifteen year old brother Wayne (Chris Demetral) are walking through a railway tunnel on the way to the library when they are set upon by a gang of teenage greasers who kill Wayne, but are themselves almost immediately killed by a train.
Despite still being haunted by nightmares of his brother's death, Jim and his family settle in, and he starts teaching at the local high school, bonding with some students and making enemies of others. However, the students who Jim gets close to start dying in apparent suicides, and are replaced in class by students who look suspiciously like the gang who murdered Wayne.
Jim realises that the spirits of the dead gang members have returned and are set on revenge.
This film was originally made for TV and was first broadcast in 1991, directed by Tom McLoughlin. Based on a short story by Stephen King, it's a pretty by the numbers horror film, that features plenty of King tropes. Made on a low budget without particular style or flair, with a cast of solid performers, including veteran William Sanderson, who all try their best with stodgy material (pity Brooke Adams, who really has nothing to do here at all except be alternately supportive and scared). The story is not one of Stephen King's best and the screenwriters, Lawrence Konner and Mark Rosenthal, have trouble punching it up to feature length. The film is at it's best when the focus is on the ghoulish greasers who (as played by Robert Rusler, Bentley Mitchum and Nicholas Sadler) are ominous and threatening, although we never find out enough about them, they have no backgrounds or personalities, and are portrayed as pack animals (they growl, bray and howl like wolves).
Probably due to the limits of television in 1991, the film is light on blood and gore. At times it seems more like a supernatural drama about coming to terms with grief, than it is about shocks and scares, and the two sides don't gel together. The biggest problem that the film has is that it offers nothing new. Really, if you're interested at all in horror, than you've seen it all before.
In 1963, nine year old Jim (Zachary Ball) and his fifteen year old brother Wayne (Chris Demetral) are walking through a railway tunnel on the way to the library when they are set upon by a gang of teenage greasers who kill Wayne, but are themselves almost immediately killed by a train.
Despite still being haunted by nightmares of his brother's death, Jim and his family settle in, and he starts teaching at the local high school, bonding with some students and making enemies of others. However, the students who Jim gets close to start dying in apparent suicides, and are replaced in class by students who look suspiciously like the gang who murdered Wayne.
Jim realises that the spirits of the dead gang members have returned and are set on revenge.
This film was originally made for TV and was first broadcast in 1991, directed by Tom McLoughlin. Based on a short story by Stephen King, it's a pretty by the numbers horror film, that features plenty of King tropes. Made on a low budget without particular style or flair, with a cast of solid performers, including veteran William Sanderson, who all try their best with stodgy material (pity Brooke Adams, who really has nothing to do here at all except be alternately supportive and scared). The story is not one of Stephen King's best and the screenwriters, Lawrence Konner and Mark Rosenthal, have trouble punching it up to feature length. The film is at it's best when the focus is on the ghoulish greasers who (as played by Robert Rusler, Bentley Mitchum and Nicholas Sadler) are ominous and threatening, although we never find out enough about them, they have no backgrounds or personalities, and are portrayed as pack animals (they growl, bray and howl like wolves).
Probably due to the limits of television in 1991, the film is light on blood and gore. At times it seems more like a supernatural drama about coming to terms with grief, than it is about shocks and scares, and the two sides don't gel together. The biggest problem that the film has is that it offers nothing new. Really, if you're interested at all in horror, than you've seen it all before.
Saturday, 30 September 2017
Flatliners
Medical student Courtney Holmes (played by Ellen Page) convinces her reluctant friends to take part in an experiment during which she will be clinically dead before they resuscitate her, so that she can learn first hand what happens after death. After the experiment Courtney finds herself with a new lease on life and astonishing powers of memory. After seeing the effects, Courtney's friends all want to undergo the experience. However, it soon turns out that flatlining has some much darker side effects, as the students begin to be haunted by bizarre and disturbing visions.
Although referred to as a sequel to the 1990 film Flatliners, this 2017 film, directed by Niels Arden Oplev, is really a remake. Keifer Sutherland, who starred in the original, does appear in this, although as a different character. This is a fun film, with a good cast. Despite being a horror film, it's really not scary at all, and suffers from being too long. The characters aren't particularly explored and are more or less cliched. It also suffers from having too pat a conclusion. There is plenty of humour, the characters manage to rise above the material, and it is exciting, and the flatlining sequences are well executed.
I can't really say how fans of the original Flatliners will take to the remake, because I've not seen the original in years, and can't remember much about it.
Although referred to as a sequel to the 1990 film Flatliners, this 2017 film, directed by Niels Arden Oplev, is really a remake. Keifer Sutherland, who starred in the original, does appear in this, although as a different character. This is a fun film, with a good cast. Despite being a horror film, it's really not scary at all, and suffers from being too long. The characters aren't particularly explored and are more or less cliched. It also suffers from having too pat a conclusion. There is plenty of humour, the characters manage to rise above the material, and it is exciting, and the flatlining sequences are well executed.
I can't really say how fans of the original Flatliners will take to the remake, because I've not seen the original in years, and can't remember much about it.
Sunday, 24 September 2017
El Mariachi
This 1992 movie is the debut film from writer/director Robert Rodriguez. An unnamed musician (Carlos Gallardo) travels from town to town with his guitar to pursue his dream of becoming a mariachi like his father and grandfather. Arriving in a small town, the Mariachi is mistaken for a criminal, Azul (Reinol Martinez), who has broken out of jail and is being hunted by the local crime boss, Moco (Peter Marquardt). Like the Mariachi, Azul dresses in black and carries a guitar case, only Azul's is full of guns.
Reputedly produced for a budget of only $7000, which Rodriguez raised mainly by taking part in medical tests, this is funnier and more exciting than many bigger and more expensive action films. Carlos Gallardo is winning as the Mariachi, and Consuelo Gomez is affecting as the bar owner who he falls in love with. Some of the acting can be politely described as overly enthusiastic, the low budget is obvious in many scenes, and also there are several scenes that seem to be there just to pad out the run time, but by and large this is a fun, stylish movie, with well choreographed action. It was followed by two sequels: Desperado (1995) and Once Upon a Time in Mexico (2003).
By the way, Robert Rodriguez's book on the making of the film, Rebel Without a Crew (1995), is worth tracking down for anyone interested in low-budget film-making.
Reputedly produced for a budget of only $7000, which Rodriguez raised mainly by taking part in medical tests, this is funnier and more exciting than many bigger and more expensive action films. Carlos Gallardo is winning as the Mariachi, and Consuelo Gomez is affecting as the bar owner who he falls in love with. Some of the acting can be politely described as overly enthusiastic, the low budget is obvious in many scenes, and also there are several scenes that seem to be there just to pad out the run time, but by and large this is a fun, stylish movie, with well choreographed action. It was followed by two sequels: Desperado (1995) and Once Upon a Time in Mexico (2003).
By the way, Robert Rodriguez's book on the making of the film, Rebel Without a Crew (1995), is worth tracking down for anyone interested in low-budget film-making.
Performance
This film was produced in 1968 but not released until 1970, and was directed by Donald Cammell and Nicolas Roeg. In London, Chas Devlin (James Fox) is a brutal gangland enforcer, who genuinely enjoys his work. When he disobeys direct orders from his boss and kills a rival for personal, rather than business reasons, Devlin becomes targeted by his own gang. He decides to hide out in the vast mansion of reclusive rock star, Turner (Mick Jagger), who lives with Pherber (Anita Pallenberg) and Lucy (Michele Breton). In Turner's surreal, erotic, decadent world of drugs, sex and mysticism, Devlin finds the boundaries of reality and fantasy collapsing.
This is a film that, if you see it once, you will never forget it. It's very much a film of two halves. The first half is, in terms of plot, a great if conventional gangster film (in terms of style and technique it is a million miles away from an ordinary gangster film), and in the second it becomes a surreal fantasy of sex, drugs and identity. It utilises a fragmented, stream of conscience style, using almost every cinematic trick in the book. James Fox is perfect as Chas Devlin, someone who is, in British criminal slang, a "performer" (a gangster with a special talent for violence and intimidation), he frequently tells people "I know who I am", he lives in a pristine apartment, and is always immaculately groomed and dressed in sharp suits, and is always in control. Mick Jagger's Turner is another type of performer, a rock star who has retired because, as he says "I lost my demon". Devlin, a man who needs to be in control, suddenly finds himself, in Turner's house, in a situation where he has no control, where all the old rules just don't apply. Very much a product of it's time, and full of references to Jorge Luis Borges and William Burroughs, this is still genuinely shocking and disturbing.
This is a film that, if you see it once, you will never forget it. It's very much a film of two halves. The first half is, in terms of plot, a great if conventional gangster film (in terms of style and technique it is a million miles away from an ordinary gangster film), and in the second it becomes a surreal fantasy of sex, drugs and identity. It utilises a fragmented, stream of conscience style, using almost every cinematic trick in the book. James Fox is perfect as Chas Devlin, someone who is, in British criminal slang, a "performer" (a gangster with a special talent for violence and intimidation), he frequently tells people "I know who I am", he lives in a pristine apartment, and is always immaculately groomed and dressed in sharp suits, and is always in control. Mick Jagger's Turner is another type of performer, a rock star who has retired because, as he says "I lost my demon". Devlin, a man who needs to be in control, suddenly finds himself, in Turner's house, in a situation where he has no control, where all the old rules just don't apply. Very much a product of it's time, and full of references to Jorge Luis Borges and William Burroughs, this is still genuinely shocking and disturbing.
White Heat
This 1949 film is one of the quintessential Hollywood gangster movies. Tracing the violent life of psychotic robber Cody Jarrett (James Cagney) who despite being married to Verna (Virginia Mayo), has a deeply unhealthy bond with his equally ruthless mother (Margaret Wycherly) who is the only person that he seems to have any real feelings for.
This is an exciting, influential film and is widely regarded as one of the best films ever made. It has aged well, and the almost documentary style film-making is still in evidence today. The ending of the film has become one of the iconic scenes in movie history, and the prison cafeteria sequence is startling. James Cagney turns in a gripping performance as the savage, but strangely sympathetic Jarrett, and Virginia Mayo is impressive as Verna, who Jarrett cruelly ignores, but has her own capacity for extreme ruthlessness. Edmond O'Brien makes less of an impression, however, as the square-jawed hero. This is a must see for thriller fans.
This is an exciting, influential film and is widely regarded as one of the best films ever made. It has aged well, and the almost documentary style film-making is still in evidence today. The ending of the film has become one of the iconic scenes in movie history, and the prison cafeteria sequence is startling. James Cagney turns in a gripping performance as the savage, but strangely sympathetic Jarrett, and Virginia Mayo is impressive as Verna, who Jarrett cruelly ignores, but has her own capacity for extreme ruthlessness. Edmond O'Brien makes less of an impression, however, as the square-jawed hero. This is a must see for thriller fans.
Saturday, 16 September 2017
Mother!
A young woman (Jennifer Lawrence), referred to as "Mother" in the credits, although nine of the characters are named in the film, is married to a successful poet (Javier Bardem), who is suffering from writer's block. They live together in a rambling country house which she is renovating after a severe fire. One night a strange couple (Ed Harris and Michelle Pfeiffer) arrive and insinuate themselves into the lives of the homeowners. It then gets progressively darker and weirder as more and more people invade the couple's home.
This film from writer/director Darren Aronofsky is frankly bizarre. It's full of striking, memorable images and sequences, and Jennifer Lawrence gives a fantastic, tortured performance. Some of it though is frankly tedious, and almost the whole thing makes very little sense. It's probably best to see the film as an allegory, not to be taken literally, and there is likely to be a lot of discussion about what it actually means. My take on it is that Jennifer Lawrence just wants to be left in piece with her family, but it's impossible to escape from the demands and intrusion of the world outside. It's worth watching for it's sheer ambition. You'll likely not see much like this, certainly not from a mainstream Hollywood release. Personally I didn't enjoy the film, but I'm glad that I saw it, and I*'m still trying to decode what the hell it's all about.
This film from writer/director Darren Aronofsky is frankly bizarre. It's full of striking, memorable images and sequences, and Jennifer Lawrence gives a fantastic, tortured performance. Some of it though is frankly tedious, and almost the whole thing makes very little sense. It's probably best to see the film as an allegory, not to be taken literally, and there is likely to be a lot of discussion about what it actually means. My take on it is that Jennifer Lawrence just wants to be left in piece with her family, but it's impossible to escape from the demands and intrusion of the world outside. It's worth watching for it's sheer ambition. You'll likely not see much like this, certainly not from a mainstream Hollywood release. Personally I didn't enjoy the film, but I'm glad that I saw it, and I*'m still trying to decode what the hell it's all about.
Friday, 15 September 2017
A Nightmare on Elm Street
A group of teenage friends in a small American town find themselves pursued in their dreams by a horrifically burned figure armed with a glove which has razor-sharp blades attached to the fingers. If they are killed in their dreams, they die in reality too. As the friends are killed off one by one, the survivors have to stay awake long enough to figure out a way to fight their dreams.
Released in 1984, this film is one of the most influential horror films of the 1980s and possibly one of the most influential horror movies of all time, introducing the iconic movie villain Freddy Krueger (played by Robert Englund), and spawning six direct sequels, a TV series (Freddy's Nightmares (1988-1990)), a crossover with the Friday the 13th franchise (Freddy vs. Jason (2003)) and a remake in 2010. By and large the film sticks to the well-established slasher movie formula, but given a supernatural twist. The death scenes are, by and large, imaginative and well-staged. Another reason why the film works so well is the simple fact that everyone sleeps and dreams, and our dreams are always beyond our control, and it plays with the idea that is we are harmed in a dream we could be harmed in real-life as well (the idea that dying in a dream equals dying in real life is a very old one, and it used to be believed that this is why we wake up at the very last minute, a kind of psychological escape hatch so we don't snuff it in our sleep because we happened to have a midnight snack). Writer-director Wes Craven was inspired by a series of disturbing real-lifer incidents from the 1970s where refugees from Southeast Asia refused to sleep after suffering terrifying nightmares, some of them subsequently died in their sleep.
The film creates a believably cluttered suburban setting, and is elevated by Craven's obvious affection for his teenage characters, who are played by a talented cast headed by Heather Langenkemp who gives a great performance mixing vulnerability and strength as the strong-minded Nancy, and a very young Johnny Depp as her boyfriend Glen. Of course, the standout performance is Freddy Krueger who, coupled with his memorable appearance, gives Freddy a gleefully cruel wit, before the character became a pop culture joke.
Saturday, 9 September 2017
It
This is an adaptation of the 1986 novel by Stephen King. Set in 1989 (as opposed to the novel's 1958 setting) in the small town of Derry, Maine, which has been terrorised by a spate of mysterious disappearances of children. Seven young outcasts, who call themselves "The Loser's Club" decide to put a stop to it: Bill Denbrough (Jaeden Lieberher) has a bad stutter and his younger brother, Georgie, is among the missing; Ben Hanscom (Jeremy Ray Taylor) is picked on because he is overweight; Beverley Marsh (Sophia Lillis) is abused by her father and is the subject of cruel rumours; Richie Tozier (Finn Wolfhard) is the group clown, often getting in trouble due to his loud mouth and foul language; Stan Uris (Wyatt Oleff) is picked on because he is Jewish; Mike Hanlon (Chosen Jacobs) is subjected to racist bullying; and Eddie Kaspbrak (Jack Dylan Grazer) has become a hypochondriac due to his over-protective mother. They discover that the culprit is Pennywise the Dancing Clown (Bill Skarsgard), who is in reality an evil, shapeshifting entity which feeds on fear, particularly children's fear.
Previously adapted as a two part TV miniseries in 1990 which was re-edited into a feature film; It is one of Stephen King's best known books. The film lacks the richness of the book, but is an effective horror film, with a reliance on sudden jump scares. It is well acted, and the film really shines in the quieter character moments.
Previously adapted as a two part TV miniseries in 1990 which was re-edited into a feature film; It is one of Stephen King's best known books. The film lacks the richness of the book, but is an effective horror film, with a reliance on sudden jump scares. It is well acted, and the film really shines in the quieter character moments.
Saturday, 2 September 2017
The Limehouse Golem
Year of Release: 2017
Director: Juan Carlos Medina
Screenplay: Jane Goldman, based on the novel Dan Leno and the Limehouse Golem by Peter Ackroyd
Starring: Bill Nighy, Olivia Cooke, Douglas Booth, Daniel Mays, Sam Reid, Maria Valverde, Henry Goodman, Morgan Watkins, Eddie Marsan
Running Time: 105 minutes
Genre: Horror, crime, period drama, mystery, thriller
Limehouse is one of the poorest and roughest areas of Victorian London where every kind of crime, degradation and vice is rampant, and now it is targeted by a brutal serial killer, the so-called "Limehouse Golem" which strikes seemingly at random, targeting the young, the old, men and women. World weary Police Inspector John Kildare (Nighy), who has been passed over for promotion due to rumours about his private life, is put in charge of the case and during the investigation finds himself drawn to troubled music hall actress Elizabeth Cree (Cooke), who is on trial for the poisoning of her husband, one of several suspects in the Golem case.
This is a lurid, full-blooded Victorian melodrama, rich with atmosphere and period detail. It's full of gore and horror, but also works as an intriguing mystery. The film uses historical figures as characters, such as Karl Marx (Goodman), novelist George Gissing (Watkins) and comedian Dan Leno (Booth). Bill Nighy is great as the sensitive, troubled police inspector and the connection he forms with Elizabeth is genuinely touching. The film explores themes of social inequality and the pursuit of fame.
Director: Juan Carlos Medina
Screenplay: Jane Goldman, based on the novel Dan Leno and the Limehouse Golem by Peter Ackroyd
Starring: Bill Nighy, Olivia Cooke, Douglas Booth, Daniel Mays, Sam Reid, Maria Valverde, Henry Goodman, Morgan Watkins, Eddie Marsan
Running Time: 105 minutes
Genre: Horror, crime, period drama, mystery, thriller
Limehouse is one of the poorest and roughest areas of Victorian London where every kind of crime, degradation and vice is rampant, and now it is targeted by a brutal serial killer, the so-called "Limehouse Golem" which strikes seemingly at random, targeting the young, the old, men and women. World weary Police Inspector John Kildare (Nighy), who has been passed over for promotion due to rumours about his private life, is put in charge of the case and during the investigation finds himself drawn to troubled music hall actress Elizabeth Cree (Cooke), who is on trial for the poisoning of her husband, one of several suspects in the Golem case.
This is a lurid, full-blooded Victorian melodrama, rich with atmosphere and period detail. It's full of gore and horror, but also works as an intriguing mystery. The film uses historical figures as characters, such as Karl Marx (Goodman), novelist George Gissing (Watkins) and comedian Dan Leno (Booth). Bill Nighy is great as the sensitive, troubled police inspector and the connection he forms with Elizabeth is genuinely touching. The film explores themes of social inequality and the pursuit of fame.
Wednesday, 23 September 2015
Smashed
USA / 2012 / 81 mins
Director: James Ponsoldt
Screenplay: James Ponsoldt and Susan Burke
Starring: Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Aaron Paul, Nick Offerman, Megan Mullally, Octavia Spencer
Genre: Drama, comedy
Elementary school teacher Kate Hannah (Winstead) is married to writer Charlie (Paul). Their union is based on a mutual love of alcohol and not much else. After a very bad day and night, Kate finally realises that they are both definitely alcoholics and decides to get help, on the advice of her friend Dave (Offerman), himself a recovering alcoholic. Kate is serious about her attempts to stay sober, Charlie, however, has no intention of quitting the drink, stretching both their relationship and Kate's resolve, to breaking point.
This indie film is a little gem. Shot in a freewheeling hand held style, it tackles a serious issue without coming across as either preachy of flippant. Of course alcoholism is no laughing matter, and the film does not play it for laughs. The humour comes form the characters and the situations that they find themselves in, even if it at times the very darkest humour.
Mary Elizabeth Winstead is the film's standout. She goes to some very bleak places as Kate, but always makes her a warm, sympathetic character. Kate is never played as a victim, and Winstead gives her the steel necessary to deal with everything that is thrown at her.
Director: James Ponsoldt
Screenplay: James Ponsoldt and Susan Burke
Starring: Mary Elizabeth Winstead, Aaron Paul, Nick Offerman, Megan Mullally, Octavia Spencer
Genre: Drama, comedy
Elementary school teacher Kate Hannah (Winstead) is married to writer Charlie (Paul). Their union is based on a mutual love of alcohol and not much else. After a very bad day and night, Kate finally realises that they are both definitely alcoholics and decides to get help, on the advice of her friend Dave (Offerman), himself a recovering alcoholic. Kate is serious about her attempts to stay sober, Charlie, however, has no intention of quitting the drink, stretching both their relationship and Kate's resolve, to breaking point.
This indie film is a little gem. Shot in a freewheeling hand held style, it tackles a serious issue without coming across as either preachy of flippant. Of course alcoholism is no laughing matter, and the film does not play it for laughs. The humour comes form the characters and the situations that they find themselves in, even if it at times the very darkest humour.
Mary Elizabeth Winstead is the film's standout. She goes to some very bleak places as Kate, but always makes her a warm, sympathetic character. Kate is never played as a victim, and Winstead gives her the steel necessary to deal with everything that is thrown at her.
Saturday, 28 February 2015
The Bridge on the River Kwai
1957 / UK / 161 minutes
Director: David Lean
Screenplay: Carl Foreman and Michael Wilson, based on the novel The Bridge Over the River Kwai by Pierre Boulle
Starring: William Holden, Alec Guinness, Jack Hawkins, Sessue Hayakawa
Genre: Action, drama, war
This film is set in Thailand in 1943 and concerns a group of British Prisoners Of War led by principled dutiful gentleman officer Lieutenant Colonel Nicholson (Guinness) who are ordered by their Japanese captors, led by tough strict Colonel Saito (Hayakawa), to work on a rail bridge spanninjg the Kwai river. After a long battle of wills between Nicholson and Saito, primarily due to the latter's insistence that officers work alongside the men, the two reach a compromise, and Nicholson and his men co-operate on the construction of the bridge, partly to boost the prisoner's morale and partly out of pride in British engineering.
Unbeknownst to anyone at the prison camp however, a small group of Allied soldiers, led by cynical realist American naval officer Shears (Holden), who has some secrets of his own, and who managed to escape from the prison camp, are moving through the jungle on a dangerous mission to destroy the bridge by any means necessary.
Based on a novel by French author Pierre Boulle (whose work also inspired Planet of the Apes), this is an acknowledged cinema classic. Directed by David Lean, the master of widescreen spectacle, it is a hugely entertaining film. It's not an all-action shoot 'em up war film, although there are some exciting action set pieces, it's more of a character piece. Particularly interesting is the relationship between Nicholson, practically the epitome of the stiff upper lipped British officer, and Saito, his Japanese counterpart, initially antagonistic it becomes something more complex.
The film was the winner of seven Academy Awards, including Best Picture and there are elements of it that have become part of cinema history, such as the prisoners whistling the "Colonel Bogey March" while marching, and the exciting climax.
Director: David Lean
Screenplay: Carl Foreman and Michael Wilson, based on the novel The Bridge Over the River Kwai by Pierre Boulle
Starring: William Holden, Alec Guinness, Jack Hawkins, Sessue Hayakawa
Genre: Action, drama, war
This film is set in Thailand in 1943 and concerns a group of British Prisoners Of War led by principled dutiful gentleman officer Lieutenant Colonel Nicholson (Guinness) who are ordered by their Japanese captors, led by tough strict Colonel Saito (Hayakawa), to work on a rail bridge spanninjg the Kwai river. After a long battle of wills between Nicholson and Saito, primarily due to the latter's insistence that officers work alongside the men, the two reach a compromise, and Nicholson and his men co-operate on the construction of the bridge, partly to boost the prisoner's morale and partly out of pride in British engineering.
Unbeknownst to anyone at the prison camp however, a small group of Allied soldiers, led by cynical realist American naval officer Shears (Holden), who has some secrets of his own, and who managed to escape from the prison camp, are moving through the jungle on a dangerous mission to destroy the bridge by any means necessary.
Based on a novel by French author Pierre Boulle (whose work also inspired Planet of the Apes), this is an acknowledged cinema classic. Directed by David Lean, the master of widescreen spectacle, it is a hugely entertaining film. It's not an all-action shoot 'em up war film, although there are some exciting action set pieces, it's more of a character piece. Particularly interesting is the relationship between Nicholson, practically the epitome of the stiff upper lipped British officer, and Saito, his Japanese counterpart, initially antagonistic it becomes something more complex.
The film was the winner of seven Academy Awards, including Best Picture and there are elements of it that have become part of cinema history, such as the prisoners whistling the "Colonel Bogey March" while marching, and the exciting climax.
Saturday, 21 February 2015
Raging Bull
1980 / USA / 129 minutes
Director: Martin Scorsese
Screenplay: Paul Schrader and Mardik Martin, based on the book Raging Bull: My Story by Jake LaMotta, Joseph Carter and Peter Savage
Starring: Robert De Niro, Cathy Moriarty and Joe Pesci
Genre: Drama, sports
This film is widely regarded as one of the greatest films of the 1980s and one of the peaks of director Martin Scorsese and actor Robert De Niro's careers. The film tells the true story of champion boxer Jake LaMotta (De Niro) following his career from a hungry up and coming prize fighter in the early 1940s to to a bloated nightclub entertainer in the 1960s. It details how the violence and rage which made LaMotta such a feared and formidable opponent in the ring, affected his personal life and relationships, in particular with second wife Vicky (Moriarty) and his brother and manager Joey (Pesci), which were coloured by his obsessive rage, sexual jealousy, paranoia and self-destructive behaviour.
LaMotta is never a likeable individual, but he is fascinating and weirdly sympathetic thanks to the astonishing performance by De Niro, in which he attained peak physical form to play the young LaMotta (the real Jake LaMotta on whose autobiography the film is based and who served as an advisor for the film-makers commented that DeNiro was one of the twenty best middleweight boxers of all time). and then famously became hugely overweight to play the older LaMotta.
The film is shot in beautiful black and white with a brief colour sequence about halfway through the film. Most of the film is shot in the gritty low-key style familiar from earlier Scorsese films, but the boxing scenes are spectacular choreographed and edited and stylishly shot.
A bleak, savage and uncompromising film, it is also a masterpiece.
Director: Martin Scorsese
Screenplay: Paul Schrader and Mardik Martin, based on the book Raging Bull: My Story by Jake LaMotta, Joseph Carter and Peter Savage
Starring: Robert De Niro, Cathy Moriarty and Joe Pesci
Genre: Drama, sports
This film is widely regarded as one of the greatest films of the 1980s and one of the peaks of director Martin Scorsese and actor Robert De Niro's careers. The film tells the true story of champion boxer Jake LaMotta (De Niro) following his career from a hungry up and coming prize fighter in the early 1940s to to a bloated nightclub entertainer in the 1960s. It details how the violence and rage which made LaMotta such a feared and formidable opponent in the ring, affected his personal life and relationships, in particular with second wife Vicky (Moriarty) and his brother and manager Joey (Pesci), which were coloured by his obsessive rage, sexual jealousy, paranoia and self-destructive behaviour.
LaMotta is never a likeable individual, but he is fascinating and weirdly sympathetic thanks to the astonishing performance by De Niro, in which he attained peak physical form to play the young LaMotta (the real Jake LaMotta on whose autobiography the film is based and who served as an advisor for the film-makers commented that DeNiro was one of the twenty best middleweight boxers of all time). and then famously became hugely overweight to play the older LaMotta.
The film is shot in beautiful black and white with a brief colour sequence about halfway through the film. Most of the film is shot in the gritty low-key style familiar from earlier Scorsese films, but the boxing scenes are spectacular choreographed and edited and stylishly shot.
A bleak, savage and uncompromising film, it is also a masterpiece.
Saturday, 12 July 2014
22 Jump Street
2014 / USA / 112 minutes
Director: Phil Lord and Christopher Miller
Screenplay: Michael Bacall, Oren Uziel and Rodney Rothman, from a story by Jonah Hill and Michael Bacall, based on the television series 21 Jump Street
Starring: Jonah Hill, Channing Tatum, Peter Stormare, Ice Cube, Amber Williams
Genre: Comedy, action
This movie is the sequel to the 2012 film 21 Jump Street which itself was based on the 1980s television series. This time round cops Jenko (Tatum) and Schmidt (Hill) are assigned to go undercover as college students to locate the suppliers of a new synthetic drug called "WHY PHY" which caused the death of a student. While Jenko quickly befriends the local jocks, causing a rift between him and Schmidt who falls for art major Maya (Williams).
The film is hugely entertaining. Much of the humour is very self-referential about being a sequel to a successful movie. The filmmakers know the rules of a sequel The audience knows the rules of a sequel and the filmmakers know that they know. There are a lot of jokes about the fact that it's "exactly the same as last time" but with a bigger budget. The secret to the film's humour and heart is the genuine chemistry between Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum whose bromantic relationship and pitch perfect comic timing is genuinely winning.
The movie's humour is lowbrow and the material is dumb, but it's smart enough to play with it. It's perfect for a fun movie night.
Director: Phil Lord and Christopher Miller
Screenplay: Michael Bacall, Oren Uziel and Rodney Rothman, from a story by Jonah Hill and Michael Bacall, based on the television series 21 Jump Street
Starring: Jonah Hill, Channing Tatum, Peter Stormare, Ice Cube, Amber Williams
Genre: Comedy, action
This movie is the sequel to the 2012 film 21 Jump Street which itself was based on the 1980s television series. This time round cops Jenko (Tatum) and Schmidt (Hill) are assigned to go undercover as college students to locate the suppliers of a new synthetic drug called "WHY PHY" which caused the death of a student. While Jenko quickly befriends the local jocks, causing a rift between him and Schmidt who falls for art major Maya (Williams).
The film is hugely entertaining. Much of the humour is very self-referential about being a sequel to a successful movie. The filmmakers know the rules of a sequel The audience knows the rules of a sequel and the filmmakers know that they know. There are a lot of jokes about the fact that it's "exactly the same as last time" but with a bigger budget. The secret to the film's humour and heart is the genuine chemistry between Jonah Hill and Channing Tatum whose bromantic relationship and pitch perfect comic timing is genuinely winning.
The movie's humour is lowbrow and the material is dumb, but it's smart enough to play with it. It's perfect for a fun movie night.
Friday, 28 February 2014
Bram Stoker's Dracula
Year: 1992
Director: Francis Ford Coppola
Screenplay: James V. Hart, based on the novel Dracula by Bram Stoker
Starring: Gary Oldman, Winona Ryder, Keanu Reeves, Anthony Hopkins, Richard E. Grant, Sadie Frost, Tom Waits
Running Time: 128 minutes
Genre: Horror
In 1462, the Transylvanian knight, Vlad Dracula (Oldman) returns from a victory against the invading Turks, only to find that his wife has killed herself after receiving a false report of his death. Enraged at the idea that her soul is now damned because she committed suicide, Dracula renounces God and the church and swears that he will return from his own death to avenge hers.
In 1897, English solicitor Jonathan Harker (Reeves) travels to Transylvania to negotiate the sale of some property in London to the mysterious Count Dracula (Oldman). As Harker becomes increasingly disturbed by his strange, Dracula becomes convinced that Harker's fiance, Mina Murray (Ryder) is the reincarnation of his dead wife.
Escaping to Britain, Dracula sets about preying on Mina's best friend, Lucy Westenra (Frost). It becomes apparent that only the eccentric Dr. Abraham Van Helsing (Hopkins) has the knowledge to fight Dracula's reign of terror.
This, the umpteenth screen adaptation of the evergreen horror classic, feels closer to Anne Rice than Bram Stoker in it's sensuous, romantic portrayal of the vampire. Everything about the film is extremely stylised, showcasing a range of cinematic tricks, the problem with this approach is that it constantly reminds you that your watching a movie, it's too pretty to ever be involving or, crucially, really scary.
Keanu Reeves is certainly miscast as an English solicitor (his attempt at an English accent is notoriously dreadful), Winona Ryder also struggles with the English accent, but does do well with a fairly thankless role . Gary Oldman makes a striking, if never really scary Dracula (who appears variously as a grotesque old man, a wolf man monster, a man bat monster and a romantic knight), while a scenery-chewing Anthony Hopkins ladles on steaming, thick slices of ham as Van Helsing.
The designs, costumes and sets in the film are really impressive, and the film is too lavist andinventive to ever really be scary. It adapts the novel relatively faithfully, aside from the unnecessary prologue explaining Dracula's origins, and the subplot of Dracula believing Mina to be his reincarnated wife.
The problem is that the lavish, epic treatment doesn't really work for horror, because it just seems to dilute the scary elements.
Director: Francis Ford Coppola
Screenplay: James V. Hart, based on the novel Dracula by Bram Stoker
Starring: Gary Oldman, Winona Ryder, Keanu Reeves, Anthony Hopkins, Richard E. Grant, Sadie Frost, Tom Waits
Running Time: 128 minutes
Genre: Horror
In 1462, the Transylvanian knight, Vlad Dracula (Oldman) returns from a victory against the invading Turks, only to find that his wife has killed herself after receiving a false report of his death. Enraged at the idea that her soul is now damned because she committed suicide, Dracula renounces God and the church and swears that he will return from his own death to avenge hers.
In 1897, English solicitor Jonathan Harker (Reeves) travels to Transylvania to negotiate the sale of some property in London to the mysterious Count Dracula (Oldman). As Harker becomes increasingly disturbed by his strange, Dracula becomes convinced that Harker's fiance, Mina Murray (Ryder) is the reincarnation of his dead wife.
Escaping to Britain, Dracula sets about preying on Mina's best friend, Lucy Westenra (Frost). It becomes apparent that only the eccentric Dr. Abraham Van Helsing (Hopkins) has the knowledge to fight Dracula's reign of terror.
This, the umpteenth screen adaptation of the evergreen horror classic, feels closer to Anne Rice than Bram Stoker in it's sensuous, romantic portrayal of the vampire. Everything about the film is extremely stylised, showcasing a range of cinematic tricks, the problem with this approach is that it constantly reminds you that your watching a movie, it's too pretty to ever be involving or, crucially, really scary.
Keanu Reeves is certainly miscast as an English solicitor (his attempt at an English accent is notoriously dreadful), Winona Ryder also struggles with the English accent, but does do well with a fairly thankless role . Gary Oldman makes a striking, if never really scary Dracula (who appears variously as a grotesque old man, a wolf man monster, a man bat monster and a romantic knight), while a scenery-chewing Anthony Hopkins ladles on steaming, thick slices of ham as Van Helsing.
The designs, costumes and sets in the film are really impressive, and the film is too lavist andinventive to ever really be scary. It adapts the novel relatively faithfully, aside from the unnecessary prologue explaining Dracula's origins, and the subplot of Dracula believing Mina to be his reincarnated wife.
The problem is that the lavish, epic treatment doesn't really work for horror, because it just seems to dilute the scary elements.
Saturday, 21 December 2013
Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy
Year of Release: 2004
Director: Adam McKay
Screenplay: Will Ferrell and Adam McKay
Starring: Will Ferrell, Christina Applegate, Paul Rudd, Steve Carrell, David Koechner
San Diego, the 1970s. In the cut-throat world of local television news, the winners are definitely the top-rated Channel 4 News Team: Sports reporter Champ Kind (Koechner), roving reporter Brian Fantana (Rudd), weatherman Brick Tamland (Carrell) and their leader anchorman Ron Burgundy (Ferrell). They are trusted, respected and beloved by the entire city. However their cozy male-dominated world is threatened by the arrival of ambitious reporter Veronica Corningstone (Applegate). After the whole gang make several inept attempts to seduce her, Veronica soon strikes up a relationship with Ron. however he is shocked when she reveals her plans to become a network anchor, not least by the fact that she is probably better at it than he is.
The film is constantly entertaining and most of the time it is extremely funny with many laugh out loud moments. Ferrell turns in a fantastic comic performance as the deluded, chauvinistic Ron Burgundy, who always manages to make a potentially horrible character sympathetic and kind of likable. The rest of the cast deliver pitch-perfect performances and there is brilliant rapport among them all. The script is well-written and funny and packed with memorable, quotable dialogue. Also it all looks very stylish, providing a fun take on the world of local TV news in the 70s. It may not be a masterpiece but there is plenty to enjoy and it holds up well to repeat viewings.
Deleted scenes and alternate takes from the movie were re-edited into a separate direct-to-DVD film called Wake Up, Ron Burgundy: The Lost Movie (2004). A sequel, Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues, was released in 2013.
Director: Adam McKay
Screenplay: Will Ferrell and Adam McKay
Starring: Will Ferrell, Christina Applegate, Paul Rudd, Steve Carrell, David Koechner
San Diego, the 1970s. In the cut-throat world of local television news, the winners are definitely the top-rated Channel 4 News Team: Sports reporter Champ Kind (Koechner), roving reporter Brian Fantana (Rudd), weatherman Brick Tamland (Carrell) and their leader anchorman Ron Burgundy (Ferrell). They are trusted, respected and beloved by the entire city. However their cozy male-dominated world is threatened by the arrival of ambitious reporter Veronica Corningstone (Applegate). After the whole gang make several inept attempts to seduce her, Veronica soon strikes up a relationship with Ron. however he is shocked when she reveals her plans to become a network anchor, not least by the fact that she is probably better at it than he is.
The film is constantly entertaining and most of the time it is extremely funny with many laugh out loud moments. Ferrell turns in a fantastic comic performance as the deluded, chauvinistic Ron Burgundy, who always manages to make a potentially horrible character sympathetic and kind of likable. The rest of the cast deliver pitch-perfect performances and there is brilliant rapport among them all. The script is well-written and funny and packed with memorable, quotable dialogue. Also it all looks very stylish, providing a fun take on the world of local TV news in the 70s. It may not be a masterpiece but there is plenty to enjoy and it holds up well to repeat viewings.
Deleted scenes and alternate takes from the movie were re-edited into a separate direct-to-DVD film called Wake Up, Ron Burgundy: The Lost Movie (2004). A sequel, Anchorman 2: The Legend Continues, was released in 2013.
Friday, 25 October 2013
Class of Nuke 'Em High
Year of Release: 1986
Directors: Richard W. Haines, Michael Herz and Samuel Weil
Writers: Lloyd Kaufman, Richard W. Haines, Mark Rudnitsky and Stuart Strutin
Starring: Janelle Brady, Gil Brenton, Robert Prichard, Pat Ryan
This is a comedy horror high school movie from cult production company Troma Entertainment. In the town of Tromaville, New Jersey, the local high school is only a quarter of a mile away from the nuclear power station. The honor society have transformed into violent mindless thugs who call themselves "the Cretins". They sell the students contaminated drugs, which cause strange changes in nice high school couple Chrissy (Brady) and Warren (Brenton). To make matters worse, there is a baby monster in the basement which has grown into a big monster.
The film is technically bad on almost every level (although the monster does look pretty impressive), the acting is atrocious, the jokes are bad and it is awash with gratuitous violence. However, none of that matters, because the film is actually a lot of fun. The filmmakers are in on the joke. They obviously knew their audience and it's perfectly tuned to the midnight movie cult crowd. It zips along merrily enough and it never gets boring. If your a fan of cult cinema or are just looking for a campy fun movie to laugh at with your friends then you'll probably enjoy it.
There is a kind of satirical undercurrent to it about nuclear safety (the staff of the plant are depicted almost unanimously as being completely incompetent or crooked, even though it is full of posters proclaiming how clean and safe nuclear power is) and also about fears of rebellious youth (in the principal's office one of the Cretins sneers "We're the youth of today" and they all start singing the "Star Spangled Banner").
Directors: Richard W. Haines, Michael Herz and Samuel Weil
Writers: Lloyd Kaufman, Richard W. Haines, Mark Rudnitsky and Stuart Strutin
Starring: Janelle Brady, Gil Brenton, Robert Prichard, Pat Ryan
This is a comedy horror high school movie from cult production company Troma Entertainment. In the town of Tromaville, New Jersey, the local high school is only a quarter of a mile away from the nuclear power station. The honor society have transformed into violent mindless thugs who call themselves "the Cretins". They sell the students contaminated drugs, which cause strange changes in nice high school couple Chrissy (Brady) and Warren (Brenton). To make matters worse, there is a baby monster in the basement which has grown into a big monster.
The film is technically bad on almost every level (although the monster does look pretty impressive), the acting is atrocious, the jokes are bad and it is awash with gratuitous violence. However, none of that matters, because the film is actually a lot of fun. The filmmakers are in on the joke. They obviously knew their audience and it's perfectly tuned to the midnight movie cult crowd. It zips along merrily enough and it never gets boring. If your a fan of cult cinema or are just looking for a campy fun movie to laugh at with your friends then you'll probably enjoy it.
There is a kind of satirical undercurrent to it about nuclear safety (the staff of the plant are depicted almost unanimously as being completely incompetent or crooked, even though it is full of posters proclaiming how clean and safe nuclear power is) and also about fears of rebellious youth (in the principal's office one of the Cretins sneers "We're the youth of today" and they all start singing the "Star Spangled Banner").
Labels:
Class of Nuke 'Em High,
comedy,
Gil Brenton,
high school,
horror,
Janelle Brady,
Michael Herz,
movies,
Pat Ryan,
reviews,
Richard W. Haines,
Robert Prichard,
Samuel Weil,
teen,
Troma
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)