PARKLAND

SYNOPSIS – The Kennedy assassination told from the side-lines One of the most infamous days in world history, the assassination of President Kennedy has been the focus of the big screen before. Oliver Stone’s JFK (1991) came at the events from a conspiracy/political point of view and felt like a big scale detective noir movie. Parkland comes at things from a very different angle - don’t hope to see any new revelations about the shooting itself (which is dealt with in the first five minutes) - but looks instead at the aftershock on the lives of various individuals. Effective use of a quality ensemble cast means that the lack of a sole main protagonist doesn’t derail the narrative; instead it gives a feel of the scope and scale of the event’s consequences. Some of the narrative strands are more effective than others, the strongest link is definitely Robert Oswald (James Badge Dale ) a man caught between his natural love for his brother and the horror at what he has done. Abraham Zappruder’s (Paul Giamatti) gives Giamatti plenty of opportunity to deliver an emotional performance that perfectly captures the shock and horror of the average man on the ground. Zac Efron also stands out as one of the doctors who struggle to save the President’s life. The film’s high point is its coverage of the infamous day in question (it covers from the Friday to the Monday). The sense of everything that was once solid and safe and suddenly spiralling into chaos and confusion works to great effect, whether it be the fight over legal points on what to do with the body or Robert Oswald’s reaction on hearing the name of the arrested suspect. The assassination itself is treated extremely realistically, Oswald’s shots are muted and, despite knowing what is going to happen, still shocking. Effective use is made of the Zappruder film to avoid any tasteless reconstructions. Problems begin when the film gets into its third act, once things calm down the script loses some of its intensity. Once we get into the investigation its starts to feel a lot more like a detective story that we already know the solution to. There is some attempt to put in some new revelations at this point but, though intriguing, they feel a little flat. It might have been best if the film stuck to coverage of the 22nd and some of the burning intensity could have been sustained without slowing. FINAL VERDICT 6/10 despite this third act slouch the film still boasts good performances and is a respectful dignified look at tragic events.

Read More

Unknown 04:53  No comment

HUNGER GAMES: 2 CATCHING FIRE

SYNOPSIS – Katniss and Peeta find themselves used by the government and thrown into a new deadly Hunger Games . Follow-ups are always tricky things, reigniting an audience’s interest in characters they might not have seen for up to a year takes skill. Since the Hunger Games did such a good job of establishing strong characters, making use of strong performances, it would be a shame if the sequel fell short. Luckily director Gary Ross proves adept at picking up the story as though we, the audience, never left. The best sequels are those that raise the stakes and up the ante, many simply pretend to do this whilst in actual fact just change superficial things like location etc. Catching Fire takes our two protagonists and raises the stakes from their own personal survival to the fate of their families and entire district. Handily this also gives us a chance to see more of Panem, not only of the districts, but also of the vast Babylon-like Capitol. While taking about the look of the film I feel I should note a criticism that has been around since the first film. This is that the concept (a game show which features death) is not original and has in fact been done many times before (Battle Royale, The Running Man). Personally I don’t find this particularly damning,there are few concepts these days that are wholly original . Besides if you want to be picky about it the idea of youths being sacrificed to a large empire goes right the way back to Greek myth. Having similar elements does not mean that a film is somehow stealing another’s thunder and let’s be honest (eighties nostalgia aside) comparing the Running Man to the Hunger games is ridiculous. While the film sports a strong script and distinct visuals I think it’s the performances that are Catching Fire’s real ace in the hole. Jennifer Lawrence gives a (forgive the pun) performance that burns with intensity, and yet conveys how helpless her character feels in the march of events. Josh Hutcherson (Peeta) gets to bring out more of his characters cynicism without feeling like a different person. Even minor characters like Effe (Elisabeth Banks) get development, and so no one simply phone in the same performance. There are some problems with a few of the new characters; they feel a little like cannon fodder with no other purpose but to fill the death tally. You find yourself focusing on the two main leads and find yourself caring little for the other players (though I must stress this is not the fault of the performers). FINAL VERDICT 8/10 – Continuing the characters journey with a solid script and great performances.

Read More

Unknown 15:41  No comment

BASED ON TRUE EVENTS

Given Hollywood’s recent passion for films “based on true events” (because “true story” opens you up to lawsuits) I thought I would give some ideas to the many studio bosses who I know read this blog for some untapped sources 1. Harry Houdini’s life - This one has a bit of bias in it ,as a huge fan of magic and illusion , despite not even being able to shuffle a deck of cards myself, I find Houdini one of the most fascinating figures in entertainment in general. There has only been one big studio film and many more details on the man, his life and his beliefs have come to light since then. 2. Byzantium, An entire era ignored. The Byzantium Empire was the Greek half of the Roman Empire that continued on long after its parent empire fell. It contained just as much war, murder, scandal and sex as the Roman Empire and yet has been entirely skipped over by Hollywood - do they honestly think that an audience can’t cope with an unfamiliar time period? They cope with entirely made up civilisations and species all the time, I think they could get on board with this. 3. James Bond WW2 style – There are of course numerous stories of courage and valour from the battlefield of the Second World War. Less well represented on screen however are the exploits of the intelligence services that came up with some incredible plans and deceptions to fool the Nazi war machine. To my mind you could get at least ten or twelve films from these operations, the only problem might be that an audience would throw up its hands and say “oh come on that’s clearly made up”. 4. Walt Disney’, the man not the mouse – Walt Disney’s life story is one of struggles; struggle not just to see his ideas come to fruition but to keep legal ownership of those ideas. His life is fertile ground for a movie biopic. There is just one rather ironic problem, Disney-the -company is very unlikely to entrust Disney-the-man to any other studio or writers. Any Disney project that does come to then screen then will have been ..well Disneyfied 5. The Iranian embassy siege The most famous part of this story, the dramatic rescue operation by the SAS is only part of the story. The rest involved careful planning nerve racking tension and bloodshed. What you don’t want to do is turn this into your average run of the mill action movie; personally I’d like to see Paul Greengrass helm this one. If he brought even half the tension he put into Capitan Philips it would be great. These are some of my picks, what you would like to see brought to the big screen. Answers in the comments or on twiter

Read More

Unknown 07:28  No comment

THE COUNSELLOR

SYNOPSIS One man’s choices lead to devastating consequences When, on paper, you see the combination of Ridley Scott and Cormac McCarthy collaborating on a film you cannot help but get excited. What seemed so promising on paper, however, seems to have taken a decidedly more mundane turn in reality. Performance-wise the cast do their best with the material they are provided with. Michael Fassbender tries to show the pain and turmoil as the titular Counsellor (we never find out his real name) and comes close to achieving this. Cameron Diaz plays Malkina with a steely, almost emotionless, air that provides a genuine dislike with the audience and the lurking sense of real evil. Then there is Javier Brandem, who has the great misfortune to play a character (Reiner) with some of the stupidest lines in the film (quite an achievement in this film). Brad Pitt’s Westray meanwhile is so forgettable as to be pretty much superfluous to the film. Penelope Cruz manages, and this is quite an achievement for someone with her looks, to blend into the background. Both of these problems are, to be fair, more to do with their character’s role in the narrative rather than their respective performances. No, the problems with this film can only be laid at one door - the script. McCarthy has written for a visual medium before but it was for television (as well as being some time ago). What we get from this screenplay is strange dialogue that (for the most part) is not only pointless but just sounds strange coming from drug cartel leaders and crime bosses. There is one scene in particular that I am convinced read great on paper but which fails spectacularly on screen. I am referring, of course, to Malkina’ already infamous sex act with a sports car, probably the most un-erotic sex scene to come out of Hollywood in some time (and it does nothing to help the resale value of the car). The plot two feels pretty hollow, it’s like window dressing to give the characters an excuse to talk about morality, sex, consequences and more sex. There is also (in my opinion) quite a glaring hole in the narrative. Midway through something takes place which makes the rest of the film pretty much pointless, except we, the audience, still have to sit through it. FINAL VERDICT 5/10 a case of what might have been, this is all dressed up with nowhere to go.

Read More

Unknown 05:01  No comment

Saving Mr Banks

SAVING MR BANKS SYNOPSIS – The story of the struggle to bring Mary Poppins to the screen It seems these days that everything has to have an “untold story “ behind it. This apparently extends to the troubled production history of Mary Poppins; one could look at this rather cynically as an extended ‘making of’ feature. I am happy to report that Saving Mr Banks is not simply, as a friend of mine described last year’s Hitchcock, “a list of the trivia page of IMDB”. Instead the film can be fairly called a battle of two equally vibrant personalities; in one corner we have PL Travers (Emma Thompson) and in the other Walt Disney (Tom Hanks). It’s not much of an exaggeration to call this battle the core strength of the film. Thompson has to portray a character that for much of the film appears difficult and obstinate, yet ensure the audience understands the emotional roots of her attitude rather than simply seeming being labelled ‘snooty’. Hanks, meanwhile, portrays a man few are familiar with outside of the statue in the magic kingdom or old archive footage. He plays the part larger than life; you can believe that this is the man who forged an animation empire and built a theme park from a swamp. He is slightly constrained by the fact that, as this is a Disney production, the script plays it very safe. Indeed some might feel that the aforementioned statue of Walt has suddenly come to life, the image of the man rather than the man himself. Of course, in fairness, the film is not supposed to be about Disney in general but this particular part of movie history. There is a third player who is also vital to the success of the film and that is Colin Farrell who portrays Travers’ father Robert, a man tormented by his personal demons. The jumps back and forth between past and present are handled very well for the most part and give the conflict in the present times an emotional context based on our knowledge of what happened in the past. The script has a good amount of wit and humour throughout it, Travers dripping sarcasm against Disney’s plain speak. In the emotional department the story of Travers’ childhood definitely has the upper hand; it just feels a lot more sincere than some of the rather contrived scenes that take place in the main story. FINAL VERDICT 7/10 it plays it safe and has a very Disney ending but it’s still extremely enjoyable.

Read More

Unknown 06:51  No comment

GRAVITY

GRAVITY SYNOPSIS- when their space station is damaged, two astronauts must struggle to return to earth. From the first shot of space we get the sense of the majesty and breath-taking visuals that are going to mark this film. Watching Dr Ryan Stone (Sandra Bullock) and Lieutenant Matt Kowalski (George Clooney) floating through the vast expanse of space, the sense of helpless drifting is immediate. Director Alfonso Cuaron has taken a story - which a hundred years ago would have taken place on the high seas - and fits it seamlessly into the science fiction medium. Cuaron is aided greatly by both his actors giving it their all despite being in restrictive suits that rarely allow them much movement. Bullock and Clooney use their vocal and facial assets to give life to their characters and emotionally involve the audience. Their third co –star could almost said to be the earth itself, the views are so breath-taking that it can sometimes be hard to tear yourself away from them and focus on the human cast. CGI can produce wonderous images but its true place here is placing the actors in the environment and then letting the audience drink in the beauty of the ensuing images If all of these sounds like I’m waxing only positive that’s only because I’m genuinely struggling to think of any negatives. Some of the religious imagery and themes can feel a bit forced but this is only down to one’s personal preference. Some might find Clooney’s character a little too quirky, especially in some of the life or death scenarios he’s placed in. I have to admit that I’m nit-picking this is a film that will be talked about for a long time to come and if the academy awards don’t take notice then Oscar should come down from his plinth and put that sword to good use. FINAL VERDICT 10/10 No film is perfect but I’ve run out of numbers in measuring this films qualities. PS The worst mistake you can make with this movie is “wait till it’s out on DVD”

Read More

Unknown 14:57  3 comments

THOR THE DARK WORLD

SYNOPSIS –With the universe threatened by a new evil, Thor must form an uneasy alliance with his treacherous brother in order to defeat it. The first Thor film was out long before this blog began so I think it’s only fair that, before moving on to the sequel, to give some brief thoughts on the first film. I have to admit that I was not entirely wowed by the god of thunder’s first outing, it certainly wasn’t a bad film but it set things up for the Avengers movie as well. I just felt that out of the entire pre-Avenger Assemble movies it felt a little by-the-book and flat. Of course, cinema is a tricky thing and when I caught a double screening of both films last night I found myself enjoying and appreciating the first film much more. So with all the hype over the sequel can it possibly live up to the expectations? The short answer is yes. We pick up the movie a little after the end of the Avengers and the transition works well. Asgard feels like a connected piece of the larger Marvel universe as we see the chaos unleashed by Loki (Tom Hiddleston). New director Alan Taylor shows us more of the nine realms and expands Thor’s universe, as well as giving a fuller look at Asgard, which we did not get to see a great deal last time, The core of the film is the relationship between Thor (Chris Hemsworth) and Loki, both actors show great skill in mixing the fraternal bickering with the deeper emotional scenes. Both characters progress and grow in the film and we get to see new sides of them (one of the biggest curses of franchise movies for me is this lack of development). In a nice irony we get to see Thor, who started out as a brash warmonger, be the voice of moderation to his father Odin (Sir Anthony Hopkins) which marks him out as a leader of men rather than simply a muscled bruiser. Loki meanwhile gets his own journey which, whilst giving the character new ground, feels like there is more to tell (the director has signed on for a possible third film so it’s possible things are being held back for that). Whilst our heroes (well hero and anti-hero) are well developed, the villain of the piece, Malekeith (Christopher Eccleston) is a lot more ‘by the numbers’ and a bit dull. This is not Eccelston’s fault, he does his best to give the role real menace but he is hampered by clichéd dialogue and a lack of screen time. Thor’s loyal warrior companions, the warriors three, feel underused, this is a shame because as a group they have strong dynamics and it would have been nice to see more of them in action. Much more comedy has been put into this instalment and though it is very effective it sometimes can be a little jarring when we suddenly jump from laughter to serious mode. Now, of course, there was a good deal of tongue in cheek humour in the first film but some of this feels a bit out of place. FINAL VERDICT 8/10 This is how you keep a fan base interested, excited and ready for more

Read More

Unknown 15:26  No comment

JACKASS PRESENTS BAD GRANDPA

SYNOPSIS: left with his young grandson Irving Zisman (Johnny Knoxville) must get the boy to his father, causing chaos and destruction along the way The Jackass movies have never exactly been highbrow comedy (Jackass being the biggest about their brand of humour), despite this they still have managed to find an audience. One of the more popular moments in the first two movies involved star/stuntman Johnny Knoxville donning complex make up and indulging in antics as a foul mouthed old man with an equally foul mouthed grandson. In many ways the main figure in this outing is not Knoxville but Jackson Nicoll as grandson Billy. Put into situations that play his age he proves adept at getting the best comic reactions out of strangers. Some of the film’s best moments are when Billy quizzes strangers on topics and gets some of the movies best reactions. Like movies of its kind before it (Borat, Bruno) the film has a certain contrived feel as it struggles to pull hidden camera stunts and reaction shots into some kind of a story. It has to be said that, given this is coming from the Jackass team, they succeed rather well. Most of the scripted story scenes fit well and are not too numerous to distract from the laughter. Knoxville actually manages to give a decent performance as Zisman in the more emotional scenes. The main problem lies more with the trailer than with the film itself. The film has a moment that is supposed to serve as the films climax ,this moment however is shown in the films trailer and therefore much of the comic value is ruined. In many ways the film feels like it’s playing it safe compared to other Jackass productions. This might have something to do with the presence of eight year old Nicoll (though they seem fine with making him swear etc.) But it leaves the film feeling a little flat, the laughs are there but it feels like the punches are being pulled. FINAL VERDICT 7/10 it may not be on the level of previous Jackass films but it still gets the right reactions.

Read More

Unknown 14:36  No comment

ESCAPE PLAN

What do you get if you combine Rocky, Terminator and episodes of MacGyver? A surprisingly muted film that seems to be playing it safe is what you get. Though they teamed up before in The Expendables 2, this is the first film where Stallone and Schwarzenegger have teamed up properly as an action duo. As usual let’s start with what works; the buddy cop banter between the two action veterans is really enjoyable . Shwarz…… – Arnold- in particular looks like he’s having a good time and channelling the tongue-in-cheek humour that permeated his classic films of the eighties. The deadpan humour matches well with Stallone’s straight-man delivery and gives the film such much needed humour (more on that later). Another enjoyable element of the film is the A-team/MacGyver-like ways our heroes escape from their situation. Whenever an obstacle presents itself ,seeing them come up with a solution ,however ridiculous ,is always fun. What holds the film back is its very reserved ‘play it safe’ style that does not really live up to having two of cinemas biggest action stars in the same place. Given this you would expect something like Terminator meets Rocky, instead the action feels like an average Stephen Segal movie. Towards the end the film begins to degenerate into bland gunfights and fails to use any of these fights as effective set pieces . Even the final confrontation between Stallone and the tormenting head guard (played by football hard Vinnie Jones) feels flat and rather dull Should the two team up again we can only hope a stronger script will do them better justice. FINAL VERDICT 6/10 Disappointing for what could have been a really good action movie icon team up.

Read More

Unknown 12:50  No comment

Captain Philips

SYNOPSIS When his ship is threatened by pirates, the captain must try to defend it and the lives of his crew. When we first see the pirate skiffs closing in on captain Richard Philips’ (Tom Hanks) ship we get a beautiful shot of the vessel alone in an empty ocean, highlightig just how stranded they really are. This lonely, isolated, feeling is kept up throughout the film and makes for nail-biting tension. Director Paul Greengrass (who likes the ‘two sides to every story’ approach) shows us the pirates, led by Muse (Barkhad Abdi) in their preparations to go “fishing”. By giving the characters on both sides equal depth Greengrass avoids any one-dimensional caricatures, the Somali Pirates are all fleshed-out with their own individual traits and motivations. This allows the director to explore deeper political issues in the story without getting onto a soapbox or leaning to one side or another. In fact this is done so skilfully that amongst all the tension and action you might not even be aware of it until you think back on the film later. Given that this is, at its heart, a story about people the two most critical performances are Hank’s and Abdi’s. Hank’s gives a great performance as someone desperately trying to keep a grip on a situation that is rapidly spiralling out of control. Much of the attention has, however, been focused on the career debut of Barkad. His arresting portrayal of a man who is trying to keep control, not only over his hostages, but his own unruly crew, even as his bosses put on the pressure for profit, is one of the film’s central pillars. In fact it’s not too much to say that he somewhat overshadows Hanks - which is saying something for a start. The film is a little slow in getting started but once it does it keeps going at a relentless pace without feeling rushed or getting lost. FINAL VERDICT 8/10 both thought-provoking and nerve shredding, this film grips and does not let go

Read More

Unknown 12:48  No comment