THE WOMEN

2008

DIRECTOR: Diane English

NOT A PART OF OUR COLLECTION

May Contain Spoilers!

Will we be adding this to our collection?  NO

This remake of the 1939 original “Woman’s Picture” as it were, The Women has the formula to draw in a vast audience of females, in love with idea of women speaking plainly about women’s issue in a way that men couldn’t possibly understand. Well, we do understand, and in this day an age, watching women discuss men, sex and body image in a plain manner, it’s hardly groundbreaking, certainly not in the wake of Sex And The City (TV Series).

The film tries to be self-aware, referencing issues of female insecurity and women sticking together against their adversaries, (Men) whilst pretending to promote compromise within relationships, but the tone is that men can get away with whatever they please.  Well, maybe in 1939, but in 2008, it’s a bit of a stretch.

One of the most interesting features of this film, is the adoption of one of the originals plot devices of NEVER showing a single man or even male pet on-screen, with them only be refered to and spoken to on the phone etc… throughout. The plot focuses around Meg Ryan coming to terms with her husband’s affair with perfume girl, Eva Mendes. She is surrounded by her friends who try to help with varying degrees of success. But Debra Messing’s casting as one of the titular “Women”, was as diabolical as ever, but she did redeem herself slightly in her final scene as she quite comically gives birth.

I find myself thinking that in 1939, this would have made quiet a decent comedy and the original is well-regarded, but in 2008, sticking so closely to the source material was a mistake, with casting all the woman in roles with are empowering but for very dated reasons. They all seem to be accepting behaviour from their men which no right thinking modern woman would accept, yet they do so and empower themselves with very feminine pursuits such as becoming a fashion designer, publishing magazines about revenge and bitchiness and have their nails done!

It’s another example of how a film with good and decent motives has completely lost its way by fighting a battle with has already been won. Watchable but that’s about it.

GHOSTBUSTERS II

1989

DIRECTOR: Ivan Reitman

May Contain Spoilers!

There are those who believe that Ghostbusters II is a better movie than Ghostbusters. I am not one of them. Saying that, Ghostbusters II is far from a poor sequel. It has the integrity to acknowledge its predecessor and attempt to take the story further. Five years have passed since the events of Ghostbusters, Marshmallow Man and Gozer, and the Ghostbusters have gone out of business after being sued by everybody as a result of saving the city of New York.

Now, after discovering a river of slime under the city, they return to save the day yet again, from another demon, Vigo, who is after Sigourney Weaver’s 8 month old child, as a vessel for his rebirth. The plot is fine but as with the first film, it is the character incidentals and interactions which drive this, along with more of same special effects. Though I’m no longer convinced by the Proton Packs, as they haven’t half dated and look totally animated, more like something out of Forbidden Planet!

But still, this is a fun film, not as funny as its predecessor but enough to satisfy, but again, thins is Bill Murray as his comedic best as the dry witted Peter Venkman, as he clearly monopolises the best lines, as the rest, Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis become more like caricatures of themselves. Far from a rubbish sequel but not as sharp or original, obviously, as the first, but well worth catching up with again. Not sure about making anymore though…

THE PERFECT STORM

2000

DIRECTOR: Wolfgang Peterson

May Contain Spoilers!

“The one with the vertical wave”; that’s how we thought of this film back at the dawn of the century. The effects looked stunning in their day, as water had finally been mastered by the CGI wizards at I.L.M. Beyond that, nobody really seemed to care much about the plot.

In fact, it turned out that the story was somewhat true, based on the novel by Sebastian Junger, of the true events, though many are speculative, of the 1991, Perfect Storm. It was created by three storm fronts as they collided over the Atlantic Ocean, laying waste to coastlines and ships alike. Peterson’s film focuses on the Andrea Gale, the shall we say Fated sword fishing vessel, whilst trying not  spoil the film for those yet to see it, as they struggled to survive the storm as it waged havoc all around them.

The first half reminded me in many ways of Melville’s Moby Dick, not so much in plot but in the manner of telling the of the story. For those who haven’t read it, Mody Dick does spend a lot of time discussing whaling as well as the core plot of hunting the White Whale as Ahab’s legendary obsession.

This is a fishing film and a quite in-depth one and there’s a lot of fishing before the vertical wave, let’s just say that. But on repeat viewings, it is quite interesting but it does seem to be a little misjudged. Sold as film about as storm, and in many ways, sold as action film, there’ not really enough going on.

As I’ve said, the first half is about fishing, fishermen and the wider fishing community of Gloucester, Massachusetts, and the second is about sailing through the storm. Well, all’s that George Clooney and Mark Wallberg seem to do here, is steer the boat and play around with the throttle. Then there’s a bit of an outlandish sequence with a crane, but by then, you might be more interested with the rescue helicopter plotline, which deals with a doomed chopper as it rescues the crew of a yacht before succumbing to the waves themselves.

But that too, seems to be misjudged, besides dragging on for too long, it just seems that Peterson was interested in doing a film about a storm, but didn’t really have a story to tell, so he found a few smaller ones to fill it out. The problem was that neither was really enough to hold a film and they don’t really gel together that well either.

All in all, the effects were great, the plotting and execution were all over the place but it does still manage to have enough about it to hold your interest, certainly on late night TV when there’s nowt else on, which as dire as it sounds!

THE DARK KNIGHT RISES

2012

DIRECTOR: Christopher Nolan

CINEMA REVIEW

Contains Spoilers!

Will we be adding this to our collection? YES

After four years, since The Dark Knight ended, leaving us wanting more and seven years since Christopher Nolan reinvented the comic book adaptation with Batman Begins, The final chapter of The Dark Knight Trilogy has arrived.

With this much hype, would it possible live up to potentially bloated expectations? The first reviews hit last monday, with 4 to 5 stars being the consensus. Well, it did! The Dark Knight returns one last time, after eight years have passed since the events of The Dark Knight and Batman had retreated into the rebuilt Wayne Manor as Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman), maintaining the lie that Harvey Dent was Gotham’s The White Knight, and not the maniacal Two-Face, had managed to clean up Gotham City.

Batman was no longer needed but in the meantime, Bane has arrived in the city with grand plans for its destruction. I won’t go much further into the plot that this, though I will probably write a more spoiler heavy review for the Blu-ray later in the year. But for now, I will try to maintain the film’s integrity.

When we first meet Bruce Wayne after almost a decade of seclusion, he is a broken man, both physically and mentally following the murder of his childhood sweetheart, Rachel Dawes in the previous film and the toll of nightly combat. So the first port of call is to bring Batman back to the streets of Gotham. The sense of excitement is palpable and very much a part of what makes Nolan’s films tick.

He draws his audience into the narrative as if we are part of the events and the universe as it unfolds, leaving us not just wanting Batman to return for the sake of the action but for Gotham’s sake as well.  Bane, played so excellently by Tom Hardy, was a little difficult to understand from behind his mask, but still conveyed an enormous amount of presence and power, as he lays siege to the city but not as Terrorist per say, but as a freedom fighter or revolutionary, with many visual references to the French Revolution to keep us going.

Anne Hathaway’s Catwoman, though not named as anyone other than Selina Kyle, was a credit to her character as well as the actress. Dark, sultry, seductive and agile, her feline credibly was intact, whilst still being a very human character. Her duplicity was bread from desperation rather than evil and her motives convincingly drive her in both good and more dubious endeavours.

*** MAJOR SPOILER***

The less said about Talia Al Ghul the better, but the for those aware of her role, it was well-played, though her final scene was the hammiest in the film, possibly the entire trilogy.

***SPOILER END***

Then there’s the supporting cast, such as Mathew Modene, who does a great job as Dept. Commissioner Foley and Cillian Murphy’s back again, as the subtly unrecognisable Scarecrow, who besides some frayed shoulder’s on his jacket, could have been anyone,and that’s the beauty of Nolan’s Batman universe. It’s fluid and you can’t count on anything on anyone for too long.

But this franchise would be nothing without Hans Zimmer percussive score, pounding as much as it was gentle, it works well among with Nolan’s direction to craft the near perfect conclusion to the Trilogy. Both riff on earlier films and supe it up accordingly whilst maintaining the film’s integrity.

In the end, my expectations were met and exceeded. Nolan has crowned his trilogy with a film which is of the same calabar as the two which preceded it, filling in many of the blanks, choosing the right characters to take on and doing so a variety of ways, touching this time on the flamboyant Bain, though scrapping the “Venom” plot from the comics, creating an intriguing Catwoman and building another major character in the form of R. John Blake (Joseph Gordon-Lovett).

The ending of the film is just perfect, not only for this but for the entire Trilogy. With nods to Inception though I believe that it is just a nod and not as similar as some would protest, but this is epic in the way that The Dark Knight never tried to be and Batman Begins didn’t need to be. The threat is apocalyptic, in keeping with the genre, but believable in keeping with Nolan.

The same can be said for the action, though I must admit, the sentimentalist in me wanted to see the Batmoble/Tumber back, though it was there in triplicate, as Bane steels three prototype Tumbers from Wayne Enterprises, for his private army, but the Bat (Batwing) was stunning, and the Batpod made a reappearance. The Final showdown will leave you breathless, the perfect blend of direction, Zimmer’s score and some of the most intense and meaningful action you’ll see on the big screen.

The only real faults with The Dark Knight Rises stem from its scale and change in direction. It’s more about Batman’s evolution from crime fighter to savour. Less intense on a personal level, but much grander in its ideals and horror as Gotham is destroyed on scale never seen in a film of this type. But it’s not as far-fetched as one may think, as it grounds itself with historical references, such as the French Revolution, which was hardly far-fetched, though it was hard-hitting and is well translated here.

Bruce Wayne completes his journey from the boy who witnessed his parents murder, to a young man who could not grow beyond it, to a man who lost himself in a journey to understand the criminal mind. Finally returning as Batman, who defied his mentor to protect his beloved city, to a master detective. But here, he returns to his roots.

The billionaire who never cared about his wealth as much as he cared for the people of Gotham, he ends up exactly where he needed to be. Decide for yourself, whether it’s a happy ending, sad or satisfying, but either way, it was not only the best way to advance the saga, but the best way to end the series as a whole. Thanks to Nolan and his crew, we now have the most definitively brilliant Batman series EVER committed to celluloid, (or digital), and no matter what is to follow, whether it is to be the Justice League mash-up or another reboot, I suspect that it will be a long, long time before anyone can beat these.

N.B. Our thoughts are with the families of though who lost their lives in Colorado last Friday (20/07/12)

SCARFACE (1983)

1983

DIRECTOR: Brian De Palma

May Contain Spoilers!

Someone once told me, back when I was 19 years old, that I wasn’t a real film buff if I hadn’t seen Scarface. I took offence at that and as a result, when I eventually saw the film, I was 33! Was it worth the wait? Yes.

Oliver Stone’s brutal script, along with De Palma’s equally controversal take on this remake of the 1932 original, which at the time, broke all records for the profane language, leading to a savagely brutalised TV cut. The story of a Cuban gangster who takes over Miami’s drug trade, bears a striking resemblance to De Palma’s later work, Calrito’s Way, which in my opinion, seems to be a more refined version of Scarface, and with Pacino playing a slightly more sympathetic character, that he does here.

As a remake, it seems to be pretty faithful in certain respects, in its adaptation, maintaining several key elements but this is a film of the 1980′s and a groundbreaking one at that. Ultimately, I liked it. It wasn’t the greatest gangster film of all time, but it was a film of its day, and it was engrossing, Pacino and the rest of the cast as a whole where great and the moment when he “introducing us to his little friends”, was well worth the wait.

BATMAN (1989)

1989

DIRECTOR: Tim Burton

May Contain Spoilers!

In 1989, hot off the heels of his previous hit, Beetlejuice, Director, Tim Burton set his sights on reimagining one of the DC Comics most sacred characters, apart of from Superman that is, The Dark  Knight. This incarnation owes a debt to Frank Miller’s mid-80′s, Batman: The Dark Knight Returns and Alan Moore’s (Watchmen) The Killing Joke, in which Batman became a darker, more meaningful characters, and not just your run of the mill crime fighter.

Batman, was not perfect, as the film focuses more on fulfilling Jack Nicholson’s screen time obligations over fully realising the central character himself. This would be resolved 16 years later with Batman Begins, but here, it’s the Nicholson’s, The Joker’s show, and he doesn’t half steal it! I don’t hold though, with any comparison to Heath Ledger’s, Joker from 2008′s The Dark Knight, as he was an anarchist, whilst Nicholson is just crazy.

But he is funny, darkly so, but still the clean-cut Clown Prince Of Crime, rather than Ledger’s more serious and frightening take. Both work really well and are on par with each other, but as this film goes, accusations that Batman/Wayne are sidelined are somewhat valid, though not to the extent that some would argue. In short, it works. The film is not only entertaining, it’s a classy and well conceived adaptation of the comic book characters, as influential to the genre back in 1989 and Batman Begins would be in 2005.

Burton set the tone, of a dark and more serious and sinister takes of what was perceived to be the preserve of children or overgrown kids. But as any comic book fan will attest, though I’m not one myself outside the movies, comics are allegorical and not just about cartoon characters knocking each other about.

Then, there’s the Batmobile, the Starship Enterprise of the franchise. But even though this car is impractical, and the later incarnation, the Tumbler in the latest films, would feel more plausible, Burton’s gothic jet powered car would still rank as the best looking Batmobile ever! The Tumbler is great and I love it but the Art Deco stylings of this beast beat the competition full stop. And that’s the key to this project, the style.

With a macabre take on The Joker, bad-ass Dark Knight and some of the most ambitious Art Deco/Gothic stylisation to appear in a mainstream movie makes this a visual feast from start to finish, and with Burton’s twisted sense of humour perfect for this new Joker, Batman was not only a phenomenon in its day, but a classic version of Batman, even in 2012. Oh, and even though the Batwing wouldn’t last five minutes in the sky in real life, it’s still one the coolest things I’ve ever seen!

TRUE ROMANCE (DIRECTOR’S CUT)

1993

DIRECTOR: Tony Scott

May Contain Spoilers!

True Romance is one of the strangest examples of  a movie that you’ll ever see. Directed by Tony Scott, written and originally to be directed by Quentin Tarantino, with music from the younger and upcoming composer Hans Zimmer and a cast of some Hollywood’s biggest names, not in cameo’s but some in early roles, such a Brad Pitt, there aren’t many movies that you can sit through for two hours and not only witness a fantastic collection of talent, but watch the overture to rest of the 1990′s.

Set around a couple, prostitute, Patricia Arquette and comic-book geek, Christian Slater, as they fall in love and marry almost instantly, they find themselves caught up in a complex plot, with cops, gangs, mafioso and Hollywood producers, all fighting over a briefcase of cocaine, which the couple have found themselves with.

But this is Tarantino, so the violence is as hot as the wit, but this benefited from his limited role as the screenwriter and as he admits, he would have made a bleaker, more tragic film himself. But with Scott’s lighter tone, the enigmatic characters are allowed to flourish in more conventional surroundings whilst falling around Tarantino’s plotting and delivering his wonderful dialogue.

This is not one of cinema’s most well-known films outside film fans but it is a skilful collaboration and boats some of the finest actors of the decade, doing what they do best and it seems, waiting for their respective breaks. Pulp Fiction anybody…?

THE BOAT THAT ROCKED (aka PIRATE RADIO)

2009

DIRECTOR: Richard Curtis

NOT A PART OF OUR COLLECTION

May Contain Spoilers!

Will we be adding this to our collection?  NO

Too long. Too pretentious and simply not good enough. Richard Curtis, the BBC establishment’s mind behind such work as Blackadder, Four Weddings And A Funeral and Notting Hill, brings us this bloated homage to the golden age of pirate radio, The year is 1966. England won the World Cup, Star Trek first aired on NBC and a ship was anchored of the coast of Britain broadcasting Rock n Roll to the masses against the will of the UK government.

In reality, this would lead to the illustrious and legitimate careers for the pirate radio D.J. such as Tony Blackburn but this is not their story. This is a pile of trite baloney based on the real ships and their crew of DJ’s but whatever the reasons, Curtis chooses not to actually tell a real story, but make stuff up which was similar. What’s the point in that? There were well over 100 pirate radio stations operating in the 1960′s and it’s pretty clear who it’s about, with Radio Caroline being the best known station, but that isn’t the story he tells.

But that isn’t the main problem. The main problem is that its clunky, childishly cheeky, poorly plotted with little but the aesthetic to keep us interested and capped with one of the most overblown finales to a fictional film of a real subject that I have ever seen! Let’s just say that my heart will go on but with a happy ending and we’ll leave it at that! But there were some laughs and most of them were from Kenneth Branagh, the square cabinet minister whose goal was to shut the radio station down.

It’s a real shame that with such a great cast, a solid concept and a cracking jukebox soundtrack, (which seemed to be where the films true heart lay) that this could have been the classic which it wanted to be.

HUGO 3D

2011

DIRECTOR: Martin Scorsese 

May Contain Spoilers!

When I’d finished with this film, my feelings were somewhat confused. I was still trying to make sense of what I had just seen. Not that this was particularly confusing, but it was just a little unclear as to where this film had been leading for the past two hours. Billed as a fantasy film, with quotes such as “A magical masterpiece” and with a picture of Hugo Cabret hanging from a clock face, you feel that you are watching a work of fantasy but I’m not sure that this was the case at all.

The film ends up focusing on the lost career of one of cinema’s most influential directors, Georges Méliès, played expertly by Sir Ben Kingsley, and whilst some of the build up implies magic of sorts, it all comes down to some, whilst contrived, very elegant and practical means. The titular character, Hugo Cabret, is an orphan who is left in the care of his uncle, who leaves and in turn, leaves Hugo with his job of maintaining Gare Montparnasse’s train station clocks as if his uncle’s absence is revealed, Hugo will end up in an orphanage.

His is pursued by the station’s police officer, down-played somewhat from his usual roles by Sacha Baron Cohen. It’s devices like this which play so beautifully into the children’s story, and harks back to such characters peril that you would expect from the Child-catcher in Chitty Chtty Bang Bang, for example. But we are expecting more from the dangers in which Hugo faces and are left a little underwhelmed at first by its absence, but there’s more going on here that just treading out the same old clichés.

This is a proper story, focusing on character and tying in nicely with real life characters such a Méliès as well aswith the fictions ones, Hugo being the prime example. But Scorsese has worked a master stroke here, managing to bring into the broader spectrum, the work of one of the cinema’s fathers, the creator of film effects which we take for granted such as the dissolve and a magician utilising such simple tricks as cutting film at just the right place to make objects and people disappear. Obviously, his most famous work, Le Voyage Dans La Lune features heavily throughout and Scorsese’s passion for the director simply oozes out from the screen, a long with 3D effect.

But it is the 3D which elevates this film even further, as it is simply the best 3D that I have ever seen. Avatar can eat its heart out, as finally, we have a film which uses 3D to its fullest theatrical potential, using dust partials to not only emphasises the effect but to also add depth to the scene in 2D, to name just one example. The 3D was used beautifully in a film which didn’t require it, which didn’t really have any grand visual effect sequences and still managed to bring this world to life with what is essentially a gimmick.

Scorsese is visual and narrative genius and Hugo is living proof. The history of early film is laid out for all to see in a way which people of all ages can enjoy, and I think that time will favour this film, it will serve to protect the history of these early films and keep the limelight on them for just a little bit longer.   

CASINO ROYALE

2006

DIRECTOR: Martin Campbell

May Contain Spoilers!

With Die Another Day signing off on Pearce Brosnan’s Bond on a low note, well as fans were concerned (though I as not being a particular fan, I found this to be good fun), Casino Royale had the responsibility of refreshing the franchise. Some may remember the controversy of the new “Blond Bond” as well as the campaigns which were launched against Daniel Craig as being the wrong choice for the role.

Well, they couldn’t have been more wrong. Daniel Craig is not the most versatile actor, as playing cold characters is his forte, but for this new, or more authentic James Bond, he seemed to be born for this now, post-Bourne part. Based on the first 007 novel by Ian Flemming, Casino Royale introduced the MI6 Agent as a sociopathic shovanist, who in the book, was a top-notch poker player.

The film does the same but adds the usual action set-pieces which come part and parcel with a Bond opus. But it is the action in the Casino itself which is where the film works best for me. The Casino Royale segment is probably the middle hour of the film, but in that hour we focus on the relationships between him and his Bond-girl, Eva Green, as she is MI6′s money-man as it were, the introduction of CIA Agent Felix Leiter, and where he not only played the key poker game, but is also almost hacked to death with a machete and poisoned!

And both of those scenes rank as the best action in the movie, besides the opening free-running sequence, which whilst spectacular, is a bit redundant we all is said and done. But again, the logic behind the poker game is solid, making you wonder how many international matters are dealt with in this manner?

Casino Royale is clearly Bond’s response to Jason Bourne, and this was the right direction to go in and was certainly in keeping of the reboots of the day, again, with Batman Begins springing to mind just, a year earlier. Grit was to replace flamboyance but this manages to blend to two together, still retaining what it is to be Bond whilst looking more into the physical world of Bourne. The film’s heart is espionage and character, rather than comedic turns and action for action’s sake.

This is the best Bond film in decades…