Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)

2014-05-27

Gollum had just discovered that his favourite team had been relegated.

Twitter Plot Summary: The journey to dispose of the ring continues, now featuring talking trees and a siege at Helm’s Deep.

Five Point Summary:

1. Gollum, being Gollum. Being Smeagol. Then being Gollum again.
2. The smell of manflesh.
3. The Black Gate. That didn’t take lo… oh, they need to go around it.
4. The siege of Helm’s Deep. Epic stuff.
5. Well that’s clearly leading into the final part…

The Two Towers begins where Fellowship of the Ring left off – the Fellowship is broken, the greed of Man has once more almost brought matters to a swift conclusion, and now Frodo and Sam are on their own as they get ever closer towards Mordor. Except they’re not on their own, as they are joined by Ring-obsessed former owner Gollum/Smeagol. Gollum is determined to get the Ring back from Frodo due to his previous dalliances with Bilbo and the obsession that has now taken over his soul. Gollum remains a marvel of computer generated imagery even to this day, the on-set motion capture work of Andy Serkis brings him to life in a way that simple CGI character design is currently incapable of doing.

In the other story strands, Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas are on the trail of Merry and Pippin, who were taken by the Uruk-Hai at the end of Fellowship, but are soon distracted by matters in nearby Rohan that will have an impact on Frodo’s journey, and Merry and Pippin encounter the Ents, a race of tree beings, and enlist the help of Treebeard of the Ents in order to tackle the wizard Saruman (Christopher Lee) who has joined forces with Sauron. All in all there’s a lot going on, the stakes grow ever larger and yet it still has plenty of character development interspersed throughout.

The Two Towers features many of the best lines of dialogue in the trilogy, with the main highlight being the Uruk-Hai smelling man-flesh. The humour content also switches from Merry and Pippin and flips to the fighting banter between Gimli and Legolas. Despite the odds standing against them and the possibility that they could be killed at any moment, their banter remains lighthearted and fresh whilst more dramatic moments are gradually dished out to Merry and Pippin.

The central set piece this time round is the siege of Helm’s Deep, as the fighting men of Rohan defend their positions against a massive army of Uruk-Hai and other orc-based creatures. Taking place at night in a downpour of rain, the battle is gorgeously shot and wonderfully choreographed. The vast swathes of Uruk-Hai look imposing and it’s clear that the odds are heavily stacked against those besieged in Helm’s Deep. The work by Weta, besides Gollum, is impressive enough although is starting to show its age these days as some of the CGI characters look slightly unrealistic as they run from A to B. There’s also minor issues in terms of character scaling, specifically between the hobbits and the larger characters and the use of genuine little people against the main actors, but this is a very minor gripe overall.

The Two Towers perfectly escalates the threat posed by Sauron and his minions, whilst maintaining a close eye on each of the characters we grew to love (or at least tolerate) in the opening instalment. It expands upon the quest narrative established in the first movie and sets up many threads for the third and final film. Each character has a purpose and a reason for being used in the narrative, and when you combine this level of deft storytelling with the amazing New Zealand scenery, you can’t go wrong.

Score: 4.5/5

My Best Fiend (1999)

Simon Prior

2014-05-26

Twitter Plot Summary: Werner Herzog’s documentary charting his professional and personal relationship with volatile actor Klaus Kinski.

Five Point Summary:

1. Kinski goes off on one. Not for the last time.
2. Herzog with a moustache.
3. Women clearly adored him.
4. Natives threaten to kill Kinski for Herzog.
5. Kinski and a butterfly.

My Best Fiend was released eight years after Kinski’s death, and represents a personal journey for Werner Herzog as he retraces his working relationship with Kinski from those early meetings in a shared house in Germany, through each of their five film collaborations and the behind the scenes angst and turmoil that followed Kinski wherever he went.

After a brief introduction featuring archive footage of Kinski declaring himself to be the modern Jesus to an incredulous audience, Herzog steps in front of the camera to provide a tour of the home at which a thirteen year old Werner Herzog first met Kinski. Herzog explains those early years to the current owners of the house, describing in detail the type of insane acts that Kinski was prone to demonstrate many years before they established their working relationship, including locking himself in the shared bathroom for 48 hours straight, during which time he managed to smash almost everything in there to pieces.

Just in case you weren’t clear on the point, Kinski was an incredibly disturbed individual, prone to random fits of fury and flying off the handle at a moment’s notice. But at the same time he also had a certain level of warmth to him which, as Herzog himself admits, “could turn into rage of unimaginable proportions.” He was also a phenomenal actor who, having no formal training in that field, was capable of demonstrating an incredible range of emotions to the point where his intensity becomes integral to his performance.

The focus is primarily on their work on Aguirre: Wrath of God and Fitzcarraldo, although we do get to briefly see elements of their other collaborations Nosferatu, Woyzeck and Cobra Verde. Being allowed to see behind the scenes and experience Kinski’s ravings as close to first hand as we’ll get is an experience, however those moments are all too brief. Kinski and Herzog had a tumultuous relationship, however it was clearly one that both of them needed. Away from the limelight Herzog states that they often would meet and even collaborated on some of the more offensive passages that Kinski wrote about Herzog in his autobiography.

"And it was over there that Kinski did horrific things to a chicken." — “And it was over there that Kinski did horrific things to a chicken.”

Despite his fiery nature, it’s not all negativity towards Kinski. Eva Mattes, who played the wife of Kinski’s Woyzeck in the film of the same name, reveals that he was a friendly face on the production, and that there was a mutual respect between them. Similarly Claudia Cardinale, who played his wife in Fitzcarraldo, has nothing but praise for him. There’s an argument to be made about him being predisposed to be charming and pleasant to attractive women, but that’s left for the audience to decide.

Naturally because Kinski had long since died at the time the documentary was made, there’s nothing presented directly from his perspective, but then given his propensity for exaggeration and downright lying, it’s unlikely that we’d ever get to see the real Kinski in a public forum. The closest we perhaps see to this is the occasional piece of candid footage of Kinski posing gently for the camera with a butterfly in hand, or the all too brief moments where the bond between the two men is abundantly clear. In many ways Kinski is projected in a similar vein to Christian Bale, a consummate professional prone to outbursts if something isn’t quite right. Whilst My Best Fiend isn’t covering substantially new ground and presents quite a one-sided opinion on Kinski, as a passion project for Herzog it’s understandable why he felt it necessary to make the film in the first instance, and it never approaches the realms of being a postmortem character assassination.

Score: 4/5

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hG8dd5Vsnc

Cobra Verde (1987)

Simon Prior

2014-05-25

Twitter Plot Summary: Vagabond Cobra Verde is sent to Africa to engage with the local king about resuming slave trade activities.

Five Point Summary:

1. To Africa!
2. Bundled up like a corpse.
3. Some metaphor about snakes.
4. He’s quite the promiscuous chap.
5. That boat’s not going anywhere mate.

Kinski and Herzog reunited one final time in 1987’s Cobra Verde, and once again proved that, despite their love/hate relationship, their partnership managed to inspire the best performances out of both of them, be it in front of or behind the camera. Explosive their relationship may have been, but it always resulted in some frankly excellent cinema.

Klaus Kinski, rocking an impressive hair metal head of hair, is Cobra Verde, a criminal with a penchant for getting women pregnant. True to form, Verde is a character who is constantly on the verge of having a full angry breakdown, and at several points in the story his raging insanity is unleashed on what were probably completely unsuspecting and mostly startled locals. He is a man who wants it all, beholden to nobody unless circumstances dictate it.

Much like many of their earlier collaborations, Cobra Verde sees Kinski’s titular character sent over to Africa in order to resume a slave trade with King Bossa Ahadee of Dahomey (quite a mouthful). Of course, those who have sent Cobra Verde to Africa know that the trip will likely not end well (ironically enough, so does he), and sincerely hope that Verde will be murdered by the king. Their plan stems from Verde impregnating the three daughters of sugar plantation owner Don Octavio Coutinho, although in a deliberate show of irony Verde’s exile to Africa ends up with him fathering more than 60 illegitimate children with the local women.

Little bit racist... — Little bit racist…

It perhaps lacks the focus of their earlier movies, not helped by the fact it’s essentially the same story we’ve seen before in Aguirre: Wrath of God and Fitzcarraldo, that of the white man out of his element in a foreign land and surrounded by those he would consider to be beneath him on a cultural and intellectual level. Moments of humour arise when Verde is rescued by rivals to the king who wants Verde’s head, and one of his rescuers has a tendency to stare into the middle distance with a ridiculous level of intensity. Herzog continues to treat everyone as documentary subjects, which helps combat the problem of the locals looking at the camera on several occasions.

Death is a recurring motif throughout, specifically death in order to maintain power both in the “civilised” West and the “barbaric” African continent. In Africa the skulls of previously vanquished enemies litter the ground and act as warnings to all who see them. It also follows the old theme of Kinski’s character improving his own personal circumstances by manipulating those around him, even if the end result is that it may or may not all come down around him. Of course there is the obvious theme regarding the perils of engaging in the slave trade, and the inhumanity to other living beings that is inherent to the slavery trade. Unfortunately this point isn’t emphasised nearly enough, and whilst it is central to the narrative, the core strand of Verde being a man who finds himself struggling against the forces holding him back is what it’s arguably really all about.

Score: 4/5

X-Men: Days of Future Past (2014)

Simon Prior

2014-05-24

Twitter Plot Summary: Uniting the two X-Men casts, Wolverine is sent back to 1973 to prevent a horrific future from taking place.

Five Point Summary:

1. The future looks a bit grim.
2. 70s Wolverine is a win.
3. Quicksilver is a boss.
4. Stadium plus White House.
5. Everything nicely tied up.

After the disappointment that was The Last Stand and X-Men Origins: Wolverine, there was plenty of work to be done to improve matters for the X-Men franchise. That was successfully completed by the Matthew Vaughn helmed X-Men First Class which went back to the 1960s and rebooted the franchise with a younger Charles Xavier and Magneto in the form of James McAvoy and Michael Fassbender. Fast forward to 2014 and not only has Bryan Singer returned to the director’s chair of the franchise that helped kickstart Hollywood and the public’s love for comic book movies, but also unites both his original cast and the younger bunch that were introduced in First Class. On paper it’s an epic production to say the least.

The plot has the potential to be incredibly confusing, as is typical of most time travel-related plots. It’s to Singer and company’s credit that the time travel ramifications are explained clearly and are no more complicated than is absolutely necessary. To sum up – giant robots called Sentinels (who have the power to absorb mutant abilities and use them) have taken over the world and it’s down to the last group of mutants to make one final stand by sending Wolverine’s consciousness into his younger self in 1973 to stop this future from ever taking place.

There are a couple of areas which could warrant improvement. Trask’s motivations for wishing to wipe out the mutant gene are never made clear and isn’t anywhere near as villainous as you might expect him to be. Whilst not wishing to draw too much attention to Peter Dinklage’s height, it seems an odd casting choice if you’re not going to explore this in the film. Still, he is at least a somewhat sinister presence without ever verging on becoming a stereotypical, moustache-twirling villain. So that’s good.

Obligatory "looking at something just out of shot" shot. — Obligatory “looking at something just out of shot” shot.

There’s much less of the future cast than some would perhaps like, turning up as they do in what amount to extended cameos. In particular the grumblings of franchise fans will be most notable regarding the new mutants – Blink, Bishop etc – who get to show off their powers but don’t have opportunity to introduce themselves properly. Still, Hugh Jackman’s Wolverine has opportunity to freshen up his character which is an important step to take given that he’s now on his 7th appearance in the movie universe.

On that note it’s incredibly dark and pushes the boundaries of a 12A rated film. Characters are ripped apart and brutally killed, there’s an F-bomb and a plethora of S-bombs for good measure, and the young Charles Xavier is off his face on drugs that give him back the use of his legs. Throw in some obligatory social commentary by contrasting the mutant problem against the Vietnam War, and the obligatory “everybody loves Mystique” angle established in First Class, and you’ve got a story that works on a number of levels.

On a more positive note, the finale manages to make amends for the plotting missteps in The Last Stand whilst also setting up the notion that the timeline is fluid and, without wiping out the continuity of the previous films, does at least allow certain amendments to take place in future McAvoy/Fassbender X-movies if they are required. It also turns out that the X-Men universe version of Quicksilver is a hugely entertaining addition to the cast, with a scene that apes the Nightcrawler sequence from X-2 but played for laughs.

It’s gratifying to see the X-Men franchise reassert its position after a couple of missteps, but it seems that mixing things up and focusing on period piece stories is doing the business. They’re still not perfect films – not yet anyway – but we’re most definitely heading in the right direction.

Score: 4/5

Silver Linings Playbook (2012)

Simon Prior

2014-05-23

Twitter Plot Summary: Both Pat and Tiffany have issues, so it makes perfect sense that they help each other out. Right?

Five Point Summary:

1. That’s no way to treat a book. Or a window, for that matter.
2. Marriage apparently messes everybody up.
3. Dance montage!
4. They’re talking sports stats, yet I’m not bored. Crikey.
5. Never has anybody been more excited at getting a 5/10 in a dance contest.

Both Bradley Cooper’s Pat and Jennifer Lawrence’s Tiffany are damaged people when we first meet them. Pat has recently emerged from a psychiatric home after his marriage ended on less than positive terms, whilst Tiffany is reeling from the end of her own marriage. When traditional methods of therapy don’t do their job, they end up helping each other through their problems through regular dance sessions. Their dance routine will ultimately be performed in front of an audience and a panel of judges as part of the final act, part of a double or nothing bet where the routine is as mixed up and random as Pat and Tiffany are.

Tackling mental health is always a tricky affair in cinema, but when it’s treated with respect, as it is here, then it usually works out. The actions of both Pat and Tiffany are amusing, yes, but it’s not a case of laughing at their medical issues. The reasons behind their mental health problems are covered in a sympathetic manner, and it’s clear that they are more than capable of functioning in the real world. This is all sold perfectly by Cooper and Lawrence without lapsing into the obvious cliches of people who are bipolar or have specific neuroses.

Somehow a discussion about statistics – and statistics about American Football, no less – remains not just engaging but positively entertaining. It’s all down to the delivery and interplay between Robert De Niro and Jennifer Lawrence for making this potentially dry dialogue zing and leap off the page. This is indicative of Lawrence’s performance in general, completely embodying the character. She manages to find the balance between being a screaming harpy and the more mellow moments, and never becomes annoying or irritating. Suffice to say, the Academy Award was well deserved.

It's the only way to lose weight fast. Or get carried away with the rest of the litter. — It’s the only way to lose weight fast. Or get carried away with the rest of the litter.

The relationship between Pat and his father Pat Sr (the aforementioned De Niro) is the secondary focus of the story, the older man who wants his son to spend time with him but only on his own terms. This all ties in with Pat’s constant focus on his past – the wedding ring he keeps on his finger, refusing to acknowledge the reasons for his marriage ending and so on. In this respect it’s a story about reconciliation, learning to let the past go and moving on. It’s also obviously about self improvement as per the title – seeking the silver lining in any situation and becoming a better person as a result of any ups and downs you may experience. It’s a good lesson to take away regardless of your background or status.

It has a somewhat cliche ending, but Silver Linings Playbook is more than the sum of its generic rom-com origins. The script is a delight, mixing genuine emotional drama with genuinely amusing moments, and providing two central characters who are entertaining whilst united by their individual neuroses. There’s a lot to balance but director David O Russell does so with aplomb, and just goes to show that mental health doesn’t have to be a taboo subject if handled with care and sensititivity.

Score: 4/5

Godzilla (2014)

Simon Prior

2014-05-22

Was it Godzilla... or Godzooky? — Was it Godzilla… or Godzooky?

Twitter Plot Summary: Godzilla faces off against some other mutant creatures that feed off nuclear energy.

Five Point Summary:

1. Bryan Cranston’s emotional turmoil.
2. MUTO.
3. Las Vegas gets the short end of the stick.
4. Finally – Gojira!
5. Something about a nuke.

It has been 16 years since Roland Emmerich’s disastrous attempt at making a Hollywood version of Godzilla, so it’s about time that the King of the Monsters received the remake treatment. In this post-Batman Begins world the tone defaults to gritty and super serious, and couldn’t be further away from the Emmerich version if it tried. Seemingly taking some of its thematic inspiration from the recent nuclear disaster in Japan, this new interpretation of Godzilla emulates the tone of the original by being a disaster movie that just happens to have giant monsters as the cause.

Let’s get the positive points out of the way first. The first half of the film spends a lot of time building up the mystery around Godzilla, none more so than the opening credits which show the nuclear tests that took place in the 1950s, which apparently were intended to try killing the giant beast that had inadvertently been released. The concept of nuclear waste as both a weapon and a food source is dotted throughout the story, and this is what leads Bryan Cranston’s Joe Brody to investigate the strange radiation readings that emerged from the destruction of his power plant and also caused a personal tragedy. Choosing to bill Godzilla as a disaster movie rather than a creature feature is a big thumbs up, the concept of Godzilla as a force of nature laced throughout the script.

On that note, the special effects are spectacular. You get a real feeling for the scale of Godzilla and the M.U.T.O’s he faces as they crash around San Francisco and the west coast of the United States. People have complained about “Fatzilla”, yet he’s not actually that big when you consider his height – he’s proportionate, not fat. Gareth Edwards, meanwhile, has created a film that is oozing with atmosphere and foreboding. The colour palette may be drab, but it has a certain flair and style that other similar features lack.

H.A.L.O. jump is the stylish way to enter San Francisco.

There are however a number of issues that end up holding Godzilla (the film) back. Ken Watanabe’s scientist has wild theories about Godzilla’s purpose, yet they’re provided without explanation and accepted by a military that are more often than not “shoot first, ask questions later” types. Bryan Cranston is underused, although he is a strong presence and makes a mark in the scenes he does appear in. Same again, although to a much greater extent, for Juliette Binoche, Elizabeth Olsen and Sally Hawkins, all of whom show up and then fade into the background as the giant dinosaur/mutant creature thing smackdown kicks off. Gender equality has taken a few steps back since Emmerich’s version, it seems. Then there’s Aaron Taylor-Johnson, who has been known to put in good performances in the past but in this instance is a blank slate onto which the audience can project their emotions.

In fact, all of the good work in the first hour of building up the characters and giving the story an emotional core is thrown out of the window in the second hour, and Godzilla himself – whilst entirely awesome in the screen time he does receive – occasionally feels like a guest star in his own film. The build-up in the first half is all well and good, but you almost wish he’d show up a bit sooner just so the carnage can commence. There’s also the fact that much of the action takes place off-screen, or occasionally in the corner of it, which in fairness does leave you slack-jawed when you finally (FINALLY!) get to see it close up.

It’s not without its flaws, but at least Godzilla has been treated with respect to the source this time round. Would an appearance from Mothra next time round be too much to ask?

Score: 3.5/5

Bangkok Dangerous (2008)

Simon Prior

2014-05-21

Cage could smell his own effluence. And it smelled good.

Twitter Plot Summary: An assassin ends up on the run after breaking his own very carefully structured rules.

Five Point Summary:

1. Worst escape from the police ever.
2. She’s deaf, perfect for Nicolas Cage.
3. Nicolas Cage clearly dislikes crabs.
4. Is something interesting going to happen any time soon?
5. Nicolas Cage in leather is a sight that can’t be unseen!

Nicolas Cage sports yet another adventurous hairpiece in Bangkok Dangerous, an assassin who breaks his own rules by falling for a woman and befriending/training a local boy. You can tell right from the start that this is not going to end well for him. Once you start breaking your own rules then that’s usually the start of your own downfall. When will these people learn?

This 2008 film is a remake of the Pang Brother’s debut feature of the same name. Remaking your own film is usually a bad idea unless you’re someone like Alfred Hitchcock. It’s an even worse idea when you make substantial changes to the original just to accommodate the whims of Nicolas Cage, who looks bored from start to finish. The original saw the lead character as deaf, which is an intriguing proposition, but can anyone seriously imagine Nicolas Cage playing a deaf guy? Still, the Pang Brothers bring a certain style to the direction that is frequently missing from action movies made in the West, and provides a sense of dynamic movement even if the actors are incapable of deomnstrating this themselves. It’s just a shame that it’s Nicolas Cage in the lead role bringing it all down. Now, depending on the script and the right director on occasion, Cage can be quite good – The Rock, Face/Off and Con Air being three good examples – yet here it feels nothing more than a vanity project for Cage and his production company. You can’t help but feel sorry for the Pangs, although they likely made quite a bit of money on this venture so perhaps it’s a moot point.

"So this is what I want you to do the next time you see me walking down the street..." — “So this is what I want you to do the next time you see me walking down the street…”

Not too far into the film we enjoy a scene featuring Cage conversing with a deaf girl, which is supposed to be heartwarming – at least, that’s what the soundtrack keeps telling us to feel – but it just verges on creepy. It’s Nicolas Cage hitting on a much younger woman, after all. The ensuing… well, the right word would be “romance”, apparently, is awkward and belongs in a different film. Cage struggling with hot food and grimacing at live crabs is as good as this plot gets. Far too much of the story gets bogged down with this disturbing romance, turning it not so much into an action vehicle for Nicolas Cage as a tawdry excuse for him to be in the vicinity of an attractive young Asian girl. The only person to come out of this without being smeared with the ridiculous stick is Shahkrit Yamnarm as Cage’s cheeky protege Kong, but this is mostly for his inventive use of swearing at Cage in his native tongue.

The assassinations are at least moderately entertaining, taking a variety of forms and doing something slightly different without ever outstaying their welcome. There is abundant overuse of elephants as a symbol of bad luck, and a little bit of entertaining gunplay by the final act, but ultimately they do nothing to prevent this being anything other than a tired excuse for an action film.

Score: 2/5

A Night at the Roxbury (1998)

Simon Prior

2014-05-20

"...is that Will Ferrell?!" — “…is that Will Ferrell?!”

Twitter Plot Summary: Two dimwitted brothers want to own their own nightclub or, at least, get into the Roxbury at least once.

Five Point Summary:

1. Haddaway = smashed car window.
2. Wanting more of their lives.
3. Gold Diggers.
4. She’s got her claws into him.
5. Jerry Maguire meets Say Anything.

In what is a typical Saturday Night Live spinoff movie, Chris Kattan and Will Ferrell reprise their roles from the popular television comedy show as the Roxbury Brothers, two dimwitted but somewhat loveable chaps who bop their heads constantly to Haddaway’s ‘What Is Love?’, spout the occasional catchphrase and dance badly in order to pick up women – which obviously fails on every occasion. Making sure to cram in each of their catchphrases, mannerisms and the bits that work quite well in a 2 minute live television sketch, Roxbury gives the pair a plot to work against. Will Ferrell’s Steve is lusted over by Emily (Molly Shannon), the daughter of the shop owner next door. Meanwhile brother Doug is trying to find his way in the world and that doesn’t involve the family’s flower shop. You can already telegraph where the plot will go from this, but that’s not the point – it’s all about the catchphrases and trying to cram in as many amusing moments as possible. Gender politics are also clearly not a concern, as the majority of the women are either gold diggers or manipulative and willing to exploit the loveably dim-witted men they encounter.

The selling point is the soundtrack, which in honesty doesn’t require a viewing of the film to enjoy. There’s plenty of legroom with the main contribution from Haddaway, but the likes of “Where Do You Go?” by No Mercy and “Insomnia” by Faithless add to the distinctly 90s feel of the film. Mix in a couple of genuinely funny jokes and it makes it all bearable, but nothing spectacular. It certainly doesn’t have the same long lasting appeal as fellow SNL spinoffs like The Blues Brothers or Waynes World.

Stylin', profilin'.... whooo! — Stylin’, profilin’…. whooo!

Then there’s Richard Grieco, playing himself and somehow not entirely selling it. He’s almost incidental to the plot, and other than a brief bump into the back of the Roxbury Brothers’ vehicle, literally anybody else could have been in that car and it would have done exactly the same job. The inclusion of a number of stars from old sitcoms (Dan Hedaya and Loni Anderson as their parents, for example) add to the slightly odd tone.

As afflicts the majority of SNL-based movie adaptations – the aforementioned Waynes World and the Blues Brothers aside – Roxbury starts to flag at around the 50 minute mark, and all the pizzazz in the story quickly fades to almost nothing. A number of references and homages to other films such as Say Anything, a not exactly timely reference to Saturday Night Fever and the slightly more topical Jerry Maguire. The final act is tired and clearly lacks the energy that was present in the opening two thirds.

If more effort had gone into expanding the characters beyond their SNL templates then perhaps A Night at the Roxbury would have been much more likely to be a recommendation. As it is, there seemingly isn’t enough to the characters to justify the feature length expansion and you’d be better off just sticking with the soundtrack and re-enacting the head-bopping scene to Haddaway.

Score: 2.5/5

Slugs (1988)

Simon Prior

2014-05-19

Wouldn't get this in the Cotswolds... — Wouldn’t get this in the Cotswolds…

Twitter Plot Summary: Killer slugs wreak havoc in a small American town. Yeah – killer slugs.

Five Point Summary:

1. So apparently slugs are perverts. 
2. Death by slug! And epic explosion. 
3. Half dressed woman in front of him, and he goes straight to the alcohol. 
4. Women don’t like it when you try force-feeding them pizza.
5. English scientists cannot open manhole covers.

Never would it occur to any sane person that slugs could be a potential villain for a creature feature. Come on now – they’re slugs. Just pour some salt on them, that’ll end it. This wouldn’t be much of a movie though, so with that in mind these slugs can bite and draw blood. Whilst it’s inherently ludicrous, Slugs scores highly for its concept alone. They’re really the last creature you’d expect to have evil intentions. It’s helped by the fact that everybody involved takes it so very, very seriously, to the point where it almost falls out the other side of serious and becomes an Airplane clone. Adding to this overly serious tone is the original orchestral score, bringing an element of the old Hitchcock classics to proceedings.

The plot is one we’ve seen a thousand times before – two guys, the local health inspector among them, join forces with a terribly English slug expert after a strain of killer slugs created by toxic waste start plaguing a small town in America. Naturally they’re laughed at by the local authorities, until it’s all too late. Of course.

Further cliches abound – sex-crazed teenagers get both barrels of the Slug-Gun (so to speak), as their sexual awakening is tempered by the “rampaging” slugs and a few lusty teenagers die horrible deaths. Therein lies many of the problems with the story – most of those who die do so in places where slugs are usually found. Surely the easiest way around this is to not go into gardens or sewers or open drains, yet somehow many characters find themselves in these situations and meet a grisly demise as a result. Other than a couple of brief moments where the slugs actually invade people’s homes – the horror! – much of the violence could have easily been avoided.

Should've had something other than the Bloody Mary. — Should’ve had something other than the Bloody Mary.

There’s blood and gore aplenty, and some of the death sequences deserve praise for either being so ridiculous that they’re brilliant, or for covering the usual tropes and cliches but replacing the usual killer creature – bees, sharks and so on – with slugs. Most of these deaths are perhaps unintentionally hilarious – there’s even a scene in a restaurant that in many ways could be a companion piece to Monty Python’s Mr Creosote sketch. It’s deliciously gruesome yet incredibly funny at the same time. From a directorial perspective, the main method of making the slugs look threatening involves zooming in on normal slugs incredibly slowly, accompanied by some sinister orchestral music. Take away the music and you’d just have some slugs, there’s nothing inherently creepy or scary about them.

By the finale, where we have two identically dressed men in yellow suits trying to avoid being eaten alive in the sewers beneath the town, you’ve known since the opening act how it will end. Ignoring the fact that these toxic slugs appear to explode violently when set alight, you know that there will be at least one left to wreak havoc another day. Luckily for us, that day has never happened. Not yet, anyway.

Score: 3/5

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pxItlbv0mQw

Snitch (2013)

Simon Prior

2014-05-18

Walking in slow motion with hoods up and hats on = instant bad-ass.

Twitter Plot Summary: After his son is arrested for drug trafficking, The Rock goes undercover for the Feds to take down the gang responsible.

Five Point Summary:

1. It’s a bust!
2. That chap who was in The Walking Dead wearing a hoodie…
3. Nice goatee, Mr Drug Baron.
4. Playing both sides against each other.
5. Truck driving action.

Snitch was a film that seems to pass UK cinemas by when it was released last year. We had the trailer repeated seemingly on loop in every vaguely related screening imaginable, but when the release date finally came the film didn’t get a wide release and it subsequently passed most people by. In hindsight it’s easy to see why it received such a limited release. Despite starring a big name action hero in the form of Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson, it’s an inherently low budget movie that’s better suited as a direct to DVD release rather than requiring a big screen appearance.

That’s not to say it isn’t good, however. Unlike the implication from the trailers, this is not an all action extravaganza – that only kicks in right at the end of the final act. The 90 minutes that precedes this slightly less than impressive finale is focused mostly on being a taught thriller and doing a far better job of it than the likes of last year’s Fire With Fire or Nicolas Cage’s Stolen.

The Rock does what he does best as construction company owner John Matthews – that is to be entirely engaging and a surprisingly enjoyable actor despite his origins in American Football and, later, professional wrestling. The guy could read the phone book and still be ridiculously charismatic, and that continues in this role as a father who goes undercover for the DEA in order to reduce his son’s prison sentence after said son was unwittingly set up in a drugs deal.

Jon Bernthal is no slouch as one of The Rock’s employees who has links to the criminal underworld to which The Rock is hoping to be introduced to, you can clearly see him trying to keep the more unsavoury aspects of his personality under control. The supporting cast are rounded off rather well by Barry Pepper and Susan Sarandon as the DEA agents supporting Matthews, and Benjamin Bratt as the drug kingpin who sits at the top of the chain.

Family forms the backbone of the entire narrative, and the story isn’t in any rush to move away from these aspects in favour of some big explosions or something along those lines. Matthews has a broken relationship with his recently imprisoned son. He has a new family and a big house, whilst his son and ex-wife live in their original home barely able to make ends meet. Meanwhile Bernthal’s character with the entirely unoriginal name of Daniel James is trying to prove to his wife and young son that he’s on the straight and narrow. Even “El Topo” himself, Bratt’s drug lord, has family concerns of his own to keep a handle on. From each of these three perspectives, it asks the question: what would you do to protect your own family?

When the explosions do start, and it’s not a prolonged outburst, it almost acts like a release from the slow build-up that has been leading up to this moment. Even better is that it still fits perfectly with the tone of the rest of the movie and provides an adequate resolution for everyone. It’s another example of a film managing to go above its relatively low budget origins and maintaining a compelling story from start to finish. In this respect it’s a shame that it didn’t get a much wider release in UK cinemas – unlike the aforementioned Fire With Fire and Stolen, Snitch actually deserved to be seen by more people.

Score: 3.5/5

1...525354...90 Page 53 of 90

SIMONPRIOR.COM