Mr Peabody & Sherman (2014)

2014-02-26

Twitter Plot Summary: Mr Peabody and his son Sherman go on adventure through time, instigated by girl bully Penny.

Five Point Summary:

1. A dog who adopts a boy? Gadzooks.
2. He’s clearly not a dog. Silly girl.
3. An air of 300 to that sequence in Troy.
4. Could this be the end of Mr Peabody?
5. I’m Spartacus!

Okay then, let’s whizz through the backstory of Mr Peabody & Sherman so we can get on with the juicy details. Mr Peabody is a ridiculously clever dog (he’s responsible for the invention of zumba, don’t you know) who eventually decides that, after his many years of being absolutely awesome at everything, decides to adopt a human boy. Thankfully we don’t dwell on this point for too long (nor do we dwell on the fact that Mr Peabody is the only talking dog in a world full of humans who don’t bat an eyelid about this situation), and soon Sherman has grown up and is about to start school. There he encounters a girl called Penny who bullies him about his adoptive father being a dog, which results in Mr Peabody inviting Penny and her parents around for dinner.

Of course, things don’t go smoothly. Whilst Peabody is successfully entertaining the parents, Sherman lets slip that Mr Peabody has invented a machine called the WABAC (way back – geddit?), a time machine that can take them anywhere in time and space. Events occur, shall we say, and it’s then up to Mr Peabody to help restore the timeline, etc etc. What follows is a trip throughout history as Mr Peabody, Sherman and Penny travelling through time so they can get back home, encountering a plethora of famous historical figures as they do so.

Rock dog... I mean, er, god. — Rock dog… I mean, er, god.

Hmm, that intro was a little more verbose than planned, but I think it’s necessary to get all of that firmly in place before we can talk about the film properly. As a story in its own right it kind of works, but we spend far too little time with the historical characters to learn much about them, and the central narrative itself whizzes along at too fast a pace for any specific moments – other than Patrick Warburton stealing the scene as King Agamemnon at Troy – to stand out. On the positive side, the jokes are fantastic, and don’t talk down to any aspect of its audience – in that respect it’s a true family film in that some jokes will be over the head of its younger audience but then a character will do something silly and everyone’s happy. The core story itself is also a touch slight, but to focus too much on that aspect would be churlish. If you think about the target audience, it’s never going to be an amazingly detailed story.

To say that everything works out for everybody involved would be accurate, but missing the point somewhat. Let’s be honest, it wouldn’t be much of a kid’s film if nobody learned anything – in this case tolerance – by the finale. Talking of which, the final act is a little one note but it does at least tie up all the narrative threads, even if it does so in a slightly clumsy manner. Still, having gone in completely ignorant of the character’s origins in the 1960s Rocky and Bullwinkle Show, I’m pleased to confirm that you don’t need previous knowledge of that series to enjoy this modern interpretation.

Score: 3/5

The Wicker Man (2006) review

Simon Prior

Twitter Plot Summary: The Wicker man gets a remake starring… Nicolas Cage?! He dresses up as a bear.

Five Point Summary:

1. Cage is haunted by the death of a young girl.
2. Cage threatens to shoot someone if they don’t get off the bike.
3. Cage punches a woman.
4. Cage, dressed as a bear, punches another woman.
5. Cage shouts “Not the bees!”

If one film never deserved a remake (some might argue that no film deserves such treatment) then it was Robin Hardy’s The Wicker Man. In my opinion that film is about a perfect as it can get. It was with some trepidation that I originally went to see this film at the cinema in 2006 and recently watched again for the second time, albeit as the Director’s Cut on this viewing. For clarity, there aren’t a huge number of differences between the two versions – the Director’s Cut removes a final coda on the mainland and tweaks the Wicker Man scene to the point of making it even funnier than the theatrical version – but otherwise they’re almost identical.

For what it’s worth there are a couple of good aspects – yeah I know, it surprised me too. The core idea of a matriarchal commune is actually a decent one. Maybe not as a Wicker Man film, admittedly, but it could work in isolation. Unfortunately that’s as far as my praise of this notion can go – it’s presented as an exercise in misogyny as Cage runs around the island, threatening women and, more often than not, punching them in the face. After a couple of scenes where Cage enters full-on insane mode (which continues for the majority of the film), you’re left wondering if this is actually supposed to be a comedy. I’ll be honest, it’s not that far off. The cinematography is pretty good, although as that’s essentially the only truly decent aspect of the film (seeing as the matriarchal society idea was wasted) it’s difficult to praise in any great detail.

Whilst there are a number of links to the original 1973 film (the internet tells me that 80% of the dialogue is the same, so it must be true), there are a number of newer elements that don’t add up. Cage’s Edward Malus is haunted by the death of a young girl and her mother in a freak car accident, which adds absolutely nothing to the narrative and doesn’t make much sense overall. Cage’s relationship with Willow (Beahan) is unnecessary and removes any of the underlying tension that was found in the original film. Characters are sketchy at best, motivations are hidden beneath a veneer of smarmy smiles and knowing nudge-nudge, wink-wink dialogue delivery, and all of the subtlety provided by the original is lost.

Cage was less than pleased with the child who criticised his acting.

By the inevitable finale you’ve likely spent at least 20 minutes hoping for the end credits to appear, so it’s no surprise that the appearance of the Wicker Man has no impact – you may also have found yourself distracted by Ellen Burstyn’s Braveheart homage. This scene differs between the theatrical and Director’s Cut edits to the point where both versions are unintentionally hilarious. In the former, Malus is subjugated by the locals in voiceover only, whereas in the latter he’s visibly crippled and forced to overact horribly as he’s stung repeatedly by bees.

It’s films like this that give remakes a bad name. If any of them did something worthwhile with the original idea then it would be less of a problem, but when you get something as ridiculous as this, a deluded man’s interpretation of The Wicker Man, then it’s inevitable that audiences will decry attempts at reinventing stories that they love. However, it’s not often that you get to see Nicolas Cage in a bear suit beating up women, so perhaps it’s not worth complaining about too much. And, in hindsight, I now understand why the older bearded man sat a few rows in front of me in that cinema in 2006 laughed so frequently as the er, “action” unfolded, and is perhaps the perfect film to suffer a Wicker Man style demise should the pagan gods ever decree it.

The Wicker Man (1973)

Simon Prior

2014-02-24

Christopher Lee led the islanders in a merry dance - sing cuckoo... — Christopher Lee led the islanders in a merry dance – sing cuckoo…

Twitter Plot Summary: Christian copper Sgt Howie travels to the island of Summerisle to investigate the case of a missing girl. The locals are weird.

Five Point Summary:

1. The Dandy Barman!
2. Jar of foreskins…
3. The Temptation of Sergeant Howie
4. Need a hand?!
5. The shadow of the Wicker Man is rising up again…

Ever since my university days I have had a soft spot for The Wicker Man, the 1973 horror/thriller/musical multiple genre hybrid that saw a puritanical Christian police officer visit an isolated island community off the coast of Scotland to investigate the disappearance of a young girl. On reaching the island the officer, Sgt Howie (Edward Woodward), is repeatedly given conflicting information by the locals who are devout followers of the pagan gods. Spending 2-3 days on the island, Howie starts to unravel the mystery placed in front of him whilst trying (and failing) to deal with the un-Christian attitudes and iconography that faces him everywhere he turns.

Anyone wanting to call this an out and out horror film are wrong – yes, there is the now infamous inevitable, horrific conclusion, and there is a constantly building sense of unease and tension that develops as Howie gets deeper into his investigation – the failed crops in last year’s harvest; the subtle yet sinister attitudes of everybody on the island; the charm offensive of Christopher Lee’s Lord Summerisle – yet it’s as much a folk-oriented musical and police procedural thriller as it is a horror film. The soundtrack tells a story in itself, the tracks chosen specifically to enhance the island existence and to some extent make clear how their lifestyle differs from that on the mainland. It doesn’t hurt that the songs themselves are also great to listen to in isolation.

There have been several cuts of the film over the years. The version I am most familiar with is the Director’s Cut which saw several minutes of previously unseen/unused footage reinserted into the narrative. More recently the film has been re-released with what is being dubbed The Final Cut, which I have recently watched in its rather impressive restored Blu-Ray edition. The narrative doesn’t differ too extensively between the versions, but the main point to raise is the number of nights Howie spends on the island, and at what point Lord Summerisle is introduced into the narrative.

The decor on the island of Summerisle left a lot to be desired.

Performances are strong across the board, although given that this is supposed to be a Scottish island there’s a distinct lack of appropriate accents for the region. Britt Ekland might look the part but she can’t manage a Scots accent. It’s therefore somewhat disappointing that all of her dialogue is obviously dubbed. It’s a minor quibble in the grand scheme of things, in particular when you also take into account that she had a bum double in one key scene. Christopher Lee doesn’t command much in terms of screen time, but he is an intriguing presence every time he makes an appearance. Charming and erudite, there’s still an air of sinister intention about him at every juncture, and I doubt there are many other actors of that particular era who could convey such menace whilst offering a pleasant smile. The interplay between Lord Summerisle and Sgt Howie zings and is a highlight in a film of highlights. And on that note, Woodward is excellent as Howie – the character has depth

Praise also must be bestowed on the script for building up the tension slowly over the course of the 90-100 minute running time (depending on which version you watch), and for similarly slowly revealing the extent of Sgt Howie’s puritanical zeal in the face of unrepentant paganism. As time goes on, Howie becomes less and less of the classic hero archetype and more somebody to root against as his intolerance for non-Christian beliefs becomes more pronounced.

Then of course there is the final scene. Moving, powerful and unerringly inevitable. There’s no heroic rescue, no last minute reprieve. Howie is ultimately a victim of his own intolerance, and the horror is ultimately his own to bear. At one point he states that he is only interested in the law, which to the audience and, no doubt, to the island inhabitants is a clear lie and an indication that Howie is blind to his own religious zeal. Somewhat appropriately, The Wicker Man raises many questions about faith and religion, yet creates genuine debate on its themes rather than a slanging match from the various sides of the argument. That in itself should be a clear indication of its quality.

Score: 5/5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21gb49H-Uo4

Philomena (2013)

Simon Prior

2014-02-23

He couldn't tell her how he really felt about her racist jokes. — He couldn’t tell her how he really felt about her racist jokes.

Twitter Plot Summary: After being forced to give up her baby some 50 years previously, Philomena goes searching for him with journalist Martin Sixsmith.

Five Point Summary:

1. Tragic history.
2. Road trip.
3. Discovery.
4. More questions, more answers.
5. Full circle.

There are many complaints one could level at organised religion, of which I will not go into much detail here for fear of inciting a mass exodus of readers, but suffice to say I’m not a fan of it in any capacity. Now, that’s not to say I’m not freethinking and tolerant enough to let everyone else in the world believe what they like, I just don’t feel any need to conform to religious opinion. You might be asking what my point is here – fair question. For those not already aware, Philomena tells the story of a now elderly woman who decides to find out what became of her son on what would have been his 50th birthday, the existence of whom she has kept secret for decades.

The Catholic church are painted in an extremely unpleasant light, and perhaps with good reason. Whilst it wouldn’t be fair to tar all Catholics with the same brush as I’m sure there are some morally decent ones out there, the treatment bestowed upon the pregnant teenage girls in Philomena’s youth is horrific and entirely unfair. Playing devil’s advocate, the prevailing thoughts of the era itself are the reasons behind this, so whilst it’s an entirely unpleasant set of circumstances, the nuns we see in the modern day are seemingly much more tolerant and understanding. With that said, their efforts to hide their past do not do them any favours.

The most uncomfortable book club meeting ever.

Dench is perfect as Philomena, perfectly encapsulating the existence of a dotty older woman with a penchant for romance novels. This fleshes her out a touch more than the easy option of focusing solely on her history and desire to find out about her son. In that respect, kudos must also be passed on to Steve Coogan as Martin Sixsmith, the weary journalist and former government spin doctor who decides to write a story on her life. Coogan is able to move away from his Alan Partridge mannerisms long enough to make Sixsmith stand out on his own – probably for the best given that he’s a real person outside of the film. The script plays out as a standard road movie as Philomena and Martin travel to the United States in their quest to locate her son, which itself is handled in a very sensitive manner. There’s nice interplay between the travelling pair, in particular as Martin slowly transitions from being mildly annoyed by Philomena to an almost reverential level of respect as he digs deeper into the facts to hand.

Rather unusually, and to the script’s credit, is that it doesn’t hold everything back to the final act to reveal what became of Philomena’s son and where his life ultimately led. It allows plenty of time in the second half of the film to close in on his trail, unveil more details of his life and, in one respect, allow the story to come full circle. The script also achieves one further important point to note, in that it shows two conflicting opinions on the whole affair. Philomena is very forgiving despite all the heartache and pain they have caused her over the years. Then there is Martin who, as a lapsed Catholic, is outraged at how the church treated both Philomena and all of the pregnant girls that came into their care. Whatever your opinion may be, it’s an incredibly clever and touching way to indicate that even when it seems there should be a clear black and white outlook on a certain event or occurrence, there are always at least two differing opinions, for better or for worse.

Score: 4.5/5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4DBPqcp6Hc4

The East (2013)

Simon Prior

2014-02-22

Aaaaaannnnd.... POSE! — Aaaaaannnnd…. POSE!

Twitter Plot Summary: An intelligence agent goes undercover with an eco-terrorist group called The East and finds herself drawn to their cause.

Five Point Summary:

1. Undercover, yeah! Wait, they’re eating from bins?!
2. The all naked bathing competition.
3. All this talk of jam is making me hungry.
4. A swim in a toxic dumping ground. Shabba!
5. A tough decision to make.

The East is a story concerned primarily with big business and the effects said big business has on the natural world. We’re also incredibly wasteful, let’s admit it. The amount of food that gets thrown away daily in the Western world is frankly an outrage, and we’re reminded of this fact all too infrequently.

Sent undercover to infiltrate a gang of freegans – essentially those who take things, specifically food, that have been thrown away by normal folks – called The East, Brit Marling’s operative Jane finds herself conflicted between the ideals of the group she’s been sent to spy on and her responsibilities to the big intelligence firm she works for.

Whilst undercover with The East, Jane has to be a willing participant in what are called “Jams”, anarchist attacks on a specific big name company or group with ties to shady environmental dealings. Early on in the first Jam, where The East plan to poison the members of a big pharmaceutical company, Jane secretly calls her boss to ask if she should intervene. The chilling and somewhat amusing response? “They’re not our clients.” The wonderful world of big business, right there.

The group themselves are an interesting bunch of outsiders. There’s a deaf girl, Ellen Page’s Izzy (who we discover has very personal reasons for being there), there’s Doc who has been poisoned with an antibiotic that is degenerating his nervous system, and there’s their leader Benji, played with brooding charisma by Alexander Skarsgard. There’s always the temptation to paint eco terrorists out as tree hugging, long haired, unwashed/unkempt hippies in true stereotypical fashion, but The East shies away from this and gives each member of the group a reason for being there, even Jane, and goes to great lengths to fully personalise each member of the group. These are people who have been damaged through various means and are united with a common goal which isn’t limited to tying themselves to trees or sailing into the path of a whaling ship.

Secretly, they all wished there was a television.

Environmental stories can go one of two ways, and there’s not much of a divide between them. It can be laborious and preachy, irritating its audience by ramming its message down your throat, or it can be a thoughtful exercise without being overt about its intentions. The East falls into the latter camp solely because of Marling’s conflicted intelligence agent, finding herself slowly drifting away from her standard civilised existence and towards the more “out there” lifestyle led by The East. I can kind of see her perspective – where else could you find yourself sat at a dining table in a straightjacket, given a bowl of food and a spoon and told to feed yourself?

If there’s one thing that Marling and director Zak Batmanglij’s script does well is make you think a bit more about environmental damage, and the impact we all have on it by supporting the companies who cause massive amounts of damage with barely an afterthought. Even if its ideals are somewhat out of reach of the majority of us, The East personalises the matter, gives it a face and makes us at least acknowledge that things could be changed for the better.

Score: 3.5/5

Sightseers (2012)

Simon Prior

2014-02-21

Twitter Plot Summary: Two West Midland residents head off on a sightseeing holiday, featuring pencil museums, viaducts and murder.

Five Point Summary:

1. Redditch is on the map! Literally.
2. Now that’s how to kill a dog!
3. Bit of a short temper. But then, he is ginger.
4. Are you supposed to actually use those big pencils?
5. Nice way to finish.

How many other films can you think of that open with a shot of Redditch on a map? And how many films can you think of that star people with full-on Birmingham accents? If it’s an exercise in emphasising the mundanity of local UK life and the slightly less than exotic holidays that are available to most of us, then it’s a job well done. If nothing else these mundane beginnings provide stark contrast to what is to come, and rather thankfully don’t poke fun at the locations themselves – that would be too obvious, for one, and also completely unfair. Taking a sightseeing trip around some of the UK’s many less obvious tourist destinations, including a pencil factory and a tramway museum, is an inspired decision. Not forgetting the plethora of caravan and camping parks that litter this great nation of ours – they also feature prominently.

Taking an inherently dull subject matter and turning into an entertaining film is a difficult process, yet Alice Lowe and Steve Oram’s script perfectly captures the mundanity of British life and mixes it expertly with the serial killer genre. Chris and Tina are in a relationship and head off on a sight seeing tour of Britain, much to the chagrin of Tina’s overbearing mother. All seems normal until Chris is visibly enraged at a man who refuses to pick up the litter he drops at the tramway museum. The logical reaction, of course, is to run him over with your caravan. We’ve all had similar thoughts at some point or another, I’m sure. Tina is surprised at first, less so when it quickly transpires that it wasn’t an accident, but once on board with the idea it turns out that she’s just as twisted as he is.

Of course, once she joins in with the insanity he reacts badly. It’s one thing for a man to randomly kill folks, but Grud forbid if a woman gets in on the act. In fact it soon becomes clear that she’s more twisted than he is, and no wonder – still living with her Mum, a bedroom that hasn’t changed since her youth, a poisonous relationship with her mother and no sign of escape until the ginger, bearded and balding Midlander enters her life and whisks her away for a holiday. She’s also experiencing guilt for the inadvertent death of her dog Poppy (one of the film’s highlights), resulting in her retreating into herself and even kidnapping someone else’s dog.

Gingers. Never, under any circumstances, annoy them.

There isn’t a huge amount of depth to the story itself – what we do get is a slow drip feed of information about our two lead characters and how their minds work as we move from basic set-up to the next. With each death we learn something more about each of them. Chris, the frustrated writer, the ginger man with a short temper when it comes to litterbugs, pretentious middle class types and ramblers getting up in his face about dog mess. Tina, meanwhile, is deeply jealous of anybody who draws Chris’ attention away from her, be they male or female, and her part in instigating the various deaths stems from this.

Ben Wheatley’s direction deserves kudos, if only because it’s the sort of twisted idea that’s right up his street – I doubt many other directors would’ve been able to pull this off quite as effectively. Whilst I’m of the opinion that the final act meanders a little – most of the meaty goodness happens in the middle act – it’s ultimately still an effective film overall and the kills are both impressive and graphic.

Score: 3.5/5

The Monuments Men (2014)

Simon Prior

2014-02-20

"Yes, it's a painting." — “Yes, it’s a painting.”

Twitter Plot Summary: Based on a true story, a team of art curators etc head into Europe in WW2 to save art from Hitler.

Five Point Summary:

1. Montage!
2. A sniper.
3. The random appearance of Adolf Hitler.
4. The Allies start closing in.
5. A race to the finish…

Despite my keen interest in all things World War 2, I was barely aware of the story surrounding the real life Monuments Men, the group of art scholars and auteurs that went into Europe from the final years of the war onwards in order to locate and rescue the art stolen and hoarded by Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. It’s an incredibly important story to be told, and one with a most pertinent question at its core – is a piece of art worth a human life? When you take into consideration the fact that Hitler wanted to wipe out all traces of those who didn’t fit in with his blinkered ideology, then it almost becomes a null point. If the people are gone and so is their artwork and culture, then it’s almost as if they didn’t exist in the first place. From that perspective, if the art is saved then yes, it is worth a human life to protect.

Sadly for the film, this point is laboured far too often and feels like you’re being lectured about this principle – the goal of the Monuments Men (which did include women, not that the film considers this) was an important one, just as important as stopping the rot that the Nazis spread across mainland Europe. It also sets itself up in the marketing campaign as a World War 2 caper in the same vein as Kelly’s Heroes. This also proves not to be the case. It feels very disjointed, with the team split into smaller groups to search through war torn Europe for the artwork (paintings, sculptures etc) that the Nazis were taking with either taking back to Germany with them or burning.

I’m sad to say that the cast are not given a huge amount to do. With the right material the likes of John Goodman and Bill Murray you’d expect them to have at least something of note to be getting on with. Yet again – this is a big fat no. Clooney’s direction is fine, it’s the script that’s the biggest problem here. Not quite sure if it wants to be a comedy or drama, it uncomfortably straddles the line between the two and ends up being neither funny nor overtly dramatic. There are some nice touches here and there – the interaction between Murray and Bob Balaban, for one – but other than those brief moments and the extremely good production values, there is little else to recommend. Matt Damon’s story with Cate Blanchett would have probably worked better in isolation to the rest of the script, and is perhaps the best of the many sub-tales we are presented with.

Goering planned to eat all of it. Even the frames.

There is one further key problem that is endemic in terms of movie scripts and this kind of story – unless the film is turned into a mini series we can only look at two or three key pieces of art without confusing the audience and making it unnecessarily complicated. So, the main narrative focus is on the Ghent Altarpiece, a statue of the Madonna and Child by Michaelangelo,

Attempts are made in places to create some dramatic tension, specifically towards the end of the war as the Russians start making their way into Europe, but ultimately it doesn’t work. It’s a real pity, as it was a film I wanted to like but the individual pieces didn’t come together to form a cohesive whole. Much like the work of the Monuments Men themselves, this film of their exploits finds itself rummaging around looking for something of value to present to the wider world. Unlike the Monuments Men, the film fails in this task.

Score: 2.5/5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CreneTs7sGs

Cuban Fury (2014)

Simon Prior

2014-02-19

One shall stand, one shall fall... possibly. — One shall stand, one shall fall… possibly.

Twitter Plot Summary: A man, who used to salsa as a youngster, takes up dancing again to impress his new lady boss.

Five Point Summary:

1. Nick Frost eating a yoghurt. Surprisingly funny.
2. Smarmy co-worker, good looking boss.
3. A mix tape? In this day and age?
4. Lunch time car park dance off!
5. The dance competition. Brilliant.

People tend to fall into two camps – those that dance, and those that don’t, and therein lies the theme for Cuban Fury. Bruce was a promising salsa dancer in his youth, when one night on his way to a championship final he is beaten up by a gang of bullies. From that day forward, he gave up on his dancing and retreated into his shell. Fast forward 25 years and Bruce works for a company that manufactures lathes (he’s rather a fan of them) when his new boss, the attractive Julia (Parks and Recreation’s Rashida Jones) arrives and he falls for her. Unfortunately for him, his incredibly horrible colleague Drew (O’Dowd) has set his sights on her as well, and so an unsuspecting love triangle forms. Fortunately for Bruce, he has a way in – Julia loves to salsa. And thus, Bruce visits his old mentor Ron (McShane, never sticking to one accent) to get some lessons and win her over.

It’s a surprisingly heartfelt story when all is said and done. Rather than heading down the obvious route of slapping the audience round the face with the central “man wants to win girl” story, that actually takes a back seat to watching Bruce regain his confidence and emerge from the protective shell into which he has retreated. As a result he makes new friends, finds his inner confidence and gets out into the real world where lathes are but a distant thought.

The highlight for me was the dance-off between Frost and O’Dowd. Not only did the dance moves look good, but it was also rife with zingy one liners and witty retorts. In some respects it’s a shame that the rest of the script didn’t contain as much pizzazz as this one scene, otherwise the overall score would be higher. It also has a very old school vibe to it, almost as if it should’ve been set in the 1990s rather than the present day – who in this day and age makes actual mix tapes on cassette? Seriously, I’d like to meet that person.

Not the most obvious of dance moves. Or dance partners, come to think of it.

Perhaps getting the short end of the stick are the female characters, who despite being present from start to finish are limited in what their characters have to do. Olivia Colman, as Bruce’s sister, is seen serving drinks behind a cocktail bar for the majority of the story, then gets to dance a little by the finale. At least here her character is happy – makes a nice change from her usual choice of roles. Then there’s Julia who, other than being American and interested in salsa, has almost no depth. Alexandra Roach’s Helen is apparently there just because she’s Welsh and has a distinctive accent, and that’s about it.

I’d say that there are perhaps a few too many named characters in order for the story to have any additional impact, but of all of the supporting cast it’s clearly Kayvan Novak who steals the show. With a performance dialled up to 11, he’s extravagant and very almost a total caricature. Fortunately he’s so good at what he does, it never feels laborious and he fits in surprisingly well with the rest of the cast who are, admittedly, much more realistic in their delivery.

And then of course there is the dancing. Frost impresses with his nimble moves and is proof that, with the desire and time to do so, anybody can dance. And, if this film is anything to by, women love a man who can dance. A slightly flawed piece of work then, but I would say very likely to entertain.

Score: 3.5/5

Sixteen Candles (1984)

Simon Prior

2014-02-18

Neither of them would admit to causing the smell, but both were clearly disgusted by it.

Twitter Plot Summary: After her family forget her 16th birthday, Sam Baker has to deal with lots of teenage angst-type stuff.

Five Point Summary:

1. They forgot! How rude.
2. Grandparents and a foreign exchange student? Busy house.
3. The Prom. Oh my.
4. After party!
5. Wedding! Everybody’s happy! Roll end credits, quickly!

It’s not easy, turning 16. You’re in high school, everything is… erm… changing… and brooding is pretty much the default mode for yourself and all of your friends. It’s even worse for Samantha Baker (Ringwald), whose entire family forget her 16th birthday because her older sister is getting married the following day. Of all the things to forget! So the story follows Sam for a couple of days as she has to deal with typical teenager concerns – finding out her friend didn’t receive the “sex quiz” that she filled in during class; rebutting the constant advances of the kid known as The Geek; and going to the Prom.

John Hughes is adept at the teen angst movie, and whilst he has made films with a much more adult spin (Planes, Trains and Automobiles, for one), he is most known for his films where the kids and/or the teenagers are the stars. And more often than not, let’s face it, that star is Molly Ringwald. In other hands a story like this could end up either in gross-out Porky’s territory, instead we’re funnelled down the coming of age path, where by the closing credits everybody (well, the important faces) learns something and everybody’s happy.

Much like that other Hughes classic, The Breakfast Club, Sixteen Candles features an array of classic stereotypes given just enough characterisation for them to appear fully rounded people even though in hindsight they’re actually not. There’s the jock, the Asian exchange student with the slightly risqué name (used to great comic effect throughout, I might add); the aforementioned Geek; and the “everygirl” right in the middle, Sam. Ringwald was perfectly cast as Sam, balancing teen grumpiness with a certain endearing quality that ensures the character doesn’t become overbearing. Sixteen Candles also happens to feature a young John and Joan Cusack, who to be completely honest don’t look like they’ve aged at all in the intervening 30 years. Freaky genetics going on there. It’s fair to say that much of the high school storyline may be lost on an International audience. American high school movies have a very definite feel to them, and Sixteen Candles is no different. I can’t imagine that every high school in the USA is exactly like this, but there must be at least some basis of truth to the concept. Put it this way, high schools in the UK have a completely different atmosphere. Probably for the best.

By the halfway point much of the events happening to Sam feel a little contrived, but that’s okay – it’s counterbalanced by the realistic tone and dialogue that emanates from each of the young stars. Compared to some young actors today, more often than not you can tell that this lot are living the role, and that really does help you ignore the plot contrivances. The fact too that it has a typical happy ending would also be a point of contention were it not deliberately set out to be a feel-good piece of cinema. We laugh at everyone’s antics, sure, but ultimately we’re happy to see everybody end up where they’re supposed to be. And, I’m sad to say, it’s the type of film we don’t see enough these days.

Score: 3.5/5

The Last Temptation of Christ (1988)

Simon Prior

2014-02-17

Twitter Plot Summary: The life of Jesus Christ, as hypothesised by Martin Scorsese and Nikos Kazantzakis.

Five Point Summary:

1. Ginger Judas! Collaborator Jesus!
2. Sermon on the Mount. Certainly less impressive than expected.
3. Resurrection of Lazarus.
4. All the stuff you (might) have read in the Bible.
5. The Last Temptation. Sadly, it’s not a Cornetto.

Films with an overtly religious angle are an inherently contentious issue. There are always going to be huge numbers of people who take umbrage at the mere idea without ever actually watching it; there are those who watch it and still call for a ban because it doesn’t match your own beliefs to the letter, or you just simply disagree with it. If this happened to every film, nobody would watch anything, ever. It’s as if those with extreme religious views can’t hold or maintain a logical outlook. Seriously, it’s madness.

One such film to receive this certain level of fundamentalist ire is The Last Temptation of Christ. This is the life of Jesus Christ as seen through the eyes of Martin Scorsese, via the original novel by Nikos Kazantzakis. Here Jesus is conflicted, not sure of what path he is to follow. He has had relations with women (The Shock! The Horror!), and rues about his many scenes, whether imagined or real. Willem Dafoe is suitably placed as Jesus, although again perhaps a controversial one given that he went on to play Norman Osborn/The Green Goblin in Spider-Man…

One aspect that draws either praise or ridicule is Harvey Keitel’s portrayal of Judas, here painted as the most ardent of Jesus’ followers after being sent to kill him for collaborating with the Romans. Keitel’s Judas is a ginger shouting machine, to the point where he doesn’t seem to have an off switch. He’s the one part of the entire production that doesn’t sit right. It’s like Mr White from Reservoir Dogs has been sent back in time and he’s had an Incredible Hulk-style reaction to the event. Maybe that’s why he’s such an angry man? Either way, he’s certainly not the villain as frequently seen in other interpretations of the Gospels, indeed he’s forced to betray Jesus by the man himself. After a brief meeting with Ziggy Stardust… sorry – Pontius Pilate – Jesus is crucified.

"Hello Jesus. I'm David Bowie." — “Hello Jesus. I’m David Bowie.”

This all leads into the second half of the film, and the part that the title refers to – namely, the last temptation placed in front of Christ as he slowly dies on the cross. As last temptations go, it’s decidedly insidious and the biggest target for controversy – he is shown a possible future where he is let down from the cross, marries Mary Magdalene (initially at least), lives a long life and has lots of children.

It goes without saying that The Last Temptation will offend a certain portion of the audience, most likely for blasphemy or something along those lines. My opinion? Well, I don’t put much stock in religion, but I like to think myself enlightened enough to consider that there are many possibilities regarding the life of Jesus, and this is just one of those possibilities. As a film it’s flawed but the central character of Jesus is an intriguing one, and a character who is constantly doubting his own motives is an inherently complex and interesting person to watch. For those of you who have strongly held religious beliefs and consider the film to be blasphemous or something along those lines – just don’t watch it. Simple enough.

With that said, I think that anybody who takes issue with the fact that, here at least, Jesus is portrayed in a less than flattering light, is clearly missing the point. The fact that he is as human as the rest of us, Messiah or not, whilst bringing him down to “our” level, surely also elevates us up to “his” level? Isn’t that at least part of the core point behind the crucifixion story, after all? Whatever your opinion on this matter – the film’s not bad.

Score: 3.5/5

1...616263...90 Page 62 of 90

SIMONPRIOR.COM