Carrie (2013)

2014-02-16

Twitter Plot Summary: Carrie White is bullied by the popular girls at school when her latent psychic ability manifests itself.

Five Point Summary:

1. Nope, you’re not bleeding to death.
2. Her mum’s batty. Truly batty.
3. Remorse – genuine or not? Hmm.
4. She’s going t’Prom then.
5. Oh my. Carnage aplenty.

Remakes are quite often a tricky proposition. For most remakes there is already an ardent fan base baying for blood and crying sacrilege for the mere notion that their beloved film is deemed popular enough for a studio to remake it. Then there’s the tricky spot that the makers of the new interpretation find themselves in – do they stick rigidly to the original film, a la the shot for shot remake of Psycho? Do they completely reinvent the story so that it bears no resemblance to the original, like Total Recall (admittedly in that case it’s based more on the book, but that doesn’t mean it’s any good)? Or do they play it safe and change a couple of things, but ultimately leave it much the same as the original? This is the situation the new version of Carrie finds itself in. It doesn’t deviate significantly enough from the 1976 original to say anything new – a clear target for commentary would be the new, connected world we find ourselves in these days, a world where somebody can do something embarrassing and it finds its way onto YouTube or other video sharing sites within a few minutes of it happening. This is an early narrative thread that doesn’t go anywhere and is a clear missed opportunity.

Carrie is an outsider at high school. She’s tormented by bullies and, after experiencing her first period in the showers and thinking she’s bleeding to death, the girls crowd round to have a laugh and one of them films the incident on her phone. After this humiliation, Carrie also has to deal with her fanatically religious mother, and get through high school and possibly attend the prom. Throughout all of this she is targeted by one of the girls, Chris, who takes an instant dislike to her in a way that is apparently endemic in all women – instant judgement and vilification.

In terms of central performances, Chloe Grace Moretz is fine as Carrie, although it’s hard to picture her as a social outcast. She’s a great actor, but in terms of appearance alone she isn’t different enough from the other girls to justify their dislike of her. Julianne Moore has some fun as Carrie’s near-psychotic religious mother, babbling religious texts and throwing verbal and physical insults in Carrie’s general direction. Sports teacher Ms Desjardin gets some good lines of dialogue, but is ultimately just a bit player in the story – it’s all about Carrie gaining control over her psychic abilities and gaining vengeance on those who have tormented her thus far. It’s not spoilers to say as much – the whole point of the story is to build up to her inevitable quest for revenge.

Carrie was concerned about her Mum's need to make car noises whilst they were parked up. — Carrie was concerned about her Mum’s need to make car noises whilst they were parked up.

All of the remaining teenagers are, for want of a better term, generic. Other than Carrie’s primary bully being a bit catty, there’s nothing else to define her or indeed any of the others. Oh, perhaps the guilt felt by another student, Sue, but even that feels so badly set up you start wondering if she’s genuinely remorseful or is just putting on a show. By the time we reach the prom, even without having seen the original we know what’s going to happen. And it does so – carnage, carnage and more carnage. Suffice to say, there’s no chance anything to the same scale would’ve worked and looked anywhere as good in 1976. So… huzzah for modern technological breakthroughs I guess.

The opportunity this time round is of course in the special effects. You may be surprised to note that there has been a lot of development in film effects since 1976, and this clearly separates the 2013 Carrie from the “things on strings” approach used in 1976 Carrie. In this instance the effects look good and suitable for the tone that has been established. If this had been the first stab at transferring the Carrie tale to film, then it would’ve possibly fared a bit better, however as it’s a remake – and one that doesn’t expand on the core concept of the original – then ultimately it falls short by comparison.

Score: 3/5

The Lego Movie (2014)

Simon Prior

2014-02-15

Not exactly who you'd think of when putting together a team to save the world. — Not exactly who you’d think of when putting together a team to save the world.

Twitter Plot Summary: An ordinary Lego figure discovers that he is The Special, a master builder who will save the universe.

Five Point Summary:

1. Meet Emmet. He’s beyond normal.
2. It’s Batman!
3. Rampant creativity is, in this case, a bad thing.
4. That’s a lot of Lego.
5. Ahh, fuzzy feeling inside.

Fans of Robot Chicken are well served by this big screen representation of the Lego brand. Whilst not from the same creative team as Adult Swim’s TV show, both share a similar approach to animation, a similar approach to writing jokes, and a similar slightly off the wall approach to storytelling – but then, the directors are the same guys who gave us Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs, so it seems almost inevitable that a similar approach would be followed.

The story is a relatively simple one – an ordinary guy named Emmet, a construction worker in the city of Bricksburg where everything is homogenised and established routine is a fact of life, stumbles upon the Piece of Resistance which, it is prophesised, will prevent the evil Lord Business from unleashing his super weapon the Kragle. Naturally, this weapon, if used, will wipe out all life in the Lego universe. Emmet goes on a quest with Wildstyle, her boyfriend (Batman!) and the blind mage Vitruvius to prevent Lord Business from enacting his evil plans and also for Emmet to discover his calling as a Master Builder (someone who has the vision to build anything out of Lego). Escaping from Brickburg, they visit a number of other realms within the Lego universe, and ticking off the various Lego toylines we get to see is enough to keep even the most ardent of fans busy for some time. Or, you know, you could just look it all up on the internet.

First of all, the best idea was to not have the characters move like real people. They are clearly Lego figures and as such move exactly as they would if you did a stop motion animation of them. This certainly adds a layer of charm immediately. Then there’s the like-for-like Lego branding that inhabits their world – figures and bricks have the Lego copyright imprinted on them, and the instructions used by the characters inhabiting the world are identical to the ones we’d use in the real world. This stretches to every other aspect of the Lego universe – explosions, water, gun fire – all of it is animated to look as if it’s been made out of Lego. The voice acting too, is superb – the sheer number of big name stars attached to this is staggering. Christopher Pratt and Elizabeth Banks take the lead roles, but there’s ample support from the likes of Liam Neeson, Channing Tatum, Jonah Hill, Morgan Freeman, Will Ferrell and Cobie Smulders, amongst many others.

The gags are numerous and most of them hit the mark. The majority of big laughs come from Batman and his massive ego (as you will have likely seen in the trailers), however there are many more that come from a variety of other sources which are equally likely to cause a belly laugh. The interplay between Superman and the Green Lantern is particularly worthy of mention. There’s also a surprisingly touching final act where the divide between Lego as an adult building project and Lego as a children’s toy is discussed, and to great effect too. Earlier story beats cover the sheer nnumber of combinations of things you can build with Lego, the only limits being your imagination. That said, when everybody is building their own thing, when it’s thrown together it does look a bit of a mess – the fact that they were able to write this in and it still makes sense narratively is impressive. And that, in honesty, applies to the film as a whole. It was very likely to become the equivalent of making a Lego kitchen using only parts from the Lord of the Rings and Star Wars Lego lines – in other words, potentially a horrible mess. Instead it takes the core concept of the Lego toyline, throws in a simple narrative and has some fun with what is at its source an excuse to play with Lego figures. Ultimately, Lego has appeal with young and old alike, and that certainly applies to The Lego Movie as well, no question.

Score: 4.5/5

My Neighbours The Yamadas (1999)

Simon Prior

2014-02-14

Twitter Plot Summary: The trials and tribulations of an ordinary Japanese family.

Five Point Summary:

1. Never talk to strangers. Unless they give you their name. And they’re your age.
2. Male bonding, family style.
3. Food related goings on.
4. Standing up to noisy, disruptive types.
5. A nice note to end on.

Once more I delve into the Studio Ghibli catalogue for a review, and My Neighbours The Yamadas managed to surprise me almost immediately. Gone is the usual high quality animation in favour of a more animated sketch appearance. Rest assured, the animation quality is just as high as their usual output, but choosing to animate Yamadas in this way grounds the story in reality – well, if you ignore the usual Japanese flourishes of changing animation style on occasion, the haiku’s and the fact half of the backgrounds haven’t been pencilled in and animated.

The film follows the titular Yamada family which is a typical family unit – father, mother, daughter, son, and grandmother. Further setting itself apart from the rest of the Studio Ghibli pantheon is that the story is a collection of vignettes about family life rather than a single cohesive story. Whilst there isn’t an ongoing narrative to get your teeth into, the vignettes help build up a picture of family life through various situations and circumstances, covering everything from school crushes to what everybody wants for dinner to depicting how and why families – and parents in particular – stay together despite finding certain aspects of our nearest and dearest irritating. The humour is spot on throughout, and the observations on family life are not limited solely to the Japanese – cultural differences aside, there’s a lot of truth to each vignette no matter where you’re from. Mr Yamada’s speech at a wedding is both amusing and touching as he struggles to provide a meaningful speech after his wife hands him a shopping list rather than his pre-prepared notes.

When approaching a biker gang, remember: always wear a hard hat.

The animation is mostly set in a cutesy world, where everybody is a squat figure and bears no resemblance to reality. As if to indicate seriousness at certain points, the style changes to show the characters in a more realistic anime style, with normal sized bodies and appendages. This is particularly effective when the family confront a noisy gang of bikers outside their home – as soon as the tension decreases, the animation reverts to the regular squat, cutesy style. The limited amount of detail to the background scenery feels like a deliberate attempt to draw focus to the family dynamic rather than taking you away from it by providing a needlessly detailed location. There’s enough to define where we are, and the rest of it is left down to the character interactions. Thankfully they are all well defined, each having clear personalities and problems.

Whilst the vignette style does detract from our typical expectation of viewing an ongoing narrative, ultimately it becomes a story about how we interact with others and why we do it. By the final vignette we’ve learned a lot about this typical family even if they haven’t learned very much themselves. But then I guess that’s the point – families by their very nature never seem to learn, leading to the same old mistakes and the same old arguments. We’d all like to think our families are structured, organised and rarely argue, but the reality is that every family is, one way or another, like the Yamadas – and that’s perfectly normal.

Score: 4/5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9itwuJ6iMQ

Devils of War (2013)

Simon Prior

2014-02-13

Nazi tradition dictated that he have a ruler clenched between his buttocks.

Twitter Plot Summary: A crack team of soldiers is sent into Nazi occupied Germany to stop their demon-summoning plans.

Five Point Summary:

1. That guy on the black and white film playing The President? Terrible acting.
2. Okay, so that’s the opening gunfight we saw in the flashback. Again.
3. It looks like everybody has been badly dubbed.
4. Intercutting between a love scene and demonic possession. Classy.
5. That sounds like the music from PS2 game Underworld Eternal War.

What happens when you throw a team of American soldiers behind enemy lines in Nazi-occupied Poland to stop their attempts at raising an army of demon soldiers? Not much, apparently.

Devils of War runs for a just-about feature length of 72 minutes, which is perhaps for the best. The acting is bad, the effects are bad, and the story is bad. The German foot soldiers all wear ski masks to hide the fact there are likely only six actors playing the Nazi hordes. The Americans are a bundle of stock cutouts – the white racist, the grizzled veteran commander, the tall one and the black man. The latter opts to spend all his time wearing a hachimaki headband and wielding a katana, because he served in the Pacific Theatre, but that’s essentially his only defining characteristic. On the other side of the good/evil divide are a sadistic Nazi commander and two blonde women who, random bouts of nudity aside, are content to walk around in poorly fitting white shirts and black skirts.

Unlike most low budget efforts, you can see almost everything clearly in Devils of War, as if they forgot to add the film filter in post production. Everything looks a little too clean, a touch too pristine and that in turn makes the effects look cheap and hastily added. The soundtrack too is an odd one, it’s like the MP3’s got mixed up and they had to use the “Cheesy Western Themes” album rather than the gritty WW2 tracks that they initially intended to use. A brief glimpse at the credits shows that royalty free stock music was used liberally throughout, which doesn’t help elevate it above amateur fare.

Suffice to say, she wasn't impressed with what she saw. — Suffice to say, she wasn’t impressed with what she saw.

In terms of the demonic stuff that you were expecting, very little of that happens – the majority of the story is groups of men shooting at each other in the forest. So much so that, by the time you’ve seen the same sequence twice, the introduction of an MG3 (or similar) machine gun is a welcome distraction, even if that sequence goes on far longer than is absolutely necessary and again features re-used frames as the German gunner grimaces in sadistic pleasure. When the demonic possession angle does show up, it’s a disappointment. Brief scenes of people’s eyes turning an evil shade of orange and/or red and some morphing effects are the best you’ll get.

From start to finish there’s only one truly well thought out shot, and that’s where the commando team walk towards a sunset, only their outlines clear against the horizon. The remainder is hastily put together, actors following the George Lucas style of performance – faster, more intense. They give it a good shot, for the most part, but I feel they’ve been let down by the director. The plot, thankfully, does at least remain coherent, although the execution of it is marred by both the direction and th specific details within the script as a whole. The real pity is that with a few tweaks it could’ve been a far better film. Instead, it’s lacklustre tale, seemingly filmed in a hurry and not given the level of attention it deserved.

Score: 1/5

Hard Rain (1998)

Simon Prior

2014-02-12

They were taking the Laser Quest a little too seriously.

Twitter Plot Summary: A massive downpour of rain floods a small town, giving a team of thieves opportunity to steal monies!

Five Point Summary:

1. Get out of town folks, water’s a comin’!
2. Obligatory female character/potential love interest: step forward, Minnie Driver.
3. A twist! That comes as a surprise.
4. Oh no! Not the church!
5. A fight to the end. Mmm.

First of all, let me say that this is an inherently silly idea for a film, a small town that is flooded by a combination of heavy rain and damage to the nearby dam. The opening of the film makes sense, just enough water to cause a nuisance. Yes, I can see that releasing water from the dam would result in higher water levels, but even despite all of that, by the end of the film we’re left in a town that’s hidden underwater – surely that water would have dissipated and moved elsewhere by then? My basic lack of understanding regarding how floods work aside, for a bigger budget B movie, however, it’s not that bad at all.

Christian Slater is Tom, an armoured truck guard who is attacked by Morgan Freeman and his small group of thieves. Tom makes away with the money and hides it, and is chased by the thieves from that point forward. Meanwhile the sheriff and his men are emptying the town of residents and step in to recover the money and stop Tom from being blown away. At the same time an old couple are refusing to leave their home, and a woman named Karen is intent on making sure her church doesn’t end up six feet under…water.

One aspect I rather liked was the about turn the story takes at the halfway point. We’re lef to believe that it’s heading in one direction and then suddenly the rug is pulled out from under you and it’s actually about something else. Whilst not an entirely surprising move and doesn’t make a whole heap of sense, it does at least set it apart from other similar attempts at natural disaster movies. I’m also thankful for the writer not jumping down the obligatory love interest route. Yes, there is a connection evident between Tom and Minnie Driver’s Karen, but it’s not played out and dwelled over in as much detail as you might ordinarily expect. This is also a good thing.

She wasn't impressed by his elephant impression. — She wasn’t impressed by his elephant impression.

Then there’s cowboy hat-wearing Morgan Freeman, the main man with a thieving plan and a much more complex character than you initially assume. His main focus is, of course, the money, but there is still more to him than that. Meanwhile within the sheriff’s department there’s nice interplay between long time sheriff Randy Quaid, his second in command and the rookie, all of whom are reasonably well fleshed out and have a contribution to make to the story. Less so in terms of Karen, who could be written out entirely and it wouldn’t effect the story much. She’s there for female representation though, and in that regard Minnie Driver puts in a good performance. The American accent, not so much, admittedly.

The direction is worthy of note, although this is mostly for its use of Dutch angles, used in this instance to emphasise characters that are, for want of a better term, out of their depth. The action sequences too are something we’ve not seen too often before, and a shootout taking place in 5-6 feet of water is a remarkable sight, although perhaps not one worth repeating.

As I said at the start of the review, it’s an inherently silly idea, but everyone involved seems to acknowledge that fact. This is an effective level of damage control and results in a far better film than you may initially expect. The presence of a big name like Morgan Freeman helps immensely, and there are strong performances from everyone else. Silly it may be, but it at least does something different with the genre.

Score: 3/5

The ‘Burbs (1989)

Simon Prior

2014-02-11

His worst fears had been confirmed. It was indeed... a ginger. — His worst fears had been confirmed. It was indeed… a ginger.

Twitter Plot Summary: There are some creepy new neighbours in an unassuming suburb. Are they up to no good?

Five Point Summary:

1. Google Earth: 1989 edition right there…
2. A ginger. Must be evil.
3. The dog’s found something interesting.
4. The most awkward dinner party ever.
5. An explosive finale, if you will.

Suburban paranoia is a common theme wherever you go – people are naturally suspicious of others as part of some deeply ingrained survival instinct. That’s played out to comedic effect in The Burbs, where Tom Hanks’ Ray Peterson just wants to have a quiet week off without having to head out to the holiday cabin, much to his wife’s chagrin – played, surprisingly, by Carrie Fisher. Who knew she’d made other films besides Star Wars? I jest of course – I’ve also seen her in Drop Dead Fred. What’s partially on his mind though is the new neighbours who have moved in next door. Nobody has seen them and strange noises come out of their basement at night. Something is afoot, clearly.

We’re introduced to the neighbourhood in quick succession: next door to Ray is the slightly nutty Art, ever the conspiracy theorist; over the road are Mr Rumsfield (Bruce Dern) and next door to him is Corey Feldman. Yeah, instantly that dates it as an 80s movie. Up the road is Walter and his tiny, tiny dog, one that has a habit of making deposits on Rumsfield’s lawn. Each person in the neighbourhood fits a particular stereotype, and if you can’t tell immediately that Rumsfield is a military man then you’re clearly not watching the right film. Hanks is his typical affable self in “Everyman” mode, Dern is stern brilliance as Rumsfield, and Rick Ducommun is plain wacky as Art. Corey Feldman does what he does best (irritates, slightly) and rocks an impressive 80s hairdo.

When roly poly toupee wearing neighbour Walter disappears and leaves his dog behind, the group all assume the worst and assume that the new neighbours have killed him and buried him in their back garden – Ray’s observation of them digging several holes in their back yard is a clear indication that all is not well, right? The trio of Rumsfield, Art and Ray turn their surveillance up to 11, yet somehow don’t feel the need to inform the authorities at all – even when Ray’s dog digs up a human bone from next door’s garden.

Their new hobby was hiding behind bins. Nobody knew why.

The neighbours – the Klopeks – are suitably creepy and suitably foreign – strangers in a strange land. The fact their house is decaying and fallen into disrepair adds to the sense of strangeness, as does the gothic vibe it gives off – it stands unique and alone in a neighbourhood of uniformity. This is emphasised when the womenfolk decide to take everybody round to visit the Klopeks. Not only does the inside of the house give off a creepy Hammer Horror vibe, but the food served up to the guests is both hilarious and yet liable to give you an upset stomach.

Joe Dante hasn’t made a huge number of films, but on the whole they tend to hit the mark. Joe Dante plus Tom Hanks is a winning combo for sure. It may not have the edge that Dante infused the Gremlins films with, but even without a cute Gizmo to draw in audiences it is a black comedy of high quality, balancing the mundanity of suburban existence with the macabre notion that the neighbours are serial killers. And who could blame folks for thinking as much – one of the Klopeks is ginger.

Score: 3.5/5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7_uwFcI8JE

Robocop (2014)

Simon Prior

2014-02-10

His hand... was bigger. — His hand… was bigger.

Twitter Plot Summary: When cop Alex Murphy is murdered, he is rebuilt as Robocop, the friendly face of Omnicorp’s robot line.

Five Point Summary:

1. Alex Murphy: cop, family man.
2. That’s not a particularly big explosion.
3. Black suit… hmm.
4. Some payback is due.
5. The human element will always be present…

Rest assured anybody who was expecting this completely unwarranted remake to be absolutely terrible – it’s actually not that bad. True, it was always going to struggle when compared against the original film . Whilst it’s inevitable that we’re going to be making such comparisons (I’m certainly guilty of it), it helps to consider this a film on its own and judge it on its own merits. A difficult task, perhaps, but I’ll give it a go.

In the near future the US have started using robots and drones to subjugate (sorry, bring peace) to foreign lands. But America is resolutely against having a similar array of bots roaming their home streets. It’s kind of understandable – future Detroit isn’t anywhere near as desolate and crime-ridden as that seen in the original. There’s no sense that crime levels are as bad as suggested, but we’ll let that one slide for now. Slightly maverick cop Alex Murphy targets a gun smuggler and, after a bust sees his partner shot and hospitalised, Murphy is then targeted by the gang and finds himself on the receiving end of a car bomb. Omnicorp, the company responsible for the overseas drone usage, decides that their robots need a human face to gain public acceptance and thus, what was once Alex Murphy is placed inside a robot and a legend is born. Again.

Sadly for Joel Kinnaman he doesn’t really have a huge amount to do once he’s in the suit – the story involving his family and the emotional impact that has is reasonably well executed, but it needed a certain something extra to push it to the next level. There’s a fun action scene where he attempts to solve his own murder, but then the narrative seems to lose focus once that plot strand is resolved. There’s almost nothing for the partner to do and it leaves you with the impression that either the script was modified partway through shooting or scenes were cut for pacing or similar, there’s a distinct feeling that part of the story is missing and, crucially, it’s the part of the story that relates directly to Murphy rediscovering his humanity and reconnecting with the people in his life.

Sellars wasn't keen on the "mince" posture Dr Norton was suggesting be the default mode for the new Robocop. — Sellars wasn’t keen on the “mince” posture Dr Norton was suggesting be the default mode for the new Robocop.

On the positive side of things is Gary Oldman, who is excellent as always. His modern day Dr Frankenstein is perhaps the only character with any depth to him, despite the efforts to give Robocop himself a more emotionally resonant background. Oldman seems to have the most to do from start to finish as the conflicted doctor, which isnt a bad thing – his scenes with Murphy/Robocop hold weight, and ironically they’re much more human than those that Dr Norton has with his boss, Omnicorp CEO Raymond Sellars (Michael Keaton). Sellars is only interested in one thing – selling a product to the US public. The most interesting aspect of the script is the notion of free will – at one point they even discuss that Robocop has the illusion of free will, until the human element starts to take hold. This could have been an epic screen moment as Robocop overrides his programming and would have made a serious point about defining this as its own entity. Instead we’re stuck with them giving Robocop a black paint job to make him “more tactical”. No, not necessary. Thankfully early concept ideas of him also being a transformer don’t show up in the finished film.

The satire, whilst amusing, is not as biting as in the original – Samuel L Jackson’s single day of work (as that’s what it feels like) against a green screen is amusing and pokes fun at the current American news cycle, and the whole idea about the imposition of US foreign policy on other countries gets a little bit of airtime, but otherwise it doesn’t have much impact.

Jose Padilha is one of the new breed of directors from less mainstream territories to take on a Hollywood blockbuster – Fede Alvarez did something similar last year with his interpretation of Evil Dead – and that I think is what separates this from the poorer rermakes out there. It’s not perfect, not by a stretch, but it’s entertaining. Just check your love for the original film at the door and enjoy (if you can).

Score: 3.5/5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=INmtQXUXez8

The Remains of the Day (1993)

Simon Prior

2014-02-09

The art of gazing wistfully into the middle distance.

Twitter Plot Summary: The unwavering loyalty of a butler to his household is tested by the romantic interest of the housekeeper.

Five Point Summary:

1. A proverbial spoon up the bum.
2. Drax and Superman: United at last!
3. The young butler and chamber maid show the old folks how it’s done.
4. Death and yet still an unwavering sense of duty.
5. Some years later, and he’s still got a proverbial spoon up his bum.

I almost feel an affinity with Anthony Hopkins butler Mr Stevens – I, much like him, tend to keep a lot bottled up simply because that’s what is deemed to be acceptable. Except as this film proves, that really isn’t the case. Unwavering dedication is acceptable under certain circumstances, but it doesn’t mean you should switch off to events taking place around you and be completely ignorant to what’s right in front of you.

It is that unsettled period in the 1930s when war seems inevitable and many in positions of power are doing what they can to prevent it. One such man is Lord Darlington (Fox), whose efforts to prevent war ultimately prove to be the act of a Nazi sympathiser, whether intentional or otherwise. Stevens is an accomplished butler, doing precisely what good butlers should do – fade into the background until needed, and never get involved in politics or, it seems, base emotions such as love, grief or compassion. Stevens is ultimately a prickly character, yet he’s never an unpleasant presence on screen. This is in part down to Hopkins’ stellar performance for sure, but also because this is Stevens’ job and what he was trained to do, no more, no less. There are two moments throughout the course of the film that emphasise this, although admittedly one is an ongoing narrative thread which I’ll return to in a moment. The individual sequence is the death of Stevens’ father, which he treats with the same demeanour as if someone had asked him to mop the floor – a case of “Certainly, and what would you like me to do after that?”

The ongoing narrative thread I mentioned is the romantic interest shown in Mr Stevens by new housekeeper Miss Kenton (Thompson). Initially they start off at each other’s throats, so to speak, before a kind of grudging admiration exists between them, ultimately leading to her interest in him romantically. Except, of course, that he is dedicated to his work and doesn’t have time for such frivolous matters. Without going into too much detail over the story, Miss Kenton finds herself in an unhappy marriage and Stevens finds himself incapable of opening up after years of work as a butler. As romantic tales go, this one’s a completely melancholic affair.

She had no concept of personal space, much to his chagrin.

The Remains of the Day was an Oscar-bothering effort following its release in 1993 and that is clear from every facet of the production, however being released in the same year as Schindler’s List there’s only ever going to be the one winner in that fight. It’s still a supremely accomplished effort though, and fully deserving of any other accolade you may wish to give it. Except perhaps best action film, I doubt it would win anything in that particular category…

And on a completely unrelated note, it was nice to see Drax, the villain from Moonraker (Michael Lonsdale), and Superman (Christopher Reeve edition) sharing some screen time. A rare pleasure and a moment that spawned a complete series of tales in my head that would no doubt make a terrible movie. It would still be better than Superman IV, however.

Score: 4.5/5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nlyIvHY1Xw

Cutthroat Island (1995)

Simon Prior

2014-02-08

Despite her peril, she couldn't help think that her opponent's sword would be great for slicing bread. — Despite her peril, she couldn’t help think that her opponent’s sword would be great for slicing bread.

Twitter Plot Summary: A traditional pirate tale as Geena Davis captains her crew of pirates towards the treasure on Cutthroat Island.

Five Point Summary:

1. A female captain?!
2. Some derring do.
3. More derring do.
4. Yet more derring do.
5. Arr, treasure!

It’s a brave person who makes a pirate film in the modern cinematic era. With the exception of the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise, which has a Disney ride and Johnny Depp to fall back on, and looking through the list of all pirate-based films ever released, most of them rely on the tried and tested formula of adapting Treasure Island – you usually can’t fail if you’re adapting what is perhaps Robert Louis Stevenson’s greatest work. Let’s ignore that one with Eddie Izzard, shall we?

The story takes place during the golden period of piracy in the 17th century, and newly appointed Captain Morgan (Geena Davis – a woman, no less) is on the search for three parts of a map that will lead her to the treasure found on Cutthroat Island. The problem being that each section of the map is in the possession of her father, her uncle… and her evil uncle (Langella). So, whilst trying to get the map she also has to prove to her slightly incredulous crew that she has the chops to complete her quest before they mutiny and do their own thing.

The performances are strong throughout, and the set pieces, when they happen, are suitably spectacular. So why doesn’t it quite work? That’s hard to define, but it’s certainly not the central performance of Geena Davis. Jokes aside about her bad teeth/gum ratio, she’s solid as Morgan, a woman who fits in perfectly in what is traditionally a man’s world. Attempts at flipping the usual “damsel in distress” formula on its head by giving her a feisty blonde man to butt heads with (so to speak) are moderately amusing but ultimately it’s the same old trope we’ve seen before albeit with the gender roles flipped – if her character had been played by a man it would almost be the same film, albeit a male pirate captain that slept around with other men – a gap in the market, perhaps? Anyway I digress – if anything the story we’re given is a little safe and boring. Same again for the villain – Frank Langella is usually a reliable presence, but here it feels like he’s phoning his menace in. That and he doesn’t look particularly piratey, as if he showed up at the last minute for his costume fitting and refused to have a beard because they itch. Or something along those lines.

He wasn't a fan of the music these youngsters were into nowadays. — He wasn’t a fan of the music these youngsters were into nowadays.

As you may expect, every pirate-based cliche is rolled out for your viewing pleasure. A tavern fight? Check. Sword fights? Check. Cannon attacks and repelling boarders? Check. A sword fight to the death, inexplicably at the top of the ship’s sails? Check. A cheeky monkey? Check. Drinking, treasure and more drinking? Check, check, check. This is fine to an extent, but you end up yearning for something that plays a little more “out there” just to give it a selling point. It’s certainly not a bad film, it’s just almost completely unspectacular and does nothing new with the format. It wouldn’t look out of place alongside the films released during the genre’s peak in the 1950s-1960s, and that’s perhaps the most damning statement that can be made.

Score: 3/5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zvzK7dz9qMI

Rescue Dawn (2006)

Simon Prior

2014-02-07

The news was bad: X-Factor had been renewed for another season.

Twitter Plot Summary: Pilot Dieter Dengler is shot down during the Vietnam War and imprisoned. Then he escapes.

Five Point Summary:

1. Bad CGI airplane!
2. Those are some epic beards.
3. Escape!
4. Into the jungle.
5. How to flag down US helicopters, Vietnam jungle style.

I’d not planned for Rescue Dawn to be my first Werner Herzog-directed film – I have a box set of his collaborations with Klaus Kinski that I had every intention of using as my introduction to his works. Alas, Rescue Dawn showed up on TV over the Christmas period and it seemed like a worthwhile viewing. Thankfully that turned out to be the case.

Based on real events, the story follows the crash and subsequent imprisonment of US pilot Dieter Dengler, whose name would likely work better in the adult movie industry. He’s shot down whilst undertaking a secret mission during the Vietnam War, and finds himself interned in a prison camp hidden away in the jungle alongside other pilots and civilians captured by the Vietnamese. It’s inevitable with a tale like this that Dengler escapes and starts making his way back towards civilisation, however the forests themselves are almost as inhospitable as the camp in which he was interned, throwing leeches and other unpleasant surprises his way and puts in question whether or not he’ll be rescued or recaptured.

Bale is typically dedicated to his role and fully embraces the character. It’s a small thing to pick up on, but the determination to escape is always clear in his eyes, and it’s equally surprising as it is blatantly obvious why nobody else has tried to escape from the camp before his arrival. As a previous fan of Lost, it was nice to see Dr Chang (Francois Chau) and Daniel Faraday (Jeremy Davies), although the former wasn’t in the story for anywhere near long enough. There’s fun to be had with the prison guards too, all of whom have nicknames that stem from either their personality or their physical appearance. Surprisingly not all of them are sadistic thugs – one’s actually the same size as Mini Me and for all intents and purposes despite his job he’s a friendly guy. Most peculiar.

He would do anything for love. But he wouldn't do that. — He would do anything for love. But he wouldn’t do that.

Bale and his co-stars lost a ridiculous amount of weight to portray the effects of long term imprisonment where food was in short supply and torture was an everyday possibility. It certainly helps establish the reality of the situation, in particular the almost skeletal figure of Davies as he shambles around the camp like a zombie who’s not been told he’s dead. As the beards grow, it soon starts to look like a cross between The Walking Dead and an unkempt 60s rock festival.

With one exception of an instantly cauterised decapitation aside and some decidedly iffy special effects when Dengler’s plane is shot down, the situation and reality of the pilot’s predicament are easily believed, and the almost documentary-esque style chosen by Herzog is an interesting choice that also happens to work very well in its favour. When Dengler inevitably starts hallucinating the film’s style nicely blurs the line between fiction and reality without ever resorting to cheap tricks like clouding the screen with that stereotypical “waking dream” effect that is seen so often. Thankfully it doesn’t confuse you, as we know full well that Dengler is hallucinating.

Suffice to say, my introduction to Herzog’s work was perfectly acceptable. Tense in the right places, almost entirely realistic – which one would hope for given that Herzog had already made a documentary about this story – and not an epic flag waving exercise as these things often turn out to be.

Score: 4/5

1...626364...90 Page 63 of 90

SIMONPRIOR.COM