USA / UK / Germany / Czech Republic, 2006. Directed by Martin Campbell. Daniel Craig, Eva Green, Mads Mikkelsen, Judi Dench, Jeffrey Wright, Giancarlo Giannini, Caterina Murino, Simon Abkarian.
In this film the arrival of Daniel Craig as James Bond signals not only a change of actor in the lead role but also a complete reinvention of the Bond franchise. Gone is the jokey approach; there’s no Miss Moneypenny or Q, no gadgets, no long car chases and no master criminal about to take over the world from a secret hideaway full of countless minions to be summarily despatched by our hero in the final 20 minutes. And for this reinvention the producers have, appropriately enough, adapted the very first Bond novel by Ian Fleming so this really is a new beginning for 007 in every respect. Now, I have to admit that I haven’t taken a great deal of interest in the Bond films over the years – after the early Sean Connery ones they became little more than glossy spectacle, all style and minimal content. With this film being heralded as a new approach I was keen to see what they’d do.
I’m not sure the plot was any more important than the earlier glossy movies – though it’s a complicated affair, centred around Bond playing a long, high-stakes poker game with, amongst others, Le Chiffre (Mikkelsen), a banker to terrorist groups throughout the world who is himself at risk from his customers. What I found more interesting was the redefining of Bond himself as a ruthless but fallible hero. This Bond bleeds when he’s beaten up and screams when he’s stripped and tortured. Craig plays the role as a combination of toughness and vulnerability and we have a sense of a complex psychology working beneath the brutal exterior. The pace is fast-moving and the action gripping throughout, although I felt a couple of the set pieces went on just a little too long. But the final shoot-out in a building in Venice undergoing renovation made for an exciting climax. The acting is polished without being remarkable, and Eva Green performs well as Bond’s lover Vesper, but it’s Daniel Craig’s film and he carries the mantle well. James Bond has now truly arrived in the twenty-first century.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Atonement
UK / France, 2007. Directed by Joe Wright. James McAvoy, Keira Knightley, Romola Garai, Saoirse Ronan, Vanessa Redgrave, Brenda Blethyn.
Between the two world wars, in a grand house in the English countryside, 13-year-old Briony (Ronan) is running around using her fertile imagination to create plays and stories, inspired in part by what she sees going on around her. She has plans to be a writer when she’s older. Robbie (McAvoy), an Oxford graduate, is the son of the housekeeper and attracted to Briony’s older sister, Cecilia (Knightley). The attraction is mutual and in an erotically charged sequence we see them flirt with each other at the fountain in the garden on a balmy summer’s day. Briony herself has a bit of a crush on Robbie and watches the pair from an upstairs window. Later, Robbie gives her a note to take to Cecilia, which she reads before passing it on to her sister. Later still, she interrupts them while they are in the middle of an intimate embrace. The film repeats these events, allowing us to see them from different points of view. This is crucial for, as we come to understand, they lead to Briony telling a lie which has devastating consequences for all three of them… The story then jumps to wartime, with Romola Garai taking over as the 18-year-old Briony – she is training to become a nurse, her sister is already one, and Robbie is in the army. The final sequence has Vanessa Redgrave appear as the elderly Briony, now a famous writer taking stock of these momentous incidents from her past.
This film, based on the book by Ian McEwan, works on a number of different levels and is superbly crafted from start to finish. The opening act at the family home contrasts strongly with the second, which takes place during the war – there is a memorable sequence comprising a long, unbroken take of the beach at Dunkirk which stays in the mind long after the film is over. And I was several times reminded of Joseph Losey’s film of The Go-Between, which it resembles in part. They share some similar themes and both have a Redgrave (Vanessa’s father, Michael, in Losey’s film) turn up towards the end. Very moving and unmissable.
Between the two world wars, in a grand house in the English countryside, 13-year-old Briony (Ronan) is running around using her fertile imagination to create plays and stories, inspired in part by what she sees going on around her. She has plans to be a writer when she’s older. Robbie (McAvoy), an Oxford graduate, is the son of the housekeeper and attracted to Briony’s older sister, Cecilia (Knightley). The attraction is mutual and in an erotically charged sequence we see them flirt with each other at the fountain in the garden on a balmy summer’s day. Briony herself has a bit of a crush on Robbie and watches the pair from an upstairs window. Later, Robbie gives her a note to take to Cecilia, which she reads before passing it on to her sister. Later still, she interrupts them while they are in the middle of an intimate embrace. The film repeats these events, allowing us to see them from different points of view. This is crucial for, as we come to understand, they lead to Briony telling a lie which has devastating consequences for all three of them… The story then jumps to wartime, with Romola Garai taking over as the 18-year-old Briony – she is training to become a nurse, her sister is already one, and Robbie is in the army. The final sequence has Vanessa Redgrave appear as the elderly Briony, now a famous writer taking stock of these momentous incidents from her past.
This film, based on the book by Ian McEwan, works on a number of different levels and is superbly crafted from start to finish. The opening act at the family home contrasts strongly with the second, which takes place during the war – there is a memorable sequence comprising a long, unbroken take of the beach at Dunkirk which stays in the mind long after the film is over. And I was several times reminded of Joseph Losey’s film of The Go-Between, which it resembles in part. They share some similar themes and both have a Redgrave (Vanessa’s father, Michael, in Losey’s film) turn up towards the end. Very moving and unmissable.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
War Of The Worlds
USA, 2005. Directed by Steven Spielberg. Tom Cruise, Dakota Fanning, Justin Chatwin, Tim Robbins, Miranda Otto.
Spielberg’s version of the 1898 novel by H. G. Wells updates the original and, despite some spectacular sequences and special effects, is a surprisingly sombre affair which is as much concerned with fractured families as it is with aliens. Tom Cruise stars as Ray, a blue collar father divorced from his wife Mary Ann (Miranda Otto) and separated from his children Rachel and Robbie (Dakota Fanning and Justin Chatwin). As the film starts they are being dropped off by their mother to spend the weekend with him. We quickly gather he’s not the most diligent of fathers – his place is a bit of a dump and neither of the children show much respect for him. Within a few hours disaster strikes the neighbourhood when alien machines, in the form of gigantic tripods, break out from under the ground and start to create havoc, causing death and destruction as they systematically zap everyone and everything in sight. Ray subsequently grabs his kids and they take off in a stolen car to try to find Mary Ann. The bulk of the film then follows them as they move from one dangerous and terrifying situation to another, with the crisis of the alien invasion forming the backdrop to the domestic crisis of Ray finding himself forced into parental responsibility such as he could never have envisaged. Tim Robbins turns up about half-way through as a crazed survivalist who offers them shelter but who quickly becomes dangerous to them. With this director you expect a highly accomplished movie, and this one is no exception, although its mood is downbeat and is not quite up to the high standard he has set himself. My favourite line, in a film with little humour, comes early on when Robbie asks his dad if the aliens are terrorists. “No, they’re from some place else,” says Ray, to which his son asks: “You mean, like Europe?” Trivia: the stars of the 1953 version, Gene Barry and Ann Robinson, appear in the final scene as the children’s grandparents.
Spielberg’s version of the 1898 novel by H. G. Wells updates the original and, despite some spectacular sequences and special effects, is a surprisingly sombre affair which is as much concerned with fractured families as it is with aliens. Tom Cruise stars as Ray, a blue collar father divorced from his wife Mary Ann (Miranda Otto) and separated from his children Rachel and Robbie (Dakota Fanning and Justin Chatwin). As the film starts they are being dropped off by their mother to spend the weekend with him. We quickly gather he’s not the most diligent of fathers – his place is a bit of a dump and neither of the children show much respect for him. Within a few hours disaster strikes the neighbourhood when alien machines, in the form of gigantic tripods, break out from under the ground and start to create havoc, causing death and destruction as they systematically zap everyone and everything in sight. Ray subsequently grabs his kids and they take off in a stolen car to try to find Mary Ann. The bulk of the film then follows them as they move from one dangerous and terrifying situation to another, with the crisis of the alien invasion forming the backdrop to the domestic crisis of Ray finding himself forced into parental responsibility such as he could never have envisaged. Tim Robbins turns up about half-way through as a crazed survivalist who offers them shelter but who quickly becomes dangerous to them. With this director you expect a highly accomplished movie, and this one is no exception, although its mood is downbeat and is not quite up to the high standard he has set himself. My favourite line, in a film with little humour, comes early on when Robbie asks his dad if the aliens are terrorists. “No, they’re from some place else,” says Ray, to which his son asks: “You mean, like Europe?” Trivia: the stars of the 1953 version, Gene Barry and Ann Robinson, appear in the final scene as the children’s grandparents.
Tuesday, January 18, 2011
11:14
USA / Canada, 2003. Directed by Greg Marcks. Henry Thomas, Barbara Hershey, Hilary Swank, Shawn Hatosy, Colin Hanks, Patrick Swayze, Rachael Leigh Cook.
Jack (Henry Thomas), who has been drinking, is talking on his phone and driving his car when a body drops across his windscreen. The title of the film refers to the time on his dashboard clock just before the impact. Just as he’s trying to fathom it out another driver (Hershey) passes by and thinks he’s hit a deer. Trying to be helpful, she calls the police. Jack panics and hides the body in his boot but before he can drive away a patrol car arrives. So begins a dark comedy thriller which makes little sense at the outset but which by the end of the film has slotted everything into place very neatly. It’s a sort of jigsaw puzzle – we see the events which happen around the same time slot five different times, but each time the emphasis is on a different set of characters and events and with each new angle we understand the overall story a little more. Along the way we meet, amongst others, a father (Swayze) trying to cover up a murder he thinks was committed by his daughter (Cook), three teenagers responsible for a hit-and-run accident, one of whom suffers a severed penis in their desperate attempt to get away and two convenience store workers (Swank and Hatosy) who find themselves at odds with each other when one of them decides he’s going to rob his employers. If all that sounds complicated, well it is, but although the whole story is even more complex than my description it’s understandable once we learn all the facts. Despite the presence of a few big names this is has the feel of a modest film which is watchable and intriguing without being a blockbuster. My only criticism would be that my sympathies couldn’t engage with any of the characters, but on the plus side it maintained a fast pace throughout and, at just 85 minutes long, it kept me watching and didn’t wear out its welcome.
Jack (Henry Thomas), who has been drinking, is talking on his phone and driving his car when a body drops across his windscreen. The title of the film refers to the time on his dashboard clock just before the impact. Just as he’s trying to fathom it out another driver (Hershey) passes by and thinks he’s hit a deer. Trying to be helpful, she calls the police. Jack panics and hides the body in his boot but before he can drive away a patrol car arrives. So begins a dark comedy thriller which makes little sense at the outset but which by the end of the film has slotted everything into place very neatly. It’s a sort of jigsaw puzzle – we see the events which happen around the same time slot five different times, but each time the emphasis is on a different set of characters and events and with each new angle we understand the overall story a little more. Along the way we meet, amongst others, a father (Swayze) trying to cover up a murder he thinks was committed by his daughter (Cook), three teenagers responsible for a hit-and-run accident, one of whom suffers a severed penis in their desperate attempt to get away and two convenience store workers (Swank and Hatosy) who find themselves at odds with each other when one of them decides he’s going to rob his employers. If all that sounds complicated, well it is, but although the whole story is even more complex than my description it’s understandable once we learn all the facts. Despite the presence of a few big names this is has the feel of a modest film which is watchable and intriguing without being a blockbuster. My only criticism would be that my sympathies couldn’t engage with any of the characters, but on the plus side it maintained a fast pace throughout and, at just 85 minutes long, it kept me watching and didn’t wear out its welcome.
Monday, January 17, 2011
Le Serpent
France, 2006. Directed by Eric Barbier. Yvan Attal, Clovis Cornillac, Pierre Richard, Simon Abkarian, Minna Haapkylä, Olga Kurylenko.
Vincent (Attal) is a fashion photographer whose marriage to Hélène (Haapkylä), is teetering on the brink of collapse, with Hélène threatening to take herself and their two children away to live in Germany. The final decision will be made by the judge who is hearing their case; meanwhile a distracted Vincent finds himself professionally compromised when he is falsely accused of rape by a model who, it transpires, is not quite what she seems. When she turns up dead in the boot of his car he realises he’s in big trouble. Behind the frame-up is a former schoolfriend, Plender (Cornillac), who has his own reasons for wanting to destroy Vincent…. Based on a novel by the British writer Ted Lewis (of Get Carter fame), the film is a slick, fast-moving psychological thriller with good central performances by Attal and Cornillac. It’s Hitchockian in style and atmosphere and mostly delivers the goods, although I felt it ran out of steam somewhat about two-thirds of the way through. The final act allows us time to think through the absurdity of what we’re watching, which is a shame, but it’s still an entertaining two hours.
Vincent (Attal) is a fashion photographer whose marriage to Hélène (Haapkylä), is teetering on the brink of collapse, with Hélène threatening to take herself and their two children away to live in Germany. The final decision will be made by the judge who is hearing their case; meanwhile a distracted Vincent finds himself professionally compromised when he is falsely accused of rape by a model who, it transpires, is not quite what she seems. When she turns up dead in the boot of his car he realises he’s in big trouble. Behind the frame-up is a former schoolfriend, Plender (Cornillac), who has his own reasons for wanting to destroy Vincent…. Based on a novel by the British writer Ted Lewis (of Get Carter fame), the film is a slick, fast-moving psychological thriller with good central performances by Attal and Cornillac. It’s Hitchockian in style and atmosphere and mostly delivers the goods, although I felt it ran out of steam somewhat about two-thirds of the way through. The final act allows us time to think through the absurdity of what we’re watching, which is a shame, but it’s still an entertaining two hours.
Sunday, January 16, 2011
The Devil Wears Prada
USA, 2006. Directed by David Frankel. Meryl Streep, Anne Hathaway, Emily Blunt, Stanley Tucci, Simon Baker, Adrian Grenier, Tracie Thorns, Rich Sommer, Daniel Sunjata.
Naïve Andrea (Hathaway), a graduate in journalism, takes a job as the second assistant to Miranda Priestly (Streep), the powerful and ruthless editor-in-chief of Runway magazine, a sort of fictional version of Vogue and the bible of the fashion industry. Ignorant of the fashion world and its movers and shakers, Andrea tells herself it’s a temporary position to allow her to gain experience until she can move on to a more creative role as a journalist. But Miranda is a monster, extremely demanding of her staff and cruel to them when they fall short of her expectations. Andrea finds support from the magazine’s chief stylist Nigel (Tucci) and with his help gradually finds herself rising to the challenges of working for Miranda, to the extent that her relationship with her live-in boyfriend is threatened as she adapts to her new surroundings. Central to the film’s success is yet another powerhouse performance from Streep, who skillfully conveys her character’s vulnerability beneath the bitchy exterior without overplaying it for pathos. So we get to understand her a bit, without necessarily changing our feelings about her. Stanley Tucci also delights in a supporting role which is nicely understated – he’s one of the best actors around right now. And Emily Blunt’s first assistant is nicely portrayed. The film itself was somewhat predictable, though sharply observed and suitably glossy and slick in its presentation. The satire I found amusing without it being engrossing – the film’s strength is in the excellent performances of its leading actors, and these are enough to make it an entertaining couple of hours.
Naïve Andrea (Hathaway), a graduate in journalism, takes a job as the second assistant to Miranda Priestly (Streep), the powerful and ruthless editor-in-chief of Runway magazine, a sort of fictional version of Vogue and the bible of the fashion industry. Ignorant of the fashion world and its movers and shakers, Andrea tells herself it’s a temporary position to allow her to gain experience until she can move on to a more creative role as a journalist. But Miranda is a monster, extremely demanding of her staff and cruel to them when they fall short of her expectations. Andrea finds support from the magazine’s chief stylist Nigel (Tucci) and with his help gradually finds herself rising to the challenges of working for Miranda, to the extent that her relationship with her live-in boyfriend is threatened as she adapts to her new surroundings. Central to the film’s success is yet another powerhouse performance from Streep, who skillfully conveys her character’s vulnerability beneath the bitchy exterior without overplaying it for pathos. So we get to understand her a bit, without necessarily changing our feelings about her. Stanley Tucci also delights in a supporting role which is nicely understated – he’s one of the best actors around right now. And Emily Blunt’s first assistant is nicely portrayed. The film itself was somewhat predictable, though sharply observed and suitably glossy and slick in its presentation. The satire I found amusing without it being engrossing – the film’s strength is in the excellent performances of its leading actors, and these are enough to make it an entertaining couple of hours.
Saturday, January 15, 2011
Swimfan
USA, 2002. Directed by John Polson. Jesse Bradford, Erika Christensen, Shiri Appleby, Kate Burton, Clayne Crawford, Jason Ritter, Dan Hedaya.
Ben (Bradford) is a youth with a troubled, drug-influenced past who with the help and support of his long-term girlfriend Amy (Appleby) has cleaned up his act and channelled his energies into becoming the star swimmer of his school team. He comes to the attention of new girl Madison (Christensen) and although he makes it clear he’s in a committed relationship, it’s not long before he succumbs to her charms (in the swimming pool, naturally). Despite initially agreeing that their sexual liaison will be a one-night-stand, it soon becomes clear Madison is not going to leave him alone and appears to be deaf to his ever more desperate pleas for her to do so. At first merely a nuisance, she quickly becomes a real threat to the stable life he has built up for himself and ultimately a physical threat to others in Ben’s life, particularly Amy. Basically this is Fatal Attraction set in high school. Unfortunately it has just as misogynistic a subtext as its more illustrious predecessor – women are a potential threat once they get their hooks into you. And on the strictly entertainment level the movie is also disappointing; there’s no subtlety and the plot is so well-worn you can predict the key events without needing to sit through the film. It might have been more interesting if the film-makers had explored Ben and Madison's contrasting family backgrounds (she's from a much classier family than he is), but this opportunity is missed. Overall it’s a competent piece of work by all concerned but it’s not going to hold anybody on the edge of their seat.
Ben (Bradford) is a youth with a troubled, drug-influenced past who with the help and support of his long-term girlfriend Amy (Appleby) has cleaned up his act and channelled his energies into becoming the star swimmer of his school team. He comes to the attention of new girl Madison (Christensen) and although he makes it clear he’s in a committed relationship, it’s not long before he succumbs to her charms (in the swimming pool, naturally). Despite initially agreeing that their sexual liaison will be a one-night-stand, it soon becomes clear Madison is not going to leave him alone and appears to be deaf to his ever more desperate pleas for her to do so. At first merely a nuisance, she quickly becomes a real threat to the stable life he has built up for himself and ultimately a physical threat to others in Ben’s life, particularly Amy. Basically this is Fatal Attraction set in high school. Unfortunately it has just as misogynistic a subtext as its more illustrious predecessor – women are a potential threat once they get their hooks into you. And on the strictly entertainment level the movie is also disappointing; there’s no subtlety and the plot is so well-worn you can predict the key events without needing to sit through the film. It might have been more interesting if the film-makers had explored Ben and Madison's contrasting family backgrounds (she's from a much classier family than he is), but this opportunity is missed. Overall it’s a competent piece of work by all concerned but it’s not going to hold anybody on the edge of their seat.
Friday, January 14, 2011
Resident Evil
UK / Germany / France, 2002. Directed by Paul W. S. Anderson. Milla Jovovich, Michelle Rodriguez, Eric Mabius, James Purefoy, Martin Crewes, Colin Salmon.
A military team is sent into a secret underground laboratory known as “The Hive”, run by the sinister Umbrella Corporation. A virus has been released, the staff have all been killed and the central computer has closed off the building to prevent the world outside from becoming infected. The team come across Alice (Jovovich) and Spence (Purefoy), who have amnesia from exposure to the nerve gas, and together they find themselves in a race against time battling against the dead but now zombie-fied scientists, mutant creatures (the experiments the scientists were working on) and the computer itself, which appears to have its own agenda. That description is at best an approximation - trying to review a movie like this is challenging because it’s based on a video game. I guess its core audience is going to be folk who are already familiar with it; I confess my own knowledge in this area is extremely limited. Difficult also to discuss such things as plot and character development as the former follows a predefined path and the latter is non-existent – the characters are merely ciphers and have no inner life of their own. In view of this I would say the acting is satisfactory and the athletic Jovovich (who reportedly did most of her own stunts) drives the movie on with her kick-ass attitude, although I quickly tired of Michelle Rodriguez’s posturing performance. Paul W. S. Anderson, a director not known for his subtlety, wisely keeps the action coming fast and furious. Coming to the film without any previous knowledge or expectation, I quite enjoyed the opening sequences where the scientists begin to realise they’re trapped and Alice wakes up not knowing who or where she is. Therefore I was a little disappointed when it settled down to be a zombie movie, albeit with a few twists, and as the team struggled to get out of the building I began to identify its video game origins. Is it any good? Well, it’s competently made – I have no idea how fans of the game would rate it. Oh, did I mention the soundtrack? IT'S VERY LOUD!
A military team is sent into a secret underground laboratory known as “The Hive”, run by the sinister Umbrella Corporation. A virus has been released, the staff have all been killed and the central computer has closed off the building to prevent the world outside from becoming infected. The team come across Alice (Jovovich) and Spence (Purefoy), who have amnesia from exposure to the nerve gas, and together they find themselves in a race against time battling against the dead but now zombie-fied scientists, mutant creatures (the experiments the scientists were working on) and the computer itself, which appears to have its own agenda. That description is at best an approximation - trying to review a movie like this is challenging because it’s based on a video game. I guess its core audience is going to be folk who are already familiar with it; I confess my own knowledge in this area is extremely limited. Difficult also to discuss such things as plot and character development as the former follows a predefined path and the latter is non-existent – the characters are merely ciphers and have no inner life of their own. In view of this I would say the acting is satisfactory and the athletic Jovovich (who reportedly did most of her own stunts) drives the movie on with her kick-ass attitude, although I quickly tired of Michelle Rodriguez’s posturing performance. Paul W. S. Anderson, a director not known for his subtlety, wisely keeps the action coming fast and furious. Coming to the film without any previous knowledge or expectation, I quite enjoyed the opening sequences where the scientists begin to realise they’re trapped and Alice wakes up not knowing who or where she is. Therefore I was a little disappointed when it settled down to be a zombie movie, albeit with a few twists, and as the team struggled to get out of the building I began to identify its video game origins. Is it any good? Well, it’s competently made – I have no idea how fans of the game would rate it. Oh, did I mention the soundtrack? IT'S VERY LOUD!
Thursday, January 13, 2011
Angus, Thongs And Perfect Snogging
USA / Germany / UK, 2008. Directed by Gurinder Chadha. Georgia Groome, Aaron Johnson, Karen Taylor, Alan Davies, Eleanor Tomlinson, Georgia Henshaw, Manjeeven Grewal, Kimberley Nixon.
As its title suggests, this is a light-hearted comedy of a 14-year-old girl and her friends as she struggles with the ups and downs of adolescent life. Georgia (Groome) lives in Eastbourne with her parents (Karen Taylor and Alan Davies) and a younger sister who spends most of the film dressing up the family cat (the “Angus” of the title). She longs for a boyfriend and finds what she believes to be the perfect boy in Robbie (Johnson). But although her best friend starts dating Robbie’s brother, it takes a little longer before the course of true love runs smoothly for Georgia herself. There are a number of obstacles in her way, including Robbie’s current girlfriend… Simultaneously there’s a crisis of sorts going on at home, with Dad having gone to New Zealand on work and being offered a job opportunity there which would mean moving the family to the other side of the world. And what will Georgia make of Mum’s odd behaviour with a builder while Dad’s away? Full of adolescent angst that most girls and women (and probably quite a few men) will recognise, the movie is a perfect delight from start to finish. It’s genuinely funny (the opening sequence, with Georgia en route to a party waddling down the street dressed as a large olive, had me giggling within seconds) and unlike many films of this genre, manages to remain age-appropriate. Plot-wise there are no surprises – you know exactly where the story’s going throughout – but this doesn’t detract from it being very entertaining. Clearly aimed at girls aged 12 to 16, it nevertheless has much about it that adults will find amusing.
As its title suggests, this is a light-hearted comedy of a 14-year-old girl and her friends as she struggles with the ups and downs of adolescent life. Georgia (Groome) lives in Eastbourne with her parents (Karen Taylor and Alan Davies) and a younger sister who spends most of the film dressing up the family cat (the “Angus” of the title). She longs for a boyfriend and finds what she believes to be the perfect boy in Robbie (Johnson). But although her best friend starts dating Robbie’s brother, it takes a little longer before the course of true love runs smoothly for Georgia herself. There are a number of obstacles in her way, including Robbie’s current girlfriend… Simultaneously there’s a crisis of sorts going on at home, with Dad having gone to New Zealand on work and being offered a job opportunity there which would mean moving the family to the other side of the world. And what will Georgia make of Mum’s odd behaviour with a builder while Dad’s away? Full of adolescent angst that most girls and women (and probably quite a few men) will recognise, the movie is a perfect delight from start to finish. It’s genuinely funny (the opening sequence, with Georgia en route to a party waddling down the street dressed as a large olive, had me giggling within seconds) and unlike many films of this genre, manages to remain age-appropriate. Plot-wise there are no surprises – you know exactly where the story’s going throughout – but this doesn’t detract from it being very entertaining. Clearly aimed at girls aged 12 to 16, it nevertheless has much about it that adults will find amusing.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Children Of Men
USA / UK, 2006. Directed by Alfonso Cuarón. Clive Owen, Julianne Moore, Michael Caine, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Clare-Hope Ashitey, Pam Ferris, Danny Huston, Peter Mullan.
Children Of Men is set in 2027. Humanity is struggling to survive, most of the world is in chaos and Britain has only retained some semblance of order by becoming a police state. No children have been born for twenty years, after an epidemic which led to humans becoming sterile for reasons which no-one has been able to fathom. Theo (Owen) is a one-time freedom fighter who lost his taste for the fight after his child died. He is contacted by his previous partner (Moore) and asked to use his government connections to assist the terrorists she leads with some travel documents. One thing leads to another and the bulk of the film deals with Theo taking responsibility for Kee (Ashitey), who is pregnant with the world’s first known child for twenty years, and getting her to safety. To do this they have to dodge both government forces and the terrorists, who want to use her for their own ends. I began this film struggling to get an understanding of the various political factions but quickly realised that it wasn’t necessary. I suspect Cuarón was happy to keep it vague – what’s important here is the vision being presented to us of a world in chaos. Britain has sealed its borders, the army has rounded up immigrants and put them in detainee camps where they are bullied or killed, guerrilla fighters hide in ruined buildings and strike where and when they can, hordes of dispossessed and homeless people are on the streets like so much litter. The look and feel of the film is bleak, with an uncertain ending. The final battle scenes show Britain as a war zone – it could be Bosnia or the Middle East. The action sequences look very real and scary (there’s a remarkable scene in a car which lasts about five minutes and is one of the most gripping pieces of action I’ve seen in a movie) and there’s a hero who is as scared as anyone else would be and who doesn’t commit unlikely feats of derring-do. The acting is excellent all round; I would just give a special mention to Peter Mullan as an unhinged security guard. It’s a great piece of film-making.
Children Of Men is set in 2027. Humanity is struggling to survive, most of the world is in chaos and Britain has only retained some semblance of order by becoming a police state. No children have been born for twenty years, after an epidemic which led to humans becoming sterile for reasons which no-one has been able to fathom. Theo (Owen) is a one-time freedom fighter who lost his taste for the fight after his child died. He is contacted by his previous partner (Moore) and asked to use his government connections to assist the terrorists she leads with some travel documents. One thing leads to another and the bulk of the film deals with Theo taking responsibility for Kee (Ashitey), who is pregnant with the world’s first known child for twenty years, and getting her to safety. To do this they have to dodge both government forces and the terrorists, who want to use her for their own ends. I began this film struggling to get an understanding of the various political factions but quickly realised that it wasn’t necessary. I suspect Cuarón was happy to keep it vague – what’s important here is the vision being presented to us of a world in chaos. Britain has sealed its borders, the army has rounded up immigrants and put them in detainee camps where they are bullied or killed, guerrilla fighters hide in ruined buildings and strike where and when they can, hordes of dispossessed and homeless people are on the streets like so much litter. The look and feel of the film is bleak, with an uncertain ending. The final battle scenes show Britain as a war zone – it could be Bosnia or the Middle East. The action sequences look very real and scary (there’s a remarkable scene in a car which lasts about five minutes and is one of the most gripping pieces of action I’ve seen in a movie) and there’s a hero who is as scared as anyone else would be and who doesn’t commit unlikely feats of derring-do. The acting is excellent all round; I would just give a special mention to Peter Mullan as an unhinged security guard. It’s a great piece of film-making.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Irina Palm
Belguim / Luxembourg / UK / Germany / France, 2007. Directed by Sam Garbarski. Marianne Faithfull, Miki Manojlovic, Kevin Bishop, Siobhan Hewlett, Dorka Gryllus, Jenny Agutter.
Apparently this film has been judged to be so awful its title has been used for a Critics’ Award – the “Irina Palm d’Or” – for a bad film contest. I feel that’s a little unfair – I’ve seen worse films, although I can’t honestly say it’s very good. Marianne Faithfull stars as Maggie, a woman with a seriously ill young grandson whose parents desperately need money to pay for a possibly life-saving trip to Australia where he can receive specialist medical attention. After an unsuccessful attempt to secure a loan and having been told she’s unemployable, Maggie answers a poster ad for a hostess in a sleazy bar not realising initially what the job entails. The owner (Manojlovic) likes the look and feel of her hands and takes her on a week’s trial. The job is to sit in a “glory-hole” booth and give hand relief on demand to the punters who queue to put money in the adjoining meter. She becomes an unlikely success, the money starts to pile up, but with success comes complications, especially when her family and staid, middle-class female friends discover what she’s up to. The reasons for the critics’ scorn are fairly clear. 1. The storyline isn’t plausible. 2. The film is very slow moving – it plods relentlessly and has a soundtrack to match. 3. The writers have no ear for dialogue, which comes across stilted and false and at times very irritating, especially when Maggie inexplicably doesn’t answer the person who’s talking to her (which happens on a number of occasions). 4. Faithfull’s acting, either through misdirection or incompetence, is wooden. Having said all that, there were a few bits I enjoyed, notably Maggie’s confrontation with her turncoat friends (a trio led by Jenny Agutter). It’s an interesting oddity, but that’s about it. Maggie herself sums it up: “He’s dying, I’m wanking, it’s a mess.”
Apparently this film has been judged to be so awful its title has been used for a Critics’ Award – the “Irina Palm d’Or” – for a bad film contest. I feel that’s a little unfair – I’ve seen worse films, although I can’t honestly say it’s very good. Marianne Faithfull stars as Maggie, a woman with a seriously ill young grandson whose parents desperately need money to pay for a possibly life-saving trip to Australia where he can receive specialist medical attention. After an unsuccessful attempt to secure a loan and having been told she’s unemployable, Maggie answers a poster ad for a hostess in a sleazy bar not realising initially what the job entails. The owner (Manojlovic) likes the look and feel of her hands and takes her on a week’s trial. The job is to sit in a “glory-hole” booth and give hand relief on demand to the punters who queue to put money in the adjoining meter. She becomes an unlikely success, the money starts to pile up, but with success comes complications, especially when her family and staid, middle-class female friends discover what she’s up to. The reasons for the critics’ scorn are fairly clear. 1. The storyline isn’t plausible. 2. The film is very slow moving – it plods relentlessly and has a soundtrack to match. 3. The writers have no ear for dialogue, which comes across stilted and false and at times very irritating, especially when Maggie inexplicably doesn’t answer the person who’s talking to her (which happens on a number of occasions). 4. Faithfull’s acting, either through misdirection or incompetence, is wooden. Having said all that, there were a few bits I enjoyed, notably Maggie’s confrontation with her turncoat friends (a trio led by Jenny Agutter). It’s an interesting oddity, but that’s about it. Maggie herself sums it up: “He’s dying, I’m wanking, it’s a mess.”
Monday, January 10, 2011
House Of Wax
Australia / USA, 2005. Directed by Jaume Collet-Serra. Elisha Cuthbert, Chad Michael Murray, Brian Van Holt, Paris Hilton, Jared Padalecki, Jon Abrahams, Robert Ri’chard.
I started watching this under the impression it was a remake of the 1953 classic of the same name which starred Vincent Price, so was a little disappointed to find that all it shares with the original is its title and the idea of humans being turned into waxworks. This is enough for Charles Belden, the author of the original story, to be credited but not enough to save it from being a predictable, formulaic horror movie. We’re into the slasher genre here, with six young people finding themselves at risk from a couple of deranged brothers in a ghost (or should that be wax) town. For fans of this type of movie there’s enough creepy moments, unpleasant murders and copious blood flow to keep them satisfied I guess, though they should note that they will have to wait an hour or so before anyone is killed. This is presumably to allow time for what might be called character development, though to be honest just as much could have been achieved in fifteen minutes. It’s simply not necessary – we’ve soon worked out who’s who and their relationship with each other and by the time we’ve done that we can also predict the likely survivors (or the last two to die) in the slaughter to come. Celebrity watchers may be interested in the inclusion of Paris Hilton in the cast; her acting is unremarkable but no less competent than anyone else in the movie. For me there was little interest until the grand finale where Graham ‘Grace’ Walker’s set design really comes into its own as the House Of Wax itself burns down. I was pleasantly reminded of those final scenes of the Roger Corman/Vincent Price series of horror pictures in the early 60s. Great stuff, but I could have done without the hour and a half which preceded it.
I started watching this under the impression it was a remake of the 1953 classic of the same name which starred Vincent Price, so was a little disappointed to find that all it shares with the original is its title and the idea of humans being turned into waxworks. This is enough for Charles Belden, the author of the original story, to be credited but not enough to save it from being a predictable, formulaic horror movie. We’re into the slasher genre here, with six young people finding themselves at risk from a couple of deranged brothers in a ghost (or should that be wax) town. For fans of this type of movie there’s enough creepy moments, unpleasant murders and copious blood flow to keep them satisfied I guess, though they should note that they will have to wait an hour or so before anyone is killed. This is presumably to allow time for what might be called character development, though to be honest just as much could have been achieved in fifteen minutes. It’s simply not necessary – we’ve soon worked out who’s who and their relationship with each other and by the time we’ve done that we can also predict the likely survivors (or the last two to die) in the slaughter to come. Celebrity watchers may be interested in the inclusion of Paris Hilton in the cast; her acting is unremarkable but no less competent than anyone else in the movie. For me there was little interest until the grand finale where Graham ‘Grace’ Walker’s set design really comes into its own as the House Of Wax itself burns down. I was pleasantly reminded of those final scenes of the Roger Corman/Vincent Price series of horror pictures in the early 60s. Great stuff, but I could have done without the hour and a half which preceded it.
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Meet The Fockers
USA, 2004. Directed by Jay Roach. Robert De Niro, Ben Stiller, Dustin Hoffman, Barbra Streisand, Blythe Danner, Teri Polo, Owen Wilson.
OK, I admit I was drawn to watching this film because of Hoffman and Streisand. I’d seen Meet The Parents and found it only mildly amusing but felt the addition of these two icons playing the ageing hippy parents of Greg (Ben Stiller) might be a big boost to the comedy. In the event, sadly, I was distinctly disappointed. Having won over his fiancée’s parents Jack and Dina (De Niro and Danner), Greg arranges for them to come to Florida to meet his own (the aforementioned Hoffman and Streisand). What follows is largely a reworking of the jokes from the first film, many of them relying on the notion that it’s hilarious that “Focker” sounds like a rude word. This was amusing once – maybe even twice – but the repetition soon palls. The characterisations are good – Roz Focker is a sex therapist who quickly takes it upon herself to work on the Byrnes’s sterile love life while husband Bernie is a lawyer who took paternity leave to raise Greg and never went back to work. Together their let-it-all-hang-out approach to life serves to embarrass Greg and alienate the suspicious Jack. What lets it down, as so often, is the writing. It seems a pity – and a little surprising – that such high-level stars were happy to settle for something so mediocre. Surely it can’t be the money? While it’s agreeable to see De Niro gurning and generally sending himself up there’s a limit to how many times I want to see him do it. And it seems odd that Streisand, who rarely makes films these days, should choose to turn up in this one. Mildly funny, undemanding and OK if you’re in the right mood.
OK, I admit I was drawn to watching this film because of Hoffman and Streisand. I’d seen Meet The Parents and found it only mildly amusing but felt the addition of these two icons playing the ageing hippy parents of Greg (Ben Stiller) might be a big boost to the comedy. In the event, sadly, I was distinctly disappointed. Having won over his fiancée’s parents Jack and Dina (De Niro and Danner), Greg arranges for them to come to Florida to meet his own (the aforementioned Hoffman and Streisand). What follows is largely a reworking of the jokes from the first film, many of them relying on the notion that it’s hilarious that “Focker” sounds like a rude word. This was amusing once – maybe even twice – but the repetition soon palls. The characterisations are good – Roz Focker is a sex therapist who quickly takes it upon herself to work on the Byrnes’s sterile love life while husband Bernie is a lawyer who took paternity leave to raise Greg and never went back to work. Together their let-it-all-hang-out approach to life serves to embarrass Greg and alienate the suspicious Jack. What lets it down, as so often, is the writing. It seems a pity – and a little surprising – that such high-level stars were happy to settle for something so mediocre. Surely it can’t be the money? While it’s agreeable to see De Niro gurning and generally sending himself up there’s a limit to how many times I want to see him do it. And it seems odd that Streisand, who rarely makes films these days, should choose to turn up in this one. Mildly funny, undemanding and OK if you’re in the right mood.
Saturday, January 8, 2011
Frozen River
USA, 2008. Directed by Courtney Hunt. Melissa Leo, Misty Upham, Charlie McDermott, Michael O’Keefe, James Reilly, Mark Boone Junior.
An exceptional movie from first-time director Courtney Hunt. Set in the North Country of Upstate New York near the Mohawk Reservation and the Canadian border in the days before Christmas, Frozen River tells the story of two women who meet by chance and team up to smuggle illegal immigrants from Canada to the USA for $1,200 a time. This involves them taking hazardous trips across the frozen St Lawrence River and negotiating with dangerous crooks. Both are struggling financially: Ray (Leo) has been abandoned by her gambler husband, who has taken their savings and deposit for a new mobile home with him. She has a dead-end job and two children, the oldest of which, TJ (McDermott), is fifteen and painfully aware of the stark reality of their situation. His mother rejects all his demands to drop out of school so he can earn the family a living. The other woman is Lila (Upham), a widowed Mohawk whose husband died on a smuggling trip and whose infant son has been subsequently taken from her by her mother-in-law. The film is shot in a naturalistic style and Hunt has resisted the temptation to turn this into the thriller it so easily could have been. It is this lack of mainstream-style thrills that makes the film so powerful. There is a very strong sense of real life going on here and real life at the bottom of the pile at that. But even at the bottom there’s a pecking order – Lila confidently tells Ray she won’t get stopped “because you’re white”, while at the same time the Chinese and Pakistani immigrants they hide in the boot of the car are even lower down the scale. In its ending the film is non-judgmental – it brings a resolution to the events of the story without promising a rosy future. Ultimately it’s about poor people doing what they have to do to survive, repaying debts of one kind or another and struggling to get on with their lives from one day to the next. Highly recommended.
An exceptional movie from first-time director Courtney Hunt. Set in the North Country of Upstate New York near the Mohawk Reservation and the Canadian border in the days before Christmas, Frozen River tells the story of two women who meet by chance and team up to smuggle illegal immigrants from Canada to the USA for $1,200 a time. This involves them taking hazardous trips across the frozen St Lawrence River and negotiating with dangerous crooks. Both are struggling financially: Ray (Leo) has been abandoned by her gambler husband, who has taken their savings and deposit for a new mobile home with him. She has a dead-end job and two children, the oldest of which, TJ (McDermott), is fifteen and painfully aware of the stark reality of their situation. His mother rejects all his demands to drop out of school so he can earn the family a living. The other woman is Lila (Upham), a widowed Mohawk whose husband died on a smuggling trip and whose infant son has been subsequently taken from her by her mother-in-law. The film is shot in a naturalistic style and Hunt has resisted the temptation to turn this into the thriller it so easily could have been. It is this lack of mainstream-style thrills that makes the film so powerful. There is a very strong sense of real life going on here and real life at the bottom of the pile at that. But even at the bottom there’s a pecking order – Lila confidently tells Ray she won’t get stopped “because you’re white”, while at the same time the Chinese and Pakistani immigrants they hide in the boot of the car are even lower down the scale. In its ending the film is non-judgmental – it brings a resolution to the events of the story without promising a rosy future. Ultimately it’s about poor people doing what they have to do to survive, repaying debts of one kind or another and struggling to get on with their lives from one day to the next. Highly recommended.
Friday, January 7, 2011
Creep
UK / Germany, 2004. Directed by Christopher Smith. Franka Potente, Vas Blackwood, Ken Campbell, Jeremy Sheffield, Paul Rattray, Kelly Scott, Sean Harris.
Smart city girl Kate (Potente) leaves a party and plans to take a tube train to another location where she’s heard George Clooney is going to be in attendance. But it’s late, she falls asleep on the platform and wakes up to find herself locked in the tube station. There then follows a sequence of events which become ever more nightmarish as Kate finds herself and others (a homeless couple, a sewage worker and a potential rapist) pursued through the tunnels and passageways by something rather unpleasant. People die and there’s lots of blood. The opening sequence, a prologue of sorts which has sewage workers Vas Blackwood and Ken Campbell trawling through the Underground’s tunnels, is nicely done and sets up an expectation for the film which isn’t quite delivered. There’s some good tension and the atmosphere is suitably claustrophobic, but the film gradually descends into a gore-fest which is more unpleasant than truly frightening, particularly a torture scene towards the end. There is a back-story of sorts which hints at why the perpetrator does what they do, but it’s pretty sketchy and an attempt to generate audience sympathy for the character doesn’t work. Kate herself doesn’t generate much sympathy either, and her attitudes towards the homeless are signalled early on as a device which facilitates an ironic ending to the film. As a horror movie it’s certainly competent if not likeable and first-time director Christopher Smith shows much potential.
Smart city girl Kate (Potente) leaves a party and plans to take a tube train to another location where she’s heard George Clooney is going to be in attendance. But it’s late, she falls asleep on the platform and wakes up to find herself locked in the tube station. There then follows a sequence of events which become ever more nightmarish as Kate finds herself and others (a homeless couple, a sewage worker and a potential rapist) pursued through the tunnels and passageways by something rather unpleasant. People die and there’s lots of blood. The opening sequence, a prologue of sorts which has sewage workers Vas Blackwood and Ken Campbell trawling through the Underground’s tunnels, is nicely done and sets up an expectation for the film which isn’t quite delivered. There’s some good tension and the atmosphere is suitably claustrophobic, but the film gradually descends into a gore-fest which is more unpleasant than truly frightening, particularly a torture scene towards the end. There is a back-story of sorts which hints at why the perpetrator does what they do, but it’s pretty sketchy and an attempt to generate audience sympathy for the character doesn’t work. Kate herself doesn’t generate much sympathy either, and her attitudes towards the homeless are signalled early on as a device which facilitates an ironic ending to the film. As a horror movie it’s certainly competent if not likeable and first-time director Christopher Smith shows much potential.
Thursday, January 6, 2011
Ryan's Daughter
UK, 1970. Directed by David Lean. Robert Mitchum, Sarah Miles, Trevor Howard, Christopher Jones, John Mills, Leo McKern, Barry Foster.
Critically mauled on its release in 1970, David Lean’s epic tale of adultery in a small Irish village during the First World War was the last film he would make for 14 years, so hurt was he by the unsympathetic response. The plot is simple – a naïve young girl (Miles) marries a much older schoolmaster (Mitchum), has an affair with a shell-shocked young British officer (Jones) which is then discovered by the villagers. Some of the criticism is, I feel, unwarranted - the film is beautifully shot and one scene in particular, where the whole village battles with the elements to salvage a shipment of weapons and ammunition from the sea in the midst of a wild, raging storm is stunning to watch. But the overriding problem with the film is that the storyline isn’t best served by an epic movie, for all the wonderful widescreen cinematography by Freddie Young or the stirring, swirling music from Maurice Jarre. Lean’s previous film was the epic Dr. Zhivago and he evidentally hoped to repeat its success, but Zhivago is a wide-sweeping tale of doomed love set against the backdrop of the Russian Revolution – it is epic in scale in a way that Ryan’s Daughter is not. Having said that, if you’re not too demanding there is plenty here to entertain – it is after all a superbly crafted film. The acting is mostly enjoyable, although you might wince a bit at some of the Irish accents from some of the non-Irish actors. The casting of Christopher Jones as the British officer probably didn’t help the film though – his voice was dubbed and, possibly because of this, the role is underwritten; he says very little throughout. Predictably it was John Mills, in his portrayal of the club-footed, mute village idiot, who won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor.
Critically mauled on its release in 1970, David Lean’s epic tale of adultery in a small Irish village during the First World War was the last film he would make for 14 years, so hurt was he by the unsympathetic response. The plot is simple – a naïve young girl (Miles) marries a much older schoolmaster (Mitchum), has an affair with a shell-shocked young British officer (Jones) which is then discovered by the villagers. Some of the criticism is, I feel, unwarranted - the film is beautifully shot and one scene in particular, where the whole village battles with the elements to salvage a shipment of weapons and ammunition from the sea in the midst of a wild, raging storm is stunning to watch. But the overriding problem with the film is that the storyline isn’t best served by an epic movie, for all the wonderful widescreen cinematography by Freddie Young or the stirring, swirling music from Maurice Jarre. Lean’s previous film was the epic Dr. Zhivago and he evidentally hoped to repeat its success, but Zhivago is a wide-sweeping tale of doomed love set against the backdrop of the Russian Revolution – it is epic in scale in a way that Ryan’s Daughter is not. Having said that, if you’re not too demanding there is plenty here to entertain – it is after all a superbly crafted film. The acting is mostly enjoyable, although you might wince a bit at some of the Irish accents from some of the non-Irish actors. The casting of Christopher Jones as the British officer probably didn’t help the film though – his voice was dubbed and, possibly because of this, the role is underwritten; he says very little throughout. Predictably it was John Mills, in his portrayal of the club-footed, mute village idiot, who won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor.
Wednesday, January 5, 2011
Straightheads
UK, 2007. Directed by Dan Reed. Gillian Anderson, Danny Dyer, Anthony Calf, Francesca Fowler, Ralph Brown, Steven Robertson.
City businesswoman (Anderson) takes a fancy to the young man (Dyer) who’s installing a surveillance alarm system in her apartment and invites him to accompany her to her boss’s house party in the country. Afterwards they have sex in the grounds before starting the drive home. On the way she hits a deer and they are attacked by three locals – she is raped and he is badly beaten up. The subsequent story is a tale of revenge, much of it unbelievable and none of it very interesting. It’s also extremely brutal, both in its depiction of the rape and the subsequent violence it begets. Along the way there are hints that some insights about the nature of violence and its effects upon the human condition were intended, but by the end of the film it doesn’t feel like anything profound has been said – actually I was rather relieved it was over. Apart from the nasty taste left by its subject matter, all the characters are poorly drawn and, at times seem very muddled. Gillian Anderson handles her role with the capability one has come to expect of her but is limited by the script. Danny Dyer, an actor with a limited range at the best of times, plays a version of the persona for which he’s known, but again, the writing fails him. For people who have had such a frightful experience I found I had little sympathy for either of them, probably because no-one seems to have tried to make them particularly likeable characters in the first place. Straw Dogs is sometimes mentioned in the context of this film, presumably because it also features violence, rape and country yokels, but this is a far cry from anything Sam Peckinpah would have produced.
City businesswoman (Anderson) takes a fancy to the young man (Dyer) who’s installing a surveillance alarm system in her apartment and invites him to accompany her to her boss’s house party in the country. Afterwards they have sex in the grounds before starting the drive home. On the way she hits a deer and they are attacked by three locals – she is raped and he is badly beaten up. The subsequent story is a tale of revenge, much of it unbelievable and none of it very interesting. It’s also extremely brutal, both in its depiction of the rape and the subsequent violence it begets. Along the way there are hints that some insights about the nature of violence and its effects upon the human condition were intended, but by the end of the film it doesn’t feel like anything profound has been said – actually I was rather relieved it was over. Apart from the nasty taste left by its subject matter, all the characters are poorly drawn and, at times seem very muddled. Gillian Anderson handles her role with the capability one has come to expect of her but is limited by the script. Danny Dyer, an actor with a limited range at the best of times, plays a version of the persona for which he’s known, but again, the writing fails him. For people who have had such a frightful experience I found I had little sympathy for either of them, probably because no-one seems to have tried to make them particularly likeable characters in the first place. Straw Dogs is sometimes mentioned in the context of this film, presumably because it also features violence, rape and country yokels, but this is a far cry from anything Sam Peckinpah would have produced.
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
And Then There Were None
USA, 1945. Directed by René Clair. Barry Fitzgerald, Walter Huston, Louis Hayward, Roland Young, June Duprez, Judith Anderson, Mischa Auer, C. Aubrey Smith, Richard Haydn, Queenie Leonard.
The first filmed version of Agatha Christie’s classic mystery thriller. Eight people, all strangers to each other, have been invited to spend a weekend at a large house on a remote island off the coast of Devon. None has met their host before and when they arrive they are greeted by two servants, a married couple who have been engaged for the weekend and who also haven’t met their employer. It transpires that all ten have a guilty secret and soon they are being killed off one by one by an unknown assailant. As the bodies pile up it becomes apparent that the murderer is probably one of them and the tension mounts as no-one knows who they can trust. Christie adapted her book into a stage play and it’s worth mentioning that the film was adapted from the play rather than the book. It’s an important distinction because the book is much bleaker than the play, which softened the original ending and allowed for humour and a little love interest. The humour certainly comes out in the film, with a wonderful cast of seasoned players pulling out all the stops. Now over 65 years old, it’s no surprise that the film’s a little creaky in places but nevertheless it’s still entertaining and became something of a template for a whole raft of murder mysteries which followed in its wake. There are lots of memorable lines in Dudley Nichols’s witty screenplay, my favourite coming from Rogers the butler (Richard Haydn) after the guests voice their suspicions: “Never in my life have I been accused of any crime, sir - and if that's what you think of me, I shan't serve any dinner!”
The first filmed version of Agatha Christie’s classic mystery thriller. Eight people, all strangers to each other, have been invited to spend a weekend at a large house on a remote island off the coast of Devon. None has met their host before and when they arrive they are greeted by two servants, a married couple who have been engaged for the weekend and who also haven’t met their employer. It transpires that all ten have a guilty secret and soon they are being killed off one by one by an unknown assailant. As the bodies pile up it becomes apparent that the murderer is probably one of them and the tension mounts as no-one knows who they can trust. Christie adapted her book into a stage play and it’s worth mentioning that the film was adapted from the play rather than the book. It’s an important distinction because the book is much bleaker than the play, which softened the original ending and allowed for humour and a little love interest. The humour certainly comes out in the film, with a wonderful cast of seasoned players pulling out all the stops. Now over 65 years old, it’s no surprise that the film’s a little creaky in places but nevertheless it’s still entertaining and became something of a template for a whole raft of murder mysteries which followed in its wake. There are lots of memorable lines in Dudley Nichols’s witty screenplay, my favourite coming from Rogers the butler (Richard Haydn) after the guests voice their suspicions: “Never in my life have I been accused of any crime, sir - and if that's what you think of me, I shan't serve any dinner!”
Monday, January 3, 2011
Severance
UK / Germany, 2006. Directed by Christopher Smith. Danny Dyer, Laura Harris, Tim McInnerny, Babou Ceesay, Andy Nyman, Claudie Blakley, Toby Stephens.
Wittily titled horror comedy from director Christopher Smith which sees a group of office workers on a team-building weekend somewhere in Eastern Europe. They are members of the salesforce for Palisade Defence, a multi-national company specialising in weaponry. All are recognisable “types” – ingratiating but ineffectual manager (McInnerny), feisty female supervisor (Harris), gadget geek dullard (Nyman), cynical know-all (Stephens), irreverent laddish pothead (Dyer), plain female with conscience (Blakley) and reliable, sensible right-hand man (Ceesay). The group finds itself stranded and at the mercy of a number of very unpleasant and aggressive guerrilla-style woodsmen. One by one most of the characters come to a grisly end and along the way the horror is peppered with grim humour, together with a few political points presumably intended as satire but which lack real bite. In fact the humour often sits uncomfortably alongside the gore, especially when the film ventures into horror/torture territory. Shaun Of The Dead showed how well horror and comedy can be mixed but here the mix is only partially successful. Nevertheless it will amuse many and there are enough gags to keep the audience satisfied.
Wittily titled horror comedy from director Christopher Smith which sees a group of office workers on a team-building weekend somewhere in Eastern Europe. They are members of the salesforce for Palisade Defence, a multi-national company specialising in weaponry. All are recognisable “types” – ingratiating but ineffectual manager (McInnerny), feisty female supervisor (Harris), gadget geek dullard (Nyman), cynical know-all (Stephens), irreverent laddish pothead (Dyer), plain female with conscience (Blakley) and reliable, sensible right-hand man (Ceesay). The group finds itself stranded and at the mercy of a number of very unpleasant and aggressive guerrilla-style woodsmen. One by one most of the characters come to a grisly end and along the way the horror is peppered with grim humour, together with a few political points presumably intended as satire but which lack real bite. In fact the humour often sits uncomfortably alongside the gore, especially when the film ventures into horror/torture territory. Shaun Of The Dead showed how well horror and comedy can be mixed but here the mix is only partially successful. Nevertheless it will amuse many and there are enough gags to keep the audience satisfied.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)