Solitude

Film Fight 2012: January

2012-02-04T13:34:02-08:00

A relatively quiet January for once, with just three films… First up, J. Edgar is about the personal life (or lack thereof) of former FBI director, J. Edgar Hoover. As well as recalling some of his deeds (and exaggerations about said deeds), it goes to great lengths to show what kind of man he was [...]

A relatively quiet January for once, with just three films…

First up, J. Edgar is about the personal life (or lack thereof) of former FBI director, J. Edgar Hoover. As well as recalling some of his deeds (and exaggerations about said deeds), it goes to great lengths to show what kind of man he was and why. Paranoid, extremely driven, shaped by his domineering mother, and lacking much in the way of a social life, it’s a sobering picture. Leonardo Dicaprio does an excellent job in the lead role, but is often left working with material that seems extraneous. The final cut is overlong, largely because it remains relatively unfocussed. Many aspects could have easily been removed and a tighter film made. Good, but badly needs editing down. (See my J. Edgar Twitter review).

The Sitter is a pretty standard American comedy: a man-boy takes on more than he can/should handle for selfish reasons, and arrives in increasingly farcical situations. There’s nothing surprising or shocking here, but it does manage some good laughs, even if it feels like some of the gross-out moments are shoe-horned in. Sam Rockwell stands out as an unhinged drug dealer, but even he starts to wear a little by the end. Funny, but probably exactly what you expect. (See my The Sitter Twitter review).

Finally, Haywire is a spy film with all the usual genre tropes like, double-crosses and a bunch of international locations. The story itself isn’t particularly interesting or well told, and the acting from leading lady, Gina Carano, is pretty poor. That said, the one thing it does surprisingly well is the fight scenes. Not only is Carano convincing when she’s beating up everyone, as you might expect from a former fighter, the direction favours clean and clear shots. No handycam shaking or impossible to follow shots; everything here is about clarity, and it does sacrifice any energy or visual impact to do so. Not a classic, by any means, but the action scenes make it perfectly watchable. (See my Haywire Twitter review).

The winner for January was tough to pick, as none of the films blew me away, but I think J. Edgar was the best. It’s certainly the film I’d most like to see again.

Film Fight 2011: Finale

2011-12-28T10:09:56-08:00

Another year, another bunch of film reviews. What was the best of the lot? Settle down and read on to find out. As always my caveat from previous years still apply: Film Fight is a knock-out tournament and, as such, will only select my favourite film. It makes no guarantees about any other place. First, the [...]Another year, another bunch of film reviews. What was the best of the lot? Settle down and read on to find out. As always my caveat from previous years still apply: Film Fight is a knock-out tournament and, as such, will only select my favourite film. It makes no guarantees about any other place. First, the films that were good but did not win their month: The King’s Speech Blue Valentine 127 Hours NEDs Rango Cedar Rapids Attack The Block The Tree of Life Beginners Horrible Bosses Super 8 Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy Warrior The Ides of March Snowtown Now, the monthly winners: January: Black Swan February: The Fighter March: Submarine April: Source Code May: 13 Assassins June: Senna July: Cell 211 August: Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes September: Drive October: Red State November: We Need To Talk About Kevin December: Another Earth As you can see, there are some great films that didn’t make it through because of a tough month. That said, there’s little slack in the monthly winners. August is probably the weakest of the bunch, but that’s a pretty good average. Of all the years I’ve done this, I think this year has the most serious contenders. There are at least 5 of those 12 that I’d consider as film of the year worthy, and several more just outside that bracket. Rather than trying to place them all, as I did last year, let me just talk about them in their release order, and figure out a winner at the end. I’ve long been a fan of Darren Aronofsky’s work, which often picks dark and difficult subjects. It’s probably no surprise, then, that Black Swan has made this list. It’s a strange film, in which reality and what passes for reality to the central character are constantly shifting as she destroys herself to pursue her art. It’s difficult to sell ballet to the masses, but Aronofsky does an excellent job. One of the few foreign language films I saw in the cinema this year, Cell 211 was a bit of a surprise. I expected it to be an interesting prison drama/action film, and it was, but it was so much more. Following the first day of a guard in a prison, we see the worst of the prison system, and how it changes people. Sure, it does this in a physically violent manner, but just as often we see it in the menace around the lead. Where lesser films would stop, Cell 211 boldly goes further and further. A gripping movie. Ryan Gosling has really come into his own in recent years. He could take the easy money and churn out some Hollywood action drivel, and become a bigger mainstream success, but instead he’s focussed on making great movies. Drive is his best to date. Driving movies have been out of vogue recently, nitro-fuelled nonsense like Fast and Furious aside, so it’s good to see a movie with driving at its heart. It does it scene setting slowly, building a world in which the calmness of the lead is as unsettling as the over-the-top brutality of the criminals. At times, it’s got a magical quality, like the neon tinged city moving to the astounding soundtrack. This is how you do action: build a compelling lead, a tragic situation, paint it with unique touches, and put them all at odds. We Need To Talk About Kevin, meanwhile, is like waking from a nightmare. A reasonable portrayal, for once, of the behaviours of a psychopath: a facade of charisma, masking a lack of empathy. It’s extremely difficult to watch, knowing early on what is going to happen, but the constant flips in direction keep pulling you through the difficult narrative. Dark, but very worthwhile. Finally, Another Earth is full of a tragic beauty. It’s bittersweet, with a haunting soundtrack that pulls you through. I’m going to say[...]

Film Fight 2011: December

2012-01-03T05:19:35-08:00

Only two movies for December… First up, Another Earth is the kind of movie you never expect and is absolutely one of a kind. It’s beautiful and tragic, melancholy and hopeful, poignant and bittersweet, and otherworldly (both figuratively and somewhat literally). A mistake results in a horrible accident that ruins the lives of a composer, [...]

Only two movies for December…

First up, Another Earth is the kind of movie you never expect and is absolutely one of a kind. It’s beautiful and tragic, melancholy and hopeful, poignant and bittersweet, and otherworldly (both figuratively and somewhat literally). A mistake results in a horrible accident that ruins the lives of a composer, and a young girl. As their lives come closer together, we see the extent to which fate has not been kind to either, and how there might still be a distant hope. The light sci-fi hook is perfectly situated in the background, neither dominating proceedings nor being entirely irrelevant. It’s the gun that will be fired, but for the most part the shot is never seen, just the holes it causes. Stunning, and brilliant. A must see film. (See my Another Earth Twitter review).

Finally, Hugo is a somewhat disappointing attempt by Martin Scorsese to do a kids film. A few moments set-up as silent movies aside, it lacks the magic and splendour to really pull this off. The pacing is off: the first hour is far too slow to watch as an adult, I can’t imagine any child sitting through it comfortably. The second half is better, but the pay-off we hope for never really emerges. It’s nice, but it’s not great. Sasha Baron-Cohen manages to inject some character as an awkward station guard, but most of the rest of the cast never really do much. The much-lauded 3D in it adds absolutely nothing; there’s little in here to give it any impact. A little slow and disappointing, but ultimately okay. (See my Hugo Twitter review).

The winner for December is… Another Earth.

Film Fight 2011: November

2011-12-28T09:18:40-08:00

For November’s Film Fight, there are 3 films slowly fading out of memory… First up, We Need To Talk About Kevin is a relentlessy brutal look at another side of a horror story. We see the after-effects of a high-school massacre from a particularly interesting point of view, who then provides insight into the life [...]

For November’s Film Fight, there are 3 films slowly fading out of memory…

First up, We Need To Talk About Kevin is a relentlessy brutal look at another side of a horror story. We see the after-effects of a high-school massacre from a particularly interesting point of view, who then provides insight into the life of the perpetrator and the effect he had on her life. Tilda Swinton is fantastic throughout, almost unfailingly crushed by her life and left to deal with the consequences. It’s her character’s story, a tragedy that she feels she caused that becomes written through her body and face. The editing is exceptional, delving fluidly through memories and the present (both horrible and mundane) with a fractious momentum. Incredible, moving, and hard to watch. An excellent film. (See my We Need To Talk About Kevin Twitter review).

In The Ides of March, George Clooney adds another great directing credit to his modest list. The movie has an exceptionally strong cast (Ryan Gosling, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Paul Giamatti, Clooney himself et al) showing the dark side of politics: continuously spinning the lies and dirt into something that looks better, of strategising and back-stabbing to end in the best position. As you might expect, the cast do their jobs well, and Gosling puts in another top notch performance. Without spoiling anything, the film takes a turn for the dark halfway through, and really comes into its own when we see what each of the leads is willing to do in their own interests. Very good film. (See my The Ides of march Twitter review). Note: as a first, my Twitter review appears to have gone missing. I’m leaving the link in case I ever figure out how to get it back.

Finally, Snowtown is an unsettling look at the true story of Australian’s worst serial killers, and the impact they had on one young man’s life. At times it can be gory, but it’s the pervading atmostphere and stifling control that really bring up a sickening feeling. The naturalistic, sombre direction helps build this awful tension into something unbearable. The ending is very quick, and it would have been better to have seen a little more, but the movie works well. Good, if horrific. (See my Snowtown Twitter review).

This month’s winner is… We Need To Talk About Kevin. It’s horrible, but works on every level. A late contender for film of the year.

Film Fight 2011: October

2011-12-27T08:24:55-08:00

Yes, I’m aware that we’re 5 days from the end of the year and I haven’t put up the Film Fight for October yet. If you’d like to believe so, pretend to yourself that I was merely building dramatic tension. First up, Warrior is something of an anomaly as far as fight movies go: it [...]Yes, I’m aware that we’re 5 days from the end of the year and I haven’t put up the Film Fight for October yet. If you’d like to believe so, pretend to yourself that I was merely building dramatic tension. First up, Warrior is something of an anomaly as far as fight movies go: it tries very hard to have a plot, beyond the obvious underdog story of so many of its peers. It’s not entirely successful, but the story of a broken family, an emotionally dead marine, a drunk father, and a brother going under financially at least stand out. That said, the main focus was always going to be the fights themselves and it’s here that the film does very well. It manages to show the MMA at its best: a mix of brutish power (as exemplified by Tom Hardy) and extremely technical floor and locking work (as shown by Joel Edgerton). It doesn’t shy away from showing the consequences of the sport and is all the better for it. Not a classic, by any stretch, but a worthwhile watch.  (See my Warrior Twitter review). Real Steel manages to surprise, not by building a great film, but by being so damn entertaining. The writing is poor, with both the structure and dialogue being overly formulaic and cheesy. The actors put in an okay performance, even though the romance between Hugh Jackman and Evangeline Lilly falls flat at every turn. None of that doesn’t seem to matter too much, though, because by the end you’ll be cheering for the little silent robot to beat its Goliath-like rival. It builds up so much hope and optimism that you can’t avoid getting hopeful yourself. A feel-good, family film. (See my Real Steel Twitter review). Kevin Smith has done some classic work, mostly in the comedy and indie space, with Clerks and Chasing Amy rightfully taking their places as classics. Red State is something quite different: it’s part-horror, about kidnapping by outsiders (in this case an extreme religious cult), and part-satire, about how some governments have historically handled a siege situation. The two halves don’t marry up perfectly, with the switch seeming like two unrelated films being shoved together. The satire feels a little heavy-handed in places, and could have worked a little better by doing a little more showing, and less telling. The performances throughout, however, are excellent; veering madly between keen observation and scenery-chewing fervour that works perfectly; Michael Parks puts in a particularly notable performance as the pastor at the centre of the film. Very good. (See my Red State Twitter review). Note: this is the only film I’ve ever admitted into the Film Fight that I didn’t see at the cinema. I saw it on Netflix while I was in the US, whilst it was just exiting the cinema in the UK, making it a special case. Finally, Moneyball is better than most sports films, at least, for someone who has little interest in sports. It follows a small baseball team giving up on the traditional ways of finding talented players (which are too costly) and instead going for a statistical approach. It manages to find just enough heart in all of this to make us care about the pressures of the general manager, and the players he buys who would otherwise be overlooked. It doesn’t do enough to make us care enough about an awkward final 30 minutes, where not much happens and then the film ends abruptly. Likeable, but with serious pacing issues. (See my Moneyball Twitter review). Making my final pick for this month was tough, but I think the winner is Red State largely due to the excellent cast. [...]

Movies, Music and The Illusion of Value

2011-10-09T03:14:05-07:00

There are lots of complaints from the creative industries, in particular the movie and music industries, about the threats that they are under from piracy and new forms of digital distribution. It’s often, but not always, the industry itself that complains and not the creatives. The outcome of this has been worrying in several ways. [...]There are lots of complaints from the creative industries, in particular the movie and music industries, about the threats that they are under from piracy and new forms of digital distribution. It’s often, but not always, the industry itself that complains and not the creatives. The outcome of this has been worrying in several ways. Copyright terms have been extended to 70 years for sound recordings which, given the age we live in, is a terrible idea. Copyright, as with patents, was devised as a way to incentivise creatives to create new works by offering them exclusive control over those works for a limited period of time. That last part is extremely important here: why would we, as a society, risk our cultural heritage to benefit a handful of people? We wouldn’t and we shouldn’t. If we allow copyrights to be continually extended, there is a greater chance that we will lose, forever, those recordings that we were trying to protect in the first place. Moreover, why would we want to increase the length of time it takes to be able to access our cultural heritage? If we could argue that it would encourage artists to produce more work because they knew that it would be protected for their lifetimes, then maybe that would do it; but we know that this is not the case. The vast majority of the money from term extension would go to record labels. We’d be given more money to people who already take the vast majority of the income from creative works for merely acting as intermediaries, while pushing most of the risk onto artists themselves. The few artists who would benefit substantially from term extension are people like U2, The Beatles, and Cliff Richard i.e. giant name stars who are already multimillionaires. The vast majority of artists, who earn their living through touring, would see no meaningful benefit. Essentially, we’d be losing more of our cultural heritage for a longer time, with nothing else to show for it, except for propping up the intermediaries of the industry who are unwilling to move with the times. This seems like a terrible idea to me. Separately, we have the movie industry, who simply do not understand what consumers want but complain about declining revenues. It’s somewhat trite, at this point, to complain that the “cinema is best ads” are being only being played to people sitting in a cinema and that the unskippable, lengthy and irritating anti-piracy warnings on DVD/blu-rays are only being shown to people who legitimately bought a copy of the film; trite, but still absolutely true. Perhaps barriers to watching a film, like these unskippable ads, or DRM that stops you watching the film at all, are part of the reason that people pirate movies? That’s the thing: regardless of what’s happened before, we’re now at a point where some people pirate movies, and some people buy them. The key for the creative industries is a) not treat paying customers like thieves with constant annoyances, and b) trying to get non-customers over to the paying side. Clearly, getting people to pay for something they’ve grown somewhat accustomed to getting for free is not easy. It’s a problem that’s been around for a long enough time that if it was, people would likely have done it by now. However, it might be worthwhile starting with some of the more obvious solutions: Make it as easy and quick to watch a legitimate copy of something as it is to watch a pirated copy. This should be a no-brainer. The arguments about having DRM on digital copies and on discs has already been[...]

Film Fight 2011: September

2011-10-01T10:31:25-07:00

Although there were a number of other films I’d like to have seen, I managed to see 4 films in September: First up, Super 8 is a movie with a feel to it we haven’t seen in at least a decade. It’s a kids adventure film, in the mould of classics like The Goonies, updated slightly [...]

Although there were a number of other films I’d like to have seen, I managed to see 4 films in September:

First up, Super 8 is a movie with a feel to it we haven’t seen in at least a decade. It’s a kids adventure film, in the mould of classics like The Goonies, updated slightly for modern sensibilities. At its heart, its a monster mystery about some kids making an amateur movie who get inadvertently involved in a massive cover-up. I’ll leave the mystery at that, but say that the execution is superb. JJ Abrams brings his usual directorial style of fast, moving action shots and lots of neat set-pieces. Its a little cheesy at times, but it’s a great film. (See my Super 8 Twitter review).

The Inbetweeners Movie is exactly what you’d expect: the near-to-the-knuckle, gross-out comedy of the TV show is transplanted into a setting that gives it a little more room. This isn’t ideal, though, as the plot and jokes are spread just a little to thin over the movie’s running time. It’s funny, but not fantastic, and if you hated the show this is not going to change your mind. (See my The Inbetweeners Movie Twitter review).

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, unlike most modern spy films, is glacially slow. Not entirely to its detriment, you understand, it’s deliberately deliberate. Everything about it is supposed to ground the story, that of an investigation into a high-ranking mole in 1970s British Intelligence, in reality is much as possible. This continues through the natural lighting used throughout (many scenes are lit primarily by nearby windows) and the muted performances. That is, unfortunately, the one big downfall of the movie. In trying to be as understated as it can, nothing gets a chance to really shine through other than the plot. While that’s refreshing in many ways, it seems a shame to have such an incredible cast without giving them anything they can use to stand out. Still, it’s a good movie, if a little disappointing. (See my Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy Twitter review).

Finally, Drive is a uniquely confident driving movie. Rather than being driven with abrasive dialogue and big crashes, like the Fast and the Furious franchise, it’s got a remarkably light touch of the wheel. Ryan Gosling is excellent as the lead; a mysterious stunt and get-away driver who gets involved in something he shouldn’t. His character is relentlessly quiet, building a tension around everything he does, as you’ve no idea when he’ll react. The atmosphere is otherworldly, with a musical score like no other in recent memory, and when the action does happen its a masterclass in how car chases should be done. Some have described it as a modern day fairytale, and you can see elements of that, but it’s more of a modern day western, with Gosling as the strong, silent type who doesn’t start the fight, but will have no problem ending it. An excellent film. (See my Drive Twitter review).

While there were some great movies this month, Drive is the winner, as it’s just such a unique and refreshing film; a very good contender for film of the year.

Film Fight 2011: August

2011-08-31T14:01:02-07:00

It was a very quiet August, for a few reasons, so there are only two films in this months film fight. Firstly, Arrietty surprised me in several ways. It’s a the story of The Borrowers, previously adapted for TV and film, as seen by the legendary animation studio, Studio Ghibli. From start to finish, it [...]

It was a very quiet August, for a few reasons, so there are only two films in this months film fight.

Firstly, Arrietty surprised me in several ways. It’s a the story of The Borrowers, previously adapted for TV and film, as seen by the legendary animation studio, Studio Ghibli. From start to finish, it has their trademark look, with neatly designed characters against rich backdrops. Visually, it’s a lovely film. It tells the story modestly, and with few surprises, but without any great insight. That’s the real surprise: despite their history, Ghibli fail to bring any real sense of wonder to this already well trodden story. It’s a perfectly serviceable adaptation, but not outstanding in any real sense. (See my Arrietty Twitter review).

Finally, Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes also surprises, by doing a remarkably good job of handling such a fanciful subject. Despite it being about apes who become very intelligent, with the exception of the last act, it manages to build a reasonable path through the key relationships in the story to keep things somewhat believable, rather than ridiculous. It’s very tightly paced, which serves to keep things moving but doesn’t let some key developments linger as long as they possibly should. The final act devolves into a much more far-fetched, but reasonably action-packed film. In the end, we have an enjoyable action film, that was a little better than expected. (see my Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes Twitter review).

While neither film was a classic, I think that Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes was, against the odds, the more enjoyable film, and is this months winner.

Film Fight 2011: July

2011-08-07T11:40:30-07:00

July brought me to four films, all of which were very different. First up, Cell 211 is a brilliant, if incredibly downbeat, film about a man in the wrong place at the wrong time. Due to begin as a guard, the lead asks to tour the facilities a day early. Unfortunately for him, that’s the day [...]

July brought me to four films, all of which were very different.

First up, Cell 211 is a brilliant, if incredibly downbeat, film about a man in the wrong place at the wrong time. Due to begin as a guard, the lead asks to tour the facilities a day early. Unfortunately for him, that’s the day a riot breaks out and he finds himself on the wrong side of the fence, having to pretend he’s one of the inmates to survive. There are some excellent little set-pieces, some very tense moments, and some superbly done drama. It never flinches when showing something horrific, and is all the more satisfying for it. The acting is strong throughout, with a lot of emotional weight carried well by the main cast. Very worth seeing. (See my Cell 211 Twitter review).

The Tree of Life, meanwhile, is beautiful, difficult and flawed. It challenges the viewer at every turn; from it’s non-linear, and extremely fragmented narrative, to it’s more self-indulgent and outright pretentious moments. There’s a great story in here about growing up under an authoritarian father, tinged with dread because of some foreknowledge we’re given. However, the storytelling itself makes it a little trickier to enjoy this then we might like. In particular, the 10 minute montage of the history of time, whilst stunningly beautiful, is so conceited as to draw attention away from the worthwhile. It’s definitely not an easy film to watch, and won’t suit many, but there is a lot to like here. Worth seeing if you have the patience. (See my The Tree of Life Twitter review).

I wanted to like Beginners more than I actually did. When it delivers, it does so well. There are some incredibly bittersweet moments as Ewan McGregor stumbles through a new relationship, still haunted by the demise of his father. These two stories appear intercut, juxtaposing loss and gain on each side. At times, though, it tries too hard to be a quirky indie film, and consequently never manages to hit the highs that it should have been able to reach, given the subject matter. Certainly, the performances make up for a lack in pacing, but not for other flaws. It’s good, but not great. (See my Beginners Twitter review).

Finally, Horrible Bosses isn’t a classic comedy, but it’ll certainly do while we wait for one. The set-up is ridiculous (three friends want to kill their bosses), the leads are pretty well type-cast, and at times it misses the mark; but none of that matters. The film revels in its silliness, unapologetically letting the laughs cover up the flaws. Yes, Jason Bateman plays the character he’s played a dozen times before and Charlie Day basically plays a slightly toned down version of his It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia character, but the three bosses are fantastically against type and that really helps sell it. A very worthwhile comedy, possibly the best daft comedy of the year so far. (See my Horrible Bosses Twitter review).

 

The winner is Cell 211, for having the courage to see some of the more horrible moments through, while getting most other things so right. A very good film.

Film Fight 2011: June

2011-07-03T08:56:09-07:00

June was quite a quiet month, with only two films viewed. First off, Stake Land manages to fumble a reasonable premise and some early good will, by trying to do far too much. Set in a world that has been destroyed by a vampiric plague, we see early on that the film is capable of [...]

June was quite a quiet month, with only two films viewed.

First off, Stake Land manages to fumble a reasonable premise and some early good will, by trying to do far too much. Set in a world that has been destroyed by a vampiric plague, we see early on that the film is capable of stylish and brutal action sequences, as set in motion by the no-nonsense protagonist, Mister. Throughout, these are the film’s saving grace. However, the film-makers spend so much time world-building and setting up lots of tiny little sub-plots, they forgot to really develop any of them, or to build up most of the characters to the point that we care what happens to them. It feels like they were sticking out plot points for a TV series with the intention of fleshing them out over dozens of hours, but were instead forced to take what they had and film it for around two hours. A real shame. (See my Stake Land Twitter review).

Finally, Senna was an interesting documentary on Ayrton Senna, one of Formula One’s all-time greats. In contrast with most modern documentaries, there’s no talking-head footage, and no narrated “story”. Instead we get lots of archive footage (of which they obviously had more of than for most other subjects) and minimal use of interview audio from his family and friends, with the emphasis heavily on trying to tell the story with period materials. This works tremendously well, building up his rivalries, triumphs and downfalls in a natural fashion. It’s a little slow-paced in the middle, but keeps you interested every time Senna gets a bad break. Very good. (See my Senna Twitter review).

With those two films, there really could only be one winner: Senna. A fine documentary, and an interesting subject.

Comments (0) - Read and Add your own Comments