Happy Gilmore (1996)
Adam Sandler co-writes and stars in this sports comedy about a guy that wants to play professional ice hockey but other than his slap shot is completely useless and has anger management issues. It turns out that Sandler's slap shot is just the thing needed to become a super duper amazing golfer and that he can raise the money needed to save his grandmother's house by playing on the PGA tour.
There are many problems with this film starting with the fact that the plot is completely derivative and formulaic, the characters are not likeable, the jokes are not funny and there is far too much product placement all through out the movie. With comedies you can get away with being weak in terms of plot if there are enough jokes to paper of the cracks but this film literally has nothing going for it, no paper only cracks.
Maybe there are some bit Adam Sandler fans out there that might enjoy this film but it feels generous even giving it 2/5
Monday 31 January 2011
Sunday 30 January 2011
Get Brown?
Harry Brown (2009)
Michael Caine stars in this British revenge film about an old man whose best friend is killed by a gang of kids on the local council estate. With his Royal Marine training Harry wheezes into action taking on the low lives that blight the area he lives in.
This film is a well made vigilante thriller with plenty of atmosphere and looks at a situation which is common in many areas of Britain today, youth intimidation and crime. There are some decent characters although Emily Mortimer's timid police officer is not properly fleshed out. All in all there is little wrong with the execution of the film but the script is a little lacking in not considering why these problems arise and what can really be done about them besides going on a killing spree (not very practical).
Classic Caine in slightly different light 4/5.
Michael Caine stars in this British revenge film about an old man whose best friend is killed by a gang of kids on the local council estate. With his Royal Marine training Harry wheezes into action taking on the low lives that blight the area he lives in.
This film is a well made vigilante thriller with plenty of atmosphere and looks at a situation which is common in many areas of Britain today, youth intimidation and crime. There are some decent characters although Emily Mortimer's timid police officer is not properly fleshed out. All in all there is little wrong with the execution of the film but the script is a little lacking in not considering why these problems arise and what can really be done about them besides going on a killing spree (not very practical).
Classic Caine in slightly different light 4/5.
Saturday 29 January 2011
Egg chasing
Invictus (2009)
Based on the the story of the 1995 rugby world cup and the changing landscape of South Africa after the end of apartheid this film is directed by Clint Eastwood and stars Morgan Freeman as Nelson Mandela with Matt Damon as the South African rugby captain. As this is nominally a sports movie you can probably guess what is going to happen, generally people do not care about second place teams.
What this film does well is stay clear of many of the pitfalls sports films usually fall into such as focusing too much on the players and team itself as well as going over the same old clichés. The real thrust of Invictus is the affect sports can have on communities or nations in this instance and is as much about Mandela's attempts to reconcile a population facing radical social change and many serious problems, a lot of which still exist in South Africa today.
Like usual this is a well made effort from Eastwood with good performances from the cast although the choice of some music included is a little heavy handed and the film is a little simplistic. Despite the slight flaws and limits of the genre Invictus manages to rise above being just another sports film and gives a good insight into Mandela and his policy of forgiveness and reconciliation.
4/5
Based on the the story of the 1995 rugby world cup and the changing landscape of South Africa after the end of apartheid this film is directed by Clint Eastwood and stars Morgan Freeman as Nelson Mandela with Matt Damon as the South African rugby captain. As this is nominally a sports movie you can probably guess what is going to happen, generally people do not care about second place teams.
What this film does well is stay clear of many of the pitfalls sports films usually fall into such as focusing too much on the players and team itself as well as going over the same old clichés. The real thrust of Invictus is the affect sports can have on communities or nations in this instance and is as much about Mandela's attempts to reconcile a population facing radical social change and many serious problems, a lot of which still exist in South Africa today.
Like usual this is a well made effort from Eastwood with good performances from the cast although the choice of some music included is a little heavy handed and the film is a little simplistic. Despite the slight flaws and limits of the genre Invictus manages to rise above being just another sports film and gives a good insight into Mandela and his policy of forgiveness and reconciliation.
4/5
Friday 28 January 2011
Mud
McCabe & Mrs. Miller (1971)
Warren Beatty and Julie Christie star in Robert Altman's “anti-western”. John McCabe is a drunken gambler with a dream and that dream is building a whore house to turn the down trodden and mud filled small mining town of Presbyterian Church into something more. As McCabe is a drunk and a dreamer he needs the practical knowledge of ruthlessly efficient prostitute Mrs Miller to really fulfil the potential of his money making schemes.
The brothel becomes a high quality sporting house and eventually McCabe ends up owning the majority of the small town thanks to Mrs Millers good business sense. With success comes the attention of big business who are keen to buy up or push McCabe out and his reluctance to make a deal leads to the inevitable finale confrontation which is excellently shot in the snow. The film is beautifully shot although the choice of using natural lighting only means some of the internal sequences are a little dark.
While Altman set out to try and subvert a number of western conventions this film does share some themes with previous westerns such as High Noon (1952) and Once Upon a Time in the West (1968), the citizens decide to save the local church which is on fire rather than help McCabe and it is the arrival of a large company which causes the end of the western “ideal”.
It is very hard to find anything wrong with this movie 5/5.
Warren Beatty and Julie Christie star in Robert Altman's “anti-western”. John McCabe is a drunken gambler with a dream and that dream is building a whore house to turn the down trodden and mud filled small mining town of Presbyterian Church into something more. As McCabe is a drunk and a dreamer he needs the practical knowledge of ruthlessly efficient prostitute Mrs Miller to really fulfil the potential of his money making schemes.
The brothel becomes a high quality sporting house and eventually McCabe ends up owning the majority of the small town thanks to Mrs Millers good business sense. With success comes the attention of big business who are keen to buy up or push McCabe out and his reluctance to make a deal leads to the inevitable finale confrontation which is excellently shot in the snow. The film is beautifully shot although the choice of using natural lighting only means some of the internal sequences are a little dark.
While Altman set out to try and subvert a number of western conventions this film does share some themes with previous westerns such as High Noon (1952) and Once Upon a Time in the West (1968), the citizens decide to save the local church which is on fire rather than help McCabe and it is the arrival of a large company which causes the end of the western “ideal”.
It is very hard to find anything wrong with this movie 5/5.
Thursday 27 January 2011
Madness?
Alice in Wonderland (2010)
Tim Burton directs this re-imagining/sequel/fan fiction/adaptation of Lewis Carroll's original Alice stories. Instead of a story about a little girl we now have a coming of age tale about a young woman returning to the imaginary land she has forgotten. The narrative starts out with Alice going to a party where some guy she does not like ends up proposing to her in front of everyone else in events staged by her would be mother in law.
Although it has been covered in other books and films I did really like the idea of framing the story as an adult returning to explore the imagination and dreams of childhood, it works especially well with the backdrop and characters of Wonderland. There are some really great things about this film, the casting, the depiction of Wonderland and the first two thirds of the film but I have some real problems with the ending.
In Wonderland Alice is told that it is her destiny to go slay the Jabberwocky and mirroring her real life situation she rebels against being forced into this. Paradoxically she resolves the dream plot by submitting to her destiny and “becoming Alice” but in the real life plot rebels by rejecting the marriage proposal and thus everyone else's plans for her destiny which is a pretty mixed message. We also have an implicit approval of imperial/colonial expansion in the Victorian period with the path Alice picks for herself.
Despite the flaws this film has enough about it to still give it a 4/5.
Tim Burton directs this re-imagining/sequel/fan fiction/adaptation of Lewis Carroll's original Alice stories. Instead of a story about a little girl we now have a coming of age tale about a young woman returning to the imaginary land she has forgotten. The narrative starts out with Alice going to a party where some guy she does not like ends up proposing to her in front of everyone else in events staged by her would be mother in law.
Although it has been covered in other books and films I did really like the idea of framing the story as an adult returning to explore the imagination and dreams of childhood, it works especially well with the backdrop and characters of Wonderland. There are some really great things about this film, the casting, the depiction of Wonderland and the first two thirds of the film but I have some real problems with the ending.
In Wonderland Alice is told that it is her destiny to go slay the Jabberwocky and mirroring her real life situation she rebels against being forced into this. Paradoxically she resolves the dream plot by submitting to her destiny and “becoming Alice” but in the real life plot rebels by rejecting the marriage proposal and thus everyone else's plans for her destiny which is a pretty mixed message. We also have an implicit approval of imperial/colonial expansion in the Victorian period with the path Alice picks for herself.
Despite the flaws this film has enough about it to still give it a 4/5.
Wednesday 26 January 2011
Dingo
A Cry in the Dark (1988)
Meryl Streep stars in this film based on the real life events of dingos eating babies and the lead characters conviction for the murder of her own child set in Australia. The basic narrative of the film is fairly average, it is horrible to lose a child and it does put a terrible strain on the family relations and this is handled respectfully if unremarkably.
While the story focuses on the family it is as much about the public and press reaction and how this leads to a miscarriage of justice as it is about the loss of a young child. We have a strong belief in the justice systems in most free countries these days but it is shocking to see how the course of justice is perverted here. As science has advanced we have become increasingly reliant on expert testimony and complex scientific tests in hard to prove cases, the film deals with the misuse of these without getting bogged down in the details. The public and press are only interested in how events play out for their own entertainment and this in part also leads to the main characters conviction.
Managing to over come it's average execution this film is though provoking enough to earn a 4/5.
Meryl Streep stars in this film based on the real life events of dingos eating babies and the lead characters conviction for the murder of her own child set in Australia. The basic narrative of the film is fairly average, it is horrible to lose a child and it does put a terrible strain on the family relations and this is handled respectfully if unremarkably.
While the story focuses on the family it is as much about the public and press reaction and how this leads to a miscarriage of justice as it is about the loss of a young child. We have a strong belief in the justice systems in most free countries these days but it is shocking to see how the course of justice is perverted here. As science has advanced we have become increasingly reliant on expert testimony and complex scientific tests in hard to prove cases, the film deals with the misuse of these without getting bogged down in the details. The public and press are only interested in how events play out for their own entertainment and this in part also leads to the main characters conviction.
Managing to over come it's average execution this film is though provoking enough to earn a 4/5.
Tuesday 25 January 2011
Not anymore
The Pink Panther Strikes Again (1976)
This is the 5th film in the pink panther series although the continuity is somewhat confused as there is one film made without Sellers or director Blake Edwards being involved. In the interviening films the character of Dreyfus has been introduced as Clouseau's superior and in the 4th film was driven insane by Clouseau's blundering. Strikes Again opens with Dreyfus about to be released from the nut house before Clouseau turns up to put in a good word for him and sends him back over the edge. Once insane again Dreyfus because a criminal mastermind and holds the world to ransom in exchange for the head of his nemesis.
There is a fairly big drop off in quality when comparing this film to the original. What I think is the biggest problem here is that when you make Clouseau the main character and the antagonist also insane there is no contrast to play off, no straight man. The plot itself is fairly stupid and does not really provide a coherent frame work for the comedy, there are some laughs but they are fewer in number and fit less naturally into the story.
3/5 worth watching if you are a fan of the series but not worth seeking out otherwise.
This is the 5th film in the pink panther series although the continuity is somewhat confused as there is one film made without Sellers or director Blake Edwards being involved. In the interviening films the character of Dreyfus has been introduced as Clouseau's superior and in the 4th film was driven insane by Clouseau's blundering. Strikes Again opens with Dreyfus about to be released from the nut house before Clouseau turns up to put in a good word for him and sends him back over the edge. Once insane again Dreyfus because a criminal mastermind and holds the world to ransom in exchange for the head of his nemesis.
There is a fairly big drop off in quality when comparing this film to the original. What I think is the biggest problem here is that when you make Clouseau the main character and the antagonist also insane there is no contrast to play off, no straight man. The plot itself is fairly stupid and does not really provide a coherent frame work for the comedy, there are some laughs but they are fewer in number and fit less naturally into the story.
3/5 worth watching if you are a fan of the series but not worth seeking out otherwise.
Monday 24 January 2011
Stolen
The Pink Panther (1963)
David Niven stars here as the upper class English jewel thief out to steal the jewel that the film is named after however there are a number of surprises and mishaps along the way in this comedy. What should have been a routine comedy is itself stolen along the way by Peter Sellers as Inspector Clouseau.
If you like silly and slapstick comedy this film delivers it in spades with Sellers as the Sultan of stupidity. Before we even get started the title sequences gives a good example of what is to come and is not to be skipped as the cartoon pink panther tries to run amok. From the moment Sellers falls off the globe in his office you should know what you are in for. While the scenes without Clouseau do lack the comedy of the rest of the film there is more than enough of him to keep the film very funny and not over do it.
Originally this film was conceived as a start of a series of films based around the David Niven character and while he is the definitive upper class Englishman there is nothing really unique about his character so it is not hard to see how a funny little French policeman walked off with the plaudits. What holds this back from being a great films is that sadly without Seller's star turn it would be a distinctly average and entirely miss-able foot note in cinema however it still remains one of the great comedies 4/5.
David Niven stars here as the upper class English jewel thief out to steal the jewel that the film is named after however there are a number of surprises and mishaps along the way in this comedy. What should have been a routine comedy is itself stolen along the way by Peter Sellers as Inspector Clouseau.
If you like silly and slapstick comedy this film delivers it in spades with Sellers as the Sultan of stupidity. Before we even get started the title sequences gives a good example of what is to come and is not to be skipped as the cartoon pink panther tries to run amok. From the moment Sellers falls off the globe in his office you should know what you are in for. While the scenes without Clouseau do lack the comedy of the rest of the film there is more than enough of him to keep the film very funny and not over do it.
Originally this film was conceived as a start of a series of films based around the David Niven character and while he is the definitive upper class Englishman there is nothing really unique about his character so it is not hard to see how a funny little French policeman walked off with the plaudits. What holds this back from being a great films is that sadly without Seller's star turn it would be a distinctly average and entirely miss-able foot note in cinema however it still remains one of the great comedies 4/5.
Sunday 23 January 2011
Redeemed?
Solomon Kane (2009)
Set in the 17th century and based on Robert E. Howard's pulp magazine character this is the story of Solomon Kane, a privateer whose soul has been damned. Shocked by his damnation Kane returns to an England beset by winter and evil across the land, after renouncing his violent ways Kane is forced to return to them to save a young girl from the bad guys and redeem his soul.
It is hard to say what this film does well but I think the easiest way to summarise this film is to say that it manages to avoid all the pit falls that similar films fall into. The plot is fairly basic but managed to stay clear of out right stupidity or ham fisted attempts to give events deeper meaning that make you want to bang your head on the wall. While the action sequences do not stand out and there are a couple of glaring historical errors in the opening minutes they do not hold things back too far. There is just enough atmosphere and tension to keep the film going and hold your attention that minor problems can be over looked.
It feels strange to give this film a 4/5 but for what it is it does manage to be a good film.
Set in the 17th century and based on Robert E. Howard's pulp magazine character this is the story of Solomon Kane, a privateer whose soul has been damned. Shocked by his damnation Kane returns to an England beset by winter and evil across the land, after renouncing his violent ways Kane is forced to return to them to save a young girl from the bad guys and redeem his soul.
It is hard to say what this film does well but I think the easiest way to summarise this film is to say that it manages to avoid all the pit falls that similar films fall into. The plot is fairly basic but managed to stay clear of out right stupidity or ham fisted attempts to give events deeper meaning that make you want to bang your head on the wall. While the action sequences do not stand out and there are a couple of glaring historical errors in the opening minutes they do not hold things back too far. There is just enough atmosphere and tension to keep the film going and hold your attention that minor problems can be over looked.
It feels strange to give this film a 4/5 but for what it is it does manage to be a good film.
Saturday 22 January 2011
Mass destruction
Green Zone (2010)
Treading the thin line between fiction and “inspired by real events” we have this thriller set in Iraq shortly after the 2003 invasion. Matt Damon stars as a delta force soldier determined to get to the bottom of why his unit keep turning up to suspected WMD sites and finding nothing.
This is a good tense thriller that keeps the pace going well to the end. Plot wise the ending is a little predictable and preachy but for once it is nice that the CIA are not the bad guys. There are some good action sequences that seem fairly authentic to the untrained eye but they do become a little confusing in places, no doubt supposedly to mimic the confusion of real war but this is a fairly weak defence in my opinion. As a thriller this is a very good film, as a discussion of the of the handling of Iraq after the invasion it is too heavy handed and a little simplistic.
Defiantly worth watching despite it's flaws 4/5.
Treading the thin line between fiction and “inspired by real events” we have this thriller set in Iraq shortly after the 2003 invasion. Matt Damon stars as a delta force soldier determined to get to the bottom of why his unit keep turning up to suspected WMD sites and finding nothing.
This is a good tense thriller that keeps the pace going well to the end. Plot wise the ending is a little predictable and preachy but for once it is nice that the CIA are not the bad guys. There are some good action sequences that seem fairly authentic to the untrained eye but they do become a little confusing in places, no doubt supposedly to mimic the confusion of real war but this is a fairly weak defence in my opinion. As a thriller this is a very good film, as a discussion of the of the handling of Iraq after the invasion it is too heavy handed and a little simplistic.
Defiantly worth watching despite it's flaws 4/5.
Friday 21 January 2011
Nothing jumps out
Man of the West (1958)
Based on the book “The Boarder Jumpers” this adaptation stars Gary Cooper in the familiar western theme of the man who can not escape his past. A reformed outlaw is on a train which is held up while loading on extra wood and gets left behind when the train flees the bandits. Returning to his former hide out he finds that his controlling uncle is the one in charge of the bandits that attempted to rob the train. Stuck along with the former bandit are two stock characters in a con man/gambler/coward and a female school teacher.
Our hero has to balance the suspicions of his old gang that he has not really rejoined them willingly along with protecting the other abandoned passengers and getting back the gold his villagers entrusted him with. As you might expect the film is never going to end with a full complement of characters still living. There is a lot that is fairly predictable about this film and Gary Cooper does seem pretty old to be rolling around in fist fights but the movie holds together.
Nothing really stands out about this film one way or another so I give it 3/5, not worth seeking out but watch-able.
Based on the book “The Boarder Jumpers” this adaptation stars Gary Cooper in the familiar western theme of the man who can not escape his past. A reformed outlaw is on a train which is held up while loading on extra wood and gets left behind when the train flees the bandits. Returning to his former hide out he finds that his controlling uncle is the one in charge of the bandits that attempted to rob the train. Stuck along with the former bandit are two stock characters in a con man/gambler/coward and a female school teacher.
Our hero has to balance the suspicions of his old gang that he has not really rejoined them willingly along with protecting the other abandoned passengers and getting back the gold his villagers entrusted him with. As you might expect the film is never going to end with a full complement of characters still living. There is a lot that is fairly predictable about this film and Gary Cooper does seem pretty old to be rolling around in fist fights but the movie holds together.
Nothing really stands out about this film one way or another so I give it 3/5, not worth seeking out but watch-able.
Thursday 20 January 2011
There can be only one (unless you count sequels)
Highlander (1986)
Christopher Lambert stars in this cult classic from the 80s about immortals and sword fights. While not a massive success initially Highlander went onto spawn a number of sequels and a couple of television shows. The nucleus of the story is that a number of immortals have lived through out human history and can only die by having their heads chopped off, the last surviving immortal will gain “the prize” and the time of the gathering which forces the remaining immortals to on place for a final show down is approaching.
There are some really good ideas behind this film such as the exploration of immortals trapped in a mortal world so it is not hard to see how this series gained a cult following. Connor out living his first wife is covered well but it would have been nice to see a little more on the relationship between him and Rachel, the young Jewish girl he saves during WW2 and raises as his own.
British rock group Queen provide some excellent songs for the sound track but there is some pretty terrible incidental music/sound included as well, this is symptomatic of the film as a whole. We have some really great elements in this film but it is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination. Unorthodox is the best way to describe the casting of the two leads, a French man as a Scotsman and a Scotsman as an Egyptian. Using the the Scottish highlands as a back drop for some of the flash back sequences provides excellent scenery but some of the sword play does seem a little weak.
While Highlander is a quintessentially 80s film it does date and does have several flaws but remains a solid offering in my opinion 4/5
Christopher Lambert stars in this cult classic from the 80s about immortals and sword fights. While not a massive success initially Highlander went onto spawn a number of sequels and a couple of television shows. The nucleus of the story is that a number of immortals have lived through out human history and can only die by having their heads chopped off, the last surviving immortal will gain “the prize” and the time of the gathering which forces the remaining immortals to on place for a final show down is approaching.
There are some really good ideas behind this film such as the exploration of immortals trapped in a mortal world so it is not hard to see how this series gained a cult following. Connor out living his first wife is covered well but it would have been nice to see a little more on the relationship between him and Rachel, the young Jewish girl he saves during WW2 and raises as his own.
British rock group Queen provide some excellent songs for the sound track but there is some pretty terrible incidental music/sound included as well, this is symptomatic of the film as a whole. We have some really great elements in this film but it is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination. Unorthodox is the best way to describe the casting of the two leads, a French man as a Scotsman and a Scotsman as an Egyptian. Using the the Scottish highlands as a back drop for some of the flash back sequences provides excellent scenery but some of the sword play does seem a little weak.
While Highlander is a quintessentially 80s film it does date and does have several flaws but remains a solid offering in my opinion 4/5
Wednesday 19 January 2011
Rolling
The Way West (1967)
This western about a wagon train on the Oregon trail stars Kirk Douglas as the captain Ahab leading the train and Robert Mitchum as the wagon train's guide which is adapted from a novel of the same name. As you might expect the way to Oregon is not that easy and there are plenty of trials and tribulations along the way. Not all of the characters are straight out clean cut heroes either so it is not just a simplistic heroes against the elements story either.
Portrayal of Indians in westerns can often be problematic or just down right racist but the Indians encountered along the way here are dealt with fairly well, yes they might be only interested in booze initially but when there are problems between the settlers and the Indians they only want justice and not a massacre. Some of the characters are a bit weak, the actions of Mrs Mack are never really explains and she does set in motion a major chain of events.
While this is a well made film it does lack meat on it's bones and ends up being fairly middle of the trail 3/5.
This western about a wagon train on the Oregon trail stars Kirk Douglas as the captain Ahab leading the train and Robert Mitchum as the wagon train's guide which is adapted from a novel of the same name. As you might expect the way to Oregon is not that easy and there are plenty of trials and tribulations along the way. Not all of the characters are straight out clean cut heroes either so it is not just a simplistic heroes against the elements story either.
Portrayal of Indians in westerns can often be problematic or just down right racist but the Indians encountered along the way here are dealt with fairly well, yes they might be only interested in booze initially but when there are problems between the settlers and the Indians they only want justice and not a massacre. Some of the characters are a bit weak, the actions of Mrs Mack are never really explains and she does set in motion a major chain of events.
While this is a well made film it does lack meat on it's bones and ends up being fairly middle of the trail 3/5.
Tuesday 18 January 2011
Directors in the mist
Synecdoche, New York (2008)
Charlie Kaufman has written a number of really interesting films in the past including Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004), Adaptation (2002) and Being John Malkovic (1999) but makes his directorial début with this film. Philip Seymour Hoffman stars as a theatre director with a large cast including Catherine Keener, Samantha Morton, Emily Watson and Michelle Williams as his parade of love interests.
Starting out as a fairly average domestic based story the narrative gets stranger and more complex as we go. Obviously the film is about the human condition and acceptance of our own mortality but slowly gets more oblique and ambiguous as it goes along. It is hard to call the film confusing as the message it is conveying is clear but it takes a torturous route to get it across, we do not want films that hit us over the head with preachy sermons but it would be nice if trying to follow the plot was not like looking through a thick fog.
The only way that the film makes sense to me is that the central character at some point prior to the start of the film killed himself and the plot is some sort of dream state exploration of his guilt and hopes for what might have been. There are a couple of hints along the way that this may be the case but making sense of the events and progress of time during the film is very hard.
I give this a 3/5, there is a good film in there trying to get out but I think it gets lost in it's self indulgence and ambiguities.
Charlie Kaufman has written a number of really interesting films in the past including Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004), Adaptation (2002) and Being John Malkovic (1999) but makes his directorial début with this film. Philip Seymour Hoffman stars as a theatre director with a large cast including Catherine Keener, Samantha Morton, Emily Watson and Michelle Williams as his parade of love interests.
Starting out as a fairly average domestic based story the narrative gets stranger and more complex as we go. Obviously the film is about the human condition and acceptance of our own mortality but slowly gets more oblique and ambiguous as it goes along. It is hard to call the film confusing as the message it is conveying is clear but it takes a torturous route to get it across, we do not want films that hit us over the head with preachy sermons but it would be nice if trying to follow the plot was not like looking through a thick fog.
The only way that the film makes sense to me is that the central character at some point prior to the start of the film killed himself and the plot is some sort of dream state exploration of his guilt and hopes for what might have been. There are a couple of hints along the way that this may be the case but making sense of the events and progress of time during the film is very hard.
I give this a 3/5, there is a good film in there trying to get out but I think it gets lost in it's self indulgence and ambiguities.
Monday 17 January 2011
You wouldn't like me...
Planet Hulk (2010)
Marvel having been carving out a nice little empire for themselves by capitalising on their large stable of intellectual property in both live action films and animated direct to dvd releases such as this one. This is an adaptation of a comic book arc in which The Hulk has been expelled from earth because he has been deemed too much of a danger to the rest of humanity, when he finds out what has happened he trashes his space ship and ends up on a different one to his intended destination.
Landing on a planet with a dictator, a prophecy that needs fulfilling and enslaved as a gladiator you can probably work out what is going to happen with the plot. Despite the short run time it appears the fight scenes have been extended in some cases to pad out the film. The fight scenes themselves are fairly average and I am not sure if an animated fight sequence can ever have the impressive wow factor of a live action sequence anyway. My main worry beyond the weak plot is that we have no Bruce Banner, just his alter ego The Hulk. There seems to be little point to having just the monster if there is no internal conflict between the man and the monster inside. When you reduce your central character to one dimension and have a weak, predictable plot then things are not going to end well for you.
I am sure fans of the comic book bought this up but for most people this is one to leave alone 2/5
Marvel having been carving out a nice little empire for themselves by capitalising on their large stable of intellectual property in both live action films and animated direct to dvd releases such as this one. This is an adaptation of a comic book arc in which The Hulk has been expelled from earth because he has been deemed too much of a danger to the rest of humanity, when he finds out what has happened he trashes his space ship and ends up on a different one to his intended destination.
Landing on a planet with a dictator, a prophecy that needs fulfilling and enslaved as a gladiator you can probably work out what is going to happen with the plot. Despite the short run time it appears the fight scenes have been extended in some cases to pad out the film. The fight scenes themselves are fairly average and I am not sure if an animated fight sequence can ever have the impressive wow factor of a live action sequence anyway. My main worry beyond the weak plot is that we have no Bruce Banner, just his alter ego The Hulk. There seems to be little point to having just the monster if there is no internal conflict between the man and the monster inside. When you reduce your central character to one dimension and have a weak, predictable plot then things are not going to end well for you.
I am sure fans of the comic book bought this up but for most people this is one to leave alone 2/5
Sunday 16 January 2011
Bucking the trend?
Gentlemen Broncos (2009)
Jared Hess adds to his collection of off beat, odd ball comedies with film about a home schooled teenager who has his sci-fi novel plagiarised by his favourite author. If you enjoyed Napoleon Dynamite there is a lot in common with this film in terms of tone and style as well as a similar title sequence which this time involves sci-fi novel covers instead of different plates of food.
As you might expect there is plenty of general strangeness and weird behaviour from the characters. The dramatised portions of the main characters novel are especially surreal with flying deer and testicle theft. While there is nothing really great about this film it does bubble along well enough to be watch-able and there are some funny moments.
Probably one for only those that really love Hess's work to seek out but not bad 3/5
Jared Hess adds to his collection of off beat, odd ball comedies with film about a home schooled teenager who has his sci-fi novel plagiarised by his favourite author. If you enjoyed Napoleon Dynamite there is a lot in common with this film in terms of tone and style as well as a similar title sequence which this time involves sci-fi novel covers instead of different plates of food.
As you might expect there is plenty of general strangeness and weird behaviour from the characters. The dramatised portions of the main characters novel are especially surreal with flying deer and testicle theft. While there is nothing really great about this film it does bubble along well enough to be watch-able and there are some funny moments.
Probably one for only those that really love Hess's work to seek out but not bad 3/5
Saturday 15 January 2011
Blind faith
The Book of Eli (2010)
Denzel Washington stars in a post apocalyptic film about a guy carrying the bible across a United States that is now largely a wasteland. There is plenty that is familiar to the genre with shortages of resources and people generally not being very nice to each other. Performances from the cast are good and the direction is acceptable as well, there is also a nice twist in the end of the film.
The problem I have with this film is it's theme of religion/faith. Presumably this is supposed to be a pro faith film but there seems to be little to suggest the positive sides to it if there are any. We have a bad guy who wants to use religion as a means to control people and build up his empire which is fairly common and religion was blamed for the war which caused the apocalypse which is again not uncommon so the bad side is fairly well represented. On the good side we have that the lead character's faith gives him strength to carry on walking around with his book for 30 years but to what end? With out plunging horribly into spoiler land the plot resolution seems to offer little reason for having saved the last remaining bible and little hope for improvement in the future of the world really.
I give this a 3/5 due to it's confused message.
Denzel Washington stars in a post apocalyptic film about a guy carrying the bible across a United States that is now largely a wasteland. There is plenty that is familiar to the genre with shortages of resources and people generally not being very nice to each other. Performances from the cast are good and the direction is acceptable as well, there is also a nice twist in the end of the film.
The problem I have with this film is it's theme of religion/faith. Presumably this is supposed to be a pro faith film but there seems to be little to suggest the positive sides to it if there are any. We have a bad guy who wants to use religion as a means to control people and build up his empire which is fairly common and religion was blamed for the war which caused the apocalypse which is again not uncommon so the bad side is fairly well represented. On the good side we have that the lead character's faith gives him strength to carry on walking around with his book for 30 years but to what end? With out plunging horribly into spoiler land the plot resolution seems to offer little reason for having saved the last remaining bible and little hope for improvement in the future of the world really.
I give this a 3/5 due to it's confused message.
Friday 14 January 2011
Ye olde filme
The Adventures of Robin Hood (1938)
We are well into film history today with this famous pre war effort starting Errol Flynn as Robin Hood. Not only do we have classic cinema here we have a classic tale as well so plot wise there are never going to be any surprises on offer. All the major Robin Hood characters are on show here as well as events you probably expect such as an archery contest to draw Robin out.
As you might expect this is not the most complex or deep study of the Robin Hood legend and sticks more to being a swashbuckling action film, there are also plenty of “witty” banter between the merry men and from the hero as you might expect from a modern action film. The dialogue does date the film being stilted and some of the acting is bordering on bad, along the lines of the old batman TV series at best.
While you have accept there are going to be technological limitations on action sequences that are have been removed in later film making, specifically large and heavy cameras that you can not move around easily, the action sequences really are not that great. I was expecting more from the sword play which while fast does not especially look like a sword fight where people are really trying to kill each other. Given that there is not much depth to the plot or issues raised in the film the action element being weak is a real let down.
This is probably one for younger children, I give it 3/5.
We are well into film history today with this famous pre war effort starting Errol Flynn as Robin Hood. Not only do we have classic cinema here we have a classic tale as well so plot wise there are never going to be any surprises on offer. All the major Robin Hood characters are on show here as well as events you probably expect such as an archery contest to draw Robin out.
As you might expect this is not the most complex or deep study of the Robin Hood legend and sticks more to being a swashbuckling action film, there are also plenty of “witty” banter between the merry men and from the hero as you might expect from a modern action film. The dialogue does date the film being stilted and some of the acting is bordering on bad, along the lines of the old batman TV series at best.
While you have accept there are going to be technological limitations on action sequences that are have been removed in later film making, specifically large and heavy cameras that you can not move around easily, the action sequences really are not that great. I was expecting more from the sword play which while fast does not especially look like a sword fight where people are really trying to kill each other. Given that there is not much depth to the plot or issues raised in the film the action element being weak is a real let down.
This is probably one for younger children, I give it 3/5.
Thursday 13 January 2011
Come back
Shane (1953)
Shane is one of the main historic westerns that has influenced many film makers and specifically films like Pale Rider (1985), Once Upon a Time in the West (1968) and Taxi Driver (1976) to name but a few. Adapted from a novel of the same name the story focuses on small family homesteaders being pushed off their land by cattle farmers that want to keep the range open, a story that is the stock in trade for many a western.
The title character of the piece is a gun slinger trying to turn his back on his violent way of life by working for one of the local families. There is a tragic element that runs through the film of Shane initially being reluctant to fight but being somewhat pressured into a bar room fight by the farmers to prove himself to them and then abandoned by most of them once he is out numbered, he can not turn his back on who he is. Themes such as the nature of a person and standing up for yourself are the main thrust of the story. Telling the story from the point of view of the families child brings a sense of naivety to the film which is especially poignant in the ending.
As you would expect from the genre the mountains and scenery provide an excellent back drop. Sadly the film does date as the imagine quality is not amazing and the story is restricted in what it can cover by the sensibilities of the period but the subtlety handling of some subjects due to these restrictions is an advantage of some modern cinema that can get bogged down in love triangles. Some of the dialogue is also a little ham fisted and clearly from a simpler period of film making but it does not detract massively from the film.
I give this a 4/5, it falls just short of being a 5/5 because time has left it behind a little.
Shane is one of the main historic westerns that has influenced many film makers and specifically films like Pale Rider (1985), Once Upon a Time in the West (1968) and Taxi Driver (1976) to name but a few. Adapted from a novel of the same name the story focuses on small family homesteaders being pushed off their land by cattle farmers that want to keep the range open, a story that is the stock in trade for many a western.
The title character of the piece is a gun slinger trying to turn his back on his violent way of life by working for one of the local families. There is a tragic element that runs through the film of Shane initially being reluctant to fight but being somewhat pressured into a bar room fight by the farmers to prove himself to them and then abandoned by most of them once he is out numbered, he can not turn his back on who he is. Themes such as the nature of a person and standing up for yourself are the main thrust of the story. Telling the story from the point of view of the families child brings a sense of naivety to the film which is especially poignant in the ending.
As you would expect from the genre the mountains and scenery provide an excellent back drop. Sadly the film does date as the imagine quality is not amazing and the story is restricted in what it can cover by the sensibilities of the period but the subtlety handling of some subjects due to these restrictions is an advantage of some modern cinema that can get bogged down in love triangles. Some of the dialogue is also a little ham fisted and clearly from a simpler period of film making but it does not detract massively from the film.
I give this a 4/5, it falls just short of being a 5/5 because time has left it behind a little.
Wednesday 12 January 2011
Bad choices
Weirdsville (2007)
Today we have a Canadian black comedy about some drug users on a crime spree and the scrapes they get themselves into. You may not have been aware of this but apparently when people get high their decision making process is impaired and this is funny for third parties. Unfortunately there does not seem to have been much more thought put into making this movie than just putting in a bunch of stuff that is supposed to be funny.
For a film that runs with a relatively short run time (1 hour 30 minutes) it is surprising that it drags so often and in so many places. There are some funny moments a long the way but not enough to make up for the fairly weak and lumbering plot. The relationship between the three main characters is not developed that well and the addition of a female character seems to have been an after thought as she is especially under developed. In the end this film just not funny enough to warrant watching for the humour alone and is too weak in all other areas to make up for that.
2/5
Today we have a Canadian black comedy about some drug users on a crime spree and the scrapes they get themselves into. You may not have been aware of this but apparently when people get high their decision making process is impaired and this is funny for third parties. Unfortunately there does not seem to have been much more thought put into making this movie than just putting in a bunch of stuff that is supposed to be funny.
For a film that runs with a relatively short run time (1 hour 30 minutes) it is surprising that it drags so often and in so many places. There are some funny moments a long the way but not enough to make up for the fairly weak and lumbering plot. The relationship between the three main characters is not developed that well and the addition of a female character seems to have been an after thought as she is especially under developed. In the end this film just not funny enough to warrant watching for the humour alone and is too weak in all other areas to make up for that.
2/5
Tuesday 11 January 2011
Switch off
Switchback (1997)
Jeb Stuart writes and directs this thriller about a serial killer on the loose. The main hook of the film is that we are supposed to be kept guess as to whether Jared Leto or Danny Glover is the murderer being hunted down but unfortunately it is made clear too early on so a lot of the suspense is killed.
There is some really nice mountain scenery on show but this film does not have a lot going for it. The plot is fairly weak, clichéd and as mentioned earlier tips it's hand too soon. Another problem is that Dennis Quaid seems to have decided that his part would be best played with no personality at all so it is really hard to care if he manages to find his kid or not. R. Lee Ermey does a good job as the local Sheriff trying to get re-elected in the middle of all the chaos unfolding around him.
3/5 does just enough to not drop into the bad film category.
Jeb Stuart writes and directs this thriller about a serial killer on the loose. The main hook of the film is that we are supposed to be kept guess as to whether Jared Leto or Danny Glover is the murderer being hunted down but unfortunately it is made clear too early on so a lot of the suspense is killed.
There is some really nice mountain scenery on show but this film does not have a lot going for it. The plot is fairly weak, clichéd and as mentioned earlier tips it's hand too soon. Another problem is that Dennis Quaid seems to have decided that his part would be best played with no personality at all so it is really hard to care if he manages to find his kid or not. R. Lee Ermey does a good job as the local Sheriff trying to get re-elected in the middle of all the chaos unfolding around him.
3/5 does just enough to not drop into the bad film category.
Monday 10 January 2011
Remote viewing?
The Men Who Stare at Goats (2009)
This is film is “based” on a book of the same name when it really means it was “inspired” more than having any direct connection. The original is a non narrative book on US military research into psychic warfare while the film is a narrative set in the second Gulf war with flash backs to earlier “research”.
Taking a slightly unbelievable subject what this film does well is focus on being an offbeat and surreal comedy, satirising the invasion of Iraq by comparing it to some of the misguided military studies of the past. It takes a little while for the film to get going but once George Clooney's twitching crazy is introduced there are some really funny moments. Between Jedi, goats, independent security contractors and the general high jinx of a combat zone there are some good laughs and a little satire to be had.
4/5
This is film is “based” on a book of the same name when it really means it was “inspired” more than having any direct connection. The original is a non narrative book on US military research into psychic warfare while the film is a narrative set in the second Gulf war with flash backs to earlier “research”.
Taking a slightly unbelievable subject what this film does well is focus on being an offbeat and surreal comedy, satirising the invasion of Iraq by comparing it to some of the misguided military studies of the past. It takes a little while for the film to get going but once George Clooney's twitching crazy is introduced there are some really funny moments. Between Jedi, goats, independent security contractors and the general high jinx of a combat zone there are some good laughs and a little satire to be had.
4/5
Sunday 9 January 2011
Familiar notes
Crazy Heart (2009)
Jeff Bridges won an Oscar for his portrayal of a washed up country and western singer in this film and it is very hard not to see similarities with The Wrestler (2008) which earned Mickey Rourke an Oscar nomination for the same award as star of that film. Both films are about down and out former stars of their profession, struggling to come to terms with poor life choices and addiction.
What disappoints me about this film is that it labours for too long on how bad the central characters life is and what a mess he has made of it before he has his moment of clarity and decides to get clean then very little is shown of the hard process he has to go through to turn his life around. If you are going to go for the happy ending then I do think that your character(s) should have to earn it.
This is not a bad film, there are good performances from all the cast but I feel that The Wrestler just did this story a lot better. 3/5
Jeff Bridges won an Oscar for his portrayal of a washed up country and western singer in this film and it is very hard not to see similarities with The Wrestler (2008) which earned Mickey Rourke an Oscar nomination for the same award as star of that film. Both films are about down and out former stars of their profession, struggling to come to terms with poor life choices and addiction.
What disappoints me about this film is that it labours for too long on how bad the central characters life is and what a mess he has made of it before he has his moment of clarity and decides to get clean then very little is shown of the hard process he has to go through to turn his life around. If you are going to go for the happy ending then I do think that your character(s) should have to earn it.
This is not a bad film, there are good performances from all the cast but I feel that The Wrestler just did this story a lot better. 3/5
Saturday 8 January 2011
Elementary
Sherlock Holmes (2009)
I have never read any of the original Sherlock Holmes stories or seen any of the previous adaptations so I can not really comment on how it compares to them or how faithful it is to the source material. With all that being said when you know that a film is an adaptation of a successful set of stories such as Sherlock Holmes is then you have a decent level of expectation going into the movie. What we get here is a buddy cop film set in Victorian England for the modern day audience.
I find it really hard to feel strongly about this film one way or the other, most of the film is fairly middle of the road and slightly clichéd. By and large the acting is fine, the plot is nothing to write home about, the sets are pretty impressive but the action sequences seem to drag and get in the way of the pacing of the film. Unfortunately there is no real depth to the darker side of the characters, Watson's gambling addiction and Holmes's drug use, and the character relationships are mostly portrayed simplistically.
You do not need an advanced ability in logical deduction to work out what score I am going to leave this film with, 3/5.
I have never read any of the original Sherlock Holmes stories or seen any of the previous adaptations so I can not really comment on how it compares to them or how faithful it is to the source material. With all that being said when you know that a film is an adaptation of a successful set of stories such as Sherlock Holmes is then you have a decent level of expectation going into the movie. What we get here is a buddy cop film set in Victorian England for the modern day audience.
I find it really hard to feel strongly about this film one way or the other, most of the film is fairly middle of the road and slightly clichéd. By and large the acting is fine, the plot is nothing to write home about, the sets are pretty impressive but the action sequences seem to drag and get in the way of the pacing of the film. Unfortunately there is no real depth to the darker side of the characters, Watson's gambling addiction and Holmes's drug use, and the character relationships are mostly portrayed simplistically.
You do not need an advanced ability in logical deduction to work out what score I am going to leave this film with, 3/5.
Friday 7 January 2011
Unusual
The Usual Suspects (1995)
Pete Postlethwaite passed away in the last few days so it seems only fair to have one review be in honour of him this week.
This is a great example of a film that is constructed so that you can watch it many times over and also has a great mystery plot. Without going into spoiler land the plot is really well constructed and has some good characters, especially Dean Keaton. While Kevin Spacey may have won an Oscar for his performance in Suspects there is a great ensemble cast that includes not just the five title suspects but also Chazz Palminteri and of course Pete Postlethwaite.
Not only is the script really well written but the direction holds the tone and atmosphere of the film, we are slowly drawn deeper into the strange and uncertain world of crime. What is also excellent about the direction is how much was achieved on such a modest budget, just $6mil. It is hard to find anything bad to say about the film, some may dislike the ending feeling it cheapens the viewing experience but I think it is really well done.
I give this a top level 5/5.
Pete Postlethwaite passed away in the last few days so it seems only fair to have one review be in honour of him this week.
This is a great example of a film that is constructed so that you can watch it many times over and also has a great mystery plot. Without going into spoiler land the plot is really well constructed and has some good characters, especially Dean Keaton. While Kevin Spacey may have won an Oscar for his performance in Suspects there is a great ensemble cast that includes not just the five title suspects but also Chazz Palminteri and of course Pete Postlethwaite.
Not only is the script really well written but the direction holds the tone and atmosphere of the film, we are slowly drawn deeper into the strange and uncertain world of crime. What is also excellent about the direction is how much was achieved on such a modest budget, just $6mil. It is hard to find anything bad to say about the film, some may dislike the ending feeling it cheapens the viewing experience but I think it is really well done.
I give this a top level 5/5.
Thursday 6 January 2011
Failure at take off
Amelia (2009)
Hilary Swank stars in this biopic of female aviator Amelia Earhart that charts her life from her first transatlantic flight to her disappearance over the Pacific. Biopics can be a bit of a mine field to navigate, just because someone was a famous or an interesting person does not mean that their life story makes for a good film and this is somewhat the case with this lightweight offering.
What the film does is give an over view of Earhart's life while she was in the public image but little on her early life or how she became so interested in flying. There is some exploration of the question of who deserves fame but not in any great depth. When your own movie is raising the question should a person just be famous for performing public stunts maybe they are not the greatest choice for a biopic. While there is some good photography there is not really a lot you can say is good about this film it is just average and not very insightful or inspiring as presumably a film of this sort should be.
I give it a 3/5
Hilary Swank stars in this biopic of female aviator Amelia Earhart that charts her life from her first transatlantic flight to her disappearance over the Pacific. Biopics can be a bit of a mine field to navigate, just because someone was a famous or an interesting person does not mean that their life story makes for a good film and this is somewhat the case with this lightweight offering.
What the film does is give an over view of Earhart's life while she was in the public image but little on her early life or how she became so interested in flying. There is some exploration of the question of who deserves fame but not in any great depth. When your own movie is raising the question should a person just be famous for performing public stunts maybe they are not the greatest choice for a biopic. While there is some good photography there is not really a lot you can say is good about this film it is just average and not very insightful or inspiring as presumably a film of this sort should be.
I give it a 3/5
Wednesday 5 January 2011
Delivers?
Transporter 2 (2005)
Frank Martin is back and has now relocated to Miami, filling in for a friend doing chauffeuring for month. If you were a fan of the first film then you will note a number of good references to the original during the opening sequences of this sequel. While the plot is somewhat unrealistic it is actually better than that of the first film. There characters and motivations here are much better fleshed out and having a child in jeopardy is a much more engaging for Frank to go on a wild action spree. It is also good to see that while there are always going to be a lot of similarities between the two films that this is not just a rehash of the first one in a new location.
Again the stunts and fight sequences are decent but still on a modest budget. Changing location to Miami does not really suit my tastes, new world glass and concrete is not as appealing old world stone and scenery. The only other character to return from the original is the French detective that is Frank's friend and his inclusion is somewhat tenuous but helps move along some of the exposition/investigative side of the plot.
Having said all this the sequel is a better movie than the original but still is not good enough to make it a 4/5 unless you are a massive genre fan so I give this a top 3/5.
Frank Martin is back and has now relocated to Miami, filling in for a friend doing chauffeuring for month. If you were a fan of the first film then you will note a number of good references to the original during the opening sequences of this sequel. While the plot is somewhat unrealistic it is actually better than that of the first film. There characters and motivations here are much better fleshed out and having a child in jeopardy is a much more engaging for Frank to go on a wild action spree. It is also good to see that while there are always going to be a lot of similarities between the two films that this is not just a rehash of the first one in a new location.
Again the stunts and fight sequences are decent but still on a modest budget. Changing location to Miami does not really suit my tastes, new world glass and concrete is not as appealing old world stone and scenery. The only other character to return from the original is the French detective that is Frank's friend and his inclusion is somewhat tenuous but helps move along some of the exposition/investigative side of the plot.
Having said all this the sequel is a better movie than the original but still is not good enough to make it a 4/5 unless you are a massive genre fan so I give this a top 3/5.
Tuesday 4 January 2011
Fizzles
The Transporter (2002)
Jason Statham stars as the title character in this action film about a former soldier with a suspect accent living in the south of France who takes driving jobs from criminals. As you might expect with an action film the plot in this film does not have a huge amount going for it but it does manage not to be so bad as to offend the viewer even if it does seem that the plot was never fully fleshed out.
The problem with this film is trying to do an action movie on a modest budget means that the stunts are never going to be out of this world and lets face it the stunts and fight sequences are what you watch these movies for. While the fight sequence in the bus depot with the oil is pretty unique the rest are fairly average. What the film does have going for it is that the south of France is a really good back drop for any film and provides some good photography here.
I remembered this film as being better than it was on a second viewing so I can only give it a middle of the road 3/5.
Jason Statham stars as the title character in this action film about a former soldier with a suspect accent living in the south of France who takes driving jobs from criminals. As you might expect with an action film the plot in this film does not have a huge amount going for it but it does manage not to be so bad as to offend the viewer even if it does seem that the plot was never fully fleshed out.
The problem with this film is trying to do an action movie on a modest budget means that the stunts are never going to be out of this world and lets face it the stunts and fight sequences are what you watch these movies for. While the fight sequence in the bus depot with the oil is pretty unique the rest are fairly average. What the film does have going for it is that the south of France is a really good back drop for any film and provides some good photography here.
I remembered this film as being better than it was on a second viewing so I can only give it a middle of the road 3/5.
Monday 3 January 2011
Les Femmes de l'ombre
Female Agents (2008)
Sophie Marceau stars in this French language film about female agents in the Special Operations Executive during World War 2. Along with the lead female character's brother a varied group of female agents is sent into Nazi occupied France to rescue a British geologist posing as an injured German soldier in a hospital.
The basic plot is fairly clichéd but the different female characters and how they react to the situations they are put make the film fairly interesting. While I am not sure how realistic the story is it does show chase the different roles that women had as resistance fighters during WW2 and the price they had to pay for fighting for their country as well as consider themes such as collaboration and betrayal.
Overall I think there is just enough about this film to give it a 4/5 as it brings something slightly different to the genre.
Sophie Marceau stars in this French language film about female agents in the Special Operations Executive during World War 2. Along with the lead female character's brother a varied group of female agents is sent into Nazi occupied France to rescue a British geologist posing as an injured German soldier in a hospital.
The basic plot is fairly clichéd but the different female characters and how they react to the situations they are put make the film fairly interesting. While I am not sure how realistic the story is it does show chase the different roles that women had as resistance fighters during WW2 and the price they had to pay for fighting for their country as well as consider themes such as collaboration and betrayal.
Overall I think there is just enough about this film to give it a 4/5 as it brings something slightly different to the genre.
Sunday 2 January 2011
Ridden
The Magnificent Seven Ride (1972)
This is the third and final sequel to The Magnificent Seven (1960) and we do not even have Yul Brynner anymore, he is replaced by Lee Van Cleef. Apparently the Chris character has gotten soft in his old age and settled down as a town marshal with his new wife, she convinces him to let some kid go free rather send him to Tuscon jail and Chris turns down the chance to help a friend defend a town from bandits south of the border. Naturally once the kid is free he and his friends decide to rob the local bank, kidnap Chris's wife, rape and kill her then run off south eventually joining up with the bandits so Chris has to go help the villagers anyway.
In general the western has a real problem with female characters and how to deal with them. In early westerns there had to be a female love interest for the male lead but it was hard to find an excuse for her to be around frontier ranch or out on the trail when the cavalry is off chasing Indians. What you tend to end up with is school teachers and whores being the only women in westerns and unfortunately this film seems to be rather sexist. The women in this film are there pretty much to be raped by the bad guys and go all doe-eyed and open their legs as soon as someone comes along and offers them a bit of protection. If the male characters in the film were not there to tell them what to do and fight for them they would be unable to survive at all.
This is slightly better than the first sequel as it does have a little more unique plot in comparison to the earlier films in the series but it does seem to be ripping off the Dirty Dozen in recruitment of the hired guns. We also have the problem that Lee Van Cleef just does not have the same presence as Yul Brynner on the screen. Despite being a better film than the first sequel there are just too many flaws in this effort to milk the franchise one last time. 2/5
This is the third and final sequel to The Magnificent Seven (1960) and we do not even have Yul Brynner anymore, he is replaced by Lee Van Cleef. Apparently the Chris character has gotten soft in his old age and settled down as a town marshal with his new wife, she convinces him to let some kid go free rather send him to Tuscon jail and Chris turns down the chance to help a friend defend a town from bandits south of the border. Naturally once the kid is free he and his friends decide to rob the local bank, kidnap Chris's wife, rape and kill her then run off south eventually joining up with the bandits so Chris has to go help the villagers anyway.
In general the western has a real problem with female characters and how to deal with them. In early westerns there had to be a female love interest for the male lead but it was hard to find an excuse for her to be around frontier ranch or out on the trail when the cavalry is off chasing Indians. What you tend to end up with is school teachers and whores being the only women in westerns and unfortunately this film seems to be rather sexist. The women in this film are there pretty much to be raped by the bad guys and go all doe-eyed and open their legs as soon as someone comes along and offers them a bit of protection. If the male characters in the film were not there to tell them what to do and fight for them they would be unable to survive at all.
This is slightly better than the first sequel as it does have a little more unique plot in comparison to the earlier films in the series but it does seem to be ripping off the Dirty Dozen in recruitment of the hired guns. We also have the problem that Lee Van Cleef just does not have the same presence as Yul Brynner on the screen. Despite being a better film than the first sequel there are just too many flaws in this effort to milk the franchise one last time. 2/5
Saturday 1 January 2011
Lack of
Dedication (2007)
There is a really good film in the characters here, unfortunately that is not the film that got made. We start with two misfit, cynical authors who write a children's book about a beaver. The older one, who does the illustrations, dies in the first third or so of the film and the younger one is left to complete a contractual obligation to provide another book before Christmas. Instead of finding out how these two ended up writing kids books and about the hard lives they have lived to have such a dark out look on life we end up with the standard romantic comedy plot.
If you are going to watch this film then I would suggest giving up about a third to half way into the film because the start is actually pretty decent until the writer got bored and just cut and pasted in the second half from whatever stock script the studio had lying around. Our “hero” gets paired up with a new female illustrator, they do not get along, they go to the planetarium and look at some stars (which is apparently all you need to do to get two people to fall in love with each other), they get together, misunderstanding, they get back together, the end. Sorry if I just spoiled every romantic comedy ever for you there.
Overall this ends up being a really weak film which is a shame after it's early promise as it descends into lazy film making 2/5
There is a really good film in the characters here, unfortunately that is not the film that got made. We start with two misfit, cynical authors who write a children's book about a beaver. The older one, who does the illustrations, dies in the first third or so of the film and the younger one is left to complete a contractual obligation to provide another book before Christmas. Instead of finding out how these two ended up writing kids books and about the hard lives they have lived to have such a dark out look on life we end up with the standard romantic comedy plot.
If you are going to watch this film then I would suggest giving up about a third to half way into the film because the start is actually pretty decent until the writer got bored and just cut and pasted in the second half from whatever stock script the studio had lying around. Our “hero” gets paired up with a new female illustrator, they do not get along, they go to the planetarium and look at some stars (which is apparently all you need to do to get two people to fall in love with each other), they get together, misunderstanding, they get back together, the end. Sorry if I just spoiled every romantic comedy ever for you there.
Overall this ends up being a really weak film which is a shame after it's early promise as it descends into lazy film making 2/5
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)