Film

April, it would seem, really is the time for fools as all 4 films are comedic (though not necessarily comedies). Let’s get started…

Monsters Vs. Aliens is the best animated film I’ve seen in years that didn’t come out of Pixar. While I’m sure Dreamworks are used to coming in second place, the gap is narrowed by this, their best film. The plot is straight forward and simple enough, but it’s the characters, actors and visual jokes that really make this film. The entire voice cast (which is an impressive list by itself) do an excellent job, while the characters themselves are the right mix of lovable and a little weird. It’s also the first full 3D film I’ve seen where the 3D didn’t seem like a gimmick, it was instead quite well-integrated into the experience; bold enough to add excitement, but reserved enough to avoid being ostentatious. All in, a very good film. (See my Monsters Vs. Aliens Twitter review).

Next up is I Love You, Man. It’s a comedy about a man who needs to find a best man for his wedding, since he no longer really has any male friends. The set-up is a bit clumsy and heavy-handed, but it grows into a decent, if hit and miss, film about the lead (Paul Rudd) learning how to enjoy himself through his new friend (Jason Segel). It’s definitely a little forced in places but there are enough good parts in there to make it entertaining. Throw in the feel-good ending (even if it is cheesey), and you’ve got a reasonably worthwhile film. (See my I Love You, Man Twitter review).

I’ve been a fan of Armando Iannucci’s work for quite some time now, so it was good to see his first film In The Loop. A cinematic spin-off of his 2005 series, The Thick of It, it follows a mostly new cast fight the case for and against going to war with a Middle Eastern nation based on a flimsy amount of evidence. The result? A fantastic political satire that finds the perfect balance between the ridiculously over-the-top antics, spot-on observations and down-to-earth worries. The whole cast shines here, particularly Peter Capaldi as the vicious government policy enforcer, and James Gandolfini as the peace-loving general. Definitely worth seeing. (See my In The Loop Twitter review).

Finally, Observe and Report is a bit of an odd one. The trailer and advertising make it look like just another wacky Apatow/McKay/Ferrell styled comedy (i.e. a bit silly, a bit gross, but with a sincere lead). While it has elements of that, it’s often quite dark; preferring to go further into substance abuse and mental health, than do another fart joke. It’s wildly uneven, with some very high peaks (the final sequence, pre-denouement, being one of the best bait-and-switches I’ve seen in years) and some long dull gaps. It’s probably worth seeing, but maybe after it goes to DVD. (See my Observe and Report Twitter review).

The winner is… In The Loop. I can’t recommend enough this brilliant comedy; one of the sharpest British films in years.

A few weeks into April? It must be time for the March film fight…

Watchmen is a film that I was generally quite excited about, given that it’s based on a stunningly brilliant graphic novel whose every panel oozes detail and links together so well that it warrants many, many reads. By all accounts, this was to be a (mostly) faithful adaptation; and that’s the problem. It starts off well, going over the death of the Comedian and his funeral, re-enacting what he meant to the other characters, but it takes its time about it. Having covered maybe two issues of the comic, there was no way that the remaining ten could fit intact. That, by itself, is fine. I’m all for properly adapting material, but this was not a proper adaptation. It would seem the writers picked out all the “must-have” scenes from the novel, the stuff fans would want to see, and cut lots between them. When the path through to those scenes has been so heavily cut-back, it starts to not make much sense and feel rather rushed. I’d have rather have seen far more cut out and for the film to be coherent and solid, rather than a quick bout of fan-pleasing moments flung together. I could go on at some length about how some of the characters were badly neutered (Laurie), some of the visuals were cheap and plasticky, and the story was left a pretty flimsy mess (and let’s not go into the crappy ending), but it’s not worth it. Wait to see how the extended version comes out (fingers crossed it has the extra material the film so badly needs) or, better yet, just read the graphic novel. (See my Watchmen Twitter review).

Next is the lovable but largely forgettable Marley & Me. It’s ostensibly about a journalist (played by Owen Wilson) who buys a badly trained dog for his girlfriend, but is really more about the relationship and hardships they endure, with the dog as a lens into that. It doesn’t have a huge amount to say, and is basically light Hollywood fun. That’s not a criticism, but don’t go in expecting anything more meaty. Enjoyable, yet flimsy. (See my Marley & Me Twitter review).

You’d expect Bronson, the story of Britain’s most violent inmate, to be a straight forward if unusually brutal biopic. It’s not. Instead we get a nightmarish, carnival atmosphere, with the title character himself as our ring leader, taking us on a bizarre and twisted journey through his life in an attempt to get fame for the only thing he knows he’s good at: brutality. Tom Hardy puts in the performance of a lifetime, as the film evokes an atmosphere of slightly-off darkness that hasn’t been seen since A Clockwork Orange. It’s brutal, ugly, a little funny, and very entertaining. A fantastic movie. (See my Bronson Twitter Review).

Finally, Gran Torino is a lazy and largely dull story about an old man coming to terms with changes in his neighbourhood, and finally befriending the immigrants who he has despised for so long. Clint Eastwood is the only person who puts in a half-way decent performance, and even that is stifled by the over the top racism he shows. Subtly, you see, is something this film lacks. Rather than tell you a story and let you judge the characters, everyone seems intent on telling you exactly what they’re feeling so that they don’t have to act it or buy too much into their ridiculously one-dimensional characterisations. About as subtle as a pink brick to the face in every aspect. Even if you can somehow swallow being spoon fed, there’s very little here to make it worth while. Avoid.

That makes Bronson the deserved winner for March.

It’s February and the film fight is already a few weeks late. This does not bode well, but let’s see how it goes anyway.

Revolutionary Road is a difficult to watch, and delightfully so. The film centers on a failing relationship between a couple whose dreams are further away than they can stomach to reach, causing resentment and tension. It’s that tension that brings this film to life; the arguing, and picking, and ugliness of a once beautiful marriage worn down to a tiredness. It’s well-acted and lovingly shot, forcing us to watch some uncomfortable situations. The only place it really falls down is in the ending, where a cut a few minutes earlier could have avoided some unnecessarily tying up of loose ends. A great film. (See my Revolutionary Road Twitter review).

It’s a shame to see a great idea hampered by a some pretty clunky writing, but that’s what Doubt happens in doubt. The plot revolves around a priest who is accused of being indecent with a young boy in his care, and the nun who condemns him without any great degree of evidence. The story isn’t so much about innocence and guilt, as much as it’s about a witch hunt; a feeling that something is wrong being enough to make them wrong. The leads, again, provide strong performances, but they’re let down by some pretty weak writing. The wind as a metaphor for change? I can’t think of anything more trite. This is a good film, but with some pretty noticeable flaws. (See my Doubt Twitter review).

I like a good yarn, and that’s exactly what we get with The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. Every facet of the story, a tale of a man being born old and growing backwards, is larger than life and simple; much like Tim Burton’s Big Fish, but a touch less magical (save the central conceit). Sure, it’s not very deep, and some of it doesn’t really make sense, but it’s a fun story and told well enough that it doesn’t really matter. It looks the part, and is worth seeing, even if just to gawk at the fact that the lead’s head is entirely digital. (See my Curious Case of Benjamin Button Twitter review).

You’d like to believe that Anvil: The Story of Anvil is a mockumentary in the style of Spinal Tap for certain parts, but it isn’t. The band featured here, Anvil, never made it big in their youth but, unlike most bands, have never given up their dream. That’s what this documentary is about: the reality of never giving up on something you want more than anything else. It’s painful at times (you know exactly what a record label A&R guy means by “we’ll call you”, but the band are oblivious) and sometimes very earnest, but it’s enjoyable nonetheless. (See my Anvil Twitter review).

Finally, Vicky Cristina Barcelona is, well, a mess of a film. While Penelope Cruz shines through in the role that won her best supporting actress this year, the rest of the cast either fail to sell themselves or are simply unable to. Almost every major scene is undermind by a cold, flat narration that, rather than allow the actresses to emote and for the camera to capture the atmosphre, tells us frankly and plainly what every one is thinking and feeling. This is the worst kind of tell-don’t-show storytelling, and much of the movie comes across as self-indulgent yet empty. Avoid. (See my Vicky Cristina Barcelona Twitter review).

There are a few contenders this month but the winner is… Revolutionary Road. Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio are reunited in a winning combination.

As an aside, I also saw Winslet’s The Reader this month, but not at the cinema. It’s a great film, if a little long-winded in places; she puts in a solid performance, but the real depth lies with the main character.

A film fight that’s on time? Why, it must be January. 4 films this month:

Che Part One is the new Ernesto “Che” Guevera biopic, by Steven Soderbergh, telling the story of the retaking of Cuba (up until the assault on the capital), interspersed with his much later stay visting the UN. It’s an odd film, lacking a conventional narrative and structure when there are several pretty obvious choices that could have been picked. Instead we see moments, snatches of time throughout the Cuban uprising. The real problem with Che Part One is that there is no depth to any of these fragments. We get a problem, and then someone explaining the solution, and rarely any decisive action. This is tell-not-show storytelling at it’s worst. The last act is it’s best, as it’s the most regular: showing an assault on a beleagured region, and the defining points throughout the siege. Had the rest of the film been like this, it would have been much better. (See my Che Part one Twitter review).

Danny Boyle’s Slumdog Millionaire deserves the praise its been getting recently. We get the reasonably compelling story of a young boy, raised in poverty and in devastating conditions, and how he grows into a young man. The story is let down somewhat by a weak final act, and an entirely unnecessary love interest. However, the film looks the part: we get shot after shot of beautiful scenery and top notch direction. The art team behind this (from the cinematographers to the sound team) have done a marvellous job. A feel good movie worthy of your time. (See my Slumdog Millionaire Twitter review).

Darren Aronofsky has another masterpiece on his hands with his  fantastic (and woefully under Oscar nominated) new move, The Wrestler. The story focusses on a former champion wrestler, and the toll he has paid physically and mentally for his glory. The pain and detrimental effects pervade throughout his life, scraping by at the bottom of the barrel with only an estranged daughter and a stripper to keep him sane. This is not a cheery film in the slightest, as you might guess, but it is stunning. Mickey Rourke puts in a near perfect performance as the title character, bringing both empathy and warmth to a man who has himself to blame for his self-destructive tendencies. Marisa Tomei and Evan Rachel Wood also put in fantastic shows as the stripper and daugher respectively. An excellent movie, and an early pick for film of the year. (See my The Wrestler Twitter review).

Finally, Milk is the story of Harvey Milk, the first openly homosexual US politician in a time when a witch hunt was being fought in the States. While the story is a good one and tragic in parts, it’s Sean Penn’s performance that really makes this film. He manages to convey a convincing multi-dimensional character on his rise to power with sympathy and dignity. Where the film falls down is in the editing and pacing. There are some pretty stunning shots, but it nearly gets blundered by being over long while lacking depth on many of the ancilliary characters. Again, we sometimes get told about progression a little too much, rather than seeing it. Still, it’s strengths outweight it’s weaknesses and we get left with an enjoyable and uplifting film. Worth seeing. (See my Milk Twitter review).

And the winner is… The Wrestler. Aronofsky has another masterpiece on his hands.

After failing dismally in the early parts of last year, I’m going to be giving twittering Film Fight another chance (on my twitter feed). For anyone who didn’t see it last year, I’ll be writing film reviews before the later (and often delayed) monthly Film Fights with little snippets on twitter. Often this gives a slightly different perspective of the film, with less time for memory and external bias to change what I thought of the film.

I’m tempted to update twitter and not refer back to it for the film fight, so I can do a comparision of what I thought immediately and what I’m thinking now. We’ll see if that ever actually happens.

If you want to read the 2009 reviews but not the rest of my Twitter (which is occassionally more personal than Solitude), then use the Film Fight ’09 Twitter Search page.

Let’s hope I get a little further into this year than last.

I’m a little sad to say this but for the first time since I started doing Film Fight, and indeed for the first time since I started reviewing films on here, I haven’t actually been to the cinema this month. There’s been a dearth of quality looking films and I simply haven’t made it along to even the few “maybe ok” stragglers.

So this month the winner is…. nothing at all.

The second last film fight of the year brings us another four slices of cinema.

Quantum of Solace fails to win over the audience in all the ways that Casino Royale, it’s immediate predecessor, managed to win so easily two years ago. The gritty realism is shattered by being dressed up in Jason Bourne clothes (no bad thing) and being made to dance for Hollywood physics (the fall from the plane, for example). More importantly it lacks a real plot, with action sequences falling one after the other in lieu of a real narrative. There are too many ideas here that are simply incongrouent to the world that we’re supposed to believe in. The work done so hard not so long ago has been undone. It’s not at Die Another Die levels of awful, but it’s getting perilously close. Avoid.

Kevin Smith has always walked the fine line between gross-out comedy, heartfelt characterisation and intelligent geek banter. Zack and Miri Make a Porno is, in a lot of ways,  perfectly in the middle of those concerns, and now that he’s found this balance we realise it’s not exactly what we want. It’s not that Zack and Miri is a bad film; it’s sweet in places, very funny in others, and painfully bad in the remainder. The problem is that it’s not consistently funny throughout, and there are not enough laughs to hold interest. I like Seth Rogen and Elizabeth Banks as the leads, but the chemistry between the two is a little forced. Of note, though, is Justin Long in an early film-stealing cameo. Like some of Smith’s earlier works, this is worth seeing but if you just want the gut laughs, I’d go look at Rogen’s back catalogue first.

Chuck Palahniuk’s excellent Choke has finally been adapted for the big screen (role on Survivor), but manages to disappoint in several ways. The director, rather than cut down the number of plot strands or increase the run time, has taken the bizarre decision to shove everything into the film and hope that it works. It doesn’t. Nothing really seems fully developed: not the relationship with the lead’s mother, not even the reason he chokes every night in the arms of a stranger. Everything  is wasted. Stylistically, it’s beautiful. Artistically, Sam Rockwell puts in a very good version of Victor Mancini. Story-wise, it’s all technically there but, as a whole, it’s less than the sum of its parts. A shame.

Finally, The Changeling is the latest from Cliff Eastwood and the first time we’ve seen Angelina Jolie actually act since Girl Interrupted. It’s about a woman who has to fight against authority when they return the wrong boy when her son goes missing. As with all of Eastwood’s films, the cinematography is exceptionally well-done; big, bold, crisp art direction, beautiful lighting, and perfect costume and make-up. Where he falls down is trying to extend the material for a running time longer than it can take. There’s plenty of slack towards the end of the movie that can easily go. Although Jolie is fantastic here, a lot of the supporting cast are given less to work with. The third-tier characters are actually pretty one-dimensional, with tired stereotypes being trotted out a little too often (the hooker with a heart of gold, for example). Small niggles aside, the confident performances and top notch direction make this an excellent movie. Well worth seeing.

The winner is… The Changeling.