Trance film review

I hope Christopher Nolan was taking notes while watching Trance; this is how you make a film that flips between past and present, reality and the imaginary.  As I watched Trance I could not help but think that Danny Boyle could have made Inception a brilliant film (it so very nearly was...except it was stupid).  Evidently, I have not yet forgiven Nolan for wasting those hours of my life.  Trance, though, offers some great lessons on how to move on with one's life, so it is likely I will very soon be cured.

Although it starts out masquerading as a heist film, it soon becomes clear that the real story is much more personal - and has probably largely already taken place.  The wonderful thing about Boyle's storytelling is that he really keeps you guessing.  He drops clues just often enough to keep you wanting more, but it is a long time before the truth is actually revealed.  It takes a master to maintain suspense as long as he does, and he uses a variety of methods - often more sophisticated than the incidental music soap operas have claimed as their own, but sometimes as simple as a tap left running off-screen.

All this suspense may sound excruciating to some.  And well it would be if the only mystery to unravel were the whereabouts of a certain bounty.  But as the tale progresses we witness some twisted and intriguing behaviour between characters that we cannot help but wonder about their shared histories.  And explaining the true nature of the relationships amongst our motley crew becomes the real mystery we wish to uncover.

Add to all of this some Boyle's signature colour-rich aesthetic, some unexpected violence and some rather creatively justified nudity and hey presto, we have a blockbuster.

Fine performances all round, but this film relies mostly on its carefully crafted and carefully revealed plot.  I thoroughly enjoyed the ride.

See this film if you need a supplement of the sublime to get you through, as we continue the excruciating wait till the next Kaufman film. 

Rust and Bone film review

A knockout of a film.  10/10.  Rust and Bone delivers outstanding originality in its subject matter, its narrative arc and its visual style.  I enjoy a film that keeps me guessing.  And in this case, I was on the edge of my seat throughout as even the most mundane scenarios were given surprising weight and handled with supreme delicacy by stars Marion Cotillard and Matthias Schoenaerts.  Oh Schoenaerts.  His name may seem difficult to pronounce now, but we'll all know it before long.  It takes a bright star to maintain shininess beside Cotillard, and this guy is equal to the task.  He is very shiny indeed.

The great skill of this film is to endear the viewer so surely to characters of such low social standing.  It does not do so in the way that Wes Anderson or Guy Ritchie might, but rather lures us in with the artlessness of those striving to inch forward to a step and half ahead of death, but not at the expense of enjoying every moment.  There's a brutal honesty to these lives that beguiles.

Perhaps the most interesting thing about the film's style is that it repeatedly shies away from showing key events, and instead focuses on the emotional fallout relating to them.  I have seen this technique attempted before, without success.  The danger can be that the viewer loses emotional attachment without seeing a character's struggle/victory.  The reason it works in this case is that the struggles/victories associated with life changing events are in what happens after.  And without getting bogged down by the details of physical struggle, more time is afforded to focus on the emotional struggles.

I find this tremendously rewarding to watch, as I imagine our actors did to enact.  The material is profoundly rich.

I don't want to give anything else away, but I wish everybody would see this film.  The only possible thing that could have enriched the experience for me is if the film had been named The Streetfighter and the Cyborg.  I imagine that it's only a matter of time before we have an English-language adaptation that does just that for the American market.

See this film if you can handle subtitles and want to discover a brand new talent in Matthias Schoenaerts.  Be prepared for something mighty.  Allow yourself time afterwards to ponder the bigger questions in life.

The Impossible film review

Most.  Gut-wrenching.  Film.  Ever.  I emerged from the cinema emotionally drained and, after returning home, needed to lie down to recover.  This film will be with me for a while.  Some of its images will replay in my mind.  Some of its dialogue will ring in my ear.  Mostly though, what will stay with me is the way it made me feel.  I sobbed, whimpered, cried, often felt sick to the stomach and it plumbed the depths of my snot-reservoir.

The Impossible is not for the faint-hearted, but for those who can stand the suspense, the graphic images, and an overwhelming sense of devastation, it is a rewarding watch.

Naomi Watts' magnetism loses none of its lustre, even as her character's energy fades.  This is the grittiest role I have seen her in and she turns in an outstanding performance.  It's a tough performance to beat, in this competitive awards season.  Even so, Tom Holland, playing her eldest son Lucas, proves himself a worthy screen-partner.  For a young actor to achieve such a mature performance is a feat that mirrors his character's story:  in many ways, The Impossible is the story of Lucas and his unfair rite of passage, having the responsibilities of manhood thrust upon him suddenly and too soon.

Much of the drama and poignancy is owed to the sympathy one naturally feels for the blameless victims of a natural disaster that still feels close to home, less than a decade on.  But in lesser hands, one may have felt only pity.  Juan Antonio Bayona's masterful treatment of the story is such that one responds with a wide range of emotions.  He builds suspense as well as Hitchcock, endears us to characters as well as Richard Curtis and shocks us with the brutality of Polanski, all the while inspiring with his closely observed study of selfless love.  The result is an honest depiction of personal and communal devastation that turns many unexpected corners to arrive at its surprisingly unpredictable conclusion.

See this film if you liked 127 Hours and Schindler's List, or if you attend funerals for fun.

Gangster Squad film review

Gangster Squad is a slick, confident, cheeky-but-funny man of a movie.  So, for many people it will prove irresistibly sexy - or was that just Ryan Gosling?  He certainly steals the screen for much of the film, despite Josh Brolin's best efforts to give his GI Joe character some spark.

Of all the qualities that make Gangster Squad so watchable, enjoyable and ultimately satisfying, the one that shouts at me the loudest is that it is slick.  The idiom-filled dialogue is slick.  The clean lines of the sets and costumes are slick.  The transitions from intimate dialogue to gunfire and car chasing are slick.  With so much slickness, it runs the risk of being overproduced, and lacking soul.  Perhaps its soul suffers at times, but there are enough honest moments between husband and wife, father and son, and brothers in arms that Gangster Squad emerges as the full package: smooth, polished gold.  If you're thinking that smooth, polished gold sounds boring, I'll draw your attention the to the gem it contains: Sean Penn is a diamond, so rough it may be partly coal.  But coal, too, can sparkle - and how his performance sparkles!  His King of the underbelly is robust and terrifying, a chiseled brute both fiery and heartless.  I love to see actors create characters unlike any in their past repertoire, and Penn had me again in awe of his abilities.

So, I loved the film and I recommend it but there were a few features that got me analysing the direction in which Hollywood is heading, and what that says about the world we live in.  Gangster Squad's violence is graphic and gruesome.  Its saving grace is that it is also rather inventive.  It seems this is the trend that first came to mainstream audiences via Tarantino and has since been welcomed into franchises such as 007 and Batman, as well as stand-alone hits like Drive.  I don't enjoy seeing bloody, realistic deaths.  I've grown somewhat desensitised to it and I can handle it - but that makes me sad.  I do not watch a lot of action films - James Bond bores me and superheroes annoy me - yet even I have grown used to seeing realistic violence on screen.  Is it possible this doesn't translate into more violent tendencies among frequent viewers?  I don't believe that for a moment.  I should give credit where it's due, though: this film had scenes re-shot to replace a scene that closely resembled the tragic Aurora shooting.  But to display violence vividly, and just skirt around anything that may link it to a specific situation, looks a little like taking the gate off its hinges after the horse has bolted.  "What gate?"

This film also got me thinking about women's roles in film.  It's a common enough gripe that there are not enough interesting roles for women and that those roles we have are written by men anyhow.  Well...I thought things were getting better.  Modern films and tv shows give women more power than ever before and we are seeing characters never before shown on screen.  No longer must women be only wives or whores. This made it only more noticeable that the large cast of Gangster Squad included only two women - neither of them particularly interesting characters.  It got me thinking that by setting things in a bygone era, writers are just providing for themselves an excuse for avoiding interesting female roles.  There's more to it than that, I know, but I do think it contributes to the popularity of placing stories in an historical setting.

Of course, I am not naive enough to expect Hollywood to take a moral stand on these issues and censor itself.  I am aware, though, of the ever-increasing influence Hollywood has over the minds and attitudes of younger generations and it disturbs me.

See this film if you are a fan of The Gosling, war heroes, or LA Confidential.

Quartet film review

To set a film in a country manor that houses retired musicians is such an utterly charming idea that Quartet need barely have delivered a story for it to be thoroughly enjoyable.  The English countryside, the pristine decor, and lashings of classical music ensure that the eyes and ears are well cared for before the business of a plot is even considered.  Yet Quartet proceeds with a story that ticks all the boxes any satisfying story does.

The story, then, is quite formulaic.  The telling of it, though, is such a delight that I was more than happy to go along with things, then quite unexpectedly I found I was emotionally invested in the plights of our core cast.  Of the four title roles, Billy Connolly and Pauline Collins provide the film with heart, while Maggie Smith and Tom Courtenay provide the drama and romance.  They perform ably, but all of my favourite moments were owned by Collins.  Her sweetness and innocence are used to great comic effect, while her relentless enthusiasm for reliving the past gives greater poignancy to one of the film's more affecting moments, when we see her past haunt her.

Like any great piece of music balances lightness with strength, heart with structure, and earns its climaxes - so too does Quartet deftly blend humour with drama, and tenderness with tension.

Special mentions to:
- Sheridan Smith for claiming centre of attention whenever she is on screen - her freshness acts as a palette cleanser between courses of aged wines and mature cheeses.
- Whoever assembled Michael Gambon's wardrobe.
- This song.

See this film if you appreciate quaint scenery, opera (only the more popular pieces), and making light of the aging process.

Sightseers film review

I saw this film on a whim, not knowing what to expect but that there should be some laughter involved.  Sure enough, there were moments scattered throughout the film that achieved this result.  Many of those amusing moments were paired with acute shock at the dark subject material.  Disappointingly, there were just as many moments that reached for a laugh but fell flat.

I enjoyed the performances of our central couple and the supporting cast they meet along the way.  I enjoyed the unpredictable plot and the daffy script.  The appreciated that the drabness of the characters and scenery helped to ground the story, however absurd it became.

I enjoyed many moments of Sightseers, but ultimately it was like an adornment strung with pearls and popcorn.  What do you do with it?

For instance, the over-the-top characterisation of our lead's mother felt out of step with the more subtle qualities of other characters.  Similarly, the protagonists' reactions to the events that lead to the second turning point were at odds with their reactions to other similar moments.  I could forgive these inconsistencies if I had laughed more.  Ultimately, the laughs were too few and far between to make this an unmissable comedy.

I enjoyed it.  You might too.  I would not suggest you go out of your way to make sure you see this.

See this film if you have a dark sense of humour, and 90 minutes to murder.

Les Miserables Film Review

I will preface this review by stating that Les Miserables is very dear to my heart, and has been for years.  I have read the book and seen the musical and sung the songs in my bedroom hundreds of times over.  This makes me a tough audience, but with millions of fans worldwide similarly obsessed with the story/music/stageshow, I cannot help but think I am also the target audience.  The film makers will have known from the beginning that criticism would be opinionated and detail-oriented.

With my cards firmly on display, I will now exclaim THE FILM IS BRILLIANT.  I really enjoyed it.  It is faithful to the book and the musical, but clearly establishes its own world and rules.  Only on film is the viewer rewarded with sweeping lansdscapes, intricate sets, extreme close-ups, and realistically bad teeth. The initial grit, though, soon gives way to favour a style that could be described as polished candour.  It seems a necessary concession in the walking the fine line between high stakes and high camp.  I applaud Tom Hooper and the Les Mis team for getting the tone just right.  So with a definite tick in the box labelled 'style', we can examine the 'substance'.  This job was wisely left to the performers, and I felt each was given much freedom to create their own character and musical styling...to mixed results.

  

There are a lot of challenging roles in Les Miserables and the cast do an excellent job.  Well...Russell Crowe doesn't, but I will come back to that.  Hugh Jackman's broad shoulders are proven equal to the task of carrying this gargantuan tale, and he receives help in the first half (ish) of the film from Anne Hathaway.  Jackman's first major musical moment is Valjean's Soliloquy, and he sets the bar high.  In fact, in my opinion it is a bar he never quite reaches again, but he continues to fascinate as his character reinvents himself as often as Madonna.  Hathaway, meanwhile, is a guileless Fantine and she serves the role well – but it just never struck me as Oscar-worthy (like Madonna).  Sorry Annie.  Jackman and Hathaway both spend a lot of time singing in speech quality, or coming off-voice entirely.  It is a shame, when both voices are truly fine ones.  The result of this is that the music falls out of the singing.  As far as musicals go, it was beginning to feel rather unmusical...and then...Suddenly...and then...we fast forward nine years to a time when vocal quality is no longer sacrificed to achieve (debatably) greater emotional truth!  

The leaders of this revolution are Eddie Redmayne, Aaron Tveit, Samantha Barks and Amanda Seyfried.  The young quartet give a masterclass in singing through a phrase from beginning to end, and demonstrate that in doing so the acting need not suffer.  From this point the film flies by, shifting focus to place Marius as our protagonist.  Eddie Redmayne gives us a dignified, charming imp and for the first time in musical theatre history the audience understands what Eponine sees in him.  Marius' distinctly different relationships with Enjolras, Eponine, Cosette, and eventually Valjean make him an interesting man to watch, and I was on his side every step of the way, even when the guns come out (and I'm a peace-loving hippie).  In the past, many Les Mis fans have been of the view that the insipid Marius and Cosette deserve each other, and he really is not worthy of Eponine, who is better off on her own (pretending he's beside her).  Now Redmayne gives us a Marius who treats Eponine like a sister (oh, that's why he doesn't get jiggy with her).  Now Seyfried's Cosette is a clear-headed beauty with a ringing voice and eyes to drown in.  Now their connection has me believing they belong together. 

With the film now firmly focused on the love story, I was unsurprised to learn that the show's most interesting song was cut.  Thenardier's atheistic wail makes such a great counterpoint to Valjean's tortured piousness and Javert's staunch legalism.  In this time of Hitchens, Dawkins and atheist enthusiasm, I feel the song would resonate very well.  Alas.  This cut disappoints me greatly, but it's the only one that does.  I can now only hope for a DVD extra of Sacha Baron Cohen singing Dog Eats Dog.  I'd love to see what he could do with it! 

It must now be time to lament the casting decision that permitted Russell Crowe to sing at us.  It is not that he cannot sing, but he does this and Javert does this.  When Crowe sings in his higher register, he sounds like his nose is blocked.  There are other problems, like the fact that he does not give any dramatic weight to some really big moments (like his vow to catch Valjean at any cost) but mostly HE SOUNDS LIKE HIS NOSE IS BLOCKED.

For the record, Helena Bonham Carter was everything I wished she would be and more, while Baron Cohen  made me lol more than once.

I could not quite get my head around the finale reprise of Do you Hear the People Sing? but I'm hoping it makes more sense the next time I watch it.  And I have the feeling that will be very soon.  The cinema attendants might just get to know me as "the guy who goes to Les Mis every day".

See this film if you enjoyed the stage show, see this film if you enjoy musicals in general, see this film if you like costume dramas.