"This is simply not a very good film"

Matt's asks why certain films are regarded as classics when better films are forgotten.

Here.

Ghost Town

Full disclosure: I love Ricky Gervais in anything he has ever done. I think The Office is one of the very best sitcoms every created. I loved Extras - and I love him in it. His stand up shows are fantastic - I paid to see his last one at the Royal Albert Hall and wasn't disappointed. I even watched his role in Stardust by skipping through the film until I hit his scenes, ignoring those that didn't feature him and - surprise - i thought he was great in it.

So it wont be a complete shock to learn that I very much enjoyed his first starring role in Ghost Town, a surprisingly sweet romantic comedy that features a typically Gervais lead character in Bertram Pincus.

Read the rest

Catch Up With The Classics

The Bicycle Thieves - Ladri Di Biciclette (1948)



I would recommend that anyone invest the brief 80 minutes of your life it will take to catch up with this 1948 classic, set in the dark and depressed streets of Post-War Rome. Directed by Vitorio De Sica, this stands as a landmark in realist film-making. De Sica cast non-professional actors in the lead roles here to invest this quiet, everyday, tragedy with that realistic, pavement-centred, quality so many films aim for, but so many fail to achieve.

Read the rest

Cinematography of the Year 2002

My slow meander through great cinematography efforts of the noughties continues. And it's not such a hard choice this year. 2002 was a great year for films, but not many stand out for their cinematography. I liked the photography in a good few films - Y Tu Mama Tambien; Mondays in the Sun; Punch Drunk Love, for example - but the award really comes down to a choice of three. Beautiful Bangladeshi Film, The Clay Bird (Matir Moina), my film of the year, Signs or my colleague's number one film of all time, Road to Perdition. All deserve commendation for excellent efforts in the cinematography department.

The Clay Bird is an exquisite film, carefully drawn and delicately photographed in romantic, shadowed and gentle filters and hues. Like with Road to Perdition, there seems to have been a conscious choice not to match the cinematography to the film's overall mood (controversial, I know, see below) and the end product is much more memorable and captivating as a result. Bangladesh looks stunning, sensuous and deep (much like it does in Brick Lane) and the film stands as a compelling reason to visit, as well as an interesting and fascinating historical account of Bangladesh's separation from West Pakistan (Bangladesh was formerly known as East Pakistan). This reminds me, I really must watch this again. This is a hugely underrated and memorable film, which looks beautiful. Cinematography by Sudhir Palsane.

Tak Fujimoto, who photographed Signs, is a well known cinematographer, whose most famous work is the bleak, haunting, foggy and dark landscape that encompasses The Silence of the Lambs. M Night Shyamalan said that he deliberately went for Fujimoto on Signs because of his insight into "Americana" (the pair had also worked together on The Sixth Sense) and it shows. Signs has that static, everyday, look, augmented, for sure, by the picturesque surroundings of endless fields and quiet, rural, beauty. In a way, being a 'blockbuster' (though not, or so I would argue, a typical or traditional one), Fujimoto had an easier job on Signs as people perhaps don't pay as much attention to this kind of thing as they might on other efforts (such as, indeed, The Clay Bird), but that only serves to make his achievement more interesting and commendable. Signs looks great, and there is, throughout, fantastic attention to the detail of how light and sound affect mood, tension and meaning.

However, the prize for 2002 goes to Conrad L. Hall, whose cinematography on Road to Peridition syncs perfectly with Thomas Newman's breathtaking and haunting score. Road to Perdition was originally a graphic novel and this shows throughout (though not in the in your face, overstyalised way, it did in Sin City), particularly in the film's most memorable scene, where Michael Sullivan (Tom Hanks) kills gangster John Rooney (Paul Newman) through lashing rain, darkness and streetlight shard, reminiscent of the finest French impressionist painting. I said earlier that the cinematography (generally dark, foreboding and claustrophobic) does not match the film's mood (which is - ultimately - uplifting). Some may disagree with this, but it is certainly how I felt and, as I say, I think this is a very difficult effect to achieve and Hall's work here is breathtaking. There are also some memorable contrasts - the wide vistas of the film's final moments by the living, breathing, wide ocean, stand out starkly against the scene I have just mentioned, for example. All in all, a dazzling result. Hall won the Oscar, and deservedly so. Unfortunately, he died before learning of the nomination but his fantastic achievement here stands as the best lasting testimony it is possible to imagine to a great talent.

Brick Lane (2007)

This 2007 adaption of Monica Ali's best selling novel tells the story of Nazneen, a 17 year old girl growing up gently amidst the beautiful paddy fields of Bangladesh who is violently wrenched from her idealistic,innocent, life to marry an overweight , middle aged man living in East London. As the film goes on, Nazneen's life becomes more and more complex as she battles with her own emotions, her culture, her husband and the conflict between her new life and her old.

This is, in sum, a totally watchable, enjoyable film. What immediately strikes you about it is the overarching sadness that is entwined from the first reel to the last. I love films which manage to maintain this dolorous, distant, tone throughout. It is an incredibly difficult thing to do and I can only think of a few other films that manage it.

Read the rest

Eagle Eye

Myfilmvault watches all the crap so you don't have to!

Eagle Eye isn't worth much discussion other than to point out that it's the new DJ Caruso/Shia Leboeuf effort. Caruso also directed Leboeuf in last year's far better Disturbia which, as reported here, was hit by a lawsuit from the rights holders to Rear Window for making what they claim was an unauthorised remake of Hitchcock's classic - which it unarguably was, even if it was quite enjoyable and a moderate success. Caruso and his screenwriting team have been a little more savvy this time, ripping off more than one Hitchcock film and coming up with their own plot - of sorts - to avoid any repeat litigation.

Eagle Eye bears more than a passing resemblance to North by Northwest, although this is a film very much with its own storyline (albeit an incredibly preposterous one.) Trouble is Leboeuf is no Cary Grant, Michelle Monaghan isn't Eva Marie Saint, Caruso isn't Hitchcock and Eagle Eye isn't very good. The problems, of varying importance, include Leboeuf's ridiculous facial hair, no chemistry at all between the two leads, Monaghan proving herself totally incapable of convincing in any given scene and a plot that holds up to no scrutiny at all. Worst of all, it's just not in the least bit interesting to a chase movie where the bad guy is a (spoiler in white) computer.

This is not worth the price of admission, so save your hard earned money. Heck, this isn't even worth the price of a cheap pirated knock off.

D

Burn After Reading

Burn After Reading is not a good film. Despite being directed by the Oscar winning Coen brothers. Despite starring 3 Oscar winning actors in Clooney, Swinton and McDormund. Despite starring Oscar nominated actors in Malkovich and Pitt, Burn After Reading is not a good film.

This is ill-conceived, badly executed and a complete waste of everyone's considerable talents. You almost wonder whether the Coens decided to see if they could dupe audiences into liking something so awful. It plays as if they wrote it on the back of a napkin in a bar one evening - possibly whilst drunkenly celebrating last year's deserved Oscar success. No idea is dismissed as too stupid. No joke is seen as too unfunny. No plot thread is left tied up. What we have is a mish-mash of semi-formed ideas all thrown together with the unifying theme of isn't it funny when these great actors play idiots. Well, frankly, no it isn't.

I have no problem with their "lighter" stuff. After last year's outstanding No Country for Old Men, it was only right that they change pace dramatically, and they've had proven success with this sort of thing. O Brother went down very well, so did The Big Lebowski. For me their most successful foray into light comedy was the grossly under appreciated Intolerable Cruelty. It had a genuine wit throughout with wonderful set ups, charming performances, hilarious visual gags and terrific one liners. Everything in fact lacking in Burn After Reading.

This may get a pass or even a recommendation based on the talent involved but don't be fooled by anyone that tells you this is anything better than average. For my money it is significantly worse. The Coens have followed up their very best film with their very worst*. A real shame.

C-


*Worth pointing out I've seen all their films except The Ladykillers which got slated so may in fact be worse than this. If I'm completely honest I also probably just preferred Fargo to No Country for Old Men.

Dear Lord

The UK all time box office top 3:

1	Titanic	1997	1998		US	69,025,646
2	Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone	2001	2001		US/GB	66,096,060
3	The Lord of the Rings; The Fellowship of the Ring	2001	2001		US/New Zealand	63,009,288

Mamma Mia has just passed $66 million and now has Titanic in its sights. Are we really okay with Mamma Mia being the UK's highest grossing film of all time?

Check out the review.

In The Valley of Elah (2007)

Once again, I'm woefully behind the times, having wanted to see Paul Haggis' Iraq-war themed mystery thriller since it first came out. This time, I can't blame it on Leicester cinemas. So having finally managed to rent this last night, was it worth the wait?

Haggis' film, like all the others centred on Iraq, did not meet with box office success. It has been argued that American audiences cannot cope with the content as the country remains to this day impossibly divided (like the rest of the world) over whether or not the war was justified. It will be very interesting to see whether Ridley Scott's forthcoming Body of Lies (fronted by the heavyweight pairing of Di Caprio and Crowe) will fare better. Certainly, In the Valley of Elah pulls no punches and will not have gone down with everyone, depending on their politics. But this is a film review, not a political commentary, so I'll limit my observations to all things cinematic (for the most part at least!).

The film centres around Hank Deerfield (Tommy Lee Jones), whose son Mike, a soldier just returned from Iraq, goes Awol. Hank heads to Mike's base to try and uncover the truth behind what's happened. But when Mike's body turns up, dismembered and burnt in the New Mexico bush, Hank's investigations with local detective Emily Sanders (Charlize Theron) uncover a number of painful and hidden truths.

This is, throughout, a very sad film as Hank's military precision swamps his emotional compass, leaving others in his life alone and vulnerable. The moment when Mike's body is found is very sad indeed and Lee Jones does a brilliant job here (similar, in a way, to his fantastic performance in The Three Burials of Melquiades Estrada) of conveying the emotional distance a military man has from his feelings, without ever letting go of that human touch and closeness all of us possess for those closest to us.

The various twists and turns, and the intrigue that accompanies them, are suitably gripping and, although it begins to drag a little towards the end, the film generally flies by at a well judged, emotionally fraught, pace.

Still, in the main, this is a character driven film and character-driven films live and die on their characters. Lee Jones, as I say, is excellent and holds the film together well and his calm, assured, mature and measured performance is well supported by the other male characters (this is a male dominated world in more ways than one), who are essentially soldiers and/or detectives. Susan Sarandon also provides excellent balance as Hank's despairing and defeated wife, although she doesn't get a lot of screen time. The same can be said for James Franco - I really like Franco. He's got the looks, the emotion and the ability to be a real star. I wonder if he will be. He never gets the opportunity to showcase his talents here (in a deeper role) and that is a shame.

Then there is Charlize Theron. I can't remember why, or when, this was, but I was convinced Theron was just another beauty on the box, whose looks had got her where she was. How wrong could I be. Theron ate up the screen, spat it out, stomped on it, then ate it again in her unbelievable performance in Monster. She does it again here, but in a much more delicate, subtle, and feminine way. I genuinely think this will end up being one of my favorite performances of all time. She is brilliant and mesmerising and owns every scene she is in, particularly one show-stopping moment when she utterly puts down three chauvinistic male detectives she spends the entire film fighting against. Whilst, perhaps, not being quite as effective, what this film highlights, in the briefest but yet most violent of lights, about the continuing oppression of women deserves mention in the same breath as Silence of the Lambs. It certainly maintains that dignified, non-preachy, aura that drives an emotional stick right through your heart. And that, primarily, is down to Theron. In a number of ways, its one of those ordinary, everyday, performances we're always harping on about on this site and Theron operates on that, incredibly difficult to hit, tone. Brilliant. Theron is fast becoming my favorite living actress anywhere in the world, almost to the point where I would pay to see any film she's in. She's also hilarious in Arrested Development by the way. Like her character (and unlike a number of Hollywood's other leading ladies), Theron has never got by on her looks alone, but her depth, brilliance and talent. Stunning in every sense. The chemistry between her, and Lee Jones, is also spot-on.

As I'm writing this, I think I'm realising that I liked it a lot more than I thought. It's not an easy film, and I wasn't sure I would return to it, but I think I will, at the very least for Theron's performance. Credit to Paul Haggis too, for a fantastic ending, when I thought he'd gone and blown it (although, Paul, if you're reading, that song which closes the film is awful and totally out of place). Sorry I ever doubted you. It ends up as a hugely effective, and (once again) emotionally shattering, last scene. I'm now sure I'll watch this again.

One final word must again be directed towards the most unfortunate man in cinema, Roger Deakins. Well, unfortunate in the sense that he's never won an Oscar when he should have won about five, but not unfortunate in that he is one of the most talented men in the world, and a man who is very clearly in touch with his emotions and how they relate, in turn, to other human beings and to light and sound. The cinematography is again magical and perfectly tuned in to the film's bloodline. Deakins manages this every time. It's no accident that I end up liking all of the films he photographs, true testament to the beauty and importance of the image and what it means.

Regardless of the political message (though I have to say that I can't understand why anyone would find it hard to accept, this is an accurate, and very sad, depiction of a very distant but very much genuine, reality), this is an excellent film, well worth watching. There is so much going on here, there will be something for everyone to enjoy, especially those, like me, who just love watching a great performance jump out of the television to such an extent that you believe she could be living next door to you.

A-

Gomorrah

Italy's official entry to the 2008 Oscar race is a densely layered, sprawling look at the criminal underbelly southern Italy. Despite being completely scripted, Gomorrah retains a documentry feel throughout and almost plays out like an secret expose on the criminal masses.

The criminal organisation in question is that of Italy's oldest: the Camorra. Originating in the region of Campania and the city of Naples, it finances itself through drug trafficking, extortion, protection and racketeering. It is also reportedly responsible for at least 4000 deaths since the 70s.

Portraying any aspect of this on screen is an unenviable task but Matteo Garone has taken it on, both as director and one of several screenwriters. The Camorra has some estimated 7000 members, has existed in one form or another for 500 years and is organised into a reported 150 clans. Tackling such a huge entity borders on the imposible and whatever Garone had done would only ever have scratched the surface.

Gomorrah takes 5 tenuously connected characters and tells us the story of each, interweaving each others plot with that of the other 4 only in the loosest of ways. Any audience member expecting a neat resolution where the seemingly unconnected storylines suddenly fall into place will be disappointed. No attempt is made to tie anything together. Garone and his team of screenwriters have had the confidence to let the quality of each story line stand alone. And for the most part it is a wise decision. Each character is well written and well performed. The common theme in each thread is the exploration of how the Camorra affect the entire comunity - from those within the set-up and those who have ambitions to be in it, to those who want nothing to do with it.

Helping the documentry feel is the casting of non-professionals, 3 of whom have been arrested for real life crimes since the film was released. The book on which this is based is a non-fiction work by Roberto Saviano so this is as close to a documentary as you can get without actually watching one. And for the most part it works very well.

If I had to be critical I would say that the lack of focus probably went too far at times. Comparable films like Traffic and City of God have rather more definite links between the plot threads and you get rather more invested in individual characters than you can in this film, since everything feels so detached. It is very hard to be moved by anything that happens when you don't really feel you know the characters very well. Its deliberate detachment, delineated structure and roving focus means emotions are rather more muted than they perhaps should be - even scenes that should be shocking or saddening fail to elicit the emotions they perhaps should.

Nevertheless, it's an extremely accomplished film and one that is particularly well directed. Several scenes stand out and give audiences a taste of a director who has a flair for visuals. One overhead tracking shot that's followed by a static shot of a member of the Camorra walking off into the distance is particularly memorable.

Gomorrah is certainly something I'll be revisiting - I suspect it might play a little better second time around. Whilst it wont end up threatening for awards with me at the end of the year, don't be surprised if I'm in a minority. I think critics and awards givers will not be shy at all in rewarding this ambitious, and for the most part, highly successful attempt at filming the near-impossible.

B

Pre Bedtime Quickie

What Happens in Vegas (2008)



This new post title has nothing to do with the fact that Cameron Diaz (or Ashton Kutcher) are in this film. I promise. I just can't be bothered to write a full review.

That actually doesn't reflect the quality of the film, although I do always struggle to find a lot to say about Rom Coms. I really thought I would hate this but have to - begrudgingly - admit that I enjoyed it, though it certainly won't be changing my life.

This has literally the worst plot in film history. Jack (Kutcher) and Joy (Diaz) meet in Vegas, get drunk and get married. They then realise they hate each other, whilst standing next to a slot machine. Joy gives Jack her last quarter as they march of, in total hostility, to get as far away from each other as possible. Jack puts said quarter in said slot machine and wins 3 million dollars. Both claim the money. It ends up in court. A judge with the combined intelligence and legal insight of Sarah Palin and my arse then decides that he can somehow freeze the money and force the two of them to live together and 'work' at the marriage, otherwise they will never get the money back. 'Hilarity' (well, its never quite hilarity, but it's decent entertainment) ensues and the inevitable happens which I won't write because you've already guessed it.

Despite this absurdity, this really isn't a bad film, which is saying something because so many of these films are really really bad. This is enjoyable and it passed the time nicely. Kutcher's character is utterly obnoxious and hugely grates on you until he wakes up to himself but, that aside, the whole thing is, generally speaking, an enjoyable 'romp' even if the performers and cinematographer won't be winning any MyFilmVault awards in 2008. All in all, a nice way to spend an even being distracted from all this constant nonsense and bullshit about the fucking credit crunch. Anything that can take you away from that for an hour or two can't be all bad.

B-

Cinematography of the Year 2001

I'm loving this award. It's a very difficult one to call most years, and 2001 is no exception. Once again, there are a number of noteworthy candidates.

Janusz Kaminski was my frontronner. He bequeathed AI a beautiful, haunting and distant look which adds to the sublime sadness of this divisive film. Regardless of whether or not you loved (like me) or hated (like everyone else) this film, credit must go to Kaminski for photographing such a lasting and memorable vision of the future, the likes of which have not been seen since Ridley Scott's magnificent Blade Runner.

There are others well worthy of a mention in dispatches. I loved the pastel-shaded, gentle and beautiful Americana of Antonio Calvache's work in In The Bedroom and some of the vistas in the Fellowship of the Ring (the opening montage, coupled with Cate Blanchett's haunting and rapid dialogue, is stunning) are unforgettable, if slightly derivative (in places). Andrew Lesnie deserves credit for that, it was some undertaking after all.

Black Hawk Down (Slawomir Idziak) looked great, with great use of filters, as did Donnie Darko (Stephen Poster) (again, witness the opening bike-ride scene accompanied by Echo and the Bunnyman's sublime 'The Killing Moon'). And, even though I hated the thing from start to finish, Hannibal (John Mathieson) looks great too. I particularly remember one image of police sirens crossing a bridge in a beautiful, pensive, and smoky light.

However, I've gone for Declan Quinn's work for Mira Nair's Monsoon Wedding. Once again, this is a film of light and look which reflect its mood. Monsoon Wedding feels and plays like a leaf slowly turning to its natural colour by the unfailing passing of the year. It's deep, sensuous, mystical, exotic, romantic and beautiful. The use of colour is striking and perfectly framed. The whole film, particularly perhaps its pivotal moments, is simply washed in a radiant, sensuous, tropical blend of heady passion, feeling and meaning, a movie of transcendental and atavistic luminescence and spectral conjuring. A great, if underrated film, and a worthy winner.

Catch Up With The Classics

Record of a Tenement Gentleman (Nagaya Shinshiroku) (1947)



Yasujiro Ozu made one of my favorite films of all time - the magnificently emotional and sad Tokyo Story - so I was very grateful to receive two Ozu box-sets for a recentish birthday. I'm just sorry it has taken me so long to get round to seeing them. This is the first in my Ozu catch up.

This 1947 effort is one of Ozu's first films. With a running time of a measly 71 minutes, the film focuses on Kohei, a young boy abandoned by his father who has gone off to Tokyo to look for work. Kohei follows a poor tenement dweller home and the tenement then bicker and argue over who is to look after the boy. Then, of course, the inevitable soul-searching is done and lessons are learnt, albeit rather hastily, given the running time.

The main problem with this film is indeed its running time. It is incredibly difficult, if not impossible, to achieve the kind of emotional punch in the face Ozu is going for here in an hour and ten minutes. You are left feeling that you simply don't know the characters well enough, don't quite fully understand where they are coming from, and the eventual emotional turnaround, therefore, feels far too quick and out of shape. It's a lovely idea and what there is of it is, for the most part, done very well. It's simply that there is not enough of it. A real shame. This feels like a three hour film squeezed into 60 (or so) minutes.

The performances are generally excellent. Shoko Lida is exceptional as the harsh, brutal, unmarried Tane who ends up being tricked into taking the boy in. It's an excellent performance and it is mainly down to her that the film, and its turnaround, works at all. Hohi Aoki is full of emotion and sadness as the young, abandoned, boy. It's fortunate, though, that it is mostly a silent part (he's got the expression and the emotion down pat) because he's awful whenever he has to open his mouth, especially when it's to cry. Also nice to see a fleeting and measured appearance by MyFilmVault lister Chishu Ryu.

This is worth a go. It's only 71 minutes of your life after all. The cinematography is noteworthy and full credit must go to Yuuharu Atsuta for the way a desolate, broken and sad post WW2 Japan is landscaped. The music is sweet, enchanting, and adds another, much needed, layer to this thin effort. And, of course, there is Ozu himself. No one does abandonment, isolation, loneliness and sadness like Ozu. And with this being filmed in 1947, there is again another layer of meaning in here. Like so much of the best Japanese cinema of this era, the film carries a strong socialist message (naturally reflective of a communalistic culture like Japan's) about duty, helping others and about right and wrong. It's just a shame that, like so much else about this film, there is simply not enough of it to fully drive home the point. Like ships passing in the night, this is a silhouette of something strange and beautiful but one you know you are never destined to know on a deeper, more soulful, level.

B-

Look Familiar?

When a low budget foreign horror film becomes a cult classic you know the remake is inevitable. [Rec] is probably myfilmvault's film of the year so far. It sits in both mine and my colleagues top 3 spots and is the only film that's received an A or better from both of us. My only regret with it was that I never got to see it in the cinema - an experience that would have been wonderful. I guess I can see the remake in cinemas instead - small compensation, although it can't possibly match the brilliance of the Spanish original. Can it?

Check out Matt's review here.

I really shouldn't like this...

...but I do. I know it is completely derivative but maybe a Bond song has to be. It is certainly better than either Die Another Day or the theme tune to Casino Royale, whose title I can't even recall. Something about knowing your name was it? Anyway, I can imagine this playing quite nicely over the opening credits later this month. I know I posted a link a few weeks ago but here's the official video...

Shark in Venice

Oh Yeah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Top 25 Scenes of All Time

#20 - Perfidia (Lau) - Days of Being Wild (A Fei Zheng Chuan) (1990)


There is probably nothing remarkable about this scene whatsoever. Yet it has lingered long in my mind from the first time I saw it, like the metaphorical bird that permeates the dialogue of this beautiful and stunning film and Wong's later effort, 2046 (which, in a way, follows on from this). And what more can you ask from a scene than that.

As impossible to ignore as it is to forget, this simple, yet perfectly put together, scene is stamped by a beautiful, tired, languid monologue, by Andy Lau's sweet and heartbroken cop as he wanders towards a different and seemingly emotionless future ("and I went off to join the army") through the rainswept streets of early 1960's Hong-Kong with 'Perfidia' taking over the moment Lau's words fall off and into the rushing, lonely, drains. It is a moment which offers the perfect symmetry of music, emotion and word, Lau's quiet and understated, but destroyed and sick, words echoed perfectly by the dolorous, plangent, chords of Perfidia, as the rain falls and falls and a distant future awaits.

It is also the film's pivotal moment, the instant where the film's two main male protagonists become irreversibly destined to meet and it is sublimely done. Wong leaves his viewers with the emotional equivilant of being hit by a sunami and yet left waiting desperately for the next one to hit. This is one of his most underrated, least watched, least studied, and least understood films, but it is still genius. It's a beautiful, languid, hazy, film, which lives on through its dazzling use of filters, song, rhythms, chords, words and performances. All are irresitibly intertwined in this one single moment of timeless and echo-drenched brilliance.

Taken

Sometimes there is pleasure to be had from the check-your-brain-at-the-door, testosterone fuelled action films aimed exclusively at those cinemagoers that carry a Y chromosome. Coming under the umbrella of guilty pleasure, its a film that knows it's pretty stupid, knows it wont win much favour from critics, but aspires to entertain the masses on a Friday night. Where women get their kicks (and $120 million at the UK box office is some serious kicks) from Pierce Brosnan singing ABBA songs, men get theirs from well choreographed fight scenes, death-defying stunts, elaborate car chases or, preferably, a combination of all 3. Plot is optional - it's probably better if there is one, but it's not completely necessary - just as long as we get some cool fights. Other qualities that most moviemakers see as essential, but which are considered non-obligatory in films marketed for the Grand Theft Auto generation include: good acting (see anything starring Paul Walker); character development (totaly unnecessary) or convincing dialogue (doesn't go down as well as lines like, "Okay cocksucker. Fuck with me, and we'll see who shits on the sidewalk.")

Of course some things can transcend the action genre and break out into something of genuine quality. The TV series 24 is sometimes, okay frequently, unrealistic but it also features high quality direction, cleverly layered plots and some absolutely first rate acting. Motion picture examples include Die Hard, Speed and, most recently, Philippe Morel's District B13 - a highly enjoyable, action heavy race against time set in the world of the French criminal underworld. The success of that French-dialogue film has seen Morel and his screenwriter Luc Besson graduate to the English language action film with Taken, a better than average sophomore effort starring Liam Neeson.

Neeson dominates the film's running time as an ex-secret agent whose daughter is kidnapped whilst in holiday in Paris. Cue a very unhappy Nesson, who is given a rather arbitrary 96 hours to save her life and restore order to the world. He manages to get to Paris, from the States within about 45 minutes and then proceeds to conduct his own investigation at the speed of lightening. In fact you perhaps wonder had he not had to make it across the Atlantic, whether they might have given Neeson a 90 minute deadline and had the film play out in real time a la 24. There's certainly no time to pause for breath - probably a good thing in films like this because it doesn't give you a moment to reflect on any inconsistencies or silliness - you just soak it all up as Neeson electrocutes one bad guy to a painful death before snapping the cervical vertebrae of another.

This is a film very much in the 24 mould. The body count is piled high as Neeson, as the Jack Bauer character, dispatches bad guys with efficient ease. Neeson is very capable in a role he has not ventured into before, although he certainly doesn't match the quiet gravitas of Kiefer Sutherland, who has perfected the part over the last 5 seasons. There is however enough to enjoy - on a kind of silly, mindless level - to get a pass from me. It's not bad. It's probably not exactly good either but it has enough energy to keep you entertained for a couple of hours. You'll forget everything about it within 4 seconds of leaving the theatre, but there are worse ways to pass the time.

C+

Son of Rambow (2007)

How refreshing to see a British film not centred around gangsters, guns and girls and directed by Guy. How refreshing, too, to see it breakthrough into the mainstream, or at least semi mainstream. This probably belongs firmly alongside other British sleeper hits like The Full Monty, East is East and Bend it Like Beckham.

The film, set in a quiet, leafy, green, part of England in the 1980's, is focalised through Will, a naive, quietly idealistic, young boy brought up by his single mother, who is the member of a religious brethren. By accident, Will meets Lee Carter, a boy who, on the face of it, could not be more different than him. Again by accident, Will ends up watching Rambo: First Blood at Lee Carter's house (he is normally forbidden, by the brethren, from watching television) and is captivated by it. The two then set out to make a film, Son of Rambow, and set out on a journey together during which they come to realise they might have more in common than they had ever thought...

It's a nice message and it's well done, although the same point is made (and certainly more effectively) by the brilliant and bittersweet Stand By Me (and a host of other 'coming-of-age' movies). The chemistry between the two young leads seems natural and sweet, although during the moments when they are apart you cannot help but feel that Will Poulter (Lee Carter) is carrying Bill Milner (Will). It might seem harsh to criticise such a young actor, especially one who is clearly putting everything into what he was doing (and clearly loving every minute), but it isn't a hugely effective performance and the film's overall emotional punch suffers as a result. Poulter, however, as the enigmatic and charming Lee Carter, is excellent and is more than able to carry the film. His is a talent I would expect to hear more of in the coming years. The supporting cast is good as well, full of bright eyes and bright minds and the film is able to bubble and churn along at a nice, bright, pace that reflects the dreamy English summer which forms its backdrop. It is particularly hard not to like Jules Sitruk's breezy effort as Didier Revol, the exotic French exchange student who charms the whole school with his charismatic 'otherness'.

Son of Rambow is a perfectly enjoyable way to spend an evening or a Sunday afternoon, though it's not a film you should expect to change your life. It's well done, well directed and, for the most part, well acted, but it falls short of greatness. The effects grated with me when they were supposed to be charming and reflective of childhood imagination and freedom and the dialogue is often not up to much. That said, although it is shmaltzy in places, there are also a few very well done, and surprising, more serious and innovative moments that strike emotional chords when you least expect (the scene following Dider's departure from the school is particularly noteworthy in this regard) and director Garth Jennings deserves credit for that. The score is also awesome in places.

Some may say it's unfair to criticise a film for not changing your life. And I would agree, as far as that goes. I enjoyed this and it never once drags, but it certainly didn't inspire me enough to ever contemplate watching it again. And that, perhaps, is the essence of the dividing line that separates the cinematic great from the cinematic good.

B-

Top 25 Scenes of All Time

#21: Truman Works it out (Carrey - The Truman Show) (1998)


The Truman show was one of those films that divided audiences right down the middle, you either loved it or hated it. There never seemed to be any inbetweeners. I loved it, even though I'd be prepared to admit it perhaps hasn't endured quite as well as it might have done. It felt, at the time, like it, together with Carrey's excellent performance at its heart, had a timeless quality, but I now think it has been tarnished a little by the passing of time. That's surprising because, in this Big Brother obsessed world filled with 'reality tv', Truman is a very relevant film. And although it hasn't aged brilliantly, it remains a very very good film with some splendid performances anchoring it throughout. I couldn't believe Carrey wasn't Oscar-nominated. He proved he could not just act but act brilliantly and he gives a show-stopping performance here as the naive, charming, Truman, who becomes increasingly damaged and overwhelmed by his perplexing situation.

There are some great scenes - Ed Harris' "cue the sun" moment still gets me to this day - but this is the highlight. It is just a mesmerising moment, as Truman stands in the middle of traffic, his arms outstretched, with Burkhard Dallwitz's score ripping your nerves to shreds. It's the look in Truman's eye which makes it. Try and imagine how difficult it is to convey the look of a guy who has just realised he has been living his entire life as the star of his own television show. Not easy is it? Carrey unleashes an astonishing amount of empathy on the audience in this brief moment and Truman's pain, uncertainty and anguish are there for all too see. It's a stunningly effective result. The kind of scene you are waiting for all film if you're doing a re-watch. And I really love the music here, it is quite simple, almost like a heartbeat, or maybe a heartache, perfectly tuned in to the film's rhythm. A great moment well worthy of its place in a list remembering the greatest scenes in film history.

Recount (2008)

Okay, this was kind of a TV special, but it was feature length, had a host of great actors (and not just names, these guys really are good - Kevin Spacey; John Hurt; Tom Wilkinson; Laura Dern; Dennis Leary; Ed Begley Jr. (not to mention the likes of Bob Balaban) - all, I think, beloved by the authors of this site) and highly appropriate given the recent content of my colleague's posts and the upcoming American presidential election. And I watched it last night so it's timely.

With election fever hitting America (and this side of the channel) ahead of next month's tight presidential election, More4 have been screening a host of programmes/exposes etc. on American politics. This is perhaps the highlight - a film recounting the tense days and months following the flawed Florida count in the 2000 election between Gore and Bush, as both sides scrapped to have various votes recounted or not recounted.

The story is familiar and the drama of the piece surrounding it is suitably gripping - all of it washed in nice, austere, filters reminiscent of a number of political films and TV shows. However, really and truly, this is a character piece, driven dynamically by a host of superb performances. I genuinely don't know who was my highlight - Spacey's driven and idealistic democratic lawyer; Hurt's contrasting, weather beaten, downtrodden, highflyer who plays as though he has the weight of Washington, if not the world, on his shoulders; Leary's charismatic, flamboyant, Gore-ite, always at Spacey's side; Dern's superb Katharine Harris (the secretary of state who held ultimate sway over this election in Flordia), who looks perfectly like a cat caught in the headlights of a car she mistakenly believed to be the bright lights of fame, fortune and power heading her way; or Wilkinson's sharp republican, Tom Baker, who might have switched from being a democrat but has lost little of his pathos or humanity in doing so. Wilkinson probably has - towards the end - the best scene, but the consistently great moments are provided whenever Spacey and Leary are together on screen, reminding the audience just what a talent Denis Leary is and causing us to wonder what has happened to him. In short, the cast was brilliantly selected and all seem passionate, interested and involved in what they are doing - and that, ultimately, is bringing an important political story back to the popular imagination without being preachy.

Yes, there is sympathy for the democratic cause, but it is not all cut and dry and the republicans score punches too. It is, ultimately, like in the politics it reflects, down to the viewer to interpret as she sees fit - this is never clearer than in the final scene where row upon row upon row of stored ballot boxes from the Florida election stand stoically before you. Somewhere in there, you are left thinking, the final truth lies, though we are unlikely to ever know what it is. The film asks serious questions of the American political process (without ever saying, flatly, "the result would have been different"), particularly about disenfranchisement, and has wider matters in its sight as well - shouldn't America get its own house in order before blindly bestowing "democracy" on the rest of the world? A very interesting and thought provoking film well worthy of anyone's time, especially if, a., they are interested in politics and the political process and, b., if they just love to watch great actors doing a great job.
B+

My Week

Apologies for lack of posting. Will try and rectify this weekend.

Amusing

Random Updates

Minor site updates have been taking place. I updated the features main page which is still looking a little barren but we'll endeavour to add more to it. Check it out here if you've not yet done so. Worth having a look at our greatest actors and actresses, which now has a rather simple home page. I may well try and come up with something fancier at some point!

Quite a fitting time to have a look at Paul Newman's page which I've updated with our most recent messages about the great man. He is currently our second most honoured actor of all time and once we've caught up with that chunk of his filmography we've not seen it's disctinctly possible that he'll make it to number one.

Dear God

Someone get this woman a brain. In honour of tonight's VP debate here's some of Palin's brilliance. She makes George Bush look like a nuclear physicist.

Spin

Low quality but still worth a look - quite embarrassing what the media gets away with.