Director: Guy Ritchie.
Cast: Robert Downey Junior, Jude Law and Jared Harris.

Entertaining and well-acted A Game Of Shadows places Sherlock Holmes on well-defined territory while also taking the iconic figure along untried paths.

The convoluted plot of Sherlock Holmes: A Game Of Shadows is hard to follow. A series of apparently unconnected terrorist attacks and murders all lead back to Sherlock Holmes’s arch nemesis, Professor Moriarty. Holmes, spurred on by the death of the woman he loved, together with his trusted companion, Dr. Watson, undergo a circuitous journey as they track down a gypsy that seems to hold an important part in the puzzle.

The strengths of Sherlock Holmes: A Game Of Shadows lies in the way it manages to balance drama with a light, comic touch. It suffers when the action sequences and visual effects overpower the storytelling. Guy Ritchie’s overindulgence of slow-motion shots does not help the cause either.

The battle between Moriarty and Holmes is intriguing. Equals physically and intellectually, both are addicted to playing out their strategies as they fight their battle. The two characters seem to lack empathy, although Moriarty has taken this to extremes, and both seem to be narcissistic and egotistical.

‘This stems principally from the fact that even by American standards Downey Jr. has a deep voice…’

The subplots in A Game Of Shadows are intriguing and immeasurably add to the enjoyment of the film. The tension between Dr. Watson and the needy and attention-seeking Holmes produces some marvellous scenes as the doctor becomes a married man.

Robert Downey Jr.’s Sherlock Holmes voice has an unnatural English accent which is very difficult to understand. This stems principally from the fact that even by American standards Downey Jr. has a deep voice which does not lend itself well to a London dialect.

Accent aside, Downey Jr. delivers a highly competent performance as Holmes. He deftly handles the balance between being emotionally needy and comically likeable. Despite the superhuman aspects of Holmes, Downey Jr. brings a vulnerability to the role that emphases the human quality of the character.

Jude Law is more than satisfactory as the able sidekick, Dr. Watson. A much more reasonable personality than Holmes, he grounds his college and somewhat curbs Holmes’s self-destructive behaviours.

‘Standing in his way is Holmes who uses every excuse to tempt Watson with hedonistic activities. ‘

Watson is undergoing a transition as his seeks to bridge the gap between youthful irresponsibility and responsible adulthood as he gets married. Standing in his way is Holmes who uses every excuse to tempt Watson with hedonistic activities. Watson recognises Holmes’s true intentions but does not want to lose his dear friend. The resulting conflict between the two powers much of the film.

Jared Harris gives a very good performance as the menacing psychopath, Professor Moriarty. Harris does equally well in displaying Moriarty’s convivial mask with subtle dark undertones and and the full-blown psychotic menace lurking underneath. The battle of wits between Holmes and himself provides the highlight of the film.

‘despite having a fair few minutes on screen she fails to make a lasting impression…’

Noomi Rapace delivers an adequate performance as the gypsy Madam Simza Heron. Nonetheless, despite having a fair few minutes on screen she fails to make a lasting impression and is somewhat overshadowed by Rachel McAdams even though she is only briefly on-screen.

Although only her character endures an early demise, Rachel McAdams’s Irene Adler is one of the stand out members of the film. The fascinating mix of wit, charm, untrustworthiness and vulnerability is a potent cocktail and McAdams’s portrayal is pin sharp in its execution.

Unfortunately, for the viewer she is underutilised and the film suffers as a result.

‘Mycroft is charming, hilarious and a wonderful asset.’

Sherlock Holmse’s brother, Mycroft Holmes, is a most welcome addition to what may become a franchise. Played wonderfully by Stephen Fry, Mycroft is charming, hilarious and a wonderful asset. Many of the film’s best comic moments occur when he graces us with his presence.

As is the trademark of Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes series, A Game Of Shadows is quite difficult to follow. The plot is very convoluted and it isn’t always clear why an event is occurring. The compact nature of the film exacerbates these characteristics and at times viewers can be left wondering what is happening.

Some of the supernatural elements of the film and implausible nature of many the scenes may prove too much for some Sherlock Holmes enthusiasts. Nevertheless, when you take into account Holmes’s preternatural deductive reasoning perhaps it isn’t stretched too far.

Sherlock Holmes: A Game Of Shadows is a highly enjoyable and quite funny film. Is it a cinematic masterpiece? No, but few films are. What it does is provide light entertainment and good enjoyable escapism for just over an hour and a half.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UPckModN14

Sherlock Holmes A Game Of Shadows Film Review: Light Entertainment

Director: Alexander Payne.
Cast: George Clooney, Shailene Woodley and Nick Krause.

The Descendants is a powerfully emotive film whose precise execution ensures that the viewer is never witness to mawkish sentimentality in an extremely human story with family at its heart.

The King clan are going through a traumatic period in their lives. The matriarch of the family, Elizabeth, was involved in a tragic accident that has led to her spending several months in a comatose state.

The situation becomes critical when her husband, Matt, is told by doctors that his wife is effectively brain dead. Burdened by this, and the fact that the life support machine will have to be switched off, he must tell his two young daughters of their mother’s fate and organise the funeral proceedings.

To add further complexity to the situation Matt is the trustee of an enormous amount of Hawaiian land that other family members wish to sell to developers. Finally, to make matters even worse, Matt learns from his daughter that his wife was having an affair unbeknownst to him.

The Descendants is an gripping look inside a normal family dealing with two serious and separate issues. The film does this in a calm and intelligent manner and never resorts to the usual methods of sensationalism.

For this reason some cinema goers who have become used to dramatic action may be surprised at the pacing and could find it overlong. Many others though will be enthralled to see how Matt handles all of these difficulties in a real life manner.

‘Nevertheless, the film does have its comic moments like Matt running in flip flops which is quite entertaining.’

What we get is an ordinary family doing its best to cope in difficult circumstances. Nevertheless, the film does have its comic moments like Matt running in flip flops which is quite entertaining. This, as well as several interjections from Sid, a friend of Matt’s daughter, Alexandra, provide some memorably funny sequences.

George Clooney is brilliant as the tormented father, Matt. Instead of the usual suave Clooney we get a tired middle-aged man trying to deal with two feisty, demanding daughters. His portrayal is endearing and sincere with the usual Clooney charm coming through. He easily justifies his Oscar nomination.

‘Starting out as an attention-seeking deviant she matures and eventually provides excellent support to both her sister and her father…’

Shailene Woodley delivers a performance that belies her young years as the eldest daughter, Alexandra King. A complicated and somewhat difficult teenager, Alexandra undergoes a transformation throughout the course of the film. Starting out as an attention-seeking deviant she matures and eventually provides excellent support to both her sister and her father as a confident young woman begins to emerge.

Amara Miller’s portrayal of the youngest daughter of the King household, Scottie, is also quite good. She constantly needs to be minded as she inevitably ends up in trouble otherwise. Like all of the actors in the film, Miller does not overplay her part.

What’s more she does not suffer from the terrible affliction that plagues Hollywood. That is of course the irritating, unlikeable precociousness found in child-actors. Instead Scottie thankfully remains a child and adds greatly to the natural feel of the film.

‘Yet underscoring him is a deep pathos and empathy of other people and he is highly adroit at reading the emotional states of others.’

Nick Krause’s performance as Alexandra’s friend, Sid, is excellent. He manages to give what is essentially an over-the-top character some plausibility and realism. Sid injects some wonderful humour in many of the scenes that he is in. Yet underscoring him is a deep pathos and empathy of other people and he is highly adroit at reading the emotional states of others.

Matthew Lillard as the man Matt’s wife choose to have an affair with delivers an interesting performance as Brian Speer. Coming across as a weak-willed individual, it is very hard to marry the fact that Speer is a highly ambitious estate agent/auctioneer with what comes across on screen.

Some viewers may indeed be wondering why Matt’s wife would choose to have an affair with him. Nonetheless, we never get to see her character at all in the film  so we have no idea what she is like. And as the old adage goes, familiarity breeds contempt. 

The Descendants is a film about morals and responsibility both as individuals and as a collective. Matt’s actions in a difficult time are admirable and are all the hallmarks of a good human being who overcomes his flaws and fears.

The film’s great triumph lies in its natural execution and is a wonderful testament to the director Alexander Payne and the fine acting of its cast.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWHNXJ1K4yA

The Descendants Film Review: A Wonderful Insight Into A Family In Crisis

Director: Brad Bird.
Cast: Tom Cruise, Jeremy Renner, And Simon Pegg.

Tom Cruise once more stars in the Mission Impossible franchise with a film that chooses action over plot.

The entertaining plot of Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol is both quite complex and full of holes.

An IMF agent gets assassinated in Budapest while attempting to intercept information destined for someone codenamed ‘Cobalt’. IMF agent, Ethan Hunt, and his team are sent to the Kremlin archives to ascertain the identity of Cobalt. The operation goes terribly awry and a bomb goes off in the Kremlin with the Russians claiming the incident was an attack of war.

The IMF team are blamed and the entire IMF department are disavowed. To add further insult to injury the IMF Secretary is killed in front of Hunt’s eyes.

Finally, a deeply undercover IMF team discover the identity of Cobalt who turns out to be an insane Swedish born, Russian nuclear tactician. Armed with this information they set up to try and right a wrong and prevent what appears to be the eminent threat of an all-out nuclear war.

‘ many of the film’s set pieces reveal their implausibility.’

In order to fully enjoy Ghost Protocol, the thinking cap must be left behind. For with it on, many of the film’s set pieces reveal their implausibility. This is especially typified with several sequences none better than when a balloon conveniently finds its way to the exact spot appearing to be guided by little more than the wind.

This is somewhat disappointing since the transition the action genre in the film industry undertook with the introduction of the Jason Bourne films. This progress has meant that many action films have very solid realism underpinning them. Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol seems to have left all this progress behind. Instead we are treated to an action spectacle in which the plot only exists to further the action.

‘the visual experience of the film is its strongest attribute.’

Where the film excels at is giving the viewer a visceral experience. You are placed at the heart of the action. Shot on high-quality film and devoid of the sometimes unwelcome intrusion of 3-D, the film has some rather imaginative sequences that have never been presented on cinema screens in such fashion. With high-octane car chases and powerful sandstorms – the visual experience of the film is its strongest attribute.

Where Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol becomes a let-down is with its plot which is another tired nuclear threat romp. Surely there are easier ways to herald Armageddon than attempting to outwit major nations? There must be more imaginative ways for the meglomaniacally insane to bring about their vision.

Plot and script-issues aside, the film renders some fine acting from some of its cast.

Tom Cruise delivers a good performance as Ethan Hunt. Always a solid actor, Cruise supplements his performance with some impressive stunt work. No more so than hurling himself out the window of the tallest building in the world, the Burj Khalifa, in the desert of Dubai.

‘the script is highly predictably and the lines uttered by Dunn are also well covered by other films.’

Simon Pegg delivers a satisfactory performance as the mild-mannered, Benji Dunn. An under-experienced, somewhat nervous field agent, Dunn is supposed to provide comic relief amid the action sequences. The problem, which is not Pegg’s fault, is that the script is highly predictably and the lines uttered by Dunn are also well covered by other films. As it is, Pegg delivers a competent implementation of his character.

Jeremy Renner is disappointing as the analyst William Brandt. He is perfectly fine for much of the film but when tasked with delivering an emotion-laden scene he falls far short of the expected mark and remains unconvincing.

Vladimir Mashkov gives a good performance as the rather likeable Russian agent, Anatoly Sidorov. Always a little bit late to arrive on the scene he provides a wonderful comic foil amid the action sequences and affords the perfect opportunity for Tom Cruise’s hunt to express some wry comedy.

Whether or not you will like Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol will come down to one thing. If you can ignore the flaws in the plot then this film is for you. Full of marvellous action sequences and expensive special effects it is a visual treat. Just leave that thinking cap off before you sit down to watch it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V0LQnQSrC-g

Mission Impossible Ghost Protocol Film Review: Action-Filled But With A Cost

Director: Phyllida Lloyd.
Cast: Meryl Streep, Jim Broadbent and Alexander Roach.

The Iron Lady is a soft focus look at the life of Margaret Thatcher. If the director Phyllida Lloyd set out to make Thatcher likeable then she certainly went a long way towards succeeding.

The film is comprised of a series of flashbacks as Margaret Thatcher, now an elderly woman suffering with dementia and played outstandingly by Meryl Streep, looks back on her first foray into politics as a young woman and onto when she was elected the first and, so-far, only female Prime Minister of the United Kingdom in 1979.

A large chunk of the movie deals with Thatcher as she is today. We see her having conversations with her dead husband Denis whom she seems to believes is alive. We see a fragile and vulnerable side to someone who is regarded as being very far from one of the Britain’s most popular leaders. Devoid of the pomp and authority derived from being a country’s leader her human side comes to the fore.

How true to life this is, is questionable and the film has been criticised by those who know Margaret Thatcher as inaccurate. In fact her former personal assistance, Cynthia Crawford has said that some scenes are totally untrue. Meanwhile her children Carol and Mark are reported to have said it ‘It sounds like some left-wing fantasy.’ 

Ultimately, though the question one has to ask is whether or not the inaccuracies matter? In any dramatisation of a story there has to be some fiction. Dramatisations use a form of poetic license to create a sense of either what a person or a situation is like. It is inevitable that there is a trade-off. Since we can never tell what people are thinking assumption and subjectivity must enter the equation to create anything meaningful.

‘Stubborn, unbending and unyielding are choice words that could be used to describe her character’

Margaret Thatcher was christened the Iron Lady by Captain Yuri Gavrilov in the the Soviet Newspaper The Red Star for her steadfast opposition to Communism. It was a highly apt choice of words by Gavrilov. Stubborn, unbending and unyielding are choice words that could be used to describe her character. She often bulldozed through people and once she set her mind on something it would never be changed, no matter what the consequences.

One particular area that the film disappoints is on Thatcher’s political rise to power. Her determination, controversial policies and her commanding ways in a man’s world are covered but lack depth. We also never truly understand her motives for pursuing a career in politics. Although it is suggested that Margaret Thatcher’s father may have had a lot to play in developing notions of specialness in her and this may be amongst the reasons why she choose that path.

Her waning popularity in her first years in office, amidst high unemployment and recession, her subsequent recovery due to her political resurrection and the Falkland’s War and her re-election for a third term before her resignation are not delved into leaving the viewer with a sense of frustration and dissatisfaction.

‘Has there ever been such an actress as Streep? ‘

Minor gripes aside, there are some terrific performances none more so than from the mercurially transforming Meryl Streep.

Steep is astonishing in the role, she has captured the look  the speech and the nuances perfectly right down to the pulling in of the bottom lip which Thatcher did regularly. Has there ever been such an actress as Streep? She has the ability to immerse herself in every role and in this part she has surpassed herself.

No doubt we are living in an era where we are witnessing one of the greatest actors constantly producing dazzling performance after dazzling performance.

Absolutely riveting, Streep owns the screen and it is hard to see how she could ever reach such perfection again, but no doubt  she will continue to surprise and delight with more amazing roles in the future.

Jim Broadbent, as Denis Thatcher, is also wonderful in the role. Lovable and charming, Broadbent provides a wonderful foil to the robust Thatcher especially in her younger days. His character frequently injects mischief and intrigue providing a unique insight into Margaret Thatcher’s mind.

He portrays Denis Thatcher as a relaxed, good humoured, irreverent but solid presence in the life of his ambitious wife. Their scenes together, especially as she grapples with senility, are superb and touching.

The young Thatcher is aptly played by Alexandra Roach. Roach is a relatively new talent to the big screen. She has a strong lively presence with real potential. She certainly held her own against a highly experienced cast.

‘With a twinkle in his eye and warm empathic nature it is easy to see why Thatcher and Neave become good friends.’

Harry Lloyd plays the young Denis Thatcher. Lacking the experience of Jim Broadbent, he doesn’t quite make as strong impression as Roach but is well-suited in the part.

Airey Neave, the Shadow Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, is played by Nicholas Farrell who is both competent and understated in the role. With a twinkle in his eye and warm empathic nature it is easy to see why Thatcher and Neave become good friends. It also provides a personal reason as to why Thatcher vehemently hated the IRA.

Apart from the rather gentle look at the life of Thatcher, The Iron Lady is eminently watchable. Viewers should go, if for no other reason than to watch Meryl Streep ply her craft like no one else can.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yDiCFY2zsfc

The Iron Lady Film Review: Margaret Thatcher As You Have Never Seen Her Before

Director: Cameron Crowe.
Cast: Eddie Vedder, Stone Gossard, Mike McCready and Jeff Ament.

Pearl Jam Twenty is a interesting documentary into the famous rock band, Pearl Jam. Luckily for director, Cameron Crowe, he happens to have been on the scene since the band’s formation in the early 1990’s.

Pearl Jam turned out to be an enormously popular group that commanded the respect of tens of millions of loyal fans throughout the world. It is a band that has a deep connection between its fans and its members.

In the age in which many music acts have become corporate franchises it is unsual that Pearl Jam seem to have remained steadfastly, and arguably stubbornly, true to their early ideals.

‘If many were to mention one name associated with Pearl Jam it would be Eddie Vedder, their front man. ‘

When Pearl Jam were unhappy with the huge profits Ticketmaster were making their fans pay to go to concerts, the band boycotted the company. Such action against a hugely powerful corporation was not without its cost and the band paid a heavy price. Nevertheless, they took a stand and stuck behind their principles where others would not have taken such a stance. This sets them apart.

If many were to mention one name associated with Pearl Jam it would be Eddie Vedder, their front man. Terribly uncomfortable giving interviews and painfully shy he is not the most effective at expressing himself in conversation. Thankfully, the other members of the band have no such inhibitions.

On the surface Vedder appears to be the polar opposite of the confident, charismatic Mother Love Bone, singer Andrew Wood. Wood’s group would form the genesis of what would become Pearl Jam after the singer tragically died from drug abuse.

The dynamics between Vedder and the rest of the band is interesting. He is the unspoken leader but yet he doesn’t appear to conform to any of the stereotypical aspects of someone in command. He seems to be more unassuming and withdrawn than anything. Yet underneath there is a man with a fiery determination and a willingness to be uncompromising with his principles.

‘This further strengthens the notion that Vedder can be extremely uncompromising.’

The documentary retells an interesting anecdote of a group divided with the sole figure of Vedder doing his own thing, driving himself across the countryside to gigs while the others travel by plane. This further strengthens the notion that Vedder can be extremely uncompromising.

Aside from such idiosyncrasies there is also a darkness that permeates Vedder. We see footage of him perilously climbing stages and hanging out of the rafters high above the crowd. Members of the band look up, concern and worry etched onto their foreheads as they simply watch on. Yet Vedder, living in his own world with codified rules that are difficult for outsiders to understand, ignores their apprehension and continues on regardless.

One of the most fascinating insights Pearl Jam Twenty offers is a glimpse into the motivations behind why an uber-successful band such as Pearl Jam does what it does. Those such as Stone and Vedder speak of a connection between the band and its audience as all groups do. However, Vedder seems obsessed to the point of delusion during one of the early interviews when they play in front of a large crowd.

Unfortunately, this obsession is never focused on and sadly remains a missed opportunity. It would have been great to look at what a psychologist would have made of the euphoric experience Vedder seems to be having.

‘The chief reason for this lies with the myopia of the documentary. ‘

The problems with the documentary start to become apparent once you start to look at the wider context. This film is really only made for fans who like and are familiar with the band already. Therein lays the problem.

For people who are only vaguely aware of the group, or perhaps have never heard of them, this film may not pique their interest. The chief reason for this lies with the myopia of the documentary. It fails to properly establish a wider context. It never sets out Pearl Jam’s position in the greater pantheon of music or culture in general.

Apart from some brief, scattered television footage, the film never dwells on the culture that existed in the 1990’s. During that era a self-questioning disenfranchised youth emerged. These people were dissatisfied with the ethos that suggested they should be happy with the status quo. Although there is nothing new about this as questioning the world we inhabit dates back to the time of the ancient Greeks, it caused quite a stir amongst the gate-keeping establishment.

To the film’s credit it does explore this to some extent. Nonetheless, it is not direct and is treated more as a footnote. Pearl Jam, together with Nirvana, were two bands that captured and recorded this disenfranchised, disillusioned sentiment and explored these ideas through songs.

As it is, Pearl Jam Twenty  is a film that fans will love the most. For those indifferent to Pearl Jam, this documentary will make little or no impact. Its failure to look at the bigger picture and put the band in a cultural context as well as ask more probing questions of its lead singer detracts from its lasting impression.

It could have been a remarkable film but as it is it’s simply just another music documentary about an atypical band.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qFlacHufUw

Recommended Viewing

You can obtain Pearl Jam Twenty here from Amazon.

Amazon.co.uk
For people living in Ireland or the United Kingdom, you can access: Pearl Jam Twenty from here.

Amazon.ca
For Canada: Pearl Jam Twenty.

Amazon.de
For Germany: Pearl Jam Twenty.

Amazon.fr
For France: Pearl Jam Twenty.

Pearl Jam Twenty Film Review: One For The Fans

Director: Peter Weir.
Cast: Ed Harris,  Colin Farrell, Jim Sturges and Saoirse Ronan.

The Way Back documents the gruelling hardships endured by those held captive by Stalin’s communist prison camps as they escape their entrapment. The group swaps one form of tyranny for another as they are subjected to the devastating effects of an indifferent planet and undertake a colossal journey across Asia.

Colin Farrell is excellent as the murdering sociopath, Valka. Completely unstable, he can (and does) kill people for the most trivial of reasons without flinching or displaying even the merest hint of remorse. However, it would be impossible to stomach such a character for long durations without giving him some redeeming characteristics.

Farrell, a highly accomplished and talented actor, is in his element here neatly juxtaposing the apparently incompatible and creating a likeable murderer of the innocent. His Valka draws the full gamut of human emotions from the audience. He inspires repulsion, disgust, hatred, empathy and shared admiration for his ruthlessly cold pragmatic approach.

‘Devoid of the nauseating precociousness that blights a plethora of films’

Farrell is well-adept to deliver such difficult requirements. What’s more he makes it look ridiculously easy when it certainly is not and in places his inherent charm is apparent for all and sundry to see.

Saoirse Ronan also delivers a highly accomplished performance as the, enigmatic Irena. She deserves great praise for not resorting to the cynically tired, ham-fisted acting of many of her difficult to watch young contemporaries. Devoid of the nauseating precociousness that blights a plethora of films and television series when ever there are young actors on screen, Irene is delightful fresh and exuberant.

Ronan demonstrates a fundamental understanding of what it is to perform and once on-screen is really an adult actor trapped in the body of a teenager.

The true star of the The Way Back is without question Ed Harris as Mr. Smith. Smith displays a tremendous strength and determination. A character not to be messed with, he is a natural leader among the group and despite the script’s positioning Janusz as the leader it is Harris’s Mr. Smith that is the real chief.

‘We never understand why Valka is so child-like in some respects and why he regards human life with such frivolity.’

One of the most interesting facets of The Way Back is the multitude of enigmatic characters that feature heavily in the film. Mystery plays a large part in the make-up of these people. We never understand why Valka is so child-like in some respects and why he regards human life with such frivolity. Perhaps there is no why but we never get the satisfaction of knowing if there is a reason or not.

Likewise Irena, similar to the others, remains somewhat of an unknown. Her early attempts at deflecting the truth about her past hint at a troubled upbringing. Irena, Mr. Smith and Valka also refuse to impart their life stories. Instead what we get are titbits, recalled hand-picked vignettes that are supposed to sum up entire lives. As you can imagine these snippets are less than satisfactory.

‘it leaves a lasting impression of just how diverse the giant orb we briefly sojourn on truly is.’

Despite some terrific acting and fine performances from the cast the dominate character in the film is not human. It is the harshness and indifference of the planet and the sweeping landscapes that the group encounter that is the main protagonist and it is captured wonderfully by the camera.

The cinematography of The Way Back is simply stunning. A visual gourmet meal of exquisite beauty, of unending horizons and myriad terrains – it leaves a lasting impression of just how diverse the giant orb we briefly sojourn on truly is.

The second impression that the rolling scenery displays is the vagaries of climate and weather. From arid deserts to the enormous Himalayas, from the freezing tundra to the carpet of snow-covered forests, each setting provides enormous hardship to the group as they try to return to their homes while doing their best to stay alive.

‘He simply gets dwarfed by the trio of Ronan, Harris and Farrell.’

The performance of Jim Sturgess as the main character, Janusz, is somewhat disappointing. He simply gets dwarfed by the trio of Ronan, Harris and Farrell. The most damning indictment of an actor’s work is that it is forgettable and unfortunately on this occasion Sturgess simply leaves no lasting impression.

The other more peripheral personalities are even less distinguishing.

The Way Back is a beguiling story. Undertaking such a tremendous, almost unfathomably difficult journey is something few of us can imagine. When the film is excelling it is focused on the immense landscape that forms the colossal expanses of Russia and Asia. Dwelling on the lead characters is also riveting.

However, where it is at its weakest is when those outside the aforementioned triumvirate, the more peripheral characters, are on screen. Not half as interesting they just fail to inspire and grasp our attention to the same degree. Another let down is the fact that there is not a greater exploration of the backgrounds of the people who have decided to undertake the journey to end all journeys.

Despite these flaws The Way Back is well worth watching and its good points completely overpower the negatives.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87kezJTpyMI

Recommended Viewing

You can obtain The Way Back here from Amazon.

Amazon.co.uk
For people living in Ireland or the United Kingdom, you can access: The Way Back from here.

Amazon.ca
For Canada: The Way Back.

Amazon.de
For Germany: The Way Back.

Amazon.fr
For France: The Way Back.

The Way Back Film Review: The Journey Of Several Lifetimes

Director: Etienne Périer.
Cast: Anthony Hopkins, Robert Mortley and Natalie Delon.

When Eight Bells Toll is an exceptionally well-made film that is almost flawless in its gritty portrayal of British Intelligence operative, Philip Calvert.

If James Bond was a real person he would be Philip Calvert. One would have to wonder about the circumstances that lead to a witless, anaemic James Bond franchise becoming successful. If Bond offered ludicrously impossible stories, hammy acting and out of touch fantasy then When Eight Bells Toll presents the brutal reality of what it was really like to work as an intelligence operative.

‘At just 33 years of age and with just four years experience in the film industry Hopkins gives the perfect performance.’

It is a minor tragedy that Philip Calvert did not become a franchise.

Anthony Hopkins is mesmeric as the intelligent, anti-authority and unstable Calvert. If ever anyone needed to back up the argument that actors are born not made, Hopkins in When Eight Bells Toll is the paragon of this. At just 33 years of age and with just four years experience in the film industry Hopkins gives the perfect performance. His highly intelligent character is semi-permanently unhinged, extremely violent and cares little about other people.

Natalie Delon delivers a complicated performance as the femme fatale, Charlotte. Using the tropes and clichés of the blonde bombshell, she creates a confusing and beguiling character that breaks the mould of convention.

Charming, seductive, intelligent and possessing a cultured vulnerability, Charlotte is a character that constantly and self-consciously switches between the genuine and the created.

‘Insensitive, snobbish and quick-witted he commands our attention’

Robert Mortley is excellent as the aesthete, Uncle Arthur. With a penchant for good biscuits and tea he is a part parody of the elite that reside atop of bureaucracy. Insensitive, snobbish and quick-witted he commands our attention from the moment he enters the screen. Nonetheless, it is important to draw attention to the fact that Arthur is quite a likeable individual despite his many flaws. What originally appears as a two-dimensional character reveals himself to be much more rounded and complicated as the film progresses.

The plot of the When Eight Bells Toll is incredibly well thought-out. Murderous thieves hijack ships carrying precious cargo, in the latest case, gold bullion. Both thieves and the hijacked ship simply disappear without trace, puzzling the authorities. Without revealing the mystery it is very easy to accept this story.

‘keeping in touch with people, particularly in Scotland’s remote and rugged inhabited islands, was difficult.’

This also highlights the difference between the modern world and the 1970’s era that we have left behind. In the 1970’s the world was cut-off. Modern communications was in its infancy and satellites were just starting to populate geostationary orbit. In such a time keeping in touch with people, particularly in Scotland’s remote and rugged inhabited islands, was difficult.

Nowadays, everyone is connected via mobiles and broadband Internet. Hundreds of satellites fly over the world continuously recording what is happening on the Earth’s surface. Even the oceans are wired up with hydrophones to document incidents that occur on the planet’s waters.

In short, the plot of When Eight Bells Toll could not occur today but it certainly was more than plausible back then.

The Scottish islands and the Atlantic Ocean are shown to be a bleak, harsh environment, a place far removed from the fanciful exotic locations that normally populate espionage films. The ocean is a dominant character in When Eight Bells Toll. It is powerful, unforgiving and its dark hue adds to the movie’s gritty nature.

‘dwell sexual comfort from naked pictures.’

Another thing that is often whitewashed or avoided altogether in many spy films is the misogynistic, overt objectification of women by men. This is reified in the scenes showing the splattering of nude pictures of women decorating a sailing boat.

There is honesty to the world that When Eight Bells Toll portrays. This is the real world, a world in which groups of men who spend long periods of time away from women dwell sexual comfort from naked pictures.

When Eight Bells Toll stubbornly refuses to present its universe as either simplified or consoling. Philip Calvert is a complicated figure far removed from the sanitised nicety of James Bond. He posses many of the traits of Bond, he is charming, seductive and engaging.

However, where he differs is in be truly egotistic, murderous and anti-authority. There is no easy black and white morality, no clear-cut ‘good guys’ versus ‘bad guys’ because in reality these concepts just simply do not exist. For these reasons When Eight Bells Toll is a near masterpiece and we can only sadly lament at the franchise that could have been.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7G9iKhoL9I

Recommended Viewing

You can obtain When Eight Bells Toll here from Amazon.

Amazon.co.uk
For people living in Ireland or the United Kingdom, you can access: When Eight Bells Toll from here.

Amazon.de
For Germany: When Eight Bells Toll.

Amazon.fr
For France: When Eight Bells Toll.

When Eight Bells Toll Film Review: A Real James Bond

Director: John Lee Hancock.
Cast: Sandra Bullock, Quinton Aaron, Jae Head and Tim McGraw.

Based on a true story, The Blind Side tells the account of a god-fearing, tough-talking, peroxide-blonde mother who decides to take a black, high school boy under her wing. The boy becomes part of the family and shares in their daily life. Through his connection with his new kin he flourishes and grows in confidence.

Simultaneously, as this growth is occurring the family discovers that he also has a penchant for American Football.

The film is a heart-warming, adapted biopic of the Tuohy family who take future NFL player, Michael Oher, into their care.

The Blind Side, though not without its flaws, is a enjoyable picture dealing with prejudices, the importance of family and the similarity of all human beings, no matter where they came from or their family circumstances.

‘Unable to cry in public and very far removed from a supine trophy wife,’

Sandra Bullock’s portrayal of Leigh Anne Tuohy is exemplary and well-deserving of her Oscar. Leigh Anne is a driving, arresting force of nature who doesn’t conform to the usual expectations of femininity. Unable to cry in public and very far removed from a supine trophy wife, she is a hard grafter who gets things done. Even if it means going against the advice of her friends.

Bullock brings her sharp wit and intellect to the role and plays to her strengths. The greatest danger with portraying strong-willed woman is that they are often dislikeable on-screen. Bullock ensures that this does not happen to her Leigh Anne. What results is the perfect blend of a determined woman and thoughtful, caring mother.

‘This ambiguity feeds nicely into the film and provides sustained tension,’

Quinton Aaron’s Michael Oher is a curious mixture that refuses to be easily read. The viewer is never quite sure of either his intelligence or his intent. Is he pretending to be less smart than he actually is? Is he truly that nice? This ambiguity feeds nicely into the film and provides sustained tension, drawing the viewer into its world with seemingly little effort.

Tim McGraw’s portrayal of Sean Tuohy, husband of Leigh Anne, is completely overshadowed by his co-star. Tuohy exudes warmth and kindness and it is all-too-easy to dismiss the importance of his role in the story. For those paying attention, Tuohy is a pillar of strength for Leigh Anne. Like his wife, Tuohy is a rare breed – a husband who is comfortable allowing his spouse to be what ever she wants to be without interfering or trying to control her.

Michael Oher forms a close relationship with the cerebral member of the Tuohy clan, S.J. S.J., played by Jae Head, is an instantly likeable child with a strong curiosity and a precocious ability to read football plays.

There are plenty of memorable sub-plots in the film. One of the most fascinating is Leigh Anne’s self-questioning moral dilemma. Here she ponders her motivations as to whether or not she is doing the right thing by taking in Oher.

‘with actors rather than famous names as their ‘acting’ is terribly wooden.’

Another interesting contrast is the idea of a southern, well-to-do family completely departing from the stereotype of the uncaring and distant rich.

As already said above, The Blind Side is far from perfect. One scene where real-life American Football coaches proposition Oher may have been better executed with actors rather than famous names as their ‘acting’ is terribly wooden. This becomes an unwelcome intrusion and a reminder that we are watching a film and breaks from the story. Employing seasoned actors for these roles would have worked out much better.

Nonetheless, undoubtedly the film’s great weakness is it pandering to sentimentality and what results verges at times on being mawkish. Instead of remaining true to its roots and letting the story simply tell itself, it becomes self-knowingly maudlin.

‘The Blind Side causes you to cringe so much that you have to close your eyes.’

If it could have avoiding pandering to these pitfalls the film could have been truly terrific. However, it didn’t and the consequences of this is that at times The Blind Side causes you to cringe so much that you have to close your eyes.

When The Blind Side is at its best it is focused on Leigh Anne. A sassy and determined woman, with a strong moral compass,  who possesses an extraordinary ability to get difficult tasks accomplished.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJ3kwMq18-8

Highly Recommended Get The Film Through Amazon

You can obtain The Blind Side here from Amazon.

Amazon.co.uk

For people living in Ireland or the United Kingdom you can access The Blind Side here.

Amazon.ca

For those living in Canada you can obtain The Blind Side from here.

Amazon.de

For Germany: The Blind Side.

Amazon.fr

For France: The Blind Side.

The Blind Side Film Review: Sentimentality On Overdrive

Director: George Clooney.
Cast: Ryan Gosling, George Clooney, Philip Seymour Hoffman and Paul Giamati.

The Ides Of March provides a revealing insight into the world of politics. It unearths the sordid nature of the political class, the journalists and campaign mangers that reside on the periphery, and shatters the illusion that individuals can be saintly figures of greatness.

Stephen Meyers is a brilliant, young campaign strategist tasked with the challenge of helping Governor Mike Morris to become President of the United States. Morris has everything an ideal president would require. Instantly likeable, intelligent, thoughtful and charismatic, he is by far the best Democrat in the presidential race.

Meyer’s boss, Paul Zara, is a heavily experienced and tactful campaigner. Dripping in ennui, he has seen most things in political life. His jaded appearance betrays a life-time of stress and the strain of constantly paying attention to every word and act that is uttered by those he is representing.

As the outside worlds of the media and the general public start to exert there influence, those involved in Morris’s campaign start to feel the pressure as they battle for votes. This stress is further strengthened as Meyers starts to reveals his weaknesses and simultaneously has an affair with the young intern, Molly.

‘Yet as Meyers discovers unpalatable truths about his favourite candidate a strange transformation occurs before our very eyes.’

The film expertly deals with politics in an interesting and arresting manner. For Meyers this is his first foray into politics with a candidate that he fully stands behind. A character that he believes is whiter than snow or at least this is what he publicly states to anyone that listens. Yet as Meyers discovers unpalatable truths about his favourite candidate a strange transformation occurs before our very eyes. His brightness and friendliness makes way for cold intelligence and a firm addiction to power.

As this metamorphosis occurs you are left wondering are we seeing the stressful environment of politics moulding Meyers or is it just simply his true character, which he has earlier hidden, beginning to show through the mask. Of course we will never know for certain.

‘This is ironic for someone who prides himself on honesty and character.’

Morris, someone already well-versed in how politicking works, is a mysterious, impenetrable entity. Even when something less than desirable comes to light – his inner character remains frustratingly aloof. With his abundant charisma and powerful rhetoric, coupled with his potent insight into human relations, it is easy for the public to fall for his seductive personality without him having to ever reveal himself. This is ironic for someone who prides himself on honesty and character.

Like with all politicians, image and appearance are the two most important things to Morris. Under the eagle eye of modern media scrutiny, one slip of the tongue, the utterance of one ill-chosen word or associating with the wrong person could mean the governor’s fledgling career at the top of the American political food chain is over.

Another aspect of The Ides Of March pays particular attention to is the corruption within American politics. In what is truly a bizarre, head-scratching system, votes are exchanged for prominent positions. ‘You give me this and in return you will get x, y and z.’ Nevertheless, it isn’t the only profession that is tarred. Journalism is also revealed to be self-serving as opposed to principled.

‘But if history has taught us anything it is that these characters are figments of a willing imagination.’

The Ides Of March is a lesson for those not familiar with politics but more importantly it is a lesson in humanity. The idea of people greater than us, those that encapsulate the very best of us without the drawbacks, the negative sides of what makes us human is very appealing to us. Perhaps someone, somewhere, out on the periphery of society is actually a saintly, messiah-like character. But if history has taught us anything it is that these characters are figments of a willing imagination. They simply do not exist and if they do, they are certainly not drawn to politics or the limelight.

However, perhaps the worst indictment of this political system and virtually every other political structure is the fact that integrity and honour have no place. Rarely do highly principled and commendable candidates ever reach the top echelon. Perhaps ultimately this is because like everything, political life is a numbers game and rarely do such people put themselves forward for these types of careers.

Ryan Gosling delivers a fine performance as the bright, upwardly mobile, Stephen Meyers. Placed under tremendous pressure and out-thought by his rival, his transmutation is startling and his presence on-screen magnetic. Exuding a seductive charisma, Meyers exercises absolute control over others and this becomes more and more obvious as the campaign progresses.

‘For creating such a paradoxical and ultimately human figure, Clooney deserves great praise.’

The political foray by his father, Nick, has strongly shaped George Clooney’s desire to make this film. His Mike Morris is all about light and shadows. Morris controls all aspects of his image. He steps into the light when he wishes certain aspects to be seen yet his darker side is blurred, obscured. It resides only in the shadows and his commanding intellect and keen acumen when it comes to reading people means it stays there unrevealing. For creating such a paradoxical and ultimately human figure, Clooney deserves great praise.

Evan Rachel Wood’s Molly Stearns is a vamp-like personality. Keenly smart, strong yet vulnerable, like Morris, she is difficult to read. We are never sure of her motives and she is full of odd behaviour. Wood’s performance is very strong and in a sea of established actors, all the more impressive.

Paul Zara, portrayed by Philip Seymour Hoffman, is a wonderful mix of jaded experience and reassuring calm in a maelstrom of uncertainty. Hoffman’s ability to imbibe his characters with seemingly effortlessness is a joy to watch. Likewise, his canny knack of blending in without ever having to leave subtlety behind plays perfectly on-screen.

Finally, Paul Giamatti’s Tom Duffy is compelling viewing. Full of shrewdness and a determination  to succeed at all costs. His tactical nous and stoical, somewhat philosophical, nature means he is a worthy opponent for the Morris group.

The Ides Of March is an unmissable film. Filled with talented, on-song, actors and a sharp, somewhat unusual script, the film manages to breathe fresh life into the all-too common world of politics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McCt-_yYLpo

The Ides Of March Film Review: A Fresh Take On Politics

Director: Steven Soderbergh
Cast: Matt Damion, Kate Winslet, Marion Cotillard, Jude Law and Laurence Fishburne.

Contagion is set in a world in which a seemingly unstoppable mutated virus with a high mortality rate is sweeping all across the Earth. With deaths accruing everywhere, panic runs amok causing normal everyday society to stop functioning as survival mode kicks in.

Beth Emhoff returns back to the United States from a business trip in Hong Kong. She contracts what appears to be the flu and begins to suffer badly. Her condition worsens and she is taken by ambulance to hospital after she loses consciousness. Despite the best efforts of the medical staff, Beth dies. What’s worse, her son picks up the same symptoms and also tragically succumbs to the disease.

‘quell the fears of a paranoid and unreasonable public who are been rabble-roused by the manipulating efforts of sinister characters. ‘

Beth’s husband, Mitch is left with the difficult task of keeping his remaining daughter safe while coping with stricken grief. All throughout the world similar scenes are taking place with people losing their loved ones to a virus that nobody knows anything about.

Tasked with the unenviable challenge of fighting this deadly killer is a team of medical scientists and virologists. Dr. Ellis Cheever leads all contact with the media and has the extremely onerous responsibility of trying to quell the fears of a paranoid and unreasonable public who are been rabble-roused by the manipulating efforts of sinister characters.

Interfacing between the medical scientists and the public is Dr. Erin Mears. It is up to her to try and isolate the victims away from the general population. However, the scale of the worldwide pandemic soon overwhelms her efforts.

Amongst all this chaos is Alan Krumwiede. A devious, manipulative character with little qualms about exploiting people’s vulnerabilities and fears including promoting a homoeopathic remedy for the virus that clearly doesn’t work. Krumwiede is proof that even in the worst of times unscrupulous people will always try to make profits out of other’s misery.

‘Stories unfold to grasp your interest yet they are never properly investigated. ‘

If the above five paragraphs seems like a lot to take in that is because it is. And this points to the greatest flaw of the film. There are too many characters to the detriment of characterisation. Also the plot is too convoluted. Stories unfold to grasp your interest yet they are never properly investigated. Characters take certain actions and then walk out of the film. This is highly frustrating and one wonders what is going on.

There is an overriding suspicion that the film was originally much longer than the final version and may have been subsequently gutted leaving what is an incoherent mess. However, even if this is true, blame must still reside with Steven Soderbergh. Contagion is simply trying to do too much at once.

‘This removes the human side of the film which is the heart of any movie. ‘

There are far too many characters and too many subplots packed into one film. All of this means that there is no time to have empathy with the characters and the viewer doesn’t really care about the fates of these people. This removes the human side of the film which is the heart of any movie.

Contagion also hints at a new fad in cinema that is the latest tendency to cram films with as many well-known actors as possible. In this film we have Gwyneth Palthrow, Matt Damon, Laurence Fishburne, Kate Winslet and Marion Cotillard which by its self would normally not be a problem if all these parts were well-fleshed out but they are not. Besides there is nearly three times this amount of characters in the film that have significant contributions to the story.

Laurence Fishburne gives a convincing, warm and empathetic performance as Dr. Ellis Cheever. Placed in a highly difficult position, his character demonstrates steadfast resolve and strong morals in a time where many people are resorting to their baser sides.

Kate Winslet’s portrayal of Dr. Erin Mears is far too short to allow her to create any relationship with the audience. Lacking the onscreen time to make her character likeable, Winslet’s Mears is intelligent, efficient but alas forgettable.

Matt Damon is very good in the role of the grieving husband and parent, Mitch Emhoff. Having to be a pillar of strength for his daughter, Damon’s character is a surrogate for the everyman. Like the vast majority of people he is an imperfect, honest, decent human being trying his best.

Of all the characters in the film, Marion Cotillard’s Dr. Leonora Orantes suffers the most from time constraints and a lack of development. We don’t really get any sense of her as a person or an individual. Her last contribution in the film is to make an odd decision that really should have been fleshed out much better than it is.

Jude Law’s Alan Krumwiede turns out to be one of the stars of the film. Instantly dislikeable and borderline sociopathic, if he was in a less cluttered film he would be one of the most memorable villainous characters. His ruthless exploitation of people at their most vulnerable is harrowing and sickening.

Aside from his immoral nature, Krumwiede hints at something that is having a detrimental impact upon society. Mainly the paranoid conspiratorial nature that is gripping large swathes of the population. Contagion does explore this to its credit. People, gripped by a state of paranoid fear, make poor decisions and these decisions can be witnessed in the film where ordinarily decent people attack one another and mass rioting ensues.

‘you cannot get away from the problem that keeps cropping up no matter how it is dressed.’

There are many aspects of Contagion that makes it highly watchable. The possibility of a potent viral pandemic is certainly more than plausible and it seems almost inevitable that something like it will strike at some point in the future. The cast is also very strong and the film is nicely shot.

Nonetheless, you cannot get away from the problem that keeps cropping up no matter how it is dressed. There are simply too many characters and storylines that remain underdeveloped. A bit less and we would have got a whole lot more.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4sYSyuuLk5g

Contagion Film Review: A Few Characters Too Many

Director: Woody Allen
Cast: Owen Wilson, Naomi Watts and Marion Cottillard.

Midnight In Paris is a film that seems to offer a lot but ultimately fails to follow its initial trajectory.

Gil is a highly successful Hollywood script-writer who is in love with Paris, a sentiment not shared by his fiancée, Inez. Gil, who strangely likes walking in the rain, decides to take a midnight stroll through the streets of the French capital with startling results.

Oddly, exactly at midnight a 1920′s chauffeur-driven car pulls up with the occupants, dressed in 20′s garb, beckoning Gil to come with them. The introspective script writer who desperately wants to be a novelist gets to live his fantasy as he is taken via a time-slip back to the 1920′s to the era of Earnest Hemingway, Salvador Dali, Picasso and F. Scott Fitzgerald.

‘Owen Wilson, playing the same character that gets him numerous parts, brings his usual likeability’

Gil soon learns that by going to the same location at midnight every night he can travel back in time with regularity. During one of his sojourns he meets the extremely attractive but naive, Adriana. Things come to a head as Gil is forced into making decisions.

Owen Wilson, playing the same character that gets him numerous parts, brings his usual likeability to the role. Keeping well within his compass, he creates a warm empathy in what is essentially an introverted, self-obsessed fantasist.

Rachel McAdams is excellent as the selfish, bullying wife-to-be. Exuding a tired, fed-up demeanour she subtly undercuts Gil at ever opportunity putting him down while building up her friend Paul.

On the 1920′s side, Marion Cotillard is good as the somewhat empty vessel of Adriana. Like Gil, she believes that a better world existed in the past. There is a underlying naivete and inescapable blankness in her soul that she tries to fill by being the mistress of artists. Unfortunately, like many aspects of Midnight In Paris, the reasons why she is like this are never developed.

‘Sheen is a pleasure to watch and captures the personality of Paul perfectly.’

The character of the film is Michael Sheen’s Paul. A pompous, vain, self-obsessed pedagogue, Paul’s conversations exist solely to appease his all-too-large ego. Sheen is a pleasure to watch and captures the personality of Paul perfectly. The posturing capricious swagger, the confident gait and the strong body language are supremely executed and create a nice contrast with Gil’s diffident personality.

Inez’s parents, Paul and Helen, with their Francophobic mindsets also provide sumptuous tension when interacting with the French-loving Gil. Both actors, Kurt Fuller and Mimi Kennedy, are excellent in their respective roles. The, albeit far too-short, encounters between Paul and Gill are particular noteworthy. As is the scene where Helen, Inez and Gil go antique shopping for an expensive chair.

‘she lacks the necessary impact.’

Nonetheless, these episodes are far too rare and remain underdeveloped. This could have been a mine of comic hilarity if well-executed.

Lea Seydoux playing the part of Gabrielle, an antique seller of knick-knacks, is the only actor that seems lost. She just is inconsequential and you would have to question why she was selected for the part in the first place as she lacks the necessary impact.

Carla Bruni making her film debut plays a museum guide. Bruni is understated and does quite well in the role.

Earnest Hemingway, portrayed by Corey Stoll, is a wonderful character in the film. He remarkably renders completely ridiculous observations believable with his earnest and forthright passion as he powers through any objections that Gil has to his ideas.

Despite the fine performances from the cast they are still secondary to the main character of the film, the city of Paris.The Parisians will be delighted with how stunning their city looks and Midnight In Paris is guaranteed to bring even more tourists to a city already overflowing with visitors.

Gil’s late night meanderings through Paris are enjoyable but from the point where he hops into a car at the behest of a group of party goers and ends up back in the 1920′s the film begins to go awry.

‘These are unsatisfactory meetings and not developed to their full potential.’

Many viewers will find themselves wanting to return to present day Paris, the sumptuous scenery and his bitchy fiancée. Instead the focus of the film is his midnight encounters with famous writers and artists of the past. These are unsatisfactory meetings and not developed to their full potential. Meanwhile Gil’s dialogues and scenes with his fiancée are promisingly fun and edgy.

Midnight in Paris remains a frustrating watch. They are so many good points but the film is under developed. After catching our attention it ultimately lets us down. Pity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atLg2wQQxvU

Midnight In Paris Film Review: A Half-Baked Tourist Guide To Paris

Director: Bruce Robinson.
Cast: Richard E. Grant, Paul McGann and Richard Griffiths.

For a movie to register near the top of many people’s list of favourite films it has to have justifiably received its fair share of plaudits. The 1987 film Withnail and I definitely falls into this category.

The film hinges on the lives of two down-and-out actors struggling to survive on social welfare. With no money, no heating and no food, Withnail and Marwood have become desperate. In a fit of inspiration, they decide that Withnail’s uncle, Monty has what they need. Having obtained the uncle’s permission, the unlikely duo head off to Monty’s cottage in the countryside. Things go awry with comic consequences as they arrive to discover a place that is less than desirable.

‘Narcissistic, manipulative and self-indulgent are just some of his traits but above all he is simply riveting.’

One of the now ubiquitous stables defined as tragicomedy, Withnail and I is that mix of poignant sadness and joy so tightly interwoven it is at times very difficult to discern either.

The film centres on the extraordinary creation that is Withnail. Narcissistic, manipulative and self-indulgent are just some of his traits but above all he is simply riveting. Over two decades have passed since Withnail’s initial foray into Cinema and still Richard E. Grant is haunted by his part-creation.

Withnail possesses charm in abundance and has an almost supernatural ability to view himself as a victim despite his wrongdoing.

Marwood is the viewer’s surrogate. He is the one half-sane man in the exotically weird land that Withnail inhabits. Marwood allows the madness of Withnail to be balanced with a semblance of perspective.

‘Every act, every comment is regarded with deep meaningful seriousness’

The golden comic moments of the film centre on small, short vignettes peppered with sumptuous language and masterful performances by the actors involved. The rich, textured warmth of the poetry of the characters is espoused with frequent interjections.

The result of this magnificent marriage is a script that brings the viewers on an engrossing journey into the minds of the solipsistically afflicted with hilarious consequences.

Every act, every comment is regarded with deep meaningful seriousness the type of which can only result from the possession of an enormous ego and a drug-addled brain. Fortunately, for the viewer both Withnail and, to a somewhat lesser extent, Marwood have this egomaniacal trait in abundance.

Richard E. Grant gives the performance of his career as the despotic but likeable, Withnail. Grant’s character displays the appearance of the entire gamut of human emotions. From fear to mock concern and manic happiness, Withnail’s mood changes faster than the English summer weather.

‘In essence Withnail is a vampire.’

The real measure of Grant’s performance though comes from his ability to simultaneously show Withnail’s insincerity and duplicitous nature while hiding his real intentions and beliefs through a believable veneer. In essence Withnail is a vampire. He sucks the life out of Marwood, selfishly and almost imperceptibly using him at every opportunity.

Paul McGann plays a very convincing foil to Withnail. Second to the larger-than-life ego of his friend, Marwood’s lack of inner belief and willingness to go along with the follies of Withnail underscores the weakness in his character. These weakness make Marwood very easily to relate and empathise with.

McGann, it must be noted, has a difficult role to perform. It would be very easy for his character to be completely overshadowed by the performing Withnail. Instead the actor manages to draw some of the viewer’s attention on what is really occurring.

Marwood is someone who is not living up to his potential and is allowing his friend to limit him. Symbolically he stands for our unrealised potential. He let’s his friend hog the limelight and make the decisions when it is clear he should be the one to take responsibility.

‘his clumsy attempts at understanding Marwood are both mesmerising and truly laugh-in-the-stomach funny.’

Richard Griffiths puts in a stellar performance as Uncle Monty. His pursuance of Marwood contributes to some of the funniest scenes in the film. Griffiths’ Monty has great difficulty with reading people and his clumsy attempts at understanding Marwood are both mesmerising and truly laugh-in-the-stomach funny.

Special praise must go Bruce Robinson whose writing and direction are equally sharp. His characters and poetic language have combined for one of cinema’s great efforts. Withnail and I will live long into the memory. A masterpiece of film.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xT5qhPoRS9g

Highly Recommended

You can obtain Withnail and I here from Amazon.

Amazon.co.uk
For people living in Ireland or the United Kingdom, you can access: Withnail And I from here.

Amazon.ca
For Canada: Withnail & I.

Amazon.de
For Germany: Withnail & I.

Amazon.fr
For France: Withnail & I .

Withnail And I Film Review: The Tragicomic Masterpiece

Director: Chris Atkins.
Cast: Max Clifford and Richard Curtis.

Starsuckers provides an insight into the highly complicated, converging world of media and public relations. The documentary shows us the murky side of journalism and how the truth is often very far removed from what makes it into print.

The biggest success of Starsuckers is its investigation into the Red Tops, the sleazy miasma of tabloid media. The documentary shows just how easy it is to make up stories and have them published. It also reveals the toothless nature of the authorities regulating the industry.

‘A more astute documentary would not have gone for the tabloids and Yellow journalism but rather the mainstream press.’

None of this is shocking to anyone who has even a modicum of understanding of how the media operates. A more astute documentary would not have gone for the tabloids and Yellow journalism but rather the mainstream press. The inquiry into the phone hacking scandal in the United Kingdom has just begun. When it is over many newspapers, both tabloid and broadsheet, will emerge with smeared reputations.

Ryan is a sole product of the new celebrity landscape of the 21^st century. Without any discernible talent, this six-year-old child is famous because of his parents’ efforts and the PR spin of his agent. It is fascinating to watch just how easily it is to mould people, to convince them that certain individuals possess value. It is even more fascinating to watch this somewhat arrogant and obnoxious child command the attention of people who really should know better.

‘It is okay for his unnamed actor client to engage in sexual activities with 17-year-old girls while watching films because…’

One of the most interesting interviews occurs with Max Clifford, the King of Spin. A highly slippery customer, Clifford tries to justify the-less-than-clean behaviours of his clients. It is okay for his unnamed actor client to engage in sexual activities with 17-year-old girls while watching films because Clifford claims the man contributes to charities.

Despite whether this is true or not, Clifford represents the worst aspects of media and there can be little doubt that characters like him wield considerable power.

This fact is crystallised right before our eyes by a public relations agent who wishes to expose the winner of the Miss UK to publicity. He does this by hiring the services of fake protesters. The net effect of his rather crude attempts is quite comical. Instead of appearing the part, these ‘ protesters’ look exactly like they are play-acting.

Starsuckers also sheds light on the lack of regulation in the media industry, a reality which allows newspapers to print what they like without impunity. The fact that so many journalists (albeit without the knowledge that they were being filmed) were willing to dismiss the powers of the United Kingdom’s Press Complaints Committee is an indication that the whole system is rotten.

‘The truth is very different. There is no group. There is no ‘them’.’

One blow to Starsucker’s credibility is the false narrative it imposes. The documentary portrays the media as being fashioned by architects. Puppet masters who govern like some calculating and controlling entity, a coherent body that is in charge of much of the world. The truth is very different. There is no group. There is no ‘them’. Instead there are self-serving individuals who profit from weaknesses in the media system.

The biggest mistake of the documentary is undoubtedly to cast key Live8 players, such as Bob Geldof and Richard Curtis, as simpletons who had no idea what they were doing. Geldof is a shrewd operator with vast experience in the publishing industry, humanitarian sector and with negotiations. He has a better grasp of how the media works than most politicians and their advisers so to cast him as some naive fool doing more harm than good does the film’s credibility no favours.

This entire section of the documentary does not ring true and neither does championing the cause of the obscure organisation, Make Poverty History, as most people have never heard of them.

Currently, members of the public are susceptible to populism and celebrity endorsement. Nonetheless, things never remain the same and it is inevitable that the public appetite for all things famous will start to wane. What will takes its place will make a great documentary.

With all its blemishes removed, Starsuckers would be an outstanding documentary but as it is it must be considered with a big pinch of salt. What is true though is that it makes arresting viewing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BW0WJ_xULXU

Recommended Viewing

You can obtain Starsuckers here from Amazon.

Amazon.co.uk
For people living in Ireland or the United Kingdom, you can access: Starsuckers from here.

Amazon.de
For Germany: Starsuckers.

Amazon.fr
For France: Starsuckers .

Starsuckers Review: Plenty Of Bluster But No Substance

Babes In Hollywood is one of the strangest television experiences you are likely to encounter. To say that the Hollywood child ‘star’ industry is odd is a serious understatement. This documentary shows an industry that is almost exclusively based on deception and false promises.

The Channel Four documentary follows several children and their parents who have pretensions about making it big in Hollywood. This is a world in which nothing is as it appears and everyone has agendas. Pushy parents leave husbands, wives and children behind in search of the dream of their son or daughter becoming a famous actor.

‘The viewer is treated to mild amusement by the scope of the self-deception of the majority of the ‘talent’ and those surrounding them.’

Bordering on child abuse, these children spend most of their time away from their friends and family cooked up inside going to audition after audition. Their only respite seems to be attending quacks that promise the Moon and the stars but ultimately deliver little.

One of the most revealing things about the documentary is just how much industry is dependent upon the self-perpetuating endless conveyor belt of children and parents who believe that they will become the next Leonardo DiCaprio or Kate Winslet. The viewer is treated to mild amusement by the scope of the self-deception of the majority of the ‘talent’ and those surrounding them.

‘No one gives honest feedback because if they did there would be serious threat that the industry would fall apart overnight.’

It is quite clear that no one has ever sat either the parents or the kids themselves down and explained to them that their talents lie elsewhere. It quickly becomes apparent why there is such a lack of honesty in this profession. No one gives honest feedback because if they did there would be serious threat that the industry would fall apart overnight.

From the actor’s agents themselves to the so-called performance coaches, the casting agents, the photographers and the booking agents, every one of these professions has a lot to lose if they were forthright with those they are supposed to be representing. One casting agent even states on camera that they never tell those that auditioned the truth about their performance.

The fact of the matter is that out of the hundreds of thousands of people who audition only a tiny fraction are suitable for certain roles while only a few handful are talented.

‘The sad reality is that the vast majority of famous actors are disposable.’

Even most of those who hit the big time while they are young are likely to disappear just as quickly. The difference between a child and adult actor is the same as night and day. In such a cut-throat industry only the truly unique and talented survive. The sad reality is that the vast majority of famous actors are disposable. Worldwide, only a handful of people have a strong enough presence to become respected icons.

The parents in Babes In Hollywood are a curious mix. Clearly many are trying to live vicariously through their children. Others have obvious psychological issues. All of this begs the question how many parents would be willing to sacrifice the childhood of their children in the vain quest for fame and immortality? The answer is probably not too many.

One of the most poignant aspects of the film is the self-delusion of the nearly-beens. These are people who briefly achieved mild fame by being in low-profile films that no one has heard of. One particular unknown actress gushed about what it was like to be famous. The delusion was palpable as she babbled on about the marvels of being in a film that probably only those that were in it are aware of.

‘No amount of lessons and techniques will transform a bad actor into a good actor.’

Babes In Hollywood is a lesson in how not to raise your children. The fact that human beings are so impressionable means that you would fear for the future of these children and how they will raise the next generation. We wonder if we will find the adult versions of these children carrying out the exact patterns as their parents before them did. Will they have their children attending acting classes and pursuing their failed dreams?

Acting is a profession that requires genuine talent. No amount of lessons and techniques will transform a bad actor into a good actor. You either have the raw talent or you don’t. Perhaps all of this could be avoided if they were told this from the start.

The apathy of this industry reached its nadir when the viewers were shown what casting agents really thought of children. The sight of an agent laughing about the ‘no titties rule’ while looking through the reels of young girls was nauseating. The ultimate achievement of Babes in Hollywood is that it completely lays bare Hollywood’s true nature when it comes to the exploitation of children.

Babes In Hollywood TV Review: The Exploitation Of Children’s Dreams

Director: Jim Loach.
Cast: Emily Watson, David Wenham and Hugo Weaving.

Oranges and Sunshine deals with a horrific theme the deportation of British children from the care of the state to Australia. This is a difficult subject matter to watch and even more difficult to portray on screen. The great danger with such issues is the temptation to resort  to mawkish sentimentality. Thankfully, Oranges And Sunshine commits no such errors of judgement.

Between 1947 and 1967 roughly ten thousand British children were exported to Australia at the behest of the UK government, various charities and religious institutions. Many of these children were separated from their siblings, some were abused by religious orders such as the Christian Brothers and forced to pay for their upkeep while they worked as little more than child slaves. Oranges And Sunshine is the true story of one woman’s quest to help these victims of awful abuse tell their story.

The script is well-written, the storyline compelling and the acting solid. Oranges And Sunshine sucks the viewer into its world and brings us on a journey more bizarre and disturbing than any piece of fiction.

Emily Watson is superb is as Margaret Humphreys. She exudes a quiet magnetism that attracts the viewer. Taciturn, perhaps emotionally arrested, Margaret is enigmatic throughout the film. We never know why she is  so deeply motivated to help people she barely knows. It is this sense of mystery that adds to the character but frustrates the viewer.

David Wenham delivers a sterling performance as Len, the at times contrary and arrogant business man.  Wenham excels at managing to simultaneously show both the superficial mask of confidence his character uses to protect himself and the vulnerable hurt child underneath.

‘Merv’s character remains underdeveloped’

Richard Dillane, who plays Merv, the husband of Margaret Humphreys, does as best he can with the role. Merv’s character remains underdeveloped and the viewer could have benefited more with his character providing better insight into his wife Margaret who remains elusively unknown.

Hugo Weaving rounds off an excellent cast as the somewhat broken, Jack. A tortured and tormented soul, Jack is in constant turmoil trying to deal with the cavernous hole of missing parents and in particular a mother whom he was wrongly led to believe was dead. Deprived of a loving parent and the truth about his family, this man lives his life in purgatory.

‘it is worth bearing in mind that in many western countries religious orders and religious institutions were very powerful.’

The bravery of those involved in bringing to light these horrific events must be lauded and it is worth bearing in mind that in many western countries religious orders and religious institutions were very powerful. Untold physical and psychological damage was inflicted on tens of thousands of innocent children. All of whom had no say in the fate that befell them.

The power of religious groups in the 1980’s is not something to be underestimated. In countries such as Ireland, the Catholic Church and its orders ruled with an iron fist. It is only in recent years that people have begun to question a culture which permits such serious abuse.

‘Sadly this story is still repeating itself in the developing world’

Oranges and Sunshine is a lesson in what happens when you outsource morality to other, unchecked, parties. Sadly this story is still repeating itself in the developing world with some religious institutions abusing children in places such as Africa. It seems that some lessons are harder to learn than others.

No reason is given in the film as to what sort of thought processes were occurring in the minds of those in charge of the deportations. Undoubtedly, no rationale could ever justify such actions.

Ken Loach’s movie is a fitting tribute to the people that were affected. It gives a lasting voice to a people that were once voiceless.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zA0LrxAtLeo

Oranges And Sunshine Film Review: A Troubled Truth Comes To Light