Blazin’ Review: The Princess and the Frog

Starring(the voices of): Anika Noni Rose, Bruno Campos, Keith David, Terence Howard, John Goodman, Oprah Winfrey

Director(s): Ron Clements, John Musker

Writer(s): Ron Clements, John Musker

Cinemtography: Ian Gooding

Original Music: Randy Newman

Running Time: 97 Mins.

To be mentioned in the same breath as The Little Mermaid, Aladdin and Beauty and the Beast, this is an accolade any director of an animated feature would be proud of, that Ron Clements and John Musker are the men behind two of these three films from Disney’s heyday is quite something, the word animated masterpiece doesn’t really begin to cover how good Disney were, when at the top of their game at producing hand drawn animated films. Since the early 90’s when Toy Story ushered in two new major developments in animated features for better or for worse. CGI and the staple “buddy picture” story that has now, for whatever reason, taken precedence of the fairytale’s of old.

There is no denying that in Pixar animation found a new life amidst the doldrums of weaker Disney animations, Pocahontas, Treasure Planet, Home on the Range, to name but a few were lacking in classic Disney quality, and has now become the byword on quality animated films, and with producing films with the consistant quality as they are doing we can’t really complain. But alas it is a sad fact that no matter how good Toy Story, Up or Wall-E are, they lack that…if nothing else (to use a cheesy phrase) magic that Disney and it’s hand drawn features could at their very best.

Something which it would seem that head of Pixar recognised upon taking over as head of Disney, promptly rebooting the production of the long dead hand-drawn Walt Disney Classics, Lasseter’s intention is clear, there is a place for fairytales as much as there is for CGI  buddy pics, and it would be a great shame to see generations grow up without their own era of genre defining fairytales. Which is where Clement’s and Musker come in, rebooting and adapting classic fairytale The Frog Prince, repleat with everything that made Aladdin, The Little Mermaid et al as good as they were.

As with any film in any genre you could go through with a checklist, though this is not a bad thing if the elements work so well, why change a brilliant and successful formula, which means that we have a princess, a villain, a dashing prince and those uniquely Disney-fic elements, the songs, the comedy animal sidekicks and a happily ever after. Each of these elements are present and correct but the script is peppered with more than enough to give The Princess and the Frog the up-to-date twist’s needed to engage even the most rest-less child (or inner child!).

There is, quite simply put, no fault to be found and watching the film and I found myself transported to a place that I had not been since seeing The Lion King at the cinema many years ago, it is to the credit of all that The Princess and the Frog is such a success, the direction acts as h’omage at times yet also acts as its own entity, fresh and new yet harking back to the masterpiece’s of old. In terms of updating things there is a setting, New Orleans, that lends the film a bright and almost modern look while retaining its tradition and this fit means the music follows suit as all the numbers are Jazz inspired, and I can safely say some of the tunes will go down as classics, or certainly should.

What stood out for me the most was the use of villain Dr. Facilier, the Shadowman, maybe a little scary for the very young he struck a note of real menace, brilliant enough to rank alongside Malificent, Shere Khan and Ursula as a memorable brilliant Disney villain, truly creepy yet original, it is in the animation of Facilier, and everybody else, that the film is won, as Facilier’s shadow acts as a separate entity it displays the ingenious quality that imbues the whole film.

Much has been made of Tiana (our “princess”) being the first black Disney princess, it is a shame as you would have thought we have moved beyond these kind of distinctions but regardless of colour, Tiana is thoroughly convincing and a strong female lead avoiding the pitfalls of cliché while still becoming the Disney princess that you would quite rightly expect come the film’s final act. But if this sounds predictable enough, the journey there isn’t, taking in many great characters who all get their time to shine, and as with the rest of the production, subverting expectation enough to make The Princess and the Frog both classic in its storytelling and ingredients, but fresh and, dare is say, modern in its execution, a modern classic then as it were!

VERDICT

Walt Disney Classic The Princess and the Frog, the moniker says it all, Walt Disney animation studios are back with a bang.

 

Blazin’ Review: Invictus

Starring: Morgan Freeman, Matt Damon, Tony Kgoroge, Julian Lewis Jones, Marguerite Wheatley

Director: Clint Eastwood

Writer: Anthony Peckham, John Carlin (novel)

Cinematography: Tom Stern 

Original Score: Kyle Eastwood, Michael Stevens

Running Time: 133 Mins.

There are very few directors working today that can tackle any subject, and have unrivalled success, both critically and financially,  within any genre as Clint Eastwood. In the last 5 years alone, with In Flags of Our Fathers, Letters From Iwo Jima, Changeling, Gran Torino, Million Dollar Baby and now Invictus, to his name Eastwood has built himself up as one of the key auteur’s of our time, imprinting each film with his mark of quality and master senses of story-telling, and at the age of 80 shows no sign of slowing down, with his next feature set to be the supernatural thriller Hereafter, now thats what I call diversity.

Even when working with a narrative that seems relatively straightforward, here is a director who can turn a story on its head taking something that starts out as a drama piece, Changeling, turning it into a dark and disturbing murder thriller, or starting out with an inspirational sports tale and turning it into a heart wrenching film about euthanasia, so with this in mind upon hearing that Eastwood was to tackle the story of Nelson Mandela it would be prudent to expect something a little more than your average, run-of-the-mill, biopic.

Starting with Mandela’s release from his 27 year prison stretch, we are thrust headfirst into his campaign to end apartheid and unite the countries black and white races, evidently not an easy task, what Mandela sought to do was unite his people through that most inspirational of past-times, sport. With the help of their captain, Francois Pienaar, Mandela pushes the countries (at the time) failing Rugby team towards World Cup victory in the hope that the sport that was viewed as largely a white man’s game and turn inspiration from it into something more multicultural.

Other than the talent behind the camera, the coup of Invictus is in its casting, Morgan Freeman can play character’s of the kind of quiet dignity that Mandela is a mark of, in his sleep, having taken the part of God twice (in comedies no less!), only a fool would doubt his ability to convey anything less than a similarity to Mandela himself in capturing the man’s likeness and mannerisms. But, as with all great biopic’s, it is in more than mere imitation that the character is won, having yearned to play Mandela for many years and failing to get a full-blown biopic in front of the camera, Freeman approached Eastwood to direct Invictus, it was a wise move, and in focusing on one chapter in Mandela’s life we get a more intimate picture of the man, sharing in his quiet moments and relationship with a select few in his life.

Some may see this as problematic, there is little mention of his wife and we see only the briefest snippets of his family life, with the man himself painted largely as a saint, neglecting to mention why he was imprisoned in the first place, though these can be viewed as both help and hindrance, with the feeling that tackling the man in a much broader a  to b way would have robbed the character of much of his heart, and therein Freeman would have simply ended up a mere imitation.

Much like Million Dollar Baby and Changeling’s about-turns in narrative at the midpoint so to does Invictus, and while the earlier scenes in the film give us a feel for what it was Mandela aimed to do and how the latter half of the film turns its focus to the rugby itself, and it is here the Matt Damon very nearly steals the film from Freeman. There is a reason both men have been oscar nominated and Damon, as Pienaar, exudes both the physicality to make you believe in him as a Rugby player but more importantly underplays Pienaar to perfection, there is a dignity in Damon’s role that shadows Freeman, both actors complimenting each other perfectly.

There are faults to be found though and much like he did in Gran Torino Eastwood has surrounded his stars with a cast of largely unknowns, something which, at times, draws attention to the fact we are watching Damon and Freeman acting rather than two characters, something which is hard to avoid at the best of times when up against actors this capable. It also means that the acting when Freeman and Damon are not onscreen feels somewhat amateur, especially in the parallel sub-plot whereby Mandela attempts to integrate both blacks and white into his security detail.

However the films sporting final blow comes in with the depiction of the rugby itself, as assured as ever with the camera Eastwood glides effortlessly in and out of the rucks, taking us where we would never see in a game usually, something which adds a great air of authenticity, and as the players thunder down the pitch we follow gliding along giving a game that is often seen as nothing more than brute force and lacking in subtleties an elegant and worthy viewpoint, much like the film itself, finding its heart in some key moments.

VERDICT

Invictus is not perfect, but you would be hard pushed to find a more focused and convincing bio-pic/sports film, as ever Clint Eastwood, the director, succeeds at being the master story-teller he is…with more than a little help from Damon and Freeman’s queitly convincing turns.

 

Blazin’ Review: Youth in Revolt

Starring: Michael Cera. Portia Doubleday, Zach Galifianakis, Steve Buscemi, Ray Liotta, Fred Willard, Justin Long, Rooney Mara

Director: Miguel Arteta

Writer(s): Gustin Nash, C. D. Payne (novel)

Cinematography: Chuy Chavez

Original Score: John Swihart

Running Time: 90 Mins.

I have decided to create a supplementary persona named Francois Dillinger…so says Michael Cera’s Nick Twisp about a third of the way into Youth in Revolt, and the reason for this, to win back and keep the girl of his dreams. Sadly as fantastic as the idea of a teen comedy version of Fight Club sounds it doesn’t quite have the conviction to follow it through totally, and as such loses itself a place in the pantheon of classic comedies, thats said it is still extremely funny and avoids the pitfall of being branded just another teen comedy starring Michael Cera.

Cera is an actor who has, since Arrested Development on TV and Superbad on film, made a name for himself playing effectively the same affable loser with quirks in a number of different scenarios, all of which have involved “getting the girl” and while Youth in Revolt doesn’t stray too far from this somewhat repetitive setup, it subverts it and injects it with enough originality and flair to stand out from the crowd, and as such deserves some recognition for being more than its poster would suggest.

Most of the laughs are wrought from Cera’s innocence clashing with the rebellious nature of his created alter ego, the Tyler Durden of Youth in Revolt, and Cera as Dillinger is a hoot and I only wish he were used more and not dropped in an instant only to reappear again 5 or 10 minutes later in a different scene rather than as a constant conflicting presence. It is in doing this that the idea of the alter ego is slightly lost but more criminally wasted in it’s comic effect, there were many times that Nick was onscreen and I expected Francois to appear next to or behind him to egg him on or offer subtle looks of disbelief, but alas they did not come, and it is in this oversight that much of the potential comedy is sadly lost.

However when Youth in Revolt brings the laughs there are some down-right hilarious moments and scenario’s, most involving Francois but many owing purely to Cera’s cracking comedy timing as both sides of the character. Aided in the film by a long list of very funny support characters there are appearances by Steve Buscemi, Zack Galifianakis, Fred Ward, Justin long and Ray Liotta all largely downplaying their roles ensuring it doesn’t just become a whos who of comedy cameos, though a stronger female lead would have helped as Portia Doubleday fails to make any impact beyond the end credits.

Allowing the film to escape its teen movie trappings is the experimental hand of Migueal Arteta,  best known for his work on TV series Six Feet Under, who brings the tinges of darkness seen in that TV series to the big screen, witness Francois rebellious acts and the flippant, but very funny, remarks about death peppered throughout, some of the flashier attempts at originality feel like just that, flashy, and serve no purpose, two animated scenes being the case in point yet in one magic mushroom tripping scene the animation IS used to fantastic effect and hint at the talent’s that Arteta has and his ability to create something truly special were the editor excising a much stricter cut.

That said the finale is refreshingly subversive and offers a more bitter-sweet dénouement than you would quite rightly expect, so all in all maybe Francois Dillinger does win out over Nick Twisp after all, especially as the closing animated section is the one that works the best!

VERDICT

Youth in Revolt is to be commended for a career best performance from Cera and an a successful attempt to breakaway from his stereotypical character along with the, not always successful, attempts at making something that is at once hugely funny and different enough to stand out from an all too crowded and by the numbers genre.

 

Blazin’ Review: Edge of Darkness

Starring: Mel Gibson, Ray Winstone, Danny Huston, Shawn Roberts, Denis O’Hare

Director: Martin Campbell

Writer(s): William Monahan, Andrew Bovell

Cinematography: Phil Meheux

Original Score: Howard Shore

Rnning Time: 117 Mins.

Much has been made of Edge of Darkness being the return of the original 80’s badass, a man who has not appeared in front of the camera (other than in his scandalous endeavours) for 8 years, in which time he has seen many high’s (in his directorial skills) to match the public lows. But I am not here to judge an actor for his personal life, or misgivings, no this is about the powerhouse actor Mel Gibson, he who was one of the last true bona-fide Movie Stars,  like Cruise, Schwarzeneger and Willis, who seemed to die in the noughties and have their thunder stolen by method actors and/or comedy superstar ensembles. All of which raises the question, is Gibson back on top, can he carry a film and is he still a real badass of acting, and action…yes, there is a hell of a lot riding on Edge of Darkness.

Directed by Martin Campbell, from his own BBC miniseries, also called Edge of Darkness and starring the late Bob Peck in the Gibson role, like State of Play before it, take the series key elements and overall plot and condenses them into a satisfying feature-length plot, which while far from original is gripping and engaging throughout, throwing just enough curveballs into the mix to stop it feeling pedestrian and stale. Though, rather inevitably, it is Gibson who is the star proving that even after such a long absence his acting chops are as good as they have ever been.

That said, it is fair to say that the character of Tom Craven is hardly a stretch for the iconic actor, revisiting the  revenge motif seen in both Ransom and Payback, but there is an inevitable show of the actors age shining through now and Gibson looks determined and dogged in his pursuit of the corporation and goons that killed his beloved daughter. However etched into the lines that are now present in his face is the telling sign of a man on the edge and one of will stop at nothing to get the truth he seeks in vengeance while suffering silently in his grief in the only way he knows how, so while he won’t be troubling awards voters it is great to see him back doing what he does best.

There has been something of a suggestion, through trailers and marketing, that Edge of Darkness is a film akin to last years (literally) kick-ass action fest Taken which starred Liam Neeson, it is not and while a fair bit of pain it met out to those deserving of it Edge of Darkness treads a much more solemn line helped by the thoroughly ”dirty” setting of Boston.

This is a city that has seen many of the latest and greatest thrillers emerge in recent years, The Departed and Gone Baby Gone being the stand-outs, lacking the gloss of LA and the more filmic locations of New York or San Francisco, Boston seems to give a gritty and real sense of murk without transgressing to specific suburban ares, à la New York’s rich/poor divide. Obviously without the steady and assured direction of Campbell the setting would matter little, but he is a director who can shoot a glossy big-budget film and give it some real grit and personality, one need only know he is the man to reboot bond not once but twice (Goldeneye and Casino Royale) for further evidence of this.

As the story follows Craven’s efforts of detection away from the beaten path the usual suspects of corrupt politicians, corporate skullduggery and more are unearthed leading us towards the final reveal, which while not quite a twist is satisfying and resists having an all action shootout in favour of more personal character based scenes. This isn’t to say there aren’t flurries of action, and when they come they are short and blunt with one scene providing what will likely be this years most “jump out of your seat moment”. 

If you were to scrutinise and draw a microscope over Edge of Darkness, which seems cruel as it achieves all it really set out too, it would be in the rather cloying way Craven looks back and hears his daughter, soem would argue this neccessary and in a fashion it may well have worked but it seems a little too forced to fully convince as a story-telling device, and while those surrounding Gibson are uniformly good, particular mention to Ray Winstone as a shadowy clean-up man, they often feel somewhat redundant as good as they are, that sai these eally are things you will likely fail to notice in the course of what is a very solid, if hardly groundbreaking, thriller and return to the fray for its star.

VERDICT

Edge of Darkness see’s the return of the original 80’s badass, Gibson is well and truly back with a solid and gripping revenge thriller that side-steps convention and delivers a something as satisfying as you could have asked for and one which enables you to forget that really this is just another man-out-for- revenge film.

 

Blazin’ Review: Ninja Assassin

Starring: Rain, Sung Kang, Randall Duk kim, Naomie Harris

Director: James McTeigue

Writer(s): Matthew Sand, J. Michael Straczynski

Cinematography: Karl Walter Lindenlaub

Original Score: Llan Eshkeri

Running Time: 99 Mins.

Think of Ninja Assassin as the ninja equivalent of 300, chock full of comic book stylised action with geysers of CGI blood flowing freely left, right and centre, a plot that flashes back to training warriors from a young age in the most brutal way possible, with plot, characterisation and emotional heft no deeper than a puddle, like the sound of that, in that case Ninja Assassin might just hold enough to keep you interested. The problem is it is hard to tell if this was the intention of the film-makers, were they going for the computer game/comic book look they have pretty much hit the jack-pot , however on any other level mark Ninja Assassin down as a big fat F.

Plot is of little consequence here, revenge is the order of the day (surprise, surprise) and our titular ninja is the one meeting it out to all the other faceless ninja’s he can, with the ultimate goal of killing his “father/mentor”, and all round badass. in the name of long-lost love. clichéd much, hell yeah! But Ninja Assassin surely is not about the plot, fight scenes interspersed with some of the worst detective work seen this side of Inspector Clouseau make that abundantly clear, with Naomie Harris and partner as possibly the worst and most inept pair of Agent’s ever seen.

The fight scenes are what Ninja Assassin is all about and boy are they bloody, in a totally unrealistic and CGI smattering way, when I tell you that the key weapons include throwing stars, samurai swords and, most OTT of all, a throwing knife attached to a rather long chain you will get some idea of where this over choreographed mess is placing itself in the roster of ninja films. In fact come to think of it, based on the evidence of this, it is little wonder there aren’t more seeing as the plot needs to be that of the annoyingly hackneyed “revenge on your evil mentor against all odds” one!

The biggest, and let’s be honest the only, surprise Ninja Assassin holds is that it is directed by James McTeigue who guided V for Vendetta to such a wonderful adaptation, itself taken from a graphic novel and followed a similar revenge tale interspersed with a police investigation, but made that seem original and most of all solidly made, cast exceptionally well and featuring some truly memorable images. Sadly they are all elements missing here.on the plus side star Rain does have a noble presence, but with nothing of substance to work with he fails to stand out other than in the overly dark action sequences. It is only in the last fight a little originality shines through and by then it is just too late.

VERDICT

It Ninja Assassin was aiming for the comic book/computer game look it succeeds, simply put it is an awful film papered over with a ridiculous budget, sadly it is true what they say, you can’t polish a turd. Then again if if CGI gore is your thing…

 

Blazin’ Review: Armored

Starring: Matt Dillon, Laurence Fishburne, Jean Reno, Milo Ventimiglia, Fred Ward, Columbus Short, Skeet Ulrich

Director: Nimrod Antal

Writer: James V. Simpson

Cinematography: Andrzej Sekula

Original Score: John Murphy

Running Time: 88 Mins.

Ok, so, take every stock action character you can think of and a premise that would usually be found littering the bottom shelf at your nearest DVD rental shop and what do you get? Armored, thats what! Quite how this ever slipped through the net marked straight-to-DVD is anybody’s guess, especially given the so-called “stars” of this by-the-numbers action/thriller are all facing a lack of anything remotely approaching a hit, be it critical or commercial, in years, I mean Skeet Ulrich is even in it!

Though something is stopping me short of tearing into Armored in the way that this kind of antiquated B-movie really does deserve, and that is the anomaly known as the guilty pleasure. Starting off rather slowly and failing to engage we are introduced to each character in turn, the rookie, the wildcard, the safe one, the wary one so on and so forth, these cardboard cut-out’s all work for an armored vehicle company transporting cash (Armored, get it!) from bank to bank, hatching on a plan to rob the vans and play it out like a hijack ends up going, predictably/naturally, wrong.

 Trapped in the van is the rookie (Short), and outside are the “bad” guys (led by Dillon) trying to break in, and all around them everything that can go wrong and make this far from straightforward, does go wrong. Uninteresting and boring while making the routine introduction and setting up the premise, thankfully it steps up a gear upon its disused factory bound setting, going all Reservoir Dogs on us and having the fragile relationships between the crew slowly disintegrate to a point where the two-dimensional characterisation becomes a minor distraction and the heated dialogue keeps you hooked.

So while it is far from nothing new it is zippy enough to pass the time, and of the cast filled predominantly with people once touted as A-List, and now working either under the radar in indie productions (Dillon), appearing on TV (Fishburne) or terrible comedy remakes (Reno) none stand out and surprisingly, on the whole, they resist hamming it up, bar Fishburne who is saddled with the “wildcard” tag and a terrible accent to boot, while Dillon tries to go all Denzel in Training Day on us but plays in far too weakly to make any impact.

The improbably named director Nimrod Antal is currently lensing Predators and on the evidence of this we shouldnt get our hopes TOO high, though the pacing ramps up somewhat towards the end as the camera is let free and loose to display a little character and energy, resisting to cut too close, a la Michael Bay, and avoiding the use of shaky cam, this is old-school action in every sense of the word, for better or worse.

VERDICT

A by the numbers B-movie action/thriller becomes watchable and engaging, just about, and should you let yourself overlook the ”once were A-List” cast and lack of originality you might just enjoy Armored in a guilty, should know better kind of way.

 

Blazin’ Review: The Boys Are Back

  

Starring: Clive Owen, Laura Fraser, Emma Booth, George MacKay  

Director: Scott Hicks  

Writer(s): Simon Carr, Allan Cubitt  

Cinematography: Greig Fraser  

Original Score: Hal Lindes  

Running Time: 104 Mins.  

The Boys Are Back skirts dangerously close to cheesy  TV movie of the week territory, take the plot, single Dad tries to deal with the death of his wife whilst also trying to raise his young son much to the disproval of his mother-in-law. When, just to make things even more emotionally heavy, the estranged older son returns to live with his father, sounds like something rife for  the kind of melodramatic, over-acting seen at its worst by those who partake in the joys of the Hallmark channel. I mean just take a look at that poster (above), a poster that pretty much suggests we are in for a truly cringe-worthy, feel-good, weepie preceded by those dreaded words inspired by a true story. Alas, thanks to some sterling work by director Scott Hicks (Shine) and a solid, but warm, turn by Clive Owen it manages to largely transcend what I feared…  

Opening with an anecdotal and rather cloying voiceover admittedly doesn’t get us off to a good start, especially given Clive Owen is not a man known for his, shall we say, kindly and emotional roles (Closer aside), however it is in his turn that you can’t help but succumb to  heart-wrenching first 20 minutes. It’s no spoiler to reveal that in this time we see briefly how Joe Warr (Owen) is recklessly (in some people’s eyes) coping with his young son and the “burden” of single parent-hood and most saddening of all we witness the brief scenes of happiness before the death of Joe’s wife to a very severe case of cancer.  

These are the setup scenes and the film does not linger on death and the more depressing attributes of this in a downbeat way, throughout the way Joe’s youngest son, Artie, deals with his mother’s death is poignant and more importantly realistic, helped no end by a very good performance by Nicholas McAnulty. The scenes between father and son are at once believable and veer between humourous, the washing clothes system, and very sad in a subtle and not at all ham-fisted way.  It is true to say that not alot happens but this is the joy of the film, taking its time to set up father and son and seeing Owen convey a “real” person with warmth is something of a treat, both artistically and emotionally, were we living in an ideal world he would garner awards buzz but as it is he resists playing Joe for heightened drama and rather emotional and most importantly that realistic edge which really hooks you.  

The latter half of the film changes gear slightly and the introduction of joe’s eldest son seems more a plot device to service the film pacing and story, rather than give the story any more depth. But as George Mackay’s Harry begins as a rather sulky teenager he later opens up and the finale is played out well, despite still feeling a little too much of a stretch for something which started out rather low-key and strives for cheap shots at drama later on, this though can be overlooked in favour of the strong performances all round and the conviction with which the central trio perform.  

Aside from performance Hicks is at home shooting in his native Australia where most of the story is set, the expected shots of open plains and sun-kissed beaches are all there, but they are shot in a non-travelogue way and make the drama feel more personal  for being away from the hustle and bustle of the city, amidst the outback the emotion of both father and sons is laid beautifully bare set against a rather affecting and perfectly pitched score by Lindes, aided by the back catalogue of Sigur Ros’s haunting music.  

VERDICT  

The Boys Are Back is a film that teeters so close to TV movie melodrama avoids most of the pitfalls to become a truly moving tale of father and son. Despite losing its way a little towards the end in favour of dramatically clichéd events, the emotional wheel’s never really come off thanks to Hick’s solid direction and a brace of heart-warming turns.  

 

Blazin’ Review: Brothers

Starring: Tobey Maguire, Jake Gyllenhaal, Natalie Portman, Clifton Collins Jr., Sam Shepard

Director: Jim Sheridan

Writer(s): David Benioff, Susanne Bier

Cinematography: Frederick Elmes

Original Score: Thomas Newman

Running Time: 104 Mins.

Sometimes, just occasionally, a film comes along and grips you, emotionally and through its narrative, if it is THAT good, usually this happens at the least expected times and more often than not it is because all the elemenmts that are needed to truly make a great film have come together. As you may have already guessed Brothers is one of those films, not perfect by all means, but a brilliant film that sets out to tell a story and envelope you in the characters plight so that you become emotionally invested.

Based upon a Danish film, Brodre, Brothers is bound around the lynch-pin of it’s titular relationship between black sheep and all round bad boy Tommy (Gyllenhaal) and  family man, marine and apple of his father’s eye Sam (Maguire), but there is so much more going on, as Brothers deals with family ties, death, the burden of relationships and, the key dramatic event of the plot, the effect of war on Sam. To reveal that very early on in the film that Sam is reported as dead is no spoiler as anyone who has seen the trailer or read a synopsis will attest. 

Upon Sam’s reported death, Tommy takes over somewhat as man of the house, bonding with his niece’s and all but taking their fathers place in a sense of duty for his past misgivings, from their on in and particularly upon Sam’s return, where having been put through a series of harrowing tortore episodes is a broken and seriously damaged man. To reveal much more of the detail would seriously rob the film of much of its emotional clout, but suffice to say one look at the poster gives you a clear idea of where the story heads on one level, while another has been thankfully concealed.

What really hooks me into a good film is a plot that doesn’t pin-point its trajectory clearly, in short it is full of surprises, with events not signposted and the journey the characters take proving to be as surprising to them as it is to us, and it is in this that the actors have been granted some brilliant material to work with. Director Jim Sheridan is an expert at coaxing out touching and believable characters from his actors, one only need watch In America’s Paddy Considine or Daniel Day Lewis In The Name of the Father for evidence of this, and here the three central actor’s put in their best performances thus far.

While Maguire, who is shaking of his Peter Parker persona, and showing some real grit, particularly in the final third, that is garnering award’s buzz, but equally as good in the more subtle and less showy roles are Portman and Gyllenhaal, who both transcend their film star looks and become the characters. All too aften it is hard to forget you are watching Hollywood star’s in a film but on this occasion they achieve it with seeming ease, something which further adds to your emotional investment. Also of note are the child actors playign Sam’s daughters, initially a little too cutesy we are rewarded with some truly intense scenes, and the older of the two is heartbreaking as she longs for her “old” daddy to return rather than the emotionally scarred man that Sam becomes.

Brothers is also to be rewarded for over-coming that all to common element of succumbing to stereotype in its bad brother/good brother scenario, and for not following the route you might well expect, and whilst structured exceptionally well and achiveing the goal of showing, with conviction, what Sam endures at the hands of the Taliban, the Afghan Terrorists themselves become the only stereotype. Stock Arabs with no discernable features , bordering on pantomime villiany at points. Though it is prudent to point out that upon their final torment of Sam it really doesn’t matter, as the damage is irrevocably carried out and they have served their purpose in the narrative, leaving you shaken.

While it does deal with the war in this way Brothers is not a war film, and I was pleasantly surprised it avoided commenting on the war in Afghan one way or the other in an overt way, as so many attempts to this point have done. More akin to In The Valley of Elah, Brothers is about the effect of emotional turmoil on a family, and yes it is about Brothers.   

VERDICT

The first truly great film of the new decade, Brothers hooks you with the combination of great storyteling and even better characters, each complimenting one another to make an immersive film that feels truly original in it’s take of something that could well have fallen into cliche and stereotype.

 

Blazin’ Review: Up in The Air

Starring: George Clooney, Vera Farmiga, Anna Kendrick, Jason Bateman, J. K. Simmons, Sam Elliott, Danny McBride, Zach Galifianakis

Director: Jason Reitman

Writer(s): Jason Reitman, Sheldon Turner

Cinematography: Eric Steelberg

Original Score: Rolfe Kent

Running Time: 109 Mins.

Okay, let’s get it out there in the open, Up in the Air does “deal with” the implications of our current financial situation, Clooney’s sentral character Ryan Bingham does fly around the USA firing people for those that don’t have the balls to themselves, so to speak and yes it features accounts from “real people” who have lost their jobs. But Up in the Air really isn’t about that, in the same way that Juno, director and writer Reitman’s last film wasn’t really about teenage pregnancy. Yes folks, this is another tale of the movie star who learns valuable life lessons, oh and falls in love in the process.

That though is a cynical summation of what is one of this years award front-runners, were it not starring Clooney it would be dubbed, ”the little film that could”! And any praise Up in the Air has earns is quite honestly all worthy, largely down to the fantastic script that has the framework of a solid plot, albeit rather fragmented and melds every element together so that it works like a charm. Of course it helps that your leading man is George Clooney, the guy oozes charisma and thre is a strong possibility that were it not he at the film’s centre it wouldn’t have been half as good.

Yes he plays effectively the same role but when he does it so well and plays to his strengths like this there really is no-one better, that is not to belittle those surrounding him, Farmiga is effectively, as she puts it, Clooney’s character “with a vagina!” while it is Kendrick showing she is much more capable of acting than her handful of scenes in the Twilight film’s would suggest, but it is she who imbues the film with its heart, yes the plucky young upstart with ideas of technological revolution isn’t new but as with everything else in Up in the Air it is played to a tee.

Branching out from the central trio are the big(ish) name cameos that crop up, largely as ex-employees, or soon to be, Galifianakis and Simmons are most likely to be recognised but Danny McBride, Sam Elliot and Jason Bateman crop up too as various other minor (and often pointless) characters, most of the bigger laughs come from these guys, and sometimes they feel a touch too jarring in the overall plot, needless yet funny all the same. Though to say that the scenes where Kendrick’s takes it upon herself to fire one unknown vie webcam are the best rather calls to question whether “real people” should have been used in all the scenes whether it be for emotional or humouress effect.

Unusually standout is the editing, doing more than just compliment Reitman’s assured but unflashy direction we cut from air to airport to ground with such polish that it feels not machine like, but almost homely, clearly the intention as this is where Bingham IS at home, the check-in scenes in particular are standout, usually a thing of ritual boredom this is where Bingham is at ease, offering his protege handy tips that are very funny yet astutely observed!

If there is a gripe to be had it would be in the third act, where it looks like we may be facing that Hollywood fairytale ending, but just as you’re almost there be prepared to have the rug pulled from under you emotionally as Up in the Air gets the cracking pay-off it deserves, not at all crass but simply thoughtful, much like the film as a whole.

VERDICT

Up in the Air is a life and love story with a difference, playing both the romance and the laughs for subtlety rather than cheapness it exudes a warmth and truth rarely found in films, of course it helps when your leading man is George Clooney working with a script that good!

 

Blazin’ Review: 44 Inch Chest

Starring: Ray Winstone, John Hurt, Tom Wilkinson, Ian McShane, Stephen Dillane, Melvin Poupad

Director: Malcolm Venville

Writer(s): Louis Mellis, David Scinto 

Cinematography: Dan Landin

Original Score: Angelo Bandalamenti

Running Time: 95 Mins.

When the writer, or writers, behind a film get their names above the title on a film’s poster it is highly unusual, unless of course your name is Quentin Tarantino! So the noting of writers Mellis and Scinto above the title of 44 Inch Chest should give some indication of what to expect, especially if you know that their last film was Sexy Beast starring Ray Winstone, who once again features here. So profanities galore, a lot of (more mature) cockney geezers spouting said profanities and a clever character driven plot, straddling said cockney geezers, that holds a surprise or two,well that covers all the bases that Sexy Beast hit, sadly 44 Inch Chest can’t really emulate its forebears success, try as it might!

The main problem this time around is not so much the lack of plot, more the fact that it builds up to a good premise and does literally nothing with it! Left by his wife for a younger, more handsome French waiter Winstone goes into meltdown, and his motley crew of friends decide that said French Waiter needs teaching a lesson, so holed up in an abandoned house, meaning nearly the entire film is set within the confines of one room, these crooks and unsavoury characters egg Colin on to wreak his revenge while Colin goes through emotional turmoil…

This in itself is an intriguing premise, akin to Reservoir Dogs, and certainly the actors and characters here are strong enough to carry such a confined setting with little else to distract, but, and this is a big but, the story simply goes nowhere, which would be fine if as a character study there was some depth, but again there isn’t. Winstone as the epicentre of the “drama” does the empty shell part well enough, spending most of the film either shouting or in tears but he is so deeply unlikable with next to no redeeming features you simply cannot sympathise with the inner turmoil of his wife’s infidelity.

Thankfully the support cast are on hand to provide some real entertainment value, McShane and Hurt and the wonderfully named Old Man Peanut are the standout’s with Peanut’s persistance at turning the air blue in the style of Shakespearean prose and the bickering with McShane’s suave, gay sharp suited card shark Meredith are classic. Sadly good characters as they are they are given nothing to do reduced to idly chatting about the merits of Sampson and Delilah in the hallway as Colin tries to decide what to do with the infidel, if he can stop moping for ten minutes!

Another problem posed by the one room setting is the need for some direction to give the story a little flash or style, sadly the visuals are as flat as the plot and the same can be said of the unaffectng score meaning that this is a film which comes nowhere living up to its promise especially given the form of the above the title “writers”.

VERDICT

44 Inch Chest is a sorry disappointment, while far from terrible you would rightly expect more given a glance down the cast list, that said it is the (support) cast that are the only redeeming feature with McShane and Hurt, as ever, on excellent and highly entertaining form, it’s just everything else that is lacking!