Tag / review

by hutchwp

Film review – The Founder (John Lee Hancock, 2017)

John Lee Hancock is busily carving out a name for himself as the creator of sanitised versions of the most successful business men in the history of humanity, treading perhaps where no director would dare through a labyrinth of red tape.

In 2013 it was Saving Mr Banks, Hancock’s portrayal of an important segment of Walt Disney’s life as he helped convince P.L. Travers to release the rights to Mary Poppins and shaped the now-classic motion picture. This time around he’s tackling the origins of one of the biggest global brands of the modern world: McDonald’s.

McDonald’s hasn’t had a successful time thus far being portrayed on screen. Outside the overbearing product placement that everybody hates (even though they often pay for significant portions of films), if you ask anyone whether or not they’ve seen a film about McDonald’s, they will more than likely start talking about one of two films: McLibel or Super Size Me. Both are excellent as films and even better in showing the company in an extremely negative light.

Or you may remember this film…

 

The Founder isn’t quite as negative towards the iconic brand as the recent memorable efforts, going a long way to provide a balanced view of the origins of the story. It may be sanitised but it is at least reasonably based on facts (to our best knowledge).

Michael Keaton plays Ray Croc, a driven but unsuccessful salesman who happens upon the first McDonald’s restaurant whilst trying to sell milkshake making machines. This restaurant is owned by Richard and Maurice McDonald (Nick Offerman and John Carroll Lynch) and they soon go into partnership to franchise the company and start growing it across the rest of USA.

The biopic serves two purposes for the company. Firstly, it portrays the McDonald brothers’ story as being as wholesome and family-friendly as any of the McDonald’s adverts that are create today. This was a family company that didn’t want to be taken over by the global powers, resisting all the way and almost unbelievably against making any profit. Looking at it cynically, it serves as an advert that champions the company’s family values.

Secondly, it portrays the man who turned it into a global power as self-driven, full of business acumen but at his most basic a self-centred, cold and heartless money grabber. We aren’t supposed to like him, though I can’t help but think that the characterisation will be a template for those wishing to succeed in business. I hope not – it would be a poorly-chosen idol.

The overall result is that we don’t feel encouraged to like our central character and it feels like the side of a story that aligns with the global branding message rather than one we can truly enjoy. 

The problem is that Keaton is far too charismatic to not be liked and the Lynch/Offerman duo are sabotaging the success of the company at every turn. This makes the emotional journey slightly skewed as we try to take sides and don’t really know where to land.

Some will champion its subtlety but I don’t see it like that. I see it as a great actor shining through an advertising campaign disguised as a film.

Given the state of the political landscape right now, I don’t think it’s the film the world needs.

by hutchwp

Film review – Ghosts of Mars (John Carpenter, 2001)

John Carpenter’s history as a filmmaker may have many blemishes on it. For every Assault on Precinct 13, there was a Village of the Damned. For every time Kurt Russell escaped from New York, he also escaped from L.A. Yet few of his films have stunk as badly as Ghosts of Mars, which, unlike most of his other films, hasn’t got better with time.

Set on a remote Martian mining town, the plot concerns police woman Melanie Ballard (Natasha Henstridge) transporting dangerous criminal “Desolation” Williams (Ice Cube). However, upon arrival she realises that the planet has become infected, essentially, by zombies. She has to team together with a group of survivors including Jason Statham, Pam Grier and Clea DuVall.


The film was a box office bomb, making back just $14m of its $28m budget (global sales, according to Box Office Mojo). It’s hard to see why. Why it cost so much, that is. Conceptually, the mining town should look gritty, desolate and run down. It actually ends up looking more like a half-baked Crystal Maze set that was abandoned half-way through.
The plot isn’t terrible, and good movies have been carved out of much worse starting points. The soundtrack, provided by John Carpenter, is brilliantly varied.

What lets it down is dated visuals – they’re very 2001 – and an unreliable script. The actors do their best with it, but it simply doesn’t hit the marks.

It must be tough to turn down an offer to work with someone as great as John Carpenter. One can only assume that those involved looked at the script and were reminded of his best work. 

[Note] I hated all the official posters for this film, but unearthed the brilliant poster by Ralf Krause on the website AlternativeMoviePosters.com. Check out the website for more great alternative movie posters and order some to decorate your wall with something wonderful!

by hutchwp

Film review – T2: Trainspotting (Danny Boyle, 2017)

Trainspotting was one of the quintessential moments of British film in the 1990s, helping to define a generation and giving them a voice on the silver screen. It catapulted director Danny Boyle and his cast to international fame, with lead Ewan McGregor reaping the lion’s share of the benefits as it launched his path to stardom.

I was probably just slightly too young to enjoy the original on its initial release, catching it on VHS in around 1999 at the age of 15. But the effects were still strong amongst people my age – the music soundtracked our lives as much as the likes of Morning Glory and Parklife did. The imagery in the advertising campaign was arresting and inescapable. Finally watching the film I was blown away that something so popular was set in a Britain far more familiar than every other British film that seemed readily available at the time, all of which seemed to star Hugh Grant. 

The boys are back in town

When the sequel was announced, there was a certain amount of trepidation from fans of the original. It seemed unlikely that the success of the original could ever be matched. It wouldn’t have the same effect on society. The soundtrack surely wouldn’t be as good. Plus there’s the twenty years of nostalgia to contend with. So how does it stand up?The answer is, thankfully, very well indeed.

The plot centres around Renton (McGregor) returning to Edinburgh for the first time in twenty years, catching up with his old friends Spud (Ewen Bremner), Rent Boy (Johnny Lee Miller) and Begbie (Robert Carlysle). Time has passed and this has inevitably changed the four men, but it has also drastically changed the world around them too. It also hasn’t been long enough for two of the group to forgive Renton for what happened at the end of the first film.

Reimagining their friendship so far down the line when there hasn’t really been a particular push recently for a sequel to be made proves that this film has been made for all the right reasons. Danny Boyle and his team knew there was a story to be told here and it is told brilliantly.

As in the original, music plays a crucial role. There are reimaginings of three of the biggest hits associated with the original: Lust for Life, Born Slippy and Perfect Day. Elsewhere, more modern artists offer more up-to-date contributions from the likes of Young Fathers and Wolf Alice.

It won’t have the same cultural impact as the original, and few films have. It is, however, extremely relevant for those who lived through the first instalment, having an uncanny ability to reflect what has happened to almost everyone in society in the past two decades.

It is undoubtedly one of the best cinematic sequels we’ll see this decade.

by hutchwp

Film review – Jackie (Pablo Larraín, 2016)

One of the most shocking moments of the 20th Century was the assassination of U.S. President John F. Kennedy on 22nd November 1963. Driving along Dealy Plaza in the early afternoon, two shots were fired by a single assassin. The enduring image is that of his wife, First Lady Jackie Kennedy, as she scrambles to protect her husband, head in lap, striving to comprehend what had just happened to her. It was a tragedy.

Portman delivers a stunning performance


Central to Pablo Larraín’s biopic of Jackie Kennedy is a stunningly affecting performance from Natalie Portman. She’s capable of being both isolating and isolated within moments, in one of the most complex performances you could ever wish to take on as an actor. Portman doesn’t need to remind us of her capabilities, which we’ve known about since her debut as a 13-year-old in Luc Besson’s Léon: The Professional. 

The film is delivered in the form of Jackie Kennedy in an open interview to a nameless Time Magazine reporter (Billy Crudup). She reminisces about her television programme “Inside the White House with Mrs John F. Kennedy”, in which she effused about her collection of presidential memorabilia (as well as her abilities as an interior designer) though the story predominantly focuses on the fateful day in Dallas and the immediate aftermath as she reinvents herself as the director of her husband’s funeral, an event she hopes will rival – or at least evoke the memory of – Abraham Lincoln.

There are some solid supporting roles from the likes of Richard E. Grant, Peter Sarsgaard and the late John Hurt. Greta Gerwig also appears, though I can’t say she is in the same category.

One jarring aspect of the film is the unusual score, provided by the usually brilliant Mica Levi. It’s surprisingly sinister and usually doesn’t match the onscreen visuals, tonally or stylistically. This isn’t Levi’s fault. She’s just doing what she does best (see Under the Skin for her best scoring work). It’s jarring and made me long for something a little more conforming. I’m amazed that it has been nominated for an Academy Award for Best Score.

Portman, though, is very much deserving of her nomination. It’s a strong year of competition, but she has every chance of taking home her second statue at the 89th Academy Awards.

A must see.

by hutchwp

Short film review – The Ugly Duckling (Jack Cutting and Clyde Geronimo, 1939)

This Walt Disney Productions short animation fell under the Silly Symphony banner when it was released in 1939. It went on to win the Academy Award for Best Animated Short, the eighth in a run of eight Walt Disney films to do so.

It’s a fine little episode that tells the tale of a swanling that somehow ends up in a nest of ducklings, and is immediately shunned and ridiculed for being different to his surrogate brothers and sisters. 

A duck? Nah you must be quackers.

It curtails the original Hans Christian Andersen story by removing the whole extended pain of being without a family for around a year, skipping straight to the point where he is found by a swan family, presumably his own. In doing so, they miss out the point where he turns into an adult swan and the ducks are in awe of his beauty.
In its short sub-nine minute running time, it manages to fit in a surprising amount of substance. This is, for the whole part, a tale about an orphan who is unwanted by his new family. This would surely resonate with anyone in any element of this situation, and there is no holding back when the mother and father have a full-blown argument in front of the innocent swanling. Indeed, there’s a suggestion from the drake that since he looks nothing like the swan then perhaps his duck wife has been sleeping around. Or perhaps I’m reading too much into it.

The animation is, inevitably, a thing of beauty. Two of Disney’s Nine Old Men were on animation duty (Milt Kahl and Eric Larson) and it certainly has the feel of one of their classic films (it was released between Snow White and the Seven Dwarves and Pinocchio). There’s a certain amount of warmth you find in these old animations that has never been replicated.

It’s probably not the best short releases around this time from Walt Disney Studios, but it is deserving of all the praise it has received over the years. Why not revisit it? You’re only 78 years late to the party!

by hutchwp

Film review – Lion (Garth Davis, 2017)

Garth Davis’s debut feature, Lion, tells the true story of Saroo Brierley (Sunny Pawar), a boy who is separated from his brother at a train station in central India at the age of five. Boarding a train he believes his brother is aboard, Saroo falls asleep and the train sets off. He travels for two days across unfamiliar territory, eventually arriving in Kolkata on the far Eastern side of India, 1600km from his home. Unable to read or write, and with everyone speaking the unfamiliar Bengali language, he finds it impossible to reconnect with his home and is sent to an orphanage. He is eventually adopted by an Australian couple (David Wenham and Nicole Kidman). Twenty years later, a grown-up Saroo (Dev Patel) starts a relationship with Lucy (Rooney Mara), before a chance encounter reignites his interest in his origins and he starts to try to reconnect with his real family.

Sunny Pawar is phenomenal as the young Saroo

Dev Patel is as brilliant as ever in the lead role as a grown-up Saroo, building on his celebrated performances in Slumdog Millionaire and The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel (and its sequel). It’s a role that needs to provide a reflection of the innocent and likeable younger Saroo we have watched for the first half of the film, whilst also covering the emotional turmoil of a man who has lost his past and lived a completely different life due to a small but very significant fork in his road.

But it is Sunny Pawar as the young Saroo that steals the show. He has a charisma that shines through even when he’s completely still, effortlessly shifting from anger to sadness to fear and to contemplation as the plot develops. Without this young star, the film may have fallen flat. [1]

There is a clear distinction between the feel of the film between India and Australia. The filmmakers achieved this difference by having an almost entirely different production team for the two countries, with natives of each being involved with every aspect of the process. It’s well worth staying around to see the end credits so you can witness the difference – they run the two side by side, giving each equal billing.

This is one of the most heart-warming stories of the year, if not the decade. It may be a bit of a predictable ending (suspend your inquisitive mind and stop yourself from contemplating whether or not the story would even be a story if it had an unhappy ending), but the beauty is in the performances and the characters’ journeys – be they figurative or literal. Do yourself a favour and make sure you catch this one.

[1] There’s a fantastic article on the casting process of Sunny Pawar on Vulture.com. Check it out here: http://www.vulture.com/2016/12/sunny-pawar-lion-casting.html

 

 

by hutchwp

Film review – Arrival (Denis Villeneuve, 2016)

For many cinema-goers, Arrival may have been one of the worst films of the year. For all its big-budget sci-fi overtones and its positioning alongside other space-based 2016 blockbusters such as Independence Day: Resurgence, Passengers and Rogue One, if you sought out Arrival expecting more of the same you may have been disappointed. Indeed, you will have been tricked into that much-elusive cinematic experience: thinking.

Set in modern-day USA, it stars Amy Adams as renowned linguist Louise Banks, brought in by the government to help humanity communicate with extra-terrestrial life forms that have mysteriously landed throughout Earth. She teams up with physicist Ian Donnelly (Jeremy Renner) to begin to decipher their language and understand why they have chosen now to begin communication.

Amy Adams as linguist Louise

It is anything but a full-blown rollercoaster of action, instead concentrating its efforts on an elegant storyline with some seriously unsubtle political messaging. Or should that be serious and unsubtle?

What screenwriter Eric Heisserer has set out to do – and succeeded – is position the viewers in the shoes of alien lifeforms understanding Earth for the first time. In that sense, we are asked to consider the absurdity of the fact that so many countries have ongoing conflicts, unable to get along with one-another.

It may be set in the USA but you would be mistaken in thinking this was a lazy choice in making the Americans the saviours. The decision was more likely financial. Sure, the hero could have been from Pakistan or Chile, but this would have seriously hindered sales in the USA and all other countries where English is either a first or second language.

Amy Adams, as always, puts in a brilliant turn as the determined linguist Louise. She’s a likeable and versatile actress, perhaps at the top of her game right now, and it is a crime that not one of her five Academy Award nominations has thus far earned her a win. Perhaps this year, with a potential double-nomination for this and Nocturnal Animals, we’ll see her rightly rewarded.

Arrival is one of the best films of the year. Gripping, intelligent, thought-provoking and stylish. A must see.

by hutchwp

First reaction – Rogue One: A Star Wars Story (Gareth Edwards, 2016)

I’ve just exited the cinema following a midnight screening of Rogue One: A Star Wars Story. I don’t want to give too much away because I’m sure most people will want to discover how good it is for themselves. 

I will say this though: it’s very good, but not brilliant. There are some great moments but these are undercut by a handful of letdowns.

Full review to follow.

by hutchwp

Film review – Elstree 1976 (Jon Spira, 2015)

Elstree 1976, the latest documentary from Jon Spira, explores the lives of ten people who were involved in the original Star Wars films as extras, supporting characters or inside costumes and thus were unseen. Catching up with them 38 years later, the film gives an insight into their respective positions in the wider Star Wars fandom universe, their take on one of the most bizarrely dedicated communities and their memories of their time on set.

The featured cast includes a mixture of actors and actresses who range from household names to people only die-hard fans will know. The ten are as follows:

Paul Blake (Greedo)
Jeremy Bulloch (Boba Fett)
Garrick Hagon (Biggs Darklighter)
Anthony Forrest
David Prowse (Darth Vader)
Angus MacInnes (Gold Leader Rebel Pilot)
Pam Rose (Leesub Sirln)
Derek Lyons (Massassi Temple Guard)
Laurie Goode (the Stormtrooper who banged his head)
John Chapman (Red 12 Drifter Rebel Pilot)

For a film where it seems there is a huge difference in the interest in each of the stars, the narrative benefits by giving equal billing to each of them. But then that is the point of the film – it shows the human side of everyone involved and cross-examines the fact that the only reason they are anything more than actors is that they have been part of a great film and the fans have an unfaltering level of affection for everyone involved.

Justice for Greedo

They didn’t realise at the time but their involvement with the film would come to define their lives. It’s something that they have forever been associated with and can’t get away from, whether they like it or not.

The film opens with a humorous montage of each of their action figures, as they talk about how they feel about how they turned out (or didn’t!). There’s also a little controversy with what different interviewees believe is the right level of relevance to permit them to attend the conventions and be classed as an actor in Star Wars.

There are some moments of real emotion, just as there are moments of hilarity. Of course, they offer their own perspective on the film and provide some morsels of tales about the production, but Spira has instead made the decision to give the stories of their subsequent lives the space to breathe. This film gives them the chance to prove that they aren’t just the Stormtrooper who hit his head or the guy whose voice wasn’t quite right for Darth Vader. What makes this film work isn’t the immense details of how the most famous of sci-fi films was made. Instead it concentrates on the human side of each of the ten people we learn about.

It has been a long road to get here for the Kickstarter backers – almost two years in fact – and Jon Spira has been absolutely transparent in what must have lost him many nights of sleep through stress (the whole distribution farce is well documented on the Kickstarter campaign page). For everyone who is now able to watch it, it was well worth the wait.

Elstree 1976 is available now on Blu-ray and DVD, as well as on streaming services.

by hutchwp

Film review – Nocturnal Animals (Tom Ford, 2016)

Whilst Nocturnal Animals may be one of the most stylish and effecting pieces of cinematic art released in 2016, it may also suffer from being the second biggest Amy Adams film released in the month of November (Arrival is set to hit cinemas later this month). The films are targeted at a completely different audience, and if you’re interested in seeing Tom Ford’s latest then you need to know what you’re getting yourself in for. It’s a veritable misery-fest. And it’s absolutely breathtaking.

The film stars Adams as Susan Morrow, a hugely successful art gallery curator married to a handsome but unrelatable husband (Armie Hammer). Feeling like her life is unfulfilled, she unexpectedly receives a manuscript for a novel through the post from her ex-husband Eddie Sheffield (Jake Gyllenhaal). The book, titled ‘Nocturnal Animals’, is dedicated to her. As she delves deeper into the grippingly horrific story – which plays out for the viewers with fabulous turns from Gyllenhaal, Aaron Taylor-Johnson and Michael Shannon – we come to discover the history between Susan and Eddie and the inspiration for the story.

There were long periods of the film where I was so absolutely gripped by the fictional tale Gyllenhaal’s character was spinning – the film within a film – that I almost dated to forget that we were reading it with Adams’s Susan as she struggles with her insomnia. The meta-tale is brutally horrific, with the male central character experiencing the some of the worst experiences imaginable in life. It takes until quite near the end of the film to realise why he has written this story, and at this point we also remember the times Susan has thrown the book down in disgust. It’s easy enough to play out a story and leave a reveal until the very end. It’s quite something else to leave the audience so gripped in the journey.

Tom Ford executes every moment of the film with an unrivalled stylishness that was evident in his debut feature ‘A Single Man’. It is in the L.A. art scene that we see the characters inhabit the sort of regal living spaces most people can only dream of, despite their thin veneers here only acting as a cover for a desperately hollow existence.

The resoundingly successful final scene is an absolutely devestating act by Eddie. Susan is left emotionally drained following the reading of the manuscript that finally reveals his potential as a brilliant writer. It is also laced with accusations at Susan. She is left with no resolution. This is a clearly a reflection of how he felt after their relationship originally broke down. The answer is never clearly spelled out, with the audience left as smartly frustrated as Susan. This is a really intelligent move that epitomises the ability of Ford to sit the viewers firmly in the position of the people on the screen and ask themselves how they really feel.

It is a wonderful piece of cinema that I’ll be recommending to anyone who will listen.