Coup de torchon (or Clean Slate) is based on the Jim Thompson novel Pop. 1280. Last year I watched The Killer Inside Me also adapted from a Jim Thompson novel. I haven’t read any of Jim Thompson’s novels, but if these two films are anything to go by he favours dark psychological crime stories told from the perpetrator’s point of view.
The novel Pop. 1280 is set in Texas circa 1917, but French director Bertrand Tavernier has moved the setting to French West Africa in 1938, and has made the highly stratified and racist white society the antagonist to protagonist Lucien Cordier. Lucien Cordier is the sole policeman in a small town. He is apparently stupid, lazy and ineffective (he prides himself on never having made an arrest), a man who knows his place in society (looked down on by almost all the white people in town but superior to all the black people) and understanding the injustice of the situation but feeling powerless to openly oppose it. His pathetic attitude is underlined by his wife's apparently open affair with her live-in "brother" and by a Laurel and Hardy like scene where he gets his butt kicked.
Cordier gets his revenge by using his reputation and the "system" against itself. From childish revenge plots to murder of the town's undesirable elements - including his mistress's husband. Cordier sees himself on a self appointed crusade to clean up the trash. Finally he moves from murder to arranging situations where other people kill each other to his satisfaction. This is the ultimate manifestation of God-like powers - the situation has come full circle (as does the film).
Coup de torchon was filmed in Senegal. A climate that affects the white women into wearing very little, and the casual female nudity marks this as very definitely a French film.
Here are a couple of other opinions.
Ian's rating 3/5
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
My Wedding and other Secrets
My Wedding and Other Secrets is a kiwi love story. Short, Chinese, myopic film student Emily meets tall Caucasian nerd James at Auckland University and they fall in love. Emily lives at home with Mum and Dad and James lives in a flat with two computer science students. Emily keeps the relationship a secret from her parents because they expect her to date Chinese boys. The plot thickens when Emily suggests to James they get married so that she can use the student allowance to make a movie. Her plan is to make a horror movie but she ends up making a documentary about her relationship with James and revealing said relationship to her parents.
The Director and co-writer Roseanne Liang (on whose life the film is based) says its the story of "a selfish but well-intentioned girl" who learns about how both romantic love and familial love are important in life and how to balance and cherish those two kinds of love.
This film is a romantic comedy but it isn't light and fluffy at heart. There are definitely light elements - James' flatmates, Emily and James getting to grips with sex, the chicken head in the restaurant but there are dark moments as well - like neither James nor Emily's parents coming to the documentary screening. You will laugh but you're quite likely to cry as well.
I think I'll always have a soft spot for this film because falling for someone much taller than me while at Auckland University is something I can identify with. And I particularly like that the happy ending isn't manufactured to make a nice film - it really did work out well in the end with a happy couple and happy parents.
Anne's rating 4/5 Ian's rating 3/5
The Director and co-writer Roseanne Liang (on whose life the film is based) says its the story of "a selfish but well-intentioned girl" who learns about how both romantic love and familial love are important in life and how to balance and cherish those two kinds of love.
This film is a romantic comedy but it isn't light and fluffy at heart. There are definitely light elements - James' flatmates, Emily and James getting to grips with sex, the chicken head in the restaurant but there are dark moments as well - like neither James nor Emily's parents coming to the documentary screening. You will laugh but you're quite likely to cry as well.
I think I'll always have a soft spot for this film because falling for someone much taller than me while at Auckland University is something I can identify with. And I particularly like that the happy ending isn't manufactured to make a nice film - it really did work out well in the end with a happy couple and happy parents.
Anne's rating 4/5 Ian's rating 3/5
Friday, February 11, 2011
The King's Speech
The King's Speech is the second nostalgic British historical drama that I have seen in recent weeks. Two such films might be too few to infer a trend, though it could be claimed that the British have been looking nostalgically at their history since Dad's Army arrived on TV.
The King's Speech follows Prince Albert, Duke of York, (second son of George V) as he struggles to overcome his stammer with the help of an unorthodoxy Australian speech therapist, Lionel Logue. The prince is under pressure from his father, George V, to do more public speaking and this becomes more urgent as his father dies and his elder brother is on a collision course with the British establishment, that will see Albert become King George VI in his place.
The way this story was told made it feel like a fairy story.
This sentimental treatment of history is reinforced by the look of the film. London is foggy and quaint. The countryside looks unspoilt. The royals look and act regal. The common people are respectful and keep their distance. In addition there is a cute side story around Lionel Logue's family. Plus some historical titbits to keep the history buffs amused.
There have been some liberties with the truth to assist with the story telling. For instance Winston Churchill is introduced into the film giving advice to the Duke of York at a time when he was an out of favour backbencher.
One thing I didn't understand was that during the first consult Lionel demonstrated that Albert could deliver a speech without stuttering while listening to music through headphones. But for a reason that is never explained, this technique is never used when Albert/George VI is giving later radio speeches.
Anne found the CGI intrusive. It occasionally leaves the impression that the actors have accidentally wandered into a computer game set in 1930s London.
But it is hard to be overly critical of this film as it is well crafted. A story about royalty and leadership is brought down to a human level. Our sympathies are tugged firmly in the direction of the future George IV. The abdication crisis is explained without it coming to dominate the film. The build-up to WWII is signaled
Colin Firth plays Prince Albert in a way that reminded me of his shy and retiring author role in Love Actually with the addition of the stutter. Geoffrey Rush plays Lionel Logue as a more rounded character which is useful as he has to portray most of the friendship between Lionel and the future king.
Much of the tension in the film comes exploiting the natural tension we all feel when listening to a stutterer -- will they manage to get to the end of the sentence or not?
Despite this being a story of how a shy and damaged man became a great king and inspiring leader, there is in counterpoint, a republican theme. This is also a story of two princes, neither of whom wants to be king. Hence the film slyly poses the republican criticism, namely: isn't hereditary monarchy a stupid way of choosing a leader.
Ian's rating 3.5/5 Anne's rating 4/5
The King's Speech follows Prince Albert, Duke of York, (second son of George V) as he struggles to overcome his stammer with the help of an unorthodoxy Australian speech therapist, Lionel Logue. The prince is under pressure from his father, George V, to do more public speaking and this becomes more urgent as his father dies and his elder brother is on a collision course with the British establishment, that will see Albert become King George VI in his place.
The way this story was told made it feel like a fairy story.
The nice but shy prince is cursed by his overbearing father and teased by his brothers. His princess hears about a magician who can cure the curse and sets up a meeting. The treatment is slow, meanwhile his father, the bad king, dies and the new king is feckless and runs off with the evil witch. Leaving the stuttering younger brother to reluctantly become king and make the speech of his life rallying his people in their darkest hour and leading them to victory against the evil empire with his plucky little queen and the magician at his side.
This sentimental treatment of history is reinforced by the look of the film. London is foggy and quaint. The countryside looks unspoilt. The royals look and act regal. The common people are respectful and keep their distance. In addition there is a cute side story around Lionel Logue's family. Plus some historical titbits to keep the history buffs amused.
There have been some liberties with the truth to assist with the story telling. For instance Winston Churchill is introduced into the film giving advice to the Duke of York at a time when he was an out of favour backbencher.
One thing I didn't understand was that during the first consult Lionel demonstrated that Albert could deliver a speech without stuttering while listening to music through headphones. But for a reason that is never explained, this technique is never used when Albert/George VI is giving later radio speeches.
Anne found the CGI intrusive. It occasionally leaves the impression that the actors have accidentally wandered into a computer game set in 1930s London.
But it is hard to be overly critical of this film as it is well crafted. A story about royalty and leadership is brought down to a human level. Our sympathies are tugged firmly in the direction of the future George IV. The abdication crisis is explained without it coming to dominate the film. The build-up to WWII is signaled
Colin Firth plays Prince Albert in a way that reminded me of his shy and retiring author role in Love Actually with the addition of the stutter. Geoffrey Rush plays Lionel Logue as a more rounded character which is useful as he has to portray most of the friendship between Lionel and the future king.
Much of the tension in the film comes exploiting the natural tension we all feel when listening to a stutterer -- will they manage to get to the end of the sentence or not?
Despite this being a story of how a shy and damaged man became a great king and inspiring leader, there is in counterpoint, a republican theme. This is also a story of two princes, neither of whom wants to be king. Hence the film slyly poses the republican criticism, namely: isn't hereditary monarchy a stupid way of choosing a leader.
Ian's rating 3.5/5 Anne's rating 4/5
Sunday, January 30, 2011
Made in Dagenham
We might have the beginnings of a Christmas Eve movie tradition. In 2009 we went to Where the Wild Things Are, and Made in Dagenham was Christmas Eve 2010's effort. The fact that we were in Dunedin and that there were only 2 or 3 others in the tiny Metro cinema added novelty value.
Made in Dagenham is the story of the fight for equal pay for women at Ford's massive car assembly plant at Dagenham in Essex. Women were a tiny proportion of the work force at Ford, and they made car seat covers. They went on strike in 1968 for two reasons - firstly because their work had been re-classified from skilled to semi-skilled and secondly because they were paid less than semi-skilled men. You can't deliver cars without seat covers so production at the entire plant ground to a halt. The dispute was resolved with the involvement of the Secretary of State for employment, Barbara Castle and the way was paved for pay equality with men.
From my 21st century perspective, I wonder why Ford was so stubborn about the issue in the first place since there were only 180 or so women and many thousands of men - it could hardly have made much difference to their bottom line to pay women the same rate as men. I guess they thought there was a principle involved - its good to be able to reflect that few people these days think that paying women less than men is justifiable.
You could call Made in Dagenham docudrama or edutainment but whatever you call it, it's an easy watch with great sixties costumes and sets, unusually good-looking factory workers and a generally good-humoured tone. Apart from documenting a pivotal event in industrial relations in the UK it explores the human impact of the strike - the effects on relationships when one or both breadwinners in the family are on strike, the effect on a town with one major employer when hardly anyone is earning, and what happens when women workers meet a woman politician. Well worth a look.
Anne's rating 3.5/5 Ian's rating 3/5
Made in Dagenham is the story of the fight for equal pay for women at Ford's massive car assembly plant at Dagenham in Essex. Women were a tiny proportion of the work force at Ford, and they made car seat covers. They went on strike in 1968 for two reasons - firstly because their work had been re-classified from skilled to semi-skilled and secondly because they were paid less than semi-skilled men. You can't deliver cars without seat covers so production at the entire plant ground to a halt. The dispute was resolved with the involvement of the Secretary of State for employment, Barbara Castle and the way was paved for pay equality with men.
From my 21st century perspective, I wonder why Ford was so stubborn about the issue in the first place since there were only 180 or so women and many thousands of men - it could hardly have made much difference to their bottom line to pay women the same rate as men. I guess they thought there was a principle involved - its good to be able to reflect that few people these days think that paying women less than men is justifiable.
You could call Made in Dagenham docudrama or edutainment but whatever you call it, it's an easy watch with great sixties costumes and sets, unusually good-looking factory workers and a generally good-humoured tone. Apart from documenting a pivotal event in industrial relations in the UK it explores the human impact of the strike - the effects on relationships when one or both breadwinners in the family are on strike, the effect on a town with one major employer when hardly anyone is earning, and what happens when women workers meet a woman politician. Well worth a look.
Anne's rating 3.5/5 Ian's rating 3/5
Thursday, December 09, 2010
The Social Network
It's official, I am an older person. According to The New York Times there are two different audience reactions to the portrayal of Mark Zuckerberg in the film "The Social Network". Older people are upset by how Mark Zuckerberg behaves towards those around him, especially his best (only?) friend. Younger people are impressed by his genius. In particular they are apparently impressed by results regardless of methods used to get there. I fit in the first camp.
I think it is difficult to display genius in a film. But "The Social Network" goes some way to show how this works. It shows people talking about new ideas they have had, people using other people's ideas and choosing between different ideas (often for irrelevant reasons). This seems like a more realistic idea of how life works than the myth of the self contained genius whose ideas are entirely their own, whose decisions are always logical and execution of those ideas entirely their own effort. Genius is seldom in a vacuum and rarely perfect.
The film is less good at showing the hard work around writing software or raising capital or getting advertisers. But it does show how social convensions like honesty, friendship, honour, politeness, etc can be sacrificed to achieve results. Though in my mind this doesn't equate to genius. But that is perhaps my bourgeois, middle age mind-set.
As entertaining story telling goes, "The Social Network" does very well. Don't expect to find well rounded characters or character development here. Everyone, from Mark Zuckerberg, to the lawyers, girlfriends and dancing girls, is cut out of very thin cardboard and held stiff by stereotyping. It is amazing that they stay upright. For instance Mark himself is an ubergeek and therefore an order of magnitude more insecure, arrogant and lacking in social skills than the ordinary everyday geeks around him, and there is only the faintest suggestion that the events affect him. There are no sex scenes, no nudity (OK most of the females do spend time in their underwear), no guns or car chases. The film is carried entirely by the script and style of story telling, which kept me entertained in the cinema and the ideas it throws out there kept me thinking about it afterwards.
Did Mark have an overall plan from start to finish or was he opportunistic, swayed by the people around him, and by a need to get his own back? Did any of those who sued him really have a case or was it more a case of sour grapes and wanting to suck at the tit of guy who suddenly got rich?
Do sudden riches make otherwise nice people vindictive? Was Karl right? Is it really still all about the ownership of the means of production? (The current obsession with intellectual property being yet another way of establishing that ownership). Are ideas property? Is software property even?
How do you put a value on a company like Facebook? From a business point of view it is channel to get advertising to 500 million potential viewers. When did you last click on a Facebook advert or even read one?
One of the things that struck me about the film was how unusual it was for law suit averse Americans to make an unflattering film about a living, rich, fellow American. Then my mind started to wander. Perhaps Mark Zuckerberg doesn't find it unflattering, or doesn't care. Conspiracy theories bubble to the surface. Perhaps the film is a cunning self deprecating marketing ploy by Facebook. Or may be I have been nibbling those funny tasting afghans again.
Ultimately "The Social Network" is a film that both entertained me and made me think.
Ian's rating 4/5 Anne's rating 2.5/5
I think it is difficult to display genius in a film. But "The Social Network" goes some way to show how this works. It shows people talking about new ideas they have had, people using other people's ideas and choosing between different ideas (often for irrelevant reasons). This seems like a more realistic idea of how life works than the myth of the self contained genius whose ideas are entirely their own, whose decisions are always logical and execution of those ideas entirely their own effort. Genius is seldom in a vacuum and rarely perfect.
The film is less good at showing the hard work around writing software or raising capital or getting advertisers. But it does show how social convensions like honesty, friendship, honour, politeness, etc can be sacrificed to achieve results. Though in my mind this doesn't equate to genius. But that is perhaps my bourgeois, middle age mind-set.
As entertaining story telling goes, "The Social Network" does very well. Don't expect to find well rounded characters or character development here. Everyone, from Mark Zuckerberg, to the lawyers, girlfriends and dancing girls, is cut out of very thin cardboard and held stiff by stereotyping. It is amazing that they stay upright. For instance Mark himself is an ubergeek and therefore an order of magnitude more insecure, arrogant and lacking in social skills than the ordinary everyday geeks around him, and there is only the faintest suggestion that the events affect him. There are no sex scenes, no nudity (OK most of the females do spend time in their underwear), no guns or car chases. The film is carried entirely by the script and style of story telling, which kept me entertained in the cinema and the ideas it throws out there kept me thinking about it afterwards.
Did Mark have an overall plan from start to finish or was he opportunistic, swayed by the people around him, and by a need to get his own back? Did any of those who sued him really have a case or was it more a case of sour grapes and wanting to suck at the tit of guy who suddenly got rich?
Do sudden riches make otherwise nice people vindictive? Was Karl right? Is it really still all about the ownership of the means of production? (The current obsession with intellectual property being yet another way of establishing that ownership). Are ideas property? Is software property even?
How do you put a value on a company like Facebook? From a business point of view it is channel to get advertising to 500 million potential viewers. When did you last click on a Facebook advert or even read one?
One of the things that struck me about the film was how unusual it was for law suit averse Americans to make an unflattering film about a living, rich, fellow American. Then my mind started to wander. Perhaps Mark Zuckerberg doesn't find it unflattering, or doesn't care. Conspiracy theories bubble to the surface. Perhaps the film is a cunning self deprecating marketing ploy by Facebook. Or may be I have been nibbling those funny tasting afghans again.
Ultimately "The Social Network" is a film that both entertained me and made me think.
Ian's rating 4/5 Anne's rating 2.5/5
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
City Island
Now that Belly Dancing classes have finished for the year, Tuesday nights are free for going to the movies. Last week we went to see City Island which is a charmingly feel-good story about the perils of lying to your nearest and dearest.
The family whose lives the movie revolves around are the Rizzos. They live on City Island, which is a very pretty small island that's part of New York, one square kilometer in size, connected to the Bronx by a bridge. The novelty location adds an extra level of charm to the film.
Vince Rizzo (Dad) is a corrections officer and he's a secret smoker and a closet actor. He has a son from a previous relationship about whom his wife (Joyce) doesn't know . Joyce is also a secret smoker but apart from that is relatively uncomplicated. Their college-age daughter (Vivian) is also a secret smoker and although her parents think she's studying, she's actually working as a stripper. Their high-school-student son Vince Jr is (yes, you guessed it) a secret smoker and he also has a thing for fat girls.
Vince's long-lost son (Tony) turns up in Vince's jail and on release he comes to live at the Rizzo's. Naturally Vince doesn't let on who Tony really is and of course his identity is revealed eventually.As the movie progresses all the cats are let out of all the bags, and very amusing it is too - laugh-out-loud funny, in fact. Add the great location and generally beautiful and talented actors (Steven Strait as Tony wins my eye-candy of the year prize, I think) and a great script and you have the recipe for a very enjoyable film. There are quite a few plot-holes and it's not to be taken too seriously but it is genuine good fun.
Anne's rating 4/5 Ian's rating 3/5
The family whose lives the movie revolves around are the Rizzos. They live on City Island, which is a very pretty small island that's part of New York, one square kilometer in size, connected to the Bronx by a bridge. The novelty location adds an extra level of charm to the film.
Vince Rizzo (Dad) is a corrections officer and he's a secret smoker and a closet actor. He has a son from a previous relationship about whom his wife (Joyce) doesn't know . Joyce is also a secret smoker but apart from that is relatively uncomplicated. Their college-age daughter (Vivian) is also a secret smoker and although her parents think she's studying, she's actually working as a stripper. Their high-school-student son Vince Jr is (yes, you guessed it) a secret smoker and he also has a thing for fat girls.
Vince's long-lost son (Tony) turns up in Vince's jail and on release he comes to live at the Rizzo's. Naturally Vince doesn't let on who Tony really is and of course his identity is revealed eventually.As the movie progresses all the cats are let out of all the bags, and very amusing it is too - laugh-out-loud funny, in fact. Add the great location and generally beautiful and talented actors (Steven Strait as Tony wins my eye-candy of the year prize, I think) and a great script and you have the recipe for a very enjoyable film. There are quite a few plot-holes and it's not to be taken too seriously but it is genuine good fun.
Anne's rating 4/5 Ian's rating 3/5
Saturday, September 04, 2010
The Gay Divorcee and Shall We Dance
Event Cinemas, who are now running the Embassy, are having a season of old movies which screen on Sunday afternoons and are the repeated on Wednesdays. One Wednesday recently, I decided to give The Gay Divorcee a whirl, thinking that, since it stars Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers, at the very least there'd be some good dancing to watch.
It turns out I under-estimated the entertainment value. This splendid movie, made in 1934, not only has great dance sequences but is funny as well - witty dialogue and the kind of mistaken-identity/situational humour which I'd expect from a French farce or a Shakespearian comedy.
Buoyed by having fun on Wednesday, I persuaded Ian and two other friends to try Shall we Dance on a wet Sunday afternoon. It was made in the same mold, but I thought it even better than The Gay Divorcee. In both cases Fred Astaire plays a self-deprecating hero who falls in love (or at least gets infatuated) at first sight. Ginger Rogers plays a slightly aloof woman in each case who eventually becomes as enamoured of Fred as he is of her. Edward Everett Horton (who seems to have been in more movies that you could comfortably count) plays Astaire's sidekick in both films and Eric Blore plays a member of the hotel staff in each.
I can see that the American comedy convention of men being lovable but stupid and woman being smart and good-looking (think I love Raymond, or Gary Unmarried, or Modern Family or... ) started a VERY long time ago. The 1930's slant seems a little difference in that Fred's characters can sing and dance whereas the modern male comedy character has fewer redeeming qualities. Comedy aside, the song and dance numbers in these two movies are superb and Fred and Ginger look like they're enjoying themselves hugely which is just so appealing to watch. There's tap and ballroom and ballet (Harriet Hoctor bent over backwards while dancing en pointe is unforgettably wierd)and even a number on rollerskates. There's good singing, fabulous frocks and great cars and its all so good humoured you can't help but enjoy yourself.
I've read that Shall We Dance isn't one of Fred and Ginger's best movies so things like Top Hat and Show Time must be fantastic. Do I wait for a screening somewhere, or try and track down a DVD?
Anne's rating 4/5
It turns out I under-estimated the entertainment value. This splendid movie, made in 1934, not only has great dance sequences but is funny as well - witty dialogue and the kind of mistaken-identity/situational humour which I'd expect from a French farce or a Shakespearian comedy.
Buoyed by having fun on Wednesday, I persuaded Ian and two other friends to try Shall we Dance on a wet Sunday afternoon. It was made in the same mold, but I thought it even better than The Gay Divorcee. In both cases Fred Astaire plays a self-deprecating hero who falls in love (or at least gets infatuated) at first sight. Ginger Rogers plays a slightly aloof woman in each case who eventually becomes as enamoured of Fred as he is of her. Edward Everett Horton (who seems to have been in more movies that you could comfortably count) plays Astaire's sidekick in both films and Eric Blore plays a member of the hotel staff in each.
I can see that the American comedy convention of men being lovable but stupid and woman being smart and good-looking (think I love Raymond, or Gary Unmarried, or Modern Family or... ) started a VERY long time ago. The 1930's slant seems a little difference in that Fred's characters can sing and dance whereas the modern male comedy character has fewer redeeming qualities. Comedy aside, the song and dance numbers in these two movies are superb and Fred and Ginger look like they're enjoying themselves hugely which is just so appealing to watch. There's tap and ballroom and ballet (Harriet Hoctor bent over backwards while dancing en pointe is unforgettably wierd)and even a number on rollerskates. There's good singing, fabulous frocks and great cars and its all so good humoured you can't help but enjoy yourself.
I've read that Shall We Dance isn't one of Fred and Ginger's best movies so things like Top Hat and Show Time must be fantastic. Do I wait for a screening somewhere, or try and track down a DVD?
Anne's rating 4/5
Tuesday, August 03, 2010
Award Ceremony NZ International Film Festival 2010
This is really just a personal summary of this year's Film Festival, in a style I have used before.
This was a year of political films. A year when directors couldn't help themselves from playing with time lines, and they often couldn't be bothered with the traditional cinematic conventions to signal flashbacks. It was also a year of superfluous final scenes.
In summary, this year's...
Best Film: Cell 211
French Farce: The Concert
Classic Film: Once Upon a Time in the West
Special Mention: A Prophet - educating us on how prison educates
Best Comedy
Nominations:
All good, but The Concert just beats Four Lions, but I wouldn't like to pick a third place getter from the other three.
Best Thriller
Nominations:
My pick is Cell 211 - tense from beginning to end.
Best Mystery Film
Nominations:
The best told, yet simplest mystery was The Double Hour.
Triangle was the most mind bending,
while The Ghost Writer was the 3rd most entertaining mystery.
Best Political Film
There were plenty of films with a political theme or drama based on political conflict this year.
Nominations:
Four Lions was the most irreverant, Russian Lessons was the most thought provoking, Kawasaki's Rose and Agora also made me think, while White Material, Ajami and Scherezade did a good job of presenting consequences of political conflicts.
Best Horror
Nominations:
My pick is Triangle. Usually people take a cruise to escape, but these people want to escape from the cruise. Stylish Splice was my next pick, with The Loved Ones as the best of the splatter movies.
New Zealand Films
In order from best to worst:
The acting in the Kiwi films was often better than the films. In particlar Kate O’Rourke and William McInnes were outstanding and Jemaine Clement was delightfully spooky.
Disappointments
Time Travel
This was a year where directors used non-traditional techniques jumping around in time.
Superfluous Final Scenes
In addition Splice ran out of inspiration near end. The Time that Remains had superfluous scenes in 2nd half even though the final scene was great. While the final scene of The Killer Inside Me was full of problems.
Best Actors
In order
Eye-candy
Previously I have noted the unrealistic or unjustified use of a sexy actress. I didn't notice any blatant eye candy this year. Even Kim Cattrall and Rachel Weisz were looking restrained and aren't all female violin soloists beautiful?
But I have it on good authority that there were two pretty boys in The Hopes & Dreams of Gazza Snell.
One offs
Western: Once Upon a Time in the West - the best of the West?
Animation: In the Attic - junk having fun
Documentary: Russian Lessons - eye openning
Science Fiction: Splice - shock and humour
Surreal: Wound - amazing acting, pity about the film
Silent: Marvellous Corricks - weird and wonderful pre-1910 silent films
This was a year of political films. A year when directors couldn't help themselves from playing with time lines, and they often couldn't be bothered with the traditional cinematic conventions to signal flashbacks. It was also a year of superfluous final scenes.
In summary, this year's...
Best Film: Cell 211
French Farce: The Concert
Classic Film: Once Upon a Time in the West
Special Mention: A Prophet - educating us on how prison educates
Best Comedy
Nominations:
- Predicament - the beginners guide to blackmail.
- The Concert - have conect booking, need orchestra.
- A Somewhat Gentle Man - adjusting to the madness of life on the outside
- Cyrus - the perils of dating a solo mum
- Four Lions - don't shoot the Wookie
All good, but The Concert just beats Four Lions, but I wouldn't like to pick a third place getter from the other three.
Best Thriller
Nominations:
- Predicament - blackmail is such a dirty word.
- Animal Kingdom - you can trust granny, can't you?
- Cell 211 - let me tell you about my first day on the job.
- Farewell - how the French won the Cold War.
- The Ghost Writer - ghost writers are kittens, don't know.
- How I Ended the Summer - two men, one mistake, one short fuse.
- The Killer Inside Me - stylish, but flawed.
My pick is Cell 211 - tense from beginning to end.
Best Mystery Film
Nominations:
- Once Upon a Time in the West - why are they killing each other?
- Kawasaki's Rose - is Pavel Josek a hero or a traitor?
- The Ghost Writer - who is pulling whose the strings?
- The Double Hour - noises off.
- Triangle - why didn't they go straight to the bridge?
The best told, yet simplest mystery was The Double Hour.
Triangle was the most mind bending,
while The Ghost Writer was the 3rd most entertaining mystery.
Best Political Film
There were plenty of films with a political theme or drama based on political conflict this year.
Nominations:
- Kawasaki's Rose - who chooses the heros and the traitors?
- Four Lions - more dangerous to themselves than the public?
- Scheherazade, Tell Me a Story - is everything political in Egypt?
- The Time that Remains - are Palestinian Israelis frozen in time?
- The Ghost Writer - who pulled the strings?
- Agora - Christianity behaving badly.
- Lebanon - mummy I want to come home!
- Ajami - collision courses in Israel.
- White Material - can you be a white African?
- Russian Lessons - pawns in The Great Game.
Four Lions was the most irreverant, Russian Lessons was the most thought provoking, Kawasaki's Rose and Agora also made me think, while White Material, Ajami and Scherezade did a good job of presenting consequences of political conflicts.
Best Horror
Nominations:
- The Loved Ones - does for outback folk what Hitchcock did for shower curtains.
- Dream Home - an apartment to die for.
- The Human Centipede - mad doctor has it all sewn up.
- Wound - the angry by-product of being bored by the utterly predictable banality of our mainstream movies.
- Triangle - didn't I kill you five minutes ago?
- Splice - Picaso meets genetic engineering.
My pick is Triangle. Usually people take a cruise to escape, but these people want to escape from the cruise. Stylish Splice was my next pick, with The Loved Ones as the best of the splatter movies.
New Zealand Films
In order from best to worst:
- Predicament - what did you do in the school holidays?
- The Hopes & Dreams of Gazza Snell - come crashing down.
- Wound - love it or hate it.
The acting in the Kiwi films was often better than the films. In particlar Kate O’Rourke and William McInnes were outstanding and Jemaine Clement was delightfully spooky.
Disappointments
- Wound - too surreal for my poor brain
- The Myth of the American Sleepover - I'm not the target audience
Time Travel
This was a year where directors used non-traditional techniques jumping around in time.
- White Material - is it yesterday or tomorrow?
- Ajami - isn't he dead?
- Dream Home - 3 timelines, with subtle hints
- Triangle - its is meant to be tricky to understand
- Wound - surreal, 'nuff said
Superfluous Final Scenes
- The Housemaid - what's with that final birthday scene dubbed into English?
- The Loved Ones - should have stopped in reverse.
In addition Splice ran out of inspiration near end. The Time that Remains had superfluous scenes in 2nd half even though the final scene was great. While the final scene of The Killer Inside Me was full of problems.
Best Actors
In order
- Kate O’Rourke acts her heart out in Wound
- Luis Tosar was mesmerising as Malamadre in Cell 211
- Everyone knows a Gazza like William McInnes
- Casey Affleck was The Killer Inside Me
Eye-candy
Previously I have noted the unrealistic or unjustified use of a sexy actress. I didn't notice any blatant eye candy this year. Even Kim Cattrall and Rachel Weisz were looking restrained and aren't all female violin soloists beautiful?
But I have it on good authority that there were two pretty boys in The Hopes & Dreams of Gazza Snell.
One offs
Western: Once Upon a Time in the West - the best of the West?
Animation: In the Attic - junk having fun
Documentary: Russian Lessons - eye openning
Science Fiction: Splice - shock and humour
Surreal: Wound - amazing acting, pity about the film
Silent: Marvellous Corricks - weird and wonderful pre-1910 silent films
The Hopes & Dreams of Gazza Snell
Gazza is good Kiwi bloke, ambitiously in pursuit of his dreams and hopelessly optimistic to the point of being blind to risk and consequence. A man with a "can do" attitude and boundless energy. Not a good person to be married to if you are the worrying type (or even merely well adjusted). We all know a "Gazza" or two and William McInnes plays him perfectly.
The plot of The Hopes & Dreams of Gazza Snell is very simple, yet it is so dominated by Gazza that only his son Mark gets to share the limelight. Some of the interesting events (like the election campaign or Gail and Ron or Mark and Jee) are handled so abruptly that they seem contrived. I wonder if the story would seem more complete if either more had been made out of them or if they had been cut.
Gazza's passion is go-carting and he lives his passion through his sons and his desire to see them to top of the sport and dreams of Formula 1. He finances his dreams with proceeds of his cleaning business, and what ever schemes he can come up with, to the despair of his wife, Gail (Robyn Malcolm). His risk taking both financially and on the track are leading inevitably to disaster one way or the other only Gazza (and his sons) can't see it.
Overall it a nice simple story with a strong central character that we can all identify with, but the execution of the supporting characters and story elements lets it down a little bit. Still, I have it on good authority that the two boys are eye candy.
Ian's rating 2.5/5
Anne's rating 3/5
The plot of The Hopes & Dreams of Gazza Snell is very simple, yet it is so dominated by Gazza that only his son Mark gets to share the limelight. Some of the interesting events (like the election campaign or Gail and Ron or Mark and Jee) are handled so abruptly that they seem contrived. I wonder if the story would seem more complete if either more had been made out of them or if they had been cut.
Gazza's passion is go-carting and he lives his passion through his sons and his desire to see them to top of the sport and dreams of Formula 1. He finances his dreams with proceeds of his cleaning business, and what ever schemes he can come up with, to the despair of his wife, Gail (Robyn Malcolm). His risk taking both financially and on the track are leading inevitably to disaster one way or the other only Gazza (and his sons) can't see it.
Overall it a nice simple story with a strong central character that we can all identify with, but the execution of the supporting characters and story elements lets it down a little bit. Still, I have it on good authority that the two boys are eye candy.
Ian's rating 2.5/5
Anne's rating 3/5
The Red Shoes
Made in 1948, the Red Shoes is, apparently, THE great ballet movie of all time. The reason it features in the 2010 film festival is that is has recently been restored. (You can read all about the restoration here .) I read lots of English Ballet novels when I was a child (no TV, you understand) and while I can't remember references to The Red Shoes, Moira Shearer definitely featured. Sunday afternoon at the film festival seemed a good time to see what all the fuss was about. The story is all a bit melodramatic by twenty-first century standards but gripping nonetheless. Moira Shearer plays Vicky Page, a rising ballet star. Vicky is given her big break by the ballet company director (Boris) who offers her the leading role in The Red Shoes. The director has also given a big break to young conductor and composer Julian Craster, getting him to score the ballet music. In the process of rehearsing and performing the Red Shoes Julian and Vicky fall in love, much to Boris's disgust - he prefers his artistes to concentrate on their jobs and lavish any spare emotion on him. Poor old Vicky has to choose between love and dancing and this causes more turmoil than you'd expect - it turns into a tragedy on an epic scale, echoing the plot of the ballet itself.
There's definitely justification for the fuss - this is a beautiful film to look at on all sorts of levels. Moira Shearer is just gorgeous - wonderful red hair and big blue eyes and an hourglass waist and her party clothes are fabulous. It's fun to see Covent Garden when there was still a working market next door, and the scenery in Monte Carlo is suitably splendid. There's a big chunk of the ballet to watch which is great. There are 1940's hairstyles to admire and that clipped English delivery to marvel at - did people REALLY talk like that? The Red Shoes is escapism on a grand scale and you should take the opportunity to escape if it arises.
Anne's rating 4.5/5
Monday, August 02, 2010
Russian Lessons
Russian Lessons was the only documentary I saw in this year's Film Festival. A couple of years ago during the 2008 Beijing Olympic games Georgia attacked the city of Tskhinvali in the break away region of South Ossetia. The Russians claimed that 2000 civilians and some Russian peacekeepers had been killed in the bombardment, and that they were counter attacking to protect their peacekeepers and the South Ossetians. The Russians quickly took control ofSouth Ossetia and expanded the war into other parts of Georgia. The US, who had military advisors in Georgia, blustered that this was Russian aggression. The French tried to broker a ceasefire and a Russian withdrawal. The ceasefire took effect but the Russian withdrawal was much slower than they promised. There was talk of Russia being annoyed by a oil pipeline through Georgia that bypassed Russian controlled pipelines. Out of the mainstream there was sketchy information about the larger scale presence of Israeli military advisors and hardware in Georgia and the Georgian Minister of Defense with Israeli citizenship. The general consensus in the media seemed to be that Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili (emboldened by Dick Cheney et al) had tried to retake South Ossettia by force, while the world's media attention (and Russia) was focused on the Beijing Olympics and it had backfired.
At the start of this war Olga Konskaya and Andrei Nekrasov (documentary film makers based in St Petersburg, and connoisseurs of Georgian wine) decided to document the war. Andrei flew to Georgia to reach the front line from the south while his wife Olga went to North Ossetia (in Russia) to reach the front line from the north. Olga found the interesting information. At the Russian border she found people who saw the Russian army moving into South Ossetia before the war started. In Tskhinvali a city of about 25,000 where 2000 civilian were killed she couldn't find anyone who knows someone who died or were wounded, and only 50 new graves mostly of young men. People she talked to said that they had left the city before the war (about half the population left before the war started). Outside Tskhinvali amoung the Georgian villages she found plenty of people who's houses and businesses had been destroyed and evidence of deaths. Strangely most of the destroyed businesses were brand new, evidence of an ecconomic boom amoung Georgians in South Ossetia in recent years.
In Beslan, North Ossetia she finds witnesses from both inside the school and outside it who claim that the killing and destruction was caused by Russian soldiers and tanks attacking the school, rather than by the 7 gunmen inside the school. Turning the official story of this 2004 terrorist incident on its head. The Russian 58th Army was involved in Beslan, South Ossetia and the Second Chechen War.
In the second half of the film Olga and Andrei supplement their field work with uncovering TV footage played in the West and in Russia of Geogian victims in hospital mis-identified as South Ossetians, of Russian planes attacking Gori mis-identified as Georgian planes attacking Tskhinvali. They also look back at the earlier conflict in 1991 especially at the Russian involvement in atrocities in Abkhazia, with interviews of Georgian victims and corroborated by a Russian soldier.
The conclusions they draw are that the break up of the USSR was at least as brutal as Yugoslavia, that Russia is not to be trusted and its interest in Abkhazia is more about access to the Black Sea than the interests of Abkhazians and that western media is often too trusting or lazy about verifying facts. Even though they blame the entire 2008 war on Russia they don't explain Russia's motives. Though Putin made it clear in 2008 when the US recognised Kosovo that it would lead to Russia recognizing separtists in places like South Ossetia.
In my view the last 20 years has seen a ressurection of The Great Game between the UK and Russia in 19thC, but this time played out between the US and Russia with eastern Europe and the break away parts of the USSR as the chess board. While Russia is very short of pieces and is pinned in a corner, it is trying to play itself back into the game. Not a good time to be one of America's pawns.
Russian Lessons isn't neutral but it is a dramatic demonstration that even with today's technology the media (and through them the rest of us and our political leaders) can still be fooled.
Ian's rating 4/5
At the start of this war Olga Konskaya and Andrei Nekrasov (documentary film makers based in St Petersburg, and connoisseurs of Georgian wine) decided to document the war. Andrei flew to Georgia to reach the front line from the south while his wife Olga went to North Ossetia (in Russia) to reach the front line from the north. Olga found the interesting information. At the Russian border she found people who saw the Russian army moving into South Ossetia before the war started. In Tskhinvali a city of about 25,000 where 2000 civilian were killed she couldn't find anyone who knows someone who died or were wounded, and only 50 new graves mostly of young men. People she talked to said that they had left the city before the war (about half the population left before the war started). Outside Tskhinvali amoung the Georgian villages she found plenty of people who's houses and businesses had been destroyed and evidence of deaths. Strangely most of the destroyed businesses were brand new, evidence of an ecconomic boom amoung Georgians in South Ossetia in recent years.
In Beslan, North Ossetia she finds witnesses from both inside the school and outside it who claim that the killing and destruction was caused by Russian soldiers and tanks attacking the school, rather than by the 7 gunmen inside the school. Turning the official story of this 2004 terrorist incident on its head. The Russian 58th Army was involved in Beslan, South Ossetia and the Second Chechen War.
In the second half of the film Olga and Andrei supplement their field work with uncovering TV footage played in the West and in Russia of Geogian victims in hospital mis-identified as South Ossetians, of Russian planes attacking Gori mis-identified as Georgian planes attacking Tskhinvali. They also look back at the earlier conflict in 1991 especially at the Russian involvement in atrocities in Abkhazia, with interviews of Georgian victims and corroborated by a Russian soldier.
The conclusions they draw are that the break up of the USSR was at least as brutal as Yugoslavia, that Russia is not to be trusted and its interest in Abkhazia is more about access to the Black Sea than the interests of Abkhazians and that western media is often too trusting or lazy about verifying facts. Even though they blame the entire 2008 war on Russia they don't explain Russia's motives. Though Putin made it clear in 2008 when the US recognised Kosovo that it would lead to Russia recognizing separtists in places like South Ossetia.
In my view the last 20 years has seen a ressurection of The Great Game between the UK and Russia in 19thC, but this time played out between the US and Russia with eastern Europe and the break away parts of the USSR as the chess board. While Russia is very short of pieces and is pinned in a corner, it is trying to play itself back into the game. Not a good time to be one of America's pawns.
Russian Lessons isn't neutral but it is a dramatic demonstration that even with today's technology the media (and through them the rest of us and our political leaders) can still be fooled.
Ian's rating 4/5
Cyrus
Boy meets Girl and Girl's parents don't approve is a familiar romantic theme, all the way back to Romeo and Juliet. With Cyrus we have the theme reworked for the older, second-time-around crowd; divorced man meets solo mother and her son doesn't approve. Not only does he not approve, he regards his mother's new suitor as direct competition for her affections.
Cyrus is a fraught, funny and slightly painful story. John is our divorced man, a freelance editor who is overly dependent on his ex-wife for a sympathetic ear. He meets Molly, (the very attractive solo mother) at a party and they hit it off and end up in bed at his house. A relationship ensues, but John, who is not the best adjusted chap in the world, decides to follow her home one morning since he feels she may be hiding something from him. And so she is - her 21 year-old son, Cyrus. Cyrus and Molly have an unusually close relationship which seems to cross boundaries in the realms of personal space and propriety and watching John discovering this relationship is fun if slightly uncomfortable. Watching Cyrus attempt to sabotage the new romance is a similar combination of fun and discomfort.
Cyrus is played very straight (the acting is excellent) and you are left to make your own interpretation of the characters and their motivations - there are no Sex-and-the-City lunches with best mates where the characters explain what's going on in their heads. Despite the subject matter it's relatively light-hearted and ends on an up-beat note and was one of the festival's surprise pleasures
Anne's rating 3/5
Ian's rating 3/5
Cyrus is a fraught, funny and slightly painful story. John is our divorced man, a freelance editor who is overly dependent on his ex-wife for a sympathetic ear. He meets Molly, (the very attractive solo mother) at a party and they hit it off and end up in bed at his house. A relationship ensues, but John, who is not the best adjusted chap in the world, decides to follow her home one morning since he feels she may be hiding something from him. And so she is - her 21 year-old son, Cyrus. Cyrus and Molly have an unusually close relationship which seems to cross boundaries in the realms of personal space and propriety and watching John discovering this relationship is fun if slightly uncomfortable. Watching Cyrus attempt to sabotage the new romance is a similar combination of fun and discomfort.
Cyrus is played very straight (the acting is excellent) and you are left to make your own interpretation of the characters and their motivations - there are no Sex-and-the-City lunches with best mates where the characters explain what's going on in their heads. Despite the subject matter it's relatively light-hearted and ends on an up-beat note and was one of the festival's surprise pleasures
Anne's rating 3/5
Ian's rating 3/5
After the Waterfall
I was disappointed in After the Waterfall even though my reasons for going (centred around seeing Antony Starr in something other than Outrageous Fortune and also trying to be support New Zealand movies in general) weren't that compelling in terms of guaranteeing a good watching experience.
In fact, Antony did an awesome acting job and the Waitakeres and West Auckland looked wonderful but the film's premise was too slim. It's the story of a man whose four-year-old daughter disappears while he's minding her and she isn't found. As is often the case, the loss of their child destroys his marriage and almost destroys his ability to relate to anyone else. Eventually he emerges from his dark night of the soul and recovery looks possible.
The director was at the screening and she explained that the film is based on a novel and what appealed to her about the story was the lack of closure; that sometimes (often, even) in life we don't know what happened or why it happened and she wanted to explore that. Now, in lots of ways I agree with her - I think the media is obsessed with who or what to blame for untimely deaths, and it's full of stories of grieving parents campaigning about something to prevent others having a similar experience, because that seems to help them deal with their grief. And one of the refreshing things about Antony's character was a complete lack of that campaigning spirit. However, it really wasn't much fun watching his personal struggle, nor was it especially uplifting or edifying. So why would you want to? I'm not sure that you would, unless you just wanted your mind removed from your own issues.
Anne's rating 2/5
In fact, Antony did an awesome acting job and the Waitakeres and West Auckland looked wonderful but the film's premise was too slim. It's the story of a man whose four-year-old daughter disappears while he's minding her and she isn't found. As is often the case, the loss of their child destroys his marriage and almost destroys his ability to relate to anyone else. Eventually he emerges from his dark night of the soul and recovery looks possible.
The director was at the screening and she explained that the film is based on a novel and what appealed to her about the story was the lack of closure; that sometimes (often, even) in life we don't know what happened or why it happened and she wanted to explore that. Now, in lots of ways I agree with her - I think the media is obsessed with who or what to blame for untimely deaths, and it's full of stories of grieving parents campaigning about something to prevent others having a similar experience, because that seems to help them deal with their grief. And one of the refreshing things about Antony's character was a complete lack of that campaigning spirit. However, it really wasn't much fun watching his personal struggle, nor was it especially uplifting or edifying. So why would you want to? I'm not sure that you would, unless you just wanted your mind removed from your own issues.
Anne's rating 2/5
Sunday, August 01, 2010
Triangle
Triangle starts off in suburban Florida with a solo mum (Jess) frustrated with her autistic son and trying while trying to make a sailing trip with a her boyfriend and four other people. The trip starts smoothly, though Jess seems inexplicably dazed and distracted. But the spooky stuff starts soon enough and Jess (Melissa George) is at the middle of it.
This is more of a mystery horror movie than a splatter one. The basic mystery is signaled in the title, but like an onion there are layers of mystery here and at the bottom it becomes a psychological thriller as the protagonists try to escape the trap they are caught in.
Triangle is carefully constructed, and it pays to keep your attention on the details, as the you try to decipher it faster than Jess. In fact at the end I felt like watching it again, to double check the revelations against the earlier events to see if it all makes sense or if I'd been taken for a ride by some cinematic slight of hand.
Ian's rating 4/5
In the Attic: Who Has a Birthday Today?
Every day Buttercup bakes a cake and her three friends toss a die with 5 blank sides and a birthday cake on the sixth side to determine whose birthday it is today.
Stop motion animation has been popularized by Wallace and Gromit, but tends to be the poor cousin to the output of Pixar et al. This Czech film is based on discarded toys and other rubbish left in a capacious attic. Buttercup is a doll and her three friends are a lazy teddy bear, a pompous, windbag marionette soldier and a frenetic plasticine man with a bottle top hat. In fact it is fascinating to try and identify the junk that appears and often re-purposed into machines by Curie (the engineer and radio announcer), or used by the baddies.
Like many good stories for children there are other themes aimed at accompanying adults. In this case the baddies have over tones of a Soviet style regime, led by a talking golden, glasses wearing bust. This authoritarian leader has hots for Buttercup and Soviet style persuasion techniques, but never fear her friends are coming to her rescue (if the cat doesn't get them).
Ian's rating 3/5
Anne's rating 4/5
Stop motion animation has been popularized by Wallace and Gromit, but tends to be the poor cousin to the output of Pixar et al. This Czech film is based on discarded toys and other rubbish left in a capacious attic. Buttercup is a doll and her three friends are a lazy teddy bear, a pompous, windbag marionette soldier and a frenetic plasticine man with a bottle top hat. In fact it is fascinating to try and identify the junk that appears and often re-purposed into machines by Curie (the engineer and radio announcer), or used by the baddies.
Like many good stories for children there are other themes aimed at accompanying adults. In this case the baddies have over tones of a Soviet style regime, led by a talking golden, glasses wearing bust. This authoritarian leader has hots for Buttercup and Soviet style persuasion techniques, but never fear her friends are coming to her rescue (if the cat doesn't get them).
Ian's rating 3/5
Anne's rating 4/5
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
