Animal Kingdom (2010)

Although I take no pleasure in taking a break from my casual xenophobia towards Australia...
Frankly they have been doing stuff for us lately. The prospect of the Australian gangster movie seemed like a misnomer until Chopper came out at the outset of the decade. I haven't decided yet if Animal Kingdom is better than Chopper but that I put them in the same category is high high praise. They're not similar films but they do share something aside from the crime themes... impending doom and sudden violence. Come to think of it, so does The Proposition but I digress. I left the cinema just shaken up by what I'd saw, in the way you might having seen a horror movie. I'm not sure if David Michod has made anything else but this guy is a monster. He's made his own Australian Goodfellas. I'm sorry but I'm in the mood to heap praise because of what he's done. I guess I'm saying that as well because they are very similar stories- kid gets mixed up with the mob though they are very different takes on how you could make that; Henry Hill is clearly completely seduced by that life- our hero, J is less seduced, more left no option but to enter this pack of wolves. 
It begins fairly straight-forward as J moves in with his estranged family after his mother dies of a heroin overdose. He's generally welcomed in and no effort is made to disguise that they're a family that strives on criminal activities; I believe they're armed robbers but some sell drugs as well. And this is all well and good- a nice little character piece is developing... but then a seemingly major character is shockingly murdered by the police in cold blood. From now on.. all bets are off. This is Michod saying, anyone could be up for the chop at anytime. And this air of dread just descends over the film.
The kid played by , is just looks vacant the whole time and I think this role is the only example I can think of where you could get away with that. Being unassuming is like a special power, it's the best pokerface but that's nowhere near enough to get him out of this situation. One of his uncle is extremely highly strung and all that coke won't help and another uncle 'Pope', played by Ben Mendelsohn is superbly creepy from frame1 and becomes increasingly unsettling through out the movie, where one of his family dies he just makes matters increasingly worse. 
The cast are just amazing including Joel Edgerton as the one fairly good egg in the family and Guy Pearce, the one decent cop in Melbourne. What's also interesting is that the cops in this movie seem worse than anyone or at least equally as bad, as this bent or murderous force. It not that we want anyone in this family to get away with anything but I guess we want more for them than to get shot like dogs. 
I don't really want to say anymore about it lest I spoil it except please find Animal Kingdom and watch it. It is raw and thrilling, disturbing and engrossing. Highly Recommended. Unlike Walkabout bars, Fosters, Veggiemite, Yahoo Serious movies, Danni Minogue, Quantas....

The Illusionist (2010)

Yesterday was about failing on promise. Today is about exceeding it. 
I don't know about you about when Belleville Rendez-Vous arrived, it was so instantly classic it seemed like the film's maker Sylvain Chomet had always been here producing classics when it was his debut. It was funny and strangely beautiful, warm and charming yet unsettling.
His follow-up, The Illusionist- is all the above and more. It's the story of an old magician and the burgeoning life of a young woman from the Outer Hebrides.
This French magician has been sent to England by his agent and doesn't seem particularly plussed about it either way- this is a hardened performer that has probably done the same routine twice a night for longer than he can remember.
But times are inevitably a'changing as they will have a habit of doing. His brand of subtle showmanship and understated talent are being left behind to make way for rock and/or roll and what the hell is that about?
Needless to say our man's stay in London is short lived and he's sent to somewhere in Northern Scotland, to do a pub-gig -again he takes this large commute to work in his stride but while there his presence enchants this older-teenage girl who's probably never been anywhere and rarely sees strangers. Whatever the reason, this gentleman inspires her to stowaway and leave her island with him; Again he doesn't seem at all surprised or concerned that his young woman is inviting herself on his journey. It should be said at those point, there's no inkling of anything untoward or creepy about this relationship but then, it's not particularly paternal. It's just a guy trying to give this young kid a break and get her some nice things. It's only money- he can always go out and get more. 
That said she does seem to have expensive tastes and she doesn't seem to understand the cost of anything...
I've made it sound more solemn than it is; there are lots of physical comedy set-pieces, lots of silly characters like the foppish young rockers and the various crazy agents, the magician has. But the other theatrical characters like the ventriloquist and the booze-soaked clown are truly haunting in their melancholy as like the magician, they know their time is coming to an end. 
The young girl though is really coming into her own. The new clothes she been bought are making her feel more happy and she's enjoying taking in city-life in Edinburgh. She's even caught the eye of a young Sean Connery-type looking fellow...
Chomet has succeeded again in creating a world that you probably wouldn't want to live in but is nice to visit. Like France or Scotland, then. It reminds us that cel-animation shouldn't be forgotten because it has an impressionist quality that's impossible to have in computer-animation. It's the difference between a painting and a photograph. And even despite quite a maudlin ending, you still leave The Illusionist feeling your life has been reaffirmed just a little bit...


I watched The Illusionist (2010) online via Blinkbox.
My 2011 in Movies will return with Animal Kingdom (2010)...

I Am Number Four (2011)

You know, I really don't go to watch things I think I won't like. 
If I'm ever angry or talk shit about a film, it's only because it doesn't deliver on it's promise. But I'm struggling to think where I percieved that that I Am Number Four showed any promise. I guess I thought DJ Caruso was good for making entertaining popcorn B.S, like Disturbia and Eagle Eye.
Had I looked more closely I would have noticed that this was a film produced by Michael Bay and written by the makers of Smallville and the head writer of Buffy. It take no pride in saying that this is remarkable by how much it is translucently made by accountants/commitee. It's difficult not to view it in as cynical a manner as the way it was produced. It's like someone said 'I like Harry Potter but... um... whataboutdoingitwithbetterlookingAmericanpeople'. It's obvious that someone said I want a franchise like Twilight and Potter and sought to make one. Even the book on which those film was based was successful author James Frey taking his clout and to get prospective writers from the internet to help him write the most commercial creative property possible. More on that interesting endeavour HERE

I guess I expected this to be wall to wall action too; there's a bit but you face to wait around an hour for that to show up. It really poorly lit too,which you might excuse if it was 3d; the fact it's not 3d seems less like a moment of restraint but a great commercial oversight.
Timothy Olyphant pops up for a while and that's alright and he's likable but I'm sorry but none of the kids in this film can exide charisma. But it's okay, they're young and they can learn and their beauty will tide them over. It's not just the vapid cute youngsters.  It's the soundtrack too with it's use of songs from Adele and New Kings Of Leon (as in New Labour) and The XX. I like The XX and I don't begrudge them picking up a royalty cheque but you just know that someone in a meeting stoically said 'my intern likes these songs and we will use them'. At least and this will be the first and last time I will stick up for the Twilight travesty but at least, they commission bands to make them original music.
The mission statement of this whole thing was let's just take and make something based on what people already like. Okay. I believe in democracy but is there any place for it in creativity? It's not even like they used they themes as jumping off points-it's more like they did a sloppy cut'n'paste, where these moments are there but there's no context.
That said this film is too polished, there's no dirt under it's fingernails. There's nothing interesting or quirky about it; not that I expected it to be but it's not even dependable in it's promise of excitement. It's just boring and I can't think of a worse crime for any film.

I watched I Am Number Four (2011) at the cinema.

My 2011 in Movies will return with The Illusionist (2010)...

Drive Angry 3D (2011)

To be honest, I don't care for the quote unquote 'good' or pure 3d movies like Avatar or Tron. 
You know what I'd say was the best 3d movie ever made? That Pirahna joint from last year. It was everything you wanted from a 3d ... anything. It was booby, gory, schlocky fluff and what's wrong with that? Life might not be bloodthirsty fish and fake tits but it's hardly a Merchant/Ivory production and who wants to see that in 3d?
So it is with no trepidation I visit the cinema to watch Drive Angry. I don't want to see kids movie-Nicholas Cage. I want utro whacked Nicholas Cage. The Nicholas Cage of Bad Lieutenant, surely the antithesis of all or any of his performances.
The good news is that this movie pretty much kicks any ass, it comes in contact with for the 1st half; it is a lot of fun to watch as shit explodes and 57 varieties of shit is kicked. The voluptuous Katy Mixon of East Bound and Down turns up for 5mins, Amber Heard gets to talk some great Tarantino-type shit; it's funky and weird but it's silly and fun.
William Fincher has never quite clicked in a film for me. I mean he's like the quintessential 'guy who was in that film I saw'- I can't remember any films he's been in but I know he's been on tons; he was the Bank Manager in The Dark Knight but after that I'm blank. Well, he's great in this- it's like he's found his niche as the quirky unstoppable tracker from Hell.
Also weirdly Patrick Luissier turns in a non-hacky bit of 'party & bullshit'. He started off as Wes Craven's editor and protégée but he did well here; looks pretty good- overlit sets.which are necessary for 3d and he has put too much story in the broth either. I'm beginning to learn that if you have a very basic story that you want to tell or 'high concept' as Don Simpson would have coined it, it allows you to do fun extraneous shit and then go back to the story and know you won't lose your place. But as you may have twigged, it like every fast ride- it's not long before you run outta gas. The film just goes to being 'by the numbers' and not the silly shit from earlier. It's like Cage can't keep up his kickass routine sits the last half out and they stop playing with the 3d too it seems. The 3d here is pretty aight not great, not bad. 
If you could go see it without y'all do that.
It was as good as I expected it to be and that's all I ask BUT there is one scene, which has to be one of the best of the year in terms of action and out'n'out exploitation. It was like 5mins of cinematic glory where sight and soundtrack click perfectly.
And that was a pleasant surprise...


I watched Drive Angry 3D at the cinema.
My 2011 In Movies will return with Jackboots on Whitehall (2010)...

Sugar (2008)

If anything Sugar succeeds on the most basic level of making baseball, one of the most boring sports watchable. 

I just wish they had gone with my name for Baseball- Steroid Rounders. Anywho, I knew this was just a good movie from the start.

The photography was just so crisp and so picturesque, that it was impressionist-painting-esque and I was watching this on my phone via BBC Iplayer. That good. I had been attracted to watching this because the film-makers, Anna Boden and Ryan Fleck had made It’s Kind Of A Funny Story,which I featured on here at the start of last month. I didn’t mention then that I was kinda non-plussed about their debut, Half-Nelson but Sugar is kinda leaps ahead of both of them.

Sugar is a beautifully told rags to riches story of a young baseball hopeful trying to improve his life for his family in the Dominican Republic. Metaphorically... aren't we all?
Sports movies are a strange beast; They're like a music biopic without the music, though I think Sugar has a great recorded music soundtrack featuring TV On The Radio, most prominently.

Not that Sugar is about baseball really. It's more about a guy trying to succeed in spite of his upbringing; trying to use his gift before it’s too late and it leaves him. Like said- very similar to music-biopic country.

The greatest strength of this movie is that of the characters and writing. There aren’t many scenes of the kid being put to breaking point under pressure and there is no final showdown against the ‘big team’, thank god. It’s more about the way you rise up in professional sports these days. Miguel or Sugar as everyone calls him has gotten this far because he has a gift in his pitching throw and that’s gotten him on a training camp, where they seem to be, not just training but conditioning these athletes almost like a factory for the America baseball leagues, where don’t learn English, just the baseball terms.

His success in the camp takes him to America, his true goal all along- to play and send money home to his family but he realise how lonely and desolate professional sports can be especially when you’re in a strange place, you have small contact to your home and you don’t speak the language. He’s not even as high up the ladder as I thought he was. This all sound very dour but this film is so watchable because its characters are charming even though none of them, apart from Miguel are in it that long.

I watched Sugar (2008) online via BBC I-Player.
My 2011 in Movies will return with Drive Angry 3D (2011)...

The Secret In Their Eyes (2009)

The Secret In Their Eyes is something we Brits are very adept at making sucessfully: literary adaptations. 
Except this film is Argentinian; maybe this is a rare success in a type of cinema they don't normally make there. I'm ashamed to shame I don't know much about Argentinian cinema apart from Nine Queens, which I saw and basically liked. Both films share the same leading actor Ricardo Darin, I would perceive he is the Argentinian equivalent of a George Clooney- all charisma and gruffly charm.
If this film reminded me of the sort of crime procedural that almost litter British television; where a person goes back to investigate an old vicious crime to get closure on 'the one that got away'. I'm not saying they're always on our tv but it's the type of thing the BBC, Channel 4 and even ITV throw money at and make the centrepieces of their schedules. Here a former criminal prosecutor revisits a case from his past that never sat well with him on how it ended and since he's in retirement, he plans on writing a novel about the story; in which 25years before he had to investigate the case of a young woman to was brutally abused and murdered. It's not that he's not certain who the killer was- it's more that he was never brought to justice.
I'm afraid that I'm going to have to disagree with 'the Academy' for giving this a best Foreign Film Oscar. I mean for what it is, I'd say it was pretty well made buuut I'd also say it was pretty 'by-the-numbers' but maybe I'm just burnt out on these sorts of story after watching too many 9pm tv detective dramas and Stieg Larsson; with it's long arching timeline; covert characters and violent crime, it's difficult to shake off the feeling of The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo while watching this. If you said I was judging this by an unfair yard-stick, I'd readily concede that. I'm sure I'd like this a lot more if I'd seen/read it before '...Dragon Tattoo'. There is a good story about revenge and punishment; the character of the husband of the murdered woman is a fascinating one with his ideas about punishing violent criminals mirroring my own.
The Secret In Their Eyes is just unlucky I guess that it fell in the gap of things i've seen before but prehaps the makers of it had not, like a great idea you have, that has incidentally been done before...

I watched The Secret In Their Eyes (2009) on DVD via LoveFilm.

My 2011 in Movies will return with Sugar (2009)...

The Scouting Book For Boys (2009)

I don't know about you but I can't deny the little-brother style affection I have for Thomas Turgoose. 
With his big eyes and his pouty face, I just want to take him under my wing and cheer him up. He made an amazing debut in This Is England; it's probably my favorite child performance ever. There's just something about him; charisma would seen like the wrong word but he's sensitive and angst despite his age. He's like a chavvy young Eeyore. In The Scouting Book For Boys, he plays a character a bit older- David who spends all his time with his best friend, Emily. They live on a caravan park and generally spend most of their time messing around and causing mischief but it's fairly innocent stuff. This all changes when Emily has to leave and decides to runaway...

At this point I have to say, I know Thomas Turgoose is good but Holliday Grainger playing Emily is almost better or at least as good. She's just so natural at selling 2 or 3 conflicting emotions at the same time. I hope this gets her more work-I'm sure it will.
So Emily has run away and is hiding in a cave, depending on David to bring her clothes and food- which there's no doubt he'll do; he would do anything for her.
It's obvious from the outset that he has a crush on her and she... she's unsure exactly how she feels- she shares a strong bond with him and they're more than just friends; it's more sisterly affection.
It's this area that I can tell the writer, Jack Thorne loves playing in- the types of affection; familial vs. romantic and being young and growing, love and affection are messy exercises anyway. There's another character, an older boy expertly played by Rafe Spall, who is caught in this love triangle. He feels a big-brother sort of affection but he isn't being responsibly affectionate to Emily.

As things move on and David realises that he didn't realise how close Emily and the older boy have been, it's just becomes heartbreaking to watch this poor boy's heart being broken and eventually, losing and trying to retain his grip on what he holds dear. It's just amazing acting from a well-made script.
I think this is a brilliant film and i'm sad it didn't get more attention in this country but it's got cult classic written all over it. It's just beautifully shot by Tom Harper, another young UK director with enough chops to do whatever he likes.I don't but most of the scenes (caves withstanding) look like they could be 50's Americana- wide open landscapes, beautiful sunsets but then you realise it's probably Dorset or somewhere similar.

Harper and Thorne have paid their dues in terms of UK tv, like Shameless, Skins, Misfits but i'm glad they got a shot to work on a bigger canvas- They did good!
I'm just proud I live in a country that makes a Thomas Turgoose vehicle every year...

I watched The Scouting Book For Boys (2009) on DVD via LoveFilm.

My 2011 in Movies will return with The Secret In Their Eyes (2009)...

Sex Lies and Videotape (1989)

It's difficult to watch Steven Soderburgh's debut, Sex, Lies and Videotape without it's legend getting in the way. 
It basically changed the way movies were made. The their were others like the Coens' Blood Simple or Sam Raimi and The Evil Dead; films that were independently funded before being sold to distributors and became applauded and successful but Sex, Lies and Videotape was the birth of the proliferation of American independent cinema of the 90's.

Premiered at the Sundance Film Festival, it was acquirered by Miramax and the rest is history.
I guess the beauty of it being made was it's basically an avant-garde soap opera, that wasn't made at the time but you could probably see it's roots in Mike Nichols' Carnal Knowledge or the like but there are similarities- four main characters shopping sheets and reciting chunks of lofty dialogue; there are the 2 sisters Andie Macdowall and Laura San Giacomo. Andie Macdowall is married to Peter Gallegher and he's having an affair with her sister. Meanwhile Peter Gallegher's old school friend, James Spader is coming to stay...Andie Macdowall is a bored housewife - San Giacomo is just the opposite, free spirited without any guilt about what she might be doing to her sister. Gallegher just a bit of a self important Jag and Spade is a weird... something. You can't get much of a reading from him on what he's about. He has told Macdowall that he's impotent but later reveals that he interviews woman about their sexual histories on videotape as a way of connecting with them in an intimate way, we guess.
If anything the film should be called Lies, Videotape and Sex, if by order of what the film features. I guess at the end of the 80's, even the hint of Sex was enough for people to get excited about- Wait, I remember the end of the 80's. It was.
There's not actually any sex, at least not by today's standards though they sure do talk it out. But I can see the point, that we're probably watching this film out of voyeuristic tendencies for whatever reasons and Andie Macdowall and Peter Gallegher are disturbed by these videotapes; it's saying that the act of sex isn't the only way of being infidelidous- there's affairs of emotion, where you share intimacy just by talking about these things with another person.
I get that and I like exploring that idea but I kinda feel the writing is a bit stagey. I don't know if this film would have been so successful today but I guess that's the beauty of being the first- everyone remembers your place but you don't necessarily need to be very good...


I watched Sex Lies and Videotape (1989) on DVD via LoveFilm.
My 2011 in Movies will return with The Scouting Book For Boys (2009)...

Troll 2(1990) / Best Worst Movie (2009)

What makes a bad movie bad? But more to the point what makes a bad movie good? 

What makes the difference between something being bad bad and good bad? Surely if you like something then it's good right? Why would you say it was bad?

These questions are the crux of watching Troll 2 and it's companion piece, Best Worst Movie.

Troll 2 is not the worst movie I've ever seen- by a country mile. I could tail off many films that are worse- Vanilla Sky, Pearl Harbour, Titanic.
I wouldn't even class Troll 2 as a bad movie. I think bad movies are things that fail on their promise of being good. I'm thinking of The Ladykillers by the Coens or The Matrix sequels.
Like I would never say that Katherine Heigl movie is bad cos i've never seen it and don't plan to. We don't go about watching movies we think will be bad. No, I think quote unquote 'bad movies' have been parked in the wrong pen; when people talk about these movies- they just mean silly or dumb, not actually bad. It seems strange that people find an inate charm in something like The Room and then call it bad? My favorite movie of this ilk is Showgirls.
Showgirls fills me with girly abandon,tail-wagging contentment and during my inadvertent annual viewing, I may squee several times against my own will. It is truly the silliest movie i've ever seen.  From the seal-clapping sex scene to 'Ver-sace' to the bitch dancers. Not 'bitchy' but bitch. To describe them as bitchy would signify they take a break from their bitchalism.
But I digress. Troll 2 is also a very silly movie. In fact it's similar to The Room in the sense... it makes no sense. It's about a boy who discovers his family are going on holiday to a town named NILBOG, ruled by shapeshifting goblins (his grandfather's ghost told him), that are intent with dousing them with Baby Bio and feeding them chorophyl because goblins ... only... eat... plants?
Troll 2 is just a film that gets weirder and weirder. Made by Hollywood, it would be a kids adventure fantasy like a Witch Mountain movie but this is like a Disney remake of Bill and Ben The Flowerpot Men by Cronenberg.
So the story's bad but the film is also populated by curdled cream of Utah's am-dram scene; the guy playing the father subscribes to the Troy McClure school of pro-ennounci-ation. The mother is reminiscence of Dirk Diggler's crazy mother. The kid himself looks like a young Powers Booth. Which is weird. I would be remiss if I didn't mention the crazy shopkeeper but I'd say the star of the piece is the queen goblin- she's half evil Sarah Brightman/half eviler Susan Sarandon while smoking pharmaceutical-grade Panto jewelry, made of meth.
So the acting's mental as well but it's the charming thing that makes Troll 2 fun and memorable; there's a real 'let's-just-put-on-a-show' vibe which makes it likible and not cynical and yeoman-like. Like a real bad movie...

It's a not too often a treat to get to follow the story of the people behind a film. I guess the best example of that is Eleanor Coppola's Heart Of Darkness- about the making of Apocalypse Now. But now we have Best Worst Movie- the story of wannabe actors that came together to make Troll 2 and is madeand documented by Michael Stephenson, the kid from Troll 2 (doesn't still look like Powers Booth, thank God).
The story of Best Worst Movie is a lot simpler- if your greatest creative moment is best known for it's shittiness... how do you carry that off everyday?
I'm not sure how since it would seem people share a lot of bonhomie for Troll 2 but it was voted the worst rated movie on IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes.
The main focus of this documentary is George Hardy, who played the dad in the film. He practices dentistry now and apparently he already did during the making of Troll 2; fitting it in on his time off and weekends. He seems a nice guy and an active part of his community but you just know he still can't get passed having this moment 17years ago where he could have been a star. I mean aren't we all just waiting for that time when we get to be as prolific and loved as we dream?...
So when George hears about the post-ironic resurgence of Troll 2 in New York, he heads out to make a personal appearance and after 2decades of derision, he's finally found his flock; fans that love him and hang on his every word- I mean again who can't identify with that?
Then we start learning about the fans of the film as George and Mike start travelling around to screenings and there's also an element of 'getting the band back together' as more of the original cast reappear or they go looking for them. We've all wondered about what happens to people when they've had their '15mins'; for a few of the participents of Troll 2, the answer is quite uncomfortable. The guy who plays the wacky shop owner isn't a major character in Troll 2 but he makes up for that in memorability. Turns out he was not such a great actor but a guy with legitimate mental problems. This is pretty hard to realise but it's nothing on the present life of the woman who played the mother. To say that she suffers with paranoid psychosis of her own, for reasons unclear, is difficult is an understatement. It was really uncomfortable to see what has happened to her.
Obviously this journey would not be complete without hearing from the director and writer of this crap-masterpiece and Claudio (director) and Rossella (writer) do not disappoint. A married couple, presumably they are the Peter Jackson and Fran Walsh of Italian b-movies. When I first saw Claudio I was just glad Oliver Reed was alive somewhere. In Best Worse Movie, for better or for worse- 20years on, the cast go back to locations to reconstruct scenes from the movie and we get to get a glimpse of Claudio's directing style or maybe the term 'Mussolini micro-management' would be more apt... I loved this guy. My favorite moment in the documentary was asking Rossella what her motivation to write the movie was? To which she basically answered, 'all my friends were going vegetarian and it just pissed me off...'
Is that a bad reason to make a good movie or a good reason to make a bad one?...

I saw Troll 2 (1990) and Best Worst Movie (2009) at the Prince Charles Cinema, London.
My 2011 In Movies will return with Sex, Lies and Videotape (1989)...

Paul (2011)

Who can deny the charm of Simon Pegg and Nick Frost sharing the screen?
Yeah, you liked Pegg before you'd ever heard of Nick and if you see Nick turn up in something, you get a cosy feeling but they're never as effective as when they're working together. I mean they're obviously great friends and would never tire of each others company but it totally translates on screen too.
So the idea of watching Paul, something they both wrote too is a simple prospect to accept. But after a half-hour into watching Paul, there was one guy I couldn't stop thinking of. Edgar Wright. Damn my cynical brain but I was less watching a film with Pegg & Frost but a film that wasn't directed by Edgar Wright. I've always had a weird feeling coming out if his films but now I realise what it was. When I saw Shaun Of The Dead and when I saw Hot Fuzz, I was very confllicted. I knew I had really liked what I had saw but I felt a bit batter and bruised and tired. These feelings were even more extreme after seeing Scott Pilgrim. But I think I understand what it meant now. An Edgar Wright production packs so much entertainment into every frame, be it action or comedy- that it just knackers me out. It's exhausting. So watching Paul has helped me in the respect of figuring out that mystery. But sadly I can't judge Paul singularly by it's own merits and the style of Edgar Wright in conspicuous by it's absence. But let me be clear, this is no diss to Greg Mottola. I love him and I liked Adventureland and LOVED Superbad. It's just that Paul, while I did enjoy it and it's funny... It's not firing on all cylinders; it's just a cultureshock to see Pegg and Frost in this paired down visual style I guess and that's me; that's no else's fault.So if you can get passed that overwrought and basically unfair point; there is a lot to like about this movie. A great American cast of some of my favorite current comedy actors like Bill Hader and Jo Le Truglio, who both were in Superbad- who play dumb FBI (!?) agents and Kristen Wiig who's currently on SNL with Hader. These are all guys, if I find out they are in a movie-I will endeavor to see it. You already know I unashamedly love Seth Rogen so i'll simply say he's quite good in his part as a Seth Rogen alien. But all is not right in the world of Pegg and Frost.For some strange reason, they've swopped roles. Yeah. In this one, they've decided after those 1,2-2 films, that they've grown weary of Frost playing the silly one and Pegg playing the grown-up one and they've swopped. I know i shouldn't be so frumpy about what's such a sweet and pleasant film but Frost and Pegg swopping roles was a bit of shark-jump for me. Please go see Paul as such endeavors should be encouraged but don't go expecting an Edgar Wright production. It's like watching the side-project of a band you like and you're just kinda willing it to be just as good.


I watched Paul (2011) at the cinema.
My 2011 In Movies will return with the mammoth double bill of Troll 2(1990) / Best Worst Movie (2009)...

The White Ribbon (2009)

Michael Haenke. Love him or hate him- you wouldn't leave him alone around your kids. 

Not that I'm implying anything sordid but he'd probably ask them disturbing existential questions which would leave them cold and prone to weeping for no reason.
There's a moment in The White Ribbon, where a young boy asks his sister,
'What was wrong with that lady?'
'Who?... Oh. She was dead.'
...
'What does dead mean?...'
The White Ribbon is basically 2hrs of this, folks.
Set in 1910's Provincial Germany, it's set on a Lutheran compound. And when I say Lutheran, I mean Amish without the dope hats; A very strict Christian community where the common man does backbreaking labour and being upper-class must have been very boring indeed; Musaraf's Burden, as I calls it.
There's a story and plot but it's more about Germans being shitty to one another presumably because it was 1910; before they decided to start being shitty to  their neighbours in France. I mean there is something going on with people (including children) being maimed but i've seen a few Michael Haenke films before- I thought he was just warming up. There's a mystery plot with the narrator (also schoolteacher) trying to figure who was behind these mutilations but well, we're seeing the German countryside-what's the rush, yeah?
I mean Haenke's not flipping off the story in his mind but you need a few characters that are likable or identifiably human in a story and I couldn't see them.
There are 2 characters you like- the aforementioned schoolteacher and his shy and quiet fiancee. Their relationship is actually tender. In Heinke-terms, that's like an interlude into the Care Bears Movie. The character of the minister, the religious figurehead of the village is a serious nasty piece of work torturing (literally and figuratively) his children. Fair dues to the actor playing him, after a few seconds of him on-screen- you just know he's the worst sort of bully and sadist. The town doctor is a horrible shit too; maybe his crimes are worst of all.
Seriously, I'd like to think of myself pretty perceptive but I had no idea what was going on or more then that, what this film was trying to say. I was kinda just sticking around to find out the conclusion the mystery, not that that had a satisfactory answer and then it ended. Don't get me wrong - I was ready for it to end but I was still puzzled until I watched the interview with Haenke did I get it. It's apparently about adults misleading children or some gift. Adults and the lies they tell- my mistake- all his films are about that.
But who am I to call shit on this film? You may say that it was nominated for Best Foreign Film at the Oscars and won THE Palme D'or at Cannes. And I would say,the award hype surrounding the film was the only reason I wanted to see this hump but then... since when did being judged by a jury of your peers become an infallible device for anything?...

I watched The White Ribbon (2009) on DVD via LoveFilm.
My 2011 In Movies will return with Paul (2011)...

Late Night Shopping (2001)

Late Night Shopping is one of those FilmFour productions that i've always meant to watch but i've kept missing it.
I like it. It's greatly remarkable- it's just a pleasant film about the last whispers of being young before being old.
The film centres around 3guys and a girl who have crummy jobs- one works in a call centre, one stacks shelves in a supermarket, another is a hospital porter. These are all jobs we can identify with because we've all done at least one. I've done 2 out of those 3 and I am in no rush to return to either. Though I can think back and look back fondly on certain aspects- and as much I hated going in everyday- they were never bad enough for me to quit and that basically sums up these jobs - situations aren't  bad enough for you to quit.
So all these guys have crap jobs but too make matters worse- they all work the night shift at their respective places if work but they all meet regularly at this cafe and talk shit and discuss their problems. One guy, Sean hasn't seen his girlfriend in weeks because she works the dayshift and doesn't know if she's still loving with him. Penny fancies a girl he works with but can't ask her out because he has 'porno senses'. As you can tell this pretty light, whimsical kinda stuff bit I don't feel like it suffers for that. It's not too long at maybe just less than 80mins and on a list of expectations from a typical FilmFour production- it ticks most boxes. Twentysomething British cast- check.  Stylized original soundtrack- check. No one's doing drugs but they are drinking a lot of coffee.
It was made just over 10years ago, when it seemed obvious that James Lance was going to be a big star. The man should have the sort of career that Aiden Gilllen has. So bright and charming. Admittedly he did turn up in Benson but he should be doing HBO joints. Anyway he's great here as a cocky morally-vacant serial womaniser. Kate Ashfield plays the spiky tempered girl in the group. Another actress from 10years ago who seemed on the fast-track. You might say her character is under developed but you don't really notice. You like spending time with these characters. They're very calming to watch.
It's a shame that Saul Metzstein and the writer Jack Lothian haven't made much else. (Lothian is quite a prolific British tv writer) Metzstein has a warm fresh visual style even shooting at night and in factories and supermarkets and Lothian obviously has a knack for dialogue.
I mean I can see why Late Night Shopping didn't set the world alight... it doesn't have the most exciting premise and even I would struggle to make the journey to the cinema to see it (I live across the road from a cinema.) but it doesn't dispute the fact it's a charming and fun 80mins to spend on tv or DVD.


I watched Late Night Shopping (2001) on DVD via LoveFilm.
My 2011 in Movies continues with The White Ribbon (2009)...

Never Let Me Go (2010)

Never Let Me Go was a 3course meal of heartache and anguish. But luckily i was in the mood for that. 
On the surface, it seems like a film about a mixed boarding school but then you notice that none of the children mention their parents and they're afraid of leaving the school grounds. 
There are 3 characters- Kathy, Tommy and Ruth. Tommy is one of those people though bright and capable enough- he’s just not cut out for school. Kathy is perceptive and can see Tommy for what he's worth. Ruth just likes picking on Tommy and playing mind games with Kathy, her best friend.
When the children find out what their purpose is after school, it's just the most horrible heartbreaking discovery ever. It's horrible to think an hour through a film that all the characters, small children too are doomed and there's another hour to go. Then and film changes time and setting; it's maybe 6years later and the characters are young adults and have moved to cottages in the country. Tommy and Ruth are an item but we know that Kathy is still in love with him.

And the 3 lead adults are just superb. Carey Mulligan again proves she can do no wrong as Kathy playing a young woman who is the loneliest of a group of lonely people; someone who as well as suffering unrequited love, has to live with the worst knowledge. Andrew Garfield also hands in another assured performance as the naive and equally sensitive young man, Tommy. I can't think of anyone who can communicate despair like Andrew Garfield; he deserves every second of that Spiderman gig. 
And last but not least, Keira Knightly as Ruth. When was the last time you ever saw Keira Knightly be good in anything? Well she's on her game here. She manages to be manipulative and deceitfully horrible and yet vulnerable and identifiable. This might be the promise of more Keira Knightly in well-defined roles. Who’da thunk that? I know she’s been on a steady diet of stage acting- hey… if it’s working, more power to her.

Like I say, I found it quite the heart wrenching ordeal… in a good way. It’s almost unremittingly sad for 2hours but unrequited love is the wholemeal brown bread of paths. All ‘high-horse’ and no satisfaction.

But it’s also a film about dying young, which I’ve always seen as quite a romantic concept, in the ‘Jimi Hendrix’ or ‘Logan’s Run’-way but here is a story about people in their early 20’s losing their lives when they’re just coming together; when they’re just figuring out what they want to do in their lives.

I’m reticent to talk about the sci-fi/school background as it may be too spoilerific. I didn’t know much about the plot/book by Kazuo Ishiguro before I saw the film and I think because I didn’t revelations about the background were all the more poignant. Not that there is a very sci-fi element in this story, it’s more like a society change in a parallel universe but an interesting idea to wonder if society would accept the conceit of this film.

I watched Never Let Me Go (2010) at the cinema.
My 2011 in Movies continues with Late Night Shopping (2001)...

Dinner For Schmucks (2010)

First- go back to read what i said about the original of Dinner For Schmucks, Le Diner de Cons
Great. 
So the only way you can judge the remake of anything, when you've seen/heard/read the original is against what it does better and what it does worse.
I pretty much called it when i imagined what Dinner For Schmucks would be like, last month. It does focus on the 'dinner' element almost like a 3rd act that was missing from the original. Otherwise the 1st hour is very similar. The characters are not though. I'm sure i'll give anything with Paul Rudd or Carell in it a shot, a fair chance because they're good performers but they're really not right for the material here or the way they approach it is... off. Like Rudd can't really pull off 'asshole'. If he's seen to be acting like one it's kinda like when Superman goes off the rails in Superman 4? You're like 'stop it, you are gonna feel silly about this in hindsight ya big silly'. The guy who played his part in the original was an asshole, not a nice guy. Rudd probably volunteers to do the nightshift to the cat orphanage. Then Carell sadly does worse then Rudd but them Carell has a harder job- he has to be dumb and dull yet likeable. In fact i'd say the
tone of the whole thing depends on him being likeable, but his character is not likable. I do however like the mouse taxidermy thing, (it was matchstick buildings in the original)it's a really strong funny device and it makes you laugh and feel sorry for him but that doesn't make you likable. How could Brick and Brian Fontana fail me like this!
Anyway it's not all bad, at it's best, Dinner for Schmucks is a cavalcade of comic talent. Jemaine Clement, David Walliams, Kristen Schaal and Gilafinakis are fine here doing that thing you've seen them do before; Chris O'Dowd is really funny in his small part but Lucy Punch takes over every scene she's in. She's like the Nicki Minaj of this movie. I dare you not to love this crazy, sexy, scary, intense woman that she plays. She is tremendous and hilarious.
It's like everything this version tries to copy from the original it messes up and all the new stuff it improves on; not that it is in any way better but for example, Lucy Punch has a bigger role than the character had in the original and it's the best thing in the film but in the original, the Rudd character was having an affair with her character which made him more assholey but here she's a one night stand from years ago.
I was actually wrong in my prediction that Rudd tells Carell about the dinner premise and they break-up only to get together at the end- no, some how it causes their friendship to improve and becomes a call Carell to be more confident. Unsurprisingly they don't manage to land that idea well and the ending is quite unsatisfactory.
So Hollywood- don't remake films because you mess them up but because they'll always be judged against the original...

I watched Dinner For Schmucks (2010) on DVD, via LoveFilm.

My 2011 in Movies continues with Never Let Me Go (2010)...

True Grit (2010)

On Valentine's Day, I deliver you a tale of unrequited love.
A lot of the way i explain my opinion about culture is comes across as conflicted.
This may be the most conflicted post i write about a film. It might not be your favorite film but it should be in your top 10 is The Big Lebowski. The perfect marriage of Jeff Bridges and the Coens. The best ensamble cast of any film. One of the most quotable films ever; as i write this, I just heard a rugby commentator use the word 'parlance'. The film that allowed me out of the milky-booze closet; i was drinking/being fed Kahlua before i watched Lebowski and i can give you a note from my mother. So have i been excited about Bridges and the Coens getting the band back together. *inhales deeply* Yeah?
I guess i'm asking for trouble if i'm expecting a western about a trio on a journey with dangerous situations and people. I'm being facietious but asking the Coens to repeat themselves was always gonna be short-sighted.
True Grit is very good. I'm saying it's very good and i believe that. Everybody is great. Hailee Steinfeld is brilliant in-part carrying this film on her shoulder, as this frumpy forthright young girl on her path from justice and avenging her father. You forget she's a teenage girl, she's like a short fresh-faced Katherine Hepburn.
Matt Damon is brilliant as LeBoufe, a name i love. He's a wiley honest steadyhand compared to Cogburn but i love SPOILER the first scene that he and the girl share where he says, speaking with quite some candour that she looked so cute he was thinking about coming over to kiss her! Dude!! Not Cool! (SPOILER OVER.)
I gotta call out Barry Pepper. he's always come close to having a great role in some films but he's really good here; put to great ease by the Coens's evocing a young Dennis Hopper, who incidentally would have been in this sort of western. And of course Jeff Bridges is the man. Better, he's forever the Dude. Yeah Rooster Cogburn is a badass and violent and surley but he's also a collossal bum, a loser. So of course, i think he's great. Not the Dude though. And if you think that's unfair-i'll agree but it's how i feel.
In terms of the Coen Brothers, this is the most commercial film they set out to make to date. The plot is simple. The number of characters are few. The dialogue is quite direct and simple. Well for them it is. People are saying it's True Grit but it's still a Coen Brothers film. I say *hurm* to that. Compared to 'No Country...', I felt this came off as quite mercenary. Watching 'No Country...' i'd say it was unmistakably Coen despite originating from someone's prose. If i didn't know who made this, i can't say i'd feel the same but then i'd likely not judge it so harshly.
Let me be clear before i go straight back to being conflicting- i'm not saying this is The Ladykillers-bad. I'm not even saying it is bad. It just couldn't reach my sky-high expectations. This was my Phantom Menace. Actually that is too harsh but lets just say my objective brain thought it was great but my heart is pouting.
In closing as sisinctly as possible for me, please go see True Grit, if only so the Coens can get money to go back to the business of Coen Brothers movies.


I watched True Grit (2010) at the cinema.
My 2011 in Movies continues with Dinner For Schmucks (2010)...

Repulsion (1965)

So yesterday was Polanski's fastpaced modern thriller, The Ghost- Today, is his slow dream-like psychological horror, Repulsion. 
Repulsion was Polanski's 2nd film after 'Knife in the Water' (a film i'm very likely to watch soon) and already at that point he was a very assured director.
If we go back to the 60's when Repulsion was made, there were likely few films about pretty girls with deteriorating mental states; it would be groundbreaking stuff. Me in 2011- It's probably the 3rd or 4th film about girls with deteriorating mental states i've seen this month but Repulsion still holds up; it hasn't aged and it is it's lasting success.
Catherine Deneuve plays Carol, a shy depressed girl that works at a beauty salon, confused by male attention. But then Deneuve is one of the great European beauties of cinema, so therefore Carol isn't gonna have much luck going unnoticed by the menfolk. To be clear, it's not that Carol feels ugly that she's depressed- if only- no, her pain is so deep-rooted it's never actually made clear where it stems from but unusually for such a beautiful woman or beauty worker, she doesn't even seem to think in terms of beauty. And so she doesn't understand the interest men develop in her.
I guess on the surface, good-looking girl goes psycho is enough of a premise for a film, at least in the 60's but it's so much richer that Polanski asks what happens in the mind of a sacred girl who's being leered at when she's not emotionally prepared for that. Attraction is so subjective-how do you begin to understand and quantify that when you're still growing as a person and if you don't care about being attractive despite yourself that's bound to make it more confusing still.
Like i say, something has happened in Carol's past to make her so unhappy, not that Polanski is interested in providing any clues but we know it's left her quite childlike and defensive to men in general. There are 3male characters in Repulsion, a charming young man with a healthy interest in Carol; Carol's sister's boyfriend who's bit of a lech; and a groundworker who Carol see only once for a few seconds but haunts her nightmares, after casually sexually harassing her (played by, in perhaps serendipitous stunt casting, Randall from Randall & Hopkirk Deceased). When Carol's sister leaves her home-alone, to go on holiday with her boyfriend- Carol really starts becoming insular and withdrawing into her growing psychosis and things become much more difficult to discern whether they're real or not. Cracks start appearing in the walls of the flat (IT'S. A. METAPHOR... DUMMY!).
I'd suggest watching Repulsion if you liked Black Swan- they're similar in that they concern young women in psychosis but this is a more lonely journey where as Black Swan was also about other people and competition. But more importantly, i say bring on more Polanski- he's become a director whose name has been sullied by his personal life but you can't knock the guy's directing hustle.

I watched Replusion (1965) on DVD, via LoveFilm.

My 2011 in Movies continues with True Grit (2010)...

The Ghost (2010)

This weekend on My 2011 in Movies, we're having a Polanski weekend. 
Today is the newest Polanski film, The Ghost and tomorrow is one of his earliest films, Repulsion; due to the serendipity of LoveFilm sending me two of his films at the same time.
If you don't know The Ghost is a political thriller about a ghost-writer working on the autobiography of a world leader who's maybe guilty for covering up perhaps war crimes for the so-called good of the world. Written by Robert Harris based on his own book, it's very well realised political thriller. The premise is fascinating- if you find out things you don't like, is it better to be quiet or tell all and at what cost do you set out to tell the truth?
But that said The Ghost is just an imminently likable entertaining film about intrigue. It's unexpectedly wry too, with the writer's cheeky literary agent and the former PM who is constantly calling people, 'man'.
The acting is hit and miss- Ewan MacGregor is quite forgettable as the ghostwriter. Maybe that's the point. Maybe the fact is that he's trying to be understated but you dial out a lil when he's on his own in scenes. Better are the power couple of Pierce Brosnan and Olivia Williams as the former prime minister and his wife. 
Brosnan is particularly good at the childlike naivety of a coddled man and that political duplicity of trying to communicate 'hey - we're the same, you and i' but being all powerful. 
Olivia Williams is just brilliant too as the woman-behind-the-man. She's embittered by the role she's had to play and what her life has become.
Also there's another actor who you're bound to remember from... stuff, Robert Pugh. I'm saddened to think he's used as a cut-price Tony Hopkins but he's very good here as the former Foreign Secretary, who's trying to bring the former PM to justice.
I'd be remiss if I didn't mention the somewhat 'stunt' casting at play. For whatever reason, Jim Belushi pops up for a minute as a book publisher and screen legend Eli Wallach too surprises in a similar way to Charton Heston popping up in Wayne's World 2 ('Surely we can get a better actor for this part!'). It's not really a cameo unfortunately but Kim Cattrall  is not horrible/not great as the former PM's press secretary with her 'plummy Engi-lish' accent. I forgot our prime minister couldn't possibly have an American press secretary.
I think the writing is the success of The Ghost. The information is never stodgy, you're always given just enough information to leave you satisfied. 'Fascinating' is just mainlined into this film- it's everything a political thriller should be- fast-moving, curious and intelligent. Every moment it's nudging you subtly with new information about story and characters and perspective. Not that it's densely cerebral in it's twists and turns- i figured what one character's game was halfway but it's a fun puzzle to enjoy for a 100mins.


I watched The Ghost (2005) on DVD via LoveFilm.
The Polanski Weekend on My 2011 in Movies continues with Repulsion (1965)...

Killer Nun (1978)

I've come to realise that Black Swan is just a nunsploitation movie without the nuns. 

You might thing that nuns were the operative part of a nunsploitation picture. Guh. You are a silly goose. nunsploitation is about almost supernatural paranoia and the nieve and innocent entering the path of cruelty & violence and/or sex. So there. Just don't ask me to explain nursesploitation. Please Do ask me about royalsploitation.

I digress. Killer Nun is about a trio of children who find a portal to magic kingd-No, it's pretty much about a killer nun. 
Made in the 70's for 2 lira, Killer Nun is about a matron-ly nun who works in a mental hospital. She had a brain tumor removed? And is still suffering from extreme headaches (we know this because she keep doing the Solpedine pose), which in turn causes her to develop a morphine addiction. And if she's blacking-out due to the dope or pain, she’s killing too. Did i mention this film is called Killer Nun?
It was also made in Italy so bad dubbing is a natch as much as the Aldi-brand film-making. If Killer Nun had a smell (god forbid), it would smell of Yugoslavian bleach. It's kinda hard to judge this film, in so much as if it accidentally does anything right, it goes a long way. It's shitty story and shitty acting are forgotten cos it's a fun dumb watch. At one point, the titicular sister of Christ steals a dead womans wedding ring to pawn for money for drugs. So she leaves the hospital but she also leaves her morals and matronly frumpitude behind to get dolled up and pick up a random bloke at an airport bar! We get to hear her inner-monologue during her choosing process-
"Asian guy? - Not with my digestion.
Him? Oh he's married to her-i'm a sex-nun, not a whorebag.

Him? He looks... Clean?'- Yo Mario! Grab your Faggio -You've pulled !"If you were hoping for a lot of violence, there's not much-certainly not the sort of viceral gore you might expect. It's not shy about nudity though. Nuns share cots and sleep in the nude together... I did not know that. Educational. Some women enter the church to hide their Sapphism... Well i guessed that.
I said the story was no good but it's not plot heavy; it's not convoluted which is good. Which also means somehow the film you waited your life to watch (if unconsciously) called Killer Nun is instantly forgetable but that's not the point. 
You know, somethings' aren't about savouring forever. You can still enjoy something in spite of its disposablity. I'd suggest you watch Killer Nun but on a Friday or Saturday night after coming home drunk and in a leery mood. Perfect viewing but not if you're looking to be challenged.

I watched Killer Nun (1978) via LoveFilm Online - http://bit.ly/gS7MYT

My 2011 in Movies will return with The Ghost (2010)...