Stone (2010)

Is Milla Jojovich a good actress? This might inspire more internal debate within yourself then you might expect. Sure the case for the opposition is strong - she's been involved in so many blotted on the cultural landscape- it betters belief if she can read English, the amount of times when says yes to a shitty script and some might say that she was previously at her best when she was playing on her naivety like her character in The Fifth Element.  But in Stone, she has to go toe-toe in the acting stakes with De Niro and Edward Norton, two of the... well they've been better in previous years and still capable of returning to previous glories- Jojovich has never been that good. But I'm here to tell you that maybe we shouldn't have wrote her off since-and i never thought I'd be writing these words- she acts Norton and De Niro into a corner.
The story of Stone is that De Niro plays a prison parole officer and Norton is one of his last cases before he retires. Jojovich plays Norton's wife and takes it upon herself to offer herself to De De Niro so he might look on her husband's case favorably. The strange part is she doesn't seem to mind and well- the term nymphomanic is thrown around and misused a lot but she'd probably knob a door off its hinges.
Maybe Jojovich does so well were Norton and De Niro don't is that in a highly sexual (not gratuitously sexualised though) film, a lilith thing like her can play that more credibly. No one wants to see Bobby D humping away. It makes you wonder if St. John's Ambulance were waiting on the side.. just in case.  Norton looks equally embarrassed with the 'sex stuff' that permiates through his character.
But Stone is an interesting watch because you struggle to fully understand the 3leads motives- De Niro has an extremely dysfunctional abusive relationship with his wife and it's made her an alcoholic wreck but it's not clear why he's like that. Norton seems to taking a vested interest in reforming his character but how sincere is he. Jojovich seems to be fully invested in getting her husband free but she's not that interested in being the least monogamous. These questions are as frustrating as they appear and maintain your interest. Especially Jojovich's character and congrats on your performance here. I hope it's not a fluke. 'Psycho hose beast' fits her like a... glove?  Now if we can suggest to her how to kill her husband Paul W. S. Anderson we'll really be cooking with gas...

I watched Stone (2010) on Blu-ray via LoveFilm.
My 2011 in Movies will return with Belle De Jour (1969)...

This Sporting Life (1963)

This Sporting Life is one of the landmark films of the British New Wave of the 60's. It was one of the first starring roles for both, Richard Harris and Rachel Roberts and one of the first films directed by Lindsay Anderson.
It's the story-almost sweat dream of a young rugby player(Harris), his burgeoning fame & fortune and his torrid relationship with his landlady (Roberts).
It's a testament to the writing that the story of sporting ambition and success still stands up and it could apply to any athlete today. Well I say that but Harris just kinda shows an interest in playing professional rugby and the club basically let him. I mean he is obviously very good at the game but he doesn't have to come up through the ranks or train from near birth.
But I digress, Harris is completely convincing as this sulky Irish Brando tossing the oversized egg around. He's a guy basically excited by his future and the opportunities in store. He's more than happy to share his life with landlord/widow Roberts and her kids but concerns about her neighbours preconceptions stop her from the happiness so within her grasp. It's hard to believe that this was the school of thought about 50years ago. I wouldn't even recoginise MY neighbours if I passed them in the street, let alone give a jot about the way I conduct myself. That said, my neighbours need to WASH THEY ASSS but I digress.
This role was no stranger to Roberts; she was very much the queen of the kitchensink dramas of the 50's, playing the perennial housewife. I have a huge love for Rachel Roberts. She was married to Rex Harrison and suffered terribly with what was probably, bipolar as well as issues with alcohol. It's very sad to read about. Someone should make a biopic because she simply embodied the graceful strong female and she had such and dramatic life.
So as i say amazing acting is on show here but it's also brilliantly written by David Storey and directed by Lindsay Anderson. Anderson is one of the best British directors. He was so facsinated by our class system. His other gold-plated classic 'if?' is so indicative of Britishness, strong and methodical but mischievous and This Sporting Life is no different. Sure it's dramatic and tense but there's a lot of fun going on and vicariously enjoyed these local stars lifestyles.
The main thing that has always put me off older films is that I (wrongly) assume they won't be relevent but this film in its tone and themes are very relevant except the role of women in local society but that's just progress...

The Eagle (2011)

This is likely to be the solitary reference to the sub-genre dubbed 'swords & sandals'. I won't be actively going around looking ones to watch and i doubt we'll be seeing anymore new ones this year. They came back for a hot minute after Gladiator (2000) came out- there's was Troy, 300 and Kingdom of... something. Orlando Bloom was in it. It was conspicuous by its shittiness. My point is they all were and i  think maybe Gladiator wouldn't even be as good as you remember. I will say I hated history in school and this is likely a byproduct of that.
By if anyone can engage me, with history- it's gotta be Kevin MacDonald, right? The director of the superb 'Last King of Scotland'. I haven't seen Touching the Void but I'm sure that's good too.  He just seems to have a knackered for effectively photographing things in a way that makes them so vivid- the over-saturated look of '... Scotland' for example.  And this film with it's picturesque vistas of Scotland that make it seem like a rainforest in the first shot, is great.  That's not the problem.
The problem is that the dialogue in this film scans like a frigging Haynes Manual. Now some people (read:Tom Clancy readers) enjoy that sort of discourse. And I guess something like the brilliant The Wire might have a similar issue; that you have to learn a whole new syntax or dialect of English but you've got 10's of hours with a tv series like that. This film is about 100mins tops. Now I was already to lay this on the writer, Jeremy Brock but he's been involved in writing a lot of successful British films inc.  '... Scotland', Brideshead Revisited and Mrs Brown but those are adaptations and this is an original piece. It's just the story is so plodding that nothing seems interesting and when the battle scenes do come along,  they seem out of nowhere and jarring. Which is not to say they're not any good cos they are, the final one especially but I guess basically I knew what was going on but I really care.
I don't want to level this on the actors cos people like Jamie Bell and Mark Strong are solid British actors and they aren't stinking up the joint but then, the casting of Channing Tatum seems (to me) to be a cynical plot to capitalise on his fame to sell the film abroad and get the film off the ground in the first place but as I say, that script doesn't do anyone any favours.
The Eagle is just exceedingly boring. As I think back about it, I'm bored. It's also very reminicent of Centurion, the low-budget version of this from last year. It was a bit grittier and wilderness but it worked and didn't remind me to pick up milk for breakfast tomorrow....

I watched The Eagle (2011) at the cinema.
My 2011 in Movies will return with This Sporting Life (1963)...

Faster (2010)

For what it is and it ain't much, Faster has some wierd ideas about redemption. Dwayne Johnson (still The Rock to you and I) plays a wronged man fresh out of the pen out for revenge on the various people responsible for killing his brother. So far so good right? Not the most original idea I know but I'm fine with that- violent revenge stories are normally urban Westerns and will be around even after cockroaches depart their mortal coil.
My beef with Faster is that it is so dour, it's no fun to watch. Revenge stories are best when they are communicating a cathartic thrill. Faster is fully prepared to use exploitative content like drug-use, severe violence and what a film ratings board might call 'themes of child rape and... snuff tapes' but at no point does it feel justified; it all just seems like cynical posturing to get the 'R' rating. Like for example, the guy is a getaway driver and finegles a sweet ride but there is only one car chase.  He's also dangerous prison fighter but all the killing is so blunt- usually by point-blank gunshot to people who don't really defend themselves; it's actually quite pornographic. Now these are bad people who are killed- snuff-filming statutory rapists and telemarketers but still it seems excessive. If I may digress- Faster had the same 15 rating that Easy A, the light vaugely-raunchy teen film, has and i usually think the BBFC get it right but you can't hold these films in the same age-suitablity range.
As for the acting- a mixed bag. The Rock does hurt and sullen between the aforementioned murders which is 'meh'-not bad, not great. Billy Bob Thornton is pretty good, actually a return to the Thornton of the 90's - goofy and swaggerless. Carla Cugino turns up and good like she usually is but the script lets her down.  Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje turns up at the end and I've loved that guy since HBO's Oz. He does alright here with the little help has to work with.
As you may have gathered this film is too light on action (shooting people in the face notwithstanding) to get away with a light script but for all the covoluted non-linear storytelling, the script is pretty featherweight; the big reveal at the end was telegraphed by the halfway point and there's the character of an assassin that's... urgh... i can't even bring myself to say what's going on with that guy but it's superfluous-he added nothing to the film and in fact, detracts from the thing because you hate him out of confusion.
I really expected better from George Tillman Jr at least. He made the Biggie biopic, Notorious and I thought that was pretty good- a servicable biopic which could have gone wrong a hundred ways but turned out fine. Here he fudges the pooch with a simple revenge story. I've seen better Dominic Sena movies. Faster is like a rip-off of a Dominic Sena movie, which is the most sussinct indictment I can think of.

I watched Faster (2010) at the cinema.
My 2011 in Movies will return with This Sporting Life (1963)...

You Will Meet A Tall Dark Stranger (2010)

Sometimes incisive, sometimes plain old tut- the ouvre of Woody Allen will never be completely admired nor completely written off.
These days he churns out films with an almost reckless abandon. A diplomatic could only describe him as prolific. Me, i generally like the guy. I love Small Time Crooks and Sweet And Lowdown; i liked Vicky Christina Barcelona and Whatever Works recently but he doesn't hit every time and while I appreciate the need to be active and creative... i don't see why he has to maintain this almost yeoman-like production line of films every year. No one in the western film industry works like that, in writing and directing a new film every year since 1983 (?!) and i guess we wouldn't mind if some of them didn't seem so aimless but then next year, maybe he's back on form again- you can never totally write him off. Despite moments and a great cast, 'You Will Meet...' is one of those aimless ones.
Most of his films are about romantic couplings and this one is as one might gather no different. It covers the entanglements of 6 or 8people- newly divorced old couple Gemma Jones and Anthony Hopkins, their daughter Naomi Watts and her husband Josh Brolin as well Freda Pinto, Antonio Banderas and Lucy Punch, who variously represent new starts for the 1st four.
One of the strange things about Woody Allen films is his voice and style are so unique to him that it bleeds through and you start hearing it in other male roles on his films; Michael Caine in Hannah and Her Sisters, John Cusack in Bullets Over Broadway amongst others. It can be curious and/or jarring. But when it's coming out of the mouths of Brolin and Hopkins it just seems unconvincing. Now I think those two are very accomplished actors and It's hardly the shark-jump of say, Stone Cold Steve Austin turning up in an Almodovar picture but these guys are just plain shitty at delivering Woody Allen dialogue. Like creaky. Like they've never seen a Woody Allen movie before...  but that can't be the case because you wouldn't turn up unless you had and he only gives you the script on the day (probably.) It's not just those guys- there are other actors that can't deliver the one-liners and you're stuck watching them fall flat. I am reticent to blame the actors though; you don't really elect to be in a Woody Allen movie, he picks you and I'm sure he only directs people by telling them simply either 'try it again another way' and 'don't do it again like that' until it looks like something he's happy with. Not that doesn't work sometimes but you have to be a significant character actor like Gemma Jones and the glorious Lucy Punch for that to work. It's like Allen is so goofy about how nuts it is that Hannibal Lektor is saying his words, he doesn't really care about what he does with it. When you watch Brolin doing it, you think if this was nebbish New Yorker Woody you might buy the ironic lechery and jagging-about he does but Brolin is a good looking Californian and it really does not land.


I watched You Will Meet A Tall Dark Stranger (2010) at the cinema.
My 2011 in Movies will return with Faster (2010)...

Limitless (2011)

Limitless had the head start that every film wants- it has a great high-concept and a well edited trailer that perfectly explains it. Which is not to say these elements are rare but few films follow up on their potential, but i'm happy to say Limitless does.
I guess we've all heard of this thing about humans only using between 10% and 20% of our brainpower and as you know, this film posits what would happen if you were using a 100% (?). Actually that's only part of what it's about-it does get far more concerned with the wunderdrug that provides this power and the supply and demand of that. Now I realise this the necessary cause/reason for the tension in the film and it does interest me but I was just interested in the idea of what you would do if you could multiply your potential. But those are niggles... Limitless has bigger issues but I'll come back to them.  Bradley Cooper is really great in this- he's showing he can carry a weighty role and Bobby Dee doesn't really turn up for very long but he does some scenery chewing and that's fine but I don't know if i buy the idea of Abbie Cornish's character, the love interest but that's just based on a weird supposition that if you were concerned with using all your potential and you had to micro-managed your time so you weren't wasting any... would you waste it on monogamy? I don't know where that thought comes from. In reality, monogamy would save a lot of time probably. The thing about films like this, like Inception and The Matrix (pardon a very broad comparison), 'techno-thrillers' as i saw it described today is you, the audience are so curious about the concept and the rules of the macguffin, that you want to forget about the story and concentrate on the exposition, in a way. Like the main character has a finite amount of the one-pill-a-day drug and I was far more concerned then he was about using his brain resources to learn pharmaceutical chemistry and produce more but that's me being silly; that's like worrying about James Bond being killed. But like I say, I was thinking he should be sorting that out instead of investigating the withdrawals of the drug and the film should have been focusing on the creative by-product of doing the drug than the drug its self.
But director Neil Burger and writer Leslie Riding know that they have this bountiful IP to play with and Limitless makes it patently obvious they want to pack as much as they can in; at times, it could induce travel-sickness and it's unpredictable to say the least. Obviously there are things I'd change focus on but it's so imaginative and interesting that's it's difficult to be mad at.  I guess that's the point- the film is moving so fast even if you're not sure where you're going, you're giddy and excited from the speed...


I watched Limitless (2011), at the cinema.
My 2011 in Movies will return with You Will Meet A Tall Dark Stranger (2010)...

Jennifer Eight (1992)

It's Bruce Robinson time again on My 2011 in Movies. This was the last film before this year's (hope hope hope) The Rum Diaries, that Robinson directed in 1992. There doesn't seem to be a common thread in Robinson subjects of writing; Withnail was comedy autobio, How To Get Ahead...  was satire:he wrote screenplays for The Killing Fields and In Dreams too and this, Jennifer Eight is a standard serial killer mystery. Andy Garcia is a forensic cop who has relocated to a small town after his wife... I'm not sure if she died or just left-anyway doing the main thing you shouldn't do in any new job that anyone starts- he starts throwing his weight around and reopened an unsolved murder case, when someone finds a human hand at the dump ('... Dude, i could get you a hand by 3pm this afternoon...'). He also is so astute, he can tell this was a blind person's hand because of erosion to the digits from Braille (to be fair, I'm running through the story quickly and that seemed less of a stretch in the film) and through the basis of unsolved disappearances at the blind college, he goes to there and meets a young blind Uma Thurman, who for the sake of time and salient knowledge, is likely to be the next victim and looks exactly like Garcia's ex-wife.
I'm a massive fan of Withnail And I; this is a read but I've never been in a situation in pop culture where you like someone's one piece of work and everything else doesn't resonate at all. If anything this is like the anti-Withnail - it is stock, story-led, overlong and American. It's a serial killer plot from any number of tv detective shows in any number of countries and though the 'blindness' angle is fresh, there's nothing special done with it really; it's an average mystery yarn with red-herrings and disinformation.  But half-way through, i started thinking about interesting plot that might happen (that doesn't by the way)... what if blind Uma was the murderer? You never see any blinding killers do you? (No pun intended) Could be for any number of reasons- she was jealous of the other girls boyfriends, domination over bullies, thrill of the hunt... take your pick. Now that might sound exploitative but obviously this film makes a nod to Vertigo- Hitch never had a problem with landing that kind of story in a broadly pallitible way. One man's opinion.
Andy Garcia's fine in this, i guess... goes a bot overboard with the desk-smacking. I mean who doesn't enjoy a spot of desk-smacking but in moderation, guy. Sheesh. John Malkovich pops up for an extended cameo. No reason for him to be in this but he neither adds or subtracts to the proceedings. Oh yeah, Lance Henriksen is in it too as a friendly old cop buddy type, Garcia's pal- now I'm sure Lance is a pro,  a lovely generous man but no one wants to see him being understandable or nice. The thought of him being affection to a woman creeps me out like an uncle kissing you. It's weird.
So I do look forward to The Rum Diaries but only because of the prime BOOOOOZE element...

I watched Jennifer Eight (1992) on DVD via LoveFilm.
My 2011 in Movies will return with Limitless (2011)...

Anuvahood (2011)

Adam Deacon is the probably the best thing or most memorable thing in any of the British urban or gangster films of late. Kid's got charisma. There's no other words for it. He usually play a brash mean cocky prick on whatever he's in but you're happy to see him. That said if i was running a film company and he came in thru my door and said he wanted to talk about a project i'd say great. If he wanted to make the script he wrote, I'd say 'umm interesting' but really if he wanted to direct that film too...  well if don't know if I'd be that brave. Well I've never been happier to not be a movie exec and huge props to the guys at Revolver Entertainment, who have been making great distribution choices for so long now because I have to say Anuvahood is a resounding success in my blog. I guess stylistically this is closest to an East London 'Friday' not that I really liked that movie. On the review I read of this film, an exercise in don't indulge in much these days- they made out this was a spoof of the recent British hood movies. Excited to see what this Adam Deacon joint looked like, my heart dropped. Not that you can't make a hood movie spoof- I love (most) of 'Don't Be A Menace... ' but spoofs are a genre so difficult to land as I've said before. Thankfully that reviewer must have been watching a completely different film because this no spoof, just a pretty broad comedy.
I think the Deacon's genius in making Anuvahood is he keeps his scale small setting it on a single estate block and the story is pretty much about his character-K(enneth); like I say he's not even written or directed for tv before but he does have other a co-writer and co-director. Now this is film fairly well directed but I won't say it the best writing you'll see but instead it's filled with great characters. Now as a rule of thumb, I'd say lots of characters at the same time in a debut like this going to be too many plates spinning but they're all so oustentatious and dynamic, they just revitalise the film, especially the 'hater' played by Femi Oyeniran and Tyrone, the neighbourhood bully played by Richie Campbell.
Now when i say, 'broad comedy'... this is not likely to be everyone's cup of tea, the film is extremely heavy in British urban patios and there are fairly unnecessary gross-out moments but none more than a Farrelly Bros picture.  But as much as I wanted to like it, i think it is a good effort and it is a strong debut but more importantly, it is very funny! It's a great example of British film-making and you would be unlikely to find a better urban film this year.
I look forward to seeing whatever Deacon wants to make next..

I watched Anuvahood (2011), at the cinema.
My 2011 in Movies will return with You Will Meet A Tall Dark Stranger (2010)...

The Tournament (2010)

So yeah... okay The Tournament is a bit of violent tut, that was always going to be destined for the video shop before it became rinsed on ITV4 or Zone Horror. It's ambitions are simple and the story is predictable. So predictable you know how the next 90mins will play out exactly. There's nothing particularly unique about the film, it's a Running Man clone and it's not surprising to see Ving Rhames or Robert Carlyle in this sort of fare. I knew it would be forgotten as soon as it was released but I thought it'd have at least a general release, which it didn't. But i've seen it now and maybe it's the underdog status or the fact, I thrive on being contentious (I know which one I'm leaning towards...)  but I want to stand up for The Tournament and say...  'Look man...  I know this is a bit of violent tut but isn't there a place for that in this crazy mixed up world? Also it shows you can double Bulgaria for Middlesbrough QUITE convincingly.'
Let's cover that first. In this aformentioned 'wild and crazy world' for some reason, it's cheaper to film Middlesborough in Bulgaria than it is in Middlesborough. Now I've never been to Peterborough and I'm sure the cost work and (life) is cheaper but it's hardly as remote or extreme to film there like the Amazon or Antarctica but it's strange to say there there is fewer noticable differences between those 2places TO Me then say Toronto doubling New York.
But I digress. What stands out for me,  in terms of this film is that it had no studio backing, no name director or writers, nothing particularly salable about it but somehow they made a film that seems quite a large action film with major set-pieces and quite exciting ones at that.  Now some of the film is very obviously budget; there are points where it's more than happy to spend 5mins in a random warehouse and like I say... Middlesborough but it does go full throttle, to use the parlence, on the action like you'd expect of any Hollywood fare. I checked the director, Scott Mann's IMDB and he really has no salient experience in directing action, outside of Kids Stars In Your Eyes (That's true, by the way.) It's a true movie miracle that he pulled this off and I was just curious as hell to know how he pulled it off.
If ever a dvd needed a behind-the-scenes... This one. Not there. I haven't had time to do research but I will.
Anyway, the story is meh and acting has a fresh pine smell but that's okay cos the action just sorta trumps that and the 'most dangerous game' premise is like the western but even simpler- you get to run around shooting people without the story. That's the beauty of it...

I watched The Tournament (2010), on DVD via LoveFilm.
My 2011 in Movies will return with Anuvahood (2011) ...

Appaloosa (2008)

I guess it would seem like I watch a lot of Westerns if i didn't keep saying that I don't watch a lot of Westerns, based on my viewing choices so far.
But I am completely falling for a genre that I've basically dismissed before this year. I guess what I respect about the Western is the simplicity of the storytelling, that there are clearly defined goodies and smelly evil baddies. Maybe that seems to simple for today's standards; I'd say there was a look more 'grey' in characters of the fare of present day but Appaloosa is just simple story told well.
It's basically the story of 2 GOOD bad-asses who are trying to save a town from BAD bad-asses with extreme prejudice. And how they did gleefully murderate anyone who dared mistake their word as anything but the law!
It might not seem like the most exciting cast but Appaloosa makes a great ensemble of actors doing solid work. Ed Harris (also director and co-writer) and Viggo Mortenson play the Sheriff and Deputy until the wheels fall off. You just love these guys all the way. Harris is the old hand straight-shooter with less than perfect vocabulary and social skills and Mortenson is younger-ish loyal erodite sidekick. Sometimes it seems like Mortenson is playing his devotion to his boss and best friend on the knife-edge of homosexuality but it never crosses it. The cast is rounded out with Renee Zellweger as the love interest and Jeremy Irons as the bad guy. To be fair, Zellweger comes across exceptionally well as a frail woman who yearns to be protected by any means necessary; it's the best part for a woman i've seen in a western and Irons? Well he's a bit out of place in this but he's such a great panto villain, it cancels that out. More out of place is Timothy Spall, who I like to think was invited out on a free holiday to South Texas all-in by Ed for a few days work but there's no reason for him to be in the film. Honorable mention to Lance Henrickson for getting a part in something not 'a piece a shot movie'. I know he's been in good films but the ratio is so low that it bares mentioning. Your cat-on-a-washing-line 'Hang In Here' poster is on the way..
Coming back to the classic plotting of a western, there's almost something comforting about the fact you know the heroes, at some point are going to jail the bad guy and there will be a siege on the sheriff's office to have him freed. When it keeps it simple, Appaloosa is entirely effective; the 1st half of the film is really quite brilliant but the 2nd half starts to run out of steam when it tries to force more story in then is necessary but the actor Ed Harris is completely legitimate writer and director and it's a heads above most actor's side-directorial projects...

I watched Appaloosa (2008) on tv - FilmFour, 21st March 9pm.
My 2011 in Movies will return with The Tournament (2010)...

The Virginity Hit (2010)

I might seem like I take pleasure in talking shit about bad films but I don't. As much as I enjoy wasting my time watching movies- I don't enjoy having my time wasted. Maybe I should know better. Maybe even the act of me thinking this movie would be like Superbad meets The Blair Witch Project should have implied how bad a prospective The Virginity Hit would have been. But this really caught me off guard.
A few days ago I watched that Idris Elba Black Ops film and that was poor but that was fine art compared to this. There is nothing redeemable about this film. I've seen worse and I wasn't holding high hopes for it but I can't remember when I saw anything so maddeningly crummy in every aspect, writing-direction-acting.
I didn't realise until yesterday that this was written and directed by Huck Botko and Andrew Gurland, who wrote The Last Exorcism. That was a well-realised use of the faux-documentary style. Well thank God they didn't direct that because they really fumble the ball. A cursary look on IMDB, shows they're not majorly prolific but experienced enough to know better than to give the camera to the untrained people and you could successfully argue that, that is the asthetic; of boys making these shoddy YouTube clips but it doesn't add anything since this is a film not an Internet meme, it just seems miserly. Probably the most dreary aspect of the film is the writing. I'll admit that it did almost hoodwink me into believing that it was real and it was based on fact but the story is so unreal that it seems overdrawn.  I guess I thought it was too outrageous not to be true. It's about a kid trying to lose his virginity but the 2 main characters are step brothers and the youngest was adopted by the family when his mother died despite the parents only being work colleagues. Oh and his estranged father is a drug addict. Was that all necessary? Parents should be used sparingly in teen movies because after a while you start to question the logic of how they kids can keep boozing and partying if they're frequently in the background.
I guess that's if I wanted to give the film any credit (and I don't..), I'd have to say that these guys are totally believable as a tightknit group and they know each other better than they do in reality but that's as much as The Virginity Hit gets. I guess these 2 step brothers are supposed to remind me of Michael Cera and Jonah Hill but ones too insipid to be like Cera and the other is too abrasive to be like Hill. At no point do like or even respect the people who are carrying the film. It's just unremitting torture thrown in the one guy and the other one is just 100% unredeemably vile. So don't even watch this film for a bet. It's horrific.

I watched The Virginity Hit (2010) on DVD via LoveFilm.
My 2011 in Movies will return with Appaloosa (2008)...

Submarine (2010)

When I found out Richard Ayode was making a teen movie in Swansea, i felt one of those pangs of 'That should be me. I should be Ayode's represention on screen'.  He would mentor me in the ways of style and comedy and tell his secrets and what his sister-in-law Billie Piper was like.
Obviously that didn't happen but I've been excited to see his directorial debut for a while. Apart from writing and comedy genius, he's been blessed with a strong directorial style too. Any review of Submarine that casts allusions to Wes Anderson is kinda short sighted. As much as I love the prospect of any new Wes Anderson films, he doesn't own the rights to precociousness!
Submarine is a funny-funny sweet film that will haunt my dreams with thoughts that if I looked like a cute 15yo Alex Turner, me and Ayode would be like *that*. That's unfair to the kid in the main part of Oliver cos he good and funny and delightful. And the girl who played the pyromanic schoolgirl object of his desire is as infatuation-worthy as it's permissable for a 27yo me to get away with saying. She's like a valleys Ramona Flowers (You like that don't you?)  Rounding out parts of Oliver's parents, Noah Taylor and Sally Hawkins are great and good. Taylor gets to use his Australian accent for once as this unintentionally cool dad and Sally Hawkins plays Oliver's mother exactly as i imagine one of my friend's mum would be like. Paddy Considine turns up as a spiritualist and as much as I love him in the capacity that he had the capacity to be that amazing Best of British actor, he goes too broad in this.
In hindsight, i would have guessed Ayode would have tried to make something more ambitious for his first feature, i mean Darkplace is a fairly elaborate concept (a faux doc/tv show based on the writing of a faux horror author) but maybe that's where a lot of guys out of tv or music videos (Ayode being a student of both) fall down. Maybe this was the best way to start his features career before he makes the Marenghi film of my dreams. (It'll never happen but a boy can dream.)
With Submarine, you're watching someone not really challenging himself... technically. I can't say i've ever seen him work so extensively on location or with proper actors and i guess none of his writing hitherto had been this precociousness; maybe that's what the exercise of Submarine was.
In any case he delivers on the promise of a beautifully-shot melancholy teen comedy set in Swansea (or Port Talbot) of all places... but I had full confidence he would; at no point did him making this seem like it would be a stretch for the kid. I mean Kaufmanesque is an Adjective that has been the noise around a lot of people especially Charlie Kaufmanesque but that's what I expect of Richard Ayode at this point but I take comfort in the fact with the success of Submarine under his belf, he'll come back with something far more experimental...

I watched Submarine (2010) at the cinema.
My 2011 in Movies will return with The Virginity Hit (2010)...

The Outlaw (1943)

After watching Scarface and Jane Russell's recent death, it seemed opportune to watch The Outlaw, Howard Hughes' tribute to Billy the Kid and BOOBS. The only things I knew about the film was from Scorsese's The Aviator- where Hughes, played by Leo DiCaprio has a hearing about the sexual content of the film. Not to be prudish but there is a major sexual undercurrent to the film. Not in a bad way, it quite impressive how Hughes creates that sort of tension without any nudity or undress at all.  Of course, when i say undress - I mean underwear. Jane Russell probably wasn't even wearing any underwear and I would be prepared to testify to that. I feel like that would be a subject on was educated enough to speak on having seen The Outlaw. Besides that you'd have to be supremely puritanical to find anything seedy about this film. It's crazily good natured for a western. It's not particularly violent. If anything it's rather queer and silly. Now whoa-whoa-whoa - not the modern parlence of queer, but the classic use of queer: 'a strange or unconventional from the average viewpoint' although it does pretty queer towards the end. Like really queer.
Where was I? Yeah so, this film is not conventional in its conventions at all.  The soundtrack is about 5seconds ahead of the action in the film. I was watching this on IPlayer- I thought the streaming was out of sync. Since its a western, as expected there are showdowns aplenty but Hughes defuses any tension by making intensional funnys accompanied by a kazoo solo.
Despite these factors, you enjoy The Outlaw because it's a bit kooky when it should be tense because you've seen a million Westerns that play like that and in the end,  they all pretty much run together after a while. Hughes realised this on the making and saw no harm; he's knew and respected that John Ford type jawn but wanted to go another way and no, it doesn't play in the way he'd hoped but i'm sure the 2nd World War 2, there was nothing like this around but it still hold up 70years later to look at and watch due to charm and fun.
Like Jane Russell's BOOBS.

Legacy: Black Ops (2010)

Idris Elba. How many chances can only give you? I'm running out of ways to apologise to myself for watching this shot that ain't you being Stringer Bell in The Wire. In a way it wouldn't be so bad if you hadn't been so prolific since The Wire.
I feel like a bad parent; I've supported you despite letting me down. The best thing that you've been in since was that Fatal Attraction Beyonce movie and all you did was pose and be stoic like you were modelling for the cover of Jet magazine. I'll concede that your copy show Luther was gleefully dumb but not your finest hour.
If this continues i'm gonna be left with the conclusion available- that it was all downhill to The Wire writing staff and nothing to do with you.
Article 13th in this damning condemnation is Legacy: Black Ops. Which is like a shittier redux of The Manchurian Candidate than the Denzel version, which itself was 8417 Shit Street, Shittington, Surrey. First off its budget. Not in the delightful 'lets-put-on-a-show' way but the 'no effort-why sweat the details' way. Which is not to say that writer/director Thomas Ikemi isn't interested in making a visually interesting film but I don't know of you can make a film about Black Ops soldiers set in a dingy room. Maybe you can, but this guy can't.
The acting is alright I guess. Clarke Peters (Lester Fremon from The Wire) pops up but I once you get over that reunion there's nothing else to hang your hat on.  Elba isn't horrible playing this unsettled grizzly Gump grunt but I'd love to know why he wanted to produce this catastrophe? The script is half baked and where it isn't- it's stolen from other better films. It sad to be so negative about it.  But it's too boring to be exciting, too nonsensical to care. I'll tell you what it reminded me of a bad theatre-to-tv adaptation; like where the actors are acting for theatre instead of tv and the sets are unconvincing and everybody seems a bit too intense and shouty.  I'll bet it never even occurred to Ikimi to try his piece out like that. Maybe cos he was afraid of the immediate reaction.  Like I say I don't like tagging on independent film but this is a no.  Bad Idris Elba.
Oh yeah. Your Twitter is shit too...

I watched Legacy: Black Ops (2010) on BluRay via LoveFilm
My 2011 in Movies will return with The Outlaw (1943)

Easy A (2010)

There was quote that I've carried around since I heard it from the great comedienne Amy Poehler, who was asked if it could be possible to make a female equivalent of Superbad and she said that all you had to do was change the names from Jack to Jill, basically. I'm not sure but I think Easy A would be the somewhat that movie. I mean I really love Superbad-its the film is wanted to see when I was 15, probably earlier. It's dirty and heartfelt, and funny and sad. I guess that's why I think Easy A is similar, it's all those adjectives too but it's a lot more subtle, more chaste, more romantic. Girlier then.(On a side-note, a 15 cert is way too high for this film, BBFC-12 would be a better fit.)
The other prize both films share is Emma Stone, who it goes without saying I had a massive crush on since Superbad. I always hoped she would get her own movie and now she has. In fact, she has to carry the whole movie. If you didn't like her, then the movie would be scrubbed and she hasn't really made that many films but of course you fall in love with her, she's smart and strong and cute. But there's also a great cast of fingers like Thomas Haden Church, Lisa Murrow and Patricia Clarkson and Stanley Tucci, who play the girl's parents. They don't get much time in the film; not as much as you'd like but they're so good; you just love them too.
But it's full of young talent too like Dan Byrd and Amanda Bynes. I've been a massive Amanda Bynes fan for so long too, since The Amanda Show on Nickleodeon. She's been so unlucky in catching breaks in her career. It just goes to show how much timing has to do with success.
But anyway this is the Emma show and she's consistently good but you have to give writer Bert V. Royal his dues. He's written a funny and broad parable about teenage sexuality and virginity. I don't think it's one of the best because I like dirtier teen movies-this is too broad for me but I made me think that girls would love this and how I want them to throw the Twilight away and watch this!
Yeah, this is a better take on a young woman's most sacred gift. It's not about the act itself but the aftermath and what it means when a young girl starts being sexual, realising what makes you feel powerful and what makes you feel uncomfortable.
That's why Easy A was such a sleeper hit- it's light and likeable, very funny but there's a lot of heart and sensitive.

Lonely Hearts (2006)

Sheesh.  At this point, I've seen so many shitty John Travolta movies- I brace myself when I'm about to watch the ones I may have a passing interest in. Don't get me wrong; he's not incapable of turning in good work and he has charisma out the ying yang but maybe it's the parts he picks. Or maybe he thinks playing the sullen ham family man is the way to address any role... It is rare for him to be in anything that goes straight to video though like Lonely Hearts did. I mean I was curious but I don't even remember putting this on the ol' LoveFilm list and when i saw it was coming I was a bit let down but I thought I'd give it a shot since I knew Jim Gandolfini was it as was Salma Hayek.
But I'm happy to announce that this is unfortunately one of those poor movies that has slipped into the cracks and was unfortunately buried but is quite watchable and entertaining. Jared Leto and Hayek play a pair of murderous con artists who prey on lonely women. Travolta and Gandolfini play the cops on their case.  Of the four, Hayek wins but her character's nutso, so her part of the script is a bit more chest and Leto is pretty good as this nefarious duplicitous shallow crim. Travolta and Gandolfini do varying degrees of Vince Vega and Tony Soprano, characters they've been caning since the 90's. I mean like Gandolfini but it's telling when you think you're watching a great actor but he keeps repeating the same schtick in every other thing.
The real surprise here though is the writer and director, Todd Robinson. A man who certainly paid his eyes in Hollywood writing and doing other work, I'm guessing he got the directing high based on the strength of the script he turned in not to mention the talent involved. It's a good strong script based on strong dialogue and good characters; I've given a gilb synopsis of the story but it's really a good example of this sort of thing. All thecharacters are well drawn and the story's not predictable. But Robinson really succeeds in aquitting himself directing too considering he's filming 'period'. I can't imagine filming something in period first time out of the gate-so many possible disasters!
But unfortunately in this case, the spoils do not go to the victory and since, Robinson hasn't his name to much else since Lonely Hearts but he'll never be out of work, so he has that and when this comes on a 11pm on BBC One on a Wednesday...  do the right thing and give this some of the attention it missed. Lonely Hearts deserves some love.

I watched Lonely Hearts ( 2006) on DVD,  via LoveFilm.
My 2011 in Movies will return with Covert:Black Ops (2010)...

The Edge of Love (2007)

I didn't ever imagine it would have the patience to watch this film. I dislike the ponderous nature of Dylan Thomas, who in my opinion losses his talent upI against whatever wall he was propping himself upon. Somehow this isn't really that much about him and more a love triangle with 4th people. Love square? Hmm not sexy enough... Love Rhombus? Love Trapezium? It's pretty despite what I would falsely concieve as a shitty cast. I don't know how but I seem to be discovering all these films were normally shitty actors can act... The Edge of Love is like a bonanza of this. It's 3 leads are actors i've frequently wondered how they got so far. Kiera Knightly has been so-so in most things but she's great in this film and Sienna Miller is another one. Her acting party piece is weighty manic depression bit (she used it in Alfie) and she uses it to good effect here as Caitlin Thomas, my sister's namesake. And not to be unpatriotic but where the hell did Matthew Rhys come from? I don't remember him being on television before he was doing movie like Ioan. Well he's doing tv now! Sorry. No, he aquits himself pretty well as Dylan Thomas-surprisingly so, to the point you forget.
And it's beautiful to look at too, John Maybury has managed to make West Wales look like Tahiti in some panoramic shots; the style and ambition of the film bely its likely modest budget, i mean there's even a warfare sequence that Keira Knightly's other love interest in the film, Cillian Murphy gets to be in. I don't know how long he spent thinking about making this film and visualizing it but it is a great job. Another pleasant surprise I was not expecting. And the story drags after the halfway point but it's so striking to watch in the first half that you almost forgive it...

I watched The Edge of Love (2007) on BBC IPlayer
My 2011 in Movies will return with Lonely Hearts (2007)...

Police, Adjective (2009)

Police, Adjective has been a major victim of my lack of patience or time these days. I have literally stated to watch this film 3times but it's made me dose off, very rapidly afterwards. I don't want to lay this on the filmmakers; it's just failing to suffer my sleepiness. I don't want to say it's a boring film but... many chances can I give it?  Okay that is unfair but I'm just saying that this is a film that does require a bot of concentration. It's very stoic and narrow in its focus. It takes a long time for things to happen and when they do, it's fairly understated.

I watched Police, Adjective (2009) on DVD, via LoveFilm.
My 2011 in Movies will return with Lonely Hearts (2007)...

The Adjustment Bureau (2011)

I don't know if this ever happens to you but do you ever watched something but not understand why you don't like it? The Adjustment Bureau was just one of those situations. Matt Damon and Emily Blunt are good and they have great chemistry; I didn't doubt that they were in love for a second.  It has a great cast including Terrence Stamp and John Slattery. So it's not that. It looks pretty good too. George Nolfi, a screenwriter by trade aquits himself pretty well in a debut which is not afraid to move around very quickly in its New York setting, looks like a perfectly well-made.  No problem there.
And this is a good strong story adapted by Nolfi, which I'd imagine he had to redraft so many times until it made simple sense and here it's tight enough to bounce a penny on. I mean,  I'm sure that the original Philip K. Rick story made sense also but could understand how you fall into a trap of focusing on Dick's minutiae and detail. What I'm trying to say is that Nolfi takes a complex story and streamlined it down to all you need to know about the sci-fi dynamics. That gives him the opportunity to focus on the love story at the heart of the matter. And it's a great concept for sci-fi, this story of love and and fate;where if there's no free will and everything is planned, how do you explain attraction and curiousity?
This is the point where I try to spit it out like a child who's tasted something bitter, making an 'idontlikeit' face, scraping my tongue with my teeth. Okay I went a bit far there but i'm still not sure why I didn't like it. It kinda just left me cold.
It's not soooo predictable but nothing happens in this film that you don't expect. There some mild peril, they come together, they're separated, they come together again, they're separated again, yadda, yadda, yadda. This is terrible issue to take but... maybe it's too well made. Actually there's a bit that covers this on the film where the political candidate, played by Damon, reveals his image is so micro-managed for his electoral bid, that even if shoes were scuffed enough that he didn't look like a banker to the lower classes and not too scuffed that he looked lower class to bankers; only difference is that this film isn't scuffed enough. It's strange to watch sci-fi and not have questions about the scientific dynamics but feel like, 'yep, i perfectly understand the rules of the macguffin at play here.  I have no questions.'
I hope you've gathered in bear the people involved in this film no ill will. Everybody does a good job basically. But I remember just being bored by it once I understood what the science stuff was and realised it was going to play out as perfectly as if the Adjustment Bureau had planned it themselves...

I watched The Adjustment Bureau (2011)  at the cinema.
My 2011 in Movies will return with Police, Adjective (2010)

Hall Pass (2011)

I didn't really like going to the cinema before the age of 10. I think it made me feel agrophobic or something but I distinctively remember that Dumb and Dumber being the first film I really needed to see just that picture of Harry and Lloyd having their hair cut (which I don't think was in the film). It was the reason I first bought Empire magazine just get whatever snippets of info about the film and Jim Carrey. I remember seeing it on Easter weekend when I was ten in the Odeon on Queen Street in Cardiff. And it was my favorite film for a long time.  And then when There's Something About Mary came out when I was 14, that my favorite movie. The Farrelly's had done it again.
I guess my point is that despite falling off thru the last decade, maybe out of nostalgia, They were important in forming what I love about comedy and movies that I'm really want the Farrellys to deliver these funny comedies cause I know how good they can be.
Guess what?
Somehow they've managed to do another one and it feels so good!
There was a point half way through where I was literally crying in laughter.
I'm not saying it's the best comedy of the year or close to the Farrellys 1st films but it's a lot of fun to watch.
I think to be fair, making a broad comedy about marital infidelity would be like walking a tightrope in terms of keeping the tone light. You don't want these guys to cheat on their wives of visa-versa; not that I'm suggesting that we think they will- Hall Pass is as predictable as you'd expect not that that's a diss and I don't think you'd get away with it if you didn't love these soldiers played by Owen Wilson and Jason Sudekis. I love Sudekis on this.  He's amazing on Another though I feel he gets too much attention on there but that's a good problem.  In this his brand of misplaced confidence is just delightful. You just know he's gonna have a great comedy career. We know I already love Owen Wilson and it's a bit jarring to see him look so dowdy or at least as dowdy as Owen Wilson could look. He's good here but he's like the straight man for Sudekis; in fact I think his character is the straightest main character in Farrelly Bros. movie. Even Ben Stiller characters in their movies have wierd or dark querks and Owen Wilson always has these facets to his character in all his movies... so yeah it's weird.
As you might hope, Stephen Merchant is great for the short time he's in it. As is JB Smoove. I think it's a litmus test for liking this movie if you find the idea of them being brothers-in-law funny. It's only mentioned in passing and they don't elaborate on it but the imaginary backstory just cracks me up. It's like they met Stephen at a dinner party and asked him to do 2days on the film and he just ad-lib'ed his own stuff and costume. I'm into it though.
The only thing that lets Hall Pass down is the wife parts. I don't know why but they've insisted on making it about these guys wives as well but when we go to them it drags the hell outta the movie. It's a nice idea but no expects the Farrelly Bros, of all people to cover the middle age female experience.
But most importantly, Hall Pass exceeded my small expectations and the Farrellys haven't done that for too long.  It's nice to have them back...