The Mist

Director: Frank Darabont
Starring: Thomas Jane, Marcia Gay Harden & Toby Jones

Frank Darabont, acclaimed director of The Shawshank Redemption, returns to the big screen with another Stephen King adaptation. This time, Darabont replaces prison drama with old fashioned Stephen King horror.

In 1994, when Frank Darabont adapted a short, non-horror, Stephen King story The Shawshank Redemption, it gained positive reviews but made little money at the box office. However, on video, the film became a big hit and has since become one of the most critically acclaimed films of all time, constantly appearing in the Top 5 of Top 100 Greatest Films lists. Darabont followed this up with another critically acclaimed prison drama called The Green Mile, also adapted from a Stephen King tale. Then Darabont made The Majestic. No Stephen King adaptation this time, and though not a bad film, it neither made money nor achieved any critical success that even closely approached Darabont’s earlier films. Darabont has now chosen, with The Mist, to return to adapting Stephen King. However, with no more prison dramas or similar to adapt, Darabont has adapted one of King’s horror stories and, in doing so, puts his film up to comparison against, not only Darabont’s own earlier adaptations, but also against the huge number of Stephen King horrors already adapted into films and for television. The result is a film, while good, suffers somewhat from early entries into the Stephen King genre and from other horror films in general.

Frank Darabont’s strengths are in characters, developing them and in getting strong performances from the actors cast to play them. Darabont succeeds in that regard here by again casting character actors rather than big names. Thomas Jane delivers a solid performance as David Drayton, an artist and father who just wants to protect his child when a strange mist envelops a small town, a mist containing unseen creatures that pick anyone left stranded in the mist. In support the are strong performances from Tony Jones (Infamous) as a supermarket worker who struggles to overcome his fears, Andre Braugher (Homicide: Life on the Street) as Drayton’s brash neighbor and Marcia Gay Harden, usually known for playing dutiful wives but her playing the town’s religious fanatic, a cold and manipulative individual.

In addition to the performances, Darabont is effective in creating a mood of dread. As the mist descends on the town, a group of survivors barricade themselves inside a supermarket. Initially they fear the mist to be some chemical or gas but soon coming to realize its danger is darker than they imagined. Mostly unable to see what lie within the mist and with only glimpses of the dangers, most of the danger and fear in early scenes is achieved through sound and sometimes the absence of it. A sense of dread is effectively built up; exploiting old fears of things you can’t see in the dark to produce chills. It is a method of achieving scares that is rarely seen in current cinema which relies frequently on gore.
However, when attacks do come and creatures are seen more clearly, it lacks the impact of scenes where we could see very little. Some of this is due to CGI. While not exactly poor, it stands out especially when CGI comes into contact with actual actors. Darabont is not a director experienced in using CGI and sometimes it appears obvious that his actors are reacting to things that aren’t there, the use of CGI often not meshing well with the live action. One type of creature in the mist, a type of spider, is more effective seen in short glimpses and in the shadows than once fully revealed.

The film’s finale however is one that has impact. Foregoing the enigmatic ending of King’s original story, and opting against a happy mainstream ending, Darabont goes for something altogether bleaker. It might upset audiences but it does not go where you expect and that helps set it apart from many other horrors, going for emotional impact rather cheap scares.

Overall though, there are better Stephen King adaptations, better horrors and certainly better Frank Darabont films. While there is plenty to recommend this film, the ineffective use of CGI and its effect on the film’s atmosphere undermines some of the film’s better qualities making it feel as though The Mist might have been better served as a mini series for television than on the big screen.

Rating: 3/5

Hancock

Director: Peter Berg
Starring: Will Smith, Jason Bateman & Charlize Theron

Will Smith turns in another audience pleasing performance in this promising superhero action/comedy.

Superheroes are big business in Hollywood and so is Will Smith so it seems only natural to pair the two to produce a summer blockbuster. The result is Hancock which is an entertaining blockbuster even though it does not quite live up to its potential. Hancock is a superhero film that begins with a lot of promise and several smart choices. The first smart choice is that, instead of adapting an established superhero franchise for Will Smith, they create an original hero with his own back story and motivations. The next smart choice was to make this new hero a jerk.

Hancock is a drunk and a nasty drunk at that. When he does choose to use his powers to help, then he does so with little care or effort leaving damage in his wake and he is labeled less of a hero, more of a menace. Hancock is most enjoyable when its lead character is less likeable, the end results of his attempts at heroism being as humorous as the kind of stunts seen on internet sites like Youtube (in fact it is mentioned that many of Hancock’s rescues end up on Youtube including an incident where Hancock saves a beached whale by flinging it into the ocean). Will Smith also relishes in the opportunity to deliver some hilarious and acerbic insults at the many members of the public who choose to criticize him for his failures.

Hancock’s life and attitude starts to change though after he rescues a well-intentioned public relations specialist Ray (Bateman). Stopping a train, while causing a mile long pile-up, to save Ray results in another round of complaints, but Ray who is grateful that Hancock has saved his life offers to do Hancock a favor and work on improving his image to the public. Not used to such kindness, Hancock struggles with how to react and while the gags still continue, an injection of drama into the plot helps make Hancock more rewarding. Getting glimpses into Hancock’s past helps provide insight into his character and the mystery surrounding Hancock’s origins are more interesting at this point when neither Hancock, or the audience, have answers to the mystery. Claiming to have awoken in a hospital 80 years ago, with no memory but equipped with super-powers, we find Hancock is a man alone. Unable to find others like him and unable to remember his past, he has become a loner and one who hates himself (saying no one ever came looking for him when he awoke in the hospital and wondering what kind of person he must have been to be abandoned like that).

Ray manages to convince Hancock to serve time in prison for the property damage he has caused by his heroism insisting that by doing so, he is showing the people he is willing to change and be a better hero while making the public miss him when crime begins to escalate in his absence. When Hancock is called upon for help at last it is to an excellent action sequence which also mixes some well placed humor at the expense of the superhero genre (Hancock having to wear a superhero costume whilst offering words of support to police officers in the nervous manner of someone unaccustomed to doing so before). It is, however, shortly after this scene that the film takes a turn towards a less original, more standard superhero direction. A big plot twist involving Ray’s wife and her attitude towards Hancock (built up during the first half) seems unbelievable (even for a film about a man that can fly) despite a few obvious hints earlier in the film, and had already been revealed in the trailers for Hancock prior to the film’s release. From here the comedy is sacrificed for an explanation of Hancock’s origins which is less interesting than the mystery surrounding them suggests and the final third of the film becomes fairly standard melodrama and action, though the action sequences still look good and entertain.

Despite a less interesting second half, Hancock is still an entertaining film overall and this is also due to a trio of enjoyable performances. Will Smith, as mentioned before, relishes in the chance to play a hero, whether it be the boozy foul mouthed version at the beginning of the film or self-sacrificing hero of the second half. Smith delivers the kind of wise-cracking performance he is often loved for. Supporting him is Jason Bateman who’s even more capable than Smith at delivering a witty one liner (as evidenced in his TV series Arrested Development) and is also able to make Ray an incredibly likeable, and believable, nice guy who is, perhaps, the real hero of the film. Finally we have Charlize Theron. Theron playing Ray’s wife reveals there is much more to her character, and her reason for being cast in the role, at the film’s halfway point and despite the contrivances in her character and the plot from this point, Theron handles the character’s personality well.

Overall, while slightly disappointing and predictable at the end, Hancock remains and enjoyable film with plenty of comedy, some intriguing drama, enjoyable action and solid performances by the cast throughout. You will come away wanting more but, as with all superhero films; there will no doubt be more Hancock on the big screen to come.

Rating: 3/5

The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian

Director: Andrew Adamson
Starring: Ben Barnes, William Mosley & Georgie Henley

The second installment of the Narnia series on the big screen is a big improvement over the first and manages to be very entertaining.

When Disney adapted The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, the first in C. S. Lewis’ Narnia series, they were certainly hoping to capitalize on the success of New Line Cinema’s The Lord of the Rings adaptations. However, the film’s box office success, while good, was not as big as Disney had hoped and neither had the film received the critical success of The Lord of the Rings. With only average performances from the child cast, disappointing CGI and a plot that emphasized the saccharine elements of the book yet toned down the darker elements resulted in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe being labeled ‘Lord of the Rings-lite.’ Much then lies on the success of Prince Caspian. Not just financially (future installments relying on better Box Office success) but also critically. Luckily Prince Caspian succeeds on improving upon the latter by being a film more confident, and slightly darker, than its predecessor.

Like The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, Prince Caspian starts off with a strong opening scene. Where the first film began with a World War air raid on London, Prince Caspian begins in Narnia with some sinister intrigue. A child is born and announced to be a boy, his father now possessing an heir arranges for his nephew, the actual heir to the throne, to be murdered. The actual heir is Prince Caspian, and upon being alerted to the danger on his life, escapes to the woods where he comes upon the people of Narnia, long thought to be nothing more than myths. As an opening it is a gripping one and in addition to introducing political/royal intrigue it poses the question to what has happened since we were last in Narnia that the people of Narnia are now relegated to myth. This mystery and it what it means for the future of Narnia is the central theme to the film. We then find the Pevensie children, heroes of the first Narnia adventure, now back in the real world and restored to their youth despite having left Narnia in their adulthood. Trying to adapt to life back home in different ways, they all miss Narnia and soon find themselves returned there to find Narnia as it is now. One year has passed for the Pevensies since they left Narnia, but 1300 years have passed in Narnia itself.

The story of Prince Caspian is a much more satisfying affair, especially for adult audiences, than The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe with a series of circling and intertwining quests. Prince Caspian, with a band of Narnians, seeks the Pevensies and to retake his throne; the Pevensies seek out the Narnians and Aslan to discover what has happened to the world; and King Miraz seeks to find and kill Caspian to retain his hold on the throne and rule Narnia.

An additional benefit to Prince Caspian is the increased number of adult characters. Where The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe featured only a handful of adult characters, Prince Caspian has many and like its predecessor, Prince Caspian features some excellent casting in its adult cast. Peter Dinklage delivers the most entertaining performance of the film as the, very surly, dwarf Trumpkin offering many a sarcastic one-liner for the benefit of adult audiences and developing a believable bond with Lucy, the youngest of the Pevensie children. Fantasy film stalwart Warwick Davis also appears playing a role somewhat darker than usual and Italian actor Sergio Castellitto as King Miraz (leading a mostly Italian cast in the roles of his followers) brings out the greed and menace of his character and his people effectively with a tone that evokes the feeling of the Roman Caesars. Our lead character is also well served in the casting of Ben Barnes as Prince Caspian. While Barnes could be dismissed as just a pretty face (and he is certain to attract much female attention) and his inexperience as an actor is occasionally evident, he manages to carry the film quite well and certainly shows enough potential to suggest an even more satisfying performance in later installments of the Narnia series.

The weak point in Prince Caspian’s casting however, is the same weakness that The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe suffered and that is in the casting of the Pevensie children. While Georgie Hensley remains as likeable as before playing Lucy, and Skander Keynes shows improvement as Edmond, Anna Popplewell has little to do as Susan except pout and fire arrows while William Moseley, as older brother Peter, fails to demonstrate any of the qualities in his performance that would make Peter a convincing leader. Thankfully the next installment in the Narnia series sees the elder siblings, Susan and Peter, sidelined to focus more on Lucy, Edmond and Caspian.

There are a few other set backs to Prince Caspian that while not as prominent as they were in The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, still hold Prince Caspian back from being an excellent film. Despite the more mature themes running throughout the film, the battle sequences, while better than before, still seem too soft and less impressive when compared to those of other Fantasy sagas. There are also a few moments throughout the film where the flow is interrupted to through in a moment for the children. The sword swinging mouse, Reepicheep (voiced by Eddie Izzard), while mostly entertaining, hijacks a scene at the film’s climax that interrupts a warm moment unnecessarily.

Overall, Prince Caspian is a great improvement over The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. It is an enjoyable experience for adults and children alike and, while the weaker elements of the first film are still present, the Narnia series shows the potential for even more improvements in future installments. Considering how the same progression has been evident with each additional Harry Potter film, if the pattern continues to with the Narnia series then The Voyage of the Dawn Treader will be an installment to look forward to.

Rating: 3/5

Wanted

Director: Timur Bekmambetov
Starring: James McAvoy, Angelina Jolie & Morgan Freeman

A comic-book based action-blockbuster that brings the same inventiveness and edgy attitude to big screen blockbusters that its source material applied to comic-books.

While Wanted is highly enjoyable action movie full of impressive action sequences further demonstrating the flair that, director, Bekmambetov had shown in the Russian blockbusters Nightwatch and Daywatch, it is however a very loose adaptation of its source material sacrificing some of the comic-book’s moral ambiguities and crazy, though jaw-dropping, spectacle. However, for audiences unfamiliar with the comic-books, Wanted will be, perhaps, the most adrenalin fueled action film of 2008. For fans of the comic, there will be some disappointment over elements removed and/or toned down, but if they are able to overcome this they too should find much to like.

In the comic-books, Wanted is set in a world which once had superheroes, except the super-villains won. The super-villains not only won, but they also erased the memory of the heroes from the world and now run the Earth themselves from behind the scenes. Wanted, the film sacrifices the superhero/villain elements of the comic-books and has the world run by a group of assassins, guiding humanity with bullets. While losing the superhero elements deprives the film of some of the fun of the comics and will upset die-hard fans, it is a smart move as, by removing them, it sets Wanted apart from a summer season already packed with superhero films and instead replaces those elements with some fun new ideas and sequences of its own.

Wanted starts off, like the comics, with our hero/anti-hero Wesley Gibson (McAvoy). A person who, like many, is run down by limitations forced upon him by the world. He works a lifeless office job, suffers under an oppressive boss, and is in an empty relationship where his partner is cheating on him with his best friend. Coupled with McAvoy’s voiceover narrating the misery of his life and his failure to do anything about it, Wanted possesses a mood and outlook that is, fondly, reminiscent of Fight Club. “This is your life.” Where in Fight Club, freedom is obtained by the release provided in fist fights, Wanted takes this further as Wesley finds out he is the son of a top assassins and he is about to find his freedom and destiny involves a gun. When this group of assassins, The Fraternity, inducts Wesley into their ranks after revealing to him his lineage and that his father is now dead, Wesley is trained to unleash his own inner killer, the “caged lion” inside and that he can control his own life dictate its terms and be free of the oppression accepted by most in society. While the comic-books turned Wesley into a killer without morality, Wanted chooses not to lead Wesley that far into the “power corrupts” path preserving a sense of ethics in the character to make Wesley a more sympathetic character.

Wesley’s training complete; the film then departs from the direction set by the comic-books and sets itself on a path of action set-pieces as Wesley then looks to finding his father’s killer and why the killer is out to destroy The Fraternity. It is in the action sequences that Bekmambetov really impresses combining unbelievable ideas with Matrix-style slo-mo to produce sequences that amaze as much in their originality as with the adrenalin infused in them. One action sequence in particular, taking place on a moving train, is likely to be considered the best action sequence of the year while other moments involving bullets colliding in mid air and bending around corners are also impressive.

Performances in Wanted are varied in quality, though the spectacle of the film allows most faults to be overlooked. McAvoy handles his role fairly well in his first lead role of this kind and while he is able to portray Wesley as a loser convincingly at the start of the film, it is sometimes so convincing that it becomes very difficult to believe that he can become the expert assassin he later appears to be, taking until the last half hour to really convince. McAvoy also employs a particularly poor American accent that distracts from his performance on several occasions but does not undermine his entire performance. Supporting McAvoy is Angelina Jolie as fellow assassin, Fox, who delivers all the danger, confidence and sexuality that she is known for and Morgan Freeman gives a solid performance as Mr Sloan, the leader and mentor of The Fraternity.

Overall, this is a very enjoyable action film. While it lacks the courage to dive as deep into consequences that becoming a killer could have on an, otherwise, average man that the comic-book took or even that the film Fight Club (a sort of ‘spiritual cousin’ to Wanted), it still accomplishes much of what it sets out to say and partners it with breathtaking action. When Wesley asks the question “What the fuck have you done lately?” you might want to consider your answer carefully.

Rating: 4/5

The Happening

Director: M Night Shyamalan
Starring: Mark Wahlberg, Zooey Deschanel & John Leguizamo

M Night Shyamalan’s latest film begins well with rising tension and paranoia but unfortunately reveals its mystery too soon leading to a disappointing ending.

Following the success of The Sixth Sense in 1999 and Unbreakable in 2000, it seemed that M Night Shyamalan had taken the crown of top suspense maker in Hollywood possessing an almost Hitchcock-ian ability to build and maintain suspense while also demonstrating a level of character and romanticism commonly associated with Spielberg. However, in an attempt to live up to the reputation awarded him, Shyamalan has focused more and more on the sensational twists that amazed audiences in his first two films, often at the expense of the suspense and characters with each film afterwards. Signs (2002) demonstrated this flaw in its final 5 minutes with revelations that served to undermine what had otherwise been an excellent drama/thriller. The Village (2004) involved plenty of romanticism and strong characterization but then undermined it with its own ‘twist’ ending. Lady in the Water (2006), in an attempt by Shyamalan to make a film without a big ‘twist’ at the end, now seemed unsure what to do with his characters or story anymore, resulting in a fairytale based drama that alienated audiences.

The Happening is Shyamalan’s latest big screen outing, and unfortunately it continues to follow the pattern of his recent efforts by becoming his most muddled and unsatisfying effort to date. This is not to say that The Happening is without merits. The first half of The Happening is very good. An opening sequence in a public park sets an excellent tone for the film when park-goers just stop what they are doing and then proceed to commit suicide. As people jump off buildings or shoot themselves without explanation the tension level is heightened not only by what we see but by the mystery over what is causing it. Reactions lead the public to panic, speculating a possible chemical weapon attack by terrorists or the possibility that the cause is a reaction caused by nature.

In a world living post-9/11 and also becoming as equally concerned with the environment as it is about terrorism, the precedent is set for Shyamalan to deliver a tense, suspense drama and this is what we get for the first half of the film. Our cast, lead by Mark Wahlberg’s teacher, his wife (Deschanel) and fellow teacher (Leguizamo), try to find safety along with others while also trying to learn the cause of the attacks as they begin to increase. With people panicking and speculating over the attacks with occasional stops to hear reports on radio and television showing and describing other attacks there is an atmosphere that compares, favorably, with Hitchcock’s The Birds.

Once The Happening reaches its halfway point however, the story takes an odd turn that then serves to deprive the film of the conflict and suspense it had been building. As the reality as to what is causing people to commit suicide is made clear, the characters make the decision to move away from the familiar surroundings of cities and small towns and head into the country while splitting into smaller and smaller groups for survival. The attacks possess a chilling quality when they occur in more familiar surroundings and with larger populations but are somewhat lacking in wide open spaces. Once the threat is revealed, it then becomes difficult to make the threat appear as frightening as before, even having scenes of characters running from the wind or stopping to debate their options when in clear view of an attack. Having the characters separate into smaller groups also serves to highlight problems with the characters. No longer able to look sufficiently panicked as part of a crowd when there are people to interact with, Wahlberg and Deschanel look dumbfounded most of the time with Wahlberg suffering more than most being left with dialogue that involves little more than exclaiming “Oh No!” or describing events that are occurring in view of the audience.

Overall, it is Shyamalan’s choices halfway in his story that prevents this film more being better than it is. Taking the characters and story away from the cities and towns, while making sense to the story, deprives the film of the suspense that had made the first half of the film so gripping leaving us with a suspense drama that begins well but very slowly fizzles out as it reaches a quiet, unassuming climax. Shyamalan need to find the balance again that brought him his early success.

Rating: 2/5

The Incredible Hulk

Director: Louis Leterrier
Starring: Edward Norton, Tim Roth & Liv Tyler

An enjoyable superhero film that improves greatly over the last attempt to bring The Hulk to the big screen whilst being almost as enjoyable as 2008’s other Marvel Comics film: Iron Man.

The Incredible Hulk is one of Marvel Comics most well known, and loved characters. It is, then, hard to imagine how it could be difficult to adapt the character for the big screen successfully. The Incredible Hulk though, has a lot of expectation to live up to. This is the second attempt to bring the character to the big screen after Ang Lee first attempted to do so in 2003 with Hulk which failed to please either Lee’s fans (a superhero film seeming too mundane) or Comic/Blockbuster fans (Hulk being too slow and introspective and lacking fun or thrills). The Incredible Hulk not only has to prove it is better than its big screen predecessor; it also follows the warmly received Iron Man. So, is The Incredible Hulk, this time played by Edward Norton instead of Eric Bana, as good as we hope it to be? Not quite, but it still good fun and is certainly a big improvement over the 2003 adaptation.

The Incredible Hulk sets out to distance itself from Hulk immediately. Not only featuring an all new cast, it avoids the pitfalls Hulk faced in presenting the character’s origins by speeding through it during the opening credits (also depicting a somewhat different origin that seen in Hulk). As the story begins, it is now six months later. Bruce Banner (Edward Norton) is on the run, in Rio de Janeiro, and trying to find a cure whilst also learning to control his anger which would transform him back into the Hulk. Skipping past the origin is a risky gambit but one that ultimately pays off as the resulting film is a far leaner, meaner affair than before with relevant bits of history seen in short, sharp flashbacks throughout the first half of the film.

Whilst seeking a cure and trying to remain hidden, it isn’t too long before the US Government gets a lead on Bruce Banner and send in an elite military unit lead by an impressive Tim Roth. Instead of the initial confrontation leading immediately to a big conflict with Banner as The Hulk, we instead get a thrilling foot chase throughout the shanty town streets outside Rio de Janeiro, perhaps inspired by the Bourne films, before ending up in a factory where The Hulk finally takes over. Even here, we don’t get a full glimpse of the Hulk with him being kept mostly to the shadows and the result is a more thrilling set piece which is less reliant on CGI than you might expect from a summer blockbuster. The chase soon moves to the USA as Banner seeks out a scientist who has offered him help whilst reconnecting with an old flame, Betty Ross (Liv Tyler) and ultimately ending up in a Battle Royale when the government loses control of a more dangerous Hulk-like soldier which Banner must defeat in the streets of Harlem, New York.

While the final conflict is fairly entertaining and its CGI looks great, it is ultimately a somewhat hollow, mindless slugfest. The Incredible Hulk succeeds more in sequences that show restraint on the CGI front or allow our actors to be seen, the already mentioned chase in Rio being one example, another being a battle on a university campus between the Hulk and a military unit with some inventive sequences including a fully formed Hulk fighting a Tim Roth’s hard man.

As good as the CGI is it doesn’t beat actors. Fortunately The Incredible Hulk has several good actors on hand. Edward Norton, while an unlikely choice to lead a superhero franchise, maintains the right level of jitteriness in a character that must keep control of his emotions in the face of even mundane confrontations. Whilst it is not Norton’s best performance to date, it is certainly enjoyable and believable. Meanwhile, Tim Roth is excellent as Banner’s opposite number, a military man who is disciplined, using his anger against his enemies until he sees power in anger in the Hulk that eclipses his own. Tim Blake Nelson steals his few scenes as, scientist, Samuel Sterns (foreshadowing a future role for the character) while William Hurt is decent as General Ross, the man out to capture Banner and also father to Banner’s love interest Betty Ross. If any character feels underdeveloped its Betty Ross, played by Liv Tyler, who plays a standard love interest/woman in distress role with few scenes that develop the character.

There are a few faults in the film that prevent it from being as enjoyable as Iron Man. The Incredible Hulk’s plot, while generally enjoyable, is a little thin going from finding a cure, run from the government, fight and escape and then repeat right up until the end and while this was a common theme for the character in comics and even for the 1970/80s television series it would be nice for as much invention in the plot as is seen in the action sequences. There are also a few attempts at humor that fall flat trying to poke fun at old in-jokes regarding the Hulk character (the purple shorts being one example) but miss their mark when delivered by an actor like Edward Norton.

Overall The Incredible Hulk is a successful adaptation. It is mostly enjoyable and certainly a stronger start for a franchise than previous attempts especially following Iron Man and a sly tease towards the end that suggests a definite direction for the character in future films.

Rating: 3/5

Gone Baby Gone

Director: Ben Affleck
Starring: Casey Affleck, Morgan Freeman & Ed Harris

A strong, thought provoking drama which marks a very impressive directorial debut for actor Ben Affleck.

Following the critical and box office failures of films like Gigli and Jersey Girl, Ben Affleck made the smart choice of stepping back and returning to his roots in an attempt to re-energize his career. It was a smart choice and, following a few successful supporting roles (Hollywoodland in particular); Ben Affleck’s smartest move was to go from being in front of the camera to stepping behind the camera. Affleck’s last attempt to work off camera resulted in the Oscar-winning screenplay for the film Good Will Hunting, co-written with Matt Damon. This time Affleck has adapted Denis Lehane’s novel Gone Baby Gone for the big screen and its material that is familiar to Affleck with it being based in his hometown of Chicago. Affleck is therefore more than capable of capturing the voice of the Chicago communities.

Gone Baby Gone bears some similarities to another Lehane novel, also adapted for the screen, Mystic River as it deals with a loss within a Chicago community. Mystic River dealt with a murder, Gone Baby Gone deals with something that might be considered worse, a kidnapping of a young girl. This event brings us several groups involved in the investigation to find the child; we have the police investigation led by Morgan Freeman’s police chief (whose character had lost a child years before and has a personal stake in finding the child) and his officers played by Ed Harris and John Ashton. We then have a private investigation begun by family of the child who hire a private investigator from their community played by Casey Affleck. The casting of Casey Affleck is an interesting one and it works. Yes, he is the younger brother of director Ben Affleck and yes, he may seem a little young still for the role he is playing but, like brother Ben, Casey Affleck has grown up in Chicago in these communities and lends a feeling of credibility to the role. Casey Affleck is very impressive here and is proving himself capable of finally stepping up into leading man roles following another strong performance in last year’s The Assassination of Jesse James. Affleck’s character is a complex one and the moral grey areas his character lives in when dealing with the criminal and law enforcement communities over the course of his investigation are delivered effectively, with subtlety.

Supporting Casey Affleck is a cast of strong actors. Morgan Freeman delivers a solid performance, as does Ed Harris but most impressive is Amy Ryan, playing the mother of the kidnapped girl. Ryan’s mother is a sympathetic yet unlikable character. Distraught over the loss of her child yet she is a selfish and unfit mother. While we sympathize with her loss there is still doubt over whether her child’s life is better off being separated from her mother. It is characters like Ryan’s and Affleck’s and of other members of the community that add extra depth to the story and help elevate Gone Baby Gone above other similar dramas and the story itself goes in many interesting directions and asks some very difficult questions of the audience. When the investigation into the kidnapping seems to hit a wall at the film’s half way point it might seem as thought the film has no where else to go from there but Affleck’s insistence that there is more to events than what they’ve seen pursues his investigation further trying to find the motives behind the kidnapping as much as identifying the kidnappers and the climax of his investigation and the confrontation with those responsible provides the film with one of the strongest endings in recent memory. Affleck is faced with a very difficult decision, one without an easy answer and the question, and Affleck’s answer is one that not only divides opinion amongst the characters in the film but is likely to accomplish the same divide amongst the audience.

Overall this is a very strong drama and both Ben and Casey Affleck are excellent in their roles as director and actor respectively. While the story does slow a little too much at first following the film’s midpoint and a few performances not quite up to the level of Affleck and Ryan’s (Michelle Monaghan as Affleck’s romantic and business partner is good but not as convincing as her peers), the film has a very strong story, some great performances and Affleck captures the feeling of a community and their loss effectively. If Ben Affleck continues on as well he has here in the future his career will soon be restored and his brother’s career is one finally on the rise it deserves.

Rating: 4/5

Sex and the City

Director: Michael Patrick King
Starring: Sarah Jessica Parker, Cynthia Nixon, Kristin David & Kim Cattrall

An enjoyable return of the Sex and the City cast and characters, this time on the big screen.

Sex and the City is a difficult film to review. The difficulty is due mainly to two reasons; That I am a fan of the TV series and that this really is not a movie. Directed by Michael Patrick King, a director that worked on Sex and the City when it was a TV series knows the cast and characters so well that he perfectly captures the feel of the TV show for the film. King is so good at capturing the feel of the show that Sex and the City, the film, ceases to feel like a film and feels more like an extended episode of the TV series.

When adapting a TV series for the big screen, especially an adaptation that uses the same cast and follows on from the TV series, it becomes an opportunity to tell a story on a larger scale, making use of the advantages available to a big screen production. Sometimes this is an opportunity to deliver bigger action sequences and have bigger effects like with The X-Files: Fight the Future in 1998 or be more daring and risqué than was possible on television like with 2007’s The Simpsons Movie. However, Sex and the City was a TV series that ran on HBO, which was already able to be as risqué as it wished to be and its subject matter does not lend itself to big action or special effects. So, while it would seem that there is not much reason to justify a big screen adaptation of what is presented in this adaptation, Sex and the City manages to remain as entertaining as any episode of the series from which it began.

The storyline is interesting enough to old fans and provides enough to lure in new fans. The film starts several years after the TV series ended and our cast is living well in the lives established for them at the end of the TV series. At the end of the TV series, after 6 seasons, Carrie, the star of the series finally settled down with Mr. Big, her on again/off again love interest over the life of the series. The plot of the film then begins with the next logical development for characters; should they get married? The answer, the events it leads to and the consequences it has for Carrie, Mr. Big and their friends and friends’ relationships becomes the main hook for the film. Asking questions of all our characters over whether marriage is necessary in a loving relationship, the film and characters react quite naturally to the answers and their consequences. Like with the TV series, Sex and the City treats the subject matter maturely with a fair amount of comedy and sex for entertainment. While the ultimate outcome of the film is fairly predictable (the makers of the film not wanting to undermine the, already popular, finale to the TV series), the journey still has rewards.

The cast perform very well. All of the cast to come from the TV series have spent years playing their characters and are able to get back into character effectively. Chris Noth, the mysterious Mr. Big of the TV series, gets to develop his character more than most early on the film giving us a bit more insight into his personality that he usually received in the series and while his, and other male characters, are presented as fallible characters, the insight given into their decisions and reactions keep them sympathetic. Another film, featuring four female leads discussing love and fashion, might choose to focus solely on the female perspective and perhaps even demonize the male characters, however, in the film as with the TV series, Sex and the City shows our leads are every bit as fallible as the men in their lives.

Overall, Sex and the City will be enjoyed immensely by fans, old and new, of the TV series. While the plot and pacing match that of the TV series, thus feeling somewhat uneven as a film and much enjoyment in the characters depends more on you having seen some of the TV series (the first half hour giving little insight into the character’s motivations, no doubt assuming most audiences know them already), this is still an enjoyable film and will be better appreciated once it is released for television.

Rating: 3/5 for new audiences; 4/5 for fans of the TV series

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Director: Steven Spielberg
Story: George Lucas and David Koepp
Starring: Harrison Ford, Shia LeBeouf and Cate Blanchett

It has been 19 years since Indiana Jones graced the big screen with his presence and I’m glad to say he’s back in style and it feels like he never left.

Few big screen trilogies have been as highly regarded as those written by George Lucas. He captured the imaginations of an entire generation in 1977 with Star Wars and then did so again in 1981 with Indiana Jones, this time bringing in old friend, Steven Spielberg, a man with a record as impressive as Lucas’. In both trilogies Lucas also had found a leading man capable of carrying both trilogies in Harrison Ford. Ford, a star in the making thanks to Star Wars, cemented his leading man status with Indiana Jones and became an idol to many fans.

Now, fast forward to 1999 and Lucas is releasing his first new Star Wars film in 16 years. Filling in the history of the galaxy he established in his original trilogy, armed with the latest special effects but minus most of his original cast, The Phantom Menace brought in a lot of new fans to the Star Wars franchise but almost alienated many fans of his original trilogy. While some respect was regained with the following two Star Wars prequels, it certainly cast some doubt over whether Lucas still had all of that old magic. Now, it is 2008 and we are seeing the return of another Lucas creation in Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. It has been 19 years since the last Indiana Jones film was released and despite the return of Harrison Ford and Steven Spielberg, there has been a fair amount of fear in addition to anticipation over whether this new film would capture the magic of the original films.

I am happy to say that Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is not only a fun, action packed summer blockbuster, it is also an Indiana Jones film. I can think of no higher compliment to award it. It has been 19 years since the last film and Harrison Ford is older than and not as spry as he was and it has been a long time since Lucas and Spielberg have worked with these characters but it doesn’t take long for them to find that old rhythm. Opening with action and intrigue, the film feels a little uncertain at first, no doubt reflecting the feelings of audiences that have been around to remember the earlier Indiana Jones films before we had CGI. But after the opener, we get a moment to stop, breathe, and catch up with what has happened with our characters in the 19 years since we last saw them (the film taking place 19 years after the last, from 1938, now to 1957 reflecting the real world time gap between films). These scenes add a new spin to our old character. Like the audience, Indiana himself doubts his abilities and future in these new times and different attitudes (again a comparison between the 1930s and 1950s of the film and the 1980s and 2000s for audiences). This sets the stage for the new film and for the characters as Indiana is quickly involved in a new adventure as he’s brought in to rescue an old friend, lost on a quest and facing a new enemy (the Soviets of the 50s filling in for the Nazis of the 30s).
Almost everything from here on is vintage Indiana Jones. Indiana, and Harrison Ford, find new energy, reunite with old friends (seeing Karen Allen return as Marion Ravenwood is a heartwarming sight for any old fan), being brought in a mystery of a lost civilization, finding the clues, fighting the enemy, big action and a bigger finale. Everything that’s old feels fresh again and while the film injects a little of the Sci-Fi sensibilities of 1950s cinema into the plot, it feels natural rather than forced.

There are some flaws however, and most of these lie with the film’s appeal to newer audiences. There are many nods to old fans and successful attempts to appeal to the nostalgia possessed by old fans of the franchise that might not appeal to newer audiences who have never seen an Indiana Jones film or came to them after growing up on a diet of CGI blockbusters and superheroes. The romantic subplot in particular might not appeal to newer audiences that haven’t seen Raiders of the Lost Ark. Also, while Spielberg has only gotten better over the years at delivering exciting action sequences (and there are some fantastic ones here, a jungle chase sequence in particular is stunning), the occasional uses of CGI feels oddly out of place and sometimes make the dangers our characters face seem less real than those faced in the past.

In the end though, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull succeeds admirably in its goal of being an Indiana Jones film. Performances are mostly top notch. Ford and Allen recapture their chemistry as Indy and Marion, Cate Blanchett is an effective villain and Shia LeBeouf holds his own admirably and certainly proves capable of carrying the torch should rumors of a new Indiana Jones franchise prove true. Ray Winstone and John Hurt provide decent support, although their roles are fairly underdeveloped. Hurt’s character in particular serves mainly to be an expository device. But everyone works together well and the most important performance, Harrison Ford’s, captures his old character perfectly.

Overall, while there are a few minor nitpicks for old fans and some aspects might seem unappealing to new fans, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is fitting addition to the Indiana Jones series and can stand proud alongside the rest. Not the best Indiana Jones film but certainly an equal. Indy is back!

Rating: 4/5

Charlie Bartlett

Director: Jon Poll
Starring: Anton Yelchin, Robert Downey Jr & Hope Davis

A mildly amusing comedy that has some good moments but is ultimately less than the sum of its part.

There is some uncertainty surrounding Charlie Bartlett. There seems to some confusion over who Charlie Bartlett is and, as such, it leaves the film feeling somewhat uneven. As the film begins, we have a scene where Bartlett is being expelled from his private school for producing and selling illegal IDs. This rebellious act and that he has also been expelled from several other private schools prior to this, gives an impression that Bartlett is more rebellious than he later appears to be. When Bartlett is then forced to attend a public school as a result, the potential is set up for an enjoyable and, perhaps, thought provoking comedy but is, instead, something much more mild mannered.

Bartlett arrives at public school and promptly discovers his intellect is not as winning with the student body here as he believed it might be and finds there are troublemakers far worse than he. Wanting to be popular, Bartlett exploits his intellectual image and his access to prescription medication through various psychiatrists to become his school’s drug dealer. His motives and methods to become popular, along with his background make Bartlett a difficult lead to like. It does not help that aspects of his character bear similarities to other, more successful, films. An intellectual standing out from the rest of his classmates? Sounds like Rushmore. Access to various avenues of psychoanalysis, whilst having an eccentric family background? Igby Goes Down. Rebelling against the school principal whilst dating his daughter? Too many films to name.

The film that Charlie Bartlett most seems to imitate however is Risky Business, the 1983 comedy that set Tom Cruise on his road to stardom. Where Cruise’s character Joel, was a rich kid who rebels and starts his own prostitution racket, Bartlett rebels against his school by dealing drugs. In one scene, Bartlett parades around in his underwear, wearing sunglasses and randomly singing. Remind you of a scene from Risky Business?

Charlie Bartlett also does not appear to say anything original or risk straying outside of its comfort zone. Bartlett’s relationships with his mother, his girlfriend and the principal seem to wrap up too easily when the consequences of his actions are realized. The suicide attempt of a student overdosing on Bartlett’s drugs and the rising alcoholism of his principal all solve themselves in the end without any major lessons learned for Bartlett.

Performance-wise, Yelchin is watchable as Bartlett but his inexperience as a lead actor shows and some scenes (like when Bartlett trips out on Ritalin) come over as forced and the overall mild mannered nature of his performance makes it difficult to believe that Bartlett is capable of gaining the popularity and respect of the students that he receives. Hope Davis offers a decent performance as Bartlett’s mother but her performance here suffers slightly in comparison to similar roles in the past. The one stand out performance in the film is Robert Downey Jr as the school’s principal. His principal is a man trying to run a school when he’d rather be teaching instead while also having to raise a daughter alone and struggling with alcoholism is response to the stress he feels. Downey Jr’s principal then finds Bartlett to be a major obstacle preventing him from managing what is, already, a difficult set of responsibilities. Robert Downey Jr actually delivers such a strong performance the film suffers whenever he is off screen and his character feels more interesting and sympathetic than Bartlett himself.

Overall, Charlie Bartlett is a decent film with a good performance from Robert Downey Jr. While it has some good moments though, it owes too much too other films that have covered similar grounds and suffers to add anything worthwhile in comparison. Charlie Bartlett is a rebel, just not a memorable one.

Rating: 2/5