Australia

Director: Baz Luhrmann
Starring: Nicole Kidman, Hugh Jackman & Brandon Walters

An attempt at a sweeping epic romance that, while having an impressive middle hour and some very strong performances, is also too long leaving an epic that is good but not as great as it aspires to be.

Baz Luhrmann certainly has ambition. After mixing Hollywood Musical with Bollywood Musical in 2001’s Moulin Rouge! involving Busby Berkeley style dance routines, modern pop songs and a sense of showmanship to rival Cecil B. DeMille, Luhrmann has turned his attention to the epic period romances such as Gone with the Wind and applied the formula to his beloved home country of Australia whilst throwing in some of the magic of The Wizard of Oz for good measure. The result is Australia, and while certainly epic and featuring some truly breathtaking sequences and stunning visuals, it also suffers somewhat from Luhrmann having too much ambition.

Set during the years of 1939 to 1942 in Australia, with the threat of WWII looming over the country as its backdrop, Australia follows the unlikely romance of Lady Sarah Ashley (Nicole Kidman), a woman of wealth from England, and the cattle rancher Drover (Hugh Jackman) brought in to help manage her late-husband’s cattle ranch in northern Australia. Facing threats from the local cattle competition, Lady Ashley comes to terms with a different way of life thanks to a young, mixed-race Aboriginal Boy living on her property named Nullah (Brandon Walters) and her desire to prove herself the equal of any man in this new land. Australia does take a while for this main story to finally get moving. After an opening act where Luhrmann rapidly introduces characters, plot pieces and ideas whilst maintain a comedic tone that borders on farce, he finally takes the time to stop and slow down allowing us to see the characters we’ve met and begin to see what drives them. Once Luhrmann begins to focus more on his characters is where Australia entertains and succeeds most, at least for middle hour of the film. Alongside some stunning visuals (Australia itself looks nothing less than stunning throughout the film whether it be desert outback or lush waterfalls and greenery) and a truly impressive cattle drive sequence at the film’s mid-point, the building friendship and then romance between Lady Ashley and Drover is touching and believable, as is the softening of Lady Ashley’s initially icy demeanor as she comes to accept young Nullah into her life despite the nature of mixed-heritage making their friendship a taboo during this period of Australian history.

However, despite a very strong middle hour that more than makes up for the uneven opening scenes, Luhrmann’s ambitions get the better of him. After the thrilling cattle-drive sequence where Lady Ashley and Drover seemingly accept each other and settle down to a new life together, the film and its story continues for another hour bringing WWII to Australia and a sequence of events that break up our three main leads and frequently threatens to replace the earlier, happier moments in the film, with a different ending filled with tragedy. Like the rest of Australia, these war-based sequences look amazing and are suitably epic in scope, in keeping with Luhrmann’s intentions, but it also excessive and an unnecessary attempt to suggest that epic romances are not sufficiently epic unless confronted with tragedy or the threat of tragedy. Fortunately these final sequences are still watchable.

Overall, Luhrmann has made an epic romance and it certainly encompasses much of Australia’s checkered history as well as it’s wonders but, while it is certainly enjoyable, beautiful to behold and well acted, it could have done with less commitment to being an epic, and to the conventions of the epic romance, and rather been content to just telling a romance. A good, if flawed, film but one certainly best seen on the cinema screen.

Rating: 3/5

Twilight

Director: Catherine Hardwicke
Starring: Kristen Stewart, Robert Pattinson & Billy Burke

An adaptation of the best-selling novel that offers some interesting twists on the Vampire genre whilst also succeeding in appealing to more than just fans of the novels.

Twilight the novel, and the series of novels spawned from it, have been best sellers particularly amongst its target audience, teenagers. The story, that of a teenage girl falling in love with a mysterious boy at school who she discovers is a Vampire has successfully mixed fantasy and romance and captured an audience on teens attracted to tales of love everlasting. It is not surprising then that, after adaptations of fantasy books for younger crowds have achieved Box Office success (Harry Potter, Narnia etc) that Twilight would soon receive its own cinematic adaptation.

Twilight the film is a largely faithful adaptation of the novel, helped by the involvement of the novel’s author, Stephanie Meyer, and directed by Catherine Hardwicke, a director already making a name for herself with intelligent teen dramas like Thirteen and Lords of Dogtown. However, rather than focus so heavily upon the romantic elements that it feel excessive, Hardwicke has shown enough restraint to keep much of the film grounded in character. The character of Bella Swan (Stewart) feels genuine rather than a stereotypical teen. Her story, of separated parents and having to relocate to a new town and find new friends might not be original but the character’s reactions feel natural, mature. Feeling something of an outsider, even amongst those that accept her, is something she soon discovers she shares with Edward (Pattinson), one of a family of teens that keep to themselves and shun interaction with others in town. What initially begins as a prickly relationship (Edward wanting little to do with Bella but unable to stop staring at her) begins to evolve when Edward saves Bella from a swerving vehicle and revealing hints of his true nature to Bella. Unable to leave the mystery alone, Bella persists to follow Edward until the truth about him and his family is revealed that they are Vampires.

Wisely playing down the stereotypical elements of Vampire lore (no fangs, coffins etc… They can come out in the day but avoid direct sunlight) helps with the believability of the relationship between Bella and Edward. His life being one made more difficult by his nature, being unable to forge friendships due to his not aging and the reminder that his kind generally feed of Bella’s (though Edward and his family are one that refuses to feed on humans). Playing on the reluctance of both character’s desires to keep their feelings guarded in this new town, Hardwicke allows the characters to get to know each other gradually. Edward gets to show Bella his world a step at a time and Bella gets to show Edward a normal life in return. This slow approach feels somewhat refreshing and helps make the relationship more appealing to adult audiences and the performances of both Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson as Bella and Edward are suitably impressive.

Twilight does however suffer slightly towards the end. The build up throughout the film involving a second group of Vampires in town that have been attacking innocents is left too late to be resolved a decent matter leaving the film’s climax feeling very rushed as one Vampire, upon discovering Bella and her relationship to Edward seeks to hunt her as a prize. With so much of the film’s strengths lying in its gradual development of character, this direction feels like something from another film altogether and the other group of Vampires receive very little development. However, despite this and despite the occasional moment where teenage fantasy overwhelms the relationship between Bella and Edward (having Edward, and the Vampires of this series shine like diamonds in the sunlight is a step too far), Twilight still manages to resolve many of its storylines with maturity and manages to feel like a complete story rather than a deliberate set up for a franchise (though the potential for sequels is there).

Overall, despite a rushed ending and the occasional pandering to its teenage audience, Twilight is an enjoyable fantasy film. It offers enough maturity in its director’s handling of the subject matter and in the performances of Stewart and Pattinson that adults and teens alike should have much to enjoy.

Rating: 4/5

Inkheart

Director: Iain Softley
Starring: Brendan Fraser, Eliza Bennet & Paul Bettany

A fairly entertaining family adventure that has enough moments of magic to enjoy even though it does not quite live up to the potential of its premise.

Based on the novel by Cornelia Funke, Inkheart bears many of the traits of classic storybook style adventures: magic, adventure, romance, a heroic lead, a dastardly villain and even a storybook style narrator during the opening who sets the scene for this film about Silver-tongues and their ability to bring books to life by reading them aloud. Leaping ahead 12 years, we meet Mo (Fraser) and his daughter Meggie (Bennet), two avid fans and collectors of rare books on another European trip. However, Mo has another reason for his book hunts, one book in particular he seeks and this book, Inkheart, reveals the nature of his gift as a Silver-tongue to his daughter as the characters he freed, unwittingly, from the book 9 years earlier catch up to him with mixed motives. One, a fire breathing performance artist named Dustfinger (Bettany) just wants to return to the book and to his family, others like the thug Capricorn (Andy Serkis) want to use Mo to grant themselves riches and power in the real world.

So far, so good. With the story set up and our characters in motion, Inkheart is set for high adventure however, despite some very entertaining moments, particularly at the film’s climax, Inkheart only occasionally lives up to the potential it has. While Mo can bring characters to life and out of the books, there is a price that involves someone from the real world going into the book to take their place. As such, this somewhat limits the greats that the film could achieve as Mo resists using books to help him out of trouble as much as possible. When he does submit (such as bringing forth the tornado from The Wizard of Oz) then the scenes become more interesting (and fleeting shots of characters landing into novels like Arabian Nights are fun, if brief) and glimpses of other escaped characters (a Minotaur, flying monkeys and the crocodile from Peter Pan) seen in Capricorn’s dungeons hint at the possibilities that are being avoided.

Still, Inkheart, in spite of its self-imposed limitations, generally entertains. Brendan Fraser is a likeable hero (once again employing the kind of role seen twice already in 2008 with The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor and Journey to the Center of the Earth) and Eliza Bennet is incredibly charming as his highly intelligent and strong willed daughter (though perhaps is too much of both for a character that is, supposedly, 12 years old!). Paul Bettany is enjoyable as Dustfinger, the character desperate to get home who constantly tries to fight the selfish characteristics given to him by his writer, Jim Broadbent is also a joy to watch as the author of Inkheart who marvels at his creations come to life even when they threaten to harm him. Andy Serkis seems to enjoy playing a dastardly villain fitting to a literary stereotype and has several British character actors filling out the roles of his henchmen. Helen Mirren however is somewhat irritating as the high and mighty, no time for adventure, Aunt of Mo and Meggie but is fortunately not too intrusive in the scenes in which she appears.

Overall, Inkheart is certainly a fun, family film and makes a decent case for the adventures to be found in books (though of course the irony is that it takes a film to do this). Some entertaining moments and some fun casting means that the film is still quite enjoyable even though you kind of wish its main characters would have opened a few more books and read aloud.

Rating: 3/5

The Day The Earth Stood Still

Director: Scott Derrickson
Starring: Keanu Reeves, Jennifer Connelly & Jaden Smith

A somewhat average remake of the 1950s Sci-Fi classic which succeeds most in scenes which don’t employ the use of CGI effects.

The original The Day The Earth Stood Still, released in 1951, is widely regarded as a Sci-Fi classic. Capturing the atmosphere of an era in a world post-WWII and in the midst of a Cold War, the film used the background of world conflict and general distrust amongst nations to tell a cautionary tale of how the Human Race could bring about its own destruction if it were to continue to pursue its, then, course of action. Told in the form of a Sci-Fi film it entertained and educated audiences in equal measure. It is now 2008; the world is still engaged in multiple conflicts alongside an additional environmental threat. So here comes a remake of The Day The Earth Stood Still.

Where this remake succeeds most is where it follows some of the themes and events of the original film. Early scenes where the newly arrived alien Klaatu (Reeves) is questioned by the military and then escapes to see how the Human Race lives are strong. While not sticking precisely to events of the original film, Klaatu’s experiences of the Earth and its people are faithful to the tone of the original film. Dismayed by the warlike and destructive nature of the Human Race, Klaatu questions whether they should be allowed to continue existing, only to find that Humans are capable of more than destruction. The remake also manages to maintain the tone relating to the world’s political climate where decisions involving other nations are hindered while military decisions are often rushed and uninformed (a statement perhaps of the US military response post-9/11). The messages given in the film about war and its consequences and also about the effects we are having on the environment (another cause that has gained popularity in recent years after decades of concerns) are not particularly subtle but are still handled in a decent manner and certainly make for relevant present day concerns for a remake of The Day The Earth Stood Still being set in the present day.

The Day The Earth Stood Still impresses less though when it tries to embrace the technologies of today’s cinema. Making this remake a big-budget affair with modern special effects sometimes distracts the tone of the film from what could be a thought provoking Sci-Fi Drama. Replacing the flying saucer of the original film with a glowing, gaseous looking sphere in the remake is a move that succeeds in providing an effective feeling of other-worldliness in a modern Sci-Fi film where a flying saucer today would feel dated; however other special effect driven decisions are less successful. In particular is the remake’s version of the robot GORT. Here the robot is a giant and, while fearsome, bears too much resemblance to the Cylons of TVs current Battlestar Galactica series and when GORT unleashes its power on the Human Race it does so in the form of a swarm of metallic insects feeding on the manmade environments and its people. Once this event occurs, story takes a backseat to spectacle however the spectacle proves to be less interesting than the build up to it would suggest and the ultimate resolution to the problem that Klaatu describes occurs fairly quickly and predictably.

The Day The Earth Stood Still does benefit from some great casting. Keanu Reeves, often criticized for having a limited ability to convince emotionally in his performances, finds his somewhat detached persona working well for him in his portrayal of Klaatu, an alien in a Human body who has little experience with the ways and emotions of Humans. Jennifer Connelly delivers a good performance as, scientist, Helen Bensen who is raising a child alone and wants to show that Humans are capable of good. She is convincing as an intelligent woman capable in her field and also in displaying the emotional vulnerability of someone left to raise a child alone. There is strong support from Kathy Bates as the somewhat uncooperative Secretary of Defense and John Cleese in a small appearance as a professor. The only problem amongst the casting comes in the role on Bensen’s stepson Jacob who, while supposed to be demonstrating a child struggling over the loss of his father, often comes across as annoying instead of sympathetic.

Overall, The Day The Earth Stood Still is a decent remake and a decent message film. Bolstered by some good casting decisions it manages to tell a decent story, however, a weak conclusion, an over-reliance on big budget effects sequences in the final act and the resistance to truly delve too deeply into the issues it tries to raise means that ultimately this remake is a missed opportunity that disappoints more than it satisfies.

Rating: 3/5

Lakeview Terrace

Director: Neil LaBute
Starring: Samuel L. Jackson, Patrick Wilson & Kerry Washington

What looks to be an average stalker/crazy neighbor thriller actually succeeds at being far more entertaining thanks to a scenery-chewing performance from Samuel L. Jackson and a strong performance from Patrick Wilson as on of his suffering neighbors.

There was a time in the late 1980s and early 1990s when there was a trend at Hollywood to produce thrillers involving obsessive/psychotics tormenting neighbors, housemates and ex-lovers in films like Pacific Heights, The Hand That Rocks The Cradle and Fatal Attraction. While none of these films are remembered as being masterpieces, they are nevertheless memorable and hold place in many a film audiences list of guilty pleasures. Now, in 2008, we get another addition to this genre that will likely serve a similar purpose for a new audience in Lakeview Terrace.

Set, very much, in present-day Los Angeles in the midst of forest fires and in an economic climate where being or becoming a home-owner is a big undertaking, Chris and Lisa (Patrick Wilson & Kerry Washington) are a recently married couple who’ve just moved to Los Angeles and bought their first home. As if the strains of purchasing a new home and starting a new life are not enough, they soon find that the police officer next door is far from the ideal neighbor they had hoped for. The neighbor, widowed single father and policeman, Abel Turner (Samuel L. Jackson) is a man with strict rules and a very black and white outlook on what he believes is appropriate behavior and his new neighbors being an interracial couple is something he does not condone. Initially bothering his neighbors with more minor acts of intimidation such as subtle hints of his disapproval of their lifestyle in conversations to leaving his security lights on at night and directed open his neighbors windows soon leads to more aggressive actions when Chris and Lisa show that they won’t be intimidated.

As a thriller, while the steady escalation of the threat Abel poses to Chris and Lisa is predictable, the performance of Samuel L. Jackson as Abel succeeds in convincing of his character’s instability. With just a few hints of recent events involving his dead wife to justify his reactions to Chris and Lisa while hinting his anger has always been an obstacle to his relationships with others (as seen by the reactions of his sister and of fellow police officers). Jackson manages to make Abel incredibly menacing yet also maintaining enough charm to keep us interested and also managing to dominate many scenes in a manner that would make the performance memorable in a genre that usually struggles to add anything interesting to what has been seen before.

In addition to Jackson, Lakeview Terrace also features good performances from Patrick Wilson and Kerry Washington as the victimized couple next door. Washington has the slightly less developed role mostly showing her character to be strong and intelligent and able to hold her own in some scenes with Jackson. It is, however, Wilson that gets the bigger role. Wilson’s character faces many conflicts in the film and represents a different perspective on the question of racism and relationships. As the white male in the relationship with his wife, he is the main focus of Abel’s intimidation tactics and Chris refuses to back down as he finds the attitude of Abel to representative of an attitude he has faced from Lisa’s father that he perceives to be based on the color of his skin. Effectively portraying a man frustrated by situations where he feels he cannot win, he also maintains enough decency that his frustrations can be understood even if his actions are not always condoned.

Overall, while building up to a predictable conclusion, the performances of Wilson and Jackson and the effective raising of tensions makes Lakeview Terrace a more enjoyable and much memorable film than it could have been. Fans of Samuel L. Jackson is particular will find many reasons to watch the film again. A three star film the gains and extra point for casting.

Rating: 4/5

Changeling

Director: Clint Eastwood
Starring: Angelina Jolie, John Malkovich & Jeffrey Donovan

A strong, engrossing drama featuring an impressive performance from Jolie and is another worthy addition to Clint Eastwood’s directorial resume.

While the story of Changeling, based on the true story of Christine Collin’s search for her abducted son in 1928 and the LAPD’s attempts to demonize her when they return the wrong child, is material that certainly brings up thoughts of Oscar nominations, especially given the performance from Angelina Jolie and direction by, frequent Oscar winner, Clint Eastwood; it would be foolish to dismiss Changeling as deliberate Oscar bait. Changeling is, nevertheless, a well made, well acted and engrossing drama.

The first half of Changeling follows a fairly standard course as we get early scenes of Christine Collins (Jolie) playing the hard-working single mother of a little boy Walter and how important he is to her. When she comes home from work one day to find Walter missing, she is, understandably, distraught and waits anxiously for news from the police that begin searching for Walter. The twist in the story comes when, upon being told her son has been found, she is presented with a child who is not Walter but claims to be. With the LAPD already under scrutiny on allegations of corruption, they refuse to acknowledge their mistake and face further embarrassment and proceed to pressure Collins into accepting the boy as her son. When she takes the matter public with the help of a local Pastor (Malkovich) she is deemed unstable by the police and sent into a psychiatric ward.

While the story here and its twists are powerful and gripping, made even more so because the events are true, the telling of the story is also very traditional. Jolie is convincing as the distraught mother, shedding tears when necessary and crying out in anger and frustration over her missing child with conviction as expected while other characters are portrayed as idealistically good, the Pastor, or villainous, Captain Jones of the LAPD (Donovan). Even scenes in the psychiatric ward run towards the familiar with nurses willing to hand out pills and shock treatment without question and the doctors quick to dismiss anything Collins says as a sign of madness although they are still effective in allowing audiences to feel Collins’ frustration at those that are preventing her from finding her son.

Fortunately, at the film’s halfway point, the narrative takes a darker turn and becomes altogether more complex when a boy found on a chicken farm reveals shock shocking, gruesome revelations involving kidnapped children. Changeling turns somewhat darker at this point with the added atmosphere of Noir pictures like L.A. Confidential as the revelations expose the police forces mistakes with Collins and her son whilst also sending the search down a different path and following up on the aftermath of what is revealed. Even when the film moves towards the use of two simultaneous trials, one against the LAPD for their treatment of Collins, the other for the prime suspect in the kidnapping of Collins’ and other people’s children, Changeling still keeps tensions high as we await the ultimate fate of Walter and the effect this ordeal has had and will continue to have on Christine Collins. Whilst the supporting characters and performances still run towards the black and white presentations of good and bad characters with the addition of an honest cop and an unstable suspect, Jolie is given plenty of material to work with and despite frequent reminders from other characters as to how strong a woman Christine Collins is, Jolie is able to convince us it just as well with her performance.

Clint Eastwood demonstrates the skills and experience expected of a director with the experience and award-winning acclaim that he has achieved. While Eastwood’s characterizations involve traditional good or bad stereotypes, the ability to cast talented actors like Angelina Jolie, John Malkovich and Amy Ryan ensure that the characters have more depth from the actor’s performances than the script alone would afford them. Eastwood also shows great ability to capture the feel of 1920s America with much attention to detail and his usual use of a jazz and brass instrument score that feels appropriate for the period. Also, in addition to focusing on the plight of Christine Collins, Eastwood is also able to effectively portray the treatment of women during that period of history in addition to ineptitude and corruption of the LAPD.

Overall, Changeling is very moving, very well made drama. In spite of its adherence to somewhat old fashioned storytelling techniques, it also aids in not only capturing the mood of the 1920s but also some of the feeling of the films of that period. With a decent opening and a strong second half, alongside Jolie’s impressive performance, Changeling is a very good film, worthy of Oscar attention though perhaps not of success.

Rating: 4/5

Choke

Director: Clark Gregg
Starring: Sam Rockwell, Kelly MacDonald & Anjelica Huston

A very dark and funny comedy from the writer of Fight Club that may lack that film’s visual flair and its intensity but certainly maintains the writer’s dark wit and inventiveness.

Nine years after the release of Fight Club, based on the novel by Chuck Palahniuk, we finally get to see another adaptation of the author’s work. While Fight Club only achieved moderate box-office success and received a lot of criticism for its violence and tone, it was nevertheless a cult success building up a faithful following and receiving positive reviews from many critics. In the aftermath, many of the author’s works were prepared for film adaptations but none were ever able to get into production and see release until now. Choke, while based on one of Palahniuk’s later and less intense novels, is still a successful adaptation and certainly an entertaining one.

Sam Rockwell stars as Victor, a college drop-out and sex addict who, through conning people out of money by faking choking attacks in restaurants and then milking his rescuers for money to help pay for the medical fees of his dying mother (Huston) who was once an activist dragging Victor from town to town as a child. Victor is a fairly unlikable character; he cares little for the women he sleeps with, feels no guilt for the kindness of his ‘rescuers’ that he exploits, and feels spite towards his mother whose medical fees keep him working yet she never recognizes him anymore and speak disapprovingly of the choices he has made, choices me has made to support her. Like Ed Norton in Fight Club, Sam Rockwell narrates as well as stars in Choke and like with Palahniuk’s other protagonists, his perspective is one of cynicism towards society.

Things begin to change for Victor however when his mother gets a new doctor in the form of Paige (MacDonald) whose resistance to his advancements to sleep with her and her general kindness towards him and his mother make him wonder whether he could like someone for once. When Victor also learns that his mother has lied to him for years over the identity of his father and is then presented with possibilities that his actual father may have ‘Holy’ ties, he begins to question his identity and his ways. Victor’s life, his sex addiction, his second job as a historical tour guide where everyone must stay in character, the other patients at his mother’s care facility and the revelations over Victor’s possible parentage is source for a lot of dark humor in Choke and it is this humor that makes the film so enjoyable especially given Rockwell’s deadpan, weary performance. In addition to the humor and the entertaining twists and turns of the plot, the film and Victor also give many insights into the nature of people, especially those prone to similar acts as himself and makes commentary on the meaning of good and kindness even in a world that has so much despair and meaningless relationships.

More die-hard fans, purists, of Palahniuk’s novel might criticize the changes made to the ending of Victor’s story in this adaptation and the changes are somewhat disappointing, leaning towards a safer, almost happier ending, but considering some of the novel’s themes and acts, that this adaptation stays faithful so much of it should hopefully satisfy most fans while entertaining audiences unfamiliar with the novel. Rockwell is perfect casting for the role of Victor and is well supported by Angelica Huston as his activist/now-dying mother, a sweet and endearing turn from Kelly MacDonald as Dr. Paige Braddock and a somewhat loveable loser in his best friend Denny, played by Brad William Henke.

Overall, while some Palahniuk fans might be disappointed by some other changes and Fight Club fans looking for something similar might be disappointed by the lack of intensity or immediacy in Choke, it is very funny, well performed and a very satisfying film and adaptation. Here is hoping the next Palahniuk adaptation does not take another nine years to be released.

Rating: 4/5

Body Of Lies

Director: Ridley Scott
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio, Russell Crowe & Mark Strong

A well acted, visually impressive espionage thriller that, while entertaining in places, is not quite as deep as it would have you believe.

Ridley Scott is very talented director but if there were just one criticism to be made of his abilities it is that he often makes films that have much more style than substance. Frequently Scott gets the balance just right, impressing you with a meaty story and impressive visuals such as with Alien, Gladiator or Blade Runner (where, arguably style is the substance). Sometimes though, the style takes a bigger hold and despite coming away impressed you may later realize that there wasn’t as much depth to the film to truly satisfy such as in Matchstick Men, A Good Year or even 2007’s American Gangster. Scott’s latest film, Body Of Lies, falls into this second category. Body Of Lies does feature some strong performances, plenty of twists and turns and some technically brilliant action sequences but ultimately it keeps you on your toes so much that it rarely settles to allow more than the occasional insight into the war against terrorism.

Starting in England before quickly moving on to Iraq and then Jordan, we are quickly introduced to our main players. Leonardo DiCaprio plays Ferris, a CIA operative tracking a terrorist cell from Iraq to Jordan while liaising with Jordan’s head of intelligence Hani (Mark Strong). Ferris’ boss Hoffman, played by Russell Crowe, is a manipulative individual who controls and interferes with Ferris’ investigations from the comfort of the United States, watching the action from satellite feeds and communicating primarily by phone. With Ferris in the thick of the action, he often finds himself too close to see what other operations are going on and Hoffman, in a room more than a million miles away, can’t see the small, important details. The result is some operations are compromised and Ferris finds himself struggling to fulfill his objective while also trying to maintain something of a normal life in a job that involves secrecy and the risk of death, capture or relocation.

What Scott is effectively able to communicate is that the breaks in communication, between operatives and their handlers overseas, leads to more harm than good. What the film rarely does however, is stop to look too closely at the deeper, and more long term, effects of their strategies. Only in scenes where Ferris works alongside Hani and we can see the different methods, attitudes and results between Jordanian intelligence operations and those of the Americans, do we get an understanding into how the American drive for immediate results undermines their efforts and hinders their own progress. Also, an incredibly gripping final act where Ferris is forced to trade himself to the enemy for the safety of a woman he has grown to care for, we see the potentially fatal implications that operatives may face in the field with some detailed and shocking acts of violence and intimidation.

Body Of Lies, in addition to strong cinematography, also benefits from strong performances from its cast. Crowe entertains as the somewhat arrogant CIA chief back in America, though his performance while entertaining is also underdeveloped. Mark Strong puts in an impressive performance as Jordanian intelligence chief Hani, and effectively conveys the character’s intelliegence and confidence, but also his ability to intimidate even experienced officers like Ferris. Strong is able to command control over most scenes he is in which helps elicit a strong performance from DiCaprio as Ferris. DiCaprio has the hardest job in the film; acting across from Strong in the Jordan scenes while also having to act alongside Crowe when most scenes place them miles apart with just a phone connection to link them, DiCaprio needs to be able to live up to their performances while also making his character a believable CIA operative and human being when alone. Fortunately, DiCaprio succeeds and delivers a great performance.

Overall though, despite good acting, skillfully handled action sequences and the occasional insight into the real war of terror and its effects, Body Of Lies is still dominated by style over substance. Its characters are underdeveloped and the film is more content at showing you operations in action than delving into the hows and whys of terrorism or how better to fight it. Entertaining, but not wholly satisfying.

Rating: 3/5

Zack and Miri Make a Porno

Director: Kevin Smith
Starring: Seth Rogen, Elizabeth Banks & Craig Robinson

Kevin Smith’s eighth film, and second not featuring his cult creations Jay & Silent Bob, is likely his most mainstream effort to date and while it sometimes lacks the bravery of some of his earlier pictures it still entertains and is very funny.

Kevin Smith and Seth Rogen make a good team. Smith has been making low-budget, ‘Indie’ comedies for 14 years now. While none of his films can make claims to being huge hits at the Box-Office, they’ve certainly garnered ample critical appraise based on Smith’s risqué yet honest dialogue filled with movie references, particularly Star Wars, whilst also capturing the thought and feelings of entire generations. Seth Rogen, with the help of director/producer Judd Apatow has done much the same as Smith only with slightly tamer material and with much greater commercial success with 40 Year Old Virgin in 2005 followed by Knocked Up, Superbad and 2008’s Pineapple Express. It comes as no surprise then that this pair should eventually collaborate on a project together.

Zack and Miri make a Porno is their first collaboration and the results are quite good and, as the title suggests, the subject matter is very risqué. Rogen plays Zack who, along with his housemate Miri (Banks) whom he has lived with for 10 years, find themselves too poor to pay their rent, their water or their electricity. With the prospects of facing homelessness they turn to an idea to make a porn film. Despite a long friendship, the pair believes they can keep things professional despite sex, and make the film that will solve their debt problems only to find that sex can indeed change a relationship.

The first half of the film is its strongest. Starting with a high school reunion where Zack and Miri face the reality that they have done much less with their lives than their classmates and featuring some scene stealing from Brandon Routh (Superman Returns) and Justin Long (Die Hard 4.0) as a gay couple, the film is then set up for its main plot when Zack and Miri decide to make a porn film of their own. Pulling in a few friends including Craig Robinson (Americas The Office TV series) and Jeff Anderson (Randall of Kevin Smith’s Clerks films) to produce the film and casting Traci Lords, Katie Morgan (Lords a former pornstar herself, and Morgan a current pornstar) and Kevin Smith regular Jason Mewes to act in the film they then have to decide on a plot and title, including many amusing twists on famous movie titles including Star Whores before launching into production. With dialogue laced with Smith’s trademark sex and movie references, Zack and Miri succeeds most when its characters are talking and the subject matter leads in to some hilarious scenes of sex acts and nudity including one moment when a stranger wanders into the set (a coffee shop being used out of hours) and another with Mewes involving an act referred to as the “Dutch Rudder” that ranks as one of Smith’s and Mewes’ funniest moments.

However, where Zack and Miri make a Porno disappoints is in the use of Seth Rogen and Elizabeth Banks in these later scenes. While Smith, Rogen and Banks, are happy to talk dirty, they all seem too afraid to actually ‘be’ as risqué which, considering the film’s title and the willingness of the supporting cast to engage in raunchy scenes is disappointing. This is especially so since not only has Smith shown he is more daring with his main stars within his earlier pictures, but also in knowing that Rogen and Banks have had much raunchier scenes, Banks in particular in 40 Year Old Virgin. However, Rogen and Banks are much more commercial now than they were then and by extension, in starring in a Kevin Smith film, they bring that level of commerciality to Zack and Miri. Perhaps all involved were a little too scared to cut as loose and brave as they had when there were less well known. Also, while Smith has shown he is willing to take more unpredictable paths with the relationships of his main characters, avoiding the usual Hollywood ending, in films like Clerks and Chasing Amy, here the path of Zack and Miri is a predictable one. This is not really a bad thing as the cast are likeable enough that the ending the film has is the one audiences want but is still a little traditional for a Kevin Smith film all the same.

Overall, there is still a lot to like and enjoy about Zack and Miri make a Porno. It is neither Smith nor Rogen’s funniest film to date but is still a solid addition to both their filmographies and future collaborations are welcome and the film also serves as better start to Kevin Smith’s non-Jay & Bob film career than 2004’s Jersey Girl. This is still a very funny film and audiences will be entertained.

Rating: 3/5

W.

Director: Oliver Stone
Starring: Josh Brolin, James Cromwell & Elizabeth Banks

At best, an average biopic of the most controversial American President since Nixon, but, at worst a disappointing and toothless effort from Oliver Stone, a director known for controversy himself.

On paper, W. (pronounced ‘Dubya’) looks to have the potential to be another classic in the filmography of director Oliver Stone. A biopic of an American President, an unpopular one at that, in a time when the US is embroiled in an unpopular war, which for Stone, who is known for his anti-war films (Platoon, Born on the Fourth of July) and his biopics (JFK, and the scathing Nixon) seems to be the ideal mix of subject matter and timing (with George W. Bush’s presidency in its final months). However, the result is something that is not only unsatisfying as a biopic, but also incredibly disappointing coming from a director such as Stone.

Opening in the White House, with George W. Bush already President and debating the name he and his administration are going to give to the Iraq/Iran/Afghanistan alliance they want to reveal to the American public to aid in their plans to invade Iraq, the tone is somewhat mixed. Perhaps harmed somewhat by the real-life Bush still being in office, perhaps also by the large amount of ridicule he has faced on his actions and demeanour, this opening scene strikes a somewhat humorous (presumably unintentional) tone. While the casting of actors such as Brolin as Bush, Wright as Colin Powell, Dreyfuss as Dick Cheney look the part and certainly go on later in the film to inhabit the personalities of their characters delivering believable performances without merely being caricatures, in this early scene the commitment to the look and demeanour of these characters almost feel like parody. As said, while these roles are developed better later, diving straight into scene such as this so early in the film still mixes the tone of the film. Will W. serve to ridicule George W. Bush? Illuminate his past and his motives? Or will it outright condemn the man? The opening scene, and scenes, leaves this uncertain and by the end of W. the film ultimately fails to do very much of any.

Initially, once Stone starts jumping back into the past to show George W. Bush’s early years, we see many scenes with great potential for the future of the film. Leaping right into Bush’s college years and a fraternity party, we get a glimpse of Bush’s early, fun-loving, responsibility avoiding years. While little of Bush’s past is unknown given the scrutiny he has faced during his Presidency, actually seeing the enactment of Bush as beer-drinking, girl chasing young man who fights, gets arrested and constantly disappoints his father, Bush Sr., is a refreshing change from the Bush audiences have seen in the news these past 8 years. These scenes not only allow Brolin to deliver a more rounded performance as Bush, one that extends beyond looking the part or inhabiting the man’s mannerisms, but also serve to look at the events that helped define how a man who avoided responsibility might ultimately take on the ultimate responsibility and this lies in his relationship with his father.

However, while early scenes between Bush Jr. and Bush Sr. lay promising groundwork for what is to follow, Stone unwisely chooses to make this relationship the primary focus of defining Bush Jr.’s motivations. While it does not, and should not, excuse Bush Jr. of his later mistakes it certainly helps to take away some of his accountability. Skimming by other defining relationships in George W. Bush’s life such as that with his wife Laura (ably performed by Elizabeth Banks but sidelined to a role of supportive wife who keeps her opinions to herself and off screen), with Karl Rove (again performed admirably by Toby Stephens but without insight as to how their relationship developed) and most importantly his relationship with his faith which develops and strengthens all too quickly, we are ultimately left with a man who is driven mainly by Daddy-issues.

Also, Stone’s focus on George W. Bush’s relationship with his father leaves him avoiding the more controversial acts of his Presidency such as his election itself and his actions on 9/11 with more present days scenes taking place post-9/11 and pre-Iraq War as Bush Jr. and his administration look to how they can justify the war with Iraq and Iran the seek to engage in. While many of these scenes display evidence that Stone has lost all his skills for delivering political commentary on his subject matter (Colin Powell is portrayed as a reluctant hero, while Cheney and Rumsfeld are demonised as unsympathetic power-mongers) it rarely digs deep enough or for long enough before veering back to Bush Jr.’s father issues.

Performance-wise, W. does manage to excel. Brolin manages to embody the personality of George W. Bush by showing he can do much more than merely look the part and speak with Bush’s mannerisms. Brolin manages to make Bush Jr. a much more sympathetic character than many could imagine him being while also remaining true to the personality seen in the public eye. In supporting roles we have excellent performances from Toby Stephen’s as Bush’s advisor Karl Rove and from Jeffrey Wright as Colin Powell, Bush’s Secretary of State. Powell is portrayed as the reluctant, resistant figure to Bush’s actions with Rove the talented spin doctor that helped Bush justify his actions to many. Richard Dreyfuss and Scott Glenn deliver unnerving performances as Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, the two men judged even more harshly than Bush during his presidency. While they are perhaps portrayed somewhat as caricatures (a little too evil?), given the actions and words of the actual men themselves these performances are nevertheless believable.

Overall, despite occasional moments of insight, of political commentary and despite some generally excellent casting and performances, Stone’s decision to focus too frequently on George W. Bush’s family relationships and not enough on other relationships or on the more controversial decisions he has made and the reasoning behind them result in a very unsatisfying biopic and an even more unsatisfying Oliver Stone film. Perhaps if Stone had waited a few more years to distance himself from the presidency and any critical/audience backlash he may have faced if he openly engaged the subject matter of Bush Jr.’s life while he still held the office of President, then Stone may have made a much more daring and satisfying film. Instead we are left with W., a film as disappointing as the man himself.

Rating: 2/5