Showing posts with label 8 OUT OF 10. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 8 OUT OF 10. Show all posts

Wednesday, 9 September 2009

49: INGLOURIOUS BASTERDS

Although slightly disappointed with Death Proof, it didn't take me a second to say 'yes' to Tarantino's latest. Part one of a two movie night at Staples Corner - party animal!

Fitting somewhere between Jackie Brown and Kill Bill No. 1, this is Tarantino back on form. Long drawn out scenes, great dialogue, and excessive violence - it's all here and in pure QT style. Constant references to Nazi killing don't always sit well, but if you didn't catch the tongue in cheek tone of the film in the second act, you will in the final one. Not a masterpiece, but very entertaining.

8 out of 10

Wednesday, 2 September 2009

47: MOON

The previews suggested an atmospheric, claustrophobic, old fashioned science fiction movie in the style of 2001 and Alien. Something we've all been waiting for.

Three things made this movie an amazing experience - Duncan Jones skilfully subtle direction, Sam Rockwell's stellar 'one-man band' performance, and the moody music of Clint Mansell lurking in the background. Moon is a throwback to the smart sci fi movies of the 70s and one that is entirely welcome.

Side note: The soundtrack is so good, I bought it the next day.

Second side note: Adrian McKinty compares Moon to another sci fi classic here.

8 out of 10

Thursday, 11 June 2009

33: THE BAADER-MEINHOF COMPLEX

Jumping around a bit here; I think I saw this one in November or December of last year.



Intense, violent, Komplex. Multi-layered action and a deep character study: a film about the infamous West German terrorist group that is entertaining, shocking and morally ambiguous.

8 out of 10

Monday, 11 May 2009

30: STAR TREK

Why I chose it?

Good reviews and a promising trailer suggested that this re-envisioning by J. J. Abrams would be entertaining. Also, a hangover ruled out anything too taxing on the noggin.

Where?

The old faithful, Wandsworth, 640pm.

Comments?

I've never been a Trekkie; I'm more of a Star Wars fan. I've tried to watch some of the movies and a couple of the TV episodes but I could never get into the whole Star Trek thing. The later series, Next Generation, etc, did nothing to generate interest either. Nah, definitely Star Wars for me, through and through.

That said, there's a chink in my anti-Star Trek armour after last night. I enjoyed this new version of Star Trek, using the original (and best) characters, made with flair and skill by director J. J. Abrams of Lost and MI:3 fame. In fact, I loved it. Excellent fast moving storyline (not the "by the numbers" plot my hangover was hoping for), likeable characters and amazing special effects. Not being a Trekkie, I can't say for certain whether this movie was faithful to the original but I got the impression that it was. The cheers and the clapping as the credits rolled seemed genuine and were a good sign of approval.

The humour in the movie surprised me and it's entertaining humour, especially in the scenes with Kirk (Chris Pine), Spock (Zachary Quinto) and, of course, Scotty (Simon Pegg). There are plenty of nods to the old series too, including a cameo that does not come off as a hastily inserted publicity stunt at all; in fact, it fits into the storyline superbly, the first appearance of the character giving me one of my laugh out loud moments.

But this is not all laughs and nostalgia - the action and tension is ramped up with brilliant space battle scenes and entertaining hand to hand combats. And Bana is brilliant as the Romulan baddie - like Chopper Reed, but with ears.

The movie's best moments, in my opinion, are when Spock is on the screen. Quinto does an amazing job at nailing this role and bringing a darker side to the much loved character - an absolute joy to watch. Let's hope they keep him on.

I won't say I've been converted to the Trek side of science fiction, but if Abrams continues to champion this new vision, I'm definitely on board for future instalments.

Would I pay to see it?

Definitely - a must see on the big screen.

Rating?

8 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Brilliant! Even with a hangover. Live long and prosper."

Wednesday, 18 February 2009

22: DOUBT (OSCAR SERIES)

Eye on which Oscar?

Performance by an actor in a supporting role - Philip Seymour Hoffman

Performance by an actress in a leading role - Meryl Streep

Performance by an actress in a supporting role - Amy Adams

Performance by an actress in a supporting role - Viola Davis

Where?

Chelsea, 6.30pm (a pain in the ass to get to, so a double bill was required to justify the trek).

Comments?

As can be seen by the Oscar nominations, this is a movie for the actors. Despite a tremendous effort by the director, John Patrick Shanley, who also wrote the screenplay based on his own stage play, the ensemble cast carry this movie beyond that of just a good dramatic film.

Doubt held my attention throughout. It is a harrowing tale about the suspicions of the Principal of a Catholic Church in the Bronx; suspicions of the Father of the Church and how he may have strayed from the flock, taking particular small boys with him.

The paedophile priest, unfortunately, has become a bit of a cliche in movies and real life, but it pays to remember when watching this movie that it is set in the sixties. The Principal, Sister Aloysius, played by Meryl Streep, has grave concerns about the Father's conduct and for her to make any accusations at all is a major step outside the boundaries of what is considered acceptable. But, nevertheless, she takes those steps and puts Father Flynn's reputation at risk.

Are the accusations unfounded? Shanley skillfully ensures that nothing is clear cut and that the audience remains in the same boat as the main characters, never really sure what is happening behind closed doors. Some of the characters have no doubt, they have their certainty that they are right; some seem certain but then their minds are changed, they become confused, they choose what is less hideous to comprehend, they want "simplicity back". Others make decisions that seem unfathomable in the face of the obvious repercussions.


The movie builds up along the thoughts and feelings of these characters, driven forward by the actions of those who think they are right, and ultimately searches for a satisfying resolution. A final emotional statement ensures that this can not be so, a revelation that, on the face of it, shatters everything that has gone before, but upon reflection, in my opinion, refers to something less obvious, and reflects a greater fear, a greater sense of self doubt, one that is not so easy to cast out.

Oscar worthy?

What a cast! Streep! Hoffman! Adams! It's a stellar line up of consummate professionals and they deliver in spades. The skill that these actors show is amazing; their performances breathtaking without dominating any one particular scene. They form part of the bigger story, each of them bringing a captivating performance to the screen.

I read somewhere that there was an award (not in the Oscars) for best ensemble cast and that the Doubt team were nominated. They should win that, for sure. A confrontation scene mid-way through the film, with the three actors above involved, is something truly mesmerising to experience; you can not help but enjoy watching them in full flow, acting their socks off, but avoiding taking it too far. Professionals, every one of them.

In my opinion, though, no one will win an Oscar. Not because of their performances, but because of who they are up against. Streep is amazing and, as expected, at her best, bringing the very strict and stubborn Sister Aloysius to life; Hoffman as Father Flynn, as he so perfectly does, tip toes along a line of creepiness, staying on the right side so as to keep the doubt brewing. That said: Streep will lose out to Winslet; Hoffman to Ledger. It's a shame but it doesn't take anything away from their performances.

Best Supporting Actress could be a different kettle of fish. Amy Adams is very good but she is slightly overshadowed by the two headline acts above; but that works, as she plays Sister James, young, naive and totally overwhelmed by the head Sister and Father Flynn. Another great performance.

Viola Davis is good too, as the mother of the only African American boy in the Church. Her son attracts the care and attention of Father Flynn and his well being becomes of great concern to Sister Aloysius. The mother makes a decision that shocks and Davis plays it quite well, but her screen time is minimal, fifteen minutes tops, not enough in my opinion to make a good enough impression.

So, the jury is still out on Best Supporting Actress. I haven't seen the other nominations yet, so I won't make a call. I will say, on their performances alone, the Oscar probably isn't here either. The team at Doubt need a new category in the Oscars - Best Ensemble.

Rating?

8 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Either I've discovered something quite profound in the movie's last words or my mind is not completely with it because I haven't eaten enough food. More popcorn for the next one please."

Saturday, 29 November 2008

15: BODY OF LIES

Why I chose it?

Despite the two big names in the lead, it was Sir Ridley Scott as director that pulled me towards this one. I've always been a big fan, love his style and American Gangster was up there as my favourite movie of 2007.

Where?

Shaftesbury Avenue, 8.45pm. (There's not enough angle on the seating, so I got a crick in the neck after watching this 2hr plus movie).

Comments?

Body Of Lies is based on a novel by David Ignatius and follows the crusade of a CIA operative on the trail of a terrorist who has recently taken credit for bombings in Continental Europe and whose secret safehouse is believed to be in Jordon. Ferris (DiCaprio) is assisted by CIA Boss Hoffman (Crowe) in tracking down the terrorist leader and bringing him to justice, but has motives, information and plans of his own which he keeps to himself, thus putting Ferris and others in danger.

I found this movie very intriguing and, as I have said, I am a big fan of Scott's direction (except when he creates an effect on screen where the images blur and jump, which he did once in this movie and too many times in Hannibal). The tension is tangible throughout, not just in the action scenes, but in the dialogue, most notably between Ferris and Hani Salaam, head of the Jordanian General Intelligence Department (superbly played by Mark Strong).

There are issues raised here about government policy, the threat of terrorism and the tragedy of war. Scenes of bombings in public places (Manchester, Amsterdam, Turkey) resonate, especially since recent events overseas. However, it is the underlying theme of secrets withheld and lies told that creates the greatest tension and which result in the direst of consequences.
There is an element of realism here that had an impact on the layman (me) and the drama unfolding on the screen is captivating. There is globetrotting around some of the most dangerous parts of the world, including Iraq, and I found much interest in some of the aerial shots of these locations. Scenes of torture and violence are graphic and realistic, not for shock value, but to add to the tension; still, most are very hard to watch.

DiCaprio and Crowe (who added plenty of weight to "fill" the role of the CIA boss) are engaging to watch, DiCaprio going from strength to strength since Blood Diamond. As I mentioned above, Mark Strong is superb as the Jordanian intelligence boss, who toes the line of righteousness with methods that are questionable but effective. Just don't lie to him. And there was a pleasant surprise to see a well-liked Australian actor amongst it all (see below).

This is an explosive movie, and not just in the pyrotechnics, and it is one of the better movies to address the war on the ground in the Middle East and the fight, as ill directed as one may think, against terrorists. It also has a much better thematic approach than last year's The Kingdom. Some critics point out that the long running time desensitises the film's impact, but I, for one, can say that my interest was held throughout.

Another worthy effort by Sir Ridley Scott.

Would I pay to see it?

Yes.

Rating?

8 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"I knew that was Vince Colosimo!" said with visions of buying the Underbelly TV series next year.

Monday, 12 May 2008

4 : SPEED RACER

Why I chose it?

The Wachowski brothers - those dudes who came up with The Matrix Trilogy - said to have pushed the boundaries on visual effects once again!

Where?

Cinema 2, Hammersmith, 8.20pm (right after Iron Man with only enough time for a 6" Sub)

Comments?

All I can say is WOW. Yeah, it's pretty much a kid's flick, a little cheesy and some of the race scenes are confusing, but with the AMAZING CGI effects and a great cast, this is definitely a must see. It's bold in its visuals, writing and direction and its nothing like anything you've ever seen before.

You'll either hate it or love it but you will definitely be impressed by it! Take the kids if you've got 'em!

Would I pay to see it?

My word yes, this movie stayed with me a long time afterwards (and not just because of the catchy theme song). If I get a chance, I'll be doing a repeat viewing. Might even go and see it at IMAX in 3D.

Rating?

8 out of 10

Post Movie Quote:

"Go Speed Racer, Go Speed Racer, Go Speed Racer, GO!!" Repeating over and over in Daryl Nilbett's head.