Safe House

Secret agents seem to be very popular at the moment with a few films about them released recently. This is the latest.

We've had CIA agents falling in love in 'This Means War', but this is more hard core action with a plot about rogue agents like 'Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy'. Instead of an agent looking for a mole we have an agent trying to protect a mole from being attacked. You could be very cynical and say that if Hollywood took 'Tinker Tailor' then re-wrote it to make it more appealing and better for a broader audience. that is not to say the film is terrible but just a kind of dumbed down version. The plot is fairly basic with no really surprising twists. If the film is anything to go by, I did find the procedures of working in a safe house to be very interesting. I could not imagine working in a place like that as it seems they are not allowed to do much except be bored. It also seems hard for them to keep relationships as are not allowed to tell anyone what they do. The action sequences are well handled and nicely fast and loud.

I'm not a terribly big fan of Denzel Washington. Here he does a decent job of playing the smart bad guy who knows how to judge people and their behaviour. He does also give a nicely subdued performance and does not over play it as he normally does. Ryan Reynolds is excellent and plays the morally strong hero part well. The rest of the cast are highly respected actors but have little to do other than stand and talk in a surveillance room.

A decent but not overly great action film about the CIA. If you thought 'Tinker Tailor' made your brain hurt with its intellect then this is more for you.

Weekend

Love can come in many shapes and forms. We are always seeing films about the love between a man and a woman, but rarely do we see one between two men.

Rarely that is in cinemas. Here in Australia we don't normally get gay themed movies released in cinemas. They are normally released straight to DVD/blu-ray. So it is great to see a film like this in the cinema. The story is very simple. Two guys meet at a club on a Friday night, they spend the night together and end up falling in love over the weekend. Not much happens,it is just the two guys and various times they meet over the weekend. Meets that let them get to know each other. As a gay man is is refreshing to see such a romantic story about being gay portrayed so well. Based on my own experiences it is difficult to find romance within the gay community. So I found it nice to know that it still exists. The character of Russell is the one I most related to being so romantic. Looking for the one person he can share his life with. He finds that in Glen. Not the type of guy you would expect to want a relationship. But you can easily see him come to like Russell. Their love is not obviously sign posted like in many romantic films. It is a gradual thing that slowly evolves. Something that I really like.

The two leads give such wonderfully brilliant performances. Tom Cullen as the quiet Russell who is the romantic one. He is most like me and portrays that rarely seen softer side so very well. His 'not quite out of the closet' status was not explored much but its a minor flaw. Chris New is the character more like most of the gay guys I meet. Just after a one night stand and not a relationship. However as the film develops Glen's softer side comes out. Chris is excellent as showing both these sides in very subtle ways.

Not all love stories come in the standard, straight way. There are stories out there that are queer and a bit bent. We need to see more of them in our cinemas. Especially when they are as good as this.

Any Questions For Ben?

Working Dog are an Australian production company that has made some of the best TV shows ever made. They have also made a couple of Aussie film classics. This is their latest project.

The Working Dog team consist of Santo Cilauro, Tom Gleisner and Rob Sitch, with some input from Jane Kennedy. I have been a fan of this team ever since I first saw them on television in the early 1980's when they were part of a comedy team called The D-Generation. In the early 90's they made the brilliant comedy show 'The Late Show', then in the late 90's they branched off as what we now know as Working Dog and made one of the best Australian TV shows ever made 'Frontline'. As well as making one of the most beloved Australian films of all time 'The Castle'. This is only the tip of the iceberg for some of the things they have made. Let's just say that I am an unquestionable fan of everything that they do. I think they might have found a failing.

The team have tried to make a romantic comedy but I don't think they are the right guys to do it. They have tried to make something a bit different to the normal rom-com but they did not make it quite right. The plot is pretty conventional with a young man questioning his free-wheeling lifestyle before finding a girl he likes. The main problem is that it is far too long. It takes ages for Ben to meet the girl, Alex, then he spends the rest of the movie deciding if he really wants to be with her. Ben's love of his bachelor life is obviously the obstacle that is keeping him from being with Alex but it takes so long to get there. Towards the end of the film it was becoming so incredibly tedious that I became really bored. You know they are going to end up together (sorry if that's a spoiler but we all knew that's what happens with these films) so just get it over with. I don't mind a character being conflicted but there comes a time when there is too much conflict. Despite this there are some very funny moments and enjoyable supporting characters. Even if there are far too many of them.

The Working Dog team have assembled a cast that is comprised mostly of friends who have worked on their previous projects. It has been revealed that the film is loosely based on lead actor Josh Lawson's real life. He is quite a charming actor and has a nicely dry sense of humour. But he is ostensibly playing himself so maybe there is not much 'acting' involved.Rachel Taylor is very good but I felt her character got a bit short-shifted. I felt she need to have a bit more to do rather than just appear occasionally as the object of affection. There are however some excellent members of the support cast. I thought Felicity Ward was the best thing in the film. I loved her sarcastic humour. Daniel Henshall gave an incredibly creepy performance in 'Snowtown' so its great to see that he can play light hearted characters as well. Rob Carlton is excellent as Ben's father but he looks far too young to play Josh's dad. I am also a fan of Ed Kavalee and found him to be very funny here. I am also a big fan of Lachy Hulme but I found his character to be unnecessary.

As a huge fan of the film's makers I may have been willing to overlook some of the films failings. But there are just far too many for me to forgive. I very big disappointment for me.

This Means War

The romantic comedy has long been considered 'chick flick' territory. How Hollywood has worked out a way to make them more appealing to men as well by adding some action.

Most romantic comedies that Hollywood makes are not very daring or different. They take a theme or issue about love and explore it in a comedic way. You know exactly where it is going and what is going to happen. Generally any enjoyment you get out of it is in the journey and not the destination. This film has a little bit of interest as far as destination goes because you wonder which guy Lauren is going to choose. There is a hint in the way it is set up but you don't mind. I found myself enjoying this film a lot more than I expected. Most of it seems pretty implausible but that's OK. I cannot imagine real CIA agents getting away with most of the stuff that Tuck and FDR get up to in this film. Not many love triangles have access to that kind of hardware. So that adds some fun to proceedings. But are the heads of the CIA too busy watching other people to care about what is going on within their own company. The writers though have come up with some really funny situations for the characters to get into.

I think the charm of the cast also has a lot to do with its appeal. Reese Witherspoon has done many romantic comedies before so she knows how to play the character well. She does an excellent job here and gives a really sweet performance. Chris Pine and Tom Hardy make an excellent couple of spies. They have the suaveness of James Bond as well as the everyman quality to make them seem like normal guys. I like how Tom is doing a comedy too. Talk show host Chelsea Handler does an excellent job as the heroine's best friend and advice giver. Quite wisely she is given all the funniest lines in the film and makes it well worth seeing. I also liked how they give her character a bit of back story so she has some dimension.

It would have made a better film, in my opinion, if Tuck and FDR ended up together. I found their relationship to be very homoerotic. But I know that will never happen. Despite that it is a really fun film.

Shame

Director Steve McQueen and actor Michael Fassbender came together in 2008 for the brilliant drama 'Hunger'. Now they return to look at a taboo subject.

Sex addiction is an affliction that you hear about but don't really see represented much in film and TV. There are lots of movies made about drug and alcohol addiction but sex addiction is one which is not spoken much about. I think it is because of the prudish nature of Hollywood and the USA that more films are not made about it. The only other film I can remember having a character with sex addiction was in the movie 'Choke'. There might be more though. But Steve McQueen is English so he is less prudish.

For me I did no think that Brandon's sex life was all that bad. Yes he does sleep with a lot of women and visits the bathroom during work hours but I'm not sure that I would call it an addiction. I think other films have depicted the same sort of behaviour or a lot worse. So maybe there is sex addiction in movies but it's just not called that. But the film is very subtle in its approach. We just see Brandon go about his life and we must make judgements ourselves. Things are not hammered home and over emphasised like they can be in a lot of films. We are asked to go through an emotional journey with this character. He is asked to reassess his life and what he does when his sister comes to stay with him. Up until this point he has mostly been alone and now has to change his behaviour to take into account someone else. Steve brilliantly directs the film and lets scenes linger without much editing or close-ups. I really liked the cinematography as well and the way the scenes are framed.

I believe it is the prudish nature of the Academy Of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences that has meant Michael Fassbender did not get an Oscar nomination. Recent information has revealed that they are a mostly older group of people and so would be less likely to honour a film with this type of subject matter. I know it should not matter but it is only one group of people's opinion. Sadly it is one that gained lots of status which means it is held in high regard. I think Michael should have been nominated as he gives an amazing performance. As mentioned above it is a subtle film, so we need to analyse him to find out about his character. The fact that scenes linger means he has to emote a lot and he does it brilliantly. Equally as brilliant is Carey Mulligan. She gives a very emotionally raw performance. I don't think it is possible for her to be bad in any film that she does.

If you find sex confronting then this is probably not he film for you. Otherwise be amazed by brilliantly emotional journey of a man forced to reassess his life.

Breakfast At Tiffany's

This is another one of those classic films that you hear a lot about. Sadly i had not seen it up until now.

I firmly believe that seeing films on the big screen helps you to enjoy them more. While you don't need to concentrate on this film all that much, I think that having your attention focus means you can pick up on subtleties in the performances. The plot is very character based. It is about the relationship between two people and how that develops. I have not read the book on which the film is based and I'm aware that some changes have been made. Even author Truman Capote was not pleased with the film. Despite that I think it is a wonderful film. The character of Holly Golightly is such a delightful character. A woman who has set up a life for herself in a big city to escape the dreary life she had in the country. She had soon become a bit bored of this new life as well and saw an opportunity to brighten her life when a handsome young author, Paul Varjak, moves in upstairs. The feeling is mutual as Holly definitely brightens Paul's life. Holly's free spirited lifestyle shocks Paul and in typical heroic style he aims to save her.

There is a lot that has been written about the brilliance that is Audrey Hepburn. I can clearly see from her performance in this film as to why people love her so much. She brings a great deal of charm and grace to the role of Holly. You cannot help but fall in love with her. It is obvious why Paul comes under her spell. Audrey does so many subtle things in her performance that she really inhabits the role. As someone who grew up in the 80's my only exposure to George Peppard has been with the TV series 'The A-Team'. Here he plays the wonderfully naive Paul who plans to tame a free-spirit. While Paul is a bit worldly, George manages to bring a certain nerdiness to his performance. This is very much a film 'of its time'. I could not imagine a white man playing an Asian character today. While Mickey Rooney is fairly amusing his performance is a bit cringe worthy.

Definitely the brilliant classic that everyone says it is. Worth seeing for Audrey Hepburn's performance on its own.

Chronicle

The success of 'found footage' films like the 'Paranormal Activity' series has given Hollywood the license to make more of these films because they are so cheap.

For me 'found footage' films can be very hit and miss. There are some great ones such as the recent 'Troll Hunter' and bad ones such as the afore mentioned 'Paranormal Activity' series. I had not planned on seeing this film because the topic and trailer did not make me think this was going to be one of the great ones. However there were a few good reviews so I decided I might check it out.

I was not really that impressed. There are some interesting elements and issues bought up but on the whole I found too much to dislike that I did not think it was great. I've not been bothered with the 'found footage' format, but this film really annoyed me for some reason. I think the editing was very badly done. I think it was the wrong way to film the story. I would have preferred if it was filmed in a more conventional way. I feel it would have suited the story more. I also did not like the way that the meteor was discovered. I think it came across as very contrived and did not seem very realistic which would have been better for the story. I'm being really picky but I did not like some of the flying special effects either.

I have mixed feelings about Dane DeHaan. I think his performance is very good, but I found his character very irritating at times. I'm not sure if that's because he is so good at playing a teenager with all the right mannerism, something that can annoy me. Alex Russell is excellent as the only character with much sense in the film. Michael B. Jordan I found to be a bit cliched in his performance. The casting of Michael Kelly was not right I don't think either. He is a familiar face from other films and TV shows and therefore you know he's an actor and so can take you out of the 'found footage' fantasy.

Fans of this type of film will enjoy it more than what I did. There are some interesting themes but over all it was not filmed in the right way for me.

Contraband

'Just when I thought I was out ... they pull me back in'.

A popular theme in movies is one where a person who until recently led a life of crime is able to escape it but ends up having to return to it due to unforeseen circumstances. In this case we have a smuggler who has left the job but when his family is threatened he must pull off 'one last job'. The first third of this film was so irritating. The way it is set up with Mark Wahlberg's character Chris Farraday having to go back to his old life was so obvious that you knew exactly where the film was going. It would have been nice if they could have come up with a better way to start things up. Despite the bad opening, once the story gets going the film becomes much better. I'd love to know how much of this type of smuggling actually goes on in the world. It seems quite easy and experienced smugglers could get away with it quite often. There are some great twists in the plot that keep you interested and the tricks that Chris comes up with to avoid capture make it intriguing. There is probably not as much action as you might expect but it is still a very thrilling film.

Mark Wahlberg's career is full of films that are very similar to this. He likes to play heroes that get themselves into difficult situations and then he has to not only save himself but loved ones as well. Despite this he is very charming and does a good job here. Poor Kate Beckinsale does not have much to do with her character. She is stuck as the frightened wife at home trying to protect the kids. Not a lot to work with. This would have to be one of Ben Fosters best performances. He is playing a character that's not wild and crazy like he normally does. He plays it straight and is all the better for it. However Giovanni Ribisi brings enough of the crazy for anyone. It is the same type of character he normally play but a little bit more nasty. Lukas Haas is very good as the nerdy member of Mark's gang. J.K. Simmons is excellent as always.

If you can get past the set up then your in for a fun time with this movie. Not as action pact as you might expect but still fun.

Man On A Ledge

There have been some great films based on a simple premise of someone being confined to one place. This is another attempt.

It is always good when you go into a film with low expectations and end up enjoying it more that what you expected. The great thing about this film is that it does not try too hard. It sets out to be an enjoyable thriller and does just that. The plot is fairly simple but has enough twists to keep you interested. Some of them you do see coming but that is fine.

Sam Worthington is certainly making the most of his fame from 'Avatar'. I don't think he is the best actor but he seems to know his limitations. He does a good job here of playing the man done wrong. I did notice his accent slipping here. I'm a big fan of Elizabeth Banks and she does not disappoint here. While I prefer her in comedies she does drama just as well. Jamie Bell is very good as the supportive brother. Ed Burns give a decent performance too. Ed Harris just oozes evil in this role. All he needed was a mustache to twirl.

A fun and solid thriller. Worth checking out if you want a great piece of entertainment.

The Artist

Every so often a film comes along that is so different that it stands out amongst the rest of the films we normally see.

It is always interesting when a film comes along that despite its brilliance can defy all expectations and become so successful and widely praised. This film had so much going against it as far as being so widely accepted. Firstly the film is in black and white. We do see black and white films occasionally but not very often. The film is silent or free of dialogue. That's definitely something we do not see these days. It is a testament to writer/director Michel Hazanavicius that he has created film that can overcome these hurdles to be so successful. While it does borrow many story elements from other stories, Michel has made story that you could only imagine being told in the way he has. This is a very loving tribute to the early stages of film making and how great that time was. Without dialogue the actors have to rely mostly on their body movements and facial expressions to but across plot points and what they are feeling. There are title cards for some dialogue but it does make you realise how important talking can be in those situations. You can see many parallels that can be drawn with modern film making and how actor George Valentin is unwilling to accept sound in films. Films are constantly evolving and makers are always trying to come up with unique ways to make their films stand out. It is ironic that Michel has gone backwards with some old fashioned techniques to make his film stand out.

Many of you will not have heard of Jean Dujardin, but I'm sure you will see a lot more of him in the future after this film. Jean is a very skilled actor who can convey so much through facial expressions and body movements. As mentioned above, he needs to get across lots of information without any dialogue. I definitely think he deserves all the awards he has managed to receive so far. He would also be worthy of the Oscar if, hopefully, it should come his way. Equally brilliant is Berenice Bejo. She is so delightful and gives a wonderful performance. She and Jean are a lovely couple. Michel has cast some great American actors in supporting roles. John Goodman is hilarious as the head of the studio. James Cromwell gives a nicely dignified performance.

We are being constantly bombarded by the same types of films, made in the same ways. So when something refreshing, even if it is old fashioned, comes along it is a reason to celebrate. I'm sure it will win most of the Oscars this year and deservedly so.

J. Edgar

Director Clint Eastwood explores the life of one of the most influential men of the 20th Century.

Much has been written about J. Edgar Hoover and his life as the creator of the FBI. He managed to keep his private life fairly private, which led to people speculating about what he was really like. I suppose when you go to so much trouble to keep things private then it is more likely people are going to want to know about you.

America seems to always be on the look out for an enemy to scare their citizens and the world with. For most of the 20th century it was communists. And there was no one more determined to stop them than J. Edgar Hoover. He kept numerous files on various people to not only stop the communist movement but to influence those who had control over him. Clint Eastwood has made a fascinating film that looks at this fascinating life. Clint and his writer Dustin Lance Black have managed to give a great deal of dignity to the man considering they could have taken the story in a different direction. We would all love to know about his private homosexual life and the rumours he was a cross-dresser. The film does touch on these issues but in a dignified way. Being the period it is, we understand how and why he could not be more revealing. It is also not afraid to portray J.Edgar in a negative light as far as his career goes too. Like many men of his type he let the power of his position go to his head and therefore take credit for things that maybe he did not do.

Leonardo DiCaprio is certainly a brilliant actor and he really inhabits this role. In some of the pictures I'd seen of J. Edgar I did not think Leo looked the part but he certainly does give a powerful performance that makes it very convincing. Naomi Watts gives a nicely understated performance as J. Edgar's assistant Helen Gandy. She plays it with a great deal of grace as the person who must hold all of J. Edgar's secrets. Armie Hammer is very good as Hoover's partner. He is nicely subdued and not over the top. I did think his old age make-up was not very good though.

Clint Eastwood has a nicely old fashioned approach to film making which suits the story here. It manages to pay respect to this highly influential man and go into all the details of his life.

A Few Best Men

Aussie director Stephan Elliot has been away from his home country for awhile but now returns with this film from the writer of 'Death At A Funeral'.

Weddings are one of those events that people place a great deal of significance and reverence. People feel that because of this significance that you need to make everything perfect. This kind of perfection is what film makers love to take advantage of and create all sorts of disasters to befall the event. Much like what happens with this film. Writer Dean Craig had great success with finding fun at funerals with 'Death At A Funeral', he now takes on another major event. The film is a very enjoyable romp and full of some great farcical moments. The humour is quite crude and full of bodily function jokes. I am a huge fan of 'Death At A Funeral' but this film, while enjoyable, was not as brilliant. I got quite a few laughs out of the film but not as many as I might have hoped. Dean has created many humourous moments from the wedding scenario. I did have a few problems with some of the cliches, like the fact that the brides father is a rich senator.

Xavier Samuel has certainly taken advantage of his new found fame. It is great to see that he does not do all his work overseas. He is quite funny in this role but he is mostly the straight man for much of the humour. Kris Marshall has certainly proven himself to be an excellent comedic actor in previous roles like 'Death At A Funeral'. Here is is very funny and his crazy antics set up most of the comedy set pieces. Kevin Bishop does an excellent job as Kris's comedy partner. He is probably the funniest actor in the film and manages to get most of the film's laughs. Rebel Wilson is also very funny in her small role. I liked seeing Olivia Newton-John back on the big screen and in a very different role.

It might not be as hilariously funny as you might expect but still a very enjoyable romp. Stephan Elliot proves that he can be an excellent director of comedy.

A Dangerous Method

Director David Cronenberg has been known for making daring and very grotesque films. However lately he has been making less shocking films.

It sometimes happens that I do not know much about a film before I see it. All I knew about this film before I saw it was the cast and a basic plot. I see a lot of films and so I see lots of trailers and so I get to know some films before I see them. It is sometimes refreshing to see a film without knowing much about it.

Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung are two names you hear when people talk about psychiatry. They are the pioneers of what we consider modern psychiatric health. But how much do we really know about the men themselves. This film does not delve much into their full life story but it does explore the men a bit and tells a part of their lives that is quite fascinating. It looks at the relationship they had with the woman, Sabina Spielrein. Jung was a man who admired Freud's methods and decided to use them to treat Spielrein. The Jung/Spielrein relationship is interesting and fraught with many salacious details which make the film very entertaining. This might be why psychiatrist don't get involved with their patients.

Keira Knightley has had a varied career. Not all her roles have been that great and she does not always give a great performance. I think that this one is her best. At the beginning of the film she gives such an emotionally raw performance that she is simply amazing. Both Michael Fassbender and Viggo Mortensen give very understated performances. That suits the role as they are playing characters who are analytical in their behaviour. Michael though gets the chance to be more emotional with his character. Vincent Cassel is wonderful as a crazy character who enters the story to spice things up a bit.

We hear the names Freud and Jung used in TV shows and movies when there is a psychiatrist character. We now get to see who these men are in an excellent film that looks at an interesting chapter in their lives.