Now that he is no longer the Governor of California, Arnold Schwazenegger is returning to his former job of acting.
It seems Arnold has chosen to make a quiet return to films. Although he was in 'The Expendables 2', this is his first leading role. The plot is fairly typical action film plot. A plot that is done on the cheap. There is nothing special as far as the plot goes. You have a small town sheriff who decides to stop a criminal on his own. The characters are nothing special and are quite clichéd. You pretty much know where the film is going and what each of the characters is going to do. The action though is quite exciting and the final 'last stand' is quite good and lots of fun. One other problem I had was the tone of the film. Director Jee-woon Kim can't seem to decide successfully if the film should be serious or funny. While there are a few amusing moments a few of them felt out of place and did not suit the film.
Arnold is not famous for being a really gifted actor. is whole routine is killing people and saying one liners. Which he does with great delight here. He does have a great deal of charisma which I think goes a long way towards making this film entertaining. Forest Whitaker seems to been one of those Oscar winners whose career went down rather than up. He is serviceable here as the FBI agent after the criminal Arnie runs into. As the criminal or bad guy Eduardo Noriega does not make much of a presence. Granted he spends the whole time driving in a car so that does not give him much room to express his evil. I think Johnny Knoxville was miscast. He is more suited to all out comedy rather than this semi-serious type of film.
Arnold returns to movies with more of a whimper than with a bang. as long as you do not expect too much then you might get some enjoyment out of this film.
I am ashamed to say that this is the first year I have attended a film at the Mardi Gras Film Festival. The all star cast was a big draw.
Many of you will know Chris Colfer from his role as Kurt Hummel on the TV series 'Glee'. What you may not know is that he written a book and now a film screenplay. It is probably easy to say that this film has many biographical elements. I am not sure if that is true but the film is very well written. It does follow the very familiar territory of a high school student who is an outsider in his school. Although Carson is hated by just about everyone in his small town as well. But Carson is a very funny and clever character, so that makes the film a lot more interesting than the usual high school film you see. The scheme Carson comes up with to help him get into college is very well done and one of the film's highlights. But Carson's high school life is not just what the film is all about. Chris has also given his character a really interesting home life as life. With an excellent subplot involving his mom and dad who are divorced. There is one thing I had a problem with. It is not spoiling anything by saying that film opens with Carson's death by being struck by lightning. Plot wise I found that this was a bad move. There is something that happens at the end of the film that to me lessened the impact of his death. It would have been more dramatic and emotional if we either did not find out about his death until the end or we changed the plot point. I apologise if this does not make much sense but I'm trying to explain something with out a spoiler.
Chris is an excellent actor on 'Glee' but I think he is far better in this film. I do not think that it is too wrong of me to say that Chris has a very flamboyant personality. You would naturally think that he is gay. In this film he does not the flamboyant elements that we normally see him play. His character's sexuality is not mentioned in the film but you do get the impression that he could be gay. It is by far and away the best performance he has ever given. Rebel Wilson continues to be amazing in every film she does and is just as good here. Christina Hendricks is quite good as Carson's dad's fiancé. Sarah Hyland from 'Modern Family' is good to but plays a character we have seen her do before. Allison Janney is simply magnificent. That's all I need to say.
Definitely a film for 'Glee' fans but also for other people who enjoy interesting coming-of-age films that feature funny characters.
After years of making motion capture animated films, Robert Zemeckis returns to making live action films with no animation.
Robert Zemeckis is one of my favourite directors. He directed one of my all time favourite films, 'Death Becomes Her'. So I hold him in very high regard. I do feel that his recent foray into motion capture was not the success that he hoped for. I did like these films but they were not as great as some of his previous films. Alcoholics are another popular type of character that writers like to write about. Of all forms of addiction this one is one that most writers like to play with. The plots are usually the same with a person having trouble in their lives and then going through a major upheaval before either finding redemption or dying. The one thing that makes this film all the more interesting is that it begins with one of the most spectacular plane crashes ever seen on film. Robert Zemeckis loves to play with special effects and he really puts a lot of time and effort into making this plane crash incredibly intense and thrilling. This then makes the rest of the film a lot more interesting than usual too. The conflict of Whip saving a plane load of people from a massive crash while being drunk is a very clever ploy. While he saves most of the passengers there were 6 that died, so that means he can be charged with manslaughter. Whip also begins a relationship with a fellow addict so that adds a nice little wrinkle to proceedings.
I am not that big a fan of Denzel Washington. But I thought his performance here was excellent. He is able to make Whip feel more than just a worthless drunk. You really come to care about him and see that he is successful in getting over his addiction. Equally as good is Kelly Reilly. I think she gives a brilliant performance but attention for it has been over shadowed by Denzel. She is just a deserving of awards as Denzel but his star power has meant she has been forgotten. Don Cheedle and Bruce Greenwood are good in their minor roles but they have nothing to work with as their characters are more functionary than emotionally involved with Whip. John Goodman on the other hand has a very grand role and steals every scene he is in.
While it may seem on the surface that this film goes all out within the first half hour without much happening after that, it is still a very good film. Worth seeing for the plane crash and Denzel's performance.
Steven Spielberg sometimes takes so long to decide what film to make that you hear about a film he has in development for ages before that film is released. 'Lincoln' is one such film.
I've spoken before about my problems with racism. It is an issue that I do not fully comprehend. I do not know how people can be biased based on skin colour. I know that the 13th Amendment was a big deal in the history of the USA so it is a shame that Steven has not managed to convey that importance. In much the same way I felt about the other Abraham Lincoln film released recently, I think you need to be American to fully appreciate what is going on. While I did not find the film boring, I did not feel engaged with the material and that I was just getting a history lesson. In 'Amistad' Spielberg was able to take the issue of slavery and make an emotionally engaging film that made you care about what was going on. Something he is unable to do here. I know that slavery is an important issue and this was an important event but I did not feel emotionally engaged with the issue so that I came to care about it. Part of the problem is that there are so many characters and issues involved that things are not always properly explained. Perhaps if I was taught American history at school I would understand it better. Most of my knowledge of American politics comes from watching the TV series 'The West Wing'. What I found most interesting was how much things have changed with regards to getting a bill passed into law and some that remain the same.
There is no denying that Daniel Day-Lewis is a brilliant actor and he gives another brilliant performance here but much like the problems I had with the plot, I did not feel emotionally engaged with his character. I found his performance very dry and mostly just a series of speeches. On the other hand we get more emotion out of Sally Field. She is brilliant and you feel more emotionally engaged with her character. We get a better sense of her difficulties with being the First Lady. Other cast members like David Strathairn, John Hawkes and Tim Blake Nelson are good but merely functional in the roles. James Spader manages to rise above his functional role to add some comedy to this dry film. Tommy Lee Jones is another actor that manages to give some emotional depth to his character.
For me this film was very dry and emotionally lacking. Considering the issues dealt with you expected more. Especially from such a skilled film maker like Steven Spielberg.
It appears that The Academy Of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has finally fallen in love with David O. Russell. I admit that his first few films were quirky so he now makes films that are less quirky.
Mental illness is an issue that film makers like to explore in their work. It provides them with characters that have interesting traits which allow them to seem different to regular people. Pat is on the mild side of mental illness. He is not as wild and crazy as some people we see depicted in movies. He does have anger management issues and that is what makes the film tense because you keep expecting him to have a big blow up and go crazy. But ultimately this is a romantic comedy about two people who are just a little bit off. They find each other and manage to come together for a project which helps them over come their issues. David O. Russell is one of my favourite film makers and he does an excellent job here. As I said this is a romantic comedy but does not feel like a romantic comedy. He takes the story of two people with issues and watch as we fall in love. Pat does have that clichéd thing of speaking his mind with no filter and that provides a lot of the films comedy. There is also the funny parents. Despite these familiar elements the film is still excellent. There is also a great deal of emotion in Pat and his relationship with his father.
Bradley Cooper has become famous from 'The Hangover' trilogy, not a series of films which will get him awards. He has proven to be an excellent actor and so it is great to see him get some awards recognition. Bradley manages to make Pat a very believable character because his mental illness is not that obvious. We know there is a problem because of what he's previously done but it does not become an issue in his life. Jennifer Lawrence has proven before she is a brilliant actress (despite being in trash films like 'The Hunger Games'). I think she is brilliant in this film and she gives one of her best performances. Her character is so amazing and Jennifer is more than up to the challenge of playing her. There are so many subtle things that Jennifer does which totally blew me away. Robert DeNiro has finally gotten a role that reminds us he is a brilliant actor. His performance as Pat's father is so wonderful. I also loved Aussie Jackie Weaver but just wish she had a bit more to do. Her role is more subtle than obvious and Jackie play. The biggest surprise for me was Chris Tucker. He is mostly known for playing wild and crazy characters like in 'Rush Hour' but here he gives a nicely subdued performance and is brilliant at it.
A romantic comedy that does not feel like a romantic comedy. David O. Russell may use a few clichés but he does it in a subtle way.
On December 26th, 2004 a massive tsunami hit Thailand. This is the real life story of a family who got caught up in this major disaster.
I am a big fan of disaster movies. I love to see all the massive destruction that special effects can unleash. I especially like major disasters with lots of loud surround sound. Most disaster films though are fake and not real. Which is why when you think that the events in 'The Impossible' are real, it changes your perspective of disaster films. I do not think I have cried as much in a film as I did with this movie. I'm not talking a lump in the throat or a tear or two. I'm talking major sobbing. There are two moments when that happened so it was not through the entire film. During the tsunami sequence I was upset but not as much as I was later in the film. When you know that this is a real event it just makes the situation all the more heartbreaking. What these people, not just the family we focus on, but everyone who got caught up in this catastrophe is hard to fathom. Focusing on one family means director Juan Antonio Bayona can give a more intimate approach to what happened. Juan just tells events as they happened with out cliché or emotional manipulation. You feels for these people because of what they went through but not in a manipulative way. Except at the end with a sequence that did feel a bit cringe worthy.
Naomi Watts does a simply stunning performance in this film. Not only does she have to endure emotional distress but amazing amounts of physical distress too. What Maria goes through in this film is incredibly harrowing and Naomi plays her with a great deal of courage and fortitude. She deserves all the recognition she has received for this role and in my opinion should win the awards. Ewan McGregor is also brilliant but does not appear to go through as much as Naomi so has not received as much attention, but is still wonderful. Tom Holland went through just as much physical and emotional distress as Naomi and is equally as brilliant. Tom displays emotional skill far beyond his years and almost manages to steal the movie. Samuel Joslin and Oaklee Pendergast are also very good as the other two children.
This is not the type of film you want to see if your looking to cheer yourself up. I know you may go to the cinema to escape but this is still an amazingly powerful film that you should see. Just take a fist full of tissues.
The darling of the Canne Film Festival Michael Haneke returns with another film that is gobbling up the awards left right and centre.
On the surface this does not sound like a terribly interesting film. Watching an older couple struggle as one of the them deteriorates. It is however directed by a skilled film maker and so that makes it far better than you might expect. I came a bit late to Michael Haneke. The first of his films I saw was Cache (Hidden). It was an amazing film and so was his next one 'The White Ribbon'. Michael is a minimalist director who just lets scenes play out and does not make all the information obvious. You need to really think about what is going on so you get the full picture of the story. It was especially helpful with a film like this that I got to attend a screening with a discussion afterwards. Talking with other people about how they saw the film definitely helped me understand it better. I hope that this does not put your off seeing it though but does suggest that you should see it with someone. I think many might find it boring as the film is not very action packed. You may even find it fairly mundane as we follow this couple through their daily life. It is however through these rather mundane tasks that we learn about them, their relationship and how they are coping with their old age. It is a subject that I know is not thrilling or hip but is one that is very important. I'm sure there is a lot here that many people who have elderly relatives can relate to. That is the beauty of the film and what Michael has done. It feels so real. You feel that these are real people going through a real struggle. They are not actors but real people struggling with a real issue that many of us might have to face.
Emmanuelle Riva certainly deserves all the awards attention she has been getting lately. This woman is simply amazing. It is easy to think that she has the simple task of playing the person with an illness but in a Michael Haneke film she is required to do a lot more than just lay there. There are so many subtle things that she does so we learn about her and her struggle. Being a film called 'Love' means there is another side to this story. Emmanuelle might be getting most of the attention but it is Jean-Louis Trintignant who should also be getting the attention. He is brilliant as Emmanuelle's husband. She is not the only one suffering. Jean-Louis must makes you sympathetic to Georges struggle to look after his wife. He has made a tough decision for love and you must respect him for that. Isabelle Huppert is excellent as well in a role that on the surface makes her look like a bitch. But she manages to let you understand her character and the fact that she is struggling with the situation as much as her father. Even if it does not put her in a terribly good light.
Another film that I know will not be to every one's tastes. I'm glad to see all the awards recognition it is getting will mean it will reach a larger audience. It is a film that will make force to you think about what is going on so you can appreciate it more.
It only coast around $6 million but features a big all star cast. That is a major feat in itself. But then there is the film.
It is a type of film that we sadly do not see anything of any more, that is a sketch comedy film. The most beloved of these is 'The Kentucky Fried Movie' which was made in the 1970's. I wish there were more of them made. Which is why I thought this film was hilarious. Perhaps because it is a style we do not see anymore is why this film is not very popular despite the fact that it has an all star cast. I admit that this is an unconventional film but that is why I like it. There is also the hit and miss nature of doing this type of thing but form me there were more hits than misses. The first segment with Kate Winslet and Hugh Jackman on a first date is hilarious and features the one of the most disturbing images on screen. The other favourite is a parody of a tampon commercial. The connecting story is quite funny as well. There was one segment involving a girl getting her first period that was a bit of a worry but I did find myself laughing at most of it.
I have great admiration and respect for every actor who appears in this film. There are some like Anna Faris, Johhny Knocksville or Sean William Scott who normally appear in a film like this, but it is the bigger names who I have the respect for. Kate Winslet is brilliant. What Hugh Jackman does to his image is risky but it pays off with one of the most hilarious images I have seen on film in a long time. Naomi Watts and Liev Schreiber are also hilarious. I never knew Naomi could do comedy like this. Richard Gere has done comedy before but not as strange as this and I love him for that. Halle Berry once again does some of her best work by showing her breasts.
I know it will not be to everyone's tastes but this is by far and away one of the funniest films I've seen in a while. See some of the world's most popular actors in situations you would have never thought you'd see them in.
For his first film director Ruben Fleisher made the hilarious zombie film 'Zombieland'. His follow up '30 Minutes Or Less' was not as well received. He now goes back in time to look at gangster in LA.
Is there a major city in the USA where gangsters have not set up an operation? While I love films, I am also quite fond of television. Films are competing heavily these days with television for an audience. Television has improved so much in the last few years that there are many series which are far better than most of the films we see in cinema. Television also allows writers to explore a subject in a great deal more depth. I think that this is the way that 'Gangster Squad' should have been made. Almost all the time I was watching this film I kept thinking about the TV series 'Boardwalk Empire' and how that is a much better series than this was a film. The plot of 'Gangster Squad' is very similar to 'The Untouchables' which is another criticism. The characters are all so clichéd and typical of what you see in a gangster film. Nothing about this film seems very fresh or interesting. You know exactly where the plot is going (yes I know it is based on a true story) so there are no surprises or twists that keep you interested. The costumes look good and so does the scenery, but that's not enough to keep someone entertained.
Despite the lack of originality in the script Ruben has managed to assemble a pretty impressive cast for this film. Josh Brolin plays thte typical tough cop who plays by his own rules. He also has the typically happy family life that must come under threat for his rebellious behavior. Sean Penn is also doing a clichéd performance as the bad guy. It pains me to say something like that as I love Sean so much. Emma Stone is also playing the same clichéd gangsters mole role. The only one who looks like he was trying something a bit different is Ryan Gosling. He adds a slightly high inflection to his voice which I found interesting. The only interesting thing in the film.
Don't be fooled by the all star cast. This is a very boring and clichéd gangster film that does not bring any thing fresh to the genre.
Director Joe Wright once again takes on a beloved classic novel and brings along his popular muse Keira Knightley.
I like when a classic book is being made into a movie because it gives me the chance to read the book before the film came out. For those who have seen the book of 'Anna Karenina' will know that it is a really long book and it took me a couple of months to read it. Leo Tolstoy has written a very detailed account of the Russian aristocracy in the late 19th century. Most of it is not necessary to the plot but I found it interesting all the detail about society and the politics of the time. The main story is much like many written at the time of a woman who falls in love but the constraints of society mean she cannot be with the man she loves.
We have seen a story like this done so many times before. It is a typical love story in a period setting. So Joe Wright has done the clever thing by making the film look different to what you normally expect. Most of the film takes place within a theatrical setting and the actors move through it like they are in a play. I imagine that this could seem strange to people and may take some time to get used to, but for me I thought it was brilliant. Joe loves his long, one take camera moves so this film is full of them. Characters will move through various sets as they change from one scene to another. I thought it looked amazing. The set design is a work of art and the way it moves just takes it to a new level. The way the actors more through these sets is stunning as well. It looks so carefully choreographed and looks like they are dancing. Writer Tom Stoppard has nicely condensed Leo Tolstoy's story into its basic elements. This means it does not feel long winded like the book did. You really feel sorry for Anna as she is not only subject to the constraints of society but religion as well in wanting to be with the man she loves. While she does elicit sympathy on that level, I did have a problem with her relationship with her son. Anna professes that she can not get a divorce from her husband because it would mean not seeing her son anymore. But to me she hardly sees her son much anyway. I know there is the motherly love instinct in place but you get the impression that much like many rich people they rely mostly on a nanny (or in this case a governess) to raise their child.
There is something about Keira Knightley that she loves period film. Keira does give an excellent performance here as the woman tormented by the men in her life. You do feel sympathy for her character and the way she is treated by society. Aaron Taylor-Johnson makes an excellent Vronsky. Aaron gives him the right amount of arrogance and charm. Jude Law gives the correct degree of coldness to Karenin. We can see why Anna does not love him and how he is married to his work and not Anna. I also liked Domhnall Gleeson as Levin. I thought Domhnall was excellent as this naïve, and hopeless romantic who loves the rural life.
Not the conventional period romantic drama that you might expect. This takes the genre to a whole new level and makes it a hard act to follow.
When you're on to a good thing you stick to it. Hollywood is now working their way through fairytales and turning them into big budget action films.
The story of Hansel and Gretel is an interesting one to kick start an action film. It is a shame then that writer/director Tommy Wirkola has not put it to good use. Under all the outrageousness on display there is a decent premise and what could have been a really good action film. There is a common misconception that young people have short attention spans so the film moves along at a really quick pace. I think if Tommy had slowed down a bit he could have given Hansel & Gretel a bit more characterization and therefore come across as more than just two dimensional characters. The set up of the story with the fairytale is done really quickly when it would have been nice to see a bit more. While I understand that we are familiar with the story and being held captive by a witch is a traumatic event, knowing more about the event would have helped. The one clever thing I found was that Hansel is now a diabetic because of all the candy he ate when held captive. That was an excellent trait which has an impact on the story. Don't get me started on the fact that this is a film set in Germany but Hansel has an American accent and Gretel has an English accent. I will say that most of the action is well done and has a certain silliness which I found enjoyable.
Both Jeremy Renner and Gemma Arterton look like they are having fun with the film. Jeremy has done so many action films lately that he can do this type of thing in his sleep. I'd like to see him do something a bit different. On the other hand we don't always see Gemma do this type of film and it suits her. Famke Janssen makes an excellent villain and she manages to make her character scary despite all the over the top behavior.
It is not a good example for continuing the trend of fairytale movies. There is a certain amount of fun to be had but don't expect much depth.
Barbara Streisand has been quiet of late as far as films go. Except for the occasional appearance as a Focker, she has not had a leading role.
The relationship a man has with his mother is one that is as old as time. Mothers are usually portrayed as being very smothering and overbearing. It is the natural mothering instinct to protect one's young. That theme has been explored many times in films over the years. That is why you need to do something fairly unique to make an impact. 'The Guilt Trip' does not bring anything new to the overbearing-mother theme. Most of the jokes and situations you can see coming from a mile away. It is however a pleasant enough experience. The characters do come to grow on you as you watch the film. I must admit that I could relate to the film in the sense that I'm sure if I went on a road trip with my mum it would happen much the same way.
A lot of the film's charm does come from the two leads. While it would have been nice to see Barbara Streisand do a less clichéd comedy, it is still nice to see her back on the big screen. I kind of felt sorry for Seth Rogan as I watched this film. He continually has a pained expression on his face as a grimaces every time Barbara says something embarrassing. It happens so often in this film that I was worried he'd stay that way. Otherwise he gives a nice performance as the put-upon son.
You've seen a film like this a million times before. While it is mildly entertaining it does not break much new ground.
As we know Quentin Tarantino is a fan of Blaxploitation films. He also likes to take things to the extreme and does that with his new film.
I am a big fan of Quentin Tarantino. I am a fan of writers who can write such brilliant dialogue. Most of his films are dialogue driven and that is his strength, so that's why I love his films so much. I could sit and watch an entire movie that is only dialogue written by Quentin. Part of his skill is creating interesting characters. All good dialogue comes from great characters and Quentin knows how to write great characters. Django is certainly an interesting character. He looks to be modeled off the 'Man With No Name' character that Clint Eastwood made famous. Quentin knows how to make his leading characters cool and that is one way to describe Django. On the other end of the psectrum you have his partner Dr. Schultz. He is a lot more forthright than Django but has a very kind side that is refreshing in a film like this. My only problem with the film is that it is too long. While I enjoy the way he crafts a story but sometimes he takes too long to tell it. Some scenes and situations stretch out longer than they need be and there were a few moments where I became bored.
One of Quentin Tarantino's greatest strengths is his ability to cast his films so well and get amazing performances out of them. I got really excited when I heard that Will Smith as cast in this film. Then I got disappointed when he had to drop out. But Jamie Foxx is brilliant in this role. Jamie plays him like a very tightly wound spring that is ready to explode. Jamie manages to keep this tension nicely simmering away throughout the film and makes Django the cool man he should be. After playing a villain in 'Inglourious Basterds' Christoph Waltz only seemed to play bad guys. So it was nice of his mate Quentin to write him a good buy role. Christoph is brilliant as always. He has the nice suave, sophisticated manner that suits his character and the language he uses. Despite being a killer he has a softer side. Another disappointment I had with the film was Kerry Washington. Not with Kerry and her performance but with the fact that I thought she should have been used more in the film. In the small role she has Kerry is excellent. Also excellent is frequent Quentin friend: Samuel L. Jackson. Many may not recognize him under the make-up but he is brilliant as the cantankerous house servant. The best thing about this film for me though is, Leonardo DiCaprio. Everyone compliments him on playing such an evil character but for me the best thing is that he is finally playing a character that has a more humorous side. I think Leo is an excellent actor but for a while now I have hoped that he would do a comedy. Calvin Candie is not an outright funny character but he has a more outrageous side. Leo plays him in a flamboyant way which I thought was brilliant.
There needs to be a bit of tightening of the story but this is still an excellent film from one of the best writer/directors working today.
One of the many things we learned at the cinema in 2012 was that the cinema is no longer just for young people. If you make star studded films with older actors then older people will go see them.
I think it might be the fact that the 'baby boomer' generation is reaching retirement age and therefor having more free time, means that more of them are going to the movies. What to do in that retirement is also an issue faced in the films about older people we are seeing at the cinema. It is a scary thing and so many films use humour to lighten the issue. They are usually a very cranky bunch who are always complaining about things. But it is always charming. That is what 'Quartet' is. Very sweet and charming. The plot is not unlike something you would see in any number of teen movies or the TV series 'Glee'. You have a bunch of musicians who are about to put on a show. But you have one person who needs convincing to join the group or it cannot be done. But it is the characters that make the film interesting. These are a charming group of older people who you would not mind spending your time with. As a first time director, Dustin Hoffman has done a very good job. He is not required to do anything technically radical but manages to get excellent performances from his cast and make the film very entertaining.
Dustin has managed to assemble a very top notch cast here. Maggie Smith, when she is not being a Duchess is going to retirement villages. She plays her usual crotchty character here but we all love it so much that you don't mind. Her more mild mannered foil Tom Courtney is utterly delightful. He nicely balances the sweetness with his mild hatred of Maggie Smith's character. It was not until I saw this film that I realized how old Billy Connolly is. He plays a character that does not seem too far off his real self. He is incredibly funny and gets all the films really big laughs. Pauline Collins is by far the best as she plays the ditzy member of the group. She is so sweet and delightful. Michael Gambon is also excellent in his small role.
The themes and issues it brings up will no doubt hit home for some older viewers, but that does not stop it from being an entertaining film. It proves that older people can be just as entertaining as the younger ones.
Please note: this is one of those films that you should know very little about before you see it. Just know that it should be mandatory viewing for anyone who works in the services industries.
I do not think that I have been as disturbed for a long time as I was when watching this film. It is definitely cringe worthy. I work as a manager but cannot believe that something like this could really happen. The film is based on a series of incidents that happened in the USA where a man would call the manager of a fast food restaurant and claim to be a police officer who has evidence that one of the restaurant's staff has stolen money from a customer. That is about as much information as you need to know because it gets quite disturbing from there. Writer/director Craig Zobel has made an incredibly tense film that really puts you on the edge of your seat as you see someone so easily manipulated. I will say that the situation does stretch credibility a bit. The manager, Sandra, is asked to do some pretty strange things but just seems to trust this 'man' on the end of the phone. She does not investigate if he is telling the truth or verify his story. I know there are probably very guidable people out there who would fall for a prank like this but it is still very troubling. Then there is the victim in all this, Becky. How she can let herself be humiliated like this is also very strange in itself.
Craig has cast hid film well with actors who look like ordinary people. Ann Dowd gives a very convincing performance as Sandra. She feels like a real person who is under a huge amount of pressure and gets caught up in a difficult situation. On the other end of the scale we have Dreama Walker as the poor Becky who is fully exposed. Dreama gives a very brave performance and must be commended. Pat Healy is suitably creepy as the perpetrator of this heinous crime.
I would encourage you all to see this film but it will upset many people. Despite the subject matter is it an excellent thriller that really makes for tense viewing.
As part of the Sydney film festival there was a screening of '2001: A Space Odyssey' with musical accompaniment by the Sydney Symphony Orchestra.
There is no doubt that Stanley Kubrick is a brilliant film maker. Most of Kubrick's films have a very artistic quality but he also manages to make them entertaining as well. He can also go through many different genres which is something I really respect in a director. He can make comedy, drama, horror and sci-fi.
There is no denying that this is a very arty and metaphysical film. The plot is not that obvious. It is not until later in the film that you realize what is going on. All we know is that it takes place in various places in human history. That is one of the reasons I like it. It does not give you all the answers right away and does not explain them in an obvious way. You have to think about it and you can interpret it in many different ways. This is a sci-fi film that came out before 'Star Wars' which made the genre more mainstream. The film is very poetic in the imagery and the score. Kubrick is known for his groundbreaking camera moves and this film is no different. In this case 'camera move' might be the wrong way of saying it. I think 'set moves' is a more accurate description. The way the sets seem to move and the camera stay still is amazing and make this film a real work of art. I admit that things move at a very slow pace but that just suits the type of film that it is. This means it may not be everyone's style. It feels very much a film of its time. I cannot imagine it being made today unless it was a small independent film. The music is one of the films major achievments. Such a beautiful selection of classics and they sounded wonderful being played by a live orchestra. I thought, though, that there was more music in the film.
The acting is not one of the major features of a film like this. Kier Dullea probably has the biggest part in the film as one of the astronauts that has to tackle HAL. He is quite good and works well against a voice. Dougles Rain is equally as good as the voice of HAL. His droning monotone really adds menace to the scenes where he goes crazy.
I can highly recommend this if not for the fact that you will understand many parodies that have been made of the film over the years.
