Happy Family

In Sydney we get lots of film festivals. Each year we get ones from one specific country. At this years Italian Film Festival. I noticed in the program a couple of films which looked interesting.

As a script writer I've always been interested in films about script writers. I liked this film for that aspect but also because of the way it is told. All the characters spend the first half of the film talking to camera and telling you all about their lives. It is a very unconventional technique that is not used much because you have to know how to use it and it can be used badly. It is kind of like narration, which you are told is lazy writing. It helps though as it gives you all the back story to the story and characters in this film the writer is trying to write. But he is having a lot of trouble with the film and ends up writing himself into it. The characters in his film talk to him as well asking why their lives have been written the way he has and how things should go. I kind of wish this could happen in real life as it would be nice to have your film character talk to you and you can help guide their story. But then again a good writer will have crafted excellent characters that can talk to him like they were real people. It is quite a funny film as we have these two families brought together when their son and daughter want to get married. The only problem I had with the film was the daughters motivation for getting married. She did not seem to keen on the idea but just goes along with it. Considering these kids are only 16 years-old the parents do not seem to upset they are getting married so young.

Fabio De Luigi is excellent as the writer trying to battle his characters and own insecurities to get the script completed. The fathers of the two teenagers are also great fun. Fabrizio Bentivoglio as the boy's father hiding a secret is nicely reserved as he plays well of the more outgoing father of the girl played by Diego Abatantuono.

An excellent and unusually told story of two families brought together. As well as a funny look at a writer trying to get his film written.

The Disappearance Of Alice Creed

Writer/director J Blakeson makes his directorial debut with this low budget thriller. With almost all of it set in the one place.

I'm a big fan of nice simple movies with a basic premise. That's not to say I don't like the complex stuff. But when you have a simple kidnapping movie with one set and only three actors, there is the challenge to keep your audience interested. J Blakeson certainly does that. He has managed to create a great thriller from pretty simple elements and make it entertaining. The twists are very surprising too. With films like this I always have fun trying to guess what the twists are and I'm proud to say that I did not guess these twists. While the tension was not as great as I hoped it was still effective enough. After watching the film I did come up with a nice sequel idea called 'The Reappearance Of Alice Creed'.

Lately I have been very disappointed with the career of Gemma Arterton. All her roles are the same as she plays a lame love interest in action films. Finally we get to see her in something descent. Considering what she has to go through in this film she is amazing. A real breakout role for her that proves she can be more than just a pretty face. I hope she keeps it up. Her co-stars are equally as good. Martin Compston has not done much work before this but proves he is an excellent young actor. Eddie Marsan has been in the background of many films before but now gets the chance to be out front. He proves an excellent lead and very effective.

An excellent little thriller that nicely uses its simple elements to create an effective thriller. With a nice set of twists to keep you constantly guessing.

The Last Airbender

Until now M. Night Shyamalan has been directing films based on scripts from his own ideas. Now he takes on someone Else's idea.

M. Night Shyamalan was a director that I really admired. He produced three excellent films. Then all of a sudden he went down hill. I read a book called 'The Man Who Heard Voices' about the making of 'Lady In The Water' and realised that his ego had grown too big and so despite making bad choices still thought he was the greatest. I know that you need confidence to be a director but he just comes across as far too arrogant. You also need to know that I have not seen any episodes of 'Avatar: The Lat Airbender' before seeing the film, but I watched it with a friend who was a huge fan of the series. I think seeing it with my friend helped make watching the film a lot better. To say he was upset was an understatement. I felt that this was an epic TV series that has been dumbed down for a mass market. A combination of bad writing and other elements have meant that a powerful adventure series has come across as lame and weak. M. Night needs to have his scripts worked over by someone else before he films them. The dialogue in this film is appalling. It sounds so stupid and cliched. Then there are the actions of the characters. It makes them seem silly and ridiculous. Not the great warriors they are meant to be. It was funny to watch my friend get angry at this ridiculousness.

This would have to be one of the most badly acted films I've seen in a long time. I'm not sure who is to blame here. As mentioned above the script is pretty bad to begin with so obviously these actors are not strong enough to rise above the bad dialogue and poor direction by their director to make their characters seem convincing. From what my friend tells me they can't even pronounce people's names properly. Dev Patel we know can be a brilliant actor and even here he is pretty poor. So maybe the director is to blame.

Don't even bother with this film, especially if you are a fan of the TV series. M. Night a once promising talent is fast turning into one of the worst directors ever and this is further evidence.

The Other Guys

Writer/director Adam McKay and his pal Will Farrell come together once again to breathe life into another tired genre. This time it's the buddy cop film.

It is quite amusing that Kevin Smith originally wanted Will Ferrell and Mark Wahlberg for 'Cop Out' as he tried to revive the buddy cop film genre. As much as I love Kevin Smith I found this film to be slightly better, but not by much. The first half is hilarious and has some brilliantly funny scenes. However the second half really drags with some unnecessary scenes, while as funny as they are, were not important to the plot. Towards the end I was getting annoyed and hoping they would wrap things up a lot quicker once you know where it is going. The other problem is the action scenes are very poorly directed. The whole Paul Greengrass quick cut, frantic camera move thing is all well and good but when over done can make the action look confusing. I had a lot of trouble working out what was going on as the camera could not focus on the right part of the action and give any sense of geography to what was going on. I did like the plot and how it looks at the often over looked area of law enforcement known as forensic accounting.

For me Will Ferrell can be pretty hit and miss. He is a really gifted comedic actor but not all his films work. The improvisation style that he does only works sometimes and there are some great scenes in this film where it works. But others do not. The real joy though is getting to see Mark Wahlberg doing comedy. Normally you would expect him to play the roles that Samuel L. Jackson or Dwayne Johnson do but it is great to see him play the less macho role. Mark is hilarious in this film and I hope it leads to more comedies. I also liked seeing Michael Keaton back on screen again. Samuel L. Jackson and Dwayne Johnson are great in their roles as well. Eva Mendes looks like she is having fun doing comedy as well.

A decent action/comedy tat is good for the first half but really drags in the second half. The less said about the filming of the action scenes the better.

I'm Still Here

I've mentioned before that film falls into two different categories. Primarily they are an art form but they are also seen as a form of entertainment. This film is definitely a work of art.

As an actor I've always found Joaquin Phoenix to be a bit weird and strange. He has not done anything to my mind that I found incredibly outstanding. That was until now. The biggest disappointment with this film for me was that Casey Affleck revealed it was a hoax a bit too early. I would have liked him to have kept it a secret for longer as it kind of affected the way I viewed the film. Knowing that it was a 'joke' meant that I kept wondering who was in on it. I could not look at a scene as being played because I was constantly looking at everyone to see if they showed signs of 'acting'. But it wasn't too much of a distraction that I could not enjoy the film. Knowing it is a joke also makes the film seem like something that Sasha Baron Cohen would do. But instead of creating a character Joaquin is playing a version of himself. Also being about himself means he would have taken a huge challenge on his career to basically give it up for a year to make this one film. There is then the gamble of whether it will work or not. And if it didn't work he may not get work again. I think it is an amazing achievement. As a film it is excellent piece of art. But entertaining too. I am not a fan of Joaquin's musical choice but I think choosing hip hop music was a good choice as it was a bigger challenge for him. Casey Affleck looks to be following in the foot steps of his brother Ben and producing excellent films. I'd be interested in seeing if he does a 'fictional' film.

Probably the best thing that Joaquin Phoenix has ever done. An excellent mockumentary that is very funny and an interesting look at what happens when a celebrity does something risky.

Ghostbusters + Ghostbusters 2

For many years comedies were not thought of as being blockbusters. They would be successful as they were relatively cheap to make and usually made a profit. However in 1984 one film came along that changed that.

I have a very distinct memory of my parents taking me and my brother to see 'Ghostbusters' when it was first released. I also remember my father taking great delight in my brother and I being scared by the ghost librarian at the beginning of the film. I also remember being a huge fan. It is always interesting to watch films that you love in a cinema. I find that because you are watching it in an environment where you are focused on the film you can notice things you may have missed in past viewings. Especially when seeing it at home where you can become easily distracted. What I noticed most about this film is the acceptance of ghosts by everyone in the film. Even the person who you would consider its biggest skeptic, Dr Peter Venkmen. I know that they see ghosts and so must accept that but why? They do not look into other alternative explanations for why or how they are happening. Or if they are really a hoax. But I think that it is this acceptance by the characters that makes it acceptable for the audience. We go along with all the silliness of there being ghosts attacking New York city because these characters accept it. We do not doubt for one minute their beliefs. So not only do you have a great plot and convincing characters but you have them doing and saying incredibly funny things. I will be the first to admit that the sequel is not as good as the first film. The plot is almost identical and while still very funny it is not at the same level of hilarity as the first film. One other thing I noticed about both films was how much smoking they have in them. We do not see it very much in movies anymore so when you do see it as much as you do in a film like this it really stands out.

One of the great things about the cast of this film and more specifically the three leads is their friendship. Bill, Dan and Harold have been friends for ages and worked together quite a lot before these films. The films feel like a group of friends getting together to have some fun and filming it. This fun then comes across in their performances and so we as an audience have fun too. Most of the other cast are sort of straight people to the fun of the main three. With the exception of Rick Moranis who plays the ultimate nerd so very well. This would be one of the first comedy films for Sigourney Weaver and she is excellent. Considering what she has to go through. The highlight for me in the second film was the performance of Peter MacNicol. I soon became a fan of his from this film and always looked forward to seeing him in films and TV.

One of the greatest comedies of all time. The sequel is not quite as good but still an excellent film. As much as I love these films I think too much time has passed for them to try for a third film. While it would be fun to see the gang back together I don't hold much hope for it being any good.

Tomorrow When The War Began

Most Aussie films are made on very low budgets with an independent feel. But every so often someone is given a bigger budget to make what is hoped will be a blockbuster. That someone this time is Stuart Beattie. A writer who has been making a name for himself in Hollywood lately on some blockbuster films and now returns home to make his first film as director.

To show you how out of touch I am, I did not know of this hugely successful book series until it was announced that this film was being made about it. The concept of Australia being invaded is an interesting one and one that I've thought about on several occasions. In some ways I'm surprised it has not happened for real. As a film this proves that Stuart Beattie's strength as a director lies in action scenes and not those driven by dialogue. There are some great actions scenes in the film and look fantastic. But for me the film really dragged when there was no action and the characters had to relate to each other. Their dialogue is very cliched and does not feel very natural. I would have also liked a bit more back story on the characters and more specifically their relationships to each other. There were some relationships that did not feel very real to me but I got the impression there was a history to the characters that was not properly explained.

Caitlin Stasey is good as the groups leader Ellie but not great. I admit she has a commanding presence as the one to become the groups leader but she did not impress me much. Most of the cast come from TV and it shows. I don't think they have mastered the change to the big screen. The only one that impressed me was Chris Pang as Lee. He did have the most interesting character arc in the film so had the better material to work with.

I think the fans of the book series will appreciate this a lot more. I hope for their sake that we get to see the other books adapted.

Easy A

The teen comedy can be a very hit and miss affair. There seems to be more misses than hits. Which is why it is great when a good one comes along.

In the 1980's writer/director John Hughes was the master of making teen comedies. Ever since he stopped making then other film makers have been trying to capture some of his magic. Most fail and other reference him in their films hoping that some of the magic will rub off. While this film does reference John Hughes, it does so in a brilliant way. Being a film about teenagers it will inevitably be about sex. What was so refreshingly different about this film was that despite it being about sex we do not see any or are there any gratuitous scenes will obvious innuendo. There is lots of talk about sex but no actual sex. Instead writer Bert V. Royal uses clever dialogue and intelligent characters to deal with it. And like clever teen comedies before it like 'Clueless' and '10 Things I Hate About You' this film brilliantly references a classic piece of literature to tell its story. It treats the audience with a bit of intelligence. While they don't expect them to have read 'The Scarlet Letter' but instead watch the movie. And they recommend the best version to watch as well.

Finally the brilliantly funny actress Emma Stone is getting a starring role. For years now she has been wonderful in supporting roles but it is nice to see her front and center. And she is more than up to the task. Her comic timing is impeccable and delivers all her great witty lines like a truly gifted comedic actress. She comes across as intelligent without being arrogant. Emma is backed up by a brilliant supporting cast. Amanda Bynes would have taken the starring role in a film like this so it is nice to see her just as good in support. Thomas Hayden Church is also wonderfully subdued in his role as the only person at school on the same level as Olive. The biggest joy, though, is Patricia Clarkson and Stanley Tucci as Emma's parents. They are like an awesome comedy duo with Stanley getting one of the funniest moments I've seen in a film in a while.

This is the break out role for the brilliant Emma Stone. A teen comedy that is not afraid to treat its audience with intelligence and, heaven forbid, assume they have read a book.

Please Give

Nicole Holofcener is a great film maker who makes female centric films that look at some modern issues people have to deal with.

In this film she explores the issue of guilt. Each of our lead characters deal with or doesn't deal with the guilt they feel about certain people in their lives. Whether is be about a grandmother who is very demanding or the homeless people you see in the street, Nicole explores how our characters deal with their feelings to the people around them. It is not done in a very obvious way but subtly and in a nicely humorous way. The comedy comes naturally from the situations and not in a in your face way. But it is dramatic too and does not shy away from dealing with the emotion of situations.

Nicole is also great at assembling an excellent cast to be in her films. Catherine Keener is always excellent in what ever she does. She can move from comedy to drama with great ease. Amanda Peet has gained a bit of a reputation for playing bitches in her films and does that wonderfully here too. She is nicely balanced by the very sweet Rebecca Hall as her sister. Oliver Platt is one of my favourite actors and is always a joy to watch.

Nicole Holofcener once again assembles a great ensemble cast to explore some issues facing us in modern society. While they are heavy issues it is done in a lighter way.

The Kids Are All Right

Every year it seems there is one independent film that become a huge success over the American summer. This year it was this film.

I find it interesting that when homosexuals are portrayed in film and on TV that it is usually gay men. We do not get to see many lesbians. So it was nicely refreshing to see a lesbian couple portrayed in this film. I think it is because of the stereotype that lesbians are big, tough and butch so come across as very threatening, where are gay men are lighter and more fun loving and so less threatening. But then again considering the story I don't think it could have been done with gay men. There is also the issue of kids who are either adopted or born through artificial insemination trying to find their birth parent(s). Because of the drama involved films only portray the stories where kids go looking for their parent(s), we don't see kids who don't look for their birth parent(s). Does that ever happen? Which begs the question, why do parents keep the information from their kids? And why are they surprised when the kids decide to do it? This is especially true when there are gay parents involved as with heterosexual couples you can usually keep it it a secret better. This is a wonderfully told modern story that proves a gay parent is just as warm and loving as a heterosexual one. They have problems just like all families but ultimately there is a great deal of love there. It feels like a very real relationship. The film is very funny as well and the humour comes from truth.

It is kind of disappointing when actresses like Annette Benning have children. It means they cut back on their acting to look after their kids and we don't seem them on screen as much. This film is one such reason that we should see more of her. While she normally plays uptight women, she does it so well that we don't mind. To counter point that we get the more free spirited Julianne Moore. There were many times I wondered how these opposites got together. But they seem to love each other and portray that relationship really well. Mark Ruffalo is excellent as always but does play a similar character as he usually does. We have seen Josh Hutcherson grow up on screen and while he has mostly been doing kids films it is nice to see him do something more mature. Mia Wasikowska burst onto the big time in 'Alice In Wonderland' and it is good to see her do a film where she gets a chance to act and not react to imaginary characters.

A very realistic film about the perfect example of the modern family. Funny as well as touching and a good reason to let gays marry.