Shutter Island

Expectation is a funny thing. Try as you might there are certain things about a film that can influence the way you view it. I've noticed that many critics have not been all that pleased with 'Shutter Island'. I think there is a reason for this.

Martin Scorsese's last film was a big Oscar winner. So expectations were very high for his follow up. That I think is where many people went wrong. They had such incredibly high expectations. I think mostly because after having finally won an Oscar they have put Scorsese onto a higher pedestal. Now don't get me wrong I really liked this film, but I think many were expecting perfection and didn't get it. Before we go on I need to warn you. This review may have a few spoilers in it. If you want to see the film without knowing anything, which is the way I suggest you do it, then stop reading now and wait until after you've seen the film before continuing.


This is one of those films that has a big twist in the middle that changes the direction of the film. I will admit that I noticed a clue pretty early on that tipped me off as to what it was. However the clue I saw did not turn out to be what I thought it was. In some ways the setting for the film and its plot gives things away a bit but I was still able to be involved in the story and not be too put off by the turn of events. Another thing that I think has put people off is the weird dream imagery. Scenes seem to end abruptly and Teddy has many dreams that fill in the blanks about his back story but have lots of strange things going on. I quite liked these as they are a little unsettling and make you question what is really going on. I really liked the film's score as well. While it comes across as very bombastic and overbearing, I liked it as it further unsettled you and make things seem all the more creepy.


The only problem I had with this film was Leonardo DiCaprio. Not so much his performance but his look in the film. I did not feel he looked like he came from the 1950's. He looked a bit too modern for me and seemed out of place. Other than that he gives a typically excellent performance. I just wish he would do a comedy. Mark Ruffalo is very good too but his role is more of a sounding board for Leo's rants. It is not until the end that we find why that is the case. Ben Kingsley gives an excellent, measure performance as one of the island's doctors. Of the cameos the best is Jackie Earle Hayley. Although he is suited to play a mental patient he does a suitably creepy job here.


As long as you lower your expectations a bit you should really like this very clever, adult thriller. Try not to spoil the ending for those who have not seen it.

Invictus

For a few years now Morgan Freeman has spoken of playing Nelson Mandela in a movie of his life. Morgan has also spoken of the difficulty of being able to fit all that history into one film. So really this may be the closest thing we will get to him doing that film.

I'm not really a fan of sports. My lack of any decent ball handling skills means I'm not very good at it. So while I don't care much for real sports games, i do like movie ones. I think because they are more like edited highlights and involve characters you come to care about. It is interesting how the sports film genre has very little by way of variety. All the stories are pretty much the same. Sports team over comes adversity to win major championship. There is hardly any variation. So most of the time a film's success comes down to the characters and whether you care enough about them to follow them on their journey. A few twists in the story can also help. What this film has is a very recognisable character in Nelson Mandela. I was not very aware of this event before seeing the film, so I liked learning something. Clint Eastwood is an amazing film maker and one who I have a great deal of respect and admiration for. He has a simple old fashioned approach that is very refreshing in this day and age. This style suits the story very well. My only minor criticism would be that while the simplicity is nice, it can mean there is a lack of originality and so it becomes just another sports movie.

As mentioned before Morgan Freeman has been wanting to play this role for quite a while. Morgan certainly looks and sounds like Mandela. Plus he get the minute details right with his mannerisms and stance down pat. You forget you are watching an actor sometimes. I wasn't all that impressed, however, with Matt Damon. Normally he is an excellent actor but here he does not look as if he is trying very hard. I think he deserves an Oscar nomination for 'The Informer' rather than this film.

A very good if fairly decent film that follows the usual conventions of a sports movie. Interesting for being possibly the closest thing we will get to a film about Nelson Mandela.

Law Abiding Citizen

Gerard Butler has been a very busy boy lately. He has been in quite a few films recently and has got more coming soon.

I watch a fair few legal TV shows. One thing that is popular in those shows is when lawyers think they are loosing a case will try and do a deal to get their client less time in jail if they feel the client is innocent. I don't think I've seen it happen where a prosecutor will do it to make his hot rate higher. With all this deal making going on it surprises me that this type of revenge thriller has not been seen before. Most of the time people will take out the revenge on the killer not the people who put him/her away. I found the premise quite intriguing and it is handled quite well. There is a great deal of fun in the way Clyde sets up various traps and scenarios to get back at those involved. My only minor complaint would be Clyde's background. I would have liked him to be less experienced.

I am a fan of Gerard Butler and his skill at being versatility at being able to do a variety of roles. He can move effortlessly from comedy to drama to action and back again. I liked here how he can easily go from being sweet and innocent to cold blooded killer. Jamie Foxx on the other hand is not someone that impresses me all that much. I think he is an excellent actor he has done a couple of great roles but as a whole does not 'wow' me. Here he is very good but not great.

A very nice little thriller that will keep you very entertained. Much better than you might expect. However not for the squeamish.

The Road

I have read that this film has split many critics. Its bleak story line has turned many people off I think. Well this is my opinion.

While the story is fairly bleak and in some ways a little depressing, I thought it was very inspiring. Watching this father and son struggle through a harsh landscape and overcome various obstacles makes it not as bad as you may think. While it is not the film to choose when looking for a fun night out at the cinema, it's not the bleak piece of misery that it is made out to be. I have not read the book so cannot compare but the flashback scenes with the mother were not in the book. I found them to be quite powerful as we get a better insight into the father and his commitment to his son. He lost his wife and so all responsibility falls to him. I also think it may have been a way to inject some estrogen into the film as it may have gone too blokey otherwise. The father and son do not have very many encounters with other people in the film. I expected them to find more survivors but that was OK.


This is one of those films that screams Oscar. The roles are pretty much that too. I could approach it with the jaded view that Viggo Mortenson has rolled around in the mud and done a bit of road walking with the intention of getting an award. But I'm not that cynical (well maybe a little). Viggo is excellent though and his relationship with Kodi is great. Overseas readers may not know of Kodi Smit-McPhee but he was in an excellent Australian film 'Romulus, My Father' and this is his first big overseas film. Kodi is a great young actor and I hope he chooses more roles like this that showcase is amazing acting ability at such a young age. I was quite impressed by Robert Duvall's cameo appearance in the film and for me was the best of the cameos.


The end of the film leaves it open for a sequel. I would like to see what happens to the boy in say 10 years. I know it won't happen but would be something I'd like to see.

Edge Of Darkness

Mel Gibson has been behind the cameras lately rather than in front. He has also had quite a lot of tabloid problems. But that's something I'm not interested in.

When I heard about this film, while on the one hand I was excited to see Mel return to the screen in an acting capacity, I was a bit disappointed by the fact that had chosen another revenge film. The story is pretty stock standard stuff: cop or law enforcer must avenge the death of a loved one. While that might be the case and there is a little predictability it is still a decent film. Director Martin Campbell is working on a much smaller scale to his last few films and does a good job. He is able to keep you interested in the story despite its familiarity. There are enough twists and he is able to cleverly reveal the right information at the right time to keep you in your seat. The conspiracy theory in the plot I was quite pleased with as well. The film is based on a miniseries and is sometimes the case I often wonder how they were able to stretch out a slim plot to a longer length. Martin Campbell can normally stretch films out quite well but I was pleasantly surprised that he was able to restrain himself here.

I've always been a fan of Mel Gibson. He is great at doing a variety of roles from comedy to drama. As mentioned above I was disappointed with this film because we have seen him do it so often. Mel is able to bring his experience to make this role a little better than I expected. He does not go all that much insane as he normally does which was a nice point of difference. Ray Winstone is another excellent actor and gives a very cool performance here. On the opposite side of that spectrum is Danny Houston. I did not like his character and not because he was the bad guy. He has a few encounters with Mel in the film and comes across as a rather weak and cowardly. I expected bad guys in this situation to be tougher.

A decent crime thriller that does not break any new ground but is a bit of a fun ride. I think we can expect more from Mel's next film which I'm going to announce here and now that he will win the Academy Award for at next years Oscars.

NT Live: Nation

This blog will take a little explaining. Many may know that cinemas have been screening live Operas that have been filmed. Some are also playing plays as well, which is what I saw. This production was filmed at the National Theatre in London.

Terry Pratchett is an English author who has written a series of fantasy novels known as The Discworld Series. I am a huge fan of these novels that are kind of like a satire of the fantasy genre. A couple of years ago Terry wrote a book that was not part of that series called 'Nation'. Set in an alternate earth it is about a boy from an island that is sent away to perform a rite-of-passage ritual. However when he returns home he finds everyone has been wiped out by a tsunami. Also washed up on the island is a young girl who is the only remaining survivor of an English ship. The book was quite serious and not as funny as the Discworld books. I did not enjoy it as much as his other books. That did not stop me though from seeing the book turned into a play.

The play is excellent. While watching it on a cinema screen was a little different to seeing it live, I still marvelled at the wonderful way the creators of the play were able to bring the novel to life. I loved the way they used tricks to realise some of the trickier aspects of the book. It is a visually wonderful and may have been better live. I enjoyed the play much more than I did the book. I'm not sure whether seeing things gave me a better understanding than having to imagine it myself. As mentioned it is more serious, very philosophical and a bit religious. While I normally don't mind that sort of thing it was just so different to what I expected from Terry that it took me quite by surprise. The play was able to bring more of the humour out as well. this is especially true of a parrot character in the film which is played by an actor.

I may not have gotten the chance to see this play live. I've not heard of any plans to bring the play to Australia. Although Terry has a large following here so it would make sense to do so. Despite that I wanted to take the opportunity to see the play. I'm really glad I did.

The Wolfman

Slowly but surely Universal Studios have been doing remakes of their old horror films. They created a franchise out of 'The Mummy' and now look to do the same with 'The Wolfman'.

Normally I like to judge a film on its final product and not let any of the behind the scenes turmoil affect what I see. But looking at 'The Wolfman', I begin to think the concern was justified. The film is so lifeless and dull that while not boring as such does not make it memorable. The first few minutes of the film seem very rushed. I would have liked a bit more background information about Lawrence and the reasons he left his family. Even a scene showing him at his job as an actor. I feel the makers are trying to rush things in order to get to Lawrence's transformation. I don't know if that was done initially in anticipation of the fickle young audiences need to get to the action quickly or came out of the test screening process. It is indicative of the whole film really. It has very little emotion and feeling. You don't come to care about the characters and the makers seem only concerned about the events the characters are involved in and not how they feel about these events. There is only one really memorable scene in the film when Lawrence escapes from a mental hospital. This action scene was very well handled the only good part of the film. Actually I take that back the other good part is the make-up and transformation effects. They are excellent, but it is a pity they are not in a good film.

An excellent cast has been assembled for this film and maybe an indication that the script or idea were much better when they signed on. Benicio Del Toro is a very good actor and the only good thing about him in this film is his close resemblance to Lon Chaney Jnr. from the original film. Anthony Hopkins looks like he is just coasting through the film and not really trying but waiting to get paid. Emily Blunt looks bored and is so above material like this. The only one who seems to be any good or having fun is Hugo Weaving. He does a great job and shows how he can raise himself above very ordinary material.

The plan to get horror fans away from vampires with a new franchise does not seem to have worked. I can't see a franchise coming from this film unless they decide to re-boot which is another popular fad.

Daybreakers

In 2003, the Aussie Spierig Brothers wrote and directed the zombie film 'Undead'. Now they move onto the much bigger budget Hollywood films. Let's hope they can handle it.

Something that I've always wondered is if a bad guy in a movie actually got what they wanted and they came to rule the world. There have been times when I've wanted to write a screenplay based on that idea. Well The Spierig Brothers have done it. This is one of the more intriguing premises in not just a horror film but any film. What if vampires actually ruled the world and took over? When vampires go around biting humans do they actually think things through? The film while very good, did not reach the greatness I was hoping for. That's not to say I did not enjoy it because I did. The premise as I said was excellent but maybe not explored as much as I hoped. I did like how the guys did not shy away from the gore either. There is plenty of blood and guts to gross even the hardened mind.

Ethan Hawke is a very good actor but has never been in anything to make me rave about him. Here he is very good as the vampire who teams up with the humans but does nothing to make himself dazzle. Aussie actress Claudia Karven is great and it is nice to see her get in a Hollywood film. Sam Neill proves once again how evil he can be. Willem Dafoe does the best as I think he gets the best lines and role in the film. He seems to be having the most fun.

For those who feel that vampire films have gotten a bit too lovey-dovey they should check this out. An excellent premise with very little by way of romance.

It's Complicated

Writer/director Nancy Myers is fill the void left in the market for films aimed at older audiences, especially women. She has had a few successful romantic comedies that prove you can be any age to fall in love.

I do not think that Nancy Meyers is a particularly great writer or director. Her films are very pleasant and enjoyable but not in a very enthusiastic way. The only one of her films that I really liked was 'Somethings Gotta Give'. I have a personal rule regarding romantic comedies that they should go for around 90 - 100 minutes. I will agree that sometimes there can be exceptions to that rule, but Nancy does not meet that exception. I usually find her films get boring sometimes and the story can loose its way in certain areas. That didn't really happen that much here but the film still felt a little too long. I think she could have been more ruthless with the editing. Her films have a very simple premise and can be told in a simple way. I do not mind these films. I got a few funny moments from this one, but as a whole I do not find them terribly great.

In some ways I think Nancy Meyers is a lazy writer. Would this film have been as popular as it has been if she did not get this cast? If you recast the film with relatively unknown actors, would it have been as successful? I don't really think so. Meryl Streep is a brilliant actress and so I think elevates the mediocre material somewhat. This is not her greatest role, but I think she does an excellent job with the material she is given. Alec Baldwin is so brilliant in the TV series '30 Rock'. He is good here but again I think the ordinary script lets him down. The best thing about this film for me is Steve Martin. He has been in so many bad family films lately that I think he is loosing most of his credibility. I liked him here because he is in a more adult film and is not playing a wacky character. I think this is a role that's a close to being the real Steve Martin as you can get.

A pleasant romantic comedy that will appeal more to mature age people than younger ones. There are a few laughs but not as wonderful as you might hope.

Toy Story + Toy Story 2

It is no secret that one of the most successful film companies operating today is Pixar. They have firmly established themselves as a film company to respect and admire. When you watch a Pixar film you know you are guaranteed a quality film.

'Toy Story' was the start of their success story and continues today. They took a very simple premise of toys coming to life when people were not looking and created a wonderful story and brilliant characters. They then continued that with the sequel and did the rare thing of making a sequel that was better than the original. Pixar are very proud of the fact that they work hard on the story in their films and it shows. Other animated film seem more determined to create a wacky character or characters ans stick them in a weird situation and then see how they survive. That's all well and good but their journey to that weird situation has to be truthful to the characters and be a journey worth taking. It is no good having a series of situations in the hope of finding a story. I think Pixar focus more on their characters internal journey as opposed to their external journey. Pixar is also brilliant at creating the best characters. They were able to make us care about a group of in-animate objects that we don't consider to have feelings or thoughts. I think they have been successful at making us think twice about our toys. As adults we have lost the child-like ability to use our imagination to give personality to our toys. I like to think these films revive that. My all time favourite Pixar film is 'Toy Story 2'. Not only is it funny and have a really good story but has one of the best moments in all their films and is played during one of their best songs. 'When Somebody Loves Me'. This song is pretty much guaranteed to make me cry every time I hear it. Even when not watching the film I can't help but think about the scene and it makes me cry. That is the moment you realise that toys are real.

Woody the cowboy is such a wonderfully complex character. In the first film he is quickly established as the leader of Andy's toys and soon has this leadership threatened by the arrival of Buzz Lightyear. While on the surface he may seem ruthless in his attempts to get rid of Buzz, he does feel remorse when an accident happens. In the second film he becomes incredibly arrogant when he finds out where he really came from. In the end though he comes to realise the importance of his true family. I think part of the charm is the brilliant vocal work of Tom Hanks. Tom Hanks is a very popular actor in live-action films but I think his best work comes in these films. The brilliant part being that you don't think about it being Tom Hanks providing his voice to a character but you really believe it is Woody. It is the same for Buzz. Tim Allen give his greatest ever performance as Buzz. The fact that you see such a dramatic change in his character after he realises he's not a toy is so profound and Tim's vocal acting is amazing ('I am Mrs. Nesbet').

Just because these films are screening in 3D should not be your excuse to go see them. They are incredibly brilliant films that need to be seen regardless of the the format they are shown. I don't think you will find many people who do not like these movies. Which means the release of the third film in June is going to be HUGE!