Director Ron Howard has made some excellent films based on real life stories. So he was the best choice to make this film about Formulae 1 race car drivers.
For those who know me will know that I am not a sporty person. Yet I do enjoy sporting movies. The way movies are made and the film making techniques used, to me make sport far more exciting than actually watching the game in real life. That is very much the case with race car driving. I've never understood the interest in watching these races live. I once heard someone describe them jokingly as not a race but a parade. Only certain cars will make it to the front of the pack and they will stay there for the whole race. Plus watching it live means you do not get to see the whole lap but only one small section.
Surprisingly for a film about two race car drivers I got the impression that the film was less focused on this aspect of the story. The actual races seemed to be glossed over and only certain aspects were highlighted. Quite rightly the focus of the story is the rivalry between these two very different men. It is a fascinating look at how two men can have varying views on the same thing. James Hunt's skill was driving a car where as Niki Lauda was more focused on the car itself. It makes you think that if they were not rival and had perhaps teamed up then they would have been a more formidable team. This rivalry is what makes the film great for me. You get the sense that while they were rivals on the race track that they still had a deep respect for each other. Peter Morgan's script does a good job of highlighting these differences and similarities. But it still does sink into cliché sometimes which seems to be what all sporting films tend to do. Ron Howard also brings his skill as a director to the racing scenes and makes them quite thrilling.
I admire Chris Hemsworth for making films like this to prove he is more than just a hunky action hero. While this type of character is probably not that much of a stretch for him he does manage to bring more complexity to his character than you might expect. He also works well with his partner in the rivalry Daniel Bruhl. Daniel got the more interesting character and does a brilliant job with it. The way Niki uses James as a way to drive him in his driving is interesting, especially when Niki was injured. The rest of the cast are merely hangers on to the central story of this rivalry. Olivia Wilde is lumbered with a character who is merely a minor plot point and she does not do anything interesting with the character except look good. As Niki's love interest Alexandra Maria Lara gets a more interesting character to work with and so Alexandra gives an excellent performance.
Even if you are not a sports fan there is still a lot to like about this film. An entertaining look at a fascinating rivalry.
I think we have all worked out what Rachel McAdams likes in her men. The ability to time travel. Be it unconsciously or unconsciously.
Writer Richard Curtis is one of my all time favourite writers. I first fell in love with his work when I saw the TV series 'Blackadder'. For me that is not only of the funniest TV series ever written but one of the most perfectly written TV series ever made. He then went on to write some of the best romantic comedies ever seen with one 'Notting Hill' being one of my all time favourite. He did however become less than perfect when he made the film 'Rock The Boat'. He is on safer territory here with a move back to safer ground in the romantic comedy arena. While the film does deal with a romance the love story is not just about a man and a girl but a relationship between a man and his father.
Time travel is one of those plot devises which is prone to disaster. You need to be a really skilled writer to write a completely flawless story involving time travel. Sadly as skilled as Richard is he has not been completely successful. For me the problem is that he has taken the easy route with using the time travel element. There is not enough jeopardy in the story to make it very interesting considering the time travelling. I expected with this type of plot to have our hero go through some more difficult hurdles. Despite that the film has a great deal of charm and sweetness. There is lots of trademark Richard Curtis wit but maybe not as much as I'd have liked.
You may not be familiar with lead actor Domhnall Gleeson but he makes a very charming hero of the story. He has great comedic timing and you can't help but car about him. Rachel McAdams is her usually delightful self. While her character is what drives the story she does not have an awful lot to do. Bill Nighy gives his normally brilliant performance. He lights up the screen each time he is on. Also providing much of the film's humour is Tom Hollander.
It misses the cutting edge elements you would expect from a film about time travel but is still very delightful and charming.
She was one of the most beloved women of all time. We have had a film about how people reacted to her death and now get a film about her life.
Much like Steve Jobs, Princess Diana was a much beloved and respected person who have had films made about their lives. And like Steve, Diana's film is a lackluster effort which fails to capture the greatness of the person they are trying to honour. The plot for this film while interesting in a way that we get to find out about an aspect of Diana's life we may not already know about. On another level it is not told in an interesting way as it feels like every other story we've heard about a famous person falling in love with a not famous person. There is no freshness to the story and so does not reach the heights of greatness you would expect of someone so highly regarded. I like to consider myself a very romantic person and I'm a fan of love stories but I think I'm beginning to become a bit more discerning about how they are told.
Naomi Watts is an excellent actress but she has been unable to bring the majesty of Diana to the big screen. Part of the problem for my feelings that this is an average film is Naomi's performance. I did not get any sense from her of why people loved Diana so much. I think she lacked the presence of the character she was playing. One other thing I found odd was that in scenes which were recreations of public footage, like TV interviews, Naomi very closely mimics Diana's voice. However for the rest of the film she does not try to mimic her. Obviously Naomi has watched these scenes extensively as research and perhaps unconsciously began to imitate those scenes. I found it rather amusing. We have not seen Naveen Andrews in film for a while so it was nice to see him back. He does a decent job here but I found his character a bit dull and not sure exactly why Diana falls for him.
I expected more from a film about someone to great. For someone who evoked so much love, this film manages to destroy it.
One of my all time favourite documentaries is 'Super Size Me'. I felt I should check out his latest film. Honestly that is the reason I saw this.
I think it was very delusional of me to think that this film would be nothing more than a fan film for the massive hordes of One Direction fans. I did though have some tiny hope that with the Morgan Sporlock directing it that it might be a bit different to the run of the mill fan films you see about famous music artists. That was one of the many things that surprised me about this film. Why do you hire someone like Morgan, who has a slightly anarchic quality, to make such a generic film. My hope was that we might at least get some of that anarchic behavior which Morgan is famous for. Which brings me to my second problem with the film. The group mention several times that they are trying to not come across as a typical boy band and I get the impression that this is the reason they hired Morgan but it has not worked. For all their efforts to make them not seem like a boy band they come across as like every other boy band we have seen. Their songs are just like every other boy band and so are the boys themselves. The one interesting thing is trying to guess which one is gay. Which brings me to another problem with the film and that is the fans. I don't think I saw one male fan in the entire film when they showed crowd shots. They were always teenage girls. Is it possible that the only male fans they have are gay boys? Are the managers that control the boys so afraid of showing those male fans, that it might imply the boys are gay too? And in therefore loose their female fans because they no longer desirable. That would have been the one thing to make the film dramatically more enjoyable.
Definitely only for those who are die hard fans of the band One Direction. Not even those with a passing interest would be interested.
Films come along that receive lots of critical acclaim and you often wonder if it is warranted. In the case of this film it is.
The Script: I'm sure that the script for this film will be extensively studied at films schools all over the world as an example of the perfect script. The way it sets up the characters and then establishes an incident for them to over come then continually ramps up the action at each turn to make that a hard thing to achieve. The simplicity of the films plot and characters is one of the many elements that makes it so great. But writers Alfonso Cuaron and Jonas Cuaron have taken this simple idea and made one of the most exciting and thrilling films I think I have ever seen. I was continually amazed at how they were able to create so many disasters for our astronautts to go through. I'm quite sure they did extensive research on what being in space would be like and the film feels very authentic. Although a few experts have come forward to say that certain aspects could not happen. But that does not detract from your enjoyment.
Cinematography: This would have to be one of the most beautiful looking films I have ever seen. I saw it in IMAX so that added to the films beauty. Seeing the massive screen filled with images of earth from space, completely took my breath away. I think there needs to be a rule that only certain directors are allowed to use 3D when making films and Alfonso is one. He does not use the 3D as a gimmick but rather a way for us as the audience to become fully amerced in the environment of outer space that our characters inhabit. You definitely feel like you are truly there with these characters. Well worth paying the extra money to experience it in 3D.
Direction: All these great elements are brought together by one of the greatest directors working today, Alfonso Cuaron. The artistic majesty he brings to this film is nothing short of amazing. We take for granted things like 3D and special effects in films because we see them used so often and sometimes not very well. Then along comes an accomplished director like Alfonso who takes them to a whole new level of mastery. I loved the way he keeps the audience tense throughout the entire film. There are only a few moments for brevity before we are right back on the edge of our seats. Part of the reason he keeps that tension so high is because the film has a short duration. Many film makers seem to think that they need to take time to tell stories when really they don't and Alfonso knows that brevity is important when it comes to thrillers.
Performances: I lost interest in Sandra Bullock after 'The Blind Side'. A film which I think was over hyped and not one which I think she deserved all that acclaim for. She gave a decent performance in 'The Heat' recently but was largely overshadowed by Melissa McCarthy. But she is pretty much on her own for most of this film and carries it all so incredibly well. If she ever deserves an Oscar it is for this film. I suppose it is because of their heroic job that we hold astronauts in such high regard. Sandra does many heroic things in this film but she establishes her character as a very ordinary person. This makes her relatable to the audience and so we feel for her each time something goes wrong. George Clooney has a small but pivotal role. He is essentially playing himself and does not bring that much more to the role than he does in many of the other films he has been in. I did quite like the casting of the voice for mission control too.
I cannot encourage you enough to see this film. It is a film that needs to be seen on the big screen. And the bigger the better. Also see it in 3D too so you experience the film as it was meant to be seen.
The arrival of a film by Pedro Almodovar is a big event that should be celebrated. Such is the greatness of this acclaimed film maker.
While I am a big fan of Almodovar, I am willing to admit that this is not one of his best films. Most of his films are usually pretty serious and dramatic but this time he has made a very light comedy. When I say light I am talking very light. There is not a lot of deep meaning in the film which is what you normally find in his movies. The plot is very simple and not unlike that of one of the greatest comedies of all time 'Airplane' (aka 'Flying High'). While there are a few implausibilities it does not detract from the enjoyment. Almodovar's films usually have gay characters and this film is no exception but it does make the film very camp. Despite that the film is largely a lot of fun and quite funny.
As our three central characters, Carlos Areces, Javier Camara and Raul Arevalo are excellent and make a great comedy team. They provide many of the film's funniest moments. Lola Duenas is an Almodovar regular and is very good as the shy passenger. That changes when she breaks out of her shell and is featured in a scene which we don't normally see in film which is a woman raping a man.
This is a very short review but the film it's about is very slight. Perhaps more for the die hard Almodovar fans, but still quite enjoyable for those who are not.
Usually in films we see relationships between older men and younger women. But back in the early 1970's we had one that was the other way around.
This is another one of those films that I had heard of from its reputation but never actually seen. So I was pleased to get the chance to see it on the big screen. Being a black comedy it appealed to me quite a lot. I cannot imagine one of the major film studios making his film today. The morbid nature of Harold would not survive the focus groups or marketing people. The film opens with Harold trying to kill himself so that would not be the best way to start a film. The plot is the fairly typical one of a young rich kid who feels underappreciated by his parents (in this case a mother) and so lashes out. Most of the humour in the film is derived by Harold's mother and the way she responds to Harold's various suicide attempts. They are especially funny when he attempts them while she is trying to set him up with women. My favourite was when he set himself on fire. In amongst all these funny suicide attempts Harold begins a very sweet relationship with a much older woman. At first it seems to be just a friendly relationship but then develops into something more. Director Hal Ashby manages to make the relationship feel natural and not sleazy like you would expect some film makers to do.
As Harold Bud Cort is excellent. His performance is very subtle and not over stated. He really brings out the melancholy nature of Harold. His body language and facial expressions also make him more expressive. I mostly know Ruth Gordon from the Clint Eastwood films 'Every Which Way But Loose' and 'Any Which Way You Can'. I was not familiar with many of her other films so was pleased to see her performance here. Ruth definitely gives older people a good name, even if she is doing some bad things. Her zest for life makes the film very enjoyable. Also enjoyable in a humorous way is Vivian Pickles as Harold's mother. As mentioned above her scenes provide most of the films humour and she is very funny in her apathetic view to Harold's suicide attempts. The film's other funniest performance comes from Charles Tyner as Harold's uncle. While he does play the character over the top and a bit clichéd he is still very funny.
Just your old fashioned unconventional romantic comedy. A wonderful black comedy about a relationship we don't see much of in cinema.
Director Giuseppe Tornatore came to prominence for making 'Cinema Paradiso'. While he has not had the same success he still makes quality films.
Ever since watching this film I have had trouble trying to work out how to describe my reaction to it. The film is well made and it has an intriguing story which keeps you interested in where it is going but it just felt a little 'off'. I don't like to use the words 'strange' or 'weird' as that does not quite accurately describe it but the tone just felt different. I normally pride myself on liking films that are a bit different to the norm but this film felt a little bit unusual even for me. The story though is a very good one and as I said kept me interested in where it was going. Giuseppe also added a few nice subplots that add nicely textured elements to not only the plot but its conclusion as well.
I'm not sure if part of my being uncomfortable with this film was the casting of Geoffrey Rush. Up until now he has not really played roles that require him to have a romantic element, so I have not considered him in that way. I'm not saying he does not deserve to find love but it just may take me time to thing of Geoffrey as a sexual being. Other than that he is very good in his role. He plays the sophisticated and refined elements rather well. I have not been a fan of Jim Sturgess in the past but this would have to be his best performance yet. He plays the role very understated which suits the character and means he comes across as less annoying than he usually is. Sylvia Hoeks does is very good as the object of Geoffrey's desire. Donald Sutherland adds some dignity to the film as well.
It's well made and has a well paced story but the tone of the film is a little bit strange and unusual.
This year Hollywood has declared war on the White House. We've had the hardcore version earlier this year and now get the softer version of the White House War II.
It seems perfectly natural that Hollywood would want to make a film about an attack on the White House. It is supposedly the most fortified building in the world. Why wouldn't you want to see how someone would try to attack it? Earlier this year Mike Banning was the one to save the President from attack. This was a really violent film which I did not like for it's nasty streak cause it felt so mean. I know that an attack is not meant to be pleasant but it should not make you feel uncomfortable. Which is why I liked 'White House Down' more. It was able to make the situation enjoyable and fun. With this film I think I was more aware of the comparisons to 'Die Hard'. I could see so many similarities and became more aware of how 'Die Hard' se the standard for action film and especially those where there is a hostage situation. But as great as 'White House Down' is it does lack that spark of brilliance that could have brought it to the level of 'Die Hard'. I think part of the problem is the director. Roland Emmerich is an excellent director and has made many spectacular action films but he feels very restrained here. His other films, with the exception of the non-action 'Anonymous', have been big action films on a global scale, where as 'White House Down' has all its action contained to one location. Roland feels so restrained here that you get the feeling that he wants to break out any moment but can't due to the restraints of the story.
Channing Tatum certainly knows how to fill out a singlet. Sadly it too him a while to strip down. Other than that he does a very good job. He is able to play the role as more of an average guy who must step up in a difficult situation. He plays humble so well. I was surprised Jamie Foxx would take a role like this considering he is essentially playing the damsel in distress role. He is probably there for his likeness to President Obama but I would have liked him to be a bit less bumbling and more active in the action. The best thing about the film for me was seeing James Woods back on the big screen again. I wish he was in more films. The rest of the cast are good and serviceable in the roles.
The lighter tone taken with this film certainly made it more enjoyable than the last White House attacked film. But needed a director who feels more comfortable being restrained.
Woody Allen has joined with Clint Eastwood in being one of those older film makers who still continue to make brilliant films after all these years.
I may not be the right person to critique a Woody Allen film. As a huge fan of his I tend to see the greatness and can sometimes over look the bad stuff. But despite that I still thoroughly enjoy all his films. 'Blue Jasmine' would have to be his best film in recent times. Woody seems to have a real knack for creating such wonderful female characters. I think the awards actresses who have appeared in his films have received is testament to that. Jasmine is such a multilayered character that despite the fact she can be annoying at times you end up feeling a great deal of sympathy for her. She can be seen as someone we would be unable to relate to because of her social status but after a while you come to appreciate her situation. There is also a certain sense of joy in seeing a person of high stature cut down to size. But Jasmine does not wallow in self pity but instead goes out and tries to improve her situation. She does get herself into trouble but she learns from her mistakes and moves on. What I really liked about the film was the way Woody was able to blend so seamlessly the comedy and the drama of the situation. In some scenes he can go from heartfelt drama to funny dialogue. I feel it is his most accomplished and mature work. He has had a great resurgence lately since the success of 'Midnight In Paris' but I think this is by far and away his best recently.
As great as Woody's writing and directing are, the biggest delight in this film is the performance of Cate Blanchett. She is another actress who I think is incapable of giving a bad performance. So powerful is her performance that you do not see Cate Blanchett in this film but Jasmine. As good as Cate is, equally as good is Sally Hawkins. Sally, much like Cate, really inhabits her character so you feel for her character and all the problems she is going through. The men in the film are not too bad either. I was most amazed at Andrew Dice Clay. I did not think he was such a great actor outside the comedy roles he has played but he gives an excellent, more dramatic performance here. Bobby Carnivale is also equally as good, even if his character does border on stereotype and caricature. Alec Baldwin's role is sadly more functional than you'd expect.
Further proof of the brilliance that is Woody Allen. That is coming from a huge Woody Allen fan but I'm sure non-fans can enjoy it too.
